October
18,
2022
RE:
Meeting
Agenda
Item
7G
Honorable
Mayor
and
Councilmembers,
As
you
are
all
aware,
the
Council
adopted
an
emergency
ordinance
in
March
2020
to
permit
the
city
government
to
take
certain
actions
which
wouldn’t
require
the
normal
oversight
and
permission
of
the
residents
of
our
city.
This
suspension
of
the
normal
restraints
on
our
Council
and
Staff
may
have
seemed
reasonable
at
the
time
though
in
hindsight,
some
of
the
decisionss
now
appear
to
have
been
ill-
advised
and
possibly
entirely
inappropriate.
The
Staff
Report
on
this
issue,
Item
7G,
addresses
the
fact
that
the
character
of
the
pandemic
has
changed
and,
therefore,
it
appears
that
it
is
no
longer
necessary
or
appropriate
to
allow
the
Council
and
Staff
to
continue
to
enforce
several
of
the
resolutions,
rules,
regulations,
and
ordinances
that
were
adopted
at
a
time
when
the
whole
world,
including
local
government
leaders,
were
operating
in
a
state
of
panic
and
appear
to
have
been
ignoring
some
of
the
potentially
negative
and
harmful
long-term
consequences
of
their
precipitously
adopted
resolutions.
The
Staff
Report
attempts
to
clarify
our
current
predicament
related
to
these
persisting
under-the-radar
actions
taken
by
the
Council.
Unfortunately,
the
report
is
written
in
such
legalistic
language
that
it
really
isn’t
all
that
helpful
when
it
comes
to
clarifying
the
issue
for
the
average
resident
of
Alameda.
The
report
suggests
that
there
would
be
no
cost
to
the
City
if
many
of
these
resolutions,
etc.
were
allowed
to
remain
in
effect.
I
disagree
with
this
assessment.
It
appears
that
for
the
most
part,
the
report
is
addressing
cost
to
the
City’s
treasury
and
is
ignoring
the
ongoing
costs
to
the
residents.
Mom
and
pop
landlords
continue
to
be
impacted.
Some
small
business
owners
continue
to
be
impacted.
And
drivers,
including
first
responders,
who
would
use
Park
Street,
Webster
Street,
and
the
several
ill-conceived
“quiet
streets”
continue
to
be
significantly
impacted.
Consider
also
that
the
cost
of
placing
permanent
barriers
along
the
narrowed
commercial
streets
will
cost
a
hundred
thousand
dollars,
or
more.
This
project
will
also
potentially
have
a
disastrous
outcome
should
emergency
evacuation
ever
become
necessary.
This
will
become
even
more
significant
if
self-
interested
pressure
groups
succeed
in
their
quest
to
distort
Grand
Street
so
that
it
will
no
longer
be
able
to
serve
as
a
route
for
emergency
evacuation.
So,
in
the
case
of
the
“Commercial
Streets”
project
the
Council
should
be
advised
to
reverse
their
previous
ill-advised
decisions
to
1)
permanently
narrow
Park
and
Webster
Streets,
and
2)
to
extend
the
life
of
the
“quiet
streets”
project
for
two
more
years.
I
understand
that
a
few
people
may
have
made
arguments
for
these
projects
at
the
height
of
the
pandemic,
however,
at
this
point,
I
don’t
believe
that
there
can
be
any
logical,
let
alone,
constructive
justification
for
allowing
them
to
continue
to
exert
their
harmful
effects
on
the
residents
of
Alameda.
In
my
opinion,
other
than
allowing
for
the
continued
use
of
virtual
meetings,
hopefully
as
an
element
of
a
hybrid
format
allowing
in
person
participation,
I
don’
see
any
reason
for
allowing
the
emergently
adopted
resolutions,
regulations,
and
ordinances
to
remain
in
effect.
And
there
is
absolutely
no
justification
for
allowing
the
Mayor,
the
Council,
or
any
member
of
the
City
Staff,
including
the
City
Manager,
to
take
unrestricted
action
based
on
the
no
longer
existing
state
of
emergency
that
lead
to
initially
granting
the
Staff/Manager
et
al
virtually
complete
freedom
of
action
in
2020.
Jay
Garfinkle