Title
Minutes of the Special Meeting Held on June 29, 2020; the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on July 7, 2020; and the Continued July 7, 2020 Special City Council Meeting and Special City Council Meeting Held on July 14, 2020. (City Clerk)
Body
UNAPPROVED
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- - JUNE 29, 2020- -5:30 P.M.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:30 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was conducted via Zoom.]
Absent: None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(20- ) Paul Foreman, Alameda, stated the routine invoking of reducing public speaking time gives the public the impression that their thoughts are not valued; urged that the Mayor first ask if there is a motion to waive the time limits prior to just invoking the limit.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(20- ) Recommendation to Develop a Work Plan, including Community Dialogue, to Address the Following: 1. Unbundling Services Currently Delivered by the Police Department; 2. Systemic Racism; 3. a Review of Police Department Policies and Practices; 4. Police Department Accountability and Oversight; 5. a Review of Laws that Criminalize Survival; and 6. Other Matters which may be Pertinent, including Vacancies.
The Assistant City Manager made a brief presentation.
Councilmember Oddie inquired whether Council is looking at systemic racism as a broader societal, Citywide issue, and not focusing specifically on accusing the Police Department or Officers in the Department, of racism; stated that he just wants to be clear what Council is looking at.
The Assistant City Manager responded that he has heard it to be a conversation about either organizationally or with the community; the particular component of the work program has not been directed towards the Police Department; it has been organizationally as the City of Alameda and as the broader community, which is why it is not embedded in the work plan tonight.
Councilmember Oddie stated in the future, it would be helpful to bifurcate the topic on the agenda that addresses Police reform so there is not confusion that the focus is on one particular department.
The Assistant City Manager stated the work plan could do that going forward.
Stated some suggestions to codify now, in terms of goals and measurements that everyone can agree on, include defining unacceptable behavior, making sure it stops and the requirement for practical transparency: Ben Calica, Alameda.
Expressed concern about the serious problems of using Police to handle situations involving mentally ill citizens; urged unbundling of Police services to find a better solution: Lorin Salem, Alameda.
Discussed the recent Council decision to remove the use of the Police Department’s emergency response armored vehicle and Officers in school: Jason Horvath, Alameda Police Officer.
Stated that she supports changing policing in the City, including defunding the Police Department by 50%, defunding the pay of Officers involved in detaining Mr. Watkins and investigation in the 2018 Gattenby incident: Jenice Anderson, Alameda.
Stated that she hopes for progressive, solid actions as a result of the public comments; she is interested to know how many civil rights incidents have happened resulting in payouts to victims’ families: Cheri Johansen, Alameda.
Urged Council to proceed with three things in mind when creating the work plan: listen, act, and be accountable: Laura Cutrona, Alameda.
Stated that he is glad Council is keeping the issue on the agenda and moving it forward; suggested any community participation be a robust process, inclusive and fact-based; urged against a Council-led committee: Jono Soglin, Alameda
Stated policing as an institution was built on racist ideals and principles; she does not believe Councilmember Oddie’s recommendation regarding training is a solution; urged unbundling of Police services: Alexa Arocha, Alameda.
Urged Council to use the many resources available in the community when developing the work plan; reminded Council of important youth demands: Lean DeLeon, Alameda.
Requested to be placed at the end of the speaker line so that Black and Brown speakers can be centered: Seth Marbin, Alameda
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft received consensus from the Council to rearrange the speaker order to center Black and Brown speakers.
Stated that she appreciated Councilmember Oddie sitting with dispatchers for three hours to see first-hand how things work; changes need to be made and people should put themselves in other’s shoes: Keisha Brooks, Alameda Dispatcher.
Stated that he does not understand how Council can run its own process when they are a part of the systemic racism; a community process cannot be held until there is accountability of elected and public officials; an independent oversight committee should be formed, but not without first reallocating Alameda Police Department (APD) funds to community support programs and services or enacting an immediate 50% reduction in the APD budget: Amos White, Alameda American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) People Power.
Stated that he experienced Police injustice in Alameda at a young age; suggested the framework for the process should be truth and reconciliation; urged the Council and the City to engage people who have been targeted to be able to come forward to speak their truths; until that happens, there can be no justice: Rasheed Shabazz, Alameda.
Stated that he encourages the City Manager and Council to consider a change of leadership in the Police Department; he is looking forward to the independent review of the May 23rd incident: Walter Yonn, Alameda.
Stated the Council should be better educated to truly represent the community’s interest; there is an urgency to deal with the issues and a work plan must be community-led to be worthwhile: Thomas Mariadason, Alameda.
Expressed appreciation for the Council’s continued attention to all the Police issues; suggested looking at the Police union agreement: Cheryl Taylor, Alameda
Stated Officer Horvath’s comments were disparaging to some speakers; needing Police in schools because of crime and an armored vehicle because there are guns are faulty arguments; urged community members to pay close attention to which side Councilmembers are taking so they can elect officials that represent the people: James Bergquist, Alameda.
Stated systemic racism is about unequal outcomes; the school-to-prison pipeline creates psychological and physical risks to students of Color; he agrees with defunding the Police by 50%; training has negative consequences for People of Color; expressed support for community-led organizations separate from Council: Wesley Swedlow, Alameda.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the status of School Resource Officers (SROs) in Alameda.
The Police Chief responded that he informed the City Manager and the School Superintendent a month ago that he intended to pull SROs out of the schools; the primary reason is staffing issues and school has not been in session since March 16; Council voted to approve a temporary suspension of the SRO program.
Discussed the importance of finding creative ways to center Black and Brown voices in the future; stated no matter how well-intentioned the community is, there is not the lived experience: Seth Marbin, Alameda.
Stated that she was upset about the perceived Police policy of not answering non-criminal calls from the public; urged that the City have a clear decision making process on policies regarding City services so the public is not confused: Toni Grimm, Alameda.
Stated taking until 2022 to establish Police accountability and a review board seems like a very long time; the events of May 23rd seem like clear cause to fire someone; expressed support for reductions in the Police budget: Jeff Lewis, Alameda.
Stated there are underlying issues of cultural and structural racism in the Police Department; urged Council to consider a community-based approach and critical cases of mental illness when unbundling Police services: Quinn Weaver, Alameda.
Stated a 50% defunding of the Police is a good start; a citizen oversight committee needs to be implemented immediately: Annie Murray, Alameda
Stated that he appreciated the quick response of the Council to center Black and Brown speakers; encouraged Council to continue a creative mindset going forward; he is impressed by the local young people who have become models in the role of transforming Police: Indi McCasey, Alameda.
Stated Alameda needs better oversight and better accountability; urged Council to take action sooner rather than later because she feels Black and Brown people are still being targeted: Melodye Montgomery, Alameda.
Thanked Council for putting together a thoughtful process for re-imagining policing in the community; urged Council to think about the needs, wants and what can be achieved; stated there is a lot of opportunity to do good and build a system that works and is part of the community: Michele Ellson, Alameda.
Stated City Hall needs to take a public stand and use the recent car vandalism incident as a teaching moment to stand against racism; she hopes a citizens oversight board includes People of Color who have been hurt by racism: Jannette Eng, Alameda.
Stated that he appreciates the Council’s commitment to address important issues in a timely fashion; he endorses the comments made about re-evaluating policing; he hopes the Council seizes the moment and understands the importance of making the community more compassionate: Robert Deutsch, Alameda.
In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s inquiry regarding COVID-19, Dr. Deutsch responded there is an increase in cases at Alameda Hospital, Highland Hospital, Alameda Health System and in the Bay Area; masking protects not only the wearer, but those around them; urged everyone to continue to not let their guards down until a vaccine is available.
Public Comment read into record:
Thanked Council for its commitment to make Alameda safer by directing more resources towards community programs that support mental health and public safety; stated that she supports reducing the Police budget to invest money into community programs; it is important to highlight the voices of Black residents and Black youth in Alameda; urged Council to take immediate action by no longer accepting donations from Police Unions and committing to defund the Police by 50% in the long term and 10% in the upcoming budget cycle: Molly Montgomery, Alameda.
Asked several questions of the Council regarding the Mali Watkins incident; stated APD needs to run independent of politics and should not be defunded; urged support for the Police Department and Chief Rolleri: Marilyn Grabina, Alameda.
Stated that she supports the ACLU People Power's demand of a 50% reduction of APD's budget; the process moving forward should center Black voices and the voices of those who have experienced harm from policing; urged Council to address reducing policing and re-imagining public health and safety with clear, actionable goals: Savanna Cheer, Alameda.
Urged Council to pledge to return all campaign or lobbying funds received from public sector Unions or stakeholders during the process and to commit to defunding APD by 50% in the long term; stated it is important that Black and Brown Alamedans have several prominent roles in the committees and boards to come: Erin Fraser, Alameda.
Thanked Council for its efforts in establishing a work plan; expressed support for a 50% decrease of the APD budget; urged unbundling of Police services to include an increased budget for community programs; stated the steering committees should select members who are committed to directly addressing the various inequalities in Alameda, especially racial inequality; expressed support for centralizing the voices of Black people and those most impacted by the harms of policing; urged Council to commit to not take any public safety Union or lobbyists' money at this time: D.N., Alameda.
Stated that he is a senior citizen and does not support cutting or defunding the Police; the Police have been courteous, committed and diligent in protecting Alameda citizens; now is the time to stand up and support our Police; the community moto is “Alameda stands against hate” and that includes the hate shown towards Alameda’s wonderful Police: Robert K., Alameda.
Stated that she is concerned about the recent the direction Council has taken on behalf of the City that APD is to continue business as usual and must do so with less staffing, less lifesaving and protective equipment and must respond to all calls for service, including non-criminal calls; the conversation from thousands, including advocacy groups who are seeking equality, evaluations of Police policies, and for minimal police interactions for non-criminal offenses, is important and long overdue: Michaelia B., Alameda.
Expressed support and thanks to APD for the investigation of the 15 year old student, Iko; stated that she does not support defunding the Police and believes that more funding, more training and support of Alameda’s Police Department is the only way to keep the community safe: Anna S., Alameda.
Stated that she demands serious and swift reallocation of money from the Police Department to community services, such as mental health, education, health care and homeless services; urged Council to show other cities and governments that Alameda cares about its citizens' lives more than its Police badges: Amy DeSmidt, Alameda.
Expressed support for the Police Department; stated that she is concerned about the changes Council is proposing; she does not agree with removing the armored vehicle and feels sorry that the City is being misrepresented: Maria Gutierrez, Alameda.
Stated that he strongly opposes the call for an immediate full defunding of the Police or an immediate large budget reduction; there is a need to reallocate funding to other agencies for services that can be performed without Police intervention, but not until going through the process of determining what services to transfer, the cost and the funding necessary to provide for Police response to serious crimes; Council has acted prudently in temporarily freezing the hiring of new Police Officers until the allocation process is worked through: Paul Foreman, Alameda.
Expressed concern about Councilmember Oddie seeming more concerned about accusing the police of being racist than he is about the conduct of the Police Department; stated the issue of systemic racism within APD is the concern being addressed; there is work to do in the larger society: April Madison-Ramsey, Alameda.
Expressed support for the Police Department; stated Black lives do matter; having a fair judicial system is absolutely necessary; racism on the Island is not okay; applauded APD for taking self-initiated steps in addressing matters; stated that she is concerned by Council policy changes that put the Island and the lives of People of Color in jeopardy: Tiffany Jackson, Alameda.
Urged Council to respond to questions regarding the system of policing in Alameda and to listen to Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color (BIPOC) about where funds will be directed when redistributing the budget; expressed concern about Police Officers wearing Blue Lives Matter face masks: Anonymous Alameda resident.
Shared a link from "ShowingUpForRacialJustice.org" that outlines how White supremacy manifests in organizational culture and common problematic characteristics and dynamics that emerge in particularly White-led institutions, as well as constructive actions to take in order to change organizational culture; urged Council to thoroughly read the piece and take into consideration its suggestions when making institutional reforms: Melissa Scott, Alameda.
Expressed support for the Police and distress over recent proposals to defund and alter the current leadership structure; stated the Police need more support and funding from Council; the Department is already understaffed and under-represented in the community; vacancies must be filled, overtime shortened, leave taken and training improved if the goal is to have a quality Police force: Anthony Russell, Alameda.
Stated Police budgets grow because the prison industrial complex grows; contact between oppressed people and Police must be decreased in order to make a meaningful change; Police dispatchers repeatedly try to trivialize the issue by individualizing the crimes of Officers, which is an institutional problem: Carlos Williams-Moreiras, Alameda.
Stated a 50% deduction of funds to the Police Department will not make Alameda a safer community; urged everyone to do a ride along with Police Officers to see what a day is really like in their shoes: Brittany Benvenuto, Alameda.
Urged Council to make an amendment to the City Charter and create a citizen-led oversight committee with members representing the system impacted; people should be appointed by the Council, not the Mayor; Alameda needs oversight and power with accountability; suggested redistributing $150,000 earmarked for the 4th of July Parade to the Black residents of Alameda as a beginning gesture and action towards reparations: Debra Mendoza, Alameda.
Stated the plan put forward by Vice Mayor Knox White and Councilmember Vella is a good starting point; he is concerned about the need to give every Councilmember a subcommittee in the plan; suggested reducing the complexity the five subcommittees given the great amount of overlap of the topics: Zac Bowling, Alameda.
Expressed concern about issues related to the Mali Watkins incident and mental health and support for keeping the armored vehicle; stated Alameda Police do an excellent, professional job, given the resources that they have; he does not support defunding the Police; recommended Councilmembers go on monthly or bimonthly ride-alongs with the Police: Rowland Wing, Alameda.
***
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft recessed the meeting at 7:30 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:45 p.m.
(20- ) Councilmember Oddie moved approval of waiving the nine minute Council speaking limit.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5
***
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the process is about finding solutions to serious long-standing issues in the community; it should not be about further dividing community or increasing mistrust; all energy needs to be directed to achieving important objectives; she would like to look at the most effective ways to accomplish the goals; she has thought a lot about the topic of systemic racism; one definition is a system or structure that have procedures or processes that disadvantage African Americans; it is important to address and acknowledge racism exists outside of community institutions; while Council may not be able to legislate to address it, it needs to be part of the discussion; she would like to have input from all five Councilmembers working together; she was surprised by the ready-made proposal brought to the rest of the Council by two Councilmembers; she prefers organic discussion with Councilmembers starting from the same place, also keeping in mind transparency and bringing the public along; expressed concern about comments regarding the details of the Vice Mayor’s proposal, which were not included in the proposal or staff report from the last meeting; she learned the comments were from Vice Mayor Knox White’s detailed Facebook post; a lot of people many not have seen it; she anticipated the Council would be addressing the issue starting fresh today; expressed concern; stated that she was a little thrown-off; she would have preferred details be posted be part of the staff report or as an attachment so all Councilmembers can be on the same page; inquired how the Council can have a participatory discussion given she, and perhaps others, have not had an opportunity to read Vice Mayor Knox White’s post.
Vice Mayor Knox White responded it was not his intent to just drop his proposal and ask for support; he likes to get a lot of community input; he worked with Councilmember Vella on thinking of ways to move forward and what it would look like; it has to be fair, center Black and youth voices; members of the community who are not often led to the table have been brought forward; he posted on Facebook and asked for feedback.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Vice Mayor Knox White shared the document with the rest of the Council, to which Vice Mayor Knox White responded that he sent it to the City Clerk to be distributed; the reason Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft had not seen it yet was because he wanted to make sure everyone had their say first before diving into something that had bullet points; he tried to outline a way forward, but did not anticipate there would be support for any one particular proposal; he is happy to discuss his thoughts rather than defending why he thought engaging with the community before the meeting was worthwhile.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does want to hear Vice Mayor Knox White’s thoughts and she also believes in engaging with the community; her concern is that it is a limited community as he did not share it with people other than those that follow him on Facebook; she wants to have a full and robust discussion from all Councilmembers and staff.
Councilmember Oddie stated it would be good to hear thoughts before getting into a specific plan of action.
Vice Mayor Knox White concurred with Councilmember Oddie; stated talking about what everyone had to say rather than focusing on a specific proposal was what he had in mind for the discussion.
Councilmember Oddie stated the job of the Council as elected representatives is to set policy; the City Manager’s job is to take policy direction and implement it; inquired whether Alameda Police Officers have worn Blue Lives Matter face masks.
The City Manager responded that he is hearing about the masks for the first time tonight and will check on it tomorrow; stated the Police Chief may be able to provide more information.
Councilmember Oddie stated if it is true; it is not conducive to working together; pretty divergent views were heard today; there was also lots of commentary about the fate of the Officers involved in the Mr. Watkins incident; requested an update on what information can be made available to the public and whether or not it is against the Charter to ask the City Manager to fire the Officers involved.
The City Attorney responded it would be a violation of the Charter for Council to ask the City Manager to take any disciplinary or termination action against the Officers; stated very little information can be made public as State law makes it clear that any information related to an investigation of a Police Officer is considered confidential; the City could not invite public participation in the interview of an Officer or allow the public to review any investigator’s findings or conclusions; the City could confirm the employment status of the Officer.
Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the Alameda Police Union contract includes the State law regarding confidentiality.
The City Attorney responded the confidentiality provision is covered by State law; the Council would not have the ability to adopt ordinances or have contracts changing the confidentiality provisions.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he wants to make sure people understand Council is not taking action one way or another, which is not because they are being idle or incompetent or ignorant of the public outcry, but because it is what the State law guarantees for the Officers whether the public agrees with it or not; there is a limited amount of information that Council can provide other than employment status; he has been on the Council nearly six years and has not had an issue that was so emotional and has such a dichotomy of viewpoints; Councilmembers have been called insensitive, racist, reactionary, too slow, corrupt, and complicit, which is such a wide gamut of things that all cannot be true; what was missing from the conversation, and is disappointing, is that there is an ‘either/or’ which is not what policy-making is about; he will never know the experiences of being an African American teen walking to his car or a Central American immigrant with a tail light out; quoted the Mayor of Chicago, Laurie Lightfoot, regarding how defunding the Police ignores how reform works and would hurt diversity of the force; he will not make policy by hashtag; Alameda has done a good job in terms of diversity in hiring, which is lost if blanket percent cuts are made; he has not met a racist cop in Alameda, but others say they have, which everyone should remain cognizant of; what Council needs to do is talk about building authentic, lasting relationships; what that means to him is that everyone has to put in the hard work to build partnerships and have some empathy in trying to understand what it is like to be in the other person’s shoes; he sat in with dispatch and saw how much is asked of the Police Department; the onus is on the Council to make changes; empathy is important; the Council are everyday human beings; the same goes for the Police Officers; they are diverse and have families; a broad brush should not be painted against every single Police Officer who works in Alameda or against every Councilmember; on the flip side, Alameda’s Officers need to do a better job of empathizing; there has to be a willingness to change culture; there are a lot of systemic race issues in the country and the City; gave an example of when his children were in school at Bay Farm; stated the school was able to raise $64,000 through the Parent Teacher Association; Paden School could not even raise 10% of that and Bay Farm did not want to share with Paden; there are new schools on one side of town and crumbling schools on the other side; there are constant battles over the homeless; there are zoning issues; attitudes need to change; there are things in the Charter that have racial impacts; the entire criminal justice system outside the Police Department needs a lot of reform.
Councilmember Daysog thanked the residents for participating in tonight’s meeting, an indication of democracy clearly at work; discussed his experience with the Alameda Police as a youth in Alameda; stated the Police are here because they serve the residents; described a March 2016 break-in incident at his significant other’s house; stated he was impressed by the responding Officers who put their lives at risk at a moment’s notice in order to protect and serve all; when he looks at reforming the Police, he sees it as an opportunity to institutionalize new ways of doing things in light of what has happened in the past and also the recent May 23, 2020 incident; he looks forward to the conversation of improving the Alameda Police force; it is his opinion that there is no need to frame the discussion in rhetoric where there is no reconciliation or middle ground; he sees the Alameda Police force as people who will put their lives on the line in time of emergency; he also sees the Police force that has always been a vital part of the community’s social fabric, as coaches or members of the rotary; Council should seize the opportunity to improve the Alameda Police force; as he discusses the ways he thinks the Police force could be improved, he wants to be clear to the citizens what he is for and what he is not for’ he is not in favor of a 50% defunding of the Police Department; his sense is that the Council will not defund by 50% and will look at ways to generate some efficiencies to provide the new level of services needed; he is not in favor of removing the use of the armored vehicle and would like Council to reconsider the matter; he agrees with the Police Chief and Officer Horvath that the armored vehicle may be the type of civilian vehicle needed in times of emergency; he agrees with the rest of the Council not to militarize the Police; he is in favor of three items in the staff report: 1) unbundling Police services, which should be more specific; he likes the Eugene, Oregon CAHOOTS (Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets) program which could be a solution to changing the way the Police deal with mental health issues; budget-wise, the program could be scaled to the size which would work in Alameda; 2) the power of dealing with systemic racism occurs when it is married with Police Department accountability and oversight; if a Police commission or advisory board is pursued, Council must be upfront in stating one of the reasons for the creation is to deal with long-standing issues of racism that have been a part of Alameda’s Police force; one particular task to come out of a Police commission could be strengthening the manual or policies with regard to training and racial profiling; 3) reviewing Police Department policies and practices, including dealing with crowd control issues; he would like to move forward on the three issues concretely; Councilmembers have to try their best to speak the truth as they see it and sometimes that might not coincide with how the world is seen; his responsibility to the people is to articulate what is on his mind and what he sees are the best policies for the City of Alameda going forward; growing up in Alameda has put him in a unique position to see the Police through a different lens; he respects the perspective of others affected by the events that have been happening nationally; he hopes the community can move forward around concrete issues he has put forward and come out better for it.
Councilmember Vella discussed a better method for centering Black and Brown voices during public comment; stated the robotic voice is really hard to follow; the inflections are sometimes disconcerting; expressed concerned about the order of the public comment being read; stated some came through via email and some through anonymous text, which seems to be a way to get around the time limits; the process needs to be figured out; suggested going back to having someone read comments; stated that she is glad to hear some members of the community talk about how safe and secure they feel in Alameda; it is her goal, and the goal of her fellow Councilmembers, to make sure that is the experience of everybody in Alameda and not at the expense of others who do not feel the same; Council needs to acknowledge the members of the public who say they do not feel safe and secure or comfortable moving around in the community; Council needs to take heed, listen and find ways to respond; Alameda can move towards being a community that provides safety and security for all; safety and security for all are loaded words; however, part of how community services are structured is about redefining what those words mean and making sure there is space for everybody in the community to feel those things, regardless of race, gender, creed, and ethnicity; every City department serves residents and are not independent, autonomous wings of government; the City and Council are all accountable; she likes to think that she has over 80,000 bosses; all Councilmembers do; Council represents the entire community, not just segments or districts; she is concerned when there are people in the community who feel like they are not being served; she would like to find ways to improve that, which is a value and virtue shared by her colleagues; the trauma from a bad response is life-changing; shared an anecdote reflective of a bigger picture; stated that she is a woman of color, member of Council and was heavily pregnant when Police banged on her door trying to do a mental health call, which was made by a criminal stalker misusing Police authority; the anecdote is a commentary in the discussion for anti-racism beyond the four walls of the Police Department; it should inherently be part of the review of policies within the Police Department and also a part of the larger conversation throughout the City, the hiring process, through policies and practices; it is about diversity in all areas Citywide; there is also a bigger problem of the community and people weaponizing the Police force; it is a problem when there are people who feel confident and comfortable enough to call the Police and misuse their authority in that way; it is not just about systemic racism, it is about anti-racism, about misuse of different types of governmental, structural or institutional power; the issue is also more than just law enforcement; she would like to make it very clear that she stands by the direction Council unanimously gave to review policing policies; however, the conversation is also about the overall reimagining of services; if the title of the conversation includes law enforcement, then the responses will continue to be about law enforcement; she thinks Council would want to transcend and move beyond that; services need to be provided that are responsive to what people need; it is a disservice to the Officers and the public when armed Officers are sent to respond to a mental health scenario; Alameda can do better and has done better; there are models and Alameda has the ability to shift how services are reimagined; she would also like to focus on the process; she wants to talk about the end goal; she is not married to what the subcommittees would look like; there are five issues which may have some overlap; there are also issues that would require a deep-dive; she thinks having one group focus on the deeper issues may be helpful to inform policy and practices moving forward; there will always be tension when discussing issues of systemic racism, racism, anti-racism or power structures; it is not an either/or conversation and sometimes it is uncomfortable; acknowledging the tension leads to a better conversation and better work product; Council needs to be deliberate and thoughtful and create a safe space for people; create the space and let the people lead; thematically the question is how will Council create safety and security for all people in Alameda; she would like to spend time considering the bigger questions regarding the steering committee, such as who will do the selection, what is the process, what is the commitment being asked of the individuals; Council needs to be thoughtful, inclusive, consider offering a stipend and find a way to include other voices and trying to find individuals who have had unique experiences and can speak from that perspective; she feels very strongly that space needs to be created in the short term to begin working; although she is not married to the number of people on a committee, it will be difficult to have too many people; she does not want to have too few seats that people are not included; it would be perfectly appropriate for the Mayor to be part of the over-arching conversation; a process needs to be created where the people can tell the Council what they want within the finer lines; then, Council can work with staff; having ad hoc Councilmembers involved reminds people of the confines of the City Charter and Council authority; she supports the overall structure of the process laid out by herself and Vice Mayor Knox White, but also tried to hear what her colleagues want included; she would like a process that everyone can stand by and that will get to an end product which will really be transformative.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated her preference would be that all Councilmembers throw out ideas and suggestions for moving forward; she does not want to work from the attachment, which can be sent on to staff to be factored into the mix.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated he was taken aback for being called out for talking about ideas to the people Council represents; noted the Police Chief, as well as other Councilmembers, received an email about Police Officers wearing Blue Lives Matter face masks; the Police Chief stated it was not a big deal, but there is now a policy against wearing the masks; he raised the issue because he was very concerned by Councilmember Oddie’s comments trying to equivocate that everyone’s experiences are the same; everyone’s experience is not the same; he has to remind himself to stay centered on how lucky, entitled, and privileged he is as a middle-aged White man; he agrees that the Officers are people; they do a difficult job and he has a lot of respect for them; he has done ride-alongs and has talked about how they impacted him; the impact of the Officers hearing the community complain about the racists system is not equivalent to the impact on people and speakers; he looks forward to having many conversation regarding the issue; racism is not an individual action, it is a system; making it an individual action allows us to feel that somehow we are morally superior to people that we label as racists; the incident on May 23rd seems that we are indicting specific people as being immoral, which is not what is happening; he has never once talked about the specific action of any given person involved in the incident; at the end of the day, it is a system that the Council perpetuates; when people are told to calm down and step back, the system is being perpetuated; he echoes all of Councilmember Vella’s comments; he was a little disappointed that the Council asked for a conversation to come forward on a topic that turned into a conversation about law enforcement when actually the adopted language was regarding the City provision of community services, responses and law enforcement, including policy review of existing policies; it was intentional so as not to get into the argument of whether the Police are good or bad; there will be law enforcement in Alameda to provide crime and violence prevention; when he talks to the Police Department staff at all levels, they talk about all the types of responses Council has made them responsible for; all Council has done is say there are plans and programs in place to be responsive; Council cannot one day say the Police are no longer responding to 5150 calls and have the Fire Department do it, but not talk to them or the City Manager about it; he thinks Alameda needs a community-led process, not a staff-led process; Council needs to trust the community to tell them which direction to go and to help identify goals and objectives; what he is proposing tonight is to identify a couple of Councilmembers who could work to find seven to nine people to fill a steering committee; tonight’s meeting can be continued so the names can be approved by the Council next Tuesday; he proposes to hold some Town Halls this month to get community feedback and propose the objectives and goals before the whole Council; the steering committee members should not all be of like minds and should represent a diverse range of voices; most people would agree with what Council wants to provide, which is safety and security for everybody; because of tonight’s conversation, which is perpetuated by City staff and is extremely problematic, people are under the idea that Council is somehow suggesting the Police are not going to come if someone is being attacked or if their house is being broken into; nobody has proposed that; what he proposes, as a general idea, is for a community-led process that is kicked-off tonight; Council is a month into this; next week will be a month since the video came out; Council needs to start moving forward to identify the two Councilmembers to serve as ex-officio non-voting members of a steering committee to bring back input from the document and have staff start looking at the Police Chief’s June 10th policy direction to identify ways to put things into action and come back for discussion so that when the community is told the Police are not going to respond to non-crime calls, Council will also be able to tell them what that means and how concerns will be responded to; what is important is to get going so by the end of the month, there are goals and objectives Council has agreed to; systemic racism is what Council is trying to overcome, but the question is how the City can start acting like anti-racists and how actions can be taken that work against racism and it imbues everything Council does; he has benefitted from and participated in racism; he is part of a racist system and every time he does not speak up or take action, he is perpetuating that; he rejects the idea that law enforcement, community services, planning, or anything can be talked about without talking about racism; Council needs to work with law enforcement staff and help them understand that racism and racist outcomes can be discussed without impugning the people’s moral goodness or badness because that is a false dichotomy; we cannot set up the dichotomy that if we are not cheering on the Police as saviors and patriots that somehow we are anti the people and the job that they are doing; every year Council should meet with them outside the Police Station and honor the Officers that have been shot and killed; he appreciates Mr. Horvath speaking out and being open, even though they may disagree on the tactical vehicle; at the end of the day, he is here to represent the people that voted; he does not want to talk about law enforcement being good or bad; he wants to talk about what the community want; and how to get to the outcomes desired; he understands the frustration and perception that Council is dragging its feet; the budget can be cut tomorrow, but there is nowhere to put the money and Council will not fire half the Police Department overnight; he does not think Council will fire half the Police Department, but everything is on the table; tonight the Council needs to identify and approve a process; he hopes it will be community-led, not staff-led; he appreciates staff’s input, but does not want to put more on their plate right now; staff will be engaged and involved but the people who do not generally get to sit at the table should be heard and be put front and center.
Councilmember Oddie stated he respects Vice Mayor Knox White and enjoys working with him, but there was recently passed a Code of Conduct which basically says Councilmembers are not supposed to attack the integrity or impugn other colleagues; he has tried to live up to that Code of Conduct and is not sure Vice Mayor Knox White’s remarks lived up to that; he does not think a person can be called a racist just because they want folks to see the human side of someone behind a badge; as leaders, when things are said, whether they are important or not, they mean things and people react to them; when Councilmembers get up in public or go on Facebook and accuse people of things whether or not it is true, it will incite hardening of feelings; he witnessed a hardening of feelings on one side with a group that will not even utter the phrase Black Lives Matter and another group that wants to abolish the Police Department; neither one of those are feasible alternatives; in trying to ask people to calm down the rhetoric, he is being criticized in violation of the Code of Conduct for asking for a rational approach to solving a major problem; he does agree with a lot of what has been said and believes goals can be set today; if the goals are centered around Black Lives Matter and everyone regardless of age, race and gender; everyone has to feel secure and be secure, then everything else can fall into place; he is open to however the process can be done; he likes the ideas Vice Mayor Knox White and Councilmember Vella mentioned; at some point, Council, as leaders, have a responsibility to chill the rhetoric and act like leaders, not inciters; people are looking for the Council to be leaders; if one goes against the Code of Conduct and attacks another Councilmember by name, it incites people; he respects and has a high opinion of Vice Mayor Knox White, but inciting people is not helpful for a solution; he concurs with Vice Mayor Knox White in that he wants to envision where to be and build to that; hopefully Council spends the rest of today talking about that and figuring out how to get there.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated she wants to acknowledge all the hard work the Council is doing; the Council has had more tough issues in a short period of time, than any other Council; it has been 24/7 starting with the COVID-19 pandemic; then, the second crisis; it has not been easy; many of her colleagues have said they are all humans with feelings and everyone chose to get involved; Council is committed and passionate and also impacted by everything happening; there are impact of hearing public speakers who are very one-sided, which is absolutely their first amendment right; however, it is Council’s responsibility to rise above the fray and understand that there is more to an issue than meets the eye or it simply is not possible to do some of the things people are calling for Council to do; advised engaging in self-care; stated these are tough times to be a leader; she does not want to be seeming to attack each other; stated she was not chastising Vice Mayor Knox White at all and was sharing her feelings and concerns about the way his proposal was put forward, along with her fervent desire for the Council to do their best to work collectively; suggested everyone take it a little easier on themselves; stated everyone has been working really hard on really tough issues that are not just local, but national and worldwide; she reminds herself every day that this is not the White House and does not have to be divisive; it is not us against them; Council will always stick to the truth.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated he respects Councilmember Oddie; pointing out certain behaviors is not an attack on a person’s character, although he understands it can land that way; he looks forward to talking more about the issue offline.
In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s inquiry regarding policy changes, the Police Chief stated that he appreciates everything said tonight; he agrees with Councilmember Vella that tension is good in conversations and nothing moves forward without it; he is happy to be part of tension-filled conversations; it is a regular part of what he does in his office; he also appreciates that behaviors can be called out without calling out people; he wanted to point out to Vice Mayor Knox White that some of the comments he might have been hearing from members of the Police Department do not have to do with toning-down rhetoric, but has to do with some of the things that were happening early on after videos of the May 23rd incident came out; some of the dialogue has been dialed-back a little bit, but people have been feeling a little hurt and attacked personally; he would also add it has happened with him even with members of Council, which has caused some lack of confidence in some members of the public when hearing statements on the news or theories that somehow he was looking the other way or engaged in some kind of cover-up, which is all absolutely false; as far as the policy changes, on April 3rd, the department dialed-back on a lot of self-initiated enforcement because of COVID, not because of anything that happened, which was a month and a half before the May 23rd incident; the policy change were an effort to protect the Officers and the public from COVID, which he reported to the City Manager and Council; in his interview on June 10th, he was not making a drastic departure from what was already being done; the statement about not going to mental health calls was edited as he went on to say that he had hoped to start a conversation at City Hall about how to approach mental health calls, which has now happened; unfortunately, that portion was not included in the television report, which is regrettable; he has apologized to the City Manager that it could have been done in a better way; the policy direction, which is a procedural thing, was already in place on April 3rd and 100% COVID-related; he did not mean to cause any consternation in the community or with City Hall; he was also trying to respond to the reporters on what he can say to the people of Alameda to make them feel safer and be responsive; it is important for everyone to hear the clarification.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated she appreciates all the comments from the public; being able to walk in someone else’s shoes becomes a useful attribute; she believes the youth today who have had negative experiences with law enforcement; she believes Alameda could do better; she met with the family whose car was vandalized and explained to them what the City is doing about racism issues in Alameda, including meeting about the issues; it is her hope to see some community task forces; the husband said he would love to be involved; as a former Marine, he protected and served people without knowing their skin color, which is the way things should work; the issue of unbundling Police services has some exciting possibilities; she has reached out to the coordinator of the CAHOOTS program; hopefully, he will be her guest this Friday at her Mayor’s Town Hall; Alameda’s Police Chief has reached out to the Eugene, Oregon Police Department to get information on how the Department works with the CAHOOTS program; there are also County services available; the Assistant City Manager has reached out to the Alameda County Behavioral Health Department Director to talk about how the City may be able to work with the County on some services; anything done should be fact-based and data-driven; she would like to look into more information on collecting and analyzing data on the number and types of calls received by Alameda’s Dispatchers; it would be important in deciding how to reimagine the delivery of Police services and how mental health calls might be handled differently; the CAHOOTS program is unique because it is connected to a 30 year old health care institution, which is something Council would need to think about for Alameda; implicit biased training is important; it is also important to have stakeholders and Police at the table; she does not want it to be us against them and it is appropriate to have someone from the Police Department present when discussing the issue of Police policies and practices; she hopes Council would consider a youth advisory commission similar to the City of Oakland; it gives youth a voice in real time to talk about and raise issues; it is reasonable to say Council cannot do everything set forward at once, notwithstanding the public’s desire to move quickly; Council will move with deliberate speed, but also needs to do it right; the one issue that could be set aside or referred elsewhere might be the laws that criminalize survivors; some of the topics might be good subjects for task forces; Council does need to talk about the size, mission, expectations and objectives of the task forces; she agrees with some of the speakers who said the process should be community-led and that Council should not be a part of it; Councilmembers sitting in on a task force takes it in a different direction; the preferable way is for members of the community to meet with staff; there are some concerns with Brown Act issues that come into play when Councilmembers sit on subcommittees; she is happy to work with another Councilmember to work with staff on how to move forward; she would like to give staff direction and come out with a work plan and timeline; it would be helpful to have a Council subcommittee; she would be happy to work with Councilmember Vella on a subcommittee, subject to the approval of her colleagues.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated he would absolutely support a collaboration with Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft and Councilmember Vella; he is less interested in task forces; he prefers a steering committee, which does not make the decisions, but develops the process and figures out ways to bring in the community; he hopes to move forward tonight with the subcommittee as well as have a solid plan to have things come back; he would like a subcommittee that is actually an ex-officio, non-voting committee that comes back with a proposed process and goals and objectives by the end of month.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Vice Mayor Knox White; stated that she would like the decision for a proposal and other considerations to be brought back to the Council through the subcommittee; she does not want to take an inordinate amount of time, just enough time to think it through well; Council also has to consider meetings will all have to take place virtually during this time of COVID.
Councilmember Oddie stated Council had an ad hoc committee for the America’s Cup that held public meetings; he likes the idea of Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft and Councilmember Vella working together; guiding principles going forward can include basic categories and goals, geographic diversity, gender diversity, members of the Black community, community interest groups, business high impact, and centering Black and youth voices; as long as the proposal comes back quickly and is open and the community can be part of it; he agrees with Vice Mayor Knox White that Council can come up with the goals and objectives by the end of the month; the issue of accountability and the possibility of a citizens board has not been fleshed out, but ballot language would need to be considered.
In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s inquiry regarding how a citizen’s oversight committee might be formed, the City Attorney stated the Council has wide-ranging discretion on how to ultimately form a committee and how it would function; depending on the function assigned to the committee, there may or may not need to be ballot action; for example, the Charter assigns administrative functions to the City Manager, and policy-making duties to the Council; if enough decision-making authority is assigned to the body, it could begin to infringe on the City Manager’s authority to administer the Police Department; at that point, it would need voter consent; on the other hand, if a committee is established that gives Council and the City Manager recommendations about policy changes, ballot approval is clearly not needed as it would be an advisory committee.
Councilmember Oddie stated people would need to understand that if the ultimate outcome is to have a civilian body with more authority, it would have to go to the ballot; because of timing, implementation would not happen as quickly as people would want; Council would have to find a path forward.
The City Attorney stated the Council could not modify the Charter by Special election; it would have to be done at a general or primary election; so if not this year, it would go middle or end of 2022.
Councilmember Vella reiterated consensus she heard, which includes having a steering committee lay out the process; stated there would be a Council subcommittee; she would be happy to work with Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft; inquired whether there is agreement on the general scope of consideration and proposed over-arching goal; stated that she believes everyone agrees the issue goes beyond the law enforcement; she would like to hear from her colleagues on what they would like to see Council achieve; while many of the laws that criminalize survival are State laws, it will be a larger part of the conversation regarding policing policies and practices; she would like to get a sense of meeting dates and an overall timeline; Vice Mayor Knox White’s goal was to get it done by the end of the month; she thinks the issue of community calls for oversight and accountability should be part of the community-led process; she would like change, but in order for it to be transformative change, getting something on the ballot should not be rushed; she is looking forward to robust conversation about what the community wants, what are the best practices and what has been effective in similar-sized communities; part of leadership would be outlining the process and then empowering the people to inform Council of their wants; she is excited to get buy-in and be able to say the process is community-led; she recognizes and does not want the digital divide to be an issue when it comes to the meetings; she would like to figure out ways the City would be able to provide devices to committee members who need them or solutions to make it work.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to build into the process a way to measure outcomes; what makes Councilmember Vella ideal to be on the subcommittee is her understanding of policy as a labor lawyer.
In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s inquiry regarding staff timing, the Assistant City Manager stated staff could take the month of July and work through what the work plan is going to look like; using the sub-committee and steering committee concept works well; he would have to sit down and schedule specific dates with the Council; July is realistic.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he thinks the issue of unbundling Police services might require a separate community input process; one of the big reasons why Council is here is because the community was concerned about the way in which Mali Watkins was treated; the CAHOOTS program is a touchy-feely program that people are attracted to.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated he is not ready to move forward with any specifics tonight; he is not going to be able to support having a subcommittee come up with a process tonight that does not have dates or cannot come back with finalized amended goals and objectives by the end of the month; he cannot support the direction if there are no milestones; Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s proposed subcommittee working with staff will slow things down; the community expects and deserves some action so they are not waiting another month; if Council is going to move forward with some model, he would like to know when it will be brought back , who will be on the steering committee and the process, so that there are goals and objectives by the end of the month; he does not want to wait another month.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated what she intends to work with Councilmember Vella very quickly come up with proposals that can be brought back to Council for finalization, but she would like to see specified plans, a timeline, measurables and how to decide outcomes; she would like to get a better idea of what body will help shape the process; July is very busy; Council may need to carve out time in August.
Councilmember Oddie stated with COVID, he is not going anywhere; he agrees with Vice Mayor Knox White that there has to be a definitive date; one of the beauties of the proposal is that it has a fixed, rapid schedule; there is unanimity regarding the unbundling; he wants to know how Council should proceed.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is agreement across the board that Council does need to unbundle Police services; she has a general sense and aspirational goal of what the resources would look like, but there is the need to analyze data; the question is what is the right model and how to get there in terms of funding.
Councilmember Oddie stated Council direction qualifies under Vice Mayor Knox White’s definition of a pre-determined outcome.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated his proposal is that Council give staff, and the experts on the staff, the Police Chief’s list of five different policies to come up with a model and return to Council with a recommendation; unbundling can be an ongoing conversation.
Councilmember Oddie inquired what the deliverable on unbundling would be from the steering committee.
Vice Mayor Knox White responded the steering committee would come back with community-derived goals and objective definitions, and also a process for having a conversation with the community to identify what unbundling looks like and what are the important things to unbundle; then it comes to Council for a decision.
Councilmember Vella stated she thinks everyone is in agreement that Council would come back by the end of July; a special meeting can be scheduled to actually get concurrence with the proposals; there will also be a number of town hall opportunities, recognizing that there are other committees and groups that are meeting; there also needs to be discussion whether there should be consistent membership within the subcommittee; it is important to know whether members will be asked to be on the steering committee for a month or if they need to carve out time for a longer duration.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Councilmember Vella regarding the amount of time envisioned for the community engagement; stated that she hopes the economy would open back up soon and people can get back to their livelihoods; inquired what the timeframe would look like.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated that he has heard comments from community members that Council will disperse too much; there is a lot of validity to that; anti-racism and unbundling are long term projects; he has a personal interest in engaging in the anti-racism work and how that looks at a City and City government level; he thinks the two issues should be reviewed by the end of the month; the other policy issues can be looked at on separate tracks, but have two or three tracks going on at the same time; he trusts the steering committee for the timeframe.
Councilmember Oddie stated he trusts that the steering committee would communicate to the members the expectations on the timeframe.
Councilmember Daysog stated he would be looking at the end of July or early August; the City of San Leandro has made major decisions regarding de-funding Police rapidly; he believes Alameda can make similar decision on the same timeframe; he would like to look at the CAHOOTS program as a model and Council can begin to make good decisions; staff can look into an additional range of other issues which he thinks can be done by the end of month.
In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s inquiry, the City Manager stated staff has some good direction and he will work with staff to set up the steering committee format and hopefully come back with staff report to Council by July 21st.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated she was looking for more than just status report.
The City Manager clarified that, at the minimum, staff would come back with status and a recommendation.
Councilmember Oddie moved approval of authorizing the creation of a steering committee comprised of Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft and Councilmember Vella to develop the scope and goal, with the membership based on the policy documents by Vice Mayor Knox White and Councilmember Vella, with a deadline to report back by July 31st.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated she would like the motion to base the work on both the policy document and the entire Council discussion.
Councilmember Oddie concurred with Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft and accepted the amendment to the motion.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, added the clarification of reporting back with the proposal and the definition; stated that he wants to be clear there will be a final recommendation for goals, objectives and work plan.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 10:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Irma Glidden, Assistant City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
****************************************************************************************************
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -JULY 7, 2020- -5:00 P.M.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:04 p.m.
Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was held via WebEx.]
Absent: None.
The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(20- ) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8); Property: Site A at Alameda Point; City Negotiators: Eric J. Levitt, City Manager; Debbie Potter, Community Development Director; Michelle Giles, Redevelopment Project Manager; and Lisa Nelson Maxwell, Assistant City Attorney; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda and Alameda Point Partners: Under Negotiation: Price and Terms
(20- ) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8); Property: Greenway Golf, 1 Clubhouse Memorial Road, Alameda, CA; City Negotiators: Eric J. Levitt, City Manager; Michael Roush, Assistant City Attorney; Amy Wooldridge, Recreation and Parks Director; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda and Greenway Golf: Under Negotiation: Price and Terms
(20- ) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8); Property: Jim’s on the Course, 1 Clubhouse Memorial Road, Alameda, CA; City Negotiators: Amy Wooldridge, Recreation and Parks Director; and Michael H Roush, Assistant City Attorney; Organizations Represented: Dialemi Inc., dba Jim’s on the Course, Tom Geanekos, Owner: Issue Under Negotiation: Real Property Negotiations Price and Terms of Payment
(20- ) Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957); Position Evaluated: City Attorney - Yibin Shen [Continued to July 14, 2020 at 5:59 p.m.]
Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk announced that regarding Site A, staff provided information and Council provided direction by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5; regarding Greenway Golf, staff provided information and Council provided direction by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5; regarding Jim’s on the Course, staff provided information and Council provided direction by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5; and regarding Performance Evaluation, no action was taken.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 7:04 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
****************************************************************************************************
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -JULY 7, 2020- -7:00 P.M.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:22 p.m.
Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was held via WebEx.]
Absent: None.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(20- ) Proclamation Declaring July 7, 2020 as Reverend Michael Yoshii Day
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft read the proclamation.
Reverend Yoshii made brief comments.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(20- ) Danielle Mieler, Alameda, expressed concern for the selection of Alfonso Estrada to investigate police misconduct; urged Council to provide feedback to the City Manager that the contract is unacceptable.
(20- ) Ben Calica, Alameda, expressed concern for the rules governing public comment; urged Council to adopt rules aimed at understanding what is being said for nuanced and new comments.
(20- ) Former Mayor Trish Spencer, Alameda, discussed testing being made available in Alameda, hand-free dispensers, face covering clarifications and oversight committees.
CONSENT CALENDAR
The City Clerk announced the Permanent Local Housing Program [paragraph no. 20- ] was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Vice Mayor Knox White moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]
(*20- ) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on June 2, 2020. Approved.
(*20- ) Ratified bills in the amount of $6,192,015.63.
(*20- ) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Five-Year Contract in an Amount Not to Exceed $208,161.20 to Du-All Safety, LLC for Public Work’s Safety Program Compliance Services. Accepted.
(*20- ) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Remit Payment in the Amount of $476,737 to Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) for Material and Labor Costs Related to Electric Utility Extension into Alameda Point’s Adaptive Reuse Areas, Phase 1. Accepted.
(*20- ) Recommendation to Approve the Clement Avenue Safety Improvement Project Final Design Concept; and Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Second Amendment to the Service Provider Agreement with CDM Smith to Increase Compensation by $530,332, Including Contingencies, for a Total Aggregate Compensation Not to Exceed $1,130,633, to Complete the Plans, Specifications and Estimate for the Clement Avenue Safety Improvement Project. Accepted.
(*20- ) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to the Agreement with Lang, Hansen, O’Malley & Miller, a California General Partnership, Extending the Term of the Agreement by Two Months and Increasing the Compensation by $20,000, for an Aggregate Amount Not to Exceed $91,000, for Legislative Advocacy/Governmental Relations Services Relating to the Surplus Land Act. Accepted.
(20- ) Resolution No. 15671, “Authorizing the Submission of an Application for Senate Bill 2 Funding from the State Department of Housing and Community Development Under the Permanent Local Housing Program (PLHA) and Affirming the City Council’s Adoption of a Five-Year Permanent Local Housing Allocation Plan; and Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute Related Documents, Agreements, and Modifications.” Adopted.
The Community Development Director gave a brief presentation.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated goals are consistent with the Housing Element; providing housing is one of the Council’s top priorities.
Discussed a movie studio and amusement park proposal being built at Alameda Point: Darla Brown, Alameda.
Councilmember Oddie stated there has been three attempts at getting Senate Bill (SB) 2 out of legislature and it has finally come to fruition.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined the fee for SB2; stated the fee will go towards affordable housing.
Councilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
(*20- ) Resolution No. 15672, “Calling for a General Municipal Election to be Consolidated with the Statewide General Election to be Held in the City of Alameda on Tuesday, November 3, 2020 for the Election of Certain Officers, and Requesting the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to Permit the Registrar of Voters to Render Specified Services to the City Relating to the Conduct of Said Election Pursuant to Section 10403 of the California Elections Code.” Adopted.
(*20- ) Ordinance No. 3284, “Revising the City’s Sewer Service Charges.” Finally passed.
(*20- ) Ordinance No. 3285, “Authorizing the City Manager or Designee to Execute a Third Amendment to the License with Amber Kinetics, Inc., a California Corporation, for the Unimproved Lot Located at 641 West Red Line Avenue in Alameda to Extend the Term for 12 Months and Provide One 12-Month Extension Option.” Finally passed.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(20- ) Adoption of Resolution Calling for the Holding of a Consolidated Municipal Election in the City of Alameda on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, for the Submission of a Proposed Charter Amendment to Repeal the Prohibition Against Building Multi-Family Housing in Alameda and Authorizing City Councilmembers to File Written Arguments For or Against the Measure. Not Adopted.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director gave a brief presentation.
Councilmember Vella inquired the parcels likely to be impacted by the repeal of Measure A.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded the City will need to identify enough land to accommodate the lower-income portion of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) which is estimated at roughly 2,000 units; stated the land will need to be zoned at 30-units per acre; areas that are being looked at are the Northern Waterfront, Alameda Point and some shopping center sites.
Councilmember Vella inquired which shopping center sites are being considered.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded staff has not completed the Housing Element, and final numbers are not available; stated South Shore, Marina Village and Harbor Bay are possible locations.
Councilmember Vella stated most of the listed locations are west of Park Street; expressed concern about there being only one point of egress west of Park Street; expressed support for Harbor Bay being included as one of the considered sites; inquired the process after the repeal of Measure A; stated once the language is repealed, the repeal will have to be put into action; allowing the policy to be implemented in an equitable way will need a process.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated staff has begun the process due to the General Plan and Housing Element update; stated Council will need to adopt the updates in 2022; the Land Use Element of the General Plan has identified the areas to be considered to accommodate housing over the next 20 years; sites that have been called out are: Alameda Point, Northern Waterfront, and shopping center sites, as well as some opportunities along Park Street and Webster Street; the planning process anticipates robust community discussion about general location ideas; final RHNA numbers will be known in the spring of 2021; the anticipated RHNA numbers are around 3,500 to 4,000 housing units; units will be placed in the locations over the next eight years once there is consensus.
Councilmember Vella inquired whether Harbor Bay will be included.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative; stated there are four main locations being considered: South Shore, Harbor Bay, Marina Village and Alameda Landing; stated looking at the future of the sites is obvious; there is very little to no vacant land in Alameda; available land must be used; Alameda Point, Northern Waterfront and shopping centers are major areas to be considered; the vast majority of vacant land is at Alameda Point; there are few real opportunities on Park Street and Webster Street.
Councilmember Vella inquired whether there have been previous projects that would have been able to provide more units had measuring not been an issue.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative; stated the State Density Bonus has been used to get multi-family housing built; discussed a housing project on Webster Street; stated the project has nine housing units but could have more due to the volume; noted the housing types for the project are not common; stated many people have requested to redevelop the CVS Pharmacy site at Oak Street and Santa Clara Avenue; however, the project is not viable.
Councilmember Vella inquired whether City-owned parcels will be included.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative; stated repealing Measure A sets the City up to decide as a community which sites should be planned to have higher density; the process must determine where and how needs will be met; State law does not prohibit single-family housing, it does prohibit single-family housing covering the entire City.
Councilmember Vella stated the current Housing Element and multi-family overlay sets the density at 30-units per acre for low-income in order to comply with State law; the City is not quite at that limit; inquired whether the repeal of Article 26 will allow Council to set higher density levels to accommodate multi-story structures or other alternatives.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative; stated the repeal allows a decision to be made about where to increase density and in which areas; RHNA needs must be met; however, the need can be met having many units on a few sites or a little on many sites.
Vice Mayor Knox White inquired whether the removal of Measure A changes anything, to which the Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the negative.
Vice Mayor Knox White inquired whether the removal of Measure A will increase the City’s RHNA number, to which the Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the negative.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated the RHNA numbers stay the same no matter what; the numbers effect how the decision is made to accommodate.
Discussed the launch of a website called repeal26.com; urged Council to change the proposal on the ballot to strike all of Article 26 from the Charter; stated without removal, systemic racism enabled by the Article will continue; Measure A was designed to keep lower income people out of Alameda: Zac Bowling, Alameda.
Urged Council to instruct City staff to draft ballot language to repeal Article 26 in-full; stated the Bay Area has suffered a housing shortage for years; the cost of living makes housing impossible for lower income brackets; discussed essential workers living in the communities they serve; stated Article 26 is a racist stain on the City’s history: Laura Gamble, Alameda.
Expressed support for repealing Article 26; discussed “The Color of Law;” stated Alameda is a wonderful community which has an opportunity to open the City to new neighbors; the community should be fully inclusive; the matter is related to zoning, not a mandate for developers to have high density buildings; smaller multi-family project sites are a very important form of housing; more flexibility is needed: Xiomara Cisneros, Alameda.
Expressed support for a full repeal of Article 26; discussed her experience as a resident of Alameda; urged Council to support a full repeal: Susie Hufstader, Alameda.
Stated Article 26 has been laid out as racist by design; discussed his experience as a resident of Alameda; noted only 5% of the population is Black; stated housing should be made affordable for all people: Josh Geyer, Alameda.
Urged Council to fully repeal Article 26; stated Article 26 puts the City out of compliance with State law; there are strong preservation and design review ordinances which did not exist in 1973 or 1990; Article 26 is demonstrably racist in its impacts: Gaylon Parsons, Alameda.
Urged Council to place a full repeal of Article 26 on the November ballot; discussed a sponsored vigil; urged residents to consider the many ways Black lives are diminished and taken; discussed personal actions to be taken for an increase in accountability: Cheri Johansen, Alameda Progressives.
Urged Council to reconsider its June decision to divide the repeal into two parts and instead put all parts of Article 26 on the November ballot; stated low-income Easy Bay residents are overwhelmingly elders, children, people with disabilities, and Black, Brown and new immigrant residents; separating the Article will be confusing for voters and will increase costs; many people have to wait an extended time for affordable units and each affordable unit counts: Grover Wehman-Brown, East Bay Housing Organization.
Urged Council to place a full repeal of Article 26 on the November ballot; stated the Article should have been removed years ago; Article 26 has been used as a battering ram and a mockery of the City’s aspirations to being a decent and welcoming community; Alamedans can no longer ignore the discriminatory nature of Article 26; discussed supporters of repealing Article 26: Toni Grimm, Alameda Justice Alliance.
Expressed support for a full appeal of Article 26 on the November ballot; discussed the devastating effects on people kept out of housing: Liz Varela, Building Futures with Women and Children.
Urged Council to follow the staff recommendation and direct City staff to prepare a full repeal of Measure A/Article 26; stated the repeal will help the City move past a discriminatory legacy; Measure A prevents the City from reaching RHNA obligations, is at cross-purposes with the General Plan and State law and has racially discriminatory impacts and effects: Sophia DeWitt, Alameda.
Expressed support for having the total repeal of Measure A on the ballot; stated the repeal will partially help solve a critical need for housing throughout Alameda; there is still much work to do; the repeal will help to clean out exclusionary provisions; Measure A has failed various claims related to traffic congestion and protection of Victorian houses: Cynthia Bonta, Alameda.
Expressed support for a full repeal of Article 26 being put on the November ballot; stated the repeal is good governance; Article 26 is a blunt instrument and does not belong in the Charter; refined tools are needed: Jono Soglin, Alameda.
Stated there is an affordable housing crisis; Article 26 is not the culprit; the shortfall lied with past decisions made by City government; noted State law supersedes the City’s law; Council has a legal obligation to produce a Housing Element since 1969, which is four years prior to the adoption of Article 26; Alameda avoided compliance with the law until 2012 based on a legal demand letter; noted the inclusionary ordinance is also a shortfall for affordable housing: Paul Foreman, Alameda.
Discussed segregation and zoning being applied as a tool for exclusion since World War I; discussed research he provided; stated zoning reduces housing stock and affordability; urged Council to support a full repeal of Article 26: Rasheed Shabazz, Alameda.
Expressed support for a full repeal of Article 26; discussed her experience working with those at risk of being homeless; stated the island of Alameda is segregated due to zoning; urged Council to fully repeal Article 26: Alexia Arocha, Alameda.
Comments read into the record:
Expressed concern about repealing Article 26 and for trust in leadership: Patsy Baer, Alameda.
Urged Council not to include repeal of Article 26-3 on the November ballot: Barbara Johnson, Alameda.
Urged Council to direct staff to draft ballot language to repeal Article 26 in full; stated Article 26 was designed to prevent Black and Brown people from living in Alameda; multi-family housing is sorely needed; housing affordability will help the City meet RHNA targets: Danielle Mieler, Alameda.
Stated a repeal of Article 26 is an underhanded move during the pandemic while people are confined inside homes and unable to attend meetings in person; discussed their experience as residents of Alameda; urged Council to concentrate on traffic, infrastructure, homelessness and to vote no on placing the repeal of Article 26 on the November ballot: Bob and Beth Cote, Alameda.
Stated Article 26-3 should not be put on the November ballot; urged Council not to reverse the June 2 decision and vote no; stated the City deserves better consideration and decision: Denine Keltner, Alameda.
Stated it is premature to schedule repeal of Measure A; there is plenty of housing; more gentrified housing is not needed; more housing is needed for those displaced by gentrification; the nation is in a state of flux due to the economic crash and COVID-19: Margie, Alameda.
Expressed strong opposition to the staff recommendation; stated the repeal of Article 26-1 should be constrained; further modifications should be placed on the November 2022 ballot; the pandemic has permanently changed lives and future housing and transportation needs are not well understood: Therese Hall, Alameda.
Urged Council to defer the removal or alteration of Article 26-3 until after the completion of the upcoming General Plan; stated density restrictions are necessary in certain parts of the City to protect the aesthetic; density restrictions shielded vintage homes: Karen Lithgow, Alameda.
Stated allowing the matter to proceed is an infringement of rights and will reverse attempts at regaining public trust; expressed opposition to having the repeal of Article 26-3 on the ballot: James Snider, Sharon Snider, and Cynthia La Croix, Alameda.
Stated Council conduct has been dishonest; discussed statistics of Alameda residents; stated the purpose of Article 26 is to protect the character and quality of life in the City by limiting building for density: Dan McDonald, Alameda.
Stated Article 26 has not been an impediment to the development of multi-family housing in Alameda; State housing requirements partially supersede Article 26; urged Council to focus on how to bring more affordable housing the Alameda: Ed Sing, Alameda.
Expressed concern for the repeal of Article 26; expressed support for accommodating developers’ transit solutions; stated low transportation scores impact the City’s ability to qualify for affordable housing funds: M.D. Hall, Alameda.
Urged Council not to include the repeal of Article 26-3 on the November ballot; stated there is tremendous growth planned for the City and many new housing units are in the process of being built; initiating a vote during COVID-19 is the wrong time: Marel Grunt, Alameda.
Expressed opposition to reversing the June 2 decision; urged Council not to place the full repeal of Article 26 on the November ballot and to adhere to good faith agreements: Rob Halford, Alameda.
Expressed opposition to the repeal of Article 26; stated repeal will destroy the quality of life in the City; urged Council to keep the City unique: David Bock, Alameda.
Stated it is the wrong time to take up an important issue such as Measure A; members of the public would like to engage in discussions; urged Council to uphold the highest standards of political discourse: Gretchen Lipow, Alameda.
Urged Council not to include repeal of Article 26-3 on the November ballot: Andrea Medulan, Alameda.
Stated there are many proposals for additional housing but none for improving infrastructure; more people equals more congestion; Article 26 was voted in by majority of voters in both 1973 and 1991: Maria Carballedo, Alameda.
Urged Council to focus on reparations in the form of mortgage rate reductions or rent vouchers: Mike Van Dine, Alameda.
Provided a flyer: Conchita Perales, Alameda.
Stated repeal of Article 26 removes an obstacle to development and does not fight against social injustice; Alameda is not obligated to follow the State’s recommendations; residents need Alameda’s quality of life and unique character preserved: Michele Bock, Alameda.
Expressed opposition to full repeal of Article 26 being placed on the November ballot; expressed support for Article 26; stated Article 26 has helped deter development of more apartment buildings and has saved historic buildings from demolition: Joan More, Alameda.
Urged Council not to fulfil a “sneak attack” by including repeal of Measure A on the November ballot; stated there has been no opportunity for community input: Elizabeth Tuckwell, Alameda.
Stated Article 26 has been a burdensome yoke around Alameda’s neck; the Article is an imprecise planning tool, is unconstitutional and cannot be enforced; urged Council to place a repeal of Article 26 in its entirety on the ballot: Jon Spangler, Alameda.
Urged Council to leave the City of Alameda and Bay Farm alone; discussed housing in relation to transportation funds; expressed support for removing Article 26-1; urged Council to leave Article 26.3 in the City Charter: Robert Farrar, Alameda.
Stated housing will not increase by 200%; final RHNA numbers will not be published until the end of 2021; staff has identified land which can be used to satisfy State mandates; Article 26 cannot interfere with identified land; repealing Article 26 in its entirety will allow staff to proceed as they please without regard to preserving the current ambience of the City: Jay Garfinkle, Alameda.
Stated the egress issue must be addressed; discussed morning traffic issues; urged the issue not be political in nature; expressed support for building larger units versus numerous smaller units; stated high rise buildings will impact the City; urged Council to protect existing citizens of Alameda: Rosalinda Corvi, Alameda.
Additional comment via Zoom:
Urged Council not to proceed with the staff recommendation to place full repeal of Article 26 on the November ballot and to stick with the June 2 decision to repeal only Sections 26-1 and 26-2; stated repeal of Article 26 should be proposed after completion of the General Plan revision; repeal of Article 26-1 is reasonable to place on the November ballot: Christopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Society.
***
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 9:22 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:38 p.m.
***
(20- ) Vice Mayor Knox White moved approval of suspending the nine minute Council speaking time limit.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which failed by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Abstain; Vella: No; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Abstain: 1. Noes: 1.
***
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Council is a body of elected officials; stated staff members are professional and provide informative reports; noted the amount of participation via Zoom; stated there are likely to be many additional people watching the meeting as well; that she takes exception to ad hominem attacks via public comment; the meeting should remain civil.
Councilmember Oddie moved approval of Council directing staff to bring back ballot language for the November 3, 2020 election to repeal Article 26 in its entirety.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated the proponents of a full repeal of Article 26 declare it as racist and meant to stifle diversity in Alameda; noted Census data shows the African American population had grown immediately prior to the adoption of Measure A in 1973; stated the 1980 Census showed the African American population doubled in Alameda, as well as another growth in 1990; noted a drop in African American population from the 2000 Census data and was largely due to the Naval base closure; stated there is a projected Census increase for the upcoming report; there is a steady progression of African Americans in Alameda since 1970 with Measure A intact; Census data puts to rest the argument that Measure A is a racist tool meant to stifle diversity; noted African American populations have experienced significant declines in Berkeley, Oakland, and San Francisco; stated Oakland lost 10,500 African Americans between 1970 and 2018; Berkeley lost 15,200 between the same time and San Francisco lost 38,400 African Americans; Alameda has performed better than Oakland, San Francisco, and Berkeley in terms of attracting and retaining African Americans as residents; Alameda has changed drastically over the years; the argument of Measure A being a racist tool is tired; Measure A is urban planning by sledgehammer and is not a fine tool of precision; the Measure is still needed and continues to be the sledgehammer which keeps runaway growth in-check; an island such as Alameda needs to be thoughtful as to how the future is planned; removing Measure A does not mean developers will self-regulate runaway growth; Measure A provides extra protection and forces wise, thoughtful, well moderated growth; should Measure A be repealed, runaway growth is likely to occur; State mandates can be met even with Measure A; the State recently certified the Housing Element and another is due; apartments are being built while Measure A is in place; City legal experts found a way to keep Measure A intact while meeting State law; the City has become more diverse even with Measure A; the City can continue to racially diversify and support thoughtful, well-planned and modulated growth.
Councilmember Oddie stated the matter is being passed to the voters for decision; voters will decide whether change is necessary; there is a difference between de facto and de jure racism; discussed literature which illustrates the impetus behind laws in the Bay Area and population comparisons between San Leandro and Alameda; focusing on de jure racism is more important; noted racist laws have been placed in effect in the Country, many in California, to keep African Americans out of white neighborhoods; stated pillars of white supremacy must come down and laws must be changed; Council must take responsibility and steps towards removing the laws; the matter must be put forth for a vote on the November ballot; read a passage from “The Color of Law;” stated that he would like to get rid of the badges of slavery in the City Charter; expressed support for placing repeal on the ballot.
Councilmember Vella stated prior to Measure A, her grandfather could not find a home to raise his family due to discrimination against Filipinos in Alameda; expressed concern about many projects throughout Alameda being rejected due to density and multi-family units, which are affiliated with the concept of lower income; stated Council must be thoughtful about the steps to follow; repealing Measure A can still yield disparate impacts should Council not be careful and thoughtful with the process; the repeal is not the end-all and people should think beyond repeal; a lot of stress is placed on the West End including inquiries related to transit; there is not a safe and clean way for people to cross into Oakland by bike or foot; the effort to provide a safe crossing must be continued and is an environmental equity issue; noted there are many parking lots that can be part of a reimagining; stated smaller neighborhoods are part of what makes Alameda; expressed support for people being part of the process; stated people must focus on the Alameda that is wanted; homeowner options are also needed; the focus cannot just be on rental properties; racial and economic diversity are important; expressed support for placing full repeal on the November ballot.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated people may disagree, but should do so civilly; Alameda can do better than being compared against cities known for gentrification; Alameda is an area where regional impacts have significant issues; every city is going to have to step up and address the issues; a place must be created where people can network and grow by placing roots down; expressed support for repeal being placed on the ballot; stated Measure A does not protect the number of households; Measure A ends up placing housing where it does not make sense versus where infrastructure can maintain.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council has the opportunity to correct a 47 year-old mistake and allow the voters to use their voice; outlined issues around homelessness, COVID-19, and racial injustice, which are inter-related crises; Alameda is under housed and needs to do a better job of housing people; discussed housing units at Alameda Point; stated the best way to address homelessness is not to let it happen; Council must address the housing crisis; expressed support for putting Measure A repeal on the ballot; stated times change; the City is no longer the same as it was in the 1970s; some long-term residents would like to remain in Alameda and downsize; however, smaller units have not been able to be built; the opportunity is exciting and meshes with the moment; people are becoming more civically engaged and now is the time to give Measure A another look.
Councilmember Oddie stated the motion is drafted to state Council is providing direction.
Vice Mayor Knox White requested clarification that the direction is to have staff draft the language to bring back for Council to vote on the language being placed on the November ballot.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded in the affirmative; stated staff is confident they can bring back the report in time.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1.
The City Clerk announced the argument timeline will change due to Council not adopting the resolution tonight; stated should the resolution be adopted on July 21st, new deadlines will be set; all related actions will be taken on July 21st and no further action is needed at this time.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to designate members to draft argument language.
The City Attorney stated Council may begin designating members; staff will need to formally designate when the report is brought forth July 21st; an official timeline will run from July 21st as indicated by the City Clerk; Councilmembers may be designated authors prior.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for option three: no more than two Councilmembers to draft an argument and decide to have a combination of Councilmembers and/or other signers; stated the option provides maximum leeway; expressed support for Vice Mayor Knox White and herself being designated.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether a Councilmember may lead the “no” argument.
The City Attorney responded Council has the right to appoint one or two of its members to draft the opposing arguments; should Council decide to appoint a Councilmember, the priority will lie with the Councilmember(s) under the Elections Code.
In response to Councilmember Oddie’s inquiry, the City Clerk stated the distinction between options two and three is whether the subcommittee or Council decides who will sign.
Councilmember Oddie expressed support for option three, as proposed.
Councilmember Vella expressed support for option three as proposed and for Councilmember Daysog being part of the alternative subcommittee.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether he may work with others.
The City Clerk responded Councilmember Daysog will have priority ranking should more than one argument be submitted.
The City Attorney stated the two committees may designate others and have the same powers.
Vice Mayor Knox White moved approval of creating two subcommittees, a committee for yes on the repeal with members designated as himself and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft, and a committee for no on the repeal with Councilmember Daysog.
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
(20- ) Resolution No. 15673, “Calling for the Holding of a Consolidated Municipal Election in the City of Alameda on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, for the Submission of a Proposed Charter Amendment to Clarify the Prohibition Against Members of the Council Interfering with Duties of the City Manager and Other Executive City Officials, Authorize the City Attorney to Prosecute State Law Misdemeanors, and Amend Outdated Provisions including Utilizing Gender Neutral Language, and Authorizing City Councilmembers to File Written Arguments For or Against the Measure.” Adopted.
The City Attorney and City Clerk gave a brief presentation.
Councilmember Vella moved approval of the staff recommendation and adoption of the resolution.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor Knox White stated a member of the public has previously requested the matter be bifurcated; the work being performed by the City Attorney is work already being completed; noted Council will still decide whether or not the City engages in prosecutorial work; stated the matter provides a little more local control for important items.
Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he would like to see Section 7-3 have specific provisions; noted that he will be abstaining from the vote.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he previously had reservations about the matter; noted the Council is still having discussions about violations, which provides him more comfort than before.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Abstain; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Abstention: 1.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for herself and Vice Mayor Knox White draft argument language.
Councilmember Vella moved approval of Vice Mayor Knox White and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft as the subcommittee under option three on the argument in favor.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
(20- ) Resolution No. 15674, “Amending Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 to Add and Revise Fees.” Adopted.
The Assistant City Manager gave a brief presentation.
Vice Mayor Knox White expressed concern about appeal fees; outlined a previous appeal for Alameda Theatre; noted appeals on priority projects for Council and the City should have a different fees; expressed support for directing staff to return in the future to address the issue.
The City Attorney stated field fees are user fees for use of public property; the City has more latitude to set user fees; permit fees must be set at cost-recovery only; permit fees that are governed by Proposition 26 and 218 do not authorize the City to charge one group of payers to subsidize permit fees for another group of payers; noted a smaller fee on solar projects is possible due to the project type being a Council priority; fees set based on the appellant or applicant become legally problematic.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that Council may direct staff to return with the information at a later date.
Councilmember Vella moved approval of the staff recommendation, including adoption of the resolution.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, with the following amendment: direct staff to identify how Council may increase the cap on affordable housing and homeless service projects for appeals.
Councilmember Vella requested clarification; inquired whether the amendment is to look at ways to cover the cost of appeals, to which Vice Mayor Knox White responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Vella accepted the amendment to the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he supports the motion, but not necessarily the amendment.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
(20- ) Resolution No. 15675, “Establishing Integrated Waste Collection Ceiling Rates and Service Fees for Alameda County Industries, Inc. for Rate Period 19 (July 2020 to June 2021).” Adopted.
The Public Works Coordinator and Marva Sheehan, HF&H Consultants, gave a brief presentation.
Councilmember Oddie moved approval of the staff recommendation, including adoption of the related resolution.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
(20- ) Recommendation to Provide an Update on Two-Step Procurement Process for Alameda’s Integrated Waste Franchise; Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Franchise Agreement between the City of Alameda and Alameda County Industries (ACI) Providing to the City a Maximum 18 Month Extension Option, as Needed; and Authorize the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to the Service Provider Agreement with Hilton Farnkopf & Hobson Consultants, LLC (HF&H) for Solid Waste Agreement and Procurement Consulting, in an Amount Not to Exceed $74,025, with the Option of Three One-Year Extensions, for a Total Five-Year Compensation Not to Exceed $403,200.
The Public Works Coordinator and Lauren Barbieri, HF&H Consultants, gave a brief presentation.
***
(20- ) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced a motion is needed to hear new items past 11:00 p.m.
Councilmember Vella moved approval of hearing the remaining items under the Regular Agenda and the remainder of Public Comment, and to continue the Rules of Order [paragraph no. 20- ] and sustainable landscapes [paragraph no. 20- ] items to the July 14th Special Meeting.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion.
Under discussion, the City Attorney noted Council should set a time-specific for the continued items; stated staff recommends a start time of 5:59 p.m.
Councilmember Vella expressed support for the staff recommendation.
Vice Mayor Knox White requested the motion be amended to have the continued items start at 7:01 p.m.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for the 7:01 p.m. time.
Councilmember Vella accepted the amendment to the motion.
Vice Mayor Knox White agreed to still second the amended motion.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
***
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the matter empowers the City Manager to lock the City into a 10 or 20-year agreement with ACI or would Council have to vote on a long-term agreement.
Ms. Barbieri responded the matter does not provide the City Manager with the ability to sign the next contract without coming back for Council approval; stated the process allows more time for negotiations; noted the action for Council is to authorize the City Manager to execute the extension amendment.
Vice Mayor Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
(20- ) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Disburse Money Donated to the Fund-Wide Alameda Strong Community Relief Campaign as Follows: 60 Percent to Small Businesses, 20 Percent to Non-Profit Organizations, and 20 Percent to Alameda Renters.
The Economic Development Manager gave a brief presentation.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for the fund; stated funds will be available.
The City Manager stated there are four funds within the relief fund for: small businesses, renters, non-profits, and the fund currently being discussed is an allocation to the General Fund; there is little money that has been put in the General Fund and most money donated is specifically to one of the three listed funds.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the current total amount donated.
The City Manager responded $30,000 for business relief, $6,000 for renters, about $2,000 for non-profits and less than $1,000 for General Fund allocation.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether people are given a sheet or slip to allow for tax deduction when contributions are made to the East Bay Community Fund.
The Economic Development Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the funds are tax deductible and an electronic receipt is provided showing the amount donated.
Stated there has been little marketing specifically around the fund; noted more can be done; stated more funds could be found with better marketing; discussed the website layout being confusing; expressed support for the program: Zac Bowling, Alameda
Comments read into the record:
Discussed sole proprietors being part of the program; stated groups of retailers are listed as least qualified and eligible for half the amount others could receive; many retail businesses are an important part of Alameda; noted it is the first job for many of his employees: Ben Calica, Alameda.
Urged Council to clarify the issue of sole proprietor businesses applying for funds; stated a brick and mortar sole proprietor with no employees should be eligible for the full grant amount; a sole proprietor working from a residential property should be eligible for 50% of the award amount: Ronald Mooney, Alameda.
Vice Mayor Knox White inquired the award breakdown for sole proprietors.
The Community Development Director responded sole proprietors working from a residence would be eligible for 50% of the award and sole proprietors working out of a brick and mortar store would be eligible for the full amount; stated Mr. Mooney’s breakdown of the funding eligibility is accurate.
Councilmember Oddie moved approval of providing the City Manager authority to disperse the general contributions, 60% to small businesses, 20% to non-profits and 20% to Alameda renters.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
(20- ) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Contract with Redgwick Construction Co. for Chuck Corica Golf Course Parking Lot Improvements, No. PW 02-20-12 in an Amount, Including Contingency, Not to Exceed $406,471.50; or in the Alternative, Reject All Bids for Chuck Corica Golf Course Parking Lot Improvements, No. PW 02-20-12 and Provide Direction for a Lease Amendment with Greenway Golf for a Rent Reduction and Requirement to Fund and Construct the Chuck Corica Golf Course Parking Lot and Sewer Line.
The Recreation and Parks Director gave a brief presentation.
Discussed training agreements with the State of California’s Department of Apprenticeship Standards; stated individuals that have completed the program are the most productive construction workers; Council will be providing good paying jobs with benefits: Michael Ginter, Alameda County Building and Construction Trades Council.
Councilmember Vella stated the process has been long and she is satisfied with awarding the Request for Proposals (RFP) and ready to move forward; expressed support for the staff recommendation.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is a motion to approve the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated there are good reasons to look at the Greenway approach for coordinating the parking infrastructure; noted Council could take a time-out to look at how parking lot improvements can be coordinated and re-issue the RFP.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Daysog’s recommendation is a substitute motion.
Councilmember Daysog responded in the affirmative; stated there is a question related to funding for other infrastructure improvements.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
Councilmember Vella stated part of the reason for the timing of parking lot improvements is due to negotiations related to timing for Greenway; part of the agreement requires the parking lot portion to be completed first; an attempt to coordinate was made; funding needs to be found.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1.
***
(20- ) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced the Closed Session evaluation of the City Attorney will need to be continued; stated the Special Meeting on July 14th is a possible date.
Councilmember Vella moved approval of continuing the City Attorney’s evaluation to the July 14th Special Meeting Closed Session.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, requested a friendly amendment to agendize the matter at the beginning of the meeting.
The City Attorney stated the matter must have a time-specific; staff recommends a start time of 5:59 p.m.
Councilmember Vella and Vice Mayor Knox White accepted the start time and the motion was amended accordingly.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
***
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(20- ) The City Manager made an announcement related to the investigation parameters related to the incident with Mali Watkins and Police Officers.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
Comments read into the record:
(20- ) Barbara Walker, Alameda, expressed concern about the COVID-19 pandemic; stated that she would like to know who is making decisions about the response; the City needs more testing; discussed transparency; stated it is difficult to follow rules and she would like information about hospitals.
(20- ) Debra Mendoza, Alameda, stated Council has the opportunity to radically change how public safety is imagined, operated, and funded; the community is ready to defund Police and reinvest in community; urged Council to stand on the right side of justice.
(20- ) Frank, Alameda, discussed slow streets; stated the slow streets program should be worked out better.
(20- ) Amos White, Alameda, discussed protests for systemic racism and civil incidents; questioned whether an apology will be made to Mr. Watkins or the public; urged Council to act now, pass a resolution declaring racism as a Public Health Emergency, seat a Citizens Oversight Commission and convene a truth and reconciliation series of panels to address the years of systemic racism.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
(20- ) Consider Adoption of Resolution Amending Section 6 of Resolution No. 15382, which Adopted Rules of Order Governing City Council Meetings. (Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft and Councilmember Oddie)” [Continued to July 14, 2020]
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(20- ) Stopwaste June 2020 Topic Brief: Sustainable Landscapes. (Councilmember Oddie) [Informational only] [Continued to July 14, 2020]
(20- ) Vice Mayor Knox White discussed public comment; stated e-mails received prior to the meeting should not be read during the meeting.
(20- ) Councilmember Daysog noted many fireworks are being set off in concentrated in areas.
(20- ) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed gratitude toward Allen Michaan; stated there are many resources and information related to COVID-19; urged people to wear a mask, wash hands, and remain socially distant.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:44 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
****************************************************************************************************
MINUTES OF THE CONTINUED JULY 7, 2020 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -JULY 14, 2020- -5:59 P.M.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 6:06 p.m.
Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was held via WebEx.]
Absent: None.
The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(20- ) Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957); Position Evaluated: City Attorney - Yibin Shen
Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced that the evaluation was conducted and no vote was taken.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 6:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
****************************************************************************************************
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
WEDNESDAY- - JULY 14, 2020- -7:00 P.M.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:14 p.m. and Councilmember Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was conducted via WebEx and Zoom.]
Absent: None.
ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION:
(20- ) Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957); Position Evaluated: City Manager - Eric Levitt
Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced that the evaluation was continued until after the open session.
***
Mayor Ezzy Ashchraft called a recess at 7 :03 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7 :14 p.m.
***
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
AGENDA ITEM
(20- ) Consider Adoption of Resolution Declaring Racism a Public Health Emergency, including Identifying and Approving Direction to Staff Regarding Initial and Ongoing Actions to Address the Crisis. (Vice Mayor Knox White and Councilmember Oddie)
***
(20- ) Councilmember Oddie moved approval of waiving the nine minute Council speaking time.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
***
Councilmember Oddie and Vice Mayor Knox White gave a brief presentation.
Stated racism should be addressed; expressed concern for other declarations being used in cities as a Trojan horse for removing Police Departments; stated that she is disturbed the matter is not being voted on by the people; urged Council to find and retain good Officers with training and an increased budget; stated that she is not in favor of de-funding Police: Pamela Heath, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated the resolution is good start; urged Council to vote yes: Toni Grimm, Alameda Renters Coalition.
Discussed her experience as a public health professional, parent and resident; urged Council to declare racism as a public health emergency; provided statistics from Alameda County; stated racism adversely affects people’s health; racism is a Public Health Emergency: Jennifer Lucky, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution, which is a good next step to help move things forward in the City; stated the resolution names racism as a problem and provides a path to repair; shifting funds from Police into program services is the intent; should the resolution pass, Alameda joins over 65 cities and counties in doing so: Amos White, Alameda.
Stated there is a lack of understanding of the resolution based on correspondence and social media posts; noted the reduction in Police is shown in the resolution; stated it is important to listen to Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC): Jenice Anderson, Alameda.
Stated that she has seen the impacts of structural racism as a pediatrician; racism effects health, is contagious, infectious and communicable; racism is a public health emergency; urged Council to support the resolution: Jyothi Marbin, Alameda.
Urged Council to adopt the resolution; discussed the difficulties BIPOC face living a healthy life; stated racism is a public health crisis; shifting funds away from Police is nothing to fear and rights a wrong by reinvesting funds: Grace Rubenstein, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated racism is a system of privilege; discussed health statistics; stated budgets are not financial choices, they are statements of public policy and tools for achieving a City’s vision and goals: Jennifer Rakowski, Alameda.
Stated it is important to declare racism as a public health emergency; urged funding reflect the new influx of calls; more funding leads to greater Police violence; the City budget deserves to support the systems which will carry the burden of a new social system being created: Kylie Gabbard, Alameda.
Stated racism is a public health crisis; expressed support for the resolution; read a quote from Mariame Kaba; urged Council to reimagine policing, focus energy on funding and investing in creating non-violent community systems: Susie Hufstader, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; discussed her experience as a resident in Alameda; stated it is time to take immediate action to support true diversity in practice and support fellow residents of Color; racism is a true public health emergency; Alameda has a history of racism: Jillian Blanchard, Alameda.
Urged Council to vote yes on the resolution; stated disparities among Black and Brown folk is true in Alameda; the only fix is to take a proactive approach to addressing racism; the resolution will allow Alameda to take the lead; expressed support for reallocating the Police budget: Molly Montgomery, Alameda.
***
Due to technical difficulties, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a meeting recess at 8:05 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:24 p.m.
***
Expressed support for the resolution; stated the resolution demonstrates a strong awareness; expressed concern about the resolution only mentioning the issue of racism in schools without addressing the issue in a full and direct manner; stated the word education is only mentioned twice in the resolution; issues need to be addressed with the Alameda Unified School District (AUSD): James Bergquist, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated that she would like to see more of the percent of the budget as well as the dollar amount being spent on Police and social services made available to the public and subcommittee; urged Council consider innovative solutions for redirecting funding, including for housing: Laura Kindsvater, Alameda.
Stated Item 6 should be a separate agenda item; urged Council to vote no; stated the Alameda Police Department (APD) is understaffed by 16 Officers and will not be getting better; a reduction of 45% in service is not justifiable; justification must be provided in writing to residents; expressed support for a fully staffed Police Department: Lester Cabral, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution and reallocating funds from the Police Department; discussed his experience with Police Officers; stated interactions with Police have resulted in lasting effects; urged Council to adopt the resolution: Damian Leon, Alameda.
Stated that she is tired of the rampant racism on the Island; discussed a missing person; stated there are impacts to physical and mental health; the resolution is an important first step and identifies flaws in Alameda: Nairobi Taylor, Encinal High School and Youth Activists of Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution and reducing the APD budget by reallocating funds to social services; stated that she learned to fear Police at a young age; Black and Latino people make up less than one-fifth of the population combined in Alameda yet make up more than half of the arrests: Nadia Rojas, Alameda.
Stated racism is an important issue which needs to be addressed; cutting funding to the Police Department will not resolve racism; holding Police accountable and changing culture will help: Fion Lip, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated structural racism creates harmful and deadly outcomes to the Black community throughout multiple institutions; racism is killing Black Americans; expressed support for dismantling the Police; reforms cannot dismantle and institution: Alyssa Michaels, Alameda.
Discussed his experience living in Alameda; expressed support for the resolution; stated racism is not an emergency, rather a chronic condition at the structure of society; expressed support for language giving an oversight committee authority; urged Council to research anti-bias training: Wes Swedlow, Alameda Renters Coalition.
Discussed the resolution language; questioned the meaning of providing mental health to all; expressed support for providing education; questioned whether affordable child care is provided through a subsidy; stated language in Item 4 should be the core; urged language be added that displays costs: David Greene, Alameda.
Expressed concern for the lack of notification to the public; stated the Charter indicates a meaningful identification in the agenda and should be called out; discussed the term reallocate versus cut in relation to the budget; stated mental health is an issue; expressed concern about the speed of the work: Colette Supica, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated Black and Brown folks have been consistently harmed by the Police; there is nothing to fear by making the community safer; people trained in mental health is a much safer use of City resources: Eve Gordon, Alameda.
Expressed support for passing the resolution; urged Council to defund the Police, shift funds from policing to healthcare, housing and non-Police responses; discussed references to communities without sufficient policing having increased violence; stated increased safety in communities with reimagined Police services has occurred: Sofia Coffin, Alameda High School and Youth Activists of Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; urged Council to create or post a City-backed definition of what is being discussed in relation to defunding the Police; stated an understanding of the discussion is needed; community-based input is integral to what is being accomplished; a truth and reconciliation process needs to be implemented with ongoing training: Shalom Bruhn, Alameda.
Stated that he feels safe living in Alameda and there is no systematic racism; there is evidence of racism; discussed his experience calling the Police: Tong Ouyang, Alameda.
Discussed “the talk” that she has with her children as a Woman of Color; stated “the talk” is related to ways to not aggravate the Police; expressed support for the resolution; discussed movies which address systematic racism: Melodye Montgomery, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution, for reallocating 42% of the Police budget to mental health, humanity, addressing racism, and building interactions between races: Vina Verman, Alameda.
Stated racism is a public health crisis; discussed health implications and statistics which affect Black residents; there is unequal access to quality and affordable housing; the inequity is not separate from policing; interactions with Police erodes mental and physical health: Grover Wehman-Brown, Alameda.
Stated the resolution does not acknowledge that many residents occupy Ohlone land; Ohlone people are still present; the resolution could benefit from local context and acknowledge Alameda’s own history of institutionalized racism; discussed Article 26: Rasheed Shabazz, Alameda.
Stated that he is not hearing about the victims of crimes; noted that he would like to see statistics of all crimes in Alameda be made available to the public; discussed code violations in relation to the Mali Watkins case: Roland Wing, Alameda.
Stated that he has never experienced racism from the Police Department; safety and schools are the reasons to raise a family in Alameda; the City is on the bandwagon with other large cities in the country, which need defunding and more community programs; stated crimes are increasing and Police need more training, not defunding: Mo Hassen, Alameda.
Discussed her experience as a resident of Alameda; expressed support for the resolution; stated that she does not experience “the talk” in the same manner as other Families of Color; urged Council to vote yes on the resolution: Meresa Connors-Walters, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated this is an opportunity to help atone for the long history of racism in Alameda: Julie Casey, Alameda Progressives.
Discussed experience being arrested and with Police; stated systemic racism may be a public health crisis, but it should be measured with a baseline and objective metrics; urged Council not to pass the resolution without measures and transparency: Jeff Rester and Dawn Hale, Alameda.
Stated that he has benefitted from White privilege; noted that he has been working to eliminate racist attitudes from his belief system; stated that he did not learn he was White as a child; it is important for White people not to take over the conversation; there are many studies which show racism to be a public health emergency: Seth Marbin, Alameda.
Expressed concern about rewriting the history of Alameda; discussed growing up in a racially diverse school and racist interactions; stated Measure A was not a racist movement: Christine Kanbergs, Alameda.
Expressed concern about little discussion being related to how crime has risen in the last couple years; stated reducing the Police force could be a problem; the City is in a deficit until October; questioned why Council has not concentrated on the increasing crime: K Motola, Alameda.
Stated policing racism is a complex issue; people need to educate themselves; there is ample evidence that systemic racism is endemic in society, culture and cities; there are many problems with policing; there are more effective ways to deter crime; Council has embarked on a meaningful journey: Paul Bergamaschi, Alameda.
Discussed the current topic compared to COVID-19; stated most people believe COVID-19 is a public health crisis; people are dying due to elected leaders failing to take things seriously and implement effective solutions and policies; systemic racism is a public health emergency: Erin Fraser, Alameda.
Stated the City should be a safe haven for all; the Police do not help residents get to that level; expressed concern about the notion of defunding resulting in delay of investigation of a missing Black person from the community; urged Council to consider racism as a public health emergency and to pass the resolution; stated all lives cannot matter unless Black Lives Matter: Kevyn Lauren, Alameda.
Stated there have been numerous accounts of racism; racism is an issue and deserves a timely resolution; the meeting has been called as an emergency; noted the emergency status allows the Sunshine Ordinance to be bypassed; expressed concern for transparency; stated emergency items should be considered carefully: Jay Garfinkle, Alameda.
Urged Council to vote no on the resolution as currently written; stated the way the resolution is written depicts community members safety and well-being as not a goal of the Police Department; urged Council to create a separate resolution; expressed concern about the timing: Allison Pilmer, Alameda.
Stated racism is an open wound in Alameda; the pain of community members has been witnessed; many community members are calling for action; many concerns have been discussed at length; noted the shift in resources makes sense from an efficiency model: Jannette Eng, Alameda.
Stated Item 8 is more powerful than initially considered; the action provides absolute cover for the Black community while the City figures out what to do; an open truth and reconciliation process has begun; departments and Officers will be cautious; there is time to keep everyone safe and informed about rebuilding: Ben Calica, Alameda.
Stated racism is a public health crisis; policing is deeply rooted in racism and White supremacy; the budget should reflect the Police being defunded; the funding should be reallocated to low-income housing, education, healthcare and other programs and services: Samantha Russi, Alameda.
Expressed support for an understanding of the resolution; discussed what happens to Black people being different than what happens to non-Black people; noted there have been helpful Police Officers; mental health training should happen and is deserved; it is not a threat to talk about racism as a public health emergency: Melissa Merin, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; discussed articles exploring the detrimental impacts racism can have on the health of People of Color; stated people are not finding information; statistics are being used by White supremacists against the item: Aidan Keith, Alameda.
Discussed experience with systemic racism in Alameda; stated it is sad to hear other Immigrants’ comments about a lack of systemic racism; not experiencing systemic or systematic racism is not a reason to state it does not exist; racism affects health in many ways and is a public health emergency; urged Council to defund the Police and use the funds to benefit the community: Randell Rubies, Youth Activists of Alameda.
Urged Council to support the resolution; discussed records of student harassment by Police; stated passing the resolution is crucial to the safety of the children on the Island: Geronimo Coffin, Lincoln Middle School.
Urged Council to vote yes on the resolution; stated the safety others fear losing is at the expense of BIPOC’s continued lack of safety in Alameda; the fears are unfounded; meaningful actions need to be taken in order for the resolution to have impact; the meaningful actions need to be funded by the money being reallocated from Police: Naomi Forsberg, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated climate justice is inextricably linked with racial justice; discussed living and medical conditions for People of Color and the effects of redlining in the United Stated; stated Council has an opportunity to pass the resolution as a step forward: Emily Nielson, Alameda.
Expressed support for making changes to reduce racism in the City and many items in the resolution; expressed concern about portions of the resolution; stated Officers need be trained to respond to calls; appropriate staffing must occur; expressed support for having those who inappropriately call the Police taking a course in appropriate calls: Kelly Cope, Alameda.
Discussed her experience with racism; expressed support for the resolution; urged Council to end White supremacy and defund the Police; stated this is the beginning to make Alameda a better place for all people; she does not always feel safe in Alameda and would like that to change; urged Council to pass the resolution: Raquel Williams, Youth Activists of Alameda.
Stated the proposed resolution shows racism is a serious problem; the resolution also shows how dangerous racism is to BIPOC neighbors; many commenters have a fear of losing safety; the proposed resolution is not the opposite of the fears being described; the resolution is a new way forward: Savanna Cheer, Alameda.
Stated reimagining public safety is a long journey; expressed support for the resolution; urged Council to commit to the resolution and continue to make impactful actions; urged residents to consider the possibility of life outside of lived experiences; stated that she is disheartened to hear previous speakers disregard the impacts of systemic racism: Amy Chu, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated systemic racism is a crime and BIPOC people are the victims; the systems of society are designed to reinforce White wealth and power at the expense of BIPOC people; systemic racism is not unique to Alameda; crime will decrease once basic needs are met: Laura Cutrona, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated denial of racism on the Island is evidence of the need for the resolution; discussed crime statistics; stated defunding the Police does not mean immediate abolishment; funds will be re-routed to programs which provide remedies: Alexia Archoa, Alameda.
***
(20- _) Councilmember Vella moved approval of having a speaking time of one minute.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a meeting recess at 9:56 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:10 p.m.
***
The Following Comments Were Read Into the Record:
Stated that he does not support the resolution; passing the resolution feels undemocratic and a shortcut to addressing the real problem of systemic racism; the resolution is an overreach by the City to circumvent processes outlined in the Charter; the resolution fails to address the crisis in Alameda: Joseph Cutrona, Alameda.
Urged Council to approve the resolution; stated the resolution names racism as the problem and provides a path to repair; the City needs to look at Alameda Police data to understand the community’s greatest needs: Elaine Santos, Alameda.
Stated the resolution is ill-conceived and is knee-jerk; stated Alameda has dedicated law enforcement; the overall impact of a proposed 42% cut to APD is unknown; cutting the traffic division with non-sworn personnel is ridiculous: Richard Sherrat, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated a healing-centered truth and reconciliation effort is equally urgent; swift action must be taken to learn and assess how City government operates to combat systems of anti-Blackness and White supremacy: Rosemary Jordan, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated structural racism has long infected the most vulnerable populations; discussed intergenerational traumas and damages; expressed support for redirecting funds to initiatives designed to support community health: Eleanor Chung, Alameda.
Stated Alameda is a great City; noted the Police Chief is a native of Alameda and is progressive; discussed his experience as a traffic control volunteer; stated it is foolhardy to cut the Police Department budget in any amount: Michael Steinrok, Alameda.
Urged Council to use common sense in making the decision to defund the Police Department: Dave Case, Alameda.
Stated racism fears are not supported by factual data; questioned statistics provided; discussed violent crime statistics: Warren Dole, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution, further reduction beyond 42%, and housing support programs; stated low-level offenses constitute more than 80% of arrests; urged Council to align the budget with efforts to de-incarcerate and provide services to allow communities to thrive: Kate Crowley Richardson, Alameda.
Expressed concern for the current resolution; stated there is no understanding of what is driving the urgency for the resolution; Alameda is not experiencing extreme issues to cause a drastic move; reducing Police funding would cost taxpayers more: S Kane, Alameda.
Expressed disgust at Police actions and concern for the Police Department budget; stated little is spent on education, libraries and parks; more funds need to be put into services and agencies which help; urged Council to defund APD: Ryan Soule, Alameda.
Discussed how racism affects BIPOC youth and families; urged Council to declare racism a public health emergency, to address the work of dismantling racist infrastructure and to allow all youth an equal chance to succeed: Archana Nagraj, Alameda.
Discussed the Mali Watkins incident; stated crime exists because people commit crimes; urged Council to think about how social workers would handle altercations; stated Council is moving hastily to defund APD: Mackenzie Common, Alameda.
Stated Council does not care about Asian people; noted several members of the Asian community have recently been targeted and robbed; stated criminals should not be defined as Black and White but as criminals; urged Council to take care of Asian constituents and vote no: Jenny Lum, Alameda.
Stated Police are human and have faced attacks from rioters; calls are not being answered due to open positions; urged Council to redirect money from other departments to fill vacancies and hire social workers to ride with Police: Robert Farrar, Alameda.
Stated that she opposes the measure due to Section 6; urged Council to address racism and Police changes well: Joyce Boyd, Alameda.
Expressed support for a community-led process to identify how to improve the delivery of Police services; stated the community must be the centerpiece of the process; a process of conducting outreach has begun and will continue: Alan Kuboyama, Alameda Police Officers Association.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated racism harms health; it is incumbent upon society to address racism as a public health emergency; urged Council to vote in favor of the resolution: Christine Mitchell, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution: Michael Hancock, Alameda.
Stated 85% of Crisis Assistant Helping out on the Streets (CAHOOTS) calls include a Police Officer being present; stated extra funding for Police is needed, not less; discussed the City of Vallejo cutting Police funding; stated studies show use of force is less likely with more Police presence: Anna S, Alameda.
Stated systematic racism is a public health emergency; all citizens of Alameda need to be treated with respect and equality; expressed support for the subcommittee; discussed the CAHOOTS program; stated that he does not support redirecting 42% of Police funding: John Platt, Alameda.
Urged Council to think about all angles before making a decision on the resolution; stated there have been divisions; attempts at using data to support decisions falls flat; discussed arrests in Alameda: Desiree’ Abbott, Alameda.
Stated that she is upset at the proposed Council decisions; discussed Police and Fire staff; stated it is taboo to question the Fire Department budget: Brittany Benvenuto, Alameda.
Stated change is necessary; expressed support for change in policing practices; stated that she does not support changes being made without consideration of long-term effects to the safety of the City: Whitney Moon, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated the declaration conveys a “life or death” urgency; the declaration will send a clear and strong message to all Alamedans; expressed support for reducing funding for the Police Department: Laura Rose, Alameda.
Stated Alameda does not feel safe anymore for People of Color when the idea of defunding the Police is considered a good thing; discussed riots and protests across the nation and lawlessness; stated there is not an African-American Councilmember to weigh-in on the issues: Rene A, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated Alameda has to join as a leader in the movement; everyone must stop being complicit and start fighting against racism: Duc Nguyen, Alameda.
Urged Council to represent people like herself and to defund Police by 50%; stated Police do not make citizens safer; racism is a health emergency; discussed her experience as a public school Teacher and juvenile Probation Officer: Debra Mendoza, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated the resolution is important during a pandemic which affects People of Color at higher rates; the resolution is important while communities experience Police actions which also affects People of Color at higher rates: Kevin McCarty, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated structural racism is embedded in government institutions and disadvantages the most vulnerable populations; inequalities disproportionately affect BIPOC; there is a moment of reckoning caused by Police brutality: Andrea Carlise, Alameda.
Urged Council to adopt the resolution; expressed support for unbundling Police services and cutting the Department budget; stated it is not right that Black people are arrested at a disproportionate rate in Alameda; changes need to be made now: Jennifer Taggart, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated racism impacts physical, mental, emotional, and psychological well-being of all victims; there is a need to recognize the harm and damage racism inflicts at all levels: Carly Stadum-Liang, Alameda.
Stated major changes made to the Police force should be left up to the people in Alameda; Council cannot act unilaterally: Mary An, Alameda.
Urged Council to make backing up the Police Department a priority and participating in ride-alongs before making any decisions to cut funding; stated Police do good for communities: Mackenzie Chung, Alameda.
Discussed living in Alameda for safety; stated State law has become lenient on crimes; discussed crimes within the last year; expressed opposition to defunding the Police; expressed support for an increase in Police funding by 10%: Frances Mak, Jessica Zeng, Horace Ho, and Xiaoli, Alameda.
Stated that she would like the findings which support holding a special Council meeting: Therese Hall, Alameda.
Stated that she hopes the proposal leads to real action in making the City safer, healthier and more welcoming; urged Council to pass the resolution: Kristan LeVietes, Alameda.
Expressed concern about items which may pose a threat to public safety; stated that she is interested in a collaborative outline created by all Departments and presented to the community for feedback: Michaelia B., Alameda.
Urged Council to listen to the BIPOC of Alameda and defund the Police; stated action is needed; the resolution is an empty promise: Lily Kotansky, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; stated that he is disappointed the resolution does not go far enough; stated the City is allowing a directionally positive resolution to be diluted by a long-winded processes: Issao Fujiwara, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution and reducing Police funding by 50%; stated the recommendations in the resolution are important: Rhea Boyd, Alameda.
Expressed support for the resolution; discussed a friend’s experience in Alameda; stated racism is real; urged Council to vote yes on the resolution: Zac Oransky, Alameda.
Discussed arrest statistics in Alameda; stated the mistreatment of Black people by APD in Alameda is funded by tax dollars; urged Council to invest Alameda’s tax dollars into anti-racist public health policies and programming: Sarah Jo Neubauer, Alameda.
***
(20- ) Vice Mayor Knox White moved approval of continuing the meeting past 11:00 p.m. to hear the City Manager evaluation item [paragraph no. 20- ] and to proceed no later than 12:00 a.m., continuing the rules of order [paragraph no. 20- ] and the Stopwaste [paragraph no. 20- ] items to the next Council meeting.
Councilmember Oddie expressed support for moving the continued items.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for moving the continued items; inquired whether members are amenable to the meeting ending at 12:00 a.m.
Councilmember Vella responded that she is ok with the midnight stop time.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she supports the meeting going until midnight and no later; noted the rules of order and Stopwaste items should be continued to the July 21, 2020 meeting.
The City Attorney stated the Council must set a date and time specific to continue the items.
The City Clerk stated a 7:02 p.m. start time is available; should the items not be heard, the items will push to a September meeting.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the rules of order item may be continued to September.
Vice Mayor Knox White moved approval of hearing the evaluation after the current matter discussion and ending by 12:00 a.m., with the remaining items being continued to a future meeting [July 21, 2020 at 7:02 p.m.].
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
***
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is no doubt in declaring racism as a public health emergency; the matter is important and necessary; expressed concern about the timing; stated there are many topics covered in the declaration; many of the topics were delegated to a steering committee on June 29th; the unbundling services, review of Police Department policies and practices, Police Department accountability and oversight and addressing systemic and community racism and anti-racism topics originated from a proposal created by Vice Mayor Knox White and Councilmember Vella; the steering committee proposal will be heard on July 21st ; if adopted by Council, will be community-led and centered on Black voices; the steering committee has met twice; questioned whether Council should limit to the scope of community members’ input or if Council should listen to input from those that understand the experience of being Black in America; stated the declaration can be made fuller and more complete; expressed concern about how input from the Black community is received; questioned whether the input should be more than just comments received; stated the subcommittee intends to provide input in one week; it is not easy to give up power and elected officials are elected for a reason; Councilmembers are passionate about desired changes; there is room for a community process; the process is not being delayed with community input; speakers have urged Council to act, not speak; she would like the actions taken to make a difference and to mean something within a strong declaration; ceding abilities to a committee still allows Council to make final determinations; there will be a missed opportunity should Council not allow BIPOC community members the unfettered ability to be heard; Council is moving forward rapidly.
Councilmember Vella stated that a number of public commenters announced how long they have lived in Alameda; time of residency does not matter; each voice matters; there are a number of reasons for people to speak and address Council; the credentials of how long someone has lived in Alameda should not matter and are part of systemic racism; racism is not an individual thing, it is not a personal attack on any individual; racism is the over 400 years of systemic legal racism that leads to disparate outcomes and deaths of BIPOC; the goal of the resolution is to specifically call out racial disparities: income, health, wealth, education, access to upward mobility and a number of other things related to quality of life; racism is the causation of disproportionately high rates of homelessness, incarceration, economic hardship and poor outcomes in education and health; racism is not an attack on any individual; racism is the disparate outcomes happening; systemic racism is legalized racism which has occurred throughout all systems; California is not immune from racism; even though California rejected slavery, it committed genocide against Native Americans; outlined historic genocide information; stated California has overwhelmingly voted to continue racial discrimination in the sale and rental of housing; the State and United States Supreme Courts ruled discrimination is unconstitutional; many laws have been racist and created systems where simply being a race meant actions were illegal and crimes; Alameda is not leading the way in declaring racism a public health crisis; Wisconsin State and municipalities were the first, along with Indiana, Michigan and Ohio; Alameda can look to the other cities which have declared racism a public health crisis; she has reached out to cities which have declared racism a public health crisis to understand the impact verbiage has on the declaration; the trend is identifying words which showcase racism as a problem; it is important to start there from a public policy standpoint; it is important to identify the lens with which progress will take place; resolutions are often followed with a directive or process to determine the best way to promote racial equity; the subcommittee will report back with recommendations to the governing body within six months to one year; discussed generally accepted public health issues; stated it should be easy to declare racism as a public health issue; the order with which Council is approaching is off from other municipalities; expressed support for defining the problem and looking at the matter through the lens of racism; noted public comments provided have been helpful; expressed support for getting out the core sentiment that racism is a public health issue; stated the matter is beyond the Police Department and is Citywide; there is a way to combine the process; expressed support for adding language which clarifies or adds clear direction to community groups; stated the City has not been clear about which powers have been surrendered; a defined process incorporating directives needs to be established; expressed support for empowering the community group to define and gather data needed to inform its decision, for the community led group to provide recommendations on shifting resources, for finding funding for the programs recommended and to make recommendations across the board for Citywide change to define short and long-term goals and to look at the issues for the five areas provided by Council with a racial lens; stated it is important to have the racial lens when looking at the issues; surrendering to community process is daunting and jarring; informative change will not occur without voices of support from the White community; the silence from the White community has been deafening and is a reason why systems have been allowed to continue for centuries; expressed support for centering around voices of Color; BIPOC people are empowered to tell Council how to proceed without limit; stated that she is fine with shifting the funding parameters beyond the 42%; a space needs to be created to address those reacting from fear; change will not happen unless everyone is brought along.
Councilmember Oddie outlined Propositions 209 and 8; urged citizens to look at their White privilege and read books; outlined a letter of support for Police containing code words; stated the letter is indicative of the problem; Alameda has made it so that People of Color are afraid to visit; the resolution is a good first step; expressed support for hearing how the resolution can be complimentary to the process and for hearing any needed changes; noted Brown Act restrictions; stated that he is open to anything which makes the matter stronger and any process which addresses the root cause.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated that he is flabbergasted by comments; he is thrilled to support of the community led process; questioned whether comments were written beforehand; stated the resolution was put together with input from the community and with Black voices; Council can delay the resolution and hold off until there is better language; expressed support for Councilmember Vella’s comments; questioned the impacts of the delay in time spent rewriting language and whether the delay will bring the goal closer; stated there has been much support for CAHOOTS; he does not think moving forward on one item limits the subcommittee; noted that he will gladly follow Council; expressed concern about the delay in acknowledging the City’s commitment to the problem; expressed support for adding language to be brought back as a revision; stated many people have urged no delay in the process; delay is a process problem, not an action problem; it is fine to remove all of Item 6A and send it to the subcommittee; expressed support for hearing whether there is interest from Council in moving the item forward or stopping at the current position and sending it to the subcommittee.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she always hopes for conversation and discussion; Councilmembers do not have to agree, but it is good to hear other voices; the topics are difficult to discuss; expressed support for the declaration of racism as a public health emergency; stated the subcommittee may weigh-in on processes, gather data, and create a more local process; declaring racism a public health emergency is important; Council can learn from other communities; short, mid and long-term goals will be looked at; a process has been set up for community input; expressed concern about wanting to bring the community along; stated there is systemic racism; noted this is a turning point; expressed concern about putting too much into the matter without the benefit of input from lives affected; stated there may be things brought forth that were not thought of which need attention and are worthwhile; she is unsure about what can move forward, but Council returns in one week.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he appreciates various perspectives and comments; he is impressed with the amount of feedback from public health professionals; Council is a policy-making body; Council makes policy in three ways: by ordinance, resolution and motion; making policy by ordinance and resolution means Council is providing direction to the City Manager for execution; Item 6 of the resolution states: “these cuts will be proportional to the 42% reduction in services that the Department has historically responded to and identified to shift to other departments;” the interpretation is to contemplate a 42% reduction or cut in the Police force; Council has previously discussed scenarios of significant cuts to the Police Department; there has been a mantra of 42% which has increased; he has not supported a 50% cut to the Police Department; expressed concern about an up to 42% cut, the expectations of the order of magnitude of cuts and the change in the Police Department budget; stated APD is already under-staffed; there are issues the Police force has to look after; there are safety considerations and crimes which need a Police force; should Council adopt the matter as a resolution, the text would be walking orders for how the City Manager should be thinking about staff and program-making; new directions are needed as a City; this is a historic time; expressed support for work being done with CAHOOTS; stated there is a model within grasp of how to change the Police force; Police should focus on crime enforcement and crime reduction issues; alternative models should be implemented where possible when dealing with persons or individuals who are not a crime but should be addressed; expressed support for the subcommittee to better flesh out the CAHOOTS model; CAHOOTS works in Eugene, Oregon but may not work in Alameda and may require modifications; his goal is to implement a program similar to CAHOOTS, which would represent a system change; the matter before Council is broad; many organizations are effected; outlined organizations’ literature on social equity, public health, racism and the disparate impacts which result; expressed support for tapping into the bodies such as the County Public Health Department, which provides the work and literature to help formulate and refine the public health equals racism question; stated that he cannot support the resolution due to Item 6; the input can help focus the dialogue in a way which is specific to the City of Alameda.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft noted that she is not pushing for the CAHOOTS program, but is intrigued by it; stated San Francisco and Oakland are working with CAHOOTS; Alameda is more ethnically diverse than Eugene, Oregon.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he would like to see Council pass something; Council cannot unanimously agree that there is an emergency and crisis, yet not adopt a resolution; expressed support for added reference to the original occupants of Alameda land and for declaring a public health emergency; stated Item 1 does not restrict the subcommittee; Item 2 is important due to stories heard at a Town Hall and should not be delayed; Council does not need a subcommittee to state that staff being subjected to racism in the building or while on the job needs to stop; Item 3 can be modified to include only the header; however, it is still important to include and keep; Item 4 should also remain; the remaining parts begin to get specific about work to be done by the subcommittee; expressed support for passing Items 1 through 4; stated the remaining sections can be coordinated with the subcommittee.
The City Manager stated sustainable change will take time; outlined the process timeline for Minneapolis versus Alameda; expressed concern about intermediate improvements, such as CAHOOTS, related to resources which will influence the public process; stated Council must be upfront about the public process; the processes can be completed simultaneously; Council may direct the subcommittee to look at CAHOOTS early on and provide recommendations; expressed concern about beginning before pubic engagement; stated decisions could impact long-term decisions without the public involvement process; staff is looking into a variety of programs and public engagement; there are not many examples of programs happening quickly; expressed support for the public input process.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the programs being looked into reference a previous Alameda County Mayor’s Conference discussion.
The City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated there is also a program similar to CAHOOTS being reviewed.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined Darlene Flynn’s work in setting up Oakland’s Department of Race and Equity; discussed Oakland’s work to end systemic racism and a book event.
Councilmember Vella expressed support for discussion of the report; stated that she understands the Peace Officers Bill of Rights and that personnel items might not be able to be made public; expressed support for a publically accessible document to be brought forth from the report; stated a review of processes and protocols would be a helpful document for the community subcommittee; personnel items do not have to be included.
The City Manager stated the report might be parallel with the audit in Item 6; noted the process can examine things not related to personnel; the audit includes an approach similar to Councilmember Vella’s suggestions; noted that he is comfortable with the approach.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City Manager is comfortable with direction from Council without needing approval.
The City Manager responded that he could initiate the report on his own; should direction need to be provided, it can be from Council; stated that he is comfortable with conducting a non-personnel audit process.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council may discuss items not included on the agenda.
Vice Mayor Knox White responded the matter is under Item 6 before bullet point A.
The City Attorney stated the City Manager is referring to Item 6 of the proposed resolution.
Councilmember Oddie stated the audit would identify policies that may need to be changed in order to meet the goals and objectives outlined by the community-led steering committee.
Councilmember Vella stated a report is being completed; expressed concern about the need to take action; stated a lot has been done by Council; the resolution attempts to capture what has been done and should be acknowledged; what has been done is not enough, it is a start, and the process is being laid out; noted that she has experience being a Woman of Color in Alameda; the subcommittee is comprised of two Women of Color; outlined experiences as a Councilmember of Alameda and a Woman of Color; stated that she is sensitive to racism being declared a public health emergency; the resolution should address some of the issues raised; Council should not be wordsmithing at 11:56 p.m.; delaying the item by one week is not a miscarriage of justice; noted many cities’ resolutions preceded Council action; stated directives can be clarified; suggested language be added to the resolution; stated missing language needs to be added; expressed support for a week’s time to add the missing information in addition to the subcommittee report returning to Council; the reference is to the community led subcommittee; expressed support for allowing the subcommittee to look through the lens of racism and impacts from systemic racism.
***
(20- ) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the current time is 11:56 p.m.; noted the City Manager evaluation [paragraph no. 20- ] will need to be continued to July 21 at a time-specific; inquired the possible start-times.
The City Clerk responded either 5:00 p.m. or 7:02 p.m.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for a 5:00 p.m. start-time.
Councilmember Vella moved approval of continuing the City Manager evaluation to July 21 at 5:00 p.m.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
***
Councilmember Vella stated that she is happy to move approval of directing the City Manager to work on the report and discuss with Council whether the report will be an audit; an investigation should yield a public document as a result; should the direction be an audit, direction will be provided to include feedback from the community task-force about additional items to be included in said audit; that she will also make a motion to work toward declaring racism as a public health crisis and a document where all Councilmembers may provide feedback to staff about specific language to be included in the resolution with options put forward to a vote at the next Council meeting.
***
(20- ) Vice Mayor Knox White noted the meeting has gone past 12:00 a.m. and is over.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the meeting may continue with a Council vote.
Councilmember Oddie moved approval of continuing the meeting for an additional 15 minutes.
Councilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: No; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Noes. 1.
***
The City Attorney stated should Council desire to bring the resolution back; staff recommends continuing the matter to a date and time certain.
Vice Mayor Knox White inquired whether the item would be able to be worked on without proper notice.
The City Attorney responded there would be no new documents submitted; however, at a 7:02 p.m. meeting, Council may work collectively with staff to wordsmith a new resolution.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he would be willing to second a motion which declares racism as a public health emergency and a crisis affecting the City; expressed support for not waiting on Item 2 of the resolution being part of a motion.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the portion of the resolution needs to be passed for the City Manager.
Councilmember Oddie stated it is critical to get the emergency declaration on record.
Councilmember Vella expressed support for Councilmember Oddie’s suggestion.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested the motion be re-stated.
Councilmember Vella moved approval of directing the City Manager to produce a public report as a result of the investigation ordered by Council and any other recommended audit from the community-led process of the policing practices and to work with subcommittees on what the audit will include, taking into account the contents of the resolution; declaring racism a public health crisis; directing the City Manager to identify long-term and ongoing training; stated that she does not want to limit the training to anti-racism training; there are a number of additional, helpful trainings; anti-discrimination trainings are needed; expressed support for broadening training.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council is returning for further refinements on July 21st; stated the refinements can be brought back at the date and time specific rather than adopting parts which may be changed as part of the whole; inquired whether direction can be provided to the City Manager to begin addressing concerns raised.
Councilmember Oddie expressed support for providing direction.
Councilmember Vella stated that her motion includes the City Manager looking into training suggested in Item 2; noted her motion also includes continuing the specific language discussion to 7:02 p.m. on July 21st.
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor Knox White stated that he is not in support of the motion.
Councilmember Oddie inquired the process for adding language to the resolution.
The City Attorney responded Council may bring changes to the meeting and the discussion will resume.
Councilmember Oddie inquired whether there are any restrictions on discussions with colleagues.
The City Attorney responded Brown Act restrictions apply outside of the meeting.
In response to Councilmember Oddie’s further inquiry, the City Attorney stated the discussion depends on content; stated there is concern about discussions with a third member related to items not discussed at the public meeting; should a topic arise which has already been discussed, the clock is reset and a discussion with any member may occur.
Councilmember Oddie expressed support for a breakdown being sent to Councilmembers.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated that he supports the goal; expressed concern for the motion stating racism is bad and Council clarifying the meaning at a later time and for continuing the meeting without public input and comment; noted that he does not support further investigation due to delay in action; stated an audit limits the ability of the subcommittee; stated that he is not confident Council is taking action; an investigation report is new and meaningful; the rest of the items seem to be delayed; he will not be supporting the motion.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the item may be placed at the top of the agenda.
The City Clerk responded the item may be placed prior to the regular meeting; noted the agenda is large and contains time-sensitive matters.
Councilmember Oddie inquired whether there are portions of the motion which Vice Mayor Knox White supports, to which Vice Mayor Knox White responded in the negative.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he is troubled by the use of the terms “audit” and “investigation.”
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Knox White: No; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes. 2.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:15 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.