Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 2017.04.17 Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 1 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Approved Minutes Regular Meeting on April 17, 2017 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in t he City Hall Council Chambers. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG The pledge of allegiance was led by Burlingame resident Robert Bierman. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, Keighran, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor Ortiz reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the City. 6. PRESENTATIONS There were no presentations. 7. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no public comments. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 2 8. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Ortiz asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Brownrigg pulled item 8a. Councilmember Keighran made a motion to approve 8b, 8c, 8d, 8e, and 8f; seconded by Vice Mayor Brownrigg. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote; 5-0. a. APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 3, 2017 City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council approve the Meeting Minutes of April 3, 2017. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that he had no corrections to the minutes. He requested that on page 7, the discussion of Planning Commission candidates, after the first round of voting, be removed as it involved personal remarks. He noted that they remain on the record in the video. Councilmember Beach stated that because she recused herself from voting on the Planning Commission appointments at the April 3, 2017 meeting, she would not be offering an opinion on this matter. Councilmember Colson stated that if the discussion was removed, then Council needed to be consistent and in the future candidate discussion for all commission appointments should not be included in the meeting minutes. Councilmember Keighran asked the City Attorney if this could be done. City Attorney Kane replied in the affirmative stating that the record remains preserved in the video. Mayor Ortiz stated he wasn’t sure he was comfortable with the discussion of candidates being removed. Vice Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to adopt the meeting minutes as amended; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed by voice vote: 3-1-1. (Councilmember Beach abstained and Mayor Ortiz voted against). b. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO O’GRADY PAVING, INC. FOR THE FY 2016-17 STREET RESURFACING PROGRAM, CITY PROJECT NO. 84470, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 21-2017. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 3 c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ORDERING AND CALLING A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 7, 2017, AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE SAN MATEO COUNT CHIEF ELECTIONS OFFICER TO CONDUCT THE ELECTION AS AN ALL-MAILED BALLOT ELECTION City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council adopt Resolution Numbers 22-2017 and 23-2017. d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION INCREASING THE APPROPRIATION FOR ELECTION-RELATED COSTS BY $26,000 IN THE 2016-17 FISCAL YEAR City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council adopt Resolution Number 24-2017. e. OPEN NOMINATION PERIOD TO FILL ONE VACANCY ON THE BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION City Manager Goldman requested Council open the nomination period to fill one vacancy on the Beautification Commission. f. OPEN NOMINATION PERIOD TO FILL TWO VACANCIES ON THE LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES City Manager Goldman requested Council open the nomination period to fill two vacancies on the Library Board of Trustees. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DENIAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW, TWO- STORY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH AN ATTACHED GARAGE AT 746 LINDEN AVENUE CDD Meeker stated that on March 20, 2017, the City Council considered an appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of requests related to construction of a new single-family residence with an attached garage at 746 Linden Avenue. At the hearing, the Council ultimately granted the appeal and approved the project. CDD Meeker explained that following the public hearing, staff was informed that public notice of the appeal hearing was not mailed to all owners of property lying within 300-feet of the project site, as is the normal procedure. In light of this oversight, on March 24, 2017, a Notice of City Council Action was mailed to owners within 3000-feet, giving them 10 calendar days to challenge the Council’s action. Prior to the deadline, Susanne McLaughlan, at 748 Linden Avenue, requested that the matter be brought back before the Council at a properly noticed hearing. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 4 Mayor Ortiz opened the item up for public comment. Burlingame resident Susanne McLaughlan asked how the appeals process worked, as she wasn’t aware that a Planning Commission decision could be overturned by the Council. Mayor Ortiz explained that all Planning Commission decision can be appealed to the City Council for final decision. He stated that the Yarema’s (property owners of 746 Linden Avenue) properly appealed the Planning Commission’s decision in a letter. Ms. McLaughlan stated that she was not in favor of the project because single-family homes in the neighborhood didn’t have attached garages. As well, she explained that the applicants didn’t provide an explanation for why an exception should be made allowing them an attached garage. Brandy and Peter Yarema spoke about their appeal of the Planning Commission decision. Ms. Yarema discussed the neighborhood support that they received for the project. She talked about the work that they were doing to ensure neighbors’ privacy and the changes they were making in consideration of the Council’s concerns. Some of the changes that she discussed were softening up the attached garage side and lowering the pitch of the roof. Ms. Yarema noted that the attached garage was being built on the left side of the property at 5-feet from the property line shared with Ms. McLaughlin. Once construction is complete there will be a 22-foot separation between the attached garage and Ms. McLaughlin’s home since her home is at a much greater setback from the property line. Councilmember Colson asked if a homeowner could choose to put their garage on either side of the back of their lot. CDD Meeker replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson asked if in this project, the homeowner could have decided to put the garage in the back closer to Ms. McLaughlan’s property. CDD Meeker replied in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked Ms. McLaughlan what her design concerns were for 746 Linden Avenue. Ms. McLaughlan stated that the garage would create a large mass, taking up too much property, and obstructing her view. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked if Ms. McLaughlan understood that the garage could have been built in the back of the property closer to her home. Ms. McLaughlan replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson stated her support for the project. She explained that there were attached garages in the neighborhood and that the applicants’ designed their home to ensure their neighbor’s privacy. Vice Mayor Brownrigg, Councilmember Beach and Mayor Ortiz echoed their support for the project. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 5 Councilmember Keighran stated that she didn’t believe that the design followed the theme of the neighborhood. Councilmember Colson made a motion to overturn the Planning Commission’s decision and approve the application by adopting Resolution Number 25-2017; seconded by Vice Mayor Brownrigg. Councilmember Beach apologized on behalf of the City for the failure to properly notice the hearing. The motion passed by voice vote; 4-1 (Councilmember Keighran voted against). b. PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ADJUSTING THE STORM DRAINAGE FEE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 BY 2.0% BASED ON THE CPI FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO-OAKLAND-SAN JOSE, CA AREA AS PUBLISHED MARCH 15, 2017 DPW Murtuza presented the staff report requesting Council’s adoption of Resolution Number 26-2017. DPW Murtuza stated that in 2009, voters approved the storm drain bond measure. He explained that the storm drain measure included the ability to adjust the annual storm drainage fee by an amount equal to the change in the CPI, but not to exceed a maximum increase of 2% per year. He stated that the CPI increase this year was 3.4%. Therefore, DPW Murtuza stated that staff is requesting Council increase the storm drainage fee 2%. He stated that the 2% increase would raise the rate charged per square foot of impervious area from 4.792 cents to 4.888 cents effective July 1, 2017. The increase is estimated to produce an additional $55,400 for estimated revenue of $2,825, 200 in FY 2017-18. He explained that this year the average annual fee for a typical residential parcel is $172.51 and with the 2% increase it would become $175.96. Mayor Ortiz opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Vice Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 26-2017; seconded by Councilmember Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING THE BURLINGAME SCHOOL DISTRICT’S REQUEST FOR THE CITY TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE COST TO RE-TURF FRANKLIN AND OSBERG FIELDS City Manager Goldman presented the staff report requesting direction from the Council regarding the Burlingame School District’s (“BSD”) request for the City to contribute to the cost to re-turf Franklin and Osberg fields. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 6 City Manager Goldman explained that on February 27, 2017, the City Council and BSD had a liaison committee meeting. At the meeting, BSD representatives told City representatives that they wanted to re-turf Franklin and Osberg fields this summer and requested that the City contribute $1.45 million, which was one- half of the total cost of $2.9 million. As well, BSD representatives requested the City’s assistance in determining what lines should be painted on the field in order to accommodate various field users. She explained that the City representatives were surprised by the request given that the City had its own list of over $100 million in unfunded needs. City Manager Goldman stated that at the meeting, the City did offer the assistance of Recreation Supervisor Barry who is well-versed in the subject of painting lines on turf fields. City Manager Goldman explained that the liaison committee decided to meet again on April 6, 2017 to continue this discussion. She stated that at this meeting, City representatives were informed that the cost to re-turf the fields was less than the original quoted amount of $2.9 million. However, BSD representatives did not state what it would cost. The City representatives asked BSD to send the City a written request for the Council’s consideration, along with any relevant background information. She explained that BSD’s request was attached to the staff report as a presentation. City Manager Goldman stated that BSD has estimated a project cost of $2,091,955.80 to resurface Franklin and Osberg fields this summer. She stated that BSD has modified what it is requesting from the City to either $400,977.90 this year or $581,217.46 if re-turfing is delayed until 2019. She explained that BSD’s funding request to the City was created by splitting the cost of re-turfing the fields 50/50 ($1,045.977.90 each) and subtracting fees paid by the City to the District under the Joint Use Agreement. City Manager Goldman stated that BSD would also like the City to consider establishing a fund to begin preparing for the cost of replacing the fields in 2027 or 2029. The cost is estimated at $3.4 to $3.7 million. City Manager Goldman explained that in February, 2009, BSD voted to install turf at Franklin and Osberg fields using funding from Measure A, a 2007 bond measure. The fields were installed in late 2009 and early 2010, with use of the fields commencing April 24, 2010. City Manager Goldman discussed the City and BSD’s long history of collaboration dating back to an agreement in 1942 between the two agencies. She explained that BSD and the City are currently under a Joint Use Agreement that was established on July 1, 2015 and expires July 2017. She stated that under the agreement, the City is responsible for scheduling the use of the fields by BSD, City, nonprofit organizations and other users during all non-school hours. She explained that the two fields are not lit, so non-school hours include after school but before dark, on weekends, and during school vacation periods. City Manager Goldman reviewed the elaborate process the Parks and Recreation Department goes through to designate “Validated Youth User Organizations” (“VYUO”) such as AYSO, Burlingame Soccer Club, Burlingame Girls Softball, and Burlingame Youth Baseball Association. VYUOs pay for the use of BSD’s two fields and the City’s 14 fields according to a fee schedule established by the City that looks at both the total number of players (non-residents pay a higher rate than residents do) and the hours of use. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 7 Additionally, she discussed the amount of time staff spends reviewing the fees, assigning field time and working with the different VYUOs. City Manager Goldman explained that the VYUOs are community based non-profit groups that serve BSD students as well as students from Our Lady of Angels, St. Catherine of Siena, Mercy High School and other local schools. Neither the City nor BSD sponsor these organizations. She explained that because the City is responsible for scheduling all of the fields, the City collects the fees from the VYUOs. She stated that each year the first $50,000 is retained by the City, and the remaining revenue is split 50/50 between the City and BSD. She stated that in FY 2015-16, VYUOs used the City’s fields for 5,610 hours and BSD’s fields for 3,100 hours. She explained that these numbers have run pretty consistently over the past couple of years. City Manager Goldman stated that in total, BSD’s share of the VYUO fees was $259,945. As well, she explained that non-VYUOs can rent the fields. When non-VYUOs rent the fields, the City receives 10% of the fees and BSD receives 90%. In total, BSD has received $37,143 from their share of the non-VYOUs’ rental fees. Next, City Manager Goldman discussed turfed fields. She explained that turf fields can last ten or more years if they are properl y maintained. She gave the example of BHS’ field which was installed in 2001 and replaced in 2011. She stated that Franklin and Osberg fields were opened in April 2010. However, due to high use and insufficient maintenance they were nearing the end of their useful life. As well, City Manager Goldman discussed the City’s plans to turf Murray field during the next fiscal year. She stated that staff estimated the cost to be $1.75 million. Funding for this purpose was included in the City’s proposed CIP budget for FY 2017-18. She explained that because Murray has lights, the City will gain hours of usage. BSD Assistant Superintendent Gabby Hellier gave a presentation on the school district’s request. She stated that the purpose of the presentation is to discuss the possibility of the City and BSD sharing in the cost of resurfacing Franklin and Osberg fields that service the Burlingame community. She explained that part of the reason that turf was installed on these two fields is because natural gras s fields have an expected life use of 600 annual hours while turf fields can have an expected life use of 3000 annual hours. Therefore, the turf fields were installed in response to input from community groups for extended hours of use. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated that when the turfs were installed, the project cost $2,516,061.29. As well, she explained that there was an 8 year warranty on the fields and that next week the fields would be entering their 8th year. She stated that the field life can be extended two years by enrolling in service agreements for maintenance. Next, Asst. Superintendent Hellier discussed the history of the Joint Use Agreement between the City and BSD. She explained that the City contributed to the partnership in many ways including: 1) not collecting water fees for BIS and Franklin; 2) performing maintenance of grass play fields at Roosevelt and McKinley; Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 8 3) in lieu of storm drain fees BSD Property exchange; and 4) performing garbage collection on weekends when used by non-school district community and commercial users. Asst. Superintendent Heller discussed BSD’s contributions to the partnership including: 1) use of gyms, blacktops, and facilities for Park and Recreation Community Programs; 2) granting the City exclusive programming of school enrichment; 3) granting the City priority use and scheduling of the fields; 4) creating office and storage space for Park and Recreation programs at BIS; and 5) loaning equipment for City holiday events. Asst. Superintendent Hellier discussed the fees paid to BSD. She explained that for field use, the City collects all rental fees from community users for City and BSD fields. The City keeps the first $50,000, and splits the remaining balance of the revenues 50/50. Ms. Hellier stated that on average this results in annual revenue for BSD of approximately $60,000. Additionally, she explained that the City collects all rental fees from commercial users for BSD fields and gyms. She stated that BSD gets 90% of these fees, averaging approximately $8,000 a year. Lastly, for enrichment programs the City pays the district 10% of the revenue and this averages approximately $40,000 a year. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated that since the turfed fields were installed in 2010, BSD has received approximately $645,000 in fees from the City. She stated that BSD is estimating that resurfacing the two fields during the summer of 2017 will cost approximately $2.1 million. If fields are resurfaced during the summer of 2019, BSD estimates the cost at $2.5 million. Asst. Superintendent Hellier explained the City’s 50% in 2017 would be $1,045,977.90. However, she stated that BSD would credit the $645,000 that the school district received from fees against the $1,045,997.90. Therefore, BSD was looking for a contribution of $400,977.90. Similarly, if the two agencies waited until 2019, the fees that BSD received up until that date would be credited against the 50%. Lastly, Asst. Superintendent Hellier explained that BSD is also asking the City to consider establishing a fund to save towards 50% of the future replacement of the fields in 2027-2029. She stated that the estimated cost would be between $3.4 and $3.7 million Councilmember Keighran stated that previously the City was informed that the cost of re-turfing the fields was $2.9 million. She asked how this number had decreased to $2.1 million. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated that the $2.9 million included the cost of turfing two additional BSD fields. Councilmember Keighran stated that in the November, 2016 election, BSD’s bond measure (Measure M) included language that one of the purposes of the bond was to re-turf the fields. She asked why BSD wasn’t using Measure M funds to re-turf the fields. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated that BSD would like the City to share in the cost to free up Measure M funds for other projects. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 9 Councilmember Keighran stated that it was her understanding that turfed fields were good for 10 years and therefore wondered what the company that had turfed Franklin and Osberg fields had told BSD. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated that the warrant was for 8 years. Councilmember Keighran asked about the portion of the presentation that stated “in lieu of storm drain fees BSD Property exchange”. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated that it had to do with the piece of property by Franklin. City Manager Goldman stated that a few years ago a discussion of what this meant came up at a liaison committee meeting. She stated that the belief was that this referred to an exchange of water meters for the Franklin Pump Station property. However, she noted there was no clear consensus on the matter. Councilmember Keighran stated that the City also gave $285,148 to BSD to pay BSD’s storm drainage fees. Councilmember Keighran stated that BSD’s presentation discussed that the City doesn’t pay for the use of the facilities at BSD. However, she noted that the City does give 10% of the revenues they receive from the enrichment program to BSD. Recreation Supervisor Acquisti replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Keighran asked who the enrichment program was designed for. Recreation Supervisor Acquisti replied that the program was designed for BSD students. Councilmember Colson asked how the first $50,000 that comes in from fees is used by the City. Recreation Supervisor Barry replied that the $50,000 is used for garbage collection, staff and meeting time. Councilmember Colson asked if the Recreation Department had just purchased scheduling software for $7,000. Recreation Supervisor Barry replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson asked if the Civic Act prevented the City from making a profit on its fields. City Attorney Kane replied that the Education Code doesn’t directly bind the City, it binds BSD. However, because the City is acting as a scheduling agent for BSD the City is effectively bound. She explained that the purpose of the act is to ensure that the fees for field usage are only to cover operational costs. Councilmember Colson asked if the afterschool programs at BSD encompassed the private schools in the City. Recreation Supervisor Acquisti replied in the negative. Councilmember Colson asked about the user groups for the fields. Recreation Supervisor Barry stated that the three main user groups are AYSO, BCS, and lacrosse. Councilmember Beach stated that in the BSD meeting minutes, Facilities Director Tim Ryan explained that 80% of the field usage on Franklin and Osberg is by people other than BSD students. She asked if this was an accurate statement. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated that she couldn’t speak for Mr. Ryan’s comment. Councilmember Beach asked if it is reasonable to conclude that the majority of the wear and tear on the fields is during school hours or after. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated that the majority of the wear and Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 10 tear on the fields was after school hours. She discussed that the user groups are on the fields for long periods of time during the weekends and summers while BSD uses the fields for P.E. classes and recess. Mayor Ortiz asked how BSD had come up with the 50/50 split for re-turfing the fields. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated she believed it was a strict sharing of the costs. Mayor Ortiz asked if field allocation gives preference to user groups that have local residents as their users. Recreation Supervisor Barry replied in the affirmative. Mayor Ortiz asked if the majority of the people that use Franklin and Osberg fields are Burlingame residents. Recreation Supervisor Barry replied in the affirmative. Mayor Ortiz asked how much time the Recreation Department spent in the last year with the various community groups allocating field usage. Recreation Supervisor Barry replied: “a lot”. Councilmember Colson asked BSD what they currently do with the fees that they collect from the fields. Asst. Superintendent Hellier replied that the fees go into BSD’s general fund. Councilmember Colson asked what the fees pay for. Asst. Superintendent Hellier replied that they are used for whatever the district needs. Mayor Ortiz stated that he heard that BSD and the City had agreed that the fees the City pays BSD would be set aside for maintenance and re-turfing. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated it wasn’t in the Joint Use Agreement. BSD trustee member Mark Intrieri stated that he didn’t recall this agreement. Mayor Ortiz opened the item up for public comment. AYSO representative Robert Bierman discussed how critical the fields at Franklin and Osberg are to the community. He discussed AYSO’s dedication to ensuring that the fields are replaced this summer. As well, he asked that the key user groups be included in the discussion of re-turfing and that the user groups may be able to assist in the cost. Additionally, he discussed the need for maintenance on the two fields. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked if turfing Murray field would alleviate AYSO’s need for Franklin and Osberg to be re-turfed. Mr. Bierman replied in the negative. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked if there were enough fields in the City for all user groups. Mr. Bierman stated absolutely not. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that it is clear that the City’s user group fees do not cover operational costs. He asked how much more AYSO could pay a year. Mr. Bierman stated that prior to the economic crisis the City was planning to turf Bayside. He explained that AYSO had an agreement with the City to pay $10,000 a year to help turf Bayside. Mr. Bierman stated that AYSO is open to assisting in funding turfing and re- turfing of fields in Burlingame. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 11 Councilmember Colson asked about the National Soccer Organization decision to reassess field size. Mr. Bierman explained that NSO’s decision would make it so that U12 would be playing on Osberg field and U10 games would be run sideways at Franklin field. Councilmember Colson and Mr. Bierman discussed how NSO’s decision impacted the fields and the need to re-line the fields. Councilmember Beach asked if Mr. Bierman was stating that AYSO could potentially contribute $10,000 annually to turf fields in Burlingame. Mr. Bierman replied in the affirmative and added that AYSO was open to making a one-time lump sum contribution to assist in re-turfing Franklin and Osberg fields. Councilmember Keighran asked if impact testing was done on the two fields. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated that when BSD groomed the fields, an impact test was done and the fields passed. Councilmember Keighran asked if the impact test portrays how much longer the fields can last. Asst. Superintendent Hellier said that she didn’t believe so. Burlingame resident Mike Brunicardi, representing Burlingame Youth Baseball Association (“BYBA”), suggested that the City shouldn’t pay to re-turf the two fields if BSD wasn’t properly maintaining them. Additionally, he stated that the fields’ main user groups weren’t stepping up to financially support the cost and maintenance of the fields. He explained that BYBA was locally funded and maintained their fields. Councilmember Colson asked Mr. Brunicardi to estimate how much money BYBA has put into the fields they use. Mr. Brunicardi reviewed a laundry list of purchases BYBA has made including; new batting cages, bullpens and scoreboards at Washington Park and a storage shed and batting cages at Bayside Park. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked Mr. Brunicardi if he was suggesting that the City shouldn’t assist in paying for the re-turfing of the two fields. Mr. Brunicardi stated that the City should focus on funding City fields. BSD trustee member Mark Intrieri thanked the City for considering BSD’s request. He stated that when BSD initially put the turf fields in, it wasn’t because the district needed them; it was for the community. He stated he believed it was reasonable to request funding from the City because of the amount of usage the fields get after school hours. He acknowledged that BSD could have done a better job maintaining the fields. However, he stated that the wear and tear came outside of school hours. Mr. Intrieri continued by stating that BSD and the City should have ironed out the details of re-turfing the fields in the Joint Use Agreement. Councilmember Colson agreed with Mr. Intrieri that the relationship between the City and BSD should be laid out better in the future. She stated that BSD had stepped up and filled a need in the community. Additionally, she explained that she was concerned that the maintenance of the fields was not outlined in the Joint Use Agreement. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 12 Councilmember Colson discussed her time on BSD’s Bond Oversight Committee. She stated that while on the committee, she had asked over and over again how the fields were going to get turfed in the future. She stated that the response she received was that that BSD would issue another bond. Councilmember Beach stated that she appreciated everyone’s input and felt that everyone could agree that we wanted safe and serviceable fields for the community. She stated that the community is counting on both agencies to work this out so that no one is unduly burdened. She discussed the Joint Use Agreement between the City and BSD and stated that it needed to be fair and responsibilities needed to be spelled out. Councilmember Beach discussed how Franklin and Osberg fields served the community as gathering and recreational space. She stated that unfortunately the fees don’t cover the cost of re-turfing the fields, but that this was okay because the full cost of recovery could be prohibitive to some. Councilmember Beach stated that a tremendous amount of use is happening outside of school hours and they are happening for community benefit. She stated that that is the business of the Recreation Department. Accordingly, she stated that she didn’t feel that BSD had the sole responsibility of funding the re-turfing of the fields. She stated that while the City might not know the right amount to give yet, the City should assist. Councilmember Beach discussed talking with other cities and school districts about this project. She stated that there was precedent of neighboring cities assisting in funding major capital improvement field projects for the school districts. Therefore, she explained that from a policy point of view she felt the City needed to assist. Councilmember Colson discussed the bonds that BSD had passed for capital improvement projects. She explained that the community and councilmembers have continuously supported the BSD’s bonds. In contrast, Councilmember Colson explained that the City had not gone out for bonds and had a higher standard to pass bonds (2/3rds approval). She stated that the City had to save and set aside funds for capital investment projects like turfing Murray field. She added that the City had a $100 million in capital needs that needed to be prioritized. Councilmember Colson stated that prior to assisting in the funding of re-turfing Franklin and Osberg fields she wanted to understand where the money would come from in the City’s budget. She suggested holding off on re-turfing Franklin and Osberg fields for two years. She explained that in the meantime, maintenance should be done on those fields and their use should be reduced. And during those two years, the City could work with BSD on redoing their Joint Use Agreement so that specifics are defined and the City could budget for assisting in the cost of re-turfing. Councilmember Keighran stated that she agreed with Councilmember Colson. As well, she explained that she was on the liaison committee when the splitting of the fees was discussed. She stated that while it wasn’t written down, it was discussed that BSD would save their portion of the fees to re-turf the two fields. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 13 Councilmember Keighran discussed the fact that the City saved funds to turf Murray field and therefore it was next in line. Additionally, she stated she appreciated user groups coming forward and offering to assist in funding the re-turfing of the fields. Councilmember Keighran stated that she wasn’t sure she was in favor of the City assisting in funding the re- turfing because of the way Measure M was marketed. However, she explained that she did want to discuss the City’s assistance in turfing the fields in 2027-29. She added that this should be discussed in the near future so that the City and BSD could begin planning for that expense. Vice Mayor Brownrigg discussed the turfing of Murray field and the 2700 annual hours of use it would generate for the community. He stated that Franklin and Osberg fields generate about 3100 annual hours of use for the community. He explained that to him, Franklin and Osberg fields were community fields. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that he didn’t believe a 50/50 split was appropriate because the fields were an asset of BSD. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that he believed BSD got the idea for the 50/50 split from the BAC agreement. He explained that the pool agreement was different as the high school district had shut down the pool and it was the City that had approached the district asking for it to be reopened and enlarged. Vice Mayor Brownrigg explained that he would like to see BSD and the City work together on redrafting their Joint Use Agreement so that the terms and conditions are properly spelled out. He asked that the agreement have the City shoulder the responsibility of maintenance for the turfed fields. Mayor Ortiz agreed with Vice Mayor Brownrigg’s discussion on redrafting the Joint Use Agreement. As well, he discussed the City’s list of $100 million of unfunded capital improvement projects. He explained that the consequence of BSD’s request for funds is that a project from that list is set aside. Mayor Ortiz stated he agreed with Councilmember Keighran that the City and BSD should work together now to create a fund for the re-turfing of the fields in 2027-2029. Mayor Ortiz stated that Council needed to decide how much the City should give BSD to assist in re-turfing. Councilmember Keighran asked if Mayor Ortiz wanted to see the fields re-turfed this summer. She explained that like Councilmember Colson, she was concerned that the community could potentially have three fields offline at the same time (Murray, Franklin and Osberg). Mayor Ortiz asked when Murray field is being turfed. Recreation Supervisor Barry stated that the hope is to turf the field in the winter of 2017. He explained that turfing the field in the winter would cause the least impact to the user groups. City Manager Goldman stated that the field would open in March 2018. Mayor Ortiz asked if BSD had an estimate of how long it would take to re-turf the fields. Asst. Superintendent Hellier stated that the fields would be ready for use by the beginning of the school year 2017. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 14 Mayor Ortiz stated that the likelihood of the two projects overlapping is very small. Recreation Supervisor Barry replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson stated that she wouldn’t support re-turfing Franklin and Osberg fields this summer. She explained that it was too quick and she wasn’t sure what in the City budget would be cut to assist in re- turfing BSD’s fields. Councilmember Beach stated she would support coming up with a number to assist BSD in re-turfing Franklin and Osberg fields now. She added that the City needed to make sure that the fields were properly maintained and cared for so that they reached their maximum potential life. Councilmember Beach discussed Mr. Bierman’s offer of giving a one-time lump sum contribution to assist in re-turfing Franklin and Osberg fields. Additionally, she stated that she read in BSD’s meeting minutes that the district is potentially partnering with Peninsula Healthcare District to help fund the re-turfing. She explained that it would be beneficial to understand how much private groups would be contributing prior to the City making a determination of their assistance. Vice Mayor Brownrigg suggested setting summer of 2018 as the refurbishment year for the two fields. He stated that in the meantime, the agencies should work together on revising their Joint Use Agreement and determining an appropriate contribution from the City for re-turfing the fields. Councilmember Colson stated that the City had discussions with AYSO about contributing to the turfing of Murray field. Accordingly, she stated she was concerned that if AYSO contributed to BSD, they wouldn’t be able to contribute to the turfing of Murray field. Mr. Bierman stated that he believed both were possible as they do have reserves in excess of $200,000. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked that the Recreation Department staff determine how many all-season fields the City needs. He explained that there is a limit to how many the fields the City can afford to turf and re-turf every ten years. Mr. Intrieri stated as a result of financial prudence, BSD is able to re-turf the fields this summer rather than postponing it for two years. Mr. Intrieri stated that if BSD ends up paying 100% of the cost using its bond dollars, it is better for BSD to tackle this project sooner so that they save money. He explained that if the City does decide to assist in funding, the City wouldn’t need to pay their share upfront. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked why two years from now and not 2018. Mr. Intrieri stated it could be done next year but that two years is the max that the field can go without being re-turfed. Councilmember Beach stated that she was leery of talking about limited use on the fields as they are a community asset. She explained that the City’s programing has contributed to the state of the fields. Additionally, Councilmember Beach explained that the fields are conveniently located and more accessible to the public than Murray field. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 15 The Council discussed what decision they wanted to come to tonight including if they should settle on a financial contribution. Councilmember Keighran stated she didn’t know if the City should decide on what their contribution should be without understanding what would be cut from the budget. Councilmember Colson stated that she agreed with Councilmember Keighran. The Council all agreed that the Joint Use Agreement needed to be revised. It was specified that details of how fees are used and maintenance of the fields needed to be included. City Manager Goldman stated that staff would need to bring Council a short term extension to the current Joint Use Agreement as it ends July 2017. She explained that staff would request a 6 month extension on the current agreement with a potential additional 6 months. She added that the only change to the agreement would be the time period. She explained that this extension would give the liaison committee time to negotiate a new agreement that would spell out the Council’s concerns. Councilmember Beach stated that for a while the two agencies had been at an impasse on the agreement. She suggested taking advantage of the City’s contract with PCRC and bringing multiple stakeholders to the table to discuss and mediate issues. As well, she stated that the City should have an annual joint meeting with BSD. Councilmember Keighran stated that negotiations with BSD had gone smoothly. She explained that this situation was a little different because all the details hadn’t been written down in the past. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that he agreed with Councilmember Keighran. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that he didn’t believe Measure M should pay for the re-turfing of the fields as it was a community project. He explained that the City should assist, but that he wasn’t comfortable with a 50/50 split. Councilmember Beach made a motion that the City commit to spending no more than $400,000 to contribute to the re-turfing of Franklin and Osberg fields. She stated that the funds might not be made available to BSD until after the City had reviewed its budget. Mayor Ortiz asked if Councilmember Beach would be willing to amend her motion by lowering the dollar amount to $350,000. Councilmember Beach stated that she felt confident that the user groups and BSD would come to an agreement so that the number came in lower than $400,000. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 16 Vice Mayor Brownrigg thought the Council should take a step back and have the liaison committee meet and discuss the Joint Use Agreement and funding for the re-turfing of the two fields. He didn’t believe the Council should come up with a cap for the funding. Councilmember Colson agreed with Vice Mayor Brownrigg. City Attorney Kane stated that it didn’t sound like there was a majority that could coalesce tonight on the matter. She stated that the question becomes what the next step should be and whether the Council can provide direction. She explained that BSD came to the Council and asked for feedback on their schedule, and the Council has the right to get feedback and review the budget on its schedule. Councilmember Keighran stated it sounded like there was a majority in assessing the situation and determining a figure for next year. She stated that she agreed the liaison committee should work on this matter. However, she stated that BSD and the City should have a joint meeting prior so that the liaison committee hears all the concerns. Mayor Ortiz agreed with Councilmember Keighran. Councilmember Colson made a motion that the City work on extending the current Joint Use Agreement for six months; that the City Manager reach out to the Superintendent and coordinate a joint meeting; that the City include in the future Joint Use Agreement how to fund and maintain fields; seconded by Vice Mayor Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Councilmember Keighran suggested that the user groups be invited to the joint meeting. Councilmember Colson asked the user groups to think about how the City should prioritize turfing. 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Council reported on various events and committee meetings they each attended on behalf of the City. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked for the Council to agendize a discussion of amending Measure T. He stated he was concerned that Measure T inhibits the City’s ability to regulate Airbnb and potentially inhibits the City’s ability to adopt below market rate housing policies. Mayor Ortiz seconded the Vice Mayor’s request. 13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS a. MARCH, 2017 PERMIT ACTIVITY 14. ADJOURNMENT Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 5/1/17 Burlingame City Council April 17, 2017 Approved Minutes 17 Mayor Ortiz adjourned the meeting at10:04 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer City Clerk