From: Jay Ingram
To: CITYCOUNCIL-List; Lara Weisiger
Subject: [EXTERNAL] ALL MOU Discussion Thank You
Date: Wednesday, April 22, 2026 7:07:39 AM
Good Morning City Council,
I wanted to say thank you for your thoughtful and detailed discussion/questions last night. Thank you for listening to and hearing neighborhood concerns.
Jay Ingram
From: A G
To: CITYCOUNCIL-List
Cc: Justin Long
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Thank you for your thoughtful consideration on April 21 agenda item 5D 2026-5017 Date: Tuesday, April 21, 2026 10:43:44 PM
Dear Mayor Ezzy-Ashcraft, Vice-Mayor Pryor, Councilman Boller, Councilman Daysog, and Councilwoman Jensen,
Debra and I want to let you know how much we appreciate your actions this evening in moving the Littlejohn MOU item to regular agenda item for full discussion and consideration.
This has been the exact request of neighbors from the time people started to contact you. We appreciate Staff's initial focus on getting the season started may have led to tunnel vision and also appreciate Director Long's acknowledgement during the meeting.
As became very clear during the public comments, no one ever wanted to stop Little League from their season; youth sports are a critical part of a healthy community. We just want to make sure thoughtful discussion and review leads to the best outcome for all park users, and remain the open, welcoming community we pride ourselves on.
Thank you again for your stewardship this evening.
Alison Greene and Debra Arbuckle
From: Heather Little
To: Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft; Tracy Jensen; Tony Daysog; Greg Boller; Manager Manager; City Clerk; Michele Pryor Cc: mark little
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: April 21st City Council Meeting-Consent Calendar Item 5D 2026-5917 Date: Tuesday, April 21, 2026 9:49:30 PM
Good evening, Mark and I wanted to take a moment to thank you for you for hearing the community’s concerns and for recognizing the process failures that led us to where we are. We are happy with the outcome and our neighbors are energized to be a part of the process.
PS: Vice Mayor Pryor, I would be happy to meet you at the park so you can see for yourself what the current issues are regarding the impact of the fencing on the physical and visible accessibility of the multi-use field. It is hard to appreciate it without seeing it, though I’m hopeful that per council direction the fence will come down asap. Please let me know when you’re available.
Thank you all again!
Thanks, Heather
On Apr 21, 2026, at 10:49 AM, Heather Little <[email protected]> wrote:
Good morning,
I am writing to you this morning as a homeowner who has lived directly across from Littlejohn Park for 21 years. As my husband shared in his letter, our family has always welcomed, enjoyed, and encouraged the use of LJP to the fullest extent possible.
So when I first learned that ALL Majors would begin using the park, I approached it with an open and supportive mindset. ALL has used the park for practices for years without issue, and I was assured that any concerns I had would be addressed. Based on that, I welcomed the expanded use.
Unfortunately, the first few weeks were very difficult for me and my neighbors. Many of the concerns I raised became reality, and when I attempted to address them, I was at times met with dismissal or disregard. Thankfully, I was able to be in regular communication not only with my league contact, but with city representatives who were very responsive and understanding of the concerns being raised. While some issues have since improved, I remain concerned that these problems will repeat each season as new families and staff rotate in.
My primary concern now is the continued use of the perimeter fencing in the outfield. I was initially told by my league contact that it would be removed after the 8-week tournament ended, but it remains in place and is now expected to stay through the end of the season, May 31st per the MOU, and go back up again for four months in the fall. This effectively restricts access to what is otherwise a public space for much of the park's "usable" year.
Since the tournament ended, the fenced area has often sat unused, even during peak times, as it serves as a physical and visual barrier preventing others from entering. Without the fencing, there would have been people kicking the soccer ball, families picnicking, birthday parties with bouncy houses, people walking their dogs all last weekend. Instead it sat unused for most of both Saturday and Sunday, as it has during pretty much every weekday since the fencing went up. This is not typical of this park.
I’m also dismayed to share that there have been instances where individuals attempting to use the space have been told they are not allowed on the field, even outside of ALL "use hours" or when ALL was not actively using it. At other times the community has encountered unofficial signage saying the “entire field is closed”.
Additionally, the Ala Costa after school program that serves students with autism M-F from 3-6pm, no longer has access to any part of that field for their purposes or programming.
This is not about opposing use of the park by ALL. The
community is incredibly welcoming to all park users. But this is about being good partners and creating a compromise where ALL can continue to use the space for their purposes, while making sure they do so in a way that doesn’t eliminate anyone else’s ability to co-enjoy what our tax dollars pay for. Especially when many people in the neighborhood, especially including those residing at Del Monte, don’t have access to private yards and this has been their primary open space.
While I understand this is a proposed pilot agreement, changes are often difficult once a structure like this is established.
Although I have been told the league is open to feedback, I am not confident that community concerns will be consistently addressed, particularly when the current process directs concerns to the league rather than the city.
At its core, my request is about restoring reasonable access to a shared public space. We are asking for a more balanced
approach that allows ALL to continue its programming while ensuring the broader community can still use and enjoy the park.
I appreciate your thoughtfulness to the issues that have been raised. Thank you for all you do for the city.
--
Thanks,
Heather Little
Alameda Resident
From: A G
To: City Attorney; CITYCOUNCIL-List; Manager Manager; Justin Long; Sarah Henry Subject: [EXTERNAL] URGENT - conflict of interest, private CC communication to ALL Date: Tuesday, April 21, 2026 3:57:09 PM
Attachments: IMG_4064.png
Hi All-
The following notice is on ALL’s home page as of right now (4/21/26).
While ALL certainly has a right to attend any city council meeting, putting a call to attend tonight, stating they have been “tipped off by one of our friendly city council members” about tonight’s meeting, and that neighbors want to stop them from using the park is an egregious violation of public trust.
While neighbors have simply called for transparency and open discussion tonight, ALL’s impression that they have one or more elected officials working for them changes everything.
At a minimum, these “friendly city council members” must recuse themselves from a vote.
Alison Greene
From: Laura Gamble
To: Justin Long
Cc: Adam Politzer; Amy Wooldridge; Ashley Zieba; Greg Boller; Kimberly Nydam; Lara Weisiger; Mandy Arellano; Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft; Melissa Kyrimis; Michele Pryor; Roselena MejiaCampos; Sarah Henry; Tony Daysog; Tracy Jensen; Yibin Shen; Matt Nowlen
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Item 5-D on the April 21 Consent Calendar Date: Tuesday, April 21, 2026 3:40:17 PM
Attachments: Screenshot 2026-04-21 at 3.35.09 PM.png
I find this banner on the ALL website pretty interesting and hope you all take a look:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 1:05 PM Laura Gamble <[email protected]> wrote:
Thank you for the thorough response, Justin - this time and in the recent weeks. I am glad to see that so many staff members have been looped in.
To keep this inquiry brief, I still believe that two points were not addressed:
1. The construction and usage occurred many weeks ago. How was this possible before an MOU was executed?
2. IF guidelines are followed, the fact remains that the park is currently not welcoming to the community - partially due to the incidents mentioned and partially due to the park being cut off by a fence, rendering much of the community space inaccessible to the public when ALL is actively using it, and when ALL is not actively using it. Not to mention that this primarily impacts the best and busiest/most popular seasons for this park. From my perspective, this is not a reasonable balance for the community. This outer fence could easily be replaced with paint for games, and it would allow the community to actually use the space when not actively being utilized by ALL.
Hoping we can find a more reasonable middle ground.
Laura GAMBLE
On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 12:28 PM Justin Long <[email protected] > wrote:
Dear Ms. Gambel and Council Members,
Thank you for the correspondence regarding the proposed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Alameda and Alameda Little League Baseball. We appreciate the community’s engagement and the opportunity to clarify several points raised.
Process Concerns
The improvements at Littlejohn Park, including fencing, netting, and dugout out construction were for the safety of park users. The dugouts specifically were identified in the City’s adopted ADA transition plan as out of compliance. The netting was installed to protect pedestrians walking on the sidewalks as well as the playground users from foul balls. The improvements followed all City procurement policies and were within the spending authority of the City Manager.
LOSS OF COMMUNITY ACCESS
League access to the field in the MOU is limited to the M-F 4:30pm-7pm, Saturday 9am-7pm, and Sunday 9am-5pm as needed for make-up games. The park, including the field, is available for the community to use at all other times, unrestricted. The League follows the Council approved fee schedule for field rental. The MOU does not exempt the League from payments.
ONE-SIDED TERMS
The League pays the field usage fee established in the Council adopted fee schedule.
If the City determines safety improvements are required to support League usage and the League disagrees, the agreement will terminate and the League games will no longer have access to the field.
The City’s adopted Field Allocation Policy, which the League follows, required all field rentals to carry insurance and indemnification obligations.
VAGUE PERMITTED USE HOURS
The MOU provides the League with field use on Sundays from 9am-5pm. The language in the MOU establishes that ARPD will not reserve the field to another user group during those hours
Outside of these designated times, the field remains fully open and accessible to the broader community. The intent of the agreement is to balance organized youth sports with continued public use.
VIOLATIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY OCCURRED
We recognize the start of League usage at Littlejohn had several issues. The League has worked with the coaches and families to enforce the parking plan. The plan identifies Jean Sweeney Park and Windriver as the location to park. The League has informed spectators and team members to keep all sidewalks clear. The League did not invite a food truck to Littlejohn. A food truck did set up at the park and was not permitted to be there.
ARPD has worked to support the League enforcing the parking plan and clear access around the park. ARPD park monitors and staff have been onsite to mitigate issue as they arise.
We recognize the importance of Littlejohn Park as a shared community asset and remain committed to maintaining a balanced approach that supports youth programming while preserving public access. We appreciate the feedback provided and will continue working to ensure transparency and accountability in this process.
Sincerely,
Justin Long, Director of Recreation and Parks
From: Laura Gamble <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2026 8:08 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>; Tracy Jensen <[email protected]>; Tony Daysog <[email protected]>; Greg Boller <[email protected]>; Michele Pryor <[email protected]>; Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft <[email protected]> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Item 5-D on the April 21 Consent Calendar
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council,
I am writing to urge you to remove the proposed Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Alameda and Alameda Little League Baseball from the consent calendar at tomorrow's meeting and schedule it for full public deliberation. I have significant concerns about both the substance of the agreement and the process by which it has been brought forward.
I want to be clear at the outset: Alameda Little League has operated at Littlejohn Park for many years without issue, and I want them to have the fields they need to thrive.
Youth baseball is a genuine community asset. But the needs of the neighborhood must also be balanced against those of any single user group, and this agreement, as written, tips that balance too far in one direction. Many residents feel, simply put, that they have lost their park. That is not an outcome any of us should accept without a full public conversation.
PROCESS CONCERNS
Consent calendar items are understood by the public to be routine and uncontroversial. This MOU is neither. Physical improvements to Littlejohn Park, including fencing, netting, and dugout construction, appear to have been installed prior to any executed agreement or public vote authorizing them. If that is correct, it raises serious questions about whether proper procurement procedures were followed, whether public funds were expended without Council authorization, and whether the City pre-committed itself to this arrangement before the public had any opportunity for input. These are not housekeeping matters. They deserve a noticed public hearing.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Councilmember Tracy Jensen recently hosted a campaign event for her mayoral race at which League President Ron Matthews was prominently featured as a guest. This creates at a minimum an appearance of a conflict of interest. A screengrab of this invitation is attached.
LOSS OF COMMUNITY ACCESS
Littlejohn Park has long served as an informal and formal gathering space for neighborhood residents, including birthday parties, baby showers, and community events. Under this MOU, the League would hold exclusive control of the property from February through May and again from August through October. During those months, the City may only request use, and the League is under no obligation to accommodate it, nor does it pay any fee for this exclusivity. Residents are effectively locked out of public land for much of the year with no compensation or community benefit requirement in return. It is pretty dismissive of those impacted that this would happen through a consent calendar item.
ONE-SIDED TERMS
Several provisions in the agreement are difficult to justify on their merits:
- The League pays nothing for its exclusive seasonal use of City property. - If the City determines safety improvements are necessary and the League disagrees, the Agreement terminates, effectively giving a private nonprofit a veto over safety decisions on public land.
- If the League agrees to safety improvements, it must reimburse the City for all associated costs, an unusual arrangement that shifts public infrastructure costs onto a nonprofit using public land at no charge.
- The League is not required to carry any insurance or indemnification obligations that are visible within the four corners of this agreement.
VAGUE PERMITTED USE HOURS
Section 2(A)(iii) lists permitted hours of use but closes with the phrase "as needed for make-up games" without defining what that means or applying it clearly to a specific day. As written, it is ambiguous whether Sunday hours are restricted to make-up games only, or whether all permitted hours are available whenever the League unilaterally deems them necessary. Either way, the agreement contains no advance notice requirement, no definition of "make-up game," no cap on how many can be scheduled, and no mechanism for the City to verify or dispute a claimed make-up. The Council should require that: (1) all scheduled uses be submitted to ARPD in writing at least 72 hours in advance; (2) "make-up game" be defined with a reasonable annual cap; and (3) Sunday use be clearly delineated as either unrestricted within the listed hours or limited to verified make-up games, not left to the League's discretion.
VIOLATIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY OCCURRED
Perhaps most troubling is that the League appears to have already violated the terms of this agreement before it has even been formally approved. The MOU requires the League to adopt and comply with a City-approved parking plan, keep walkways clear and accessible, and follow City mobile vending Ordinance 3391 regarding concessions. None of these obligations appears to have been honored:
- Neighbors have experienced their driveways being blocked during League games, a direct violation of the parking plan the League agreed to uphold. - Sidewalks in the surrounding neighborhood have been blocked, creating accessibility and safety hazards for residents.
- The League invited a food truck to the park without the prior written City approval required under Ordinance 3391, the very ordinance this MOU obligates them to follow.
The MOU itself states that failure to comply with the parking plan may result in suspension of games, and continued failure is cause for termination. If the League cannot meet its basic obligations before the agreement is even ratified, the Council should seriously question whether approving it tomorrow is appropriate at all.
I respectfully ask that the Council:
1. Pull this item from the consent calendar and schedule it for a properly noticed public hearing.
2. Direct staff to provide a full accounting of any improvements already made to Littlejohn Park, including when they were authorized, by whom, and at what cost.
Explore why these improvements were made before a signed agreement.
3. Request that Councilmember Jensen disclose the nature of her relationship with League President Ron Matthews and consider recusal. Even if this doesn't meet the threshold for a conflict of interest, it certainly appears a certain way.
4. Direct the City Attorney to review the agreement's termination, reimbursement, and permitted use provisions for consistency with standard City contracting practice.
Littlejohn Park belongs to all Alameda residents. An agreement that grants a private organization exclusive seasonal control of public land, and whose terms are already being violated before the ink is dry, deserves full public scrutiny, not approval on the consent calendar. I am hopeful the Council can find a path that allows Little League to continue doing what it does well, while restoring the neighborhood's sense of ownership over a park that has always been shared by all.
Thank you for your service and your attention to this matter.
Laura Gamble