Title
Recommendation to Provide Feedback on City Facility Naming Policy and Procedures. (Recreation 280)
Body
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Naming public spaces is meaningful and powerful. This has been evident during 2020 in the discussion of removing monuments of people with histories of racism and discrimination. The Policy for Naming City Property Facilities (Naming Policy) was last reviewed by City Council in 2016 and this discussion is intended to solicit City Council feedback on ways to improve the Naming Policy for increased clarity on process and to better reflect Alameda’s values.
BACKGROUND
The Naming Policy (Exhibit 1) addresses naming new City of Alameda (City) facilities and renaming existing facilities. It was last updated and adopted by City Council on May 17, 2016.
During the process concerning the renaming of Jackson Park, the Recreation and Parks Commission and community-led Park Renaming Committee discussed the need to update the City’s Naming Policy to reflect better current standards and values.
City facilities include, but are not limited to parks, recreation centers, streets, and libraries. The current Naming Policy identifies the following Commission/Board for making a recommendation to the City Council* for each facility type.
• Recreation and Parks Commission - parks and recreation facilities
• Golf Commission - golf facilities
• Public Utilities Board - Alameda Municipal Power facilities
• Library Board - Library facilities
• Housing Commission - Housing Authority facilities
• Planning Board - Streets and other city facilities not listed above
*The City Council has final authority regarding the naming of City facilities.
DISCUSSION
There are clear differences between naming a new, unnamed City facility as opposed to a request by community members to rename a City facility due to the existing name deemed, for example, offensive, discriminatory, or unjust. This discussion considers different procedures for naming and renaming City facilities. A separate consideration is a City facility that does not have a City Council approved name but rather is referred to by a name solely based on its proximity to a geographical location, street or housing development.
This staff report is intended to start the discussion and receive City Council feedback on naming and renaming City facilities. The recommended next step is for staff to incorporate the feedback into a revised draft Naming Policy that is reviewed by the appropriate commission or board, for additional input. A final draft Naming Policy would then be brought back to City Council for consideration and approval.
Draft Policy and Procedures for Naming New City Facilities
Naming new City facilities would require a three step public process and meetings of the appropriate City commission/board. Each meeting and its purpose would be broadly marketed through print, social media, and email to encourage residents to attend and provide input. This would be an effort to extend beyond the standard meeting notifications as required by the Sunshine Ordinance and to involve a diverse group of stakeholders in the community, including residents who are historically underrepresented in City public discussions.
Meeting #1: Initial presentation on City facility and confirm naming criteria
• Present the City facility to be named, its location and any identifying features.
• Discuss and finalize naming criteria for the facility. Examples could include a maritime or naval reference if the facility is located at Alameda Point, a community value, a person’s name, a natural or other theme.
• After the criteria are confirmed, staff would conduct an outreach campaign to solicit name ideas.
Meeting #2: Review a list of names that meet the criteria
• Staff would provide the full list of available names that includes the existing names list and new names generated from outreach.
• Staff would recommend a shorter list of names that meets the criteria for commission/board review. The names on this list will be previously vetted, particularly names of people. Staff will work with local historians as needed or required.
• Commission/board discusses and narrows down to short list of names.
Meeting #3: Final name choice to recommend to City Council
• Commission/board discusses a short list of names and recommends a name to City Council for final approval.
Draft Policy and Procedures for Renaming a City Facility
Two options are provided for City Council discussion on a City facility renaming procedure. One is to utilize a community-led committee process to develop a new name recommendation. The other is to hold all renaming discussions at City Commission/Board meetings. Staff recommends an application process for renaming a City facility as described below.
City Facility Renaming Application Process
• A request to rename a City facility would be initiated by one or more City resident(s), business owner(s), or property owner(s) using a City Facility Renaming Request Application (“Application”), which would be submitted to the City Manager. The Application would include reasons/justifications on why the name should be changed as well as letters of support, articles, documents, and other evidence demonstrating broad-based community support for the Application.
• The Application must include a petition with at least 1,000 Alameda resident signatories.
• City Street Renaming: Application required along with a petition of at least 50% plus one signatories of the resident and business property owners on that street.
• If a City facility has a “default” name based on the location that was not formally approved by City Council, then an Application and petition are not required and the renaming may be initiated by City staff.
• City Manager reviews the Application to ensure it is complete.
• City Council reviews and determines whether the City facility should be renamed.
• The appropriate Commission or Board utilizes the renaming procedure as outlined in the approved Naming Policy and, following that procedures, may recommend a new name to City Council.
Draft Renaming Procedure with a Community-Led Committee:
1) Conduct outreach to identify community members interested in serving on the committee through an application process.
2) Establish the committee’s goals and process.
3) Establish name criteria and consider the history of the existing name and reasons for renaming.
4) Conduct extensive marketing and outreach to solicit new names.
5) Vet the names with a clear scoring system, including those received through outreach and existing name lists. This includes researching history of top names.
6) Conduct community outreach on the top names.
7) Committee recommends one or more names to the appropriate City commission/board.
8) Commission/board recommends one name to City Council for final approval.
Draft Renaming Procedure through City Commission/Board Meeting Discussions
Utilize the same procedure as outlined above for New City Facility Naming. This includes:
1) Initial presentation concerning City facility being renamed and determine naming criteria.
2) Review a list of names that meets that criteria and Commission/Board determines a short list of names.
3) Recommend a name choice to City Council.
Questions for Council Discussion
• Should a community committee be established to rename a City facility? Should this be required for a City facility that is being renamed from a “default” name that was not previously approved by City Council? Examples of “default” names include Main Street Linear Park (based on the adjacent street name) and Bayport or Marina Cove Park (based on the adjacent housing development).
• Should the City de-prioritize naming City facilities after individuals and/or include specific criteria language for names in the Naming Policy? This may include:
o Professional research required on an individual’s history prior to recommendation of that name.
o City facility names may not be cumbersome, profane, discriminatory or derogatory relating to age, race, religion, creed, national origin, sex, color, marital status, disability, sexual orientation, political affiliation or other similar categories.
• Should there be an emphasis in the Naming Policy on diversity, social justice, inclusion and equity?
• Should the Naming Policy focus solely on local/Alameda significance and/or impact, or broaden it to the San Francisco Bay Area, California and/or national significance and/or impact?
• The Historical Advisory Board (HAB) establishes the City Street Name list. How often should HAB review the list and with what process? Should HAB establish a criteria to add names?
ALTERNATIVES
1) Provide feedback on naming and renaming city facilities and direct staff to incorporate City Council feedback into a revised draft City Naming Policy and Procedures, to review with the appropriate City boards and commissions for further discussion and return to City Council for final approval.
2) Determine that the existing 2016 City Naming Policy is sufficient and no further work is required.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact to the City from City Council direction on City facility naming and renaming policy and procedures. However, future naming and renaming of City facilities may require financial contributions from the City for signage or other naming related materials that may be subject to future City Council appropriations approval.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action has no effect on the Alameda Municipal Code.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Seeking direction from the City Council concerning on naming or re-naming City facilities is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and hence, no environmental review is required. CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378 (b) (2) [general policy and procedure making activities].
CLIMATE IMPACT
There are no identifiable climate impacts or climate action opportunities associated with the subject of this report.
RECOMMENDATION
Provide feedback on City facility naming policy and procedures.
CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION
Due to the nature of this policy and that it covers a variety of department areas, I believe it is good timing for the City Council to review and update the policy. The proposed outline for the process provides a good framework for the City Council to discuss any changes on how it wishes to amend the City facility naming policy.
Respectfully submitted,
Amy Wooldridge, Recreation and Parks Director
Financial Impact section reviewed,
Annie To, Finance Director
Exhibit:
1. Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities, and Streets
cc: Eric Levitt, City Manager