Recommendation to Review the Ballot Arguments and Address Rebuttals for the Two April 9, 2019 Special Election Measures: 1) a Proposed Initiative Measure to Change the Designation for an Approximately 3.65 Acre Site on McKay Avenue, by Amending the General Plan Designation from Office to Open Space, and by Amending the Zoning Ordinance from Administrative-Professional District to Open Space District; and 2) the Caring Alameda Act. (City Clerk 2220)
Okay. All right. I'm. Who's presenting this? Is that you, Mr. Roche? Oh, I guess. Oh, you are okay? Yeah, you were right about. So basically, the two subcommittees of the council went ahead and both prepared their argument. The one against the initiative and the one in favor of the Carrying Alameda Act. And so those two are before you. And what you need to do is just review it blessed. And then you can have a brief discussion about how you want to handle signatures and rebuttals. Okay. Thank you. So where do we start, Councilmember Vella. For the valid argument against which I worked on with Mayor Ash Ashcraft, I did want to note there is a link now that we can add in. So in the second line where it says a report was prepared for the city council link, the I would like to replace the bracketed link with the direct link to the report, which is HTP s colon. I've got it. You've got it. Yeah. With. Backslash Alameda S.A. of McKay report. And so for those watching, essentially we've got the direct link to the report so you don't have to go on to our website and look through the past agendas in order to find out it's now directly available there. Mm hmm. And so with that change, I would just say that I think that, you know, our subcommittee worked. Fairly hard getting this done in the in the quick turnaround time. And I you know, I feel comfortable with the the language as written. And I will note that we have speakers. So do we have any council questions before I go to public speakers? Hearing that I'm going to call our public speakers. First, I have Doyle Saylor and then I have Doug Biggs. Mayor Ashcraft and council members and everybody pretty much knows who I am. So we talked about this issue with the McKay Avenue Respite Center. We talked with Doug Biggs quite a bit. So we understand it and renewed hope because is very feels very strongly that this rezoning is not necessary and we were opposed to it. So we just wanted to deliver a message that we're going to oppose the measure and mobilize against it in the coming election. And we're looking to get together with our allies to have a united effort against this. And we just want to let everybody know that we're going to do that. Thank you very much. Thank you, Doug Biggs. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Ashcraft and members of the City Council. I'd like to thank both committees for the wonderful work you did on on writing the ballot matters. I have just one minor suggestion, and it doesn't have to really do with the major itself, but how we refer to it for the ballot argument against Mackay. That's the zoning change ordinance. It's not an open space initiative because it's not creative open space that should be referred to as the zoning change initiative. I think we do a disservice to the community when we refer to it as. An open space initiative because it doesn't create open space, it just change zoning. And I know the discussion is going to come up around signature gatherers. As you know, over 500 Alameda INS have signed a letter endorsing the project and opposing the initiative. We have a number of folks who are very interested in signing on to to the ballot arguments and also to the rebuttals. I think it would be wonderful if it's each of the two committee members of each of the initiatives signed on, and then there's other members of the public that would be very interested in signing on in the district of those. I just put that out there. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Those are all of our public speakers. So council comments. Who wants to start? Have a question. Councilmember Vela. If this is for our city clerk, the ballot argument against that's just listed here. Is that also printed on the thing on the in the booklet? Yes. The voter information pamphlet basically identifies the that the one is the argument the order of printing is actually the argument in favor, then the rebuttal to the argument in favor. Then the argument against and the rebuttal to the argument against. So that's the way it is identified. And the title at the top is also printed. No, they use the exact wording of the elections code but. Oh that so. That that line isn't going to be. No, no, no. It'll say measure blank, you know, with the number of the letter. But I hear what the speaker said and I note that. Okay, thank you. But but so the I mean, the point you're making is it will not will it reference. It will say argument against measure and then the letter. Right, then not the. Title of any form other than right. It's against or. For. Okay. Measure. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Councilmember Okay. So, and then just to clarify what you're going to ask us for direction on actually doing a rebuttal argument. Correct. Okay. I'll have to make that decision time because you do not have another meeting prior to submitting those on the 24th. And our options are. You can maintain the same subcommittees, you could swap subcommittees, you could just figure out. Okay, I'm not a mayor. Council, I'm a vice mayor. Nice way to a quick question. I guess I'm thrown off by that. I know that the way you can format these is very, very limited. I'm thrown off a little bit by the bullet points and then the lack of them in a couple of places. And I and I understand the intent is to bullet point a couple of things that are headers, but I mean, is there a way to indent or something so that when this aligns, you know. Yes. You'd have to give me that formatting by 5 p.m. tomorrow and you know, whatever you decide. But that intention is allowed and it's this is different than candidate statements that are required to be in block format and have no anything. Special arguments have a little more leeway. And so you can do bullets, you can indent, you can. If I could just interject, I would appreciate if we could perhaps have the city attorney's office. Ms.. Chan has been working with us on these, perhaps just also give a look it over and help with whatever reformatting you're suggesting. Yeah. Is that okay? Yeah, that's one for. And what else? So you. I have no personal comments to to Councilmember Ortiz question. I would recommend that we we look to have the authors of each of these sign them and then leave the other spaces open for community members who might be sending. And then to your your question, I would suggest. Oftentimes, it's actually the campaigns that write the ballot. And I think maybe the rebuttal should be written by the by the campaigns rather than the council. I just want to say, if different people write the rebuttal, there's an additional requirement that the authors that do the first one have to release to allow other authors. So there's just an additional form that has to be signed, but it's just something to be aware of and understand. Right? Councilmember Vela So I think that the intentions went away as a formatting switch over to we used to, we hadn't tried in previous one. So I'm happy to reformat that and then also add the link and work on that. I would I actually would like to propose that we take a vote tonight in terms of having the mayor, there was a vast majority of us who signed off on on these on both initiatives. I would like to essentially give the mayor the authority to sign on behalf of the the council, and then that would leave open for spots for community folks to sign on. And my question is for the city clerk. Can we do that? Can it say mayor. Mayor Marylin as he Ashcraft on behalf of. Or is it just her signature statement title? Yeah. I mean, I know she could put her title Mayor City of Alameda City Council. I know she could put like her exact title, but I don't. I on behalf of little. I would be a little wary of doing it that way. Well, what was the question again, that. On behalf of. Half of the city council. Oh. I would say it would tend to sound like there's five and now you're adding additional four. I think. And I think we can do it. Well, I think you are destroying that. One of the things. Okay, let's everybody let's let's see what the acting city attorney, an interim seizure he's got for us. Mr. Jam points out to me, we're looking here at not sure where it's coming from, but it does say print name, title and if applicable, submitted on behalf of. Yes, so so it could be done. So my question. That's the notice that went out. And that notice is just to clarify that if it's not a voter of the city, it has to be on behalf of an organization. Right. So but I'm not sure that that even that in there, when they're representing their organization, I'm not sure they get to put the on behalf of words in. I think they just put their name and their title. I would have to double check with outside counsel. My comment would be, I would well know so-and-so comma, executive director of Sierra Club as opposed to on behalf of and the. The concern I would have is that we will recall we didn't have a unanimous vote of the council to do this. And so to say that it's on behalf of the city council seems a bit misleading and also unfair to our colleague Councilmember de Sykes position. I think when we did a lot of brainstorming in the course of our drafting. And one thing that Councilmember Vela and I thought is that perhaps the mayor and vice mayor could sign in our respective titles and then we would scurry around and get our other three signers. And we did. We started compiling a list. It's just we haven't done the outreach to get them nailed down. But we will. 5 p.m. tomorrow. 5 p.m. tomorrow. Okay. Okay. Councilmember Ody, I mean. I agree with the indentation, so that's fine. And I like the idea of having the mayor and the vice mayor, you know, sign both. You know, I personally would like to sign the Carrying Alameda Act, but, you know, if the council would prefer to do it the other way, I'm fine with that, too. Let's get to that next. Let's let's let's dispose of the first one. Hold that thought. But right now we've got the ballot argument against the Mackay Open Spaces Initiative. That's for identification purposes only. The formatting will be cleaned up, the link will be added. So everybody okay with the wording? Yes. Okay. And by 5 p.m. tomorrow we will have five up to five signatures and maybe we don't have to have a five, but. Okay. And Councilman Brody, sorry. So then on the rebuttal, I mean, isn't it also true that if we if we choose, we get first dibs, right? But then if other people submit, then there has to be like a random drawing or something, right? No. Okay. So that's. That's not for the rebuttal. That's okay. The director. Okay. There is an order in the elections code, and the council is highest in the order. So your arguments will be selected. But if we choose to, like, delegate this out to the quote unquote campaign, then we're kind of losing that or no? Well, no. Once there's two sides that have done the direct arguments, then the rebuttals are done by those same groups. Okay, so. Maybe just another. Okay. So we can't really farm out the. Rebuttal, okay. Yeah. I mean, you could work with somebody else, but technically, I mean. The original. Group has the authority over the. Rebuttal. Okay, so then the committee, the subcommittee would probably be the one that does it. I mean. That was my assumption that the two drafters would handle the rebuttal to the opposition, to the pieces that council member Jody and Vice Mayor Inoculate. Is that. True? Yeah. How do. You mean? Like I said, it was my assignment. We did a good job. If the council has to do it. Yes, that makes sense. Okay. Completely. Okay. So is that so? Okay. So we are we have approved the language of the argument against the Open Space Initiative. And then. Okay. And then we're going to let's take a look at the. Point of order. Oh, sorry. Yeah. Yeah. Yes, we do. Okay, so let's see. Well, how many votes do you want us to take? Citizens. I think if you want to combine this, like, motion to say you're approving the language with the link in the indent, and then you're authorizing the same subcommittee to work on the rebuttal. And then you're having the mayor and vice mayor sign and figure out the other three signers. That could be the motion. Okay. That's for the first one. Okay, let's break it up that way. I will make that motion. What she said. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So it's been moved by Councilmember Vela. Is there a second then we'll have discussion. I'll second it for discussion, but I'd like to go. So the problem with going one at a time is that Councilmember Ody has indicated interest in signing the other one. So the question for me is, do we want mayor and vice mayor on one and mayor and Odie and the you know, we can have two different signers on each. But. Or do we want to say the mayor? I don't know. Good question. What do we want to do, folks. Before we make a decision here and then we're okay? When a time when it time. Are you done? Okay. Councilmember Vela. I am happy to have and I think it's appropriate to have the mayor and the vice mayor sign both of them. I think in the event that we but I also think that there is a value and intrinsic value to show that there is a coalition of folks that are involved in this. It's not that the rest of the majority of the council wouldn't be involved or actively supporting it or even listed as supporters. But I think just for the purposes of the ballot argument, I think having the mayor and the vice mayor sign is a show of solidarity among the majority of the council and then have these other community groups sign on. That's that's what my vote would be. But if there's a strong feeling from one of my colleagues to sign on in a separate measure, I would consider that separately. As for this measure, I'm fine not signing it. However, if we are unable to get other signatures, I'm more than happy to be called at 450 and come to City Hall to sign it if needed. I have a I have a suggestion. What if. So we've got two valid arguments and then we have rebuttals. What if the vice. The mayor. Vice mayor signed off on the arguments and I from that expression, I'm going together, infer that you're not terribly in this. And then two other council members sign off in the rebuttal with members of the community member Odie. I mean, I'm fine with just having the two, I think, and happy to have my signature in reserve, but we could still sign the paper and then you could just use it. You don't have to rush over here at 445, right? I think you can have it in your hand and if you need it, you could take it. And if you don't need it, then you just picture pages. I don't require it. I'll be on the same page. Okay. So. Okay. So I'm not sure we decided anything, did we? That the mayor and the vice mayor are signing and that if. It signed both. And is a sign of unity and strength. And then, you know, we would offer our signatures as a backup if we couldn't get community members, because I agree that having a show, a strong show of community support is is probably stronger. Minor technical point. I'm going to be in a train at 730 tomorrow morning. You could sign it now. I could sign. A separate piece of paper. Okay. That's my hope. Okay. I mean, we all could. Live tomorrow. So. Yeah. So you can both sign tonight. Okay. On the clerk could choose. If she gets the others, then she's good. If she doesn't, then. Okay. She has some bank. Well, the the subcommittee would have to let me know who the five signers are. Right. Right, right, right. Okay. And I'll be around tomorrow. Great. Okay. And I think you could probably call in Mr. Biggs and others in the community to help you. Vice Mayor. That's why I have just just because I didn't understand the nuance exactly about the rebuttal. If Marilyn and I sign the mayor and I sign this, do we if if the mayor and. Councilmember Vela are doing it. Do I have to sign the release? Yes. There's an. Additional. Signatures after the writing. That's just the signature. It's just to release. If if some anybody any of the five signers of the original argument are different than the rebuttals. All five original signers have to sign a form releasing who? The names of the different signers. And it can be just one different sign or it's still required of. Got a great point of information. Do we need that by tomorrow? No, that's by the 24th. Okay. When the rebuttal. The rebuttal arguments are due January 24th, but these by 5 p.m. But these signatures are required by tomorrow at 5 p.m., correct? Yes. Okay. Okay. So before we do a vote, we should take a look at the valid argument in favor of the Carry Alameda Act because we're going to vote on them altogether, right? Oh, no. Sorry. Sorry. We were. Yep, we were going. We're going. Yeah, we do. We have a motion in a second and. Well, because we won the discussion. Okay, so any further discussion. Okay. So all in favor of proceeding is as we've outlined. I, I. Opposed abstain. Okay. So four in favor. One abstention. Thank you. Okay, now we move on to exhibit two, which is the ballot argument in favor of the Carrying Alameda Act. Any discussion? I would make the same motion we just made last time. Okay. So does any OC do this motion? Sure. I'll move exactly what we did. Yes. What? I said. Yes, I repeat it again. Sure. Okay. It's keeping the same subcommittee to write the approving arguments presented, approving the same subcommittee to write the rebuttal, and having the mayor and vice mayor sign. And then looking the two of them looking for additional signatures by by 5 p.m. on the 24th. And then the direction in this one would include if you released. The rebuttal rebuttal release. Okay. So there's a motion. Do we have a second? I will second it, but then there's. Some discussion, part. Of discussion I would like to suggest. I think that that unity can look and look lots of ways. I heard Councilmember Ortiz say he'd like to sign off on this and I would be very happy to have him sign off on this with the mayor. So the mayor's on both. And this one is Councilmember Odie. I don't think that's a problem. I don't think somehow vice mayor is so exceedingly and I think breadth helps and given his interests, I just wanted to throw that out there. I will support my name being on it, but I definitely doesn't have to be. I want to defer to the. Titles. Um, you know, I think you, I my my sense is that it might seem just a little confusing to voters because it almost suggests that if it's the mayor and vice mayor, those are the two positions of, you know, it's not top position because we're heavy, which is but we are designated. If we saw that another individual, I think it could just call into question, oh, does that mean the vice mayor doesn't support the this? So I mean, but but where you could help us is by helping us round up those signature gatherers cause you are going to write the rebuttal. But what do people think? That's just my my impression, to keep it as simple. Straightforward. I agree. I think the the more, you know, we stick with the same, the better. Um, and then, like I said earlier, it's not that we're not supportive of it. Obviously our votes on the record, it's not that we're not in, you know, voting to endorse the measure or take action on it. We've done that. So I think there's other ways we show our support. And I would also suggest that maybe when it subcommittee is looking for signers, there might be one set of additional signers who are more affiliated with care centers and dealing with the homeless. And there might be another set of signers for the, the, the argument in our position who are, you know, who know parks and Recreation and what it does and doesn't entail. So that might be where you differ, but I think the council members do best to keep that uniform. But I do appreciate your sung strong support. Councilmember Odie. I wanted it to be uniform too, so okay. But I mean, I could say in the rebuttal to I mean it's I can be in reserve. Perfect. I don't have. To be the one on there. Got it. Okay. Any further discussion on this one before we vote? Yeah, we've got a second. Right. Okay. It's been moved and seconded. All in favor, I, I opposed. Abstain. Motion passes four in favor with one abstention. All right. And with that, we are adjourned once again. But this time for real. Tony Sosa. Oh, I'm sorry. I am rushing this one. Yes. No. Okay. Yes. To be or not to be. No recommendation to consider directing the city attorney to initiate litigation to obtain a judicial declaration. Whether enforcement of the Open Space Initiative will require the City of Alameda to compensate the owner for the value of McKay Avenue Property Event.