Adoption of Uncodified Urgency Ordinance Continuing the Suspension During the Local Emergency due to the COVID-19 Pandemic of Certain Provisions of the City’s “Sunshine Ordinance” to the Extent Inconsistent with Assembly Bill No. 361 and Executive Order N-15-21 of the Governor of the State of California Arising from the State of Emergency Caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic [Requires four affirmative votes]; and Recommendation to Approve Findings to Allow City Meetings to be Conducted via Teleconference. (City Clerk 10022020/City Attorney 10023040)
recommendation of findings to allow city meetings to be conducted via teleconference. And I will continue on to briefly introduce this item, if that's okay with. So basically, the city has been conducting these remote meetings with under a executive order of the governor that suspended some of the provisions of the Brown Act. And so specifically, we didn't have to disclose the locations and open them to the public of anybody participating remotely. And so the assembly passed a bill and the governor in September approved it. And it puts new provisions into place that require the city council to make findings every 30 days that continue to allow us to suspend those Brown Act provisions. So this report is before each night, along with at the beginning of the pandemic, you adopted an emergency ordinance suspending some of the Sunshine Orders regulations, and that is before you again as well, so that meetings continue in the same fashion. Okay. And any clarifying questions from the council? And do we have public speakers? One speaker, Jay Garfinkel. Okay. All right. Welcome, Speaker Garfinkel. That evening. I would appreciate it if somebody would explain what is meant by an unqualified ordinance versus a regular ordinance. It appears that we're doing this in order to comply with some state law or regulation. If you recall, when we were dealing with Article 26 of Measure eight, we said that even though there is a there's a disagreement, that we will go along with the idea that whatever the state says we have to do, we don't have to necessarily get rid of Article 26. My concern is that this is a backdoor way of continuing to call a state of emergency in Alameda, which we clearly no longer have. I would point out that in the charter section three, dash 11, it says that no ordinance shall be passed within five days of when it's introduced. This is the first introduction, I believe, of this, except when it's for immediate preservation of peace, help or safety for an ordinance enacted in the event of great emergency or necessity. Yes, the pandemic has is continuing, but we are no longer in a state of emergency. There is absolutely nothing that the city council would have to do on an emergent basis to respond to the COVID 19 situation. If an emergency arises, you can declare an emergency at that time. I just don't see any reason to continue the state of emergency. What it does really, in effect, say, get out of jail free card for the city council so that when it pleases you, you can ignore some of the regular rules. And I think that's somewhat disingenuous. I would also point out that the usual parliamentary procedure is that when a motion is made, the wording of the motion is entirely spelled out. It's totally inappropriate to say, Yeah, we're going to do what it says above the whereas is disappear once you pass the motion. So you can't say we're going to do whatever the whereas has said we're going to do. So I think that whole lot has to be rewarded. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any more public speakers than we did? We have four more. The next one, Beth Kenny. Good evening, Speaker Kenny. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. I am asking tonight that you support this measure. I've had the pleasure of serving on the Commission on Disability for the past seven years, and if the meetings are not to. Be accessible remotely any more, I'll be forced to resign as a person with an autoimmune. Disease who having three doses of the vaccine already, I still don't have any immunity to COVID. I also have a four year old who cannot get a vaccine yet, so. The emergency. Is not behind us. This needs to happen. This needs to make it accessible. This is making these positions accessible to all. So I ask that you support and make these meetings accessible for both members and the public. Thank you. Thank you, speaker kenny. Our next speaker. We now have seven speakers at the time, one or two, 2 minutes, and the next speaker is Janice Anderson. Good evening, Speaker Anderson. Grieving. I just want to. Echo what you just said. I mean, I don't have children, but I do interact with them. And none of the children that I know are vaccinated. My brother is immunocompromised. He's the only contact I had during the pandemic for the first six months. So I. I can't go sit in a room with a bunch of people I don't know are vaccinated at these meetings. And I just think for accessibility reasons for, you know, immunocompromised, disabled people, I think that we need to continue this in a Zoom format. And contrary to popular belief, this pandemic is not over. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. Savannah chair. Good evening, speaker. Chair. Hi. Thanks for having me tonight. I just want to echo what both refugees just said and also just maybe mention that if it could just be on council's mind, I guess as we if we ever exit the pandemic situation that we think about this accessibility issue in general with public engagement, it's really, really helpful for folks with many barriers to be able to access these meetings online and from the comfort of their home. And if there's a mobility challenge or just straight up just getting to the building to go to the meeting can be really challenging for some folks. So just hoping that that can be considered as we move ahead. But I really do appreciate the you know. Urgency of keeping it keeping it online now, because there are many people who are not vaccinated is out there. So so in order to create that community protection, this is really important to continue to support. Zoom Meeting Access for folks. Thank you. Q Our next speaker. Zach Bowling. Good evening. Speaker Bowling. Either Council. Yeah, I supported AB 316 through the legislature. I called in at every one of the meetings to get this passed all the way from the Assembly through the Senate. And it's one of the bills I supported. I also supported AB 339 that unfortunately got neutered a little bit in that it only now affects the 15 largest cities, but it also emphasizes the importance for remote access to government meetings to make them more accessible. We had an open government item that I asked one of our commissioners to refer, and that ended up developing into a letter that was sent to council urging the importance of remote access to meetings from complete accessibility of government stance of why it's important that more people can now attend meetings that otherwise couldn't, and that that goes more with just working individuals, but also people that are immunocompromised. So this is an issue that I care about a lot. I think it opens up government to more people than people that can just come and attend. And I would be very supportive of a measure that would add the language for continuing meetings forward to our Sunshine Ordinance and making it a core part of our open government stance in Alameda to to make sure that our government meetings are accessible to more people remotely as we go forward. And I will end my comments there. Thank you much. Thank you. Our next. Speaker. Alexia Rocha. Good evening, Speaker Rocha. Hi, Nick. And I definitely second what our speakers have been saying and I support that accessibility, especially through these Zoom meetings. I hear that the first speaker doesn't think we're in a state of emergency. I know very many people who feel very much are still operating in the state of emergency. And I think we need to think about everyone. And earlier on this call, I was encouraged to hear folks talking about the equity and access for all in different areas. And I think this is a way to support that. So thank you. Thank you. Speaker Roach our next speaker. Deborah mendoza. Good evening. Speaker Mendoza. There you are. Hello. Yes. Good evening. And I would also like to give public comment that I support the continuation of remote meetings not only now, but forever. And yeah, for anybody who has ever gone to a city council meeting in person attending by remotely is is just so much more manageable, convenient, let alone. Yeah. Regardless of the situation, more. People can be involved, engage, and let's just keep it going. Thanks. Thank you. Our next speaker. Kenny, has raised our hand again, so we'll see if it's somebody else using the same line. Okay. I cannot speak again. All. All right. Who do we have? Looks like it might have been an error. So we'll go ahead and go on to the next one. All right. Thank you. Laura Katrina. Good evening. Speaker Katrina. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. I wanted to voice my support for continuing to host city council meetings online and zoom in the future. I echo what's been said around the accessibility piece, and it's it's critical that if we want to create more involvement and engagement with the city in our processes, that we make these accessible instead of in-person exclusive meetings. So thank you so much for. Making that happen. Thank you. Our next speaker. Melody Montgomery. Good evening, Speaker Montgomery. Good evening. Hello to the council. Seems like we're the same. Group. Meeting all the time. I would like to also get behind the staging with the remote type of access for meetings even into the future. I know that personally I have like chronic bronchitis and so out there is still scary for me. Some people say that the pandemic the pandemic is over, but it's not over for me. I still don't feel comfortable in large groups of people. I would not feel comfortable coming to city council in that little tight, cramped room with hardly any air like we did for so. Many years. Before on instances. And still, I. Just would. Really support. And like you to support the. Continued access to all of our meetings through and. Through, through Zoom or whatever, whatever digital access you have. But I think that it's. Important not just for me, but for other people that maybe don't have transportation, can't. Get there, have other physical disabilities. That keep them from sitting in a room three or four or 5 hours waiting for an item to come up. And so thank you for listening. And I'm okay. Thank you. Our next speaker. And this is our final speaker. It's Carmen Reid. Good evening, Speaker Reid. Good evening again and thank you for allowing me to speak. I wholeheartedly agree that two meetings are a great way for the public to engage and to access meetings. And I think that this is definitely, you know, here for the long haul and they should continue. Now, I'm also wondering, and I'm not sure if he or if the urgency ordinance is required to continue with the Zoom meetings. So I'm hoping that the Council can please clarify that it doesn't seem like you have to have one to have the other. So. So. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. With that, we have no further speakers. Correct, madam? Sporadic. Okay. With that, I will close public comment on item seven. See? Okay. Council discussion are ready for a vote. Councilmember Herrera Spencer. Mayor. So I'd like to know how this or declaration or ordinance and codified ordinance differs from the declaration of the existence of local emergency that we do. You know, I think it's like every other month or something like that under government code section 8630. See if this has any impact on that. Madam Clerk, did you want to address that or. Mr. SIM City Attorney. I see that the city attorney I needed. But yeah, the first thing that the a the bills that was just passed pertains to a different section of the government code that is known to refer to as the Brown Act. And the other resolution passed every 60 days under the different government code section. So this has to every 30 days has to be and the findings have to be made by the City Council. And then the other one is separate. It has to return on a 60 day basis. So they are two completely separate things. And I guess the attorney could weigh in on the ordinance if he wants to. City Attorney Benson, may we hear from you? Sure. Thank you, Madam Mayor and council members. The council adopted an urgency ordinance at the beginning of the pandemic, suspending certain provisions of the Sunshine Ordinance. And this ordinance simply continues that with respect to AB 361, the reason that ordinance was previously adopted by the Council and the reason we brought forward this ordinance to you is that one could interpret the Sunshine Ordinance to require that a place of the meeting be City Hall and that attendees by remote meetings would have to provide that place of meeting for members of the public. That would have been the law prior to the pandemic. And in the interest of consistency with state law and in the excessive caution to reduce the potential for sunshine complaints, we brought that ordinance to you in the beginning of the pandemic, and we do recommend you adopt this ordinance tonight. Thank you. Counsel rehearse. Spencer Thank you. I want to follow up because I have voted no on this 8638630c subset of S.C. ordinance. And it's come to us and I want to make sure that by voting advice support this one that's in front of us today that that's not conflicting with the other votes that we've taken. On the other issue, it's very similar. Mr. Chan. Councilmember So this ordinance is similar, but it is also different in the findings that the council has to make is that, one, there is a state of emergency declared by the governor, not by a local agency. So I think that is different than the previous vote that you made, which declares a local emergency. The second finding that you would have to make essentially here is that public health officials continue to recommend social distancing and other pandemic related activities, and that in-person meetings would be a hindrance to the public health emergency that's been declared by the governor. So while they are similar, I do see that there are nuanced differences. And of course, how you vote is certainly the council members perspective. Thank you. I appreciate that explanation. So then my next question or concern goes to I think we've talked about having a hybrid moving forward at some point where we would have allowed people to come in. And I and there are some people I know that want to be able to come and have concerns doing this zoom and have issues and don't feel that it's as accessible during the remote as they like to do it in person. And I was wondering if and I thought we were trying to come up with a way to do a hybrid where people could come, but they could also still continue to do it. And via Zoom. Matt. American? Yeah. I was going to say the city clerk or the city manager, but. Madam Clerk, why don't you take that? Sure. So the provisions that are outlined in this Assembly bill pertain to the members so that all of the bodies, the city council and board and commission members. So this action tonight is specifically to allow you all to continue remote without having to disclose your location and allow members of the public in. If it's a remote location, it does not pertain to the members of the public. However, if we continue meeting this same fashion, the city hall will remain closed and the public will have to participate by calling in or participating on Zoom. Okay. So do we have any idea of when we think we're going to allow the members of the public to come and speak in person? A city manager. Mr. Levitt, do you want to speak to that or I mean, this way? I figure if you had a response, please, right ahead. Mr. Levitt. I think that's why a singer would be better, because she's been the one definitely coordinating it. We were looking and she can correct me, but we were looking at the we would have the hybrid once the council started me in person. But I want to give this white singer the chance to clarify if if I'm wrong in that. Correct. That was exactly what we were looking at was once the council resumes in-person meetings, then we would implement a different type of system. Okay. So we recently had a swearing in of police officers at the library, and that was inside. And there were many members, many of us here were there in person and members of the public as well. And so I know that the city is, in fact starting to do in-person events, socially distanced. And I would like its I mean I would like the city to come back with a plan of when we will be able to meet in person, socially distanced and honor the COVID protocols. But I, but I am concerned that there are people, I think, that do want to that I would like us to come up with a hybrid so that people that are unable, if this is possible, legally, so that members of commissioners, council members who have concerns, if you will, and then open open it up and go to more in-person meetings so to facilitate the public's input. And I would like to hear more from members of the public, but I have heard from some that they really have difficulty doing this zoom process and accessing. And as we spoke about the digital divide, not everyone has the ability to sign in and be on here as much as many of us do. And they have they have like I personally come to city hall to do this because I would be losing the Internet from my home. I simply don't have that ability where I live to to be online and not lose reception. So I know that is a real phenomenon that happens to people here in Alameda. Thank you. Thank you. I'm vice mayor of L.A.. I want to speak to the fact that the state of emergency, the pandemic has not is is not over. I think that there is a marked difference between an outdoor event or a brief event, that versus an hours, hour, many hours long council meetings wherein you would be in close proximity or Border Commission meeting. Because this decision is not just about the council, it's about our boards and commissions. And I don't think that our volunteers should have to put their health and safety at risk or their families in order to serve. I think we ask a tremendous amount of those who serve on our boards and commissions. One need only look at the minutes of the meetings or view them to see how long some of these meetings can last. And I think, you know, basically forcing folks to have to disclose their home address or, you know, explain why they're not there in person when they're serving on a board or commission as a volunteer. I think that that's irresponsible of us. And I think, frankly, when we talk about equity and inclusion and everything else, it goes completely against that. We've heard from members of our boards and commissions, people who are already serving about how not doing this would impact their ability to continue to volunteer. I think we need to take that into account. You know, I know that we would all like the pandemic to be over tomorrow. I certainly would. I would like to be able to see family members and friends. I you know, I I'm speaking as somebody who has two children who even when the FDA approves the vaccine for elementary school children, they're still not going to be able to get vaccinated because they're younger than than five years old. I think we all have, you know, multigenerational families, family members and other members of our household who might not have the same robust health that we do. We need to take all of these things into account. And I would hope that we govern in a compassionate way. And I see this as allowing us to do that and allowing us to be very inclusionary with the members, with our constituents who are volunteering to serve on our boards and commissions. And so that's why I'll be supporting this tonight. I think that this you know, this will need to get reauthorized. There will be other opportunities. Of course, we will be reassessing. I just think that this allows us to address the fact that we are coming up into the same period of time that we saw a huge spike last year. The biggest spike in terms of COVID related cases came around Halloween. That was the start of kind of a long period where folks were getting infected. We've seen a number of breakthrough cases. I know we all know this. I just don't want people being afraid to step up and serve because we're forcing them to disclose personal information like their home address or things like that in order to serve remotely. So I just, I, I very much support this. I know that we'll continue to look at this issue and reevaluate as conditions change. Did I hear a motion in the making? That's in motion. All right. I thought I might have. Elsewhere. We're not quite. Second. I was reading your hand. I thought that might be what it was. All right, we have a motion. We have a second. Do we have any further discussion? SINGH Councilmember Harris Spencer, thank you. So when this comes back and I'll I'll support it now, but I, I do want to figure out if we're going to be doing this. You know, we are not going to go back to in-person meetings at all for anyone that does want prefers up or if we're going to do this indefinitely, because at some point we have been talking about a hybrid. And I think that that might be at least I'd like to consider a hybrid model. And definitely not saying that anyone from any commission has to show up in person, but trying to figure out legally how we could do a hybrid model at some point. Thank you. Thank you. We've had a motion. We've had a second. May we have a roll call vote, please. And so I'm pretty shocked. Yes. Sir. Spencer, I knocked. Hi, Ella. Hi. Mayor Ashcroft. Yes. Carries by five. Thank you. All right, we move on to item seven D. Madam Kirk, would you introduce this item? It is a public hearing to consider adoption of resolution amending Master P Resolution 121912 Revised fees for fire department services and permits.