Consider: 1) Directing Staff to Provide an Update on the Negotiations between the City and the Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter (FAAS) at the March 7, 2017 City Council Meeting; and 2) If a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has not been Reached between the City and FAAS, that Council Provide Direction to Staff on the Terms of a MOU between the City and FAAS. (Mayor Spencer)
He's instructing staff to provide an update on the negotiations between the city and friends of the Alameda Elliman animal shelter at the March seven City Council meeting. And to if a memorandum of understanding has not been reached between the city and that Council provide direction on the terms of an email. You and I brought this all because of the last council meeting. Right before the start, I was asked to announce that the item would not be on the agenda for today, which I thought it would be. And when I asked, Is there a new date, there was no date set. So I think it's important to for us to get an update. And and honestly, it's been eight months or something like that of negotiations. I think it's time to set the terms. So now we have speakers as Swati Shah and Marcy Pearce and Tenzin Peterson. You may think each get 3 minutes. Hello, everyone. It's been a long night, so I will save my remarks for the next council meeting. But I really hope that the attention that was paid tonight. To all the. Other very important issues will be focused on the shelter soon. Some time. Because as much as I love trees, as much. As I love what our city does. People come first to me and my animals are second. And so we spend. A lot of time on a lot of other issues. And so I very much look forward to a healthy discussion similar to we had about other subjects today. To be about the shelter, hopefully at the next meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Marcy Morrison Pearce. Thank you, Mayor Spencer. Councilman. I'm Mattie and I began volunteering back in 2009 when Maddie needed some community volunteer credits in middle school. At that time, the shelter was run by the police department and the volunteer program was minimal. Back then there were about 15 active volunteers, including us, and we came to find out from a friend later there was a list of people who wanted a call about volunteering. They never got called from the police department. Back then, I really didn't know much about the rescue movement. We were blissfully unaware of things like euthanasia rates. We didn't wonder why we didn't get much training at all before we worked with the animals. We didn't question why there were no other volunteers. When we were there, we didn't ask what happened to the animals when there were no volunteers allowed in on holidays or days when the shelter was closed. Now enlightened by the rescue teaching we've received through fires, we see problems existed when the animal shelter was run by the police department. That's more word to 2012 when FAS took over and formal training was instituted for volunteers. We started learning about animal enrichment, using and improving what seemed like wasted time an animal spends behind a kennel door. Working with the dogs to make them friendlier. More responsive to people. More obedient, more adoptable. Hence the lower euthanasia rate that's been admired throughout the country. It doesn't happen by accident. It happens because volunteers have that intention. As a volunteer, once a week we come in, we walk dogs, we play with them, we clean up their puppy kennels. We have also been involved with the foster program. We kept two tiny Chihuahua pups in our house for almost a month, raising them to get used to human touch and interaction. We adopted a little terrier mix that fell in love with me at the shelter, and my parents fell in love with him on my dad's 80th birthday , a week after he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease. We put a bow on Smiley's head and he became the best present my dad ever got. And I believe that dog kept him out of the assisted living for a long time. Now, smiley is the love of my mom's life. I have chased a little Chihuahua who escaped from a harness from the Grant Street Marina through the city's vehicle carwash. I have been the object of Chase from a pit bull who escaped from a kennel and just wanted a good walk. And I tell you all this not to tell my own horn, not to toot my own horn, but to impress upon you this. And this is the important thing. Of all the volunteers I see on a monday afternoon, I do the very least. That's the kind of volunteer force we have. It's a strength of our volunteer force. About 300 strong. That makes for us great. I haven't even told you about the many, many hours Ophelia and Frances put in to raise money for their shelter out the night that many of you attended. The night on the Hornet. Volunteer hours were converted into a money figure. Even at minimum wage, thousands and thousands of dollars we put into this shelter. If the police department takes over this place, that shelter is, will the volunteer force remain as strong? Will the police department recruit train coordinates, sustain and support the force of volunteers and make the shelter a great place for animals and for the community. It didn't happen when I was there, when I worked with the police department. Didn't happen. Getting involved is not only good for the animals, but for the community. And I know that bell rung. So let me tell you, Alameda is a progressive place. Lead us forward. You are leaders, as you said, Councilman Matarese. We look forward. We don't look back to the time that the city had a pound. That's not what alameda is. Value. Thank you. And lastly. Marjorie. Marcy, next time, please turn in this clip for you and Matty. Both of you have sat there all these hours and it could have been 6 minutes and then I wouldn't have had the feedback. All right. So. You need a location for 11. All right. Uh, so we need a motion to continue past 11. Second. Although I favor. My. Motion carries. Thank you for coming down. So it's like Tenzan version. Hello. My name is Tenzin Peterson. I'm 11 years old, and I began. Volunteering. At the Alameda Animal Shelter last year. I really care about animals and believe that they make very good friends and companions. I believe it is the city's responsibility to care for animals and make sure they are treated well. I want the city to accept this proposal because forces saving animals lives. It will be able to send 95% of the animals in the shelter to loving homes. It costs less for farmers to run the shelter than if the city ran it and was doing a great job taking care of all of its animals. I urge you to accept Foster's proposal of $908,000 and keep the animal shelter open. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Patricia Phillips and then Deb Knowles. Then Susan Feltman. Gettleman. GETTLEMAN And those were my last slips on this item. If you want to speak on the side of, please submit your. Hi. My name is Pat Phillips and I've been a feline volunteer for a couple of years. Purpose, sorry. In last. Year I've. Seen a lot of kids being surrendered because people, their owners are moving and they can't take them with them. Or even worse, they've been abandoned. If you just surrender your pet for whatever reason, wouldn't you want to take it to a place. Where you know. They're going to be taken care of and they're going to be safe where they're going to get a second chance? If force does not receive the funds they need to maintain quality of service, I'm afraid that this will this will affect their live release rate. And if they lower this rate for no doubt we'll lose a lot of the volunteers. I mean, as a volunteer, I wouldn't want to come in for my ship to find out that one of my favorite healthy, lovable, adoptable shelter buddies is not on the adoption board. It's gone. So please consider this. When you make your funding decision, it's the right thing to do. Thank you. Deb Nelson and Susan, I think. Here's Pat. You can go ahead. Okay. Hi. My name is Susan Gettleman. And I would like to speak in support of the FAA's funding request. Members of the City Council. I know that the city has received detailed. Financial information. From FAS about the cost. Of running the shelter properly and humanely, and about. Why the FAS. Proposal makes. Economic sense for the city. I'm not here to talk about those details. I'm here to talk about my personal experience. I love being a volunteer at FAS. In the past three and a half years, I volunteered almost 1800 hours. At the shelter. I love the time I spend interacting with the animals at the shelter, and I love the camaraderie. That I share with staff and with. Other volunteers, all of whom support and appreciate one another and have a passion for the well-being of animals of each animal that comes into the shelter. I see staff working far beyond the call of duty to keep the shelter running. As it should be run, not because it's just a job, but because. They're committed to the humane treatment. And the. Adaptability of the animals at the shelter. And I see a large and devoted group of volunteers who have been a key part of the shelter's successful performance over the past five years through the collective efforts of its board staff and volunteers. FAS now provides medical care. Behavioral assessments, daily socialization and exercise. And dramatically. Improved adoption rates for the city's. Stray. Abandoned, neglected and surrendered animals. I'm proud to be associated with Fox and its mission. I'm grateful for the. Opportunity to be an active and appreciated member of the community. And I would like to. Be proud of my. City of Alameda for providing us with a level of funding it needs in order to continue. Buzz is a well-run organization with honest, hardworking and dedicated staff members and volunteers, and all of them deserve respect and full support from the city. Thank you. Thank you. Deb Nelson, and she's the last speaker on this item. Yvonne Last but last but not least. Good evening, Madam Mayor. And Council. Pardon me. They've the best. Class. Well, maybe. Maybe not. We'll see. So. So what I'm here for? I'm Deb Knowles. I'm the president of the board of directors for FAS. And I guess there's been a fair bit of misunderstanding, miscommunication about where things are. From my perspective with with our negotiations and I'd like to set this set the record straight this evening. First of all, our proposal is for 908,000, and our total fund funding to include fundraising is a million for. Not. 1,000,009. In terms of staffing. We are not proposing that the executive director or the operations manager get a pay raise. We are proposing that our staff, those are our hourly employees, receive a 6% pay raise. We are also not recommending that we add four staff. We are proposing that we add one staff. So that's where we are today. That's not where we were a year ago when we began this journey. But that is exactly where we are today. And I guess what I would do is I'd urge you to to to direct staff to update the website. There's a lot of information there that is very dated at this point. And we want to make sure that we're. Going down the going. Down the road together. And I think that if we had more accurate information out there, that it certainly would help us have a more constructive process going forward. And finally, we had some really good news today. We've been working with the city manager's suggestion. We've been talking with APC and we have hammered out a draft menu to begin working with them on an ongoing basis. So we're kind of excited about that. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And APC. And I wanted to share in Apex Alchemy two point collaborative. For those that don't know. All right. So I brought this referral asking that Steph provide an update at the next council meeting March 7th and during the public meeting so the public can all speak on the agenda item. And then we could give feedback and that if an M you had not been reached by that time, that we give direction to staff on the terms of the M or you between the city and us. And I brought this because as we heard from the speaker, this has been going on for a year. I actually brought my first referral on this item back on July 6th, so that's eight months ago. Council gave direction five months ago at the first in October 4th. And I think that it's critical that we way we as council receive an update in a public meeting and then we can have our public comments on the substance of the referral and give direction if necessary, on the terms so that we can move forward and be done with this. And I think it's critical. I think a year, eight months, five months, it's plenty of time. Member Ashcraft. So thanks to everyone for speaking in. I'll also disclose it. A couple Saturdays ago, my husband and I went down and spent a couple of hours at the shelter and it looks great. The volunteers, the staff are doing a great job. The place looks great and we even took a dog out for a walk, which was fun, I think, for all of us. But I. I just want to clarify when the mayor says, Mayor Spencer, when you say this has been going on for over a year, but it's my understanding that the city just got the financials back in January. And so it's hard to do negotiation when you don't have everything in front of you. But that said, I'm feeling that there's been a lot of progress. I mean, I do keep in touch with the different board members and their consultant. I'm also aware that this item is it's a contract and it's appropriate that a contract be heard in closed session. And in fact, at our next council meeting on March 7th, it's on the closed session agenda. So I, I think that both sides I commend you for I can I can tell that, you know, progress is being made. And between now and March 7th, there just might be even more progress to report to us in closed session. I'd actually like so in regards to it's on the closed session agenda. That agenda has not gone out. And I know we had been told it was actually going to be on the agenda for this meeting and then it got canceled. So I think it's critical that we have some certainty that it is actually going to be heard, which seems to be a moving ball moving target. Any other comments? Well, I just would like to say that there has been movement in both sides towards the middle. And the details now are. Much, much smaller and more approachable than they have been in the past. And I feel like there is goodwill on both sides. And there is no question at all from that point of view about the good job that Ford has done. I live release great, good volunteers, just as Councilmember Ashcroft said, and the city does not intend to bring it back into the police department. And we don't intend to take over an operation that has been done so successfully by the friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter. So that said, we are working on the details in between. And the closed session is to talk about price and terms from the council's point of view. And so is. That March 7th. And that is scheduled for March 7th. Ideally, if we got input from the council in closed session, then we could go back and meet with the FAS board and then come back soon after that, if that is the preference of the FAS board and the council. And we're matariki. That sounds reasonable. The one thing I don't want to have happen. Can you also say again that the police department's not going to. The Alameda Police Department and there's a smile over there and has no intention and will not take over the the Alameda animal shelter. And the second thing that I'd like to get a commitment on is I don't want to hear. Or get an email while we're going through this process that there's a sign up on the door saying the shelters close because there's no money. We've had that conversation with the board and the feeling is that there is enough funds to get us through. The end of April, I think is what the last conversation we had. If there is an issue, we have also said that we will make sure that the animals are cared for and continue on with a process in the interim until a decision is made on the details. So the employees are secure and the animals are secure. And and then lastly, I think it's very important because with all the good intentions in 2012 to save the city money and to to get a a knowledgeable animal care group running the a a shelter, not just a dog or animal control facility. It didn't anticipate the actual costs. And I think. Looking at the actual costs and and having that good discussion between city staff and force management to narrow down truly what the budgets are and what the projections are. I think we'll be in a better place than if we rush something through and. That's all said that in the backdrop that you're saying that we're going to have an update at the next meeting. And my expectation is with that direction, go into a room and don't come out until we have a deal. Just like any other contract, it's done in good faith where the negotiators at the table prepare a contract for the city council to consider. So I don't think it conflicts. I think we can have an item on clothes that we are all privy to and we can still have an item on the open agenda where we provide an update to the people and the people can weigh in on it. Yeah, I have no problem. I have no problem with it. But in open session, direct giving direction and open session I think is a bad idea and it's not good faith bargaining, right? But you also. You report out at closed session, right? If we haven't. So actually, I have my understanding that we can give direction to staff if we haven't reached an agreement in the in the closed session that we should be able to. So have it on the agenda, get an update and then we can decide if it's not been reached, that we could have that as an option to give direction to staff at that time if we haven't made a deal. We should still have an update on the agenda on that. The public is aware of it. If I can add, I think and we have talked with city staff, has talked with Foster about this issue. And as Councilmember Matt of us has indicated, when you're doing negotiations, price, terms of payment, those kinds of things, it's better to do in a closed session. So we have informed the FAS staff that have been engaged with us in negotiations that March 7th. We will be getting hopefully what, some final direction from the city council. And based on that, we believe quickly we can work with with the force staff to get the document drafted, which we've already started trying to do the preparations for, and then be able to come back quickly with something for the council. And if we can't get agreement, then we will come back to the council and say we can't get agreement, but to do a closed session and to come back and tell everybody what happened. I would recommend highly again. I swear to you, I say so. I just think that if we're going to if we're going to meet in closed session, this is how we handle our contract negotiations. Normally we can give direction. And, you know, frankly, I mean. I think many of us are in this position where we've been speaking with folks on both sides and there's open lines of communication. And I certainly want to empower staff to get a deal done, which is what I would hope would be the point of the closed session. So there was a comment in regards to updating the website so that it's accurate and things like that be done in the meantime. Yes, we can do that. The first proposal was on the website. The second proposal we can put on their website or but put both of them on and how the progress has moved forward. Remember. You know, I was just kind of on that and I kind of agree with. My colleagues here that typically these type of negotiations don't occur in public. That's the reason why we negotiate price in terms and in closed session, whether it be a labor contract or a lease or this, which I think is a substantial contract. But might I suggest that instead of like updating Web sites, you know, having competing Web sites, you know, having this negotiation take place in the newspapers and on the Internet is that both sides take down their websites, stop the press releases and stop the letter writing and sit in a room and hammered out until we have a deal that we can all be happy with. I mean, that to me would be a better use of everyone's energy instead of, you know, me getting misinformation from one side. And, you know, he said she said this website, that Web site, just, you know, clamp down it and get in a room and get it done. So my concern that is, is taking which I agree with you, it's taking away, I think if that's what you're saying, it's taking way too much time. And I think that it is appropriate for council to give direction. I it was going to be on this agenda and then for some reason it was removed. But I think our public is entitled to an update and I think that we can keep it on, we can put it on the agenda, and if we don't need it, then there would be nothing to say. If we have a deal, we don't have a deal. I think we need to have a discussion about what's going on. Well, the problem with us meeting in closed session and getting price and terms is then we don't give the opportunity for the FAS board to take that information and see if it works and work it out and then come back as a partnership. And I understand. And Councilmember Ortiz pointed at the same time, I don't think that we as as a city council can really tell our citizens whether or not to communicate, you know, this but but. They have a First Amendment right to participate in the process. You know. And that that's not helpful to resolving the situation. I think we can tune out. Whether it's from one side or the other, is not helpful and it does not create an atmosphere of mutual trust and bargaining. So well, I think we can tune out some of the background noise and we'll all rise above this when we get that resolution that I think we're this close to getting. So at this point, I Madumere this was your item. Do you want to make a motion? So I'll just limit it to the first part. Direct staff to provide an update on the negotiations at the next Council meeting, March seven, 2017. On the Public Agenda. I have a second. I will second that if it means just reporting out the as usual from the closed session. Under the requirements for reporting what happens in close to. And so there's a motion in the second. All those in favor. I. I. Or sham fails. Okay. Well, still. It's eight months or a year. It's ridiculous. Let's keep going. Nine Be consider sending a letter to the Alameda Health System in appropriate health insurance plans regarding the lack of contracts covering many Alameda residents and urging them to reach agreements and creating a committee to review the issue. Providing access to on island health care for me to residents and make recommendations on how to proceed.