pages: PublicWorksCommittee/2016-06-14.pdf, 4
This data as json
body | date | text | page | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PublicWorksCommittee | 2016-06-14 | locks in the housing uses, and the reference the 2016 Alameda County Bond measure? The committee would like to see the Affordable Housing Bond Law prior to Council's approval of the bond measure. Can there be low income exemption for the cost? Reconsider the language providing for the Council's ability to reallocate funding across the categories after 10 years? Does the $100m Anti-displacement/ Affordable Housing funding include the Accessibility rehabs? Consider modifying the 10 year reallocation provision with language that provides reallocation for up to 10% Under existing language, could funding be used to enhance existing and/or facilitate new wetlands? If not, could language be added to do so? Please respond to the questions submitted by the Sierra Club. Request for an Infrastructure strategy reflective of all bond measures proposed by all agencies (BART, EBMUD, OUSD, ALCO, etc.) What is the structural and fiscal impact to from all of the proposed Bond measures? Consideration of including a 50% Oakland Resident employment requirement for all work proposed under the bond. There were 4 speakers on this item. A motion was made by Kalb, seconded by Gallo, that this matter be Approve the Recommendation of Staff, and Forward to the Concurrent Meeting of the Oakland Redevelopment Successor Agency and the City Council, to be heard 7/5/2016. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 4- - Gallo, Kalb, Reid, and Kaplan City of Oakland Page 4 Printed on 6/23/2016 | 4 | PublicWorksCommittee/2016-06-14.pdf |