Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute the Seaplane Lagoon Ferry Terminal Operating Agreement between the City of Alameda and the Water Emergency Transportation Authority; and Introduction of Ordinance Approving a License and Authorizing the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of a 66-Year License with the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority for Use of Real Property and Submerged Land at Alameda Point. [Requires Four Affirmative Votes] (Community Development 858)
Recommendation to authorize the city manager to negotiate and execute the Seaplane Lagoon Ferry Terminal Operating Agreement between the city of Alameda and the Water Emergency Transportation Authority and introduction of ordinance approving a license and authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute documents necessary to implement the terms of a 66 year license with the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority for the use of real property and submerged land at Alameda Point, this item requires four affirmative votes. Good evening, Ashcroft. Can I just wait until we have everyone's attention? Okay. Are we ready? All right, please. Good evening, city council members. I'm Michelle Giles, the base for you manager. And I'm here to present a report recommending that the city council authorize the city manager to negotiate and execute the Seaplane Lagoon Ferry Terminal Operating Agreement. And the water emergency with the Water Emergency Transportation Authority or WETA, and introducing an ordinance approving a license and authorizing the city managers to negotiate and execute documents necessary to implement the terms of a 66 year old 66 year license with the LIDAR for the use of real property and submerged lands at Alamy. A point I want to give you just a little bit of background, a little bit of context for how long we've been working on this. In 2005 15, the council approved the DDA with the with AP for the site, a project which required AP to construct the Seaplane Lagoon Ferry Terminal and contribute $10 million towards the project as part of the site infrastructure. In 2016, city and the city and we approved a ferry terminal plan and an IMO you with veto to provide a framework for funding and operations of the sea plane terminal. At the time the IMO was approved, funds for operation to launch the service were not sufficient. The parties agreed in the IMO to collaborate and seeking other funding sources to fund an operating subsidy. In 2017, Alameda County Transportation Commission awarded the Ferry Terminal Project at $8.2 million grant and county Measure B funds, bringing the total funds to 18.2 million. In September 2018, the city approved an updated ferry terminal plan with updated costs of 22 point million, which was a $4 million increase from the previous budget. And but to close the construction gap the city appropriated just last year. Last fiscal year, $2 million towards the project. And the Wheat Board approved a $2 million contribution to have a fully funded project. On July 19th of this year, the city entered into a funding, construction and dedication agreement with AP to address the expenditures of funds for all the ferry terminal costs for the completion of the design permitting and construction of the ferry terminal project and the dedication of the ferry terminals, landside and waterside improvements, landside improvements to the city and waterside improvements to wider following construction of the terminal. So construction began this year in July and anticipated completion is in spring 2020. Just last month, the city the Wheat Board approved initial service for a seaplane lagoon starting in August 2020 with a six trip commute service created by restructuring the Alameda Oakland Service to shift the peak period. Alameda Trips to Seaplane Lagoon. The midday and evening services at Main Street will continue. The service was initially developed for implementation with the new ALM three funds, which we just talked about with Representative Quanta, which are, as we know, currently unavailable due to the ongoing legal challenges. But we do have the board agreed to use other funds to operate the service over a three year planning period in the meantime. Just last week we had a board approved the operating agreement and license at their December 12th meeting and we are here today to bring forward that operating requirement. The purpose of the operating agreement is to define the rights and responsibilities of of WETA and the city in connection with the operation of the Seaplane Lagoon Ferry Terminal. Just a brief summary of some of those rights and responsibilities. The city's rights is to continue to own the landside area and the waterside area, which is the seaplane lagoon, to maintain and to maintain the landside area. The city will execute a 66 year license to enter and to enter on and access city's submerged real property for a license fee of a dollar per year and will cause AP to execute a bill of sale to transfer the ownership of the waterside assets from AP to Wheeler. We just rights and responsibilities are to own and maintain and repair and replace all the waterside improvements, including the float, the gangway and the. I'm missing something. But all of the waterside components of the of the ferry terminal pay for an additional water, any additional waterside equipment, including any dredging it should it be become necessary and maintain and repair the submerged real property of the sea plain lagoon that it will be going over. And they also pay all long term capital costs associated with associated with the ferry terminal operations and traveling over the marshlands. Also, what we're asking for your approval tonight is a license agreement. The license agreement is needed by we to to access the submerged lands because the waterside improvements owned by Rita, the float, the gangway and other waterside improvements are located in the seaplane lagoon. And vessels must transverse over the sea floor to access the terminal, therefore needing a license to do that. And as I said before, the staff is imposing that a license of 66 years with an annual fee of $1 be effective once the ferry commences service. So tonight, staff is recommending that the city council authorize the city manager to negotiate and execute the Seaplane Lagoon Ferry Terminal Operating Agreement with the Water Emergency Transportation Authority. And to introduce the license, I'd like to acknowledge board member Jeff Obono here tonight, who was instrumental in working with Rita to get this project in the water, the operation agreement passed by the Wheeler Board, and also Kevin Connolly, the planning and development manager who is here tonight. And I just want to express our profound appreciation for their work over these last five years and hope that we can keep moving forward with this project. Thank you and. Thank you very much. Do we have any clarifying questions? Do we have public speakers on this items? Do we have we have agenda? We have the clarifying questions. Councilmember Odie, just one. You may have said this, but so it was approved last week. Right? Okay. Thank you. I have a couple questions on the operating agreement. I think it is, yeah. Exhibit one, the operating agreement. My apologies. Usually I get my questions to staff ahead of time. I'm not not on top of things apparently today, but excuse me, um, so on the, on the operating agreement, this is page two. Sorry. Um, page two, paragraph two, B to it says this has to do with the landside assets. So parking facilities and this is at Seaplane Lagoon Terminal parking facilities for approximately 400 vehicles, vehicles with the city making reasonable efforts to ensure priority for ferry riders during ferry operation hours. And my question is, how do we do that? Good question. They both smell. It was a good question. Yeah, good question. And I think it's a good answer. You'll have to figure out how to do that. So I'm this Maxwell. You can speak to the microphone. Please think of city council. Lisa maxwell, assistant city attorney. Got to get a taller microphone. Let's put that to wear. Now, that provision was certainly important one to Aida and we discussed it a great deal. And I know that parking is of great concern to them. So we didn't really have an opportunity to flesh that out fully. So we sort of agreed to continue to work on that matter and matter that the city would do its best. And. To to more. Fully. Mr. President. We are currently working on parking management, which the Council's fully aware of. This is one of the priority areas that we are working on in connection with that. And if you go on Main Street, you obviously see parking management's a very important thing with the ferries and we're trying to aim to have probably not paid parking there by the time we get to August, which we're hoping the end of August, early September is where I'll go take off, but we'll have the parking available there. That that's our aim. Okay. And I do realize that these things take time, but we've also heard AC Transit say over and over again that they the reason we can't get AC Transit Service to the Main Street Ferry terminal is among other things, because we provide all this free parking. And so at some point we've got to bite the bullet and charge for parking. So just and I think I would have some other councilmembers who would agree with me on that. I also wanted to and again, I apologize for not getting these questions to you ahead of time because I don't like to surprise people. But here, let. Me lob this softball at here. So this is page five of the operating agreement. And it has to do with this reader's rights and responsibilities. And specifically, this is this is paragraph 60 on page five says that we to sole pay for any watershed equipment, blah, blah, blah. And all dredging activity within the water side area again. And as to the extent determined necessary by weight of her seaplane lagoon ferry terminal operations. My question on the dredging is will we to also be responsible for hauling away and disposing of dredging materials? That would be part and parcel of the dredging and they don't currently think they need to dredge because it is deep. But we all hope for the best but plan for the worst. Right? So okay, so when that's part of the responsibility for dredging. Okay, that's good to know. And then the second part was paragraph six E that says we shall maintain and repair any submerged real property within the waterside area only to the extent it is damaged or contaminated by Wheater and or Wieters operation of the Seaplane Terminal Ferry Service. And to the extent such repairs are necessary to provide the seaplane terminal ferry service. And my question on that one is what happens when the submerged real property, say, a pier outlives its useful life and must be replaced? Does that responsibility for replacement become the city's responsibility because it wasn't the result of damage or contamination by Rita? Well, are we talking about the waterside assets then related to the ferry terminal service? This is the specific paragraph, Max. All is maintained in repairing these submerged rail properties. So aren't Piers submerged Piers? No. That's not. No, no. Well, I'm a little confused of the question. I apologize. Okay. It's probably in my ass. He never again visits you. Well, okay. Just because in other areas of the city we've had, Piers, or at least the posts that hold them up. The piers are part of the waterside asset, though, so they would be what is responsibility them. Correct. They will own them and they'll take them on the water. The the distinction of the submerged land is that we still own it. The city will still own it. Okay. But I wanted to make sure to capture that anything caused as a result of the activity by Rita would be their responsibility. Okay. So. So we still own the assets. So then the city is responsible for when that pier. No, it is that city's the city owns the submerged real estate, but we don't own the actual land. Okay, okay. It's on the water site and the city owns the landside assets improvements. Okay. Okay, clear enough. All right. Thank you. Any other clarifying questions or did I muddy the waters? Bad pun. Okay, let's end. Did you say we have public TV? No public speakers. Okay. Council decision discussion motion. Where to begin? I'm of approval. We can discuss after if we. Have a second. Okay. We have a motion. And again, this is for. Is there any reason we need to break this out? Because we have to do that. This is both authorizing an operating agreement and also introduction of an ordinance approving a license to. We need to break this out for a vote or once. Okay, so we have a device be removed and Councilor Odie seconded. Okay, discussion vote all in favor. Oh, wait. That's okay. You know, you threw your arm out or something. I just want you. City Manager. Yeah, I just want to thank your member, Doug Bono and all the staff leader. Absolutely. You don't realize how much negotiation and how much this partnership means to the city of Alameda. And I think it's a very valuable relationship. And I just want to thank them for everything they've done in making this even a better relationship with the third term. Thank you. I am actually I was remiss in not acknowledging that it I'm I've been to a couple of the we had board meetings to speak in Alameda. We are so fortunate to have the backing of the majority, if not the full Ouija board. But we have a very strong representative in Mr. Barrio. And by the way, but Mr. Roboto and Mr. Connelly are Alameda residents. But we I mean, we're an island and we do water transit extremely well. It's very important to our residents, and we're thrilled to have our third ferry terminal being built as we speak. And so, yeah, we can't thank you enough for the the support and we're going to make really good use of these new ferries in this new service. So thank you for that reminder. You know, somebody. I'll just be real quick and add on to what everyone else has said, a deal of appreciation. We all I think the mayor, the vice mayor, myself, city manager, Miss Potter, I think there were many other elements that came to them last week at a meeting. That. We packed a meeting and they were. Gracious enough to let all of us speak early because some people had to go. So I want to give a shout out of thanks for that. Okay. With that, all in favor. Hi. Hi. Okay. I didn't hear any. I heard also that the motion passes unanimously. Thank you so much. Okay, we're moving on. Item six B. Recommendation to consider adoption of a City Council Code of Conduct in Councilmember Handbook and Code of Conduct providing guidelines for Council members to follow and conducting city business and fulfilling their responsibilities as city elected officials. Oh, you know, the vice mayor just mentioned that we have a number of public speakers in the audience. Could or do we know, madam? Are they all for item six? Okay. So Council, do you suppose that since we have public speakers for six C would be we could swap the order of B and C. And make that motion. Second. Okay. I have a motion to take item six ahead of six p and it's been seconded. All in favor. Hi, Mr. De. You went away? Yeah, sure. Yeah. Okay, let's make that unanimous. Okay. So with that, we will take item six, the.