Recommendation to Award a Contract for the Publication of Legal Notices to the Alameda Journal for Fiscal Year 2018-19. (City Clerk 2210)
Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Now five s. Recommendation to award contract for the publication of legal notices to the Alameda Journal for Fiscal Year 2018 19. And I don't know if you want a brief report or if you want to hear from the speaker first. I did like a brief. Short, brief report and then your speaker. Right. So every year the charter requires that the council award a contract annually for the publication of legal notices. This past year was the first year we did it with the Sun, and we've had two bidders, again, both the Sun and the Journal. And the costs for the sun are higher again. And the costs didn't show up through the last fiscal year to be higher as we anticipated by choosing them. And so I my recommendation is to go with the journal. There have also been a few instances of issues with publication from the Sun and in notes. It's not making it any more than they said it would. And so I understand the representative from the Sun is here to address that, if there's any questions on that, too. And both submitted letters. All right, so then I'll go ahead of the public speaker. So I don't know. I have once that. Julie I'm going to guess but log us l ogi with the alameda journal. Good evening, City Council Mayor. Thank you for meeting with me tonight. You want to be a little closer to the microphone? I'm sure. I just wanted to thank you very much for the opportunity to bet on the legal business. I've enjoyed working with the city of Alameda for a long time and hope to continue to do that. I do have a letter that I included in your packet. In. Response to a letter that was. Written by the publisher. Of The Sun. So I don't feel the need to have to read it or or say it, but I just wanted to make myself available tonight. If you had questions. Or concerns that I can answer them for you. And again, just wanted to say thank you for your consideration. Thank you. Thank you. Council. He's a member of Parliament. So it's my understanding there's a recommendation by staff to use the Journal this year. Okay, Castle. I'm happy. Go ahead. I'll make a statement. Way. I think we live in a time where factual reporting is really important. And perhaps I'm a little sensitive to this because reporters from the Bay Area News Group not only Ms. quoted me, but they actually never even reached out for comment and then publish saying that they had. To their credit, one of them did reach out, and eventually the other one did. But I find it a bit ironic that we would contract for legal advertising with a paper that at best engages in sloppy or UN researched or unverified reporting. I also find it interesting. I'm happy that the editor lives here in Alameda. It would also be nice if you're going to have an editorial board that your editor who lives in Alameda might sit on that board rather than just having a single reporter who doesn't live in the city of Alameda. You know. For those reasons. I have a problem with spending public dollars with the Bay Area newsgroup. But I would also say that it's a bit disconcerting that we only had to to people put in bids. I do know that there's other newspapers that do circulate, but I also know that the Sun has been doing this for us or has put in bids for this as well. And they're another local paper. They're headquartered here. A number of their employees work here more than just the editor. So it's something I would consider. And Brody. I mean, I will echo my colleague's comments. I mean, the the staff report says the Alameda Journal is the lowest responsible bidder. I don't think there's anything responsible at all about the Bay Area News Group. I mean, if you consider, you know, what they published last fall and the fact that they published an editorial and then share that editorial as news and that they did just like the vice mayor said, it happened to me, too. They posted an article that said, I declined to comment and I wasn't even contacted. Until like seven or 8 hours later. And to me, that's not responsible. And I also know that last time we did this, when we evaluated what we considered the best bid, we considered other factors like the son's place in our community, the fact that they are a community newspaper, that their own their operated here in Alameda, that a lot of their employees work here and they have a long history here. And, you know, I would much rather have our public money go to what I consider a real responsible newspaper and not an irresponsible newspaper. Member matter. I'd like to make a motion to award the bid to the Alameda Sun, because as part of the my definition of the best, it is the locally operated and locally established institution rather than a large media network. Second discussion. Any other comments? Member Ashcraft If I could just hear from the the city clerk about you mentioned, I believe there were a couple of instances when, when something went to the sender for publication but didn't get in. Can you tell us a little bit more about that? There have been some publication errors and most recently the example was an HB notice that they said would go in the paper. They printed. Ten HB it would be. The Historical Advisory Board notice. Is it a printing? That one they printed the council one twice in error. So just the little system issues that they're working out. And I've been told by their staff that it's a staffing issue and they're redoing staffing and that they're going to, you know, get it nailed down. So they have said that, but they are here if you want them to be responsive. And that a mayor I know we have a motion in a second, but I do see a mr. Aronofsky from the Sun. Would you permit him to speak? Did you want to respond at all like that? I assume that was why he. Might identify yourself and then. I full and out of my pocket there. And for the record, Dennis, I would ask him, I purposely allowed me to sign with Eric cos and I do want to apologize for the mistakes we made first of all. And, but I do want to point out we did 132 ads. And by our calculation, there were three mistakes out of 132 ads. So I'm not saying we're perfect and I'm saying we're going to be perfect in the future. But when the ads when all the city ads come before us, from now on, there's going to be a we have to we have to set a buy rule. Two sets of eyes goes on. Everything. As the publisher I know have instituted a three set of rules for the city ad. So what I'm saying is I will I will either have someone on my staff read the ad, double check the ad for the third time, or I will do it myself. So I promise I can't promise a mistake for a year, but I can certainly promise a little more care in place in your ads. Thank you. Thank you. And then to the secret. Can you tell us the difference in the two price bids? Sure. Basically, there's the sun's is almost. And and dollar wise, what is that come out to. Yeah. It worked out this year to be about. Well, the, the main focus that we usually focus on general fund money, but the main focus was there was like $40,000. Whereas in the past it. Over. Oh. Okay. So. And then just to finish my comments, I am willing to go along with the majority to give the local paper. A chance to rectify after the first year of doing the the work for us, the legal publications.