HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2016.08.01+
\-
Gity of Burlingame
Meeting Agenda - Final
City Council
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Monday, August 1,2016 7:00 PM Council Chambers
Note: Public comment is permitted on all action iferns as noted on the agenda below and in the
non-agenda public comment provided for in item 7.
Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and
hand it to staff, although the provision of a name, address or other identifying information is
optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in
light of the number of anticipated speakers.
All votes are unanimous unless separately noted for the record.
1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m. - Council Chambers
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANGE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION
5. UPCOMING EVENTS
6. PRESENTATIONS
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON.AGENDA
Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. Members of the public wishing to
suggesf an item for a future Council agenda may do so during this public comment period. The Ralph IVI .
Brown Act (the Stafe local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any mafter
that is not on the agenda.
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT GALENDAR
Consent calendar items are usually approved in a single motion, unless pulled for separate discussion.
Any member of the public wishing to comment on an item listed here may do so by submitting a speaker
slip for that item in advance of the Council's consideration of the consent calendar.
Approval of Parks and Recreation Director's Out-of-State Travel
Attachments: Staff Report
\-
City of Burlingame Page 1 Prinled on 7/28/2016
d.
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final August'1,2016
b. Adootion of a Resolu tion Authorizino the Citv I\,4anaqer lo Execute an Amendment to
the Aqreement for Professional Services With G rouD 4 Archi re & Plannino lnc
Attachfients:Staff Report
Resolution
4 Additional Service
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Public Comment)
10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Public Comment)
Adootion of a Resol ution Acceotino the Certification of the C itv Clerk as to thea.
S ufficiencV of the lnitiative Petition Entitled "An Ordinance to Enact Rent Stabilization
and Just Cause for E viction and ReDeal Prior Restrictions on the Reoulation of Sale or
Rental Price of Real Estate"
Attachfients:Staff Reoort - Citv Aftornev
California ApartnenlAssaalalle
lnitiative Prooonents Letter
Staff Report - Citv Clerk
Resolution
Notice of lntent
Ballot Title and Summarv
Letter from San Maleo Countv Elections
Certificate of Sufflciencv
Ptintec! on 7/24/2016
c.Adoption of a Resolution Authorizinq the Citv l\ranaoer to Procure Eiqht New Liqht
Poles and Execute an Amendment to the Aoreement with Tennvson Electric. lnc. for
the tvlurrav Field Liohtino Proiect, and Approvinq a Budqet Amendment in the Amount
of $ 1 10.514
Attachments: Staff ReDort
Resolution
[/1USCO Galvanized Poles Quote
Tennvson Electric Contract Amendment
a
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final August 1,2016
\-. b.
\-"
Adoption of a Resolution Callinq and Givinq Notice of a Municipal Election to be Held
on November B, 2016 as Requued !
California to General Law Cities and Sub to the Voters a Question Relatinq to an
lnitiative Measure: Directinq the Citv Attornev to Prepare an lmpartial Analvsis:
Directino the Citv Attornev and the Citv Clerk to Prepare the Documents NecessarL to
Place the lnitiative on the Ballot: and Requestinq the Countv of San Mateo to
Consolidate a Municipal Election to be Held with the Presidential General Election on
November B, 2016 Pursuant to Elections Code Section 10403
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND AGTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmembers repoft on committees and activities and make announcements.
12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
a. Commission Meetinq Minutes: June 9, 2016 Traffic. Safetv and Parkinq Commission
b. June, 2016 Permit Activitv
14. ADJOURNMENT
Notice: Any affendees wishing accommodations for disabilities please contact the City Clerk at
(650)558-7203 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the Agenda Packet is available for
public review at the City Clerk's office, City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
before the meeting and at the meeting. Visit the City's website at www.burlingame.org. Agendas and
minutes are available af this s/fe.
NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING - Next regular City Council Meeting - Monday, August
15,2016
VIEW REGULAR COUNC]L MEETING ONLINE AT WWW.BURLINGAME.ORG . GO TO
''CITY COUNCIL VIDEOS"
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this
agenda will be made available for public inspection at the Water Office counter at City Hall at 501
Primrose Road during normal buslness hours.
\-,
City of Burlingame Page 3 Printed on 7/28/2016
STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8a
MEETING DATE: August 1,2016
To:Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: August 1,2016
From: Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director - (650) 558-7307
Subject: Approval of Parks and Recreation Director's Out-of-State Travel
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve by motion the Parks and Recreation Director's
out-of-state travel.
BAGKGROUND
The annual National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) conference will be held in St.
Louis, Missouri, October 5-8, 2016. The Parks and Recreation Director has been a member of
NRPA for many years and tries to periodically attend the annual conference. The Director last
attended the Conference in 2012.
DISCUSSION
The registration fee for the conference is $509 and includes three days of training sessions
covering leadership and management, public relations, marketing, revenue generation, planning
of parks, grants, programming, conservation, and collaborations, in addition to other subject
matter. The cost of airfare and lodging is estimated to be under $1,200.
FISCAL ]MPACT
Sufficient funds have been budgeted in the Parks and Recreation Department for travel, and
Professional Development funds will be used for conference registration and hotel.
1
STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8b
MEETING DATE: August 1,2106
To:Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: August 1,2016
From: Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director - (650) 558-7307
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an
Amendment to the Agreement for Professional Services With Group 4
Architecture & Planning Inc.
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the City
Manager to execute an Amendment to the Agreement for Professional Services With Group 4
Architecture & Planning lnc. (Group 4) to include renderings and an informational video at a cost
of $33,000.
BACKGROUND
On May 4, 2015, the City Council ratified a contract with Group 4 for the conceptual design
services for the Burlingame Community Center and Washington Park renovation in the amount of
9192,310. With guidance from the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), the conceptual design
phase included such community outreach events as appearances at the Planning Commission,
the Traffic, Safety, & Parking Commission, the Parks & Recreation Commission, and various
other community events. Based on the input from these meetings, Group 4 has refined their
designs to create a conceptual design that offers a traditionally inspired and inviting building
paired with dynamic programming spaces to serve the needs of the community, Based on the
recommendation from the CAC, staff would like to request that Group 4 develop renderings and
an informational video to assist the City Council and community with visualizing the new
community center and the benefits it could offer.
DISCUSSION
The additional services that will be requested include a total of four renderings of interior and
exterior views of the community center at a cost of $2,000 each. The script and informational
video will provide an overview of the project, the reason and vision of the new facility, and the
opportunities/benefits the new center will provide to the community. The cost for the script and
video is $13,000. ln addition, Group 4 will provide the management support and coordination
with the artist and videographer at an expense of $12,000.
\-.
\-
1
I
RECOMMENDATION
Amendment to the Agreement with Group 4 Architecture & Planning lnc.
f
A,ugust 1, 2016 L
The original contract price was $192,310. The proposed addition to the scope of work to include
renderings and an informational video is $33,000, bringing the total project budget to $225,310.
There are adequate funds in the Facilities Capital lmprovement Program for this addition to the
contract.
Exhibits:
. Resolution
. Group 4 Additional Service Request Amendment
2
a
FISCAL !MPACT
{
\-
\-
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH GROUP 4 ARCHITECTURE &
PLANNING INC.
WHEREAS, on May 4, 2015 the City Council ratified a contract with Group 4
Architecture & Planning Inc. for the conceptual design seryices for the Burlingame Community Center
and Washington Park renovation in the amount of $ 192,310; and
WHEREAS, Group 4 has refined their designs to create a conceptual design that offers a
traditionally inspired and inviting building paired with dynamic programming spaces to serve the
needs of the community; and
WHEREAS, based on the recommendation from the CAC, renderings and an informational
video will be requested to assist the council and community with visualizing the new community
center and the benefits it could offer; and
WHEREAS, the additional services requested include a total of four renderings including
interior and exterior views of the community, a script and informational and management support and
coordination.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council hereby approves the development of additional renderings and an informational
video for the Community Center project at a cost of $33,000.
2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the contract amendment and any necessary
documents to undertake the above said work.
Ann Keighran, Mayor
I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer , City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby cerlify that the
foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council held on
the 1st day of August, 2016, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
\-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk
ADDITIONAL SERVICES NO. 2 TO PROVIDE RENDERINGS AND AN INFORMATIONAL VIDEO FOR
THE BURLINGAME COMMUNITY CENTER CONCEPTUAL D IGN PROJE
THIS AGREEIV1ENT, made in duplicate and entered into this 1st day of August,
2016, by and between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred
to as "CITY" and GROUP 4 ARCHITECTURE RESEACH & PLANNING lNC. h erein after referred to
as "CONSULTANT,"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, CITY and CONSULTANT have previously entered into an agreement for
certain services, said agreement being dated MARCH 4, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the CITY requires additional CONSULTANT services to provide four
renderings and an informational video for the Burlingame Community Center Conceptual
Design Project (See Exhibit A); and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the parties to amend said a8reement as hereinafter
set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Amendment of Agreement
Said agreement dated MARCH 4,20L5,is hereby amended to include those
revisions in services and compensation set forth in EXHIBIT "A", attached hereto.
2. ln all other respects said agreement dated, MARCH 4,2075, shall remain in
full force and effect.
lN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT on the
day and year first above written.
CITY OF BURLINGAME
A municipal co rporation Approved as to form:
By
City Manager - Lisa Goldman City Attorney - Kathleen Kane
ATTEST:
Consultant - Group 4 Architecture Research &
P Ian n ing, lnc.
City Clerk - l\4eaghan Hassel-Shearer
AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 1
WITH GROUP4 ABCHITECTURE RESEARCH & PIANNING, INC. FOR
Exhibit A
'=,-
ATCHITEf.T$NI
;i9lnBCn +
PiAErlFO, IHC
c R o u f c 3tlJut1.3tll6
ti * tiNsEAl rtdlrut
SQ 5^H tR.HClS({)
CA 9{!EI UIA
r:,6lOl0rli{I{9
r S50.0? r. tf I r
wflw. f,4.! r<h. com
futun'artt (ilsmstad.
FIU t{LLl{i.,L\t E Ctl}l }ttiN ET \' I Es'rEi{
&5() *urli:rg;uxc Alenuf,
llurlinganre. Cali fcr*i:l 'J.I{J 10
FROIE(T l*Alllfl
Burlin;am Cummuni ty Centrr
(6r,ip#{f
pftopos#.
E'ilID ET. HCH.TS FiTI
lcElFE *U*t *AnTr
.A&riiiarul Srrs.icc* prr: ro4**sr fr*rn itw {ti€Er ro ;x*t'idc rendrdnp aad aa. iinf*nrstirrna[ Tidl's f,i]r' rhe
BL'C crrnc*prua! dl:iigfi Fnlject [.cL-* artathfileilt.
(U[H? CON1H *r {101
trDE SfEYtdt f:
E.ILLIFiG lYPfr
FEOJECI'fr
124!l-(}1
{J:
!-ump 9um
GIOIJ,F iT FHTSE.fI
HrES$t{
IUiTFS{,}lffi lalrf,LrP
\-
ToH: I{cfl$ti*
Silry n$g Filn$
firuup;l
m#nrsr&E
flBCS
f?.oi. ! 6
0?.fi1. [ 6
0?.$5. E 6
Ffl0ro6rr
HTTD
A!lourxt:ct
.A.[1.]rext]cL*
sE ftfli?
$ lJ,fl(l$
$T,*fiS
5&00
5IJ{X'
5700
s0
38 flofi
s t4,300
$7,?tlo
$*
sss0
EErlGlI rEI SlJB'TfirA!: *-l$'fiFfi
EEII.I, BTr{^TT III,IXUF T-EHTfrHUI'
toH^tF{a HrrirrFl
:,ia:l
oiwH g. Ftrlrf,5
..ti!r?'i.:f
b.vl6 !{lirl{l
i..: i r !: i:
"tllu*,siucr 5J.ftie s:00 1:,2ix]
riI.X. EETh[EUT5AELE5 5IJB.TOIAL $AtfiO
.MAJL IH(LUEIHG BTUil8. EXFENSES:
ttLtM. lE
irjr.
rrLi$lr L!*
ii{{,li:l
lJarvrz lllerkes
llri*cipal in Charge
D:rtc
aHDtI^ Gl rf O!O
{ti.nir1i.
i{argpsct t-}l.smstad
lJurEin Eanre fhrnrnzlni ty eentm
Datc
AEDSEIUTCE EEQUI5T
rc 6{1:.r11{? Surll'rEr.fic CEffisrll Esntc4Y.cMtEE\cl"lEllfi.ldiltEnrl sfrvEc!1,*dd scB RslJert lqe'0?
,. xiiw ATTACIIfuIENT
EIU ltl-lNfi A:lt[ COli! itt lJHl't'Y CIH i'lnR
Frojr:ct Na. l:42t)-{):
$:
I
1
aleilrlaiEuill
tEla*tets i
t tl H N I H 6r I H C
etout 4
1t I t.tkogH r{18rJr.
iO- trH f uHerteg
Ca s46i0 ul*
fr{ll.rrl.r?l}
l:*5o' i r l ' lr ! I
Bsi. a t! aa h. aod
err&.ril crlrail:{
gtroPu suMl.tAflY
SCOIJE:
10 July !ul*
Pfi.{}.}I(]I:
AT.,D.IERV.:
2"
["
l.
ttcn<furingp {d {ntd}
s- Conzrnunity *oosl s$d ilutd{ror lcrmcc L':(t(rior tierv
b- S*nior "4etive Lounge
c. Maker $pare
d- trixterierr e*uy* and Lnunge t'icsd
Inflorrnaticncl t' idca:
iL Co*r:ept
b. t'.osltenl (lvho, rl.h.lre, w&rt, u'fucn, r*'by- lmx)
i- Qv*rryieru oi-{xis[im$ Recreaii.sn Cei:ter'* iBlpoflimt ,to,le
wilhifi E{rtfu}*ail1r} csffiinutity trrI!o" whele}
ii" liee&r esse-csoutlt fiYhy)
iii" Ylsi*n of nsrv ibr:itit*'{trilali
i,*. Fii:w FFprlsEil n i tie-c.&,uilef1t$ of the rlett' c&rlilrlufl it1' center
l*,r Bur[ingarne re*ideflt* {h$nl
r- Projrsct seherlu[e/ne.xt ste.Fs/hotv t+ gt! i:ntotued {w8len}
'l'onr *{cClune:
a. t{enrli:rings: lot*l uf.I rr*derings *t.S1.0(S eaeh
$nlty l}og frilm.*:
a- Vidra B.r:d5eu S11,0$0, 5 rninute virlec
i. !'idrngrapher: &:otatr"*., editing video: 5 I O,0$0
ii. S<ript: $3.ffi{}
tk*up 4 - *,tu:*gcment: $upgrort: $1,fi)(i
l&nilX*i X^aI*ri
A t t F.T t { !
6rra l. rttill
ttcFirtai
BxrtO ICil(la
AICh,T:'I COS TS,
ik6a a^ 6rrrgto
A a € tsrt I {!
3.
artY crttc
Itcra:r'Iaal
Jr!t tYllt
laghata€!
aiiitt i^ao{li
AlErr*T!€l
SllLlAa rifl
l a € ! iI i g?
sc i-lEff rJ LE r]tj uEt-x vEtLdBLES
E- Srrirrr
a- Firrr Dnrit of &c scriptta G4/elir$t: Atrgurf l!
i.. C"arenrrr:lr kck by Augu:st !*
b" $*:eonr! dr*fl ol"rcript tugurt 16
i. f'orrmefits hact by $cptr"mhr:r 2
t:- liinu! lknft uf si--ript Septenrhcr S
i.. C*rnmmts baclc by September l8
3. tridtn
& H-rol.l
i. Ej-r*tt filnring:.!ul,t 3-$rplrT rbcr ?
b" \riden" intrrr.ieivs. shcrl-s. uu:ice over: $icptember l"l-flcpt X3
Tl*tl^ iO*
STAFF REPORT AGENDANO: 8c
\-.MEETING DATE: Augusl 1, 2106
To:Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: August 1,2016
From: Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director - (650) 558-7307
Subject:Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Procure Eight
New Light Poles and Execute an Amendment to the Agreement with
Tennyson Electric, lnc. for the Murray Field Lighting Project, and
Approving a Budget Amendment in the Amount of $110,514
\-
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the City
lvlanager to procure eight new light poles at a cost of $96,856 from MUSCO and execute an
Amendment to the Agreement with Tennyson Electric, lnc. for the [t/urray Field Lighting Project at
an additional cost of $13,658; and approving a budget amendment in the amount of $1 1 0,514.
BACKGROUND
ln fiscal year 2015-16, the City Council approved $268,000 in the Parks Capital Improvement
Program to replace the existing field lighting at lr/urray Field with new LED lighting fixtures. The
project included the utilization of the existing poles and installation of new IVIUSCO LED lighting
fixtures. The City purchased the LED lighting fixtures directly from TMUSCO (the lighting
manufacturer) at a cost of $171,927. The installation contract was separately bid and awarded to
Tennyson Electric, lnc. in the amount of $76,621.
When the MUSCO staff was onsite to measure the tops of the existing poles in order to design
the bracket attachments for the new lighting fixtures, they discovered the poles were corroded,
with two having very significant corrosion.
Staff consulted Att/EC Foster Wheeler Environment & lnfrastructure, lnc. (AMEC), a firm that has
extensive experience in assessing high mast poles, to inspect and test the eight poles to
determine the extent of damage and recommend solutions. ln addition to visually inspecting the
poles, AIVEC also inspected the quality of the welding and conducted an ultrasonic thickness
measurement test.
The test results showed that there is significant corrosion and damage to the poles,
compromising their design strength and presenting a safety concern. Additionally, the poles are
not galvanized, which is a major factor contributing to the corrosion of the poles.
\-,
1
RECOMMENDATION
Amendment to the Murray Field Lighting Project August 1, 2016 (\
DISCUSSION
AMEC determined that, at a minimum, the poles would need to be stripped and recoated, and two
of the poles would require further engineering analysis to develop special procedures to remedy
the problem. All of this work would need to be completed prior to installation of the new LED
lighting fixtures. The consulting firm recommended assessing the cost of recoating/maintenance
versus complete replacement as it may be more economical to replace the existing poles with
new galvanized poles.
After extensive research and consultation with industry experts, staff recommends that all the
existing corroded poles be replaced with new galvanized steel poles. ln order to strip and recoat
the existing poles, contractors would take the poles down, inspect the interiors to determine if
they could be recoated onsite and, if not, ship the poles to an off-site location for stripping and
recoating. Additionally, engineering analysis would have to be performed in order to develop
specialized repair procedures for two of the significantly corroded poles. ln either case, the poles
would need to reinstalled, and future stripping and recoating would need to occur regularly as part
of an ongoing maintenance program. Even after being stripped and recoated, the poles will
continue to corrode, which will cost the City more money over time. As a result, staff recommends
that the existing poles be replaced with new galvanized steel poles purchased from MUSCO, and
that the City Manager be authorized to execute the contract amendment to undertake the
installation work.
MUSCO poles are structurally designed and factory tested for tr/USCO light fixtures. Utilizing
other non-MUSCO poles would require additional costs for independent third-party testing to
ensure that the poles would be compatible and.adequate for MUSCO light fixtures. This would
further increase costs and extend the timeframe to complete the project. ln addition, the City has
a good track record with the MUSCO poles and lights that are currently installed at Bayside Park.
Having the same poles at lt/urray would result in more cost-effective maintenance of the poles
due to standardized training and parts for the TVUSCO systems in the city.
FISCAL IMPACT
The original cost to purchase and install the tt/USCO LED lights was $248,548. The proposed
change of work scope to replace the existing corroded steel poles with new galvanized steel
poles is estimated at $110,514, bringing the total project budget to $359,062. Staff recommends
that the City Council authorize an additional appropriation in the amount of $1 1A,514 from the
General Fund Reserves to the project budget to complete the work.
Exhibits:
. Resolution
. TVUSCO Galvanized Poles Quote
o Tennyson Electric Contract Amendment
2
^
RESOLUTION OF THE Ctry COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PROCURE EIGHT NEW LIGHT POLES
AND EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH TENNYSON
ELECTRIC, INC. FOR THE MURRAY FIELD LIGHTING PROJECT, AND
APPROVING A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $110,514
WHEREAS, on June 15,2015, the City Council approved $250,000 to install LED
light fixtures at [t/urray Field; and
WHEREAS, on April 18,2016, the City Council approved the procurement of
LED light fixtures from IVUSCO; and
WHEREAS, after measuring the poles for fixture installation, it was discovered
the existing poles had varying degrees of significant corrosion; and
WHEREAS, AMEC Foster Wheeler Environmental & lnfrastructure, lnc. has
determined significant repairs need to be completed to fix the existing poles, or the
poles need to be completely replaced; and
WHEREAS, after extensive research and consultation with the industry experts,
staff believes that a complete replacement of the poles with galvanized steel is a cost
effective solution; and
WHEREAS, staff chose MUSCO poles because they are structurally designed
and factory tested for IMUSCO light fixtures; and utilizing other non-[r]USCO poles would
require additional costs for independent third-party testing to ensure that the poles
would be compatible and adequate for IMUSCO light fixtures; and
WHEREAS, the estimated total additional cost to purchase and install the
galvanized steel poles is $1 10,514.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CIry OF BURLINGAME
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council hereby authorizes a budget amendment in the amount of $110,514.
3. The City Council hereby approves the removal of the existing poles and installation
of eight new galvanized poles and associated costs in the amount of $13,658.
4. The City [/anager is hereby authorized to execute the contract amendment and any
necessary documents to undertake the above said work.
RESOLUTION NO.
2. The City Council hereby approves the procurement of eight galvanized poles and
associated hardware from Ir/USCO Lighting in the amount of $96,856.
Ann Keighran, Mayor
l, lVleaghan Hassel-Shearer , City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the Burlingame City
Council held on the 1st day of August, 2016, and was adopted thereafter by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk
\.,Murray Field Re-Light
Date: July 6th, 2016
King Gounty Directors Association
Master Project: 148772
Contract Number: 15-406
Quote #172630
Expi rati o n : 021 281 2017
Equipment Description
Sports-Cluster GreenrM System delivered to your site
o 8 - 70'Galvanized steel poles
. Mounting hardware
Also lncludes:
. Energy savings of more than 60% over a standard lighting system
. 50o/o less spill and glare light than Musco's prior industry leading technology
o Musco Constant 10 warranty and maintenance program that eliminates your maintenance costs for 10 years,
including labor and materials
o Guaranteed constant footcandles for 10 years, per IESNA RP-06-15
. Lighting Contactors sized for voltage and phase at the site and our Control & Monitoring System for flexible control
and solid management of your lighting system
\,a'otal Breakout of Equipment:
KCDA Contract Price - 360 x 225 - 50fc Soccer....... ......... $220,647.00
Deduct - HID fixtures & Hardware (32 @ $2,588.00 each).......... ..........($42,916.00)
Deduct - Pole and Foundation lnstallation (4 @ $7,500.00 each).......... ...........($30,000.00)
Deduct - Controls and Warranty .($10,975.00)
Total Price (Poles Only):$96.8s6.00
Notes:
Pricing does NOT include taxes.
Purchase orders are to be sent directly to the KCDA along with a copy of this Quote.
Delivery to the job site from the time of order, submittal approval, and confirmation of order details including voltage and
phase, pole locations is 30 days. Current estimated delivery month is June 2016.
Due to the built-in custom light control per luminaire, pole locations need to be confirmed prior to production.
Light Levels and uniformities are guaranteed by MUSCO, any additional aiming required to meet the specified
requirements shall be done by MUSCO.
\-
E-mail: customerserv ice@kcda.oro E-mail: Barb.davis musco.com
Phone: 800-422-50'19 Phone: 800-756-1205
Thank you for considering Musco for your sports-lighting needs. Please contact me with any questions
KCDA
Attn: Shaneel
P.O. Box 5550
Kent, WA 98064
Fax: 425-282-0675
Tim Butz
It4usco Sports Lighting, LLC
Phone: 503/558-8342
E-mail: tim.butz@musco.com
Musco Sports Lighting, LLC
Attn: Amber Shulte
P.O. Box 260
lvluscatine, lA 52761
Fax: 800-374-6402
Pat Guertin
Ivlusco Sports Lighting, LLC
Phone: 800-754-6025 ext. 4736
E-mail : pat.guertin@musco.com
Fax or l\4ail a copy of the Purchase Order to KCDA and Musco Sports Lighting:
\-
\-
FIRST AMENDMENT TO 1gN', CONTRACT BETWEEN TTIE CITY AND TENNYSON
ELECTRIC,INC., TO INCLT]DE TITF'INSTALLATION OF NEW POLES
AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT
TIIIS AMENDMENT NO. 1, made and entered into this lsr day of August, 2Ol6,by and between
the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a municipal corporation lhereinafter "City'], and Tennyson Electric, Inc.
[hereinafter "Contractor"], amends the Agreement between the parties dated April 18, 2016 [hereinafter
"Agreement"].
WIIEREAS, on April 18, 2016, the City awarded a contract for the INSTALLATION OF LED
SPORTS FIELD LIGHTING AT MIIRRAY FIELD to the Contractor in an amount of $76,621; and
WIIEREAS, the City has determined the installation of eight new poles is required as part of the
project; and
WIIEREAS, the City desires to amend the LED lights installation agreement with the Contractor to
include the removal of the old poles and installation and wiring of new poles; and
WIIEREAS, the additional cost for these services is $13,658, as described in Exhibit A'
NOW, T}TNIUPORE, THE PARTMS AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City of Burlingame and the Contractor hereby amend their agreement dated April 18,
2016 to include the removal of the old poles and the installation and wiring of the eight new poles, in an
amount not to excee d $90 ,27 9 .
2. Other than as modified by section l, above, all existing terms and conditions of the original
agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment to Agreement on the
day and year flrst above written.
CITY OF BURLINGAME
A municipal corporation
TENNYSON ELECTRIC, INC
By:By:
Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager
ATTEST Approved as to Fonn:
\-
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk Kathleen Kane, City Attorney
=LEe?Hr3 rraG.
?EI*I{YSOil#t2x?2 1-'*
Exhibit A
Bat& &ne 20, 2016
38 fertified *13195
El * *eg?stra6oE# tffi 01!t{8,
ETtr F*OFOSAL
Aa1t12 fitt o4Eudiry:ame
RE IEI} 5ffiAI T"EH?[HG . MUXRAY TgA:}
We *e p*as6dt*rstr:tlt oqr prepalfor atr* eieetl*d*o& a*ldze *fui,ie yole** e*;rJ€ttfi*:*rlthAsi,*Ainglelae'* p*lx'
& eirirlira ffiA*d*ti rra;! ban g pol*eredby evi+tine tbaAEE-
1
i6rEs:
Ten*.,ffir, stfrFe and W ixdudes lll n*blESrglJan-
F ice rcatingerlt wtrefua dI apgot*d plans
lneht*t renwlag I reei,ir'llxg exiszing pole:
r t furac t6 pr**lm LEBs
We exdilde tfie l*lfor*in6 heatr;
Eond- Our bond st{rzL* ts -?5s and atralhh€* upo* re4:at
re*:, permi4 lasget.::,ie,n fees, encoaclxzreaz petnizt
Stakir€, sur"ne;lng oe l*yo[t, o{f h:al of :peils or tLle.d1,ln1 ot cfifile. anel*4 n:atesiels
Arph,rll or ceccrete rettcretiofi, f&ls* irnork
w?c? ind SitFFF, darjater&r!E
FounditioR viwLci a*7 kind oa re,*iring of exlssog elrcilltrY *cc4c{ed at:
P r oFr uat(ti 14 * r ti tfitrd CitC,r aur,#*lmr
li yfiu ha,e rny ques.tio.ls pk^ase de mt hesi?iXe io edl tt1.
Th:nk y*r,Accf,r.d *f
IEI
*ady Ulllncl,uk
F,ojeEt l;l}Jr!Eer
{redit
Totel Added Fdrc 5
$14,{g5.og
,3,*11s}
,.1. _.ri. E -.rlt ,l : r
Jr '\ i-,r"*,;t
t- t"
7275 H=ftoa:al *r?qe Su.'ite A E-i'.'ermore. CAq455fi
cA Lice*:e #7L7S4gCril erpO1fi1l2il1E (qll'6fl+1Gfg lax {915} Ew-7855
It{'l,i Ho.F,afue Unit ArY thlt Prl.e Tofat
&-{E} r*i* pole ,rd1.J3?i.io*s t5 I 17,673J.7 5 r7fi13]:
5ubt*td 5 u,6?3Jt
It{a Ha.!ilrt*riaa Ufilt $Y tHitt Frt.Tnl?,i
*-t5 1 s
Srbg*td 5
Iter6 *la.
Itffz**;ntheef*1]t
lin
t5 1D.
@EI@
f-l!*Ef,tl
1 1
STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 10a
\-MEETING DATE: August 1,2016
To Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: August 1,2016
From: Kathleen Kane, City Attorney - (650) 558-7204
Subject: lnformational Report Regarding the Challenge to the Sufficiency of the
Pending Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance Petition
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council receive this informational report regarding the sufficiency of
the pending rent stabilization and just cause for eviction ordinance petition.
BACKGROUND
As described in the staff report from City Clerk Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, a notice of intent to
circulate a petition for an ordinance establishing rent stabilization and just cause for eviction
regulations was submitted to the City, and a ballot title and summary were prepared in
accordance with the Elections Code. The proponents of the measure began circulating the
petition in late April of this year and submitted signatures to the Clerk on July 5. Those
signatures have been examined, and the Clerk and County Elections Office have verified that
they are in excess of the fifteen percent requirement to enable the measure to be placed on the
ballot in November.
The clerk - as the elections official for the City - has a mandatory duty under Elections Code
Section 9211 to examine the signatures attached to an initiative petition in the manner prescribed
by Sections 9114 and 9115 (pertaining to county elections). Section 9114 requires the clerk to
verify signatures within 30 days of receipt of the petition. Section 9115 allows the option of using
statistical sampling to verify the signatures instead of verifying each signature. ln the case of this
petition, the City Clerk requested that each individual signature be examined by the County
elections office. Under Section 9114, if the requisite number of signatures is verified, "the
elections official sha// certify the results of the examination to the [city council] at the next regular
meeting ..." [emphasis added].
On July 1, the California Apartment Association (CAA), through its counsel, submitted a letter to
lr/s. Hassel-Shearer asserting that she had a mandatory duty to reject the petition when
submitted because it did not contain the full text of the prior voter-enacted initiative, known as
lrleasure T, which the new initiative purports to repeal. That letter is attached for your reference.
On July 22,2016, the proponents of the measure, acting through theircounsel, submitted a letter
in opposition to the CAA letter, contending that [t/s. Hassel-Shearer had a mandatory duty to
accept the petition and to certify the results, if enough verified signatures had been provided, to
\-
1
\
lnformational Report Regarding Sufficiency of Petition August 1,2016
the Council. That letter is also attached for your reference. As City Attorney, l, in consultation
with experts in the field, conducted my owh review of these arguments and other relevant case
law and materials.
The crux of the argument on this issue rests on whether the petition as circulated satisfies the so-
called "full text" requirement embodied in Section 9201 of the Elections Code. That section reads
as follows:
Any proposed ordinance may be submitted to the legislative body of the city by a
petition filed with the elections official of the legislative body, in the manner
hereinafter prescribed, after being signed by not less than the number of voters
specified in this article. The petition may be in separate sections, providing that the
petition complies with this article. The first page of each section shall contain the
title of the petition and the text of the measure. The petition sections shall be
designated in the manner set forth in Section 9020.
The petitions submitted with signatures to the City Clerk contained the full text of the ordinance
that the proponents seek to submit to the voters- They did not contain the text of Measure T,
which was enacted by the voters in 1987. The operative language of lvleasure T provides that
"the City of Burlingame shall enact no law which imposes direct restrictions on the price for which
real property may be sold, leased, rented, transferred, or exchanged, and any law which imposes
direct restrictions is hereby repealed." The current initiative conflicts with l/easure T, in that it
seeks to impose rent stabilization regulations that would be a "direct restriction on the price for
which real property may be . .. leased."
The proposed initiative addresses Measure T, but it does not quote it. In the Title and Purpose
section of the initiative, it states: "... it is the purpose of this Ordinance to repeal Municipal
Ordinance 1356, also known as "Measure T," which otheruvise limits the City's ability to provide
meaningful protections for its residents." Under the Findings section, it states "(o) Burlingame
Municipal Ordinance 1 356, passed in 1987 and also known as "lvleasure T," prevents the City
from adequately protecting the community from exorbitant rent increases." And in section
20.04.1 80, "Measure T Repealed", it states as follows:
This Ordinance shall supersede and invalidate any limitations imposed by prior
City ordinances that relate to or concern the subject matter addressed herein.
This includes, but is not limited to, Burlingame City Ordinance '1356, also known as
"Measure T," which was passed by the voters in 1987. By repealing and
superseding any prior limitations on the City's authorlty to regulate the subject
matter addressed herein, the People of the City of Burlingame specifically intend
for the City to retain authority to promote and preserve affordable housing to the
maximum extent permitted by state law, including but not limited to the authority to
enact rent stabilization, just cause for eviction, relocation assistance, inclusionary
housing policies, and all other regulatory and land use policies that relate to
affordable housing.
2
DISCUSSION
hfo)mafional Repod Regarding Sufficiency of Petition August 1,2016
The CAA asserts that this language, standing alone, is insufficient to put voters on notice about
what the effect of the proposed initiative would be on Measure T, and that in order to make an
informed decision, those voters should have had access to the full text of Measure T in the
petition they were being asked to sign. ln support of this assertion, the CAA ciles Meruyn's v.
Reyes, 1998 Cal.App.4th 93. ln that case, the Court of Appeals reviewed an initiative that sought
to roll back recent zoning changes and reenact the previous land use plan but failed to attach key
portions of that plan. The Cou( found that where a petition "utterly fail[s] to apprise prospective
signers of the substantive provisions" of laws that would be repealed by the measure, the
elections official may properly reject the petition submitted to him or her. /d. at 104. The Court
stated that the purpose of the full text requirement is to provide sufficient information so that
registered voters can intelligently evaluate whether to sign an initiative petition, and to avoid
confusion. The CAA asserts that the initiative as circulated here fails the criteria set forth by
Mervyn's.
This argument is not without merit. Mervyn's does import some of the standards previously
applied to referenda (which seek to undo a specific legislative action) to initiatives (which seek to
enact a new piece of legislation), and it found that the initiative before it failed to adequately
apprise voters of what they were being asked to support with their signatures. While a court
could apply the holding articulated there to the initiative currently before the Council and find that
this petition was inadequate, the weight of authority under the Elections Code appears to suggest
that the City Clerk in fact has a mandatory duty to certify the petition to the Council.
ln subsequent cases, the Court of Appeals has clarified the standards articulated in Mervyn's. ln
We Care-Santa Paula v. Henera, (2006X 39 Cal.App.4th 387, the Court stated that the full text
requirement under Section 9201 requires only that the petition contain "the full text of everything
that will be enacted if the voters approve it," ld. at 390, rather than the text of every law that might
be affected by the proposed legislation. Lin v. City of Pleasanton, 176 Cal. App. 4th 408 (2009),
further establishes that the full text requirement does not require setting out the text of other laws
affected by the proposed measure. Distinguishing Mervyn's, the Court in Lrn looked to whether
the petition at issue would actually mislead the voters being asked to sign it, and determined that
it did not.
Applying Lrn to the measure at issue here, the same result occurs. The touchstone under
Elections Code precedent is whether the voters would be confused as to what they are being
asked to support. A voter reading the petition submitted to the City Clerk here would understand
the nature of the law being proposed and that its intent is to wipe out all previous laws that may
be inconsistent with it, including Measure T. Having the text of N,4easure T itself may, as in Lln, be
something a conscientious voter would desire, but it is unlikely a court would find it necessary for
understanding the nature of the initiative being proposed, Glven the ambiguity of these issues,
the petition's apparent substantial compliance with Elections Code requirements that voters be
informed about what they are being asked to support, and the weight of the authority cited here
and otherwise considered, the City Clerk is not mandated to reject the petitions submitted to her
and is instead required under the Code to certify them to Council now that the signatures have
been verified.
3
lnformational Report Regarding Sufficiency of Petition August 1,2016 I
FISCAL IMPACT
None. This is an informational item only
Exhibits
. July 1,2016 Letter from California Apartment Association
. July 22,2016 Letter from lnitiative Proponents
4
\-,BELL, McANDREWS & HILTACHK, LLP
Attomeys and Counselors at Law
455 CAPITOL MALL, SUITE 600
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916) 442-7757
FAX (916) 442-7759
July 1.,201.6
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk [mhasselshearer@budingame.org]
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Initiative proposing the "Budingame Community Protection Ordinance"
Fatally Defective - Failure to Comply with Elections Code "Full Text" Requirement
Dear Ms. Hassel-Shearer:
My larv fum is legal counsel to the California Apartment Association, and has over two
decades of experience advising clients on compliance with the ballot measure provisions of the
Elections Code. We revierved the initiative proposing the "Burlingame Communiry Protection
Ordinance," filed with your office on March 3L,2016 requesting preparation of a tide and summary.
We believe the proponents rvill file the petition contaioing signarures within days. \\4een the petition
is presented for examination, you should reiect it for failure to comply with the Elections Code.
This letter is an effort to resolve this matter administratively.
Upon presentation of any voter-initiated petition, as the elections official for the City of
Burlingame, the Elections Code charges your office rvith the mandatory ministerial dury of
examining the petition (1) for compliance with the technical statutory process of proposing and
qualifying a measure, and (2) to confirm that it contains, pimafacie, a sufhcient number of signatures
to qualify the measure for adoption by the Ciry Council or presentation to the voters. (Billigu. t/oges
(1990) 223 Cal.App.3d 962,968-69.) The relevant statutory provisions are found in Article 1 of
Chapter 3 of Division 9 of the Elections Code (commencingwith section 9200). Importandy, your
duty is not discretionaqr and does not include the authoriry to determine that the format of the
petition is "close enough" or that the initiative proponent "substantially complied" with the
requirements of the Elections Code. Tltoy determinations ruull be nade b1 a cotrl. Indeed, only a court
may determine r.vhether "substantial" compliance is adequate, or rvhether "actual" compliance is the
standard under the circumstances: "Where the purpose of the statutory requirement is to give
information to the public to assist the voters in deciding vhether to sign or oPpose the perition, the
substandal compliance argument is often tejected and sttict compliance held essential." (Ibana u.
Ciry of Carcon (1989) 214 Cal.App.3d 90,99.)
RE:
\-.
,
Letter to Burlingame Ciq'Clerk
Jvly 1,201.6
Page 2
Only if the petition passes revie'nv as to both of these elements (compliance with Elections
Code and primafade sufitcient number of signatutes presented), may the signatures on the petition
be examined (either by random sample or in full) to ascertain rvhether the petition contains a
sufficient number of valid signatures from verified registered voters rvithin the Ciry of Burlingame.
NON-COMPLIANCE WITH FULL TEXT DOCTRINE
The petition that the proponents of the "Burlingame Communiry Protection Ordinance" are
about to fi.le rvith your office does not comply uzith the Elections Code, and must be rejected r,vhen
presented. The proposed initiative does not contain the full text of the "larv" (the text of the
ordinance proposed, in addition to any text that would be repealed in existing law) that the
proponents are asking the voters of the City of Burlingame to adopt.
Section 9202 of the Elections Code requires that to corrunence the initiative process, the
proponents must "6.le rvith the elections official a notice of intention to do so, rvhich shall be
accompanied by the rvritten text of the initiative. . ." Section 9203 directs initiative proponents to
design the initiative petition such that the text of the measure is printed belorv the Tide and
Summary prepared by the Ciry Attorney. (See also Elec. Code $ 9207: "The petition may be in
separate sections, providing that the petition complies with this article. The Ftst page of each
section shall contain the tide of the petition and the text of the measure.") These provisions
describe rvhat is knorvn as thefill text reqairement.l "The purpose of the full text requirement is to
provide sufficient informarion so that registered voters can intelJigendy evaluate rvhether to sign the
iniriative petition and to avoid confusion." (Merqtn's u. Relu (1998) 69 Cal.App.4rh93,99.) "It is
imperative that persons evaluating whether to sign a petition be advised rvhich laws are being
challenged and r.vhich rvill remain the same." (Id. at p. 104.) Where a petirion "utterly fail[s] to
apprise prospective signers of the substanrive provisions" of text that rvill be repealed from city larv
by a proposed ballot measure, such petition is properly rejected by the elections official. (Creighton u.
Reuicykl (1985) 171 Cal.App.3d1.225,1233;see also Elec. Code $ 9258:"p)rch section shall contain
a correct copy of the text of the proposed amendment;" and see EIec. Code $ 9267: "Pedaons that
do not substantially conform to the form requirements of this article shall not be accepted for fi.ling
by the elections official.")
The "Budingame Communiry Protection Ordinance" proposes to repeal certain provisions
of existing larv, originally enacted b), the voters in 1987, in addition to adding nerv provisions to the
Municipal Code. However, the ptovisions of the exisring larv the proposal rvould repeal are not set
forth in the initiative, as several sections of the Elections Code require. Voters asked to sign the
petition and vote on the measure at an election rvill have no idea'uvhat text r,vould be deleted from
Ciry larv, should the initiative be apptoved. This is a fatal omission.
I Courts have held that the "full text" doctrine is the same for initiative and referendum petitions. (See Billig u. L'oget
(1990) 223 Cal.App.3d 962,967.)
\-,
Letter to Burlingame City Clerk
Jvly 1,201.6
Page 3
The proposed initiative would add a nerv Tide to the Ivlunicipal Code, containing 20
secrions. Section 20.04.180 pufpofts to repeal"l\'Ieasute T." Section 20.04.180 reads:
This Ordinance shall supersede and invalidate any limitations imposed by prior City
ordinances that relate to or concern the subject matter addressed herein. This
includes, but is not iimited to, Burlingame City Ordinance 1356, also knorvn as
"I\{easure T," rvhich rvas passed by the votefs in 1987. It is the intent of the voters
of the Ciry of Burlingame to hereby repeal in its entirety said Measure T. By
repealing and superseding any prior limitations on the Ciry's authority to regulate the
subject matter addressed herein, the People of the Ciry of Burlingame speciFrcally
intend for the City to retain authority to promote and preserve affordable housing to
the maximum extent permitted by state law, including but not limited to the
authodty to enact rent stabilization, just cause for eviction, relocation assistance,
inclusionary housing policies, and all other regulatory and land use policies that relate
to affordable housing.
\\,4rile using a lot of rvords to declare intentions with respect to Measure T, the initiative fatally fails
to set forth the acrual text of Measure T, the existing City law, that it rvould have the Yoters delete
from the Ciry's books. A proponent's summa;ry of exisring ciry larv "does not constitute the text of
the ordinance because it does not contain the measure's actual words," and therefore is not a
subsdrute for acrua1 compliance rvith the Elecrions Code's full text requirement. (Bi//t& stpra,223
Cal.App.3d atp.967.) ThefollowingisthefulltextofMeasureT,which shoaldbepartof the
initiative text Frled with the City Clerk and reproduced on the petition in a manner such that it
apprises prospective signers that the text rvould be repealed if the measure were approved by voters
(this is rypically accomplished by printing the text in strike-through type):
ORDINANCE 1356
Section - Butlingame Fair Propety Rights Ordinance.
a. The purpose of this section is to promote the statewide goal of accomodating [sic]
the housing needs of all Californians by protecting the right of real properry orvners
to establish the price tor r,vhich their property is sold, leased, rented, transferred or
exchanged. Government restrictions on real properry prices result in economic and
social harm to the public as a r.vhole by creating and perpetuating housing shortages
and by inhibiting nerv investment in housing. By assuring properry owners a
favorable climate for continued investment, this section rvill promote and encourage
orderly, sustained and reasonable grorvth in the Housing supply of the City of
Burlingame.
b. An orvner of real property has the exclusive right to establish the price for rvhich
that property may be sold, leased, rented, transferred or exchanged.
c. The Ciry of Budingame shall enact no larv rvhich imposes dfuect restric[ions on the
price for rvhich real property may be sold, leased, rented, transferred or exchanged,
and any larv rvhich imposes such direct restriclions is hereby repealed.
d. This section shall not: 1. restrict the porvet of the Ciry of Budingame to zone or
the porver to implement state lorv and moderate income housing policies by methods
\-,
Letter to Burlingame City Clerk
July 1,,201.6
Page 4
rvhich may indirecdy affect the price for "vhich real ptoperty may be sold, leased,
rented, transferred or exchanged; 2. resuict the eminent domain powers of the Ciry
of Budingame; 3. apply to the sale, lease, rental, ttansfer or exchange of property
orvned by the Ciry of Burlingame or any other governmental agency.
e. If aoy portion of this section or its application to any person or circumstance is
declared unconsdrudonal or otherwise invdid, then the remainder of this section or
its application to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected and shall
continue in full force and effect.
Of course, the omission of all of the text of Measure T from the proposed "Budingame Community
Protection Ordinance" blatandy violates the Elections Code "full text" requirement, and invalidates
the initiative.
The Elections Code in fact operates such that "the offices of city clerks throughout the state
are mandated by the constitution to implement and enforce the plections Code's] procedural
requirements." Accordingly, under facts such as those present with this particular petition, you have
the "clear and present ministerial duty to refuse to process [the proponents'] petition because it
[does] not comply with the procedural requirements" of the Elections Code, and in particular, the
full text requirement,',vhich has consistently been literally and strictly enforced by the courts in this
state. (Billig upra,223 Cal.App.3d at p. 969.)
For the reasons stated herein, I respectfi.rlly request that you reject the initiative petition in
accordance rvith your ministerial dury to administer the Elections Code on behalf of the Ciry. By
omitting the jrll *xt of the proposal as the Elections Code mandates, voters were deprived of
essential information necessarT to evaluate one's decision to sign or not sign the initiative petition.
The petition is not entided to further advancement through the initiative process.
Please contact me i[your intention is to certi$, the petition for consideration by the Ciry
Council despite the petition defect. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this setious
matter.
Respectfully submitted,
Astrlee Titus
1
\-
PUBLIC
IDUIICATES
COMMUNITY
LECAL SERVICES IN
EAST PALO ALTO
III*I{ING RIGHTS R[AL
July 22,2016
VIA ELECTRONIC AND U.S. MAIL
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer [mhasselshearer@burlingame.org]
City Clerk
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
The "Burlingame Community Protection Ordinance" lnitiative Complies with the
"Full Text" Requirement of the Elections Code
Dear Ms. Hassel-Shearer:
We write to you on behalf of Burlingame Advocates for Renter Protections, the
committee which put forth the Burlingame Community Protection Ordinance initiative. This
letter responds to the July 1,2016letter sent by Ashley Titus on behalf of the California
Apartment Association regarding the purported failure of the "Burlingame Community
Protection Ordinance" initiative petition to comply with the "full text" requirement of Elections
Code $ 9201. -The Califomia Apartment Association cites inapposite precedent in an attempt to
stir up confusion where none should exist. As we explain below, the initiative petition meets the
requirements of California election law and its validity would be upheld by a court.
Consequently, in light of the recent news that the petition passed the signature threshold, you
have a nondiscretionary duty to certify the sufficiency of the initiative. If you fail to certifii the
signatures, we may be forced to seek a remedy in court.
l. The Initiative Petition Complies rvith the Full Text Requirement
We agree that your office has a ministerial duty to "ascertain[] whether the procedural
requirements for submitting a petition have been met." Billig v. Voges,223 Cat.App.3d962,
968-69 (1990) (emphasis in original). The relevant procedural requirement for initiative
petitions in Election Code $ 9201 is simple: the petition must contain "the text of the measure" to
Re
\-
I
\-
ffilryl
be adopted by voters. Cal. Elec. Code $ 9201; see also CaL Elec. Code $ 329 (defining
"measure" as "any constitutional amendment or other proposition submitted to a popular vote at
any election"). The purpose of the "full text" requirement is to ensure that there is "sufficient
information so that registered voters can intelligently evaluate whether to sign the initiative
petition" and confusion is avoided. Mervyn s,69 Cal.App.4th at 99. Accordingly, municipal
initiative petitions must "contain the text of the proposed measure" that would be enacted-and
that is all. Creighton, l7l Cal. App. at l23l; see also We Care-Santa Paula v. Herrera (2006)
139 Cal.App.4th387,391 (Sectiong20l "requires only the text of the measure proposed to be
enacted").
The Burlingame Community Protection Ordinance initiative petition satisfies this simple
requirement: the entire text of the proposed ordinance is set out on the petition in compliance
with $ 9201. The text of the ordinance clearly informs voters of each aspect of the regulatory
scheme that the measure is intended to enact, including the effect of the proposed ordinance on
other relevant laws, such as Measure T.
The California Apartment Association letter attempts to broaden the fulItext requirement
so that it encompasses the text of other laws beyond the four comers of the proposed ordinance.
This attempt must be rejected-as similar arguments previously have been by the courts.
The letter contains an out-of-context quote from Mervyn's that "[i]t is imperative that
persons evaluating whether to sign the petition be advised which laws are being challenged and
which will remain the same." 69 Cal. App. 4th at 104. The initiative petition at issue in
Mervyn s sought to reenact the City of Hayward's general plan as it had existed on a prior date in
order to protect certain open space requirements. Id. at96-97. In that case, the omission of the
general plan sections at issue-those that the petition sought to reinstate-meant that the
language the petition proposed to adopt was entirely omitted. 1d. Because of this, the failure to
provide the text of those provisions deprived the voters of fundamental information about the
character and effect of the initiative.
The California Court of Appeal has expressly rejected the argument that Mervyn's
requires "a petition for initiative or referendum [to] include the text of all laws potentially
affected by the proposed measure." Lin v. City of Pleasanton, 176 Cal. App. 4th 408, 418 (2009).
Indeed, as the Califomia Court of Appeal noted in Lin, "[t]hat proposition was specifically
disavowed in We Care, ntpra 139 Cal.App.4th at pages 390'91." Id.
1
2
a
Indeed, lVe Care provides valuable guidance here. That case concerned an initiative
petition that proposed to amend the general plan; the text of the proposed amendment was set out
on the petition, but not the text of the remainder of the general plan. 139 Cal. App. 4th at 388-
39. The city clerk refused to certifii the petition for failure to comply with $ 9201, and the
initiative proponents filed a petition for a writ of mandamus to require certification. Id. at 389.
The Court of Appeal distinguished both cases like Meruyn's and Creighton tn which the petitions
sought "to amend the general plan by nothing more than headings, titles or numbers" without
\-
\-.
including the actual text at issue, as well as cases like Chase and Billig in which the petitions
"omit the text of an incorporated exhibit or any other portion of the proposed enactment." Id. at
390. The Court held that the petition in We Care satisfred the full text requirement because it
"containfed] the full and complete text of everything that will be enacted if the voters approve
it." Id. The Court flatly rejected the argument that the text of the general plan should have been
included, writing:
The petition contains the fulItext of the measure. There is no need to include any
portion of the general plan. Certainly, the passage of We Care's initiative will
affect the general plan. But section 9201 does not require that a petition
include the text of every plan, law or ordinance the measure might affect.
/d (emphasis added). We Care was subsequently followedin Lin, supra, where the court
rejected a challenge to a referendum that would overturn an ordinance approving a proposed
development, although the development plan was not included in the petition. 176 Cal. App. 4th
at 415. The court in Lin held that inclusion of the development plan was not required by the full
text requirement where the development plan had not been made part of the ordinance, noting
that $ 9238(bX2) "requires the 'text' of the ordinance being challenged, not the inclusion of
additional information a conscientious voter might want to know before signing the petition." 1d.
at 417.
Here, the text of the proposed Burlingame Community Protection Ordinance is set out in
full in the petition. Section 20.04.180 clearly spells out the effect of the proposed ordinance on
other laws, stating that if adopted it will "supersede and invalidate any limitations imposed by
prior City ordinances that relate to or concern the subject matter addressed herein," including,
specifically, Burlingame City Ordinance 1356, or "Measure T." Section 20.04.180 is
fundamentally the same clariffing provision commonly found in initiative measures which
simply reconciles conflicts with existing laws (whether it be by superseding, invalidating,
repealing, etc). The reference to Measure T does not require the inclusion of its text any more
than the reference to the general plan in We Care necessitated the inclusion of the general plan
text, or any more than the reference to the development plan in Lin required the inclusion of that
plan in the referendum initiative. See 139 Cal. App. 4th at390;176 Cal. App. 4th at 417.
In addition to Mervyn's, which is inapplicable for the reasons discussed above, the
California Apartment Association letter relies heavily on two other inapposite cases addressing
referendum petitions: Billig, supra, and Creighton, supro. Not only were the omissions in those
cases much more significant than the alleged omission here,l both cases reflect the distinct nature
of a referendum petition, which seeks to overflrrn a specified ordinance, and do not provide
I In Billig,the referendum petition contained only the summary of the challenged
ordinance and select quotes referring to exhibits that, though part of the ordinance, were omitted
from the petition. 223 Cal. App. 3d at 964. ln Creighton, the referendum petition lvas rejected
because it only indicated the challenged ordinance by reference-and did not reproduce any,
much less all, of the ordinance's text. 171 Cal. App. 3dat 1228.
J
\-
useful insight regarding an initiative measure proposing new substantive law, like the one at
issue here.
As with $ 9201, the parallel provision governing referendum petitions has been
interpreted to impose a full text requirement. Cal. Elec. Code $ 9238. Although the fulltext
requirements of $ 9201 and $ 9238 are similar, they derive from distinct statutes and courts
applying the requirements have appropriately accounted for the distinct needs of referenda and
initiatives. Election Code $ 9238 requires that a referendun petition include the text of "the
ordinance or the portion of the ordinance that is the subject" of the repealing measure. Courts
have accordingly held that referendum petitions "must contain the exact wording of the
challenged measure," i.e.,the ordinance or law that they seek to repeal. Billig, sltprct,223 Cal.
App. 3d at967; accord Creighton, sltpra,lTl Cal. App. 3d at 1230; see also Defend Bayview
Hunters Point Com. v. City and County of San Francisco, 167 Cal. App. 4th 846,857 (2008).
Election Code $ 9201, governing initiative petitions, states that a petition must contain "the text
of the measure." Courts have interpreted the $ 9201 "text" requirement to mean, quite plainly,
that initiative petitions must include "only the text of the measure proposed to be enacted." We
Care, 139 Cal. App. 4th at 391; see also Creighton, 17l Cal. App. 3d at l23l .
The purpose of the fulItext requirement for referenda is to "apprise prospective voters of
the substantive provisions" of the challenged ordinance, similar to the related requirement for
initiative measures. Creighton,lTl Cal, App. 3d at 1233. However, given the distinct natures of
referenda and initiatives, courts have reasonably concluded that what is necessary and sufficient
to fulfiII that purpose is different with respect to referendum petitions and initiative petitions:
Because referenda seek to revoke laws recently passed by the city council, courts interpreting $
9238 have demanded that referendum petitions include the full text of the law, including exhibits
or other documents incorporated into the law, so that voters have before them in full the law that
is being challenged. Lin v. City of Pleosanton (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 408, 419; see also
Creighton, sltpro, l7l Cal. App. 3d at 1231 . Because initiatives propose new provrsions and
policies, courts interpreting $ 9201 have concluded that what is needed to sufficiently inform and
not mislead voters is only the text of what would be positively enacted by the measure . lVe Care,
supra,139 Cal. App. 4th at39l; see also Myers v. Stringham 195 Cal. 672,675 (1925); Mervyns,
supra,69 Cal. App 4th at 99.
The Burlingame Community Protection Ordinance petition sets out in full the text of the
ordinance that is proposed to be adopted, fully satisfuing both the letter and the purpose of
Elections Code $ 9201.
2. Even if the Omission of Measure T's Text Did Constitute a Technical Defect, the
Initiative Petition Nonetheless Substantially Complies lvith the Full Text
Requirement.
If the certification of the petition were challenged in a writ of mandate, the court would
apply a "substantial compliance" standard in determining its validity. Even if the failure to
I
4
\-
\-
include the text of Measure T did constitute a technical statutory defect, which it does not, the
court would nonetheless find the petition valid because it unquestionably is in substantial
compliance with the ful1text requirement.
Here, there is no suggestion that the thorough and detailed text of the proposed
Burlingame Community Protection Ordinance as set out on the petition is somehow misleading
as to what it is attempting to accomplish. Nor is the fundamental purpose of $ 9201, i.e.,to
provide "sufficient information so that registered voters can intelligently evaluate whether to sign
the initiative petition," frustrated by the petition. See Mervyn 's, 69 Cal. App. 4th at 99. The
initiative text sets out in detail the protections it would create for tenants with regard to rent
increases, evictions, and the opportunity to petition for relief before a duly constituted Rental
Housing Commission. This text enabled voters to "intelligently evaluate" whether to sign the
petition in favor of enacting those provisions. See id. Not only is the text of the proposed
ordinance sufficiently clear, the City Attorney's summary included additional language
describing the content of Measure T that lays to rest any residual concern about the adequacy of
the information available to voters who were presented with the petition. In light of this
information, the legal sufficiency of the initiative petition would undoubtedly be affirmed by a
court.2
' Co.rrts have upheld initiative petitions even in the face of substantive differences between
the text of the proposed initiative and the language of the petition or ballot. Costa, 37 Cal.4th at
1022 (finding substantial compliance despite substantive differences between the initiative
language submitted to the Attorney General for the title and summary and the language printed
on the initiative petition); Deukmejian, 30 Cal. 3d at 653 (finding substantial compliance with a
full text requirement in referenda challenges to reapportionment statutes despite typographical
errors in listed census tracts); MHC Fin. Ltd. P'ship Two v. City of Santee 125 Cal. App. 4th
1372 (2005) (finding substantial compliance although the text circulated on the petition differed
from the initiative text submitted to the City Attorney because the title and summary prepared by
the City Attorney "adequately reflected" the substance of the initiative text that was circulated on
the petition.) Here, where there is no allegation of incorrect information or the omission of a
material aspect of the proposed enactment, there should be no doubt that the petition
substantially complies with $ 9201.
5
\-.
As the California Supreme Court has repeatedly instructed, "'technical deficiencies in
referendum and initiative petitions will not invalidate the petitions if they are in 'substantial
compliance' with statutory and constitutional requirements."' Costa v. Superior Court,37 Cal.
4th986,1017 (2006) (quoting Assemblyv. Deukrnejian,30 Cal.3d 638,652-53 (1982) (applying
substantial compliance test in a case where the text of a state ballot initiative petition varied from
the proposed text submitted to the Attorney General for a title and summary)). Under that test, a
statutory defect will not invalidate an initiative or referendum petition if it does not "mislead the
public or otherwise undermine the fundamental purposes underlying the relevant constitutional
and statutory provisions." Id. at 1022.
***
For the reasons stated above, we respectfully disagree with the California Apartment
Association's letter and its argument that you should refrain from certiffing the Burlingame
Community Protection Ordinance. To the contrary, the initiative petition fully complies with the
"full text" requirement of the Elections Code, as it includes the entire text of the measure and
contains everything that will be enacted if passed. "Section 9201 does not require an initiative
petition to contain all the information an informed voter would want. It requires only the text of
the measure proposed to be enacted." We Care, supra, 139 Cal.App.4th 387,391(emphasis
added). Therefore, we request that you certif,z the petition. If you decline to do so, we may seek
a remedy in court.
Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this matter. Thank you for your
consideration.
Sincerely,
1
Daniel Saver
Housing Attorney
Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto
Cc: Kathleen Kane, City Attorney
Anne Bellows
Attorney & Equal Justice Works Fellow
Public Advocates,Inc.
6
1
STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 10a
\-,MEETING DATE: August 1,2016
To:Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: August 1,2016
From: Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk - (650) 558'7203
Subject:Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Certification of the Gity Clerk as to
the Sufficiency of the lnitiative Petition Entitled "An Ordinance to Enact
Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for Eviction and Repeal Prior
Restrictions on the Regulation of Sale or Rental Price of Real Estate"
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of a resolution accepting the certification of the City Clerk as to the
sufficiency of the initiative petition entitled "An Ordinance to enact rent stabilization and just cause
for eviction and repeal prior restrictions on the regulation of sale or rental price of real estate."
BACKGROUND
On tvlarch 31, 2016, proponents Cynthia Cornell and Adela Meadows submitted a Notice of lntent
to the Burlingame City Clerk's office to circulate an initiative petition. They informed the City
Clerk that their intention was to place a measure on the November 8,2016 Presidential Election
ballot. The City Clerk informed the proponents that pursuant to Elections Code Section 9214,
their petition would need to be signed by at least fifteen percent of the registered voters in the
City.
After receiving the Notice of lntent, City Clerk Hassel-Shearer transmitted a copy of the proposed
measure to City Attorney Kane requesting that she draft a Ballot Title and Summary for the
proposed measure.
On April 14,2016, City Clerk Hassel-Shearer sent the Ballot Title and Summary of the proposed
measure to the proponents to include in their petition. The Ballot Title for the initiative petition is:
"An Ordinance to enact rent stabilization and just cause for eviction and repeal prior restrictions
on the regulation of sale or rental price of real estate."
On April 21,2016, the proponents published their Notice of lntent, Ballot Title and Summary in
the local newspaper. Pursuant to Elections Code Section 9207, after publishing in the
newspaper, the proponents could then begin circulating their petition. The proponents have 180
days from the date the City Attorney delivers the Ballot Title and Summary to circulate their
petition. Once the petition is submitted to the City Clerk, the proponents cannot continue to
circulate their petition or deliver additional sections of the petition to the City Clerk.
\-
\-,
1
Certification of lnitiative Petition August 1', 2016
Therefore, if the lnitiative Petition is filed within 180 days of the receipt of the Ballot Title and
Summary, and it is determined pursuant to Elections Code Section 9214 that the petition is
signed by at least fifteen percent of the registered voters in the City, the City Clerk is required to
certify the results to the City Council at its next regular meeting.
DISCUSSION
On July 5, 2016, the proponents filed the petition consisting of approximately 408 sections and
containing a raw count of 3,508 signatures with the City Clerk. The City Clerk reviewed the
petition and certified the raw count. On July 6,2016, the petition was submitted to the San lt/ateo
County Elections Office in order to conduct a full verification of the petition pursuant to Elections
Code Section 9211 . ln setting up the petition for review, the County Elections Office adjusted the
raw count of signatures to 3,525. No additional sections were submitted. While the City Clerk
excluded signatures that did not include addresses, the County included those signatures in the
raw count.
Based on the San lt/ateo County Elections Report of Registration filed at the time the proponents
published their notice, Burlingame has 15,544 registered voters; therefore, any initiative petition
requires at least 2,332 (or 15o/o) valid signatures to qualify for the November 8,2016 Presidential
General Election.
On July 21, 2016 the County Elections Office notified the City Clerk that based on its review of
the petition, the petition contained 2,375 valid signatures, or 15.28o/o. The numberexceeds 15%
of the registered voters of the City, therefore deeming the petition sufficient.
FISCAL IMPACT
According to the San Mateo County Elections Office, the estimated cost of placing a measure on
the November 8,2016 General election ballot is approximately $55,000. Funds were not
included for this purpose in the FY 2016-17 Budget.
Exhibits
. Resolution
. Notice of lntent
o Ballot Title and Summary
. Letter from San Mateo County Elections
r Certificate of Sufficiency
a
2
RESOLUTTON NO._
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
ACCEPTING THE CERTIFICATION OF THE CITY CLERK AS TO THE SUFFICIENCY
OF THE INITIATIVE PETITION ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE TO ENACT
STABILIZATION AND JUST CAUSE FOR EVICTION AND REPEAL PRIOR
RESTRICTIONS ON THE REGULATION OF SALE OR RENTAL PRICE OF REAL
ESTATE"
WHEREAS, on l/arch 31 , 2016, proponents of an initiative measure entitled "the
Burlingame Community Protection Ordinance" ("lnitiative") submitted a Notice of lntent and
written text of the measure and requested that a Ballot Title and Summary be prepared for the
measure in order to circulate the petition; and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney prepared and provided an official Ballot Title and
Summary for the proposed lnitiative for use by the proponents for publication and circulation of
the petition; and
WHEREAS, the petition regarding the lnitiative was filed with the City Clerk on July 5,
2016, and was submitted to San Mateo County Elections Office on July 6,2016 for signature
verification; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code Section 9214, proponents were required to
obtain signatures in the amount of fifteen percent (15%) of the number of registered voters in
the City; and
WHEREAS, based on the last Report of Registration for the County of San h,4ateo, the
City of Burlingame has 15,544 registered voters and therefore proponents would need to obtain
at least 2,332 valid signatures to meet the 15% requirement; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk conducted a prima facie review of the petition as to form and
found it complies with the provisions of the Elections Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk conducted a raw count certifying that the petition contained
408 sections and 3,508 unverified signatures, later changed to 3,525 by the San lvlateo County
Elections Office; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk submitted the petition to the San Mateo County Elections
Office requesting a full verification of the signatures be conducted; and
WHEREAS, the San lvlateo County Elections Office found that there were 2,375 valid
signatures, equating lo 15.28% of Burlingame's registered voters; and
WHEREAS, the certified results of the signature verification are attached to the
Resolution as Exhibit A.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE lT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Burlingame
hereby accepts the City Clerk's Certificate of Sufficiency regarding the initiative petition.
[\4ayor
l, MEAGHAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held
on the 1stdayofAuqust,2016, and was adopted thereafter bythefollowing vote:
AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILfuIEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
ABSENT:
City Clerk
\-"
\-,
EXHIB]T A
CITY GLERK'S CERTIFIGATE OF SUFFICIENCY REGARDING INITIATIVE PETITION
l, fi/eaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of Burlingame, County of San [/ateo, State of
California, hereby certify the following:
1. On July 5,2016, proponents Cynthia Cornell and Adela lt/eadows filed their
lnitiative Petition entitled: "An Ordinance to enact rent stabilization and just
cause for eviction and repeal prior restrictions on the regulation of sale or
rental price of real estate" with the City Clerk.
2. The last San Mateo County Report of Registration at the time the proponents
published their Notice, stated that the City of Burlingame has 15,544
registered voters.
3. Therefore, pursuant to Elections Code Section 9214, the proponents must
collect 2,332 valid signatures (15% of the registered voters of the City of
Burlingame)to place their lnitiative on the ballot.
4. The proponents' petition consisted of approximately 408 sections
5. Each section contains signatures purporting to be the signatures of qualified
electors of the City of Burlingame.
6. The raw count of the petition contains 3,525 unverified signatures.
7. I have examined, or caused to be examined a full check of the signatures on
the petition pursuant to Elections Code Sections 9211 and 9114.
B. Based on this examination, I have determined and it is hereby acknowledged
that the petition contains 2,375 valid signatures of registered voters in the City
of Burlingame.
9. The 2,375 valid signatures is greater than the requirement of 1 5%
10. The petition is found to be sufficient and is submitted to the City Council at
their next regularly scheduled meeting to take action pursuant to Elections
Code Section 9214.
ln witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal this 22nd
day of July, 2016.
lsl
lt/leag han Hassel-Shearer
City Clerk
\-,
R.ECEIVED
March 30, 2016
MAR 3 I 2016
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer. Cit1, Clerk
City of Burlingante
501 Primrose Road
Bullingarne, CA 940I0
Y
Rc: Rcquest for l'reparntiorr of Ballot Title and Sunrmary of Proposecl Initiative
Dear Ms. Hassel-Shearer.
Enclosed please firrcl a Notice of lntent to Cilculate an Initiative entitled the "Burlingame
Community Protection Ordinance," the text of the proposed initiative, proponents' certifications
required by Elections Cocle Section 9608, and a filing fee (if required). Please immediately
transmit a copy of this measure to the City Attomey fbr preparation of a ballot title and
surnmary.
Please direct all questions and correspondence regarding this mattel to me via e-rnail at
cindy@rentersrightsnow.conl or via telephone at (650) $A-2073.
Respectfully,
Cynthia Cornell
1228 Floribunda Ave.. #2
Burlingame, CA 94010
\-
\-
NOTICE OF INTENT TO CIRCULATE PETITION
Notice is hereby given by the persons whose names appear hereon of their intention to
circulate the petition i.vithin the City of Burlingame for the Comrnunity Protection Ordinance.
Respectfully,
^An*Cynthia Cornell
1228 Floribunda Ave., #2
Burlingame, CA 94010 (, o 0': 'M a/aofanu,
CyntHia Cornell Da{e '
5*'n*n '
AdelE$eadows
1422 Bellevue Ave.. #103
Burlingame, CA 94010 8r..**"--*"-7 )a a'u
Adela lVleadows Date
\-
I
I
CERTIFICATION
t.acknorvledge that it is a rrisdemeanor
to kno'uvingly or willtirlly allor.v thetunclerlar.v (Section 18650 of the Elections Code)
signatules on an initiative petition to be used for any purpose other tharr qualification of the
proposecl rrreasure for the ballot. I certify that I will not knowinglv or rvilllully allow the
signatr-rres for tliis initiative to be used for any purpose other than qualification of the measure for
the ballot.
t228 ve. #)
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dated this 30th day of March.2016
1
1
\-
CERTIFICATION
I,A/"/* Srrrrn. M<a.daut acknorvledge that it is a misdemeanor
under state larv (Section 18650 of the Elections Code) to kr.rowingly or r,villfully allorv the
signatures on an initiative petition to be used for any pulpose other than qualihcation of the
proposed nleasure fbr the ballot. I certify that I r,vill not knowingly or willlully allor.v the
signatures folthis initiative to be used for any purpose other than qLralification of the measure for
the ballot.
&-2" Sr.-.-*-"---"- ?44in*/-,?
AdelaQ[eaclows-- ,5 u sanrr e
1422 Bellevue Ave.. #103
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dated this 30th day of March,20l6
I
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGANIE ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS
THE BURLINGAIVIE COMNIUNITY I'ROTECTION ORDINANCE
Title 20, Chapter 20.04
-
20.04.010
20.04.020
20.04.030
20.04.040
20.04.0s0
20.04.060
20.04.070
20.04.080
20.04.090
20.04.100
20.04.110
20.04.120
20.04.130
20.04.140
20.04.150
20.04.160
20.04.170
20.04.r 80
20.04.1 90
20.44.200
Title and Purpose
Findings
Det-rnitions
Exemptions
Additional Homeowner Protections
Just Cause for Eviction Protections
Stabilization of Rents
Rent Increases Pursuant to Annual General Adjustment
Initial Rents for New Tenancies
Rental Housing Commission
Petitions for Individual Rent Adjustment -- Bases
Petitions for Individual Rent Adjustment -- Procedures
Judicial Review
Non-waivability
Remedies
Injunctive and Other Civil Relief
Partial Invalidity
"Measure T" Repealed
Codification
Majority Approval, Effective Date, Execution
20.04.010 TITLE AND PURPOSE
This Ordinance shall be known as the Burlingame Community Protectiotr Ordinance. The
puryose of this Ordinance is to promote neighborhood and comnrunity stability, healtliy housing,
and affordability for renters in the City of Burlingame by controlling excessive rent increases and
arbitrary evictions to the greatest extent allowable under Calitbmia law- while ensuring Landlords
a fair and reasonable retum on their investment. ancl gilaranteeing fair protections for renters,
homeolvners, and businesses. As such, it is the purpose of this Ordinance to repeal Municipal
Ordinance 1356, also known as "Measure T," which otherr.vise limits the City's ability to provide
nreaningtirl lllotections for its residents.
2O.O4.O2O FINDINGS
The People of Burlingame find and declale as fbllorvs
(a) There is a shoftage of decent, sat-e. aftbrdable, ancl sanitary housing in the City of
Bmlingame ("the City").
a
I
\-
\-.
(b) Larv abiding tenants have to lvorry constantly abor.rt losing their homes tluough no
lault of their own. Common-sense protections against unreasonable rent increases and arbitrary
evictions are needed in the City to protect long-time resiclents from forced displacement.
(c) Burlingarne is one of the rnost expensive conrrnunities in whicli 1o live in the San
Francisco Bay Area, with median home values over $1.8 million according to Zilloiv research.
According to several measures such as Zillow and Trurlia, the niedian rental prices for market rate
rentals in the City sulpass $4,500 per month.
(d) According to the University of Califbmia, Berkeley's 201 5 Urban Displacement
Ploject, the entire City of Burlingarne is either at-r'isk oldisplacernent or has ah'eacly experienced
si gniticant displacement.
(e) More than half of Burlingame residents are renters. According to HUDIs
Conrprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS, 2008-201 2), 47yo of Burlingame tenant
households are "overpaying households," meaning tl're household pays 30% or more of its income
on housing costs. Many of these tenants are paying more than 50% of their income fbr rent.
(0 According to San Mateo County Department of Housing statistics, the average rent
in San Ivlateo County for a 2-bedroom apaftment has increased more than 50% over the last four
years alone.
(g) The problem of rent increases has reached a crisis level, r,vith examples of rents
rising at rates more than ten times that of inflatiorr or avemge wage gro,,vth.
(h) City residents have reported that there have been excessive rent increases and a
substantial inuease in the nurnber of evictions without cause. Residents have reported these trends
to the City Council at City Council meetings, as well as to the press.
(i) Renters are being displaced as a result of evictions or their inability to pay excessive
rent increases. These residents must relocate, but as a result of the housing shortage are unable to
find decent, safe, and healthy housing at affordable rent levels. Aware of the ditficulty in finding
decent housing, some rentefs attempt to pay requested rent increases, but as a consequence must
expend less on other necessities of life, such as food, transit, and healthcare. Tliis situation has a
detrimental etl'ect on substantialnunbers of renters in the City and is a tlueat to the public health,
saf'ety, and lvelfare. The situation creates a patticlllar hardship lor senior citizens. persous on fixed
incomes, families with childrert, and other vuluerable tenants.
0) No-fault evictions are forcing renlers. including thc elderly ar-rd disablecl. Iiom their
hontes. The City is experiencing a troublirrg increase in the nunrber of lancllorcls rvho evict etitire
buildings full of tenants based on no-cause temrination notices. Evictions have been shorvn to
cause serious stress, wl-rich can enclanger the health and rvellhre of those alfccted.
(k) Landlords lvho evict or price olrt'l'euants impose adverse impacts on the displaced
'lenants, including numel'oLls financial costs. These costs inclucle but are not limited to: packing
costs. uroving costs,lost wages due to taking tirne oll rvork to search fol alternative housing, the
cost of applying to alternative housing. change oladdress expenses, hotel costs or other temporary
hoLrsing expenses requirecluntilsuitable long-temr alternative housing is obtained, and the cost of a
nerv security deposit. Aclditionally, nearly all reutal housin-q requires that prospective tenants pay
three rnonths' rent up front in orcler to secure a lease - genetally representin-u the first rnontlt's reut.
last rnonth's rent, and security deposit. f'he total accumulated cost iurposecl on a displacecl
2
\-,
household generally exceeds $ 1 0,000 and frequentl,v can reach $20.000 or greater. Tenants r.vho
are seniors. disabled, or have children incur even higher costs due to their particular circumstances.
Lor.v- and nioderate-incon'le tenants cannot afford such sudden and costly expenses. and they often
experience homelessness as a direct consequence of eviction, which itself irnposes further
financial, social, and emotional costs. The severe impacts of displacernent on renters pose a threat
to the public health, safety, and welfare.
0) Evictiori or other displacement imposes an especially high burden on school-aged
children arrd their families, including increased abserrce fi'orn school and other educational
disruption that can have long-lasting effects.
0n) Escalating housing costs and the displacement of current residents has had a
detrimental impact on small businesses in the City of Burlingame. Srnall businesses have
stmggled to recruit and retain employees, and some busirresses have experienced unusually high
turnover rates among their staff as workers are displaced by massive retrt increases and evictions.
Such businesses incur increased costs due to the need to fiequently recruit and train new
employees for the sarne position. Moreover, as customers of some local businesses spend a gieater
portion of their income on rent, they sperrd less on non-essential goods and services, driving down
sales and harming the City's economic vitality and business diversity.
(n) On July 13,2015, the City Council of Burlingame convened a Special Session, at
which it considered several proposals for renter relief, iricluding just cause for eviction protections
as well as other policies to potentihlly address escalating rents. The Special Session drelv
substantial attendance and participation from the public. including renters and members of the real
estate industry.
(o) Burlingame Municipal Ordinance 1356, passed in 1987 and also known as
"Measure T," prevents the City from adequately protecting the community from exorbitant rent
increases.
(p) The City of Burlingame does not restrict rent increases or the grounds for eviction
Residents have been unfailly evicted or priced oLrt so that Landlords can take advantage of the
City's housing shorlage and raise rents excessively.
(q) It is reasonably foreseeable that the filing ol'this Chapter as a proposed ballot
initiative r,vill furllier impact the rental housing market in the City of Burlingarrle, as Landlords
may drarnaticaily increase rents in anticipation of the irrplementation of tbis Chapter.
(r) Given the increased housing cost burclen and high risk of eviction, the public healtli,
safety, and rveltbre of Burlingame residents are threatened. Residents. inclLrcling seniors aud
people on fixecl incomes, are often faced rvith a choice betr.r,een paying rent ot' buying necessary
food and rnedical care for themselves and their fhmilies.
(s) In light of the numerous concems nertecl herein- including, but not limited to, the
clureltt and irnmediate tlileat to the lrealth, safety, and rvelfare of the City's residents and the
aclverse impacts that lesult from a substantial decrease of housing affordability within the City, the
People of Burlingame detemrine that it is in the iutelest of irnmediately preserving the public
health, safety. and general rvelfhre to adopt this Ordinance in order to put into place, among other
things. regulations to plorxote affordable lrousing rvithin the City. just calrse lbr eviction policies.
and rent stabilization.
_l
\.,
\-,
20.04.030 DEFINITIONS
Unless further deflned elsewhere in this Chapter. the tbllorving r.vords or phrases as used in
this Ordinance shall have the following meanings:
(a) Annual General Adiustment. The Annual General Adjustment is the percenta-ee
by which the Rent for existing tenancies in Covered Rental Units nray be increased each year,
subject to the limitations of this Chapter.
(b) Base Rent. The Base Rent is the reference point from whicli the lawful Rent shall
be determined and adjusted in accordance with this Chapter.
(l) Tenancies commencing on or before iVlarch 30, 2016. The Base Rent for'
tenancies that commenced on or beflore March 30, 2016 shall be t]re Rent in etTect
on March 30,2016.
(2) Tenancies commencing after IVIarch 30,2016. The Base Rent for
tenancies that commenced after March 30,2016 shall be the initialrental rate
charged r.rpon initial occupancy, provided that amount is not a violation of this
Chaptel or any provision of state law. The term "initial rental rate" means only the
amount of Rent actr.rally paid by the Tenant for the initial term of the tenancy.
(c) Commission. The term "Colnmission" refers to the Burlingame Rental Housing
Commission established by this Chapter.
(d) Covered Rental Units. AII Rental Units not specilically exernpted by this Chapter
(e) CiW Council. The terrn "City Council" refers to the City Council of the City of
Burlingame,
(0 Disabled. The term "Disabled" as defined in Government Code Section 12955.3
(g) Flearins Officer. An ofticial appointed by the Cornmission to conduct an
investigation or administrative hearin-{ pursnant to this Chapter.
(h) Housing Services. Housing Services include, but are not lirnited to: repairs,
maintenance, painting, providing Iiglit, hot and cold water, elevator service, windor,v shades and
screells, storage, kitcl'ren, bath and laundry facilities and privileges. janitor sen,ices, Utility Charges
that are paid by the Larrdlord, refuse removal, furnishirigs, telephone, parking, the right to have a
specitied number of occupants, ancl any otlier benellt. privilege. or facility comected with the use
ol occupancy of any Rental Unit. Hor-rsing Services to a Rental Unit shall include a proporlionate
part ol'services provided to cornmon tacilities of the building in which the Rental Unit is
contained.
(i) Indiviclual Rent Acliustnrent. An adjLrstment to the otherwise lawfirl Rent
authorized by a Flearing Officer or the Cornmission pursuant to this Chapter.
0) Landlortl. An orvner. lessor, sublessor. or ally other person entitled to receive Rent
lbr tlre use and occupancy of any Reutal Unit. or an agent. representative- predecessol', or successor
of any of the foregoing.
(k) Petition. A petition tbr lndividual Rent Adjuslrnent pLrrsuant to this Chapter
4
\-,
(t)Primary llesidence. 'flre occ upant's usual place olreturn. To classify a unit as an
occupant's Primary Residence does not require that the occupant be physically present in the unit
at alltimes or continuously, but does require that the unit be the occupant's usual place of return.
Factors that are indicative of Prirnary Residence include but are not limited to:
(1) The occupant can'ies on basic living activities at the subject premises for
extended periods;
(2) The subject premises are listed rvith public agencies, including but not
Iimited to federal. state, and local taxing authorities, as the occupant's primary
residence;
(3) Utility Charges and otlier charges and fees associated r,vith usage of the
structure are billed to and paid by the occuirant at the subject plernises;
(4) The occupant does not file for a homeolvnel''s tax exemption for any
different property;
(5) The occupant is not registered to vote at any other location; and
(6) Ownership is held in llie name of the occupant clairning Prirnary Residence
and not held by a Limited Liability Corporation or other corporate or business entity
structure.
0n) Prorrerry. All Rental Units on a parcel or lot or contiguotts parcels or contiguous
lots under conxrlon ownership.
(n)Recosnizcd Tenant Orsanizntion.Any group of Tenants residing in Rental Units
in the same building or in diff-erent buildings operated by the same management company: agent or
Landlord, who choose to be so designated. This shall also include any other at-large organization
that represents the interest ofTenants.
(o) Rent. All periodic payments and all nonmonetary consideration including, but not
limited to, the fair rnarket value of goods, labor perfbrnred, or services rendered to or for the
benefit of the Landlord under a RentalFlousin-u Agreement concerning the use or occltpancy of a
Rental Unit and premises and attendant Flousing Services, including all payrnent and consideration
demanded or paid for parking, Utility Charges. pets. furniture, and/or sublettirrg.
(p)ntal Hotrsing Agreement, An agreement, oral, r,vritten, or inrplied, betlveen alle
Landlord and Tenant for use ol occlrpancy of a Rental Unit and for Housing Services
(q)Rental Housing F-ce. The t'ee clescribed in Sectiorr 20.04.1 00(i) herein
(r) Re ntal Unit. Any builclin-{r. strlrcture. or parl thereof. or lancl appurtenant thereto,
or any other rental property rentecl or oI't'eled tbr rent fbr resiclential pLuposes, togetl'ler rvith all
Iiousing Services connected rvith use ol occupancy of sr"rch propefiy, such as colnlrloll areas atrd
recreational facilities held out lbr use by the'l-etrant.
(s)Sinslc-Fa ly Homc. A detachecl btrildi
unit sepalately alienable fi'ont any other dvi'elling unit.
)
rug contaiuing a single residential dr,r,elling
I
\-,
(t) Tenant. A Tenant, subtenant, lessee. sublessee. or any other person entitled under
the temrs of a Rental Housing r\greement or this Chapter to the use or occLrpancy of any Rental
Unit.
(u)Utilitv Charges. An y charges for gas, electricity, rvater, garbage, sewer.
telephone, cable, intemet, or other service relating to the use and occupancy of a Rental Unit.
(v)Written Noticc to Cease. A written notice provided by a Landlord that gives a
Tenant an opportunity to cure arr alleged violation or problem prior to service of a notice to
terminate tenancy. Any Written Notice to Cease mlrst:
(t) Provide the Tenant a reasonable period to cure the alleged violation or
problem:
(2) Infonn the Tenant that failure to cure may result in the initiation of eviction
proceedings;
(3) Infonn the fenant of the right to request a reasonable accornmodation;
(4) Infonl the Tenant of the contact number tbr the Commission; arrd
(5) lnclude sufficient details about the conduct turderlying the Written Notice to
Cease that allow a reasonable person to comply.
20.04.040 EXEMPTIONS
(a) Fully Exemrrt (Exemnt frorn Both Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for
Eviction). The following Rental Units are exenlpt from all provisions of this Chapter:
(1) Units in hotels, motels, inns, tourist homes, and rooming and boarding
houses r.vhich are rented primarilv to transient guests tbr a period of fewer than
foufieen (14) days;
(2) Rental Urrits in any hospital, convent, morlastely, extended medical care
facility, asylum, non-prolit home for the aged, or dornritory owned and operated by
an acct'edited institution of higlier education;
(3) Rental Units rvhiclr a govenxnent unit, agency or authority owns, operates,
manages, or in rvhich governnlentally subsidized Tenants reside, only if applicable
fedeLal or state larv ol aclministrative regulation specifically exempt such units ll'om
municipal lent regulations; and
(4) Rental Units aclditionally exempted pursuant to Section 20.04.050 herein.
(b) Partially Erenrrrt (.Iust Cause for Eviction Applies). The following Rental Units
are exempt only from Sections 20.04.070.20.04.080. and 20.04.090 o1'this Chapter (Stabilization
of Rents) ancl Sections 20.04.110 and 20.04.120 (Petitions for Individual Rent r\djustrr-rent):
(l)Sin glc-Fa m i h, FI o rn cs :r n tl Con clorn in i unrs.Single-Farnily l-lorles.
condonriniurns. and other Rental Units specifiecl in Civil Code $ 195a.52(a)(3XA);
and
6
\-
(2)
I 995
Rental Units lvith an initial cerlificate of occupancy dated after February 1,
20.04.050 ADDITIONAL HOVIEOWNER PROTECTIONS
Homeownership is of great impofiance to the residents of the City of Burlingarne. In
addition to the Rental Units exempted in Section 20.02t.040(a) of this Chapter, the lbllowing Rental
Units are also Fully Exernpt from thjs Chapter:
(a)Orvner-Occupied Se ndarv Drvellins Units. A Rental Unit that is permitled ancl
in compliance with Burlingame lr4unicipal Code Chapter 25.59, if the Landlord is anaturalperson
and uses either the secondary dlvelling unit or the larger Single-Family Florne as his or her Prirnary
Residence.
(b) Orvner-Occupiecl Durrlexes. Rental Units in Properlies that have two (2) total
dlvelling units, if the Landlord is a natural persorl rvho occupies one of the units as his or her'
Primary Residence.
20.04.060 JUST CAUSE FOR EVICTION PROTECTIONS
(a) No Landlord shall take action to terminate any terlancy, including but not limited to
making a demand for possession of a Rental Unit, tlu'eatening to terminate a tenancy orally or in
writing, serving any notice to quit or other eviction notice, or bringing any action to recover
possession, or be granted recovery of possession of a Rental Unit unless at least one of the
following conditions exists:
(1)Failure to Pav Rent. The Tenant has fail ed, after three days' wriften notice
as provided by lar.v, to pay the amount stated in the notice, so long as the amount
stated does not exceed the Rent to r.vhich the Landlord is legally entitled under the
Rental Housir-rg Agreement, this Chapter, state, and any other local lar.v.
(2)Breach of Lease. The Tenant has coutinued, after the Landlord has served
the Tenant with Written Notice to Cease, to substantially violate any of the material
tenns of the Rental I-Iousing Agreement, except the obligation to surender
possession on proper notice as required by law, and provided that such terms are
reasonable and legal ancl have been accepted in writing by the Tenant; and provided
fi,uthel that. where such terms have been acceptecl by the Tenant or made part of the
Rental Housin_q Agreenient subsequent to the initial creation of the tenancy, the
Landlorcl shall have flrst notitled the'fenant in writing that he or she need uot
accept such tertls.
(A) Notr,r,ithstanding any contrary provision in this Section, a Landlord
shall uot talie any action to tenninate a tenancy based on a Tenant's sublease
of the Reutal Unit if the lbllou,ing requit'enrents are nret:
(i) The Tenant centinues to reside in the Rental Unit as his, her,
or thcir Prinrary Residerrce:
(ii) The sublessee replaces olte or more departecl Teuatlts ttnder
the Ilental }-lor-rsing Agreetuent on a one-lbr-one basisl and
7
I
\-,
(iii) The Landlord has Lrnreasonably rvithheld the right to sublease
lollolving lvritten request by tlie Tenant. If the Landlord fails to
respond to the Tenant in writing rvithin tburteen (14) days of receipt
of the Tenant's lvritten request, the Tenant's l'equest shall be deemed
approved by the Landlord. A Landlord's reasonable refusal of the
Tenant's written reqLrest may not be based on the proposed
additional occupant's lack of creditr,vorthiness, if that person will not
be legally obli-eated to pay some or all of the Rent to the Landlord.
A Landlord's reasonable refusal of the Tenant's written request may
be based on, but is not limited to, the ground that the total nurnber of
occupants in a Rental Unit exceeds the maximum number of
occLlpants as determined under Section 503(b) of the Unifonn
Housing Code as incorporated by Health & Safety Code Section
17922.
(B) Protections for Families. Notwithstanding any contrary provision
in this Section, a Landlord shall not take any action to terminate a tenancy as
a result of the addition to the Rental Unit of a Tenant's child. parent,
grandchild, grandparent, brother, or sister, or the spouse or domestic partner
(as defirred in Family Code SectionZ9T) of such relatives, or as a result of
the acldition of the spouse or domestic partner of a Tenant, so long as the
number of occupants does not exceed the maximum number of occupants as
determined under Section 503(b) of the Uniform Housing Code as
incorporated by Health & Safety Code I7922. The Commission may
promulgate.regulations that will further protect families and promote
stability for school-aged children.
(3) Nuisance. The Tenant has continued, after the Landlord has served the
Tenant rvith a Written Notice to Cease, to commit or expressly permit a nuisance in
the Rental Urrit.
(4)Criminal Activitv. The Tenant has conti nued, after the Landlord has served
the Tenant with a Written Notice to Cease, to be so disorderly as to destroy the
peace. qlriet, comfort. or sat'ety of the Landlord or other tenants at the Property.
Such clisorderly conduct includes violations of state and federal criminal lalv that
destloy the peace, quiet, comfort, or safety of the Lancllold or other tenants at the
Property.
(s)Failurc to Give Acccss. The Tenant has continued to refllse . after the
Landlord has served the T'enant r.vith a Written Notice to Cease, rvithout good cause.
to grant tlre Lancllord reasonable access to the Rental Unit.as reqr"rired by state or
local larv.
(6)Necessary :rnd Substantial Rennirs Recr ulrtn g Tcm Vacan CV TheDOriIt'\r
Landlold alier having obtained all necessary pelniits fi'om the City, and liaving
proviclecl u,ritten notice to the Tenant pursuant to state lar,v, seeks in goocl faith to
unclertake substantial repairs r.vhich are necessary to bring the Rerrtal Urrit into
compliance rvith applicable codes and laws affecting the health and sal'ety oltenants
of the bLrilding. providecl that:
I
v
\-,
(A) 'l-lie repairs necessitate that the Tenant vacate tlie Rental Unit
because the rvork r.vill render the lental unit uninhabitable fol a period of not
less than thirtli (30) days:
(B) The Landlord gives aclvance notice to the Tenant of the lenant's
right to elect betr.veen:
(i) The right of first refusal to any comparable vacarlt Rental
Unit orvned by the Landlord at the same Rent, if such cornparable
vacant unit exists; or
(ii) The first right of return to reoccupy the unit upon completion
of the repairs at the same Rent charged to the Tenant before the
'fenant telnporarily vacated the Rental Unit.
(iii) In the event that the Tenant elects to accept an ofl'er to move
to a comparzrble vacant Rental Unit at the same Rent, the Tenant is
not eligible for any relocation assistance pursuant to Section
20.04.060(b) herein.
(C) In the event the Landlord files a Petition for Individual Rent
Adjustment rvithin six (6) months following the completion of the work, the
Tenant shall be pafty to such proceeding the same as if he or she were still in
possession, unless the Landlord shall submit r,vith such application a rvritten
r.vaiver by the Terrant of his or her right to reoccupy the premises pulsuant to
this Subsection.
(7) Orvner Move-In. The Landlord seeks, after providing r,witten notice to the
Tenant pursuant to state lalv, to-recover possession of the Rental Unit in good taith
for use and occupancy as a Primary Residence by the Landlord, or the Landlord's
spouse, domestic paftner, children, parents or glandparents.
(A) As used in this Subsection "Landlord" shall only include a Landlord
that is a natulal person and rvho has at least a fifty percent (50%) recorded
or.vnership interest in the Property.
(B) No eviction may take place under this Subsection if the same
Landlorcl or enumerated relative already occupies a unit on the Propefty, or
if a vacancy already exists on the Property. At all times a Larrdlord rnay
request a reasonable acconlnlodation if the Landlord or enumeratecl relative
is Disabled and another unit in Burlingame is necessary to acconlmodate the
person's disability.
(C) Any notice terminating tenancy pursllant to this Subsection shall
contain the nanre, ac'ldress, and relationship to tlie Landlord of the person
iutenclecl to occupy the Rental Unit.
(D) The Lancllorc'l or cnurnerated relative mlrst intencl in good faith to
nrove into the Rental Unit rvithin sixty (60) days after the Tenarit vacates
ancl to occLrpv the [{cntal Unit as a Primary Residence for at least thirty-six
9
\-
\-
(36) consecutive months, The Commission may adopt regulations governing
the detennination of good faith.
(E) If the Landlord or relative specitied on the notice tenrinating
tenancy fails to occupy the Rental Unit within sixty (60) days after the
l-enant vacates. the Landlord shall:
(i) Offer the Rental Unit to the Tenant who vacated it at the
same Rent in effect when the Tenant vacatedl and
(ii) Pay to said Tenant all reasonable expenses incr,rrred in
rnoving to and fi'om the Rental Unit.
(F) A Landlord may not evict a Tenant pursuant to this Subsection if the
Tenant ( I ) has resided in the Rental Unit for at least five (5) years and is
either at least sixty-two (62) years old or Disabled; or (2) is cefiified as
being tenninally ill by the Tenant's treating physician. Notwithstandin_e the
above, a Landlord rnay evict a Tenant who qualifies for the exemption
herein if the Landlord or enumerated relative rvho will occlrpy the Rental
Unit also meets the criteria fol this exemption and no otlier units are
available.
(8) Withdrawal of the Unit Permanently from Rental Market. The Landlord
seeks in good faith to recover possession to withdraw all Rental Units of an entire
Ptoperly from the rental market. The Landlord first must have filed the requisite
docurnents with the Comn'rission initiating the procedurre for withdrawing Rental
U;iits fi'om rent or lease under Government Code Section 7060 et. seq. and all
regulations passed by the Comrnission, with the intention of completing the
rvithdrawal process and going out of the rental business. Tenants shall be entitled to
a minimum of 120-day notice or one (l ) year in the case Tenants are defined as
senior or Disabled under Government Code Section 12955.3. Notice times may be
increased by regulations if state law allows for additionaltime.
(9) Denrolition. The Landlord, having obtainecl all necessary permits from the
City. ancl having provided',vritten notice to the Tenant pursuant to state law, seeks
in good faith to 1'ecover possession of the Rental Unit to remove the Rental Unit
pemranently lrorn rental housing use through demolition.
(b)Relocation Assistancc
(1 ) A Landlord seeking to recover possession under Subsections (aX6)-(9),
herein shall provide relocation assistance to affected Tenant households in an
anloullt equal to three (3) times llie current market rate Rent fbr a sinrilar Rental
Unit in Bulingame. The relocatiorr assistarrce required herein shall be a r:rinimunr
arnrount. 'fhe City Council may increase the dollar amoLlnts of relocation assistance
pursLrzurt to its por,vers under law. The Landlor-d shall notify the aft'ected Tenants of
their riglrts under this Subsection, if any, at the time ol'service of the notice to quit.
(2) The Conrr-r'rission shall issr.re rules and regulations to ell'ectuate this
Sr"rbsection inclr-rding but not limited to rules and legulations setting lbrth an
aclditional an.ror.rnt ol'relocation assistance applicable to particularly vulnerablc'
l0
\-,
Tenarrt households, the ptocedr:res fbr establishing and lacilitating payrnent of the
relocation assistance, and tbr the reasonably timely payment of any applicable
relocation assistauce.
(d)Retalirtion is Barred. Notrvithstand ing the above provisions, rio Landlord sliall
take action to tenlinate any tenaucy ot otherwise recover possession of a Rental Unit in letaliation
tbl the fenant repoflin-e violations of this Chapter, for exercising rights granted under tliis Chapter.
or for fonrring or participating in a Recognized Tenant Organization.
(e) Notice to Specifv Basis for Termination. Any notice purporting to terminate
tenancy on any of the bases specified in this Section must state with specificity the basis on whicli
the Landlord seeks to tenninate the tenancy.
(f)Landlord Comrrliance rvtthjhis ehapler. In an y action brought to recover
possession of a Rental Unit, tlie Landlord shallallege compliance i,vith this Chapter
(g)Filins Termination N otices rvith Commission. The Landlord shall flle r.vitl: the
Commission a copy of any notice tenninating tenancy within three (3) days after serving the notice
on the Tenant.
(h) Failure to comnly. A Landlord's failure to comply with any requirernent of this
Chapter. including without lirnitation the failure to serve any of the required notices on the
Con'rmission pursuant to Subsection (g) herein, is a complete affirmative defense in an unlawfi-rl
detainer or other action bror-rght by the Landlord to recover possession of the Rental Unit.
20.04.070 STABILTZATION OF RENTS
(a)Ilents Stabilized. U pon the effective date of this Chapter, no Landlord shall
charge I{ent in an arnolrnt that exceeds the sum of the Base Rent plus any lawful Rent increases
actLrally inrpler:rented pursuant to this Chapter.
(b) Itcnt lncrcases ILegulated. No Landlord shall increase Rent fbr a Covered Rental
Urtit except as authorized by this Chapter. Rent increases shall be lirnited to those imposed
pursLrant to Section 20.04.080 (Annual GerreralAdjustment) and Section 20.04.110(a) (Petition I'or
UpivarclAdjustnrent-Fair Rate of Return). A Landlord rnay set the initial Rent for a new tenancy
plu'slrant to Section 20.04.090 (lnitial Rents for New Tenancies).
(c) Security Derrosit at Commencement of Tenancy Only. No Landlord shall
increase a security or other deposit originally required fi'om a Tenant as a condition of occupancy
ol'a llerrtal Unit.
20.04.080 RENT INCIIEASIiS PURSUANT TO ANNUAL GENEIIAL ADJUSTN/IIiNT
(a) Annual General Adiustnrent. No latel than .f une 30th each year, the Comntission
shall iturrounce the alnoullt o{'the Anlrual General Adjustmerrt. r,r,hich shall be eff-ective as oJ'
(c) First Right of Return. All Tenants whose tenancy is terminated based upon a
basis enurnerated in Subsections (aX6)-(9) herein shallhave the first right of return to the Rental
Unit it'that Rental Unit is returneclto the market by the Landlorclor successor Landlord. Rerrt fbr
the Rental Unit shall be the Rent lawfully paid by the Tenant at the time the Landlord gave notice
of tennination based upon Subsections (aX6)-(9) herein.
^
\-,
(l ) The Annual General Adjr"rstment shall be equal to one htrndred percent
(100%) of the pelcentage increase in the Consumer Price lndex (All Urban
Consumers, San Flancisco-Oakland-San Jose region, or any successor designation
of that index that rnay later be adopted by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics) as
reported and published by tlie U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics. for the twelve-month period ending as of March of the current year. The
Annual General Adjustrnent shall be rounded to the nearest one-tenth of a percent.
(2) Sr.rbpalaglaph l of this Subsection notwithstanding, in no event shall tl're
Annual General Adjustment be less than one percent (1%) or more than four percent
(4%).
(3) The first Rent increase that a Landlord rnay impose pursuant to this Section
slrall rrot take effect prior to September 1,2017.
(4) A Laridlord rnay only implernent a Rent increase purslrant to an Annual
Ceneral Adjustment within the twelve (12) months irnrnediately after the eff'ective
date of such Annual Geneml Adjustrnent. Any Annual General Adjustment not
implemented within the twelve (12) months immediately tbllor.ving its effective date
is lvaived.
(b)One Rent Increase Per Year. No more than one Rent increase per twelve-month
\-"period may be imposed on a Tenant.
(c) Notice of l{ent Increase Required. Allowable Rent increases purslrant to the
Amual General Adjr,rstrnent shall become effective only after the Landlord provides w'ritten notice
to the Tenant in the manner prescribed by larv, with at least thirty (30) days' advance rvritten
notice.
September l st of that year. The Annual General Adjustment is the percentage by rvhich tl're Rent
fbr existing tenancies in Covered RentalUnits rnay be increased each year, subject to the
limitations of' this Chapter.
(cl)Condi tions Unrle Which R pnf Tncreas e Nnf Permiffed No Rent increase shall
be eftective if the Landlord
(l) Has failed to substantially cornply with allprovisions of this Chapter and all
rules and regulations promulgated by the Commission; or
(2) FIas fhiled to maintain the Rentzrl Unit in compliance with Civil Code
Sections 1941.1 et seq. and Health ancl Safety Code Sections 17920.3 and 17920.10:
o1'
(3) Has failed to urake repairs ordered by a l-Iearing Officer, the Comniission, or
the City.
20.04.090 INITIAL RtrNTS FOR NEW TENANCIES
(a) Settinq of Initial Il,cnts Without Restriction. To the e.\tent pen.nittecl by state
larv. I-ancllords rnay sct the initial Rent fbr nerv Tertants at the nrarket rate.
r
\,
t2
(b)Costa-Harvliins The Costa-l-lawkins Rental llousing Act. Civil Code
ss 1954.50 et seq., permits municipalities to regulate the initial Rent in ceftain lirnited
circumstances. Pursuant to the Costa-Har.vkins Rental I-lousing Act, limitations on the initial Rent
shall apply in any of the follolving circumstances:
( 1) No Fault Termination of Tenancy. The previous Tenant vacated
follorving a notice described in Civil Code $ 195a.53(a)(1);
(2) Rent Increase Not Permitted by this Chapter. The previots'fenant
vacated following a notice of Rent increase not pennitted by this Chapter (see Civil
Code $ 195a.53(aXl));
(3) Failure to Renerv Government Contract. A Landlord that temrinates or
fails to renelv a contract or recorded agreement with a govel'nlrent agency that
provicles for a Rent liniitation to a qr:alitied Tenant shall not be eli-eible to set an
initial Rent for tlrree (3) years tbllowing the date of the tennination or nonlenewal
of the contract or agreen'rent (see Civil Code $ 195a.53(a)(tXa));
(4) Serious Cotle Yiolation. The Rental Unit rvas cited for serious health,
safety, fire, or building code violations at least sixty (60) days prior to the vacancy
and the violations were not abated by the tirne the Rentai Unit was vacated (see
Civil Code $ 19sa.53(0);
(5) Ellis Act Termination of Tenancy. The previous Tenant vacated pursuant
to a notice described in Section 20,04.060(a)(8) of tliis Chapter, but the r,vithdrar,val
of the Property lvas not fully or properly completed under the Ellis Act or any local
implernenting ordinances or regulations; or'
(6) Exchange for Public Subsidy.. The Landlord has agreed to a Rent
restriction in return for a dilect financial contribution (see Civil Code {i
19sa.53(aX2).
(c) ILent Increases_After Setting an Initial Rent. After the Landlord sets an initial
llent pursuant to this Section, the Landlord may only increase the Rent in accordance witli this
Chapter. The Lancllord may not increase Rent based on Annual General Adjustments, cost
increases. capital improvements, or other circumstances that arose before the nelv tenancy began.
20.01.100 RENTAL HOUSING COMMISSION
(a) Conrposition. There shall be in the City of Burlinganle an appointed Rental
I-Ior"rsing Cornnrission cornprised of Burlingarre residents as set tbrlh in this Section. Ttre
Commission shall consist of five (5) Comniission members appointed by the City Council, and an
altemate Comnrission member. fhe alternate Commission member shall be permittecl lo atLend all
Cornntission meetin-us and to speak, but not be authorized to vote unless a regular member of the
Corrrmission is absent at that rneeting or is recused fi'om voting on an agencla item. Thele shall be
no more than two members'uvho own ol'lneurage any rental property ol are realtors or ate
clevelopers. At least three (3) members shall be Tenants. Anyone nominaLed to this Cornmission
nrust be in contpliance rvitlr this Chapter and all other local, state. and fbdelal lalvs regulating the
provision of housing. Aruu-rally. the Commission shall elect one of its members to serve as
chairperson.
l3
-
\-
(b) Eligibilitv ancl Apnointment. Comnrission members shall be appointed by the
City Council at a public rneeting. Applicants for mernbership on the Cornrnission sltall submit an
application to the City Cor-urcil. The application shall include a statement under penalty of perjLrry
of the applicant's interests anclclealings in real property, including but not limited to. o'uvnership,
trusteeship, sale, or filanagement. and investment in and association rvith partnelships,
corporations, joint ventures. and synclicates engaged in olvnelship, sale, or managernent olreal
propelty cluring the three (3) years immediately priol to the applicant's application. This
documentation shall be made available to the public.
(c) Term of Office. Comurission members shall serve terms of fbur (4) years and may
be reappointecl tbr a total of two (2) lull terms. Cornmission member tenns shall be staggered.
Therefbre. initial appointments shall consist of two (2) members with two-year tem1s, an altemate
with a tlvo-year tenn. and three (3) members with four-year tenrs.
(d) Powers and Duties. The Commission shall have the followirlg po\.vers and duties:
(l) Set Rents at fair and equitable levels to achieve the purposes of this Chapter.
Notwithstanding ariy other provision of this C"hapter, the Commission shall have the
authority to adopt regulations authorizing Rent increases and/or adjustrnents
required by state or federal law.
(2) Establish rules aud regulations for administration and enforcement of this
Chapter.
(3) Determine and publicize the Annual Gerieral Adjustrnent pursuant to this
Cliapter.
(4) Adjr"rdicate Petitions pursuant to Sections 20.04.1 l0 and 20.04.120 herein
and issue decisions r,vith orders for appropriate relief pursuant to this Chapter.
(5) Adrninister oaths and affirrnations and subpoena u,itnesses and relevant
documents.
(6) Establish a budget for the reasonable and necessary implen.rentation of the
provisions of this Chapter, including without limitation the hiring of necessary stafl,
and charge fees as set forth herein in an amount sufficient to snpport that budget.
(7) Administer the 'uvithdrawal process for the removal of Rental Units from the
rental housing market pursuant to Section 20.04.060(a)(8) hercin.
(8) I{old pLrblic hearings.
(9) Conduct studies, sllrveys, ir-rvestigations, and hearings. ancl obtain
information to further the purposes of this Chapter.
(10) Report perioclically to the City Council on the statLls of Covered Rental
Units. Reports shall inclucle (a) a sLrmnlary of the numbers of termination ol-
tenancy notices sen,ed pllrsuant to Section 20.04.060, includin_q the bases Lrpon
whichtheylvere servecl. and (b) asunln'Iary of any anclall Petitious subn-ritted to
and/or decided by a Flearing Otliccr and/or the Comniission pulsuant to Sections
\-
\-
t4
20.04.110 and 20.A4.120, inclLrding the bases on which the Petitions were subrnitted
and the deterrninations on the Petitions.
(1 l) Publicize through reasonable and appropriate means the provisions of this
Chapter, including without limitation the rights and responsibilities of Landlords
and Tenants.
(t 2) Establish a schedule of penalties that may be imposed for noncompliance
r,vith this Chapter or with rules and regulations plomulgated under this Chapter.
(13) Pursue civilremedies as provided by this Chapter in courls of appropriate
jr-rrisdiction.
(14) Intervene as an interested party in any litigation brought before a court of
appropriate jurisdiction by a Landlord or Tenant with respect to Covered Rental
Units.
(15) Any other duties necessary to administer ancl enforce this Chapter.
(e) Rules ancl Regulations. The Cornmission shall issue and follow such rr-rles and
regulations as will further the purposes of the Chapter.
(f) Meetings. The Commission shall hold regulally scheduled meetings as necessary
to ensure the performarice of its duties under this Chapter. All regular and special meetings shall
be called and conducted in accordance with state law.
(g) Ouorum. Three (3) members shall constitute a quorum for the Cornmission.
0r) Votins. The affimrative vote of three (3) mernbers of the Commission is required
tbr a decision, including on all motions, regulations, and orders of the Cornmission.
(i) Vacancies. If a vacancy occurs on the Commission, a person qualified to fill such
vacancy shall be appointed by the City Council in accordance with this Chapter.
0) Financing. The Commission shall finance its reasonable and necessary expenses
by charging Landlords an amual Rental I-{ousing Fee as set forth herein, in amounts deemed
reasonable by the Commission in accordance with applicable law. The Commissiou is also
empowerecl to request and receive fliriding r.vhen and if necessary fi'orn any available soltrce lbr its
reasonable and necessary expenses.
(l)Ilcntal Housing Fec. All Landlorcls shall pay a Rental llousing Fee on an
annual basis. Tlie first Cornmission convened aficr the cl'ltctive c'late o1'this
Clhapter shall detennine the amount of the Rental Llousing Fee. The amount of the
Rental Flousing Fee may clifTer between Rental Units strb.ject to the entirety of this
Chapter and those that are Partially Exempt. The Comnrission may adjr"rst the
amount of the Rental Flousing Fee at its discretion to ensLtte firll ftnding of its
reasonable and necessary expenses, in accorclance r.r'ith all applicable Iarv-
(2)Citv to Adv:rnce Initial Fuqds Dirring the initial inrplementation of this
Chapter. the City shall advance all necessary fnnds to ensure the ef-fective
implenrentation of this Chapter, r.rntil the Commission Itas collected Rental Housing
Irees sLrfl'lcient to slrpport the implernentatior-r o1'this Chapter. The City t-uay seek a
l5
1
1
\-
\-
reinrbursement of any advanced fturds ftom the Rental I-lousing Conirnission after
the Rental Housing Fee has been collecled.
(k) Integrity antl Autonomv of Commission. The Commission shall be an integral
parl of the govenlment of the City, but shall exercise its powers and duties under this Chapter
irrdependent frorn the City Council, City Manager, and City Attomey, except by request of the
Comntission. In tlie period between the eff'ective date of this Chapter and the appointment of the
initial rnembers of the Commission, the City shall take r,vhatever steps are necessary to perform the
duties of the Corlrnission and implernent the purposes of this Chapter.
(l) Conforming Regulations. If any portion of this Chapter is declared invalid or
unenforceable by clecision of a court of competent jurisdiction or rendered invalid or unenforceable
by state or federal legislation, tlie Commission and not the City Council shall have authority to
enact replacement regulations consistent rvith the intent and pulpose of the invalidated provision
and applicable law. Such replacementregulations shall supersede invalidated or unenforceable
provisions of this Chapter to the extent necessary to resolve any inconsistency. The subject malter
of such replacement regulations shall be limited to the matters addressed in this Chapter.
0n) Designation of Replacement Commission. In the event the establishment of the
Cornrnission under this Section is adjudged to be invalid for any reason by a court of competent
jurisdiction, the City Council shall designate one or more City departfilents, agencies, committees,
or commissions to perform the duties of the Commission prescribed by this Chapter.
h) Conflict of interest. Commission members shall not necessarily be disqualified
from exercising any of their powers and duties on the grounds of a conflict of interest solely on the
basis of their status as a Landlord, realtor, developer, or Tenant. However, a Commission member
shall be disqualified from ruling on a Petition if the Commission member is either the Landlord of
the Property or a Tenant residing in the Propefiy that is involved in the Petition. The provisions of
the Political Reform Act, Government Code Sections 87100 et seq. shall apply.
20.04.1r0 PETITIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL RENT AD.IUSTMENT--BASES
A Landlord or a Tenant may file a Petition r.vith the Comrnission seekin-e adjustment, either
upward or downward, of the Rent for any given tenancy in accordance with the standards set forth
in tlris Section, and using the procedrues set forth in Section 20.04.120 lrerein and implementing
regulations. A Petition shall be on a form provided by the Commission and, if nrade by the
Landlord, shall include a declaration by the Landlord that the Rental Unit complies r,vith all
requirements of this Chapter.
(a) Petition for Unrvarcl Adiustment-F:rir llate of Return. To el'l'ectuate the
purposes of this Chapter and the requirements ollalv, a Landlorcl rnay file a Peti'tion for an upr.vard
adjustment of the Rent to eusure a fair and reasonable rate of retum. It is the intc'nt olthis Chapter
that individual upr,r,ard adjustrnents in Rent be granted only rvhen the Landlord clemonstrates that
suclracliLrstntentsarenecessarytoprovidetheLandlorclr.r,ithaltirrateoJ'retuur.'l'heCornrnission
shall prornulgate regulations to further govenl Petitions filecl pursuant to this Subsection in
accordance with larv and the purposes o1'this Chapter.
(1) Prerccluisites. No ttpr,vat-cl adjustnrent oj'l{ettt shall be aLrthorized by a
Hearing OJficer or the Comnission under this SLrbsection il'the I-ancllorcl:
\-.
l6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
(A) Flas continued to tail to conrply, after order of the Commission or
other authority. r,vitli any provisions of this Chapter or orders or regulations
issued thereunder: or
(B) LIas failed to maintain the Rental Unit in compliance rvith Civil Code
Sections 1941.1 et seq. and Flealth and Saf'ety Code Sections 17920.3 and
17920.10.
(2)Fair Rate of Return - Factors. In nraki ng any uprvard adjr"rstment to the
Rerit based upon a Lancllord's Petitiorr [o ensllre a tair rate of return, the l{earing
Officer or Commission shall consider relevant fhctors. including but not limited to,
the following:
(A) Increases or decreases in property taxes;
(B) Unavoidable increases or any decreases in maintenance and
operating expenses;
(C) The cost of plzurned or completed capital improvements to the
Rental Unit (as distinguished from ordinary repair, replaeement, and
maintenance) but only where such capital improvements are necessary to
bring the propefty into conipliance or maintain compliance with applicable
local codes affecting health and safety, and where such capital improvement
costs are properly amortized over the litb of the improvements;
(D) Increases or decreases in the number of Tenants occupying the
Rental Unit, living space, furniture. fiunishin-es, equipment, or other
Housing Services provided, or occupancy rules;
(E) Substantial deterioration of tlie Rental Unit other than as a result of
nonnal r,vear and tear:
(F) Failure on the part of the Lancllold to provide adequate Housing
Services, or to comply substantially r.vith applicable state rental housing
larvs, local housing codes, l-realth and sal'ety codes, or the Rental Housing
Agreement; and
(G) The pattem o['recent Rent increases or decreases in the Rental Unit
during the occupancy of the cunent Tenant.
(3)Fair R:rte of lleturn - F:rctors Exclutlcd ln making any upward
adir-rstment to the Rent based upon a Landlord's Petition to ensLlre a tair rate of
retrutl, the Hearing Officer or Commission shall not consider the fbllolving factors
as justifyin-u an uprvard adjustmeut:
(A) Costs of debt servicing (inch-rding but not limitecl to principal,
interest, and fees) for any debt obtained after March 30. 2016;
(B) Any penalties, f'ees, or interest assessed or ai,varcled for violation o1'
tl-ris or any other larv r.vith respect to the Rental Unit:
t7
-
\-
\-.
(C) The costs of capital improvements that are not necessary to bring the
property into compliance or ntaintain compliance with applicable local
codes aff'ecting health and sat-ety;
(D) Cost increases, capital improvernents, Annual General Adjustments,
or other circumstances that arose before the current tenancy began; and
(E) Income taxes.
(4) Effective Date of Inclividual Il.ent Adiustment. Rent increases authorized
pursuant to this Sr.rbsection shall become eft'ective only after the Landlord provides
the Tenant,uvritten notice of such Rent increase pursuant to state law.
(b)Petition for Dorvnrvard Acliustnrent-Failure to Maintain Habitable Premises.
(I) Faihrre to maintain a Rerital Unit in compliance with goveming health and
safety and buildin-e codes, including but not limited to Civil Code Sections 1941.1
et seq. and Health and Safety Code Sections 17920.3 and 17920.10, constitutes an
increase in Rent. A Tenant may file a Petition with the Comrnission to adjust the
Rent doi.vnward based on a loss in rental value attributable to the Landlord's failure
to maintain the Rental Unit in habitable condition.
(2) A Tenant Petition liled pursuant to this Subsectiori rnust specify the
conditions alleged to constitute the failure to maintain tlie Rental Unit in habitable
condition and demonstrate that the Landlord was provided with reasonable notice
and opportunity to corect the conditions that fonn the basis fbr the Petition.
(c)Petition for Dorvnrvard Adiustmen t-I)ecrease in llousins Services or
Maintenance. A decrease in Housing Services or maintenance. or deterioration of the Rentai Unit
beyond ordinary wear and tear, without a conesponding redr.rction in Rent is considered an
increase in Rent. A Terrant may file a Petition to adjust the Rent dorvnward based on a loss in
rental value attributable to a decrease in Housing Services or maintenance or deterioration of the
Rental Unit. The Petition rnust specify the defective conclitions and demonstrate that the Landlord
was provided with reasonable notice and an opportunity to correct in like nlanner to Petitions filed
pnrsLrant to Section 20.04.110(bX2) above.
(d)P etiti on th nrvard Atlirrstntcnt-lln Iarv frrl Renf If a Landlord demands olDorv
retains Rent in excess of the lawfirl Rent pursuant to this Cl-rapter. a Tenant nray file a Petition to
adjust the Rent to its lalvful level.
20,04.120 PETITIONS FOR INDIVIDUALITENTAD.IUSTNIENT--PROCEDURES
The Cornmission shall promulgate regulations regarcling procedures tbr Petitiorrs filed
underthis Chapter. Petitions shall be govelnecl by such regulations ancl by the provisions of this
Section.
(a) Hearing Officer. A l-learing Oflicer appointed by the Comnrission shall conduct a
hearing to act Lrpou thc Pctition and shall have the porver to aclnrinister oaths and aff-rnrations, and
to render a final decision on the merits of the Petition. subject to the provisions of tl:is Chapter.
r
\-,
t8
(b) Notice. The Commission shall notily the Landlord, if the Petition r.vas filed by the
'fenant, or the Tenant, if the Petition was filed by the Lancllord. of the receipt of such a Petition and
provicle a copy thereof.
(c) Time of Hearins. Each party to a Petition shail receive sufficient advance notice of
the bases, theories, and relevant documents to be presented by the other party(ies), and as to the
time, date, and place of any hearing regarding tlre Petition.
(d)Develoning the Record The Hearing Otlicer may require either party to a Petition
to provide any books, records, and papers deenred pertilrent. If the Hearing Officer finds good
cause to believe that an inspection would assist in resolt,ing the issues raised by the Petition, the
Hearing Officer rnay conduct a building inspection and/or request the City to condr.rct a building
inspection. The Terrar,t lnay reqllest the Flearing Oflicer to order such an inspection prior to the
date of the hearing. All documerlts reqllired r.rnder this Subsection shall be rnade available to the
parties involved prior to the hearing
(e) Open Hearinss. All hearings conducted pursuant to this Subsection shall be open
to the public.
(0 Rieht of Assistance. All parties to a hearing conducted pursuant to this Subsection
may have assistance in presenting evidence and developing their position fi'om attorneys, legal
workers, Recognized Tenant Organization representatives, or any other persons designated by said
parties.
(g) Hearins Record. The Commission shallmake available for inspection and
copying any official record that shall constitute tlie exclusive record for decision on the issues at
the hearing. The record ofthe hearing, or any part ofone, shall be obtainable for the reasonable
cost of copying. All hearings shall be audio or video recorded, as ordered by the Hearing Officer,
and any pafiy to the Petition may receive a copy of the recording upon payment of a reasonable
cost.
0, Ouantum of Proof and Notice of Decisiou. No Petition for Individual Rerrt
Adjustrnent, r,vhether upward or downward, shall be granted unless supported by the
preponderance of the evidence subrnitted prior to and at the hearing. All parties to a hearing shall
be sent a notice of the decision and a copy of the findings of fact and law upon lvhich said decision
is based. At the sarne tirne, parlies to the proceeding shall also be notified of their right to appeal
to the Commission and/or to judicial revierv of the decisiorr.
(i)Consolidation. Whether subrnittecl by a Lancllord or Tenant(s), all Petitions
pertaining to Rental Units at the same Property may be consolidatecl fbr hearing upoll a slior,ving of
good cause.
0) Arrrreal. Any person aggrievecl by the decision of the I learing Olllcer may appeal
to the ftrll Commission for revier,v. On appeal. the Comnrission sliall affir'm, revelse, or rr-rodify tlie
clecision ol'the l-learing Officer. 'fhe decision on appeal shall be based ort the liearing record and
the Cournrission shall neitlier hear nor find facts in aclclition to those presentecl to the Flearing
Olflcer.
(k)Finality of Decision. The decision of tlte l'learin g Oflicer shall be the final decision
of the Cornmission. unless an aggrievecl party lias tinrcly sougl-rt an appeal to the Cornmission. The
l9
\-.
decision of the Cornmission on appeal shall be llnal unless an aggrieved party has tirnely sou-eht
judicial review pllrsuant to latv.
(l)Time for Dccision. A ilnal clecision on any Petition shall be made rvithiri a
reasonable time. Decisions decreasing Rent shallrenrain in effect until the Larrdlold has corrected
the defect lvarranting the decrease. The Comrnission shall, by regulation, establish procedures for
making prornpt compliance determinations.
(m)Rieht to Fnir Return Guaranteecl. No provision of this Chapter shall be applied
so as to prohibit the Cor-nmission fi'om granting an Individual Rent Adjustment that is
demonstrated by the Landlord to be necessary to provide the Landlord with a tair rate of retum
20.04.I30 JUDICIAL RtrVIEW
A Landlord or Tenant ag,erieved by any action or decision of the Commission may seek
judicial review pursuant to state lar,v and this Chapter and its irnplementing regulations. No action
or decision by tlie Cornmission shall go into eltect until any statutory time period for such review
has expired.
20.04.140 NON-WAIVABILITY
Any provision of a Rental Housing Agreement, whether oral or written, which pluporls (o
waive any provision of this Chapter established for the benefit of the Tenant, shall be deerned to be
against public policy and shall be void.
20.04.150 REMEDIES
In addition to any other remedies provided by law, Landlords and Tenants covered by this
Chapter shall have the following remedies for violations of this Chapter.
(a) Lantllorcl's Demand for or Rctention of Excessive Rent. When a Landlord
dernands, accepts, receives, or retains any payment or payments in excess of the lawful Rent
pursuant to this Chapter and the regulatiorrs prornulgated hereunder, including in violation of the
provisions ensuring compliance r,vith habitability standards and maintenance of Housing Services,
the Tenant rnay file a Pctition pursuant to Section 20.04.1 l0 or file a civil suit against the
Landlord. A Larrdlord who clemands- accepts. receives, or re(ains any payment of Rent in excess
of the lawful Rent shall be liable to tlie Tenant in the amount by which the payment or payn-rents
have exceedecl tlie larvful Rent. In such a case, the Rent shall be adjustecl to reflect the lawful Rerrt
pru'suant to this Chapter and its implementing regulations.
(t)CivilRemedies. A Tenant ura y bring a civil sLrit in the courts of the state alleging
that a Lancllord has violated any of the provisions of this Chapter or the regulations prornr:lgated
hereuncler, including that the Landlord has demanded. acceptecl, received, or relained a payment or
paymerlts in excess of tlie lalvlul Rent. In a civil suit, a Landlold found to violate this Chapter
shall be liable to the Tenant for all actual damages. includirig but not limited to the dama-e,es
clescribed in Subsection (a) above. A prevailing Tenant in a civil action brought to enfbrce this
Chapter shall be awarded reasonable attorneys' f'ees and costs as detennined by the cou't.
Additionally, upon a shor.r,ing that the Landlord has acted willtully ol with oppression, fi-aucl. or
malice, the Tenant shall be arvarded treble damages. No adrninistrative rerledy need be exhausted
prior to tiling suit plrrsuant to this Subsection.
20
\-
(c)Additional Ilelief for Landlord's Violation of Eviction Rules. If it is sltolvn that
tlre event which tlie Lerndlord claims as grounds to recover possession under 20.04.110(a)(6)-(9) is
not initiated ',vithin tw-o (2) months atter the J'enant vacates the Rental Unit, or it is shown tliat the
Landlold's claim rvas lalse or in bad faith, the Tenant shall be entitled to regain possession of the
Rerrtal Unit at same'Rent that was lawlully in effect r.vhen the Tenant vacated, in addition to the
reliefdescribed in Subsection (b) above.
(d) Defense to Action to Recover Possession. A Landlord's failure to comply r,vith
any of the provisior.rs of this Chapter or regulations prornulgated herennder shall serve as a
cornplete affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer or other action brought by the Landlord to
recover possession of the Rental Unit. Any and all violatiorrs of this Chapter by the Landlord shall
constitute such an aftlrmative det'ense, including but not lirnited to the demand or retention of
payment in excess of the lar,vtul Rent, tailr.rre to sel've any of the notices required pursuant to this
Chapter on the Tenant or the Commission, failure to pay the Rental Flousing Fee, and a decrease in
Housing Services or maintenance without a coresporlding reduction in Rent. It is the intent of this
Chapter to construe this SLrbsection to the broadest extent permissible under the lar,v to ensure
nraximum cornpliance with this Chapter and avoid unlawfurl evictions.
(e)Commission or CiW Attorney Enforcement Action. If the Tenant tbils to bling a
civil or admirristrative actiorr to enforce the Tenant's rights under this Chapter within one hundred
and twenty (120) days after the date of the violation, the Commission or the City Attomey may
br'ing such an action or settle the claim on the Tenant's behalf. If the Commission or City Attorney
brings such an action, the Tenant shall be provided the right to opt in or out of the action, In the
case of an opt-in, the Tenant on',vhose behallthe Comrnission acted is barred from bringing a
separate action against the Landlord in regard to the sarne violation, and the Commission or City
Attomey shall be entitled to recuperate the costs it incuned fiom any monetary recovery fronr the
Landlord, with the remainder to go to the Tenant against r.vhom the violation has been cornn'ritted.
In the case of an opt-out, the Tenant shall retain all rights relating to his or her riglit to private
action. The Commissioti or City Atlorney rnay take other such enforcement action as necessary to
ellsure compliance witli this Chapter.
(0 Remedies Not Exclusive. The remedies available in this Chapter are not exclusive
and may be used cumulatively r.vith any other remedies in this Chapter or othetwise available at
law.
(e)Jurisd iction.The appropriate courl in the jurisdiction in which the Rental Unit is
located sliall have jurisdiction over all actions brought under this Chapter
20.0,1.160 INJUNCTIVE AND OTTIER CIVTL IIELIBF
The Comnrission. Tenants. and Larrdlords rlay seek relief frorn the applopriate court in the
jLrrisdiction wherc the af'fectecl I{ental Unit is located to enforce any provision of tliis Chapter or its
iniplementing regr.rlations or to restrain orenjoirr any violation of this Chapter and of the rules,
regulations, orders, and clecisious of the Commission.
20.04.170 PARTIAI, INVALIDITY
Il any provision of this Chapter or application thereof to any person or circumstances is
held invalicl, this invalidity shall not aI'f-ect otlrel plovisions or applications of this Chapter that can
be given efl'ect r.vithout the invalicl provision or application, aud to this encl the provisions of this
2t
Cltapter are declared to be severable. This Chapter shall be liberally construed to acl-rieve the
purposes of this Chapter and to preserve its validit-v.
\-. 2o.o4.l8o
\-
..MEASUIIE T" REPEALED
This Ordinance shall supersecle arrd invalidate any limitations irnposed by pLior City
ordittances that relate to or concern the subject matter addressed herein. This includes, but is not
linrited to, Burlinganre City Ordinance 1356, also knolvn as'oMeasnre T," which rvas passed by the
voters in I987. It is the intent of the voters of the City of Burlingarne to hereby repeal in its
entirely said Measure T. By repealing and superseding any prior limitations on the City's alltliority
to regulate the subject matter addlessecl herein, the People of the City of Burlingame specifically
intend for the City to retain authority to promote and preserve affordable housing to the maxirnuur
extent permitted by state lar.v. including but not limited to the authority to enact rent stabilization.
just cause for eviction, relocation assistance, inclusionary housing policies, and all other regulatoly
and land use policies that relate to aflordable housing.
20.04.190 CODIFICATION
The City Clerk and the City Attorney shall take all steps necessary to ensure the proper and
efficient codification of this Chapter into the Municipal Code, including makirig revisions to
nurnbering and similar non-substantive iterns contained herein. In exercising this authority, the
City Clerk and City Attorney shall not alter the substantive provisions of this Chapter nor take any
action that contradicts express terms and purpose of this Ordinance.
20.04.200 MAJORTTY APPROVAL, EFFECTM DATE, EXECUTTON
This Ordinance shall be etfective only if approved by a majority of the voters voting
thereon and shall go into efl'ect ten (10) days after the vote is declared by the City Council. The
Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute this Chapter to give evidence of its
adoption by the voters.
\-
al
R.ECEIVEI}
APR 14 2OI$Ballot Title and Summary
Ballot Title;B
An Ordinance to Enact Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for Eviction and Repea
Regulation of Sale or Rental Price of Real Estate
Prior Restrictions on the
Ballot Summary:
The proposed ordinance would enact three changes in law: (1) repeal Measure T; (2) establish rent
stabilization; and (3) enact just cause for eviction provisions.
(1) A prior voter-adopted measure, known as Measure T, prohibits the City of Burlingame from directly
regulating the rental or sale price of real estate units. Under Measure T, the City cannot impose rent
stabilization or below-market-rate housing requirements. The proposed ordinance would repeal
Measure T.
(2) The measure would establish a rent stabilization program. Rent control would apply to multi-family
rental units with initial certificates of occupancy before February 1, 1995. The proposed ordinance
excludes single family homes, condominiums, owner-occupied duplexes or secondary dwelling units,
hotels, motels, hospitals, certain nonprofits, dormitories and certain governmental facilities from rent
control.
The ordinance would establish base rents for each tenancy and limit subsequent rent increases. For
tenancies commencing on or before March 30, 2016, the base rent would be the rent in effect on that
date. For later tenancies, the base rent would be the initial rent charged upon occupation, with narrow
exceptions. Rent increases in an amount equal to the Consumer Price lndex would be limited to one per
year. However,rentincreasescouldnotbelessthanl%normorefhan4%inanyyear'
The proposed ordinance would establish a Rental Housing Commission, which would be charged with
creating implementing regulations. The five-member Commission would be appointed by the City
Council and would oversee rent hearings. No more than two commissioners could be landlords, realtors
or developers. Tenants could petition for rent reductions if landlords provide substandard housing,
decreasehousingservices,orraiserentsinexcessofthoseallowed. Landlordsmaypetitionforrent
increases to ensure a fair rate of return under limited circumstances. lnitial hearings are appealable to
the Commission and thereafter to the courts. The Commission, once appointed by Council, operates
independentlyof itandseniorCitymanagement. TheCommissionwouldsetfeestocoverthecostsof
the rent stabilization Program.
(3) Just cause for eviction restrictions would apply to units subject to rent control, as well as single
family homes, condominiums, and most multi-family rental units regardless of when
constructed. Landlords could terminate a tenancy for failure to pay rent, breach of lease, nuisance,
criminal activity and failure to trant reasonable access. Landlords may evict tenants but must provide
relocation assistance for evictions based on necessary repairs, owner move-in, withdrawal of the unit
from the rental market, and demolition. Relocation assistance would equal at least three months'rent
for a similar unit, and tenants evicted for these reasons would have a first right of return if the unit is re-
rented. Tenants who are disabled, terminally ill, or 62 or older and who have occupied their units for
^\
more than 5 years could not be evicted in order to allow owner move-in, except under limited
circumstances.U
\-
\-,
Mqrk Church 40 Tower Rood
Son Moleo. CA 94402-4035
phone 650.31 2.5222 lox 650.3 I 2.5348
emoll regiskor@smcore.org
web www.shcpethe f uture.org
-
Chlef Elecllons Ofllcer & Assessor-Counly Clerk-Recorder
July 21,2016
Ms. Meaghan Hassel Shearer
50i Primrose Rd
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Ms. Hassel Shearer:
We have completed the review of signatures on the City of Burlingame "AN ORDINANCE TO ENACT
RENT STABILIZATION AND ruST CAUSE FOR EVICTTON AND REPEAL PRIOR RESTzuCTIONS
ON THE REGULATION OF SALE OR RENTAL PRICE OF REAL ESTATE" requested by you on July
76,2016. Of the 3,525 signatures submined, 3,525 were checked and 2,375 signatwes were verified as
valid.
Billing for our services will be sent separately.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to call me at (650) 312-5294,
MARK CHURCH
Chief Elections Officer &
Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder
, Assistant
Clerk Recorder
\-
U
s-l,n
,'l/
It/ea$ha
CITY CLERK'S CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY REGARDING INITIATIVE PETITION
l, il/eaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of Burlingame, County of San lMateo, State of
California, hereby ceftify the following:
1. On July 5,2016, proponents Cynthia Cornell and Adela lV]eadows filed their
lnitiative Petition entitled: "An Ordinance to enact rent stabilization and just
cause for eviction and repeal prior restrictions on the regulation of sale or
rental price of real estate" with the City Clerk.
2. The last San ltlateo County Report of Registration at the time the proponents
published their Notice, stated that the City of Burlingame has 15,544
registered voters.
3. Therefore, pursuant to Elections Code Section 9214, the proponents must
collect 2,332 valid signatures (15% of the registered voters of the City of
Burlingame) to place their lnitiative on the ballot.
4. The proponents' petition consisted of approximately 408 sections
5. Each section contains signatures purporting to be the signatures of qualified
electors of the City of Burlingame.
6. The raw count of the petition contains 3,525 unverified signatures
7. I have examined, or caused to be examined a full check of the signatures on
the petition pursuant to Elections Code Sections 9211 and9114.
8. Based on this examination, I have determined and it is hereby acknowledged
that the petition contains 2,375 valid signatures of registered voters in the City
of Burlingame.
9. The 2,375 valid signatures is greater than the requirement of 15%
10.The petition is found to be sufficient and is submitted to the City Council at
their next regularly scheduled meeting to take action pursuant to Elections
Code Section 9214.
ln witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal this 22nd
day of July, 20
n Hassel\-
City Clerk
earer
r,.
AGENDANO: 10b
MEETING DATE: August 1,2016
To:Honorable Mayor and Gity Counci!
Date: August 1,2016
From: Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk - (650) 558-7203
Subject:Adoption of a Resolution Calling and Giving Notice of a Municipal Election
to be Held on November 8, 2016 as Required by the Provisions of the Laws
of the State of California to General Law Cities and Submitting to the
Voters a Question Relating to an lnitiative Measure; Directing the City
Attorney to Prepare an lmpartial Analysis; Directing the City Attorney and
the City Clerk to Prepare the Documents Necessary to Place the lnitiative
on the Ballot; and Requesting the County of San Mateo to Consolidate a
Municipal Election to be Held with the Presidentia! General Election on
November 8, 2016 Pursuant to Elections Code Section 10403
RECOMME NDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution calling and giving notice of a municipal
election to be held on November 8,2016, as required bythe provisions of the laws of the State of
California to general law cities and for the submission to the voters of a question relating to an
initiative measure; directing the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis; directing the City
Attorney and the City Clerk to prepare the documents necessary to place the initiative on the
ballot; and requesting the County of San Mateo to consolidate a municipal election to be held with
the Presidential General Election on November 8, 2016, pursuant to Elections Code Section
1 0403.
BACKGROUND
On ft/arch 31,2016, proponents Cynthia Cornell and Adela lr/eadows submitted a Notice of lntent
to the Burlingame City Clerk's office to circulate an initiative petition using the title "the
Burlingame Community Protection Ordinance" (later retitled "An ordinance to enact rent
stabilization and just cause for evictlon and repeal prior restrictions on the regulation of sale or
rental price of real estate" through the Ballot Title and Summary prepared by the City Attorney.)
On April 21, 2016, as required, the proponents published their Notice of lntent, Ballot Title and
Summary. Upon publication, the proponents began circulating their petition. Pursuant to
Elections Code Section 9208, the proponents had 180 days from the date of receipt of the Ballot
Title and Summary of the lnitiative Petition to circulate their petition.
On July 5,2016, the proponents filed their petition consisting of approximately 408 sections and
containing 3,525 unverified signatures with the City Clerk. The City Clerk submitted the petition
STAFF REPORT
\-
1
\-,
Resolution Calling for Municipal Election August 1,2016
to the San Mateo County Elections Office and asked that they conduct a full verification of the
petition pursuant to Elections Code Section 921 1 .
After reviewing the petition and verifying the signatures, the County Elections Office notified the
City Clerk that based on its review, the petition contained 2,375 valid signatures, or 15.28% of the
registered voters of Burlingame's signatures.
Accordingly, because the proponents met the requirement pursuant to Elections Code Section
9214 of gathering at least 15% of the registered voters of Burlingame's signatures, the City Clerk
certified the results and presented the certification to the City Council for adoption.
DISCUSSION
After accepting the City Clerk's certification regarding the sufficiency of the initiative petition,
pursuant to Elections Code Section 9214, lhe City Council is now required to take one of the
following three actions:
'I . Adopt the ordinance, without alteration, at the regular meeting at which the
certification of the petition is presented, or within 10 days after it is presented.
2. lmmediately order a special election, to be held pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section
'1405, at which the ordinance, without alteration, shall be submitted to a vote of the
voters of the City.
3. Order a report pursuant to Section 9212 al the regular meeting at which the
certification of the petition is presented.
Ootion 1:
The City Council is unable to adopt the ordinance without alteration. The ordinance proposes to
repeal Ordinance 1 356 (Measure T) which was enacted by a vote of the people. Accordingly, the
initiative must be voted on by the registered voters of Burlingame.
Option 2:
lf the City Council adopts the resolution presented with this report, the measure would be added
to the November 8,2016 Presidential General Election ballot.
ln placing the measure on the November 8, 2016 ballot, pursuant to Elections Code Section 9280
and at the direction of the Council, the City Attorney will prepare an impartial analysis of the
measure showing the effect and operation of the proposed ordinance. The impartial analysis will
be printed preceding the arguments in favor of and against the measure in the voter pamphlet
and shall not exceed 500 words in length. The filing deadline for the impartial analysis is August
29,2016.
ln addition, those interested will have the opportunity to file arguments in favor of and against the
measure. For measures placed on the ballot by petition, the person filing an initiative petition
may file a written argument in favor of the measure, and the city council may submit an
argument against the measure. Section 4 of the resolution authorizes the City Council to
designate any or all of its members to file a written argument against the measure. lf approved,
2
Resolution Calling for Municipal Election August 1,2016
staff recommends that, as part of its action, Council designate the member(s) who will prepare
the written argument. Primary arguments filed in favor of and against the measure are limited to
300 words and are due on August 19,2016.
lf more than one argument for or against the measure is submitted, the City Clerk shall select one
of the arguments using specific criteria as outlined in Elections Code Section 9287 and
Resolution Number 1 5-2016.
The cost to the City of placing this measure on the November 8, 20'16 ballot is approximately
$55,000.
Option 3:
Under Elections Code Section 9212,lhe City Council could request a report from the City on any
or all of the following in relation to the proposed initiative:
1 . lts fiscal impact.
2. lts effect on the internal consistency of the City's general and specific plans, including
the housing element, the consistency between planning and zoning, and the
limitations on City actions under Section 65008 of the Government Code and
Chapters 4.2 (commencing with Section 65913) and 4.3 (commencing with Section
65915) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code.
3. lts effect on the use of land, the impact on the availability and location of housing, and
the ability of the City to meet its regional housing needs.
4. lts impact on funding for infrastructure of all types, including, but not limited to,
transportation, schools, parks, and open space. The report may also discuss whether
the measure would be likely to result in increased infrastructure costs or savings,
including the costs of infrastructure maintenance, to current residents and businesses.
5. Its impact on the community's ability to attract and retain business and employment.
6. lts impact on the uses of vacant parcels of land.
7. lts impact on agricultural lands, open space, traffic congestion, existing business
districts, and developed areas designated for revitalization.
8. Any other matters the legislative body requests to be in the report.
After presenting the report to the City Council, the City Council would need to call for a special
election on the measure. As a result of the compressed timeline relative to the upcoming
election, the City Council's adoption of a resolution calling for an election after preparation of such
a report would miss the statutory deadline to place a measure on the November ballot.
Accordingly, the City would have to hold a special election, which would cost the City
approximately $1 45,000.
3
lf the City Council requests this report, staff would have 30 days from the date of this meeting to
present their findings to the City Council.
Resolution Calling for Municipal Election August 1, 2016
According to the San lt/ateo County Elections Office, the estimated cost of placing a measure on
the November 8, 2016 Presidential General Election ballot is approximately $55,000. Funds were
not included in the FY 2016-17 Budget for this expense. This projected cost includes the
expense associated with printing the entirety of the proposed measure rather than merely the
impartial analysis and arguments. The estimated cost of holding a special election is
approximately $t 45,000.
Exhibit:
a Resolution
-
4
F!SCAL IMPACT
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CIry COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME CALLING
AND GIVING NOTICE OF A MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 8,
2016 AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES AND SUBMITTING TO THE
VOTERS A QUESTION RELATING TO AN INITIATIVE PETITION; DIRECTING THE
CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS; DIRECTING THE CITY
ATTORNEY AND THE CITY CLERK TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS
TO PLACE THE INTIATIVE ON THE BALLOT; AND REQUESTING THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO TO CONSOLIDATE A
MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD WITH THE PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL
ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 8,2016 PURSUANT TO ELECTIONS CODE SECTION
10403
WHEREAS, on L4arch 31, 2016, proponents of an initiative measure entitled "the
Burlingame Community Protection Ordinance" ("lnitiative") submitted a Notice of lntent and
written text of the measure and requested that a Ballot Title and Summary be prepared for the
measure in order to circulate the petition; and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney prepared and provided the Ballot Title and Summary on
April 14, 2016, with the Ballot Title ""An ordinance to enact rent stabilization and just cause for
eviction and repeal prior restrictions on the regulation of sale or rental prlce of real estate"; and
WHEREAS, on April 21, 2016 the proponents published their Notice of lntent, Ballot Title
and Summary in the newspaper and pursuant to Elections Code Section 9207 began circulating
their petition; and
WHEREAS, the petition was filed with the City Clerk on July 5, 2016, and was submitted
to the San l\/ateo County Elections Office on July 6, 2016, for signature verification; and
WHEREAS, in order for the lnitiative to be placed on the November 8,2016 Presidential
General Election ballot, proponents needed to collect valid signatures of at least fifteen percent
(15%)of the registered voters in the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk conducted a prima facie review of the petition as to form and
found it complied with the provisions of the Elections Code; and
WHEREAS, the certified results of the signature verification were presented by the City
Clerk and accepted by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, it is desirable that the municipal election be consolidated with the
Presidential General Election to be held on the same date and that within the City the precincts,
polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same; and that the San I\,4ateo
County Elections Office canvass the returns of the municipal election; and that the election be
held in all respects as if it were one election;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE lT RESOLVED, that the City Council order as follows:
Section 1. That pursuant to the requirements of the laws of the State of California relating to
general law cities, there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Burlingame, California, on
Tuesday, November 8,2016, a municipal election for the purpose of submitting the following
question:
Shall the ordinance (a) enacting rent stabilization with an annual maximum
increase of 4o/o for most multi-family rental residences with certificates of occupancy before
February 1, 1995; (b) establishing just cause for eviction restrictions on most rental residential
units, includlng single family homes and multi-family residences built after 1995; (c) creating a
Commission authorized to enact regulations and set fees to implement the ordinance; and (d)
superseding prior restrictions on the passage of rent control be adopted?
YES
NO
Section 2. That the "full text" of the proposed ordinance shall appear in the Voter lnformation
Pamphlet. The "full text" of the proposed ordinance is attached to this resolution as "Exhibit A."
Section 3. That the City Clerk is directed to transmit a copy of the measure to the City
Attorney, and the City Attorney is directed to prepare an impartial analysis of the measure
showing the effect and operation of the proposed ordinance and to file the analysis no later than
August 29, 2016.
Section 4. The proponents of the initiative may file a written argument in favor of the measure,
and the City Council authorizes any and all members of the City Council to file a written
argument against the measure and any individual voter who is eligible to vote on the measure or
bona fide association of citizens or combinatlon of voters and associations may also submit a
written argument for or against the measure. Such argument, whether in favor or against, shall
not exceed 300 words and be accompanied by the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the
person(s) submitting it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization, the name of the
organization, and the printed name and signature of at least one of its principal officers. Primary
argumenls in favor of and against the measure must be submitted to the City Clerk by 5:00 p.m.
on August 19,2016. ln the event that more than one written argument is filed in favor of or
against the measure, the City Clerk shall select one of the multiple arguments in accordance
with the provision of Elections Code Section 9287 and Resolution Number '15-20'16. Rebuttal
arguments must be submitted to the City Clerk by 5:00 p.m. on August 29, 2016 and shall not
exceed 250 words-
Section 5. The boundaries of the City have not changed since the City of Burlingame's
previous election held on November 3,2015.
Section 6. The measure requires a simple majority of the voters voting on the initiative to pass.
Section 7. Pursuant to the requirements of Elections Code Section 10403, the Board of
Supervisors of the County of San lVlateo is hereby requested to consent and agree to the
consolidation of a municipal election with the Presidential General Election on Tuesday,
November 8, 2016.
Section 8. The City Manager and the City Clerk are authorized to enter into a service
agreement with the San Mateo County Elections Office to request the services of the Elections
Office in conducting the election, consolidating the election and canvassing the returns. The
election shall be held in all respects as if there were only one electlon and only one form of
ballot shall be used.
Section 9. The ballots to be used at the election shall be in the form and content as required by
law.
Section 10. That the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to contract for the
procurement and furnishing of any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter and all
supplies, equipment and paraphernalia that may be necessary in order to properly and lawfully
conduct the election and to take all other necessary actions to place the measure on the
November 8, 2016 ballot.
Section '11. That the polls for the election shall be open at 7:00 a.m. on the day of the election
and shall remain open continuously from that time until 8:00 p.m. of the same day when the
polls shall be closed, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10242, except as provided in Elections
Code Section 14401 .
Section 12. That the City shall reimburse the County for services performed when the work is
completed and upon presentation to the City of a properly approved bill.
Section 13. That in all particulars not recited in this resolution, the election shall be held and
conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections.
Section 14. That notice of the time and place of holding the election is given and the City Clerk
is authorized, instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of the election, in time,
form and manner as required by law.
Ivlayor
l, IUEAGHAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held
on the 1st day of Auoust, 2016, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:COUNCILIT/EII/BERS:
NOES:COUNCILIt/EIr/BERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILN/Elr/BERS:
City Clerk
EXHIBIT A ^
FULL TEXT BEGINS:
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
TTIE BURLINGAME C OMMUNITY PROTECTION ORDINANC E
Title 20, Chapter 20.04
20.04.010
20.04.020
20.04.030
20.04.040
20.04.050
20.04.060
20.04.070
20.04.080
20.04.090
20.04.100
20.04.110
20.04.120
20.04.t30
20.04.140
20.04.t50
20.04.160
20.04.170
20.04.180
20.04.190
20.04.200
Title and Purpose
Findings
Definitions
Exemptions
Additional Homeowner Protections
Just Cause for Eviction Protections
Stabilization of Rents
Rent Increases Pursuant to Annual General Adjustment
Initial Rents for New Tenancies
Rental Housing Commission
Petitions for Individual Rent Adjustment -- Bases
Petitions for lndividual Rent Adjustment -- Procedures
Judicial Review
Non-waivability
Remedies
Injunctive and Other Civil Relief
Partial Invalidity
"Measure T" Repealed
Codification
Majority Approval, Effective Date, Execution
20.04.010 TITLE AND PURPOSE
This Ordinance shall be known as the Burlingame Community Protection Ordinance. The
pulpose of this Ordinance is to promote neighborhood and community stability, healthy housing,
and affordability for renters in the City of Burlingame by controlling excessive rent increases and
arbitrary evictions to the greatest extent allowable under California law, while ensuring
Landlords a fair and reasonable returrr on their investment, and guaranteeing fair protections for
renters, homeowners, and businesses. As such, it is the pulpose of this Ordinance to repeal
Municipal Ordinance 1356, also known as "Measure T," which otherwise limits the City's ability
to provide rneaningful protections for its residents.
20.04.020 FINDINGS
The People of Burlingame find and declare as follows
-
\-
\-
(a) There is a shortage of decent, safe, affordable, and sanitary housing in the City of
Burlingame ("the City").
(b) Law abiding tenants have to worry constantly about losing their homes through no
fault of their own. Common-sense protections against unreasonable rent increases and arbitrary
evictions are needed in the City to protect long-time residents from forced displacement.
(c) Burlingame is one of the most expensive communities in which to live in the San
Francisco Bay Area, with median home values over $1.8 million according to Zillow research.
According to several measures such as Zlllow and Trulia, the median rental prices for market
rate rentals in the City surpass $4,500 per month.
(d) According to the University of California, Berkeley's 2015 Urban Displacement
Project, the entire City of Burlingame is either at-risk of displacement or has already experienced
significant displacement.
(e) More than half of Burlingame residents are renters. According to HUD's
Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS, 2008-2012),41% of Burlingame tenant
households are "ovelpaying households," meaning the household pays 30Yo or more of its
income on housing costs. Many of these tenants are paying more than 50% of their income for
rent.
(0 According to San Mateo County Department of Housing statistics, the average
rent in San Mateo County for a 2-bedroom apartment has increased more than 50% over the last
four years alone.
(g) The problem of rent increases has reached a crisis level, with examples of rents
rising at rates more than ten times that of inflation or average wage growth.
(h) City residents have reported that there have been excessive rent increases and a
substantial increase in the number of evictions without cause. Residents have reported these
trends to the City Council at City Council meetings, as well as to the press.
(i) Renters are being displaced as a result of evictions or their inability to pay
excessive rent increases. These residents must relocate, but as a result of the housing shortage
are unable to find decent, safe, and healthy housing at affordable rent levels. Aware of the
difficulty in finding decent housing, some renters attempt to pay requested rent increases, but as
a consequence must expend less on other necessities of life, such as food, transit, and healthcare.
This situation has a detrimental effect on substantial numbers of renters in the City and is a threat
to the public health, safety, and welfare. The situation creates a particular hardship for senior
citizens, persons on fixed incomes, families with children, and other vulnerable tenants.
0) No-fault evictions are forcing renters, including tlie elderly and disabled, from
their homes. The City is experiencing a troubling increase in the number of landlords who evict
entire buildings full of tenants based on no-cause tennination notices. Evictions have been
shown to cause serious stress, which can endanger the health and welfare of those affected.
(k) Landlords who evict or price out Tenants impose adverse impacts on the
displaced Tenants, including numerous financial costs. These costs include but are not limited
to: packing costs, rnoving costs, lost wages due to taking time off work to search for alternative
housing, the cost of applying to alternative housing, change of address expenses, hotel costs or
other temporary housing expenses required until suitable long-term altemative hor"rsing is
obtained, and the cost of a new security deposit. Additionally, nearly all rental housing requires
\-
that prospective tenants pay three months' rent up front in order to secure a lease - generally
representing the first month's rent, last month's rent, and security deposit. The total accumulated
cost imposed on a displaced household generally exceeds $10,000 and frequently can reach
$20,000 or greater. Tenants who are seniors, disabled, or have children incur even higher costs
due to their particular circumstances. Low- and moderate-income tenants cannot afford such
sudden and costly expenses, and they often experience homelessness as a direct consequence of
eviction, which itself imposes further financia1, social, and emotional costs. The severe impacts
of displacement on renters pose a threat to the public health, safety, and welfare.
(1) Eviction or other displacement imposes an especially high burden on school-aged
children and their families, including increased absence from school and other educational
disruption that can have long-lasting effects.
(m) Escalating housing costs and the displacement of current residents has had a
detrimental impact on small businesses in the City of Burlingame. Small businesses have
struggled to recruit and retain employees, and some businesses have experienced unusually high
turnover rates among their staff as workers are displaced by massive rent increases and evictions.
Such businesses incur increased costs due to the need to frequently recruit and train new
employees for the same position. Moreover, as customers of some local businesses spend a
greater portion of their income on rent, they spend less on non-essential goods and services,
driving down sales and harming the City's economic vitality and business diversity.
(n) On July 13,2Ol5,the City Council of Burlingame convened a Special Session, at
which it considered several proposals for renter relief, including just cause for eviction
protections as well as other policies to potentially address escalating rents. The Special Session
drew substantial attendance and participation from the public, including renters and members of
the real estate industry.
(o) Burlingame Municipal Ordinance 1356, passed in 1987 and also known as
"Measure T," prevents the City from adequately protecting the community from exorbitant rent
increases.
(p) The City of Burlingame does not restrict rent increases or the grounds for
eviction. Residents have been unfairly evicted or priced out so that Landlords can take
advantage of the City's housing shortage and raise rents excessively.
(q) It is reasonably foreseeable that the filing of this Chapter as a proposed ballot
initiative will fuither impact the rental housing market in the City of Burlingame, as Landlords
may dramatically increase rents in anticipation of the irnplementation of this Chapter.
G) Given the increased housing cost burden and high risk of eviction, the public
health, safety, and welfare of Burlingame residents are threatened. Residents, including seniors
and people on fixed incomes, are often faced with a choice between paying rent or buying
necessary food and medical care for themselves and their families.
(s) In light of the numerous concefirs noted herein, including, but not limited to, the
cunent and irnmediate threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the City's residents and the
adverse impacts that result from a substantial decrease of housing affordability within the City,
the People of Bgrlingame determine that it is in the interest of immediately preserving the public
health, safety, and general welfale to adopt this Ordinance in order to put into place, among other
things, regulations to promote affordable housing within the City, just cause for eviction policies,
and rent stabilization.
\-.
20.04.030 DEFINITIONS
Unless further defined elsewhere in this Chapter, the following words or phrases as used
in this Ordinance shall have the following meanings:
(a) Annual General Adiustment. The Annual General Adjustment is the percentage
by which the Rent for existing tenancies in Covered Rental Units may be increased each year,
subject to the limitations of this Chapter.
(b) Base Rent. The Base Rent is the reference point from which the lawful Rent
shall be determined and adjusted in accordance with this Chapter.
(1) Tenancies commencing on or before March 30,2016. The Base Rent
for tenancies that commenced on or before March 30,2016 shall be the Rent in
effect on March 30,2016.
(2) Tenancies commencing after March 3012016. The Base Rent for
tenancies that commenced after March 30,2016 shall be the initial rental rate
charged upon initial occupancy, provided that amount is not a violation of this
Chapter or any provision of state law. The term "initial rental rate" means only
the amount of Rent actually paid by the Tenant for the initial term of the tenancy
(c) Commission. The term "Commission" refers to the Burlingame Rental Housing
Commission established by this Chapter.
(d)
Chapter.
Covered Rental Units. All Rental Units not specifically exempted by this
(e) City Council. The term "City Council" refers to the City Council of the City of
Burlingame.
\-
(0
t2955.3.
Disabled. The term "Disabled" as defined in Government Code Section
(g) Hearins Officer. An official appointed by the Comrnission to conduct an
investigation or administrative hearing pursuant to this Chapter.
(h)Housing Serviqes Housing Services include, but are not limited to: repairs,
maintenance, painting, providing light, hot and cold lvater, elevator service, window shades and
screens, storage, kitchen, bath and laundry facilities and privileges, janitor services, Utility
Charges that are paid by the Landlord, reftise removal, furtrishings, telephone, parking, the right
to have a specified number of occupants, and any other benefit, privilege, or facility connected
with the use or occupancy of any Rental Unit. Housing Services to a Rental Unit shall include a
proportionate part of seruices provided to common facilities of the building in which the Rental
Unit is contained.
(i)Individual Rent Adiustment. An adjustment to the otherwise lawful Rent
authorized by a Hearing Officer or the Commission pursuant to this Chapter.
0) Landlord. An owner, lessor, sublessor, or any other person entitled to receive
Rent for the use and occupancy of any Rental Unit, or an agent, representative, predecessor, or
successor ofany ofthe foregoing.
(k) Petition. A petition for Individual Rent Adjustment pursuant to this Chapter.
(l) Primary Residence. The occupant's usual place of return. To classify a unit as
an occupant's Primary Residence does not require that the occupant be physically present in the
unit at all times or continuously, but does require that the unit be the occupant's usual place of
return. Factors that are indicative of Primary Residence include but are not limited to:
(1) The occupant carries on basic living activities at the subject premises for
extended periods;
(2) The subject premises are listed with public agencies, including but not
limited to federal, state, and local taxing authorities, as the occupant's primary
residence;
(3) Utility Charges and other charges and fees associated with usage of the
structure are billed to and paid by the occupant at the subject premises;
(4) The occupant does not file for a homeowner's tax exemption for any
different property;
(5) The occupant is not registered to vote at any other location; and
(6) Ownership is held in the name of the occupant claiming Primary
Residence and not held by a Limited Liability Corporation or other corporate or
business entity structure.
(m) Property. All Rental Units on a parcel or lot or contiguous parcels or contiguous
lots under cofirmon ownership.
(n) Recognized Tenant Organization. Any group of Tenants residing in Rental
Units in the same building or in different buildings operated by the same management company,
agent or Landlord, who choose to be so designated. This shall also include any other at-large
organizalion that represents the interest of Tenants.
(o) Rent. All periodic payments and all nonmonetary consideration including, but not
limited to, the fair market value of goods, labor performed, or services rendered to or for the
benefit of the Landlord under a Rental Housing Agreement concerning the use or occupancy of a
Rental Unit and premises and attendant Housing Services, including all payment and
consideration demanded or paid for parking, Utility Charges, pets, fumiture, and/or subletting.
(p) Rental Housinq Agreement. An agreerrent, oral, written, or implied, between a
Landlord and Tenant for use or occupancy of a Rental Unit and for Housing Services.
(q)Rental Housins Fee. The fee described in Section2}.)4.l 00fi) herein.
(L)Rental Unit. An y building, stt-ucture, ol part thereof, or land appufienant
thereto, or any other rental properly rented or offered for rent for residential purposes, together
with all Housing Services connected with use or occupancy of such property, such as common
areas and recreational facilities held out for use by the Tenant.
(s) Sinsle-Family Home. A detached building containing a single residential
dwelling unit separately alienable from any other dwelling unit.
^
\-
(t) Tenant. A Tenant, subtenant, lessee, sublessee, or any other person entitled
under the terms of a Rental Housing Agreement or this Chapter to the use or occupancy of any
Rental Unit.
(u) Utility Charees. Any charges for gas, electricity, water, garbage, sewer,
telephone, cable, internet, or other service relating to the use and occupancy of a Rental Unit.
(1) Provide the Tenant a reasonable period to cure the alleged violation or
problem;
(2) Inform the Tenant that failure to cure may result in the initiation of
eviction proceedings;
(3) Inform the Tenant of the right to request a reasonable accommodation;
(4) Inform the Tenant of the contact number for the Commission; and
(5) Include sufficient details about the conduct underlying the Written Notice
to Cease that allow a reasonable person to comply.
20.04.040 EXEMPTIONS
(a) Fully Exempt (Exempt from Both Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for
Eviction). The following Rental Units are exempt from all provisions of this Chapter:
(1) Units in hotels, motels, inns, tourist homes, and rooming and boarding
houses which are rented primarily to transient guests for a period of fewer than
fourteen (14) days;
(2) Rental Units in any hospital, convent, monastery, extended medical care
facility, asylum, non-profit home for the aged, or dormitory owned and operated
by an accredited institution of higher education;
(3) Rental Units which a goverrrment unit, agency or authority owns, operates,
manages, or in which governmentally subsidized Tenants reside, only if
applicable federal or state law or administrative regulation specifically exempt
such units from municipal rent regulations; and
(4) Rental Units additionally exempted pursuant to Section 20.04.050 herein.
(b) Partially Exempt (Just Cause for Eviction Applies). The following Rental
Units are exempt only frorn Sections 20.04.070,20.04.080, and 20.04.090 of this Chapter
(Stabilization of Rents) and Sections 20.04.1 10 and 20.04J20 (Petitions for Individual Rent
Adjushnent):
(l) Single-Family Homes and Condominiums. Single-Family Homes,
condominiurns, and other Rental Units specified in Civil Code $
t9sa.s2(a)(3)(A); and
\-
\-
(v) Written Notice to Cease. A written notice provided by a Landlord that gives a
Tenant an opportunity to cure an alleged violation or problem prior to service of a notice to
terminate tenancy. Any Written Notice to Cease must:
(2) Rental Units with an initial certificate of occupancy dated after February
1,1995.
20.04.050 ADDITIONAL HOMEOWNER PROTECTIONS
Homeownership is of great importance to the residents of the City of Burlingame. In
addition to the Rental Units exempted in Section 20.04.040(a) of this Chapter, the following
Rental Units are also Fully Exempt from this Chapter:
(a) Orvner-Occupied Secondarv Drvellins Units. A Rental Unit that is permitted
and in compliance with Burlingame Municipal Code Chapter 25.59, if the Landlord is a natural
person and uses either the secondary dwelling unit or the larger Single-Family Home as his or
her Primary Residence.
(b)Owner-Occu Dunlexes . Rental Units in Properties that have two (2) total
dwelling units, if the Landlord is a natural person who occupies one of the units as his or her
Primary Residence.
20.04.060 JUST CAUSE FOR EVICTION PROTECTIONS
(a) No Landlord shall take action to terminate any tenancy, including but not limited
to making a demand for possession of a Rental Unit, threatening to terminate a tenancy orally or
in writing, serving any notice to quit or other eviction notice, or bringing any action to recover
possession, or be granted recovery of possession of a Rental Unit unless at least one of the
following conditions exists:
(1) Failure to Pay Rent. The Tenant has failed, after three days' written
notice as provided by law, to pay the amount stated in the notice, so long as the
amount stated does not exceed the Rent to which the Landlord is legally entitled
under the Rental Housing Agreement, this Chapter, state, and any other local law.
a
(2) Breach of Lease. The Tenant has continued, after the Landlord has served
the Tenant with Written Notice to Cease, to substantially violate any of the
material terms of the Rental Housing Agreement, except the obligation to
surrender possession on proper notice as required by law, and provided that such
terms are reasonable and legal and have been accepted in writing by the Tenant;
and provided further that, where such terms have been accepted by the Tenant or
made parl of the Rental Housing Agreement subsequent to the initial creation of
the tenancy, the Landlord shall have first notified the Tenant in writing that he or
she need not accept such terms.
(A) Notwithstanding any contrary provision in this Section, a Landlord
shall not take any action to terminate a tenancy based on a Tenant's
sublease of the Rental Unit if the following requirements are met:
(i) The Tenant continues to reside in the Rental Unit as his,
her, or their Primary Residence;
(ii) The sublessee replaces one or more departed Tenants under
tl're Rental Housing Agreement on a one-for-one basis; and
(iii) The Landlord has unreasonably withheld the right to
sr.rblease following written request by the Tenant. If the Landlord
\-.
\-
. fails to respond to the Tenant in writing within fourteen (14) days
of receipt of the Tenant's written request, the Tenant's request
shall be deemed approved by the Landlord. A Landlord's
reasonable refusal of the Tenant's written request may not be based
on the proposed additional occupant's lack of creditworthiness, if
that person will not be legally obligated to pay some or all of the
Rent to the Landlord. A Landlord's reasonable refusal of the
Tenant's written request may be based on, but is not limited to, the
ground that the total number of occupants in a Rental Unit exceeds
the maximum number of occupants as determined under Section
503(b) of the Uniform Housing Code as incorporated by Health &
Safety Code Section l7 922.
(B)Protections for Families. Notwi thstanding any contrary provision
in this Section, a Landlord shall not take any action to terminate a tenancy
as a result of the addition to the Rental Unit of a Tenant's child, parent,
grandchild, grandparent, brother, or sister, or the spouse or domestic
partner (as defined in Family Code Section29T) of such relatives, or as a
result of the addition of the spouse or domestic partner of a Tenant, so
long as the number of occupants does not exceed the maximum number of
occupants as determined under Section 503(b) of the Uniform Housing
Code as incorporated by Health & Safety Code 17922. The Commission
may promulgate regulations that will further protect families and promote
stability for school-aged children.
(3) Nuisance. The Tenant has continued, after the Landlord has served the
Tenant with a Written Notice to Cease, to commit or expressly permit a nuisance
in the Rental Unit.
(4) Criminal Activitv. The Tenant has continued, after the Landlord has
served the Tenant with a Written Notice to Cease, to be so disorderly as to destroy
the peace, quiet, comfort, or safety of the Landlord or other tenants at the
Property. Such disorderly conduct includes violations ofstate and federal
criminal law that destroy the peace, quiet, comfort, or safety of the Landlord or
other tenants at the Property.
(s)Failure to Give Access. The Tenant has continued to refus e, after the
Landlord has served the Tenant with a Written Notice to Cease, without good
cause, to grant the Landlord reasonable access to the Rental Unit as required by
state or local Iaw.
(6) Necessary and Substantial Repairs Requiring Temporary Vacancy.
The Landlord after having obtained all necessary permits from the City, and
having provided written notice to the Tenant pursuant to state law, seeks in good
faith to undertake substantial repairs which are necessary to bring the Rental Unit
into compliance with applicable codes and laws affecting the health and safety of
tenants of the building, provided that:
(A) The repairs necessitate that the Tenant vacate the Rental Unit
because the work will render the rental unit uninhabitable for a period of
not less than thirly (30) days;
(B) The Landlord gives advance notice to the Tenant of the Tenant's
right to elect between:
(i) The right of first refusal to any comparable vacant Rental
Unit owned by the Landlord at the same Rent, if such comparable
vacant unit exists; or
(ii) The first right of return to reoccupy the unit upon
completion of the repairs at the same Rent charged to the Tenant
before the Tenant temporarily vacated the Rental Unit.
(iii) In the event that the Tenant elects to accept an offer to
move to a comparable vacant Rental Unit at the same Rent, the
Tenant is not eligible for any relocation assistance pursuant to
S ection 20.04. 060(b) herein.
(C) In the event the Landlord files a Petition for Individual Rent
Adjustment within six (6) months following the completion of the work,
the Tenant shall be party to such proceeding the same as if he or she were
still in possession, unless the Landlord shall submit with such application
a written waiver by the Tenant of his or her right to reoccupy the premises
pursuant to this Subsection.
(7)Orvner Move-In. The Landlord seeks , after providing written notice to the
Tenant pursuant to state law, to recover possession of the Rental Unit in good
faith for use and occupancy as a Primary Residence by the Landlord, or the
Landlord's spouse, domestic partner, children, parents or grandparents.
(A) As used in this Subsection "Landlord" shall only include a
Landlord that is a natural person and who has at least a fifty percent (50%)
recorded ownership interest in the Property.
(B) No eviction may take place under this Subsection if the same
Landlord or enumerated relative already occupies a unit on the Property,
or if a vacancy already exists on the Property. At all times a Landlord
may request a reasonable accommodation if the Landlord or enumerated
relative is Disabled and another unit in Burlingame is necessary to
accommodate the person's disability.
(C) Any notice terminating tenancy pursuant to this Subsection shall
contain the name, address, and relationship to the Landlord of the person
intended to occupy the Rental Unit.
(D) The Landlord or enumerated relative rrust intend in good faith to
move into the Rental Unit within sixty (60) days after the Tenant vacates
and to occupy the Rental Unit as a Primary Residence for at least thirty-six
(36) consecutive months. The Commission may adopt regulations
goveming the determination of good faith.
(E) If the Landlord or relative specified on the notice terminating
tenancy fails to occupy the Rental Unit within sixty (60) days after the
Tenant vacates, the Landlord shall:
-
^
\-
\-
(i) Offer the Rental Unit to the Tenant who vacated it at the
same Rent in effect when the Tenant vacated; and
(ii) Pay to said Tenant all reasonable expenses incurred in
moving to and from the Rental Unit.
(F) A Landlord may not evict a Tenant pursuant to this Subsection if
the Tenant (1) has resided in the Rental Unit for at least five (5) years and
is either at least sixty-two (62) years old or Disabled; or (2) is certified as
being terminally ill by the Tenant's treating physician. Notwithstanding
the above, a Landlord may evict a Tenant who qualifies for the exemption
herein if the Landlord or enumerated relative who will occupy the Rental
Unit also meets the criteria for this exemption and no other units are
available.
(8) Withdrarval of the Unit Permanently from Rental Market. The
Landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession to withdraw all Rental Units of
an entire Property from the rental market. The Landlord first must have filed the
requisite documents with the Commission initiating the procedure for
withdrawing Rental Units from rent or lease under Govemment Code Section
7060 et. seq. and all regulations passed by the Commission, with the intention of
completing the withdrawal process and going out of the rental business. Tenants
shall be entitled to a minimum of 120-day notice or one (1) year in the case
Tenants are defined as senior or Disabled under Government Code Section
12955.3. Notice times may be increased by regulations if state law allows for
additional time.
(9) Demolition. The Landlord, having obtained all necessary permits from
the City, and having provided written notice to the Tenant pursuant to state law,
seeks in good faith to recover possession of the Rental Unit to remove the Rental
Unit permanently from rental housing use through demolition.
(b) Relocation Assistance.
(1) A Landlord seeking to recoverpossession under Subsections (a)(6)-(9),
herein shall provide relocation assistance to affected Tenant households in an
arnount equal to three (3) times the current market rate Rent for a similar Rental
Unit in Burlingame. The relocation assistance required herein shall be a
minimum amount. The City Council may increase the dollar amounts of
relocation assistance pursuant to its powers under law. The Landlord shall notify
the affected Tenants of their rights under this Subsection, if any, at the tirne of
service of the notice to quit.
(2) The Commission shall issue rules and regulations to effectuate this
Subsection including but not limited to rules and regulations setting forth an
additional amount of relocation assistance applicable to particularly vulnerable
Tenant households, the procedures for establishing and facilitating payment of the
relocation assistance, and for the reasonably timely paylent of any applicable
relocation assistance.
(c) First Right of Return. All Tenants whose tenancy is tenninated based upon a
basis enumerated in Subsections (a)(6)-(9) herein shall have the first right of letum to the Rental
\
Unit if that Rental Unit is returned to the market by the Landlord or successor Landlord. Rent
for the Rental Unit shall be the Rent lawfully paid by the Tenant at the time the Landlord gave
notice of termination based upon Subsections (aX6)-(9) herein.
(d)Retaliation is Barred. Notwi thstanding the above provisions, no Landlord shall
take action to terminate any tenancy or otherwise recover possession of a Rental Unit in
retaliation for the Tenant reporting violations of this Chapter, for exercising rights granted under
this Chapter, or for forming or participating in a Recognized Tenant Organization.
(e)Notice to Specify Basis for Termination.Any notice purporting to terminate
tenancy on any of the bases specified in this Section must state with specificity the basis on
which the Landlord seeks to terminate the tenancy.
(0 Landlord Compliance with this Chapt-q. In any action brought to recover
possession of a Rental Unit, the Landlord shall allege compliance with this Chapter.
(g) Filins Termination Notices rvith Commission. The Landlord shall file with the
Commission a copy of any notice terminating tenancy within three (3) days after serving the
notice on the Tenant.
(h) Failure to complv. A Landlord's failure to comply with any requirement of this
Chapter, including without limitation the failure to serve any of the required notices on the
Commission pursuant to Subsection (g) herein, is a complete affirmative defense in an unlawful
detainer or other action brought by the Landlord to recover possession of the Rental Unit.
20.04.070 STABILIZATION OF RENTS
(a)Rents bilized.Upon the effective date of this Chapter, no Landlord shall
charge Rent in an amount that exceeds the sum of the Base Rent plus any lawful Rent increases
actually implemented pursuant to this Chapter.
(b)Rent In Resulated.No Landlord shall increase Rent for a Covered
Rental Unit except as authorizedby this Chapter. Rent increases shall be limited to those
imposed pursuant to Section 20.04.080 (Annual General Adjustment) and Section 20.04.110(a)
(Petition for Upward Adjustment-Fair Rate of Return). A Landlord may set the initial Rent for
a new tenancy pursuant to Section 20.04.090 (lnitial Rents for New Tenancies).
(c) Securitv Deposit at Commencement of Tenancy Onlv. No Landlord shall
increase a security or other deposit originally required from a Tenant as a condition of occupancy
of a Rental Unit.
2O.O4.O8O RENT INCREASES PURSUANT TO ANNUAL GENERAL
ADJUSTMENT
(a)Annual I Adiustment.No later than June 30th each year, the
Comrnission shall announce the amount of the Annual General Adjustment, which shall be
effective as of September 1st of that year. The Annual General Adjustrnent is the percentage by
which the Rent for existing tenancies in Covered Rental Units rnay be increased each year,
subject to the limitations of this Chapter.
(1) The Annual General Adjustment shall be equal to one hundred percent
(100%) of the percentage increase in the Consutner Price Index (All Urban
Consumers, San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose region, or any successor designation
I
1
\-
of thatindex that may later be adopted by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics) as
reported and published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, for the twelve-month period ending as of March of the current year.
The Annual General Adjustment shall be rounded to the nearest one-tenth of a
percent.
(2) Subparagraph 1 of this Subsection notwithstanding, in no event shall the
Annual General Adjustment be less than one percent (1%) or more than four
percent (4%).
(3) The first Rent increase that a Landlord may impose pursuant to this
Section sha1l not take effect prior to September 7,2017.
(4) A Landlord may only implement a Rent increase pursuant to an Annual
General Adjustment within the twelve (12) months immediately after the effective
date of such Annual General Adjustment. Any Annual General Adjustment not
implemented within the twelve (12) months immediately following its effective
date is waived.
(b) One Rent Increase Per Year. No more than one Rent increase per twelve-month
period may be imposed on a Tenant.
(c)Notice of Rent Reouired. Allowable Rent increases pursuant to the
Annual General Adjustment shall become effective only after the Landlord provides written
notice to the Tenant in the manner prescribed by law, with at least thirty (30) days' advance
written notice.
(d)Conditions Under Which Increase Not Permitted. No Rent increase shall
be effective if the Landlord:
(1) Has failed to substantially comply with all provisions of this Chapter and
all rules and regulations promulgated by the Commission; or
(2) Has failed to maintain the Rental Unit in compliance with Civil Code
Sections 1941.1et seq. and Health and Safety Code Sections 17920.3 and
11920.10; or
(3) Has failed to make repairs ordered by a Hearing Officer, the Commission,
or the City.
20.04.090 INITIAL RENTS FOR NEW TENANCIES
(a) Settins of Initial Rents Without Restriction. To the extent permitted by state
law, Landlords may set the initial Rent for new Tenants at the market rate.
(b)Costa-Hawkins E.xcsptions. The Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, Civil
Code $ 1954.50 et seq., permits municipalities to regulate the initial Rent in certain limited
circurnstances. Pursuant to the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, limitations on the initial
Rent shall apply in any of the following circumstances:
(1) No Fault Termination of Tenancy. The previous Tenant vacated
following a notice described in Civil Code $ 195a.53(a)(1);
.__-
\-,
(2) Rent Increase Not Permitted by this Chapter. The previous Tenant
vacated following a notice of Rent increase not permitted by this Chapter (see
Civil Code $ 1gsa.s3(aX1));
(3) Failure to Renelv Government Contract. A Landlord that terminates or
fails to renew a contract or recorded agreement with a government agency that
provides for a Rent limitation to a qualified Tenant shall not be eligible to set an
initial Rent for three (3) years following the date of the termination or nonrenewal
of the contract or agreement (see Civil Code $ 195a.53(aXtXe));
(4) Serious Code Violation. The Rental Unit was cited for serious health,
safety, fire, or building code violations at least sixty (60) days prior to the vacancy
and the violations were not abated by the time the Rental Unit was vacated (see
Civil Code $ 19sa.s3(0);
(5) Ellis Act Termination of Tenancy. The previous Tenant vacated
pursuant to a notice described in Section 20.04.060(aX8) of this Chapter, but the
withdrawal of the Property was not fully or properly completed under the Ellis
Act or any local implementing ordinances or regulations; or
(6) Exchange for Public Subsidy. The Landlord has agreed to a Rent
restriction in return for a direct financial contribution (see Civil Code $
19sa.s3(aX2)).
(c) Rent Increases After Settins an Initial Rent. After the Landlord sets an initial
Rent pursuant to this Section, the Landlord may only increase the Rent in accordance with this
Chapter. The Landlord may not increase Rent based on Annual General Adjustments, cost
increases, capital improvements, or other circur"nstances that arose before the new tenancy began.
20.04.100 RENTAL IIOUSING COMMISSION
(a) Composition. There shall be in the City of Burlingame an appointed Rental
Housing Commission comprised of Burlingame residents as set forth in this Section. The
Commission shall consist of five (5) Commission members appointed by the City Council, and
an altemate Commission member. The alternate Commission member shall be permitted to
attend all Commission meetings and to speak, but not be authorized to vote unless a regular
member of the Commission is absent at that meeting or is recused from voting on an agenda
item. There shall be no more than two members who own or manage any rental property or are
realtors or are developers. At least three (3) members shall be Tenants. Anyone nominated to
this Commission rnust be in compliance with this Chapter and all other local, state, and federal
laws regulating the provision of housing. Annually, the Commission shall elect one of its
members to serve as chaitperson.
(b) ElieibiliW and Appointment. Cornmission members shall be appointed by the
City Council at a public rneeting. Applicants for membership on the Commission shall submit
an application to the City Council. The application shall include a statement under penalty of
perjury of the applicant's interests and dealings in real properly, including but not lirnited to,
ownership, tr-usteeship, sale, or rnanagement, and investment in and association with
partnerships, corporations, joint ventures, and syndicates engaged in ownership, sale, or
managelnent of real propefiy during the three (3) years irrmediately prior to the applicant's
application. This documentation shall be made available to the public.
-
\-
\-
(c)Term'of Offite. Commission members shall serve terms of four (4) years and
may be reappointed for a total of two (2) fu1l terms. Commission member terms shall be
staggered. Therefore, initial appointments shall consist of two (2) members with two-year terms,
an alternate with a two-year term, and three (3) members with four-year terms.
(d) Powers and Duties. The Commission shall have the following powers and
duties
(1) Set Rents at fair and equitable levels to achieve the purposes of this
Chapter. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, the Commission
shall have the authority to adopt regulations authorizing Rent increases and/or
adjustments required by state or federal law.
(2) Establish rules and regulations for administration and enforcement of this
Chapter.
(3) Determine and publicize the Annual General Adjustment pursuant to this
Chapter.
(4) Adjudicate Petitions pursuant to Sections 20.04.110 and 20.04.120 herein
and issue decisions with orders for appropriate relief pursuant to this Chapter.
(5) Administer oaths and affirmations and subpoena witnesses and relevant
documents.
(6) Establish a budget for the reasonable and necessary implementation of the
provisions of this Chapter, including without limitation the hiring of necessary
staff, and charge fees as set forth herein in an amount sufficient to support that
budget.
(7) Administer the withdrawal process for the removal of Rental Units from
the rental housing market pursuant to Section 20.04.060(a)(8) herein.
(8) Hold public hearings.
(9) Conduct studies, surveys, investigations, and hearings, and obtain
information to further the purposes of this Chapter.
(10) Report periodically to the City Council on the status of Covered Rental
Units. Reports shall include (a) a surnmary of the numbers of tennination of
tenancy notices served pursuant to Section 20.04.060, including the bases upon
which they were served, and (b) a summary of any and all Petitions submitted to
andlor decided by a Hearing Officer and/or the Commission pursuant to Sections
20.04.110 and 20.04.120, including the bases on which the Petitions were
submitted and the determinations on the Petitions.
(11) Publicize through reasonable and appropriate means the provisions of this
Chapter, including without limitation the rights and responsibilities of Landlords
and Tenants.
(12) Establish a schedule of penalties that may be imposed fol noncompliance
with this Chapter or with rules and regulations promulgated under this Chapter.
\-
(13) Pursue civil remedies as provided by this'Chapter in courts of appropriate
jurisdiction.
(14) Intervene as an interested party in any litigation brought before a court of
appropriate jurisdiction by a Landlord or Tenant with respect to Covered Rental
Units.
(15) Any other duties necessary to administer and enforce this Chapter
(e)Rules and lations.The Commission shall issue and follow such rules and
regulations as will further the purposes of the Chapter.
(0 Meetinss. The Commission shall hold regularly scheduled meetings as necessary
to ensure the performance of its duties under this Chapter. All regular and special meetings shall
be called and conducted in accordance with state law.
(g) Quorum. Three (3) members shall constitute a quomm for the Commission.
(h) Voting. The affirmative vote of three (3) members of the Commission is required
for a decision, including on all motions, regulations, and orders of the Commission.
(i) Vacancies. If a vacancy occurs on the Commission, a person qualified to fiIl such
vacancy shall be appointed by the City Council in accordance with this Chapter.
0) Financing. The Commission shall finance its reasonable and necessary expenses
by charging Landlords an annual Rental Housing Fee as set forth herein, in amounts deemed
reasonable by the Commission in accordance with applicable law. The Commission is also
empowered to request and receive funding when and if necessary from any available source for
its reasonable and necessary expenses.
(1)Rental sins Fee.All Landlords shal1 pay aRental Housing Fee on an
annual basis. The first Commission convened after the effective date of this
Chapter shall determine the amount of the Rental Housing Fee. The amount of
the Rental Housing Fee rnay differ between Rental Units subject to the entirety of
this Chapter and those that are Partially Exempt. The Commission may adjust the
amount of the Rental Housing Fee at its discretion to ensure fuIl funding of its
reasonable and necessary expenses, in accordance with all applicable law.
(2)Citv to Initial Funds Dr,rring the initial irnplementation of this
Chapter, the City shall advance all necessary flinds to ensure the effective
implementation of this Chapter, until the Commission has collected Rental
Housing Fees sufficient to supporl the implementation of this Chapter. The City
may seek a reimbursement of any advanced funds from the Rental Housing
Commission after the Rental Housing Fee has been collected.
(k)Intesrity d Autonomv of C lon The Cornrrission shall be an integral
part of the govemment of the City, but shall exercise its powers and duties under this Chapter
independent from the City Council, City Manager, and City Attorney, except by request of the
Commission. In the period betlveen the effective date of this Chapter and the appointment of the
initial members of the Commission, the City shall take whatever steps are necessary to perform
the duties of the Comrnission and implement the purposes of this Chapter.
I
1
\-,
\-,
(1) Conformins Regulations. If any portion of this Chapter is declared invalid or
unenforceable by decision of a court of competent jurisdiction or rendered invalid or
unenforceable by state or federal legislation, the Commission and not the City Council shall have
authority to enact replacement regulations consistent with the intent and purpose of the
invalidated provision and applicable law. Such replacement regulations sha1l supersede
invalidated or unenforceable provisions of this Chapter to the extent necessary to resolve any
inconsistency. The subject matter of such replacement regulations shall be limited to the matters
addressed in this Chapter.
(m) Designation of Replacement Commission. In the event the establishment of the
Commission under this Section is adjudged to be invalid for any reason by a court of competent
jurisdiction, the City Council shall designate one or more City departments, agencies,
committees, or commissions to perform the duties of the Commission prescribed by this Chapter.
(n)Conflict of interest. Commission members shall not necess arily be disqualified
from exercising any of their powers and duties on the grounds of a conflict of interest solely on
the basis of their status as a Landlord, realtor, developer, or Tenant. However, a Commission
member shall be disqualified from ruling on a Petition if the Commission member is either the
Landlord of the Property or a Tenant residing in the Property that is involved in the Petition. The
provisions of the Political Reform Act, Government Code Sections 87100 et seq. shall apply.
20.04.110 PETITIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL RENT ADJUSTMENT--BASES
A Landlord or a Tenant may file a Petition with the Commission seeking adjustment,
either upward or downward, of the Rent for any given tenancy in accordance with the standards
set forth in this Section, and using the procedures set forth in Section 20.04.120 herein and
implementing regulations. A Petition shall be on a form provided by the Commission and, if
made by the Landlord, shall include a declaration by the Landlord that the Rental Unit complies
with all requirements of this Chapter.
(a)Petition for Upward Adiustment-Earr Bate qtBatulu. To effectuate the
purposes of this Chapter and the requirements of law, a Landlord may file a Petition for an
upward adjustment of the Rent to ensure a fair and reasonable rate of return. It is the intent of
this Chapter that individual upward adjustments in Rent be granted only when the Landlord
demonstrates that such adjustments are necessary to provide the Landlord with a fair rate of
return. The Cornmission shall promulgate regulations to flirther govern Petitions filed pursuant
to this Subsection in accordance with law and the purposes of this Chapter.
(1) Prerequisites. No upward adjustment of Rent shall be authorized by a
Hearing Officer or the Commission under this Subsection if the Landlord:
(A) Has continued to fail to comply, after order of the Commission or
other authority, with any provisions of this Chapter or orders or
regulations issued thereunder; or
(B) Has failed to rraintain the Rental Unit in compliance with Civil
Code Sections 1941.1 et seq. and Health and Safety Code Sections
17920.3 and 17920.10.
(2) Fair Rate of Return - Factors. In rnaking any upr,vard adjustment to the
Rent based Llpon a Landlord's Petition to ensure a fair rate of retum, the Healing
\-
Officer or Commission shall consider relevant factors, itrcluding but not limited
to, the following:
(A) Increases or decreases in property taxes;
(B) Unavoidable increases or any decreases in maintenance and
operating expenses;
(C) The cost of planned or completed capital improvements to the
Rental Unit (as distinguished from ordinary repair, replacement, and
maintenance) but only where such capital improvements are necessary to
bring the property into compliance or maintain compliance with applicable
local codes affecting health and safety, and where such capital
improvement costs are properly amortized over the life of the
improvements;
(D) Increases or decreases in the number of Tenants occupying the
Rental Unit, living space, furniture, furnishings, equipment, or other
Housing Services provided, or occupancy rules;
(E) Substantial deterioration of the Rental Unit other than as a result of
normal wear and tear;
(F) Failure on the part of the Landlord to provide adequate Housing
Services, or to comply substantially with applicable state rental housing
laws, local housing codes, health and safety codes, or the Rental Housing
Agreement; and
^
(G) The pattem of recent Rent increases or decreases in the Rental Unit
during the occupancy of the current Tenant.
(3) Fair Rate of Return - Factors Excluded. In making any upward
adjustment to the Rent based upon a Landlord's Petition to ensure a fair rate of
return, the Hearing Officer or Commission shall not consider the following factors
as justifying an upward adjustment:
(A) Costs of debt servicing (including but not limited to principal,
interest, and fees) for any debt obtained after March 30,2016;
(B) Any penalties, fees, or interest assessed or awarded for violation of
this or any other law with respect to the Rental Unit;
(C) The costs of capital improvements that are not necessary to bring
the property into compliance or maintain compliance with applicable local
codes affecting health and safety;
(D) Cost increases, capital improvements, Annual General
Adjustments, or other circumstances that arose before the current tenancy
began; and
(E) Income taxes
\-
(4) ' Effective Date of Individual Rent Adiustment. Rent increases
authorized pursuant to this Subsection shall become effective only after the
Landlord provides the Tenant written notice of such Rent increase pursuant to
state law.
Petition for Downward Adiustment-Failure to Maintain Habitable(b)
Premises.
\-
(1) Failure to maintain a Rental Unit in compliance with goveming health and
safety and building codes, including but not limited to Civil Code Sections 1941.1
et seq. and Health and Safety Code Sections 17920.3 and 17920.10, constitutes an
increase in Rent. A Tenant may file a Petition with the Commission to adjust the
Rent downward based on a loss in rental value attributable to the Landlord's
failure to maintain the Rental Unit in habitable condition.
(2) A Tenant Petition filed pursuant to this Subsection must specify the
conditions alleged to constitute the failure to maintain the Rental Unit in habitable
condition and demonstrate that the Landlord was provided with reasonable notice
and opportunity to correct the conditions that form the basis for the Petition.
(c) Petition for Downward Adiustment-Decrease in Housing Services or
Maintenance. A decrease in Housing Services or maintenance, or deterioration of the Rental
Unit beyond ordinary wear and tear, without a corresponding reduction in Rent is considered an
increase in Rent. A Tenant may file a Petition to adjust the Rent downward based on a loss in
rental value attributable to a decrease in Housing Services or maintenance or deterioration of the
Rental Unit. The Petition must specify the defective conditions and demonstrate that the
Landlord was provided with reasonable notice and an opportunity to correct in like manner to
Petitions filed pursuant to Section 20.04.110(bX2) above.
(d) Petition for Dorvnward Adiustment-Unlawful Rent. If a Landlord demands
or retains Rent in excess of the lawful Rent pursuant to this Chapter, a Tenant may file a Petition
to adjust the Rent to its lawful level.
2O.O4,I2O PETITIONS FORINDIVIDUALRENT ADJUSTMENT--PROCEDURES
The Commission shall promulgate regulations regarding procedures for Petitions filed
under this Chapter. Petitions shall be governed by such regulations and by the provisions of this
Section.
(a)Hearing Offieer. A H earing Officer appointed by the Cornrnission shall conduct
a hearing to act upon the Petition and shall have the power to administer oaths and affinnations,
and to render a final decision on the merits of the Petition, subject to the provisions of this
Chapter.
(b) Notice. The Commission shall notify the Landlord, if the Petition was filed by
the Tenant, or the Tenant, if the Petition was filed by the Landlord, of the receipt of such a
Petition and provide a copy thereof.
(c)Time of Hearing. Each party to a Petition shall receive sufficient advance notice
of the bases, theories, and relevant documents to be presented by the other party(ies), and as to
the time, date, and place of any hearing regarding tlie Petition.
\-
(d) Developins the Record. The Hearing Officer may require either party to a
Petition to provide any books, records, and papers deemed pertinent. If the Hearing Officer finds
good cause to believe that an inspection would assist in resolving the issues raised by the
Petition, the Hearing Officer may conduct a building inspection and/or request the City to
conduct a building inspection. The Tenant may request the Hearing Officer to order such an
inspection prior to the date of the hearing. All documents required under this Subsection shall be
made available to the parties involved prior to the hearing.
(e) Open Hearinss. All hearings conducted pursuant to this Subsection shall be
open to the public.
(0 Rieht of:lsqbtan$. A11 parties to a hearing conducted pursuant to this
Subsection may have assistance in presenting evidence and developing their position from
attorneys, legal workers, Recognized Tenant Organization representatives, or any other persons
designated by said parties.
(g) Hearins Record. The Commission shall make available for inspection and
copying any official record that shall constitute the exclusive record for decision on the issues at
the hearing. The record of the hearing, or any part of one, shall be obtainable for the reasonable
cost of copying. All hearings shall be audio or video recorded, as ordered by the Hearing
Officer, and any party to the Petition may receive a copy of the recording upon payment of a
reasonable cost.
(h)Ouantum of Proof and Notice of Decision. No Petition for Individual Rent
Adjustment, whether upward or downward, shall be granted unless supported by the
preponderance of the evidence submitted prior to and at the hearing. All parties to a hearing
shall be sent a notice of the decision and a copy of the findings of fact and law upon which said
decision is based. At the same time, parties to the proceeding shall also be notified of their right
to appeal to the Commission and/or to judicial review of the decision.
(i)Co dation Whether submitted by a Landlord or Tenant(s), all Petitions
pertaining to Rental Units at the same Property may be consolidated for hearing upon a showing
ofgood cause.
0) Appeal. Any person aggrieved by the decision of the Hearing Officer may appeal
to the fulI Commission for review. On appeal, the Comrnission shall affinn, reverse, or modify
the decision of the Hearing Officer. The decision on appeal shall be based on the hearing record
and the Commission shall neither hear nor find facts in addition to those presented to the Hearing
Officer.
(k) Finalitv of Decision. The decision of the Hearing Officer shall be the final
decision of the Commission, unless an aggrieved party has timely sought an appeal to the
Commission. The decision of the Comrnission on appeal shall be final unless an aggrieved party
has timely sought judicial review pursuant to law.
(1)Time for Decision. A final decision on any Petition shall be made within a
teasonable time. Decisions decreasing Rent shall remain in effect until the Landlord has
corrected the defect wan'anting the decrease. The Cornmission shall, by regulation, establish
procedures for making prornpt compliance detenninations.
1
1
\-,
(m) Right to Fair Return Guaranteed. No provision of this Chapter shall be applied
so as to prohibit the Commission from granting an Individual Rent Adjustment that is
demonstrated by the Landlord to be necessary to provide the Landlord with a fair rate of return.
20.04.130 JUDICIAL REVIEW
A Landlord or Tenant aggrieved by any action or decision of the Commission may seek
judicial review pursuant to state law and this Chapter and its implementing regulations. No
action or decision by the Commission shall go into effect until any statutory time period for such
review has expired.
20.O4.I4O NON.WAIVABILITY
Any provision of a Rental Housing Agreement, whether oral or written, which purports to
waive any provision of this Chapter established for the benefit of the Tenant, shall be deemed to
be against public policy and shall be void.
20.04.150 REMEDIES
In addition to any other remedies provided by law, Landlords and Tenants covered by
this Chapter shall have the following remedies for violations of this Chapter.
(a) Landlord's Demand for or Retention of Excessive Rent. When a Landlord
demands, accepts, receives, or retains any payment or payments in excess of the lawful Rent
pursuant to this Chapter and the regulations promulgated hereunder, including in violation of the
provisions ensuring compliance with habitability standards and maintenance of Housing
Services, the Tenant may file a Petition pursuant to Section 20.04.110 or file a civil suit against
the Landlord. A Landlord who demands, accepts, receives, or retains any payment of Rent in
excess of the lawful Rent shall be liable to the Tenant in the amount by which the payment or
payrnents have exceeded the lawful Rent. In such a case, the Rent shall be adjusted to reflect the
lawful Rent pursuant to this Chapter and its implementing regulations.
(b)Civil Remedies. A Tenant may bring a civil suit in the courts of the state
alleging that a Landlord has violated any of the provisions of this Chapter or the regulations
promulgated hereunder, including that the Landlord has demanded, accepted, received, or
retained a payment or payments in excess of the lawful Rent. In a civil suit, a Landlord found to
violate this Chapter shall be liable to the Tenant for all actual damages, including but not limited
to the damages described in Subsection (a) above. A prevailing Tenant in a civil action brought
to enforce this Chapter shall be awarded reasonable attorneys' fees and costs as detennined by
the cour1. Additionally, upon a showing that the Landlord has acted r,villfully or with oppression,
flaud, or malice, the Tenant shall be awarded treble damages. No administrative remedy need be
exhausted prior to filing suit pursuant to this Subsection.
(c)Additional for Landlord's Violation of Eviction Rules.If it is shor,vn
that the event which the Landlord claims as grounds to recover possession under
20.04.110(aX6)-(9) is not initiated within two (2) months after the Tenant vacates the Rental
Unit, or it is shown that the Landlord's claim was false or in bad faith, the Tenant shall be
entitled to regain possession of the Rental Unit at same Rent that was lawflilly in effect when the
Tenant vacated, in addition to the relief described in Subsection (b) above.
(d) Defense to Action to Recover Possession. A Landlord's failure to comply with
any of the provisions of this Chapter or regulations promulgated hereunder shall selve as a
\-
\-,
complete affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer or other astion brought by the Landlord to
recover possession of the Rental Unit. Any and all violations of this Chapter by the Landlord
shall constitute such an affirmative defense, including but not limited to the demand or retention
of payment in excess of the lawful Rent, failure to sere any of the notices required pursuant to
this Chapter on the Tenant or the Commission, failure to pay the Rental Housing Fee, and a
decrease in Housing Services or maintenance without a corresponding reduction in Rent. It is
the intent of this Chapter to construe this Subsection to the broadest extent permissible under the
law to ensure maximum compliance with this Chapter and avoid unlawful evictions.
(e) Commission or Cify Attorney Enforcement Action. If the Tenant fails to bring
a civil or administrative action to enforce the Tenant's rights under this Chapter within one
hundred and twenty (120) days after the date of the violation, the Commission or the City
Attorney may bring such an action or settle the claim on the Tenant's behalf. If the Commission
or City Attorney brings such an action, the Tenant shall be provided the right to opt in or out of
the action. In the case of an opt-in, the Tenant on whose behalf the Commission acted is barred
from bringing a separate action against the Landlord in regard to the same violation, and the
Commission or City Attorney shall be entitled to recuperate the costs it incurred from any
monetary recovery from the Landlord, with the remainder to go to the Tenant against whom the
violation has been committed. In the case of an opt-out, the Tenant shall retain all rights relating
to his or her right to private action. The Commission or City Attorney may take other such
enforcement action as necessary to ensure compliance with this Chapter.
(0 Remedies Not Exclusive. The remedies available in this Chapter are not
exclusive and may be used cumulatively with any other remedies in this Chapter or otherwise
available at law.
(g) Jurisdiction. The appropriate court in the jurisdiction in which the Rental Unit is
located shall have jurisdiction over all actions brought under this Chapter.
20.04.160 INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER CIVI RELIEF
The Commission, Tenants, and Landlords may seek relief from the appropriate court in
the jurisdiction where the affected Rental Unit is located to enforce any provision of this Chapter
or its implernenting regulations or to restrain or enjoin any violation of this Chapter and of the
rules, regulations, orders, and decisions of the Commission.
20.04.170 PARTIAL INVALIDITY
If any provision of this Chapter or application thereof to any person or circumstances is
held invalid, this invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Chapter that
can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of
this Chapter are declared to be severable. This Chapter shall be liberally construed to achieve the
purposes of this Chapter and to preserve its validity.
20.04.180 ..MEASURE T'' REPEALED
This Ordinance shall supersede and invalidate any limitations imposed by prior City
ordinances that relate to or concern the subject matter addressed herein. This includes, but is not
limited to, Burlingame City Ordinance 1356, also known as "Measure T," which was passed by
the voters in 1987. It is the intent of the voters of the City of Burlingame to hereby repeal in its
entirely said Measure T. By repealing and superseding any prior limitations on the City's
authority to regulate the subject matter addressed herein, the People of the City of Burlingame
-
-
^
\-,
specifically intend for the City to retain authority to promote and preserve affordable housing to
the maximum extent permitted by state law, including but not limited to the authority to enact
rent stabilization, just cause for eviction, relocation assistance, inclusionary housing policies, and
all other regulatory and land use policies that relate to affordable housing.
20.04.190 CODIFICATION
The City Clerk and the City Attorney shall take all steps necessary to ensure the proper
and efficient codification of this Chapter into the Municipal Code, including making revisions to
numbering and similar non-substantive items contained herein. In exercising this authority, the
City Clerk and City Attorney shall not alter the substantive provisions of this Chapter nor take
any action that contradicts express terms and purpose of this Ordinance.
20.04.200 MAJORITY APPROVAL, EFFECTIVE DATE, EXECUTION
This Ordinance shall be effective only if approved by a majority of the voters voting
thereon and shall go into effect ten (10) days after the vote is declared by the City Council. The
Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute this Chapter to give evidence of its
adoption by the voters.
FULL TEXT ENDS
\-
\-
CLK-Meaqhan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Ho Louie < holouie99@gmail.com >
Sunday, July 3L, 2016 9:02 PM
GRP-Council
Rent controlSubject:
I am the owner of 907 larkspur Ave, Burlingame, ca. I object the rent control measure to put on November ballot.
Ho Louie
Sent from my iPhone
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Theresa Aiello <theresaaiello@yahoo.com>
Sunday, July 31, 2016 7:28 PM
GRP-Council
COUNCIL-Emily Beach; COUNCIL-Michael Brownrigg; COUNCIL-Donna Colson;
COUNCIL-Ann Keighran; rotiz@burlingame.org; Pete Aiello; Terry Rodden; Michael
Brosnan; Patrick Brosnan
Burlingame Council Meeting regarding rent control initiative being placed on November
Ballot
Subject:
Hello Family,
(After reading this email, please "reply a ll" to voice your opinion to the City Council members copied in this email.)There
is an important meetlng taking place tomorrow night/ August 1 at 7pm at Burlingame City Hall.
The subject of the meeting is in this emails "subject line".
It is a very important meeting. lt will determine if "mom and pop" apartment owners like us, will forever have our
primary source of income controlled by government. Yes, we are first generation children of immigrants who chose to
use their "back" to earn a living and build apartments.
We are all over or close to 60 years old, with many of our family members either retired or close to retirement.
We started out building and cleaning the apartments ourselves.
Supply and Demand has worked, over all these years, just fine. We have had lean years and good years, that have
balanced out. We have learned to save money from the good years for the bad years to replace roofs, modernizing the
units, insurance hikes and much more. Our pride of ownership will be greatly effected if rent control is voted in.
We see building cranes everywhere today and supply is at it's best again. Supply is plentiful.
We own buildings built before 1992 and we already have seen the rents in our old building's stabilize and/or decline
due to supply being healthy once again. You don't see too many small apartment buildings being built today. tt is all big
corporate/shareholder's that are building today and they are excluded from rent control!
Dear Members of the City Council:
Please stay with the plan your city council and voters decided on years ago. Do not allow rent control! You are
"choosing" to control older buildings so revenue can still be brought in to the city by newer corporate buildings.
Thank you for taking the time for reading this email.
Theresa Aiello
650 642 0678-cell
Sent from my iPhone
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
L-B P <lhadon@hotmail.com>
Sunday, July 31-, 20L6 6:22 PM
GRP-Council; COUNCIL-Emily Beach;COUNCIL-Michael Brownrigg;COUNCIL-Donna
Colson; COU NCIL-An n Keig h ran; COU NCIL- Rica rdo O rtiz
Rent Stabilization
I will not be able to attend the counsel meeting, so I am sending this email requesting that you keep the rent
stabilization initiative on the ballot for THIS November. Thank you.
Barbara Plant
1117 El Camino Real #2
Burlingame, CA 94010
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Please vote for Option # 3.
Leonice Cordeiro < leonicech@gmail.com >
Sunday, July 31,2016 5:2L Pt\4
GRP-Council
Council meeting vote
I
CLK-Meaghan Hasset-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Evelyn Ytu rralde < evelyn.ytu rralde@ g mai l.com >
Sunday, July 31, 2015 4:15 PM
GRP-Council
Please Certify the Ballot Initiative for Rent Stabilization for Nov 2016 election
Esteemed Burlingame City Councilmember:
As a resident of Burlingame, I urge you to vote to certify the Initiative for Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for
Eviction for the ballot in November 2016.
Many dedicated and concemed volunteers devoted hundreds of hours to collect over 3,000 signatures of
supportive voting Burlingame residents - a true grassroots petition drive. Please uphold this process of
democracy in action.
Both the City Clerk and the City Attomey recommend placing the initiative on the November 2016 ballot.
Putting the initiative on the November 2016 ballot will save the City $100,000 (the increased amount it would
cost to put it on the ballot in November 2017, if choosing to delay by preparing an impact report with its own
additional costs).
Thank you for your work in the best interest of a stable, thriving Burlingame community.
-- Evelyn Yturralde
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kelly Radetich < kellyradetich@yahoo.com>
Sunday, July 31, 20L6 4:12 PM
GRP-Council
Rent Control
Dear Council Members:
With our Presidential election quickly approaching and abuzz around who is our next President will be, I think
in regards to Rent Control voting option 3 is the best at this time.
Please take this into consideration. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Kelly Ringer-Radetich
Today Sotheby's
650.303.9589 or 71 4.8 15.8226
kellwadetich@,)zahoo. com
Kelly@Kellyradetich. com
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Philip Eskins <philipeskins@gmail.com>
Sunday, July 31, 201-5 3:25 PM
GRP-Council; Firstname Lastname
Renter Initiative Proposal
Hello members of the Burlingame City Council
I was a resident of Burlingame for 7 years. My wife I and had to move away because of the increasing rent
prices. When we moved to the area in 2008, right after getting married, we were able to find a 1 bedroom
apartment for $950 a month which was our first home. The rent did not increase much until2014 when the
building was sold. To recoup the price of the building being sold our rent was increased almost $500 a month,
we were paying $1050 at the time and it was going to be about $1600 a month. Our only choice at that time was
to move into a two bedroom apartment with a friend to continue living in the area and working at the jobs we
had established. We luckily were able to find a place to move into, but it was hard living like that as a married
couple living with a roommate and having to share a bathroom. Our rent was $2400 a month, it was taking 3
full time incomes in order to keep us housed in Burlingame and be able to pay the rest of our bills.
Our story is very typical of what your residents go through living in Burlingame where the average price for a 1
bedroom on craigslist is now at $2000 a month. I STRONGLY urge the council to let the measure be placed on
the November ballot so the people can vote on it, it'll help people like my wife and I possibly stay in
Burlingame and contribute to the community. Any delay in the measure WILL cost the homes of people just
trying to get by. Please do not waste the tax payer money on a report that other cities in the area are not
requiring for their rent initiative proposals.
Sincerely
Philip Eskins
Former Burlingame resident
PS I wish we could have stayed living in the beautiful city that is Burlingame but it just got too expensive to
continue on, it was very difficult leaving our friends and jobs we had established over the past 7 years.
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Terry Nagel <terrynagel@gmail.com >
Sunday, July 31,2016 1:32 PM
GRP-Council
Challenge to ballot measure
Hi, everyone-
Just want to add my 2 cents regarding the challenge to the rent stabilization measure proposed for
the November ballot that you will be discussing [\/onday night. Three points stand out:
1. The city attorney has determined that voters reading the petition would understand the nature of
the law being proposed and its intention to wipe out all previous laws inconsistent with it (her citations
of Santa Paula v. Herrera and Lin v. City of Pleasanton are persuasive).
2. The petitioners have followed the rules and received confirmation from county elections officials
that they have enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot.
3. lt would cost an estimated $145,000 to hold a special election should the process be delayed (and
likely more to fight a legal challenge).
Therefore, whether or not you support the measure, it seems best to allow to democratic process to
continue and let the voters decide this matter in November.
Thanks for your consideration.
Best,
Terry Nagel
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
A1l,
Anything else will be a reflection on your ethics and values.
Time to let the voters VOTE and get rid of special interest smoke and mirrors that could hold up the democratic
process.
As a life-long resident of Burlingame who attended OLA and now have children of my own, I will be at
Monday's meeting with my fellow life-long Burlingame friends, and will be watching with intense scrutiny and
interest to see how each council member votes to certify or not certify the rent control initiative and will act
accordingly when your time approaches for elected office!
Again, as Father Michael told me when I was a six year old boy, "John, as you go through life, remember, it
will always be important to do the right thing. God is watching."
From:
Sent:
IO:
Cc:
Subject:
Cordially and respectfully!
John
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message :
From: Burlingame Renters
John Spanek <johnspanek@gmail.com >
Sunday, July 3L, 2016 l-0:58 AM
GRP-Council
Burlingame Renters
Fwd:TODAY: Points to Use in Your Email or Phone Call to the Burlingame City Council
.com>
Date: July 31,2016 at 70:32:1 1 AM PDT
To : undisclosed-recipients : ;
Subject: TODAY: Points to Use in Your Email or Phone Call to the Burlingame City
Council
I am strongly urging each of you to email or call each Burlingame City Council member (contact
info below) today to tell them we want them to CERTIFY our ballot measure FOR THIS
NOVEMBER 2016 ELECTION. Any other action will delay the democratic process and you
may wait another year for rent stabilization! Below are some points you may wish to use in your
message:
Why the Burlingame City Council Should Adopt the Resolution to Certify the
Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for Eviction Initiative for the Ballot for
NOVEMBER 2016.
1
I agree with everything Cindy is saying below. They followed the RULES, now it's up to you to do the same.
FOLLOW THE RULES.
1. The grassroots petition drive for the initiative involved hundreds of volunteer
hours to collect over 3,000 supportive Burlingame residents' signatures. The legal
process has been followed and the City Council should uphold the democratic
process by certifying the initiative for the Novembet 2016 ballot.
2. The City Clerk recommends placing the initiative on the ballot for November
20t6
3. The City Attorney recommends placing the initiative on the ballot for
November 2016.
4. There is no need for a special report that SAMCAR is demanding. Four other
city councils (Mountain View, San Mateo, Richmond, and Alameda) are certiflring
similar ballot measures without requiring a report. In addition, the City could have
asked for a report after the Petition was originally filed in April, not at this late
stage of the process.
5. Putting the initiative on the ballot this November will save the City $100,000
and the additional costs of requiring City staff to produce an unnecessary report.
Councilmember Emily Beach | (415) 377-8125 | ebeach@burlingame.org
Councilmember Michael Brownrigg | (a15) 987-3230 |
mbrownrig g@burlingame. org
Councilmember Donna Colson I dcolson@burlingame.org
Mayor Ann Keighran | (650) 340-9399 | akeighran@burlingame.org
Vice Mayor Ricardo Orta I (650) 678-4432 | rortiz@,burlineame.org
To e-mail all at once: council@burlingame.org
AND PLEASE COME TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON MONDAY NIGHT AT
CITY HALL BY 6:45! We will be wearing "Protect Burlingame" stickers so you can find
us. It is likely you will be able to speak if you wish, but probably for only one
MiNUtE. IMPORTANT THAT RENTERS AND THEIR SUPPORTERS SHOW UP!
2
Cindy
Burlingame Advocates for Renter Protections
3
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Tom Thompson <talltom@rwthompsonproperties.com >
Sunday, July 31, 2016 6:37 AM
COUNCIL-Emily Beach; COUNCIL-Donna Colson; COUNCIL-Ricardo Ortiz; COUNCIL-
Michael Brownrigg; COUNCIL-Ann Keighran
GRP-Council
Rent Control Petition
Cc:
Subject:
Democracy works best in the light of day.
Unfortunately, the Burlingame Rent Control Petition is a power-grab by San Francisco & East Palo
Alto "community organizers". They larded the Burlingame ordinance with legislative "power pork" in
the shape of a new rent board with virtually unlimited budget and power.
Of particular concern in the rent control petition is section 20.04.100 (k) (top page 16) which reads:
"The commission shall be an integral part of the government of the city, but shall exercise its powers
and duties under this chapter independent from the City Council, City Manager, and City Attorney,
except by request of the Commission".
This is cleverly worded "lawyer language". lt means the commission has a blank check to do as they
please. Again, the commission can exercise their power independent from inbrterence, control, fiscal
restraints or oversight by City Council, City Manager and City Aftorney. lt is a dangerous and
expensive precedent in government to establish a virtually uncontrollable commission. The Rent
Control Commission would have unlimited power to tax, make their own rules, change rules
whenever they want. . . all with unlimited costs fronted from the Burlingame general fund. What a
poster child for bad government. A fiefdom will be created by commissioners who were not elected
and who need not answer to voters.
A partial list of Rent Control Commission costs, initially funded by Burlingame general fund, includes:
1) Hiring any and all staff the commission decides they want.
2) Hiring attorneys to write rent control rules, procedures, hearing rules, appeal procedures,
personnel policies, etc.
3) Hiring accountant(s) to establish budgets, fee structures etc.
4) Ongoing litigation defense costs of the ordinance itself and any decisions by the commission.
5) Office space, maintenance, janitorial costs, phones, utilities etc.
6) Computers, equipment and office furnishings.
I urge you to shine the light of day on fhls issue. Adopt Staff Report Opilon 3, and prepare a Fiscal
lmpact Report on the rent control petition As responsible elected officials, I strongly urge you to do
the right thing so that voters can make an informed decision. Air the fiscal impact report in a public
city council meeting so that everyone will know the facts. You owe this to Burlingame voters.
Voters have a right to know, and a need to know, what the proposed rent control ordinance will cost.
Voters need to be informed on aspects such as the start-up costs, operational costs, loss of
increased future property tax revenue, additional related city overhead expenses, substantial cost of
Honorable Members of the Burlingame City Council:
1
initial and ongoing litigation, related costs and other general overhead related matters. How else
could voters make an informed decision?
There may be an investment to preparing a fiscal impact report and then placing the rent control
petition on a future ballot. lt's a relatively small and reasonable price to pay. You would be
demonstrating both transparency in government and fiscal responsibility. Voters deserve to be fully
informed before they vote.
I am out of town for the August 1st council meeting. I can be reached by cell phone at 650-678 -0252 if
you have any questions.
Respectfully
Tom Thompson
Board lVember & Past President, San Mateo Rotary Haciendas (131 Low income units)
Past President, Rotary Club of San Mateo
Real Estate Broker, representing buyers and sellers in Burlingame
Rental Property Provider and lVlanager
Tom MBA Broker
CA RE Broker License 01343030
Office 650/ 312-1819
Direct 6501678-0252
Faxl 357-1327
Email : talltom@rwthompsonproperties.com
Website www. rwthom pson properties.com
2
k*ryr**
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Art Michael <arthur940L0@gmail.com >
Saturday, July 30, 20L6 2:18 PM
GRP-Council
Rent ControlSubject:
Please consider Option #3 when you decide on the rent control initiative Monday night.
Thank you,
Sue Michael
1340 Carlos
Burlingame, CA 94010
(6s0) 343-8s17
1
CLK-Meaghan Hasse!-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Please vote for Option 3.
Cordially,
Cathy & Peter Deutsch
1633 Lassen Way
Slnce 1981
PETER DEUTSCH <peterhdeutsch@gmail.com>
Saturday, July 30, 2016 1-0:46 AM
GRP-Council
Option 3
1
CLK- Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Melanie Smith <melsmith53@outlook.com>
Saturday, July 30, 2016 8:51 AM
GRP-Council
Rent Control initiative
Dear Council Members,
Please vote for Option 3 of the Rent Control Initiative on August lst.
Respectfully,
Melanie Smith
Melanie Smith & Dieter Hartmann
Realtors I Previews Property Specialist
Coldwell Banker
650 464-080s | 650 400-049s
www.HartSmithHomes. com
www.F acebook. com/HartSmithHomes
Selling fine Homes on the Peninsula Since 1988
BRE 00980844 & 00980843
1
CLK- Meag han Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Nicholas Shevelyov < nshevelyov@ gmail.com >
Friday, July 29,2016 8:28 PM
G RP-Council; Nick Shevelyov
Rent ControlSubject:
Council Members,
The so called "Community Action" goup behind the rent control initiative DOES NOT represent the interests
of property tax paying citizens of Burlingame.
Please vote option 3 so that voters have an opportunity to make an informed decision.
Thank you,
Nick Shevelyov
600 Bayswater Ave
Burlingame CA 94010
Sent from my iPhone
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Burlingame City Council Members:
As the owner of a small apartment building in Burlingame, I respectfully urge you to vote for Option 3 of the Burlingame Staff
Report.
Thank you
Doug Robertson
douqnrGpacbel-1 . net
Doug Robertson <dougnr@pacbell.net>
Friday, )uly 29,2016 8:20 PM
GRP-Council
Proposed Rent Control Initiative
Virus-free. www. avast.com
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Jay Grossman <jhgrossman@live.com >
Friday, July 29,2016 8:09 PM
ci ndy@ rentersrig htsnow.com
GRP-Council;COUNCIL-Emily Beach;COUNCIL-Michael Brownrigg;COUNCIL-Donna
Colson; COUNCIL-Ann Keighran; COUNCIL-Ricardo Ortiz
RE: Burlingame RENT CONTROL MEASURE on Monday August 1st
I work part-time on MONDAY, Aug 1st but the SENIOR APARTMENT SITUATION in Burlingame is RATED as
an EXTREMELY BAD/POOR situation.
With Social Security RAISES at ZERO percent again next year and getting a part-time job next year being next
to impossible...SEN|ORS are DEFINITELY being FORCED OUT of Burlingame without some type of Rent Control
Measures tied to income.
ihgrossma n@live.com
From : ci ndy@ rentersrightsnow.com
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 L6:34:28 -0700
Subject: Fwd: Fw: Fwd: Burlingame RENT CONTROL Monday
To:
This is why you all must come on Monday night to Gity Hall. The
realtors are lobbying the City Gouncil to delay our ballot initiative for
rent stabilization FOR NO GOOD REASON! They will fill the chambers
with landlords and realtors. Get there at 6:30 and get a seat! ln the
meantime, feel free to call or email all of the council members listed
below.
This upcoming Monday, August 1,2A16, the Burlingame City Council will
determine when an egregious rent control initiative is placed on the ballot.
OPTION 3 in the Burlin oam e Staff Report says that the City Council could
request a fiscal impact report from the City
ys to present their findings to the Council, and
1
OPT ION 3: Staff would have 30 da
the measure would NOf go on the November ballot, so that the voters have the
opportunity to make an informed choice. After Sfaff's presentation of the fiscal
impact report, the City Council would need to call for a Special Election on the
Rent Control measure, which would take place next year.
Please join us in attending the Burlingame City Council N/eeting on [Vlonday,
August 1 and ask the Council to vote for OPTION 3.
Monday, August 1 at 7 PM
Burlingame City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA
lf you are not able to attend the Council lMeeting in person, please contact all of
the City Councilmembers and urge them to please vote for OPTION 3 of the Rent
Control lnitiative:
(You can email all councilmembers as once by sending an email to:
co u nc i I @ b u r I i n g a m e. orgl
Councilmember Emily Beach | (415) 377-8125 | ebeach@burlinqame.orq
Councilmember Michael Brownrigg I (415) 987-3230 I
mbrownrioo@ rlinoame.oro
Gouncilmember Donna Colson I dcolson@burlinqame.orq
Mayor Ann Keighran | (650) 340-9399 | akeiqhran@burlinqame.ors
Vice Mayor Ricardo Ortiz | (650) 678-4432 | rortiz@burlinqame.orq
B5O WOODSIDE WAY, SAN IVIATEO, CA 94401
Phone (650)696-8200 | Fax (650) 342-7509 | samcar@samcar.org I www.samcar.oro
COPYRIGHT O SAN I\4ATEO COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS@
2
CLK-Meag han Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
L <susanlewisstuff@yahoo.com >
Frlday, )uly 29, 2016 6:04 PM
GRP-Council
Burlingame citizens deserve option 3
Elected Burlingame City Council members -
The voters of Burlingame deserve much better than to have rent control- aka property control -
rushed to the ballot.
This is a busy Presidential election year. Respect your constituents and respect the important
Presidential selection process.
Urging you to Select OPTION 3 in the Burlingame staff report for the good of Burlingame
Burlingame's future depends on it.
lsn't the future of beautiful Burlingame worth a little extra effort ?
1
CLK- Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Bijan Amini <bijanaminiL9@gmail.com>
Friday, July 29,2016 5:04 PM
GRP-Council
Burlingame rent control issue
Dear Council,
I urge you to please vote for OPTION 3 of the Rent Control initiative on Monday, August 1. Rent control in
City of Burlingame will discourage investors to invest in the City and/or maintain their property in a top
condition.It will hurt the economy of the City and will stop the normal healthy growth of property values.
Regards,
Bijun Amini
Broker
Quest Real Estate
www.Bi .com
Bi.i an@Bij anAmini. com
CeII - (6s0) 888-7888
e-FAX - (6s0) 352-90s5
Office - (6s0) 343-4824
BRE# 01717506
1
tr
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
Flom:
Sent:
To:
subject:
Herman/Marina van Blommestein <vbconst@earthlink.net>
lvlonday, August 0L, 2016 1:56 PM
GRP-Council
Opposed to Rent Control
Dear Councilmembers:
As a member of the local community (San Mateo resident) I am opposed to rent control anywhere in the peninsula as
there has never been a city in which rent control works. lts only benefit it to the few who "get in" yet the overall
economic effect to the public is disastrous-decreased rental units, spiked rental increases upon vacancies, decreased
maintenance, rising costs of units etc, as you well know. The issue is not a problem of rental increases in the area,
though there have been cases of ridiculous increases. The issue is a housing problem. Housing and multiple units are
beinj built all around which will help with the supply issue however, we will then have an infrastructure issue as our
roads, schools etc can not support more people in this area.
RENT CONTROL is not a solution. YOu need a growth plan that is realistic and includes more schools, park areas and
roads. you also need to have enough water. I urge you to vote against any rent control. At this point, I understand you
have an option of requesting a study to evaluate rent control's effects. At minimum you should do that and NOT place
the rent control issue on the ballot.
Tha nk you
Marina van Blommestein
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
subject:
tommclo@netscaPe.net
Monday, August 01, 2016 12:36 PM
G RP -Cou ncil
Rent Stabilization must be on Nov. ballot
During tonight's City Council meeting, please vote to certify for the November, 2016 election the Rent
Stabilization measure. The voters have a right to vote on it. There is no need to delay it, certainly not at an
extra SIOO,OO expense. The adequate number of valid signatures have been collected and verified by Mark
church,s office. Both the city Attorney and city clerk recommend placing the in itiative on the ballot. Thank
you.
Tom McCloskey
828 El Camino Real
Burlingame
1
CLK-Mea han Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sonja Shevelyov < so nja.shevelyov@ I ma i l.co m >
Monday, August 07,2016 L2:72 PM
GRP-Council
Please Vote Option 3 tonight!!
Dear City Council of Burlingame,
As a resident and property owner in Burlingame I have become aware of the rent control proponents in
Burlingame. please vote Option 3 tonight and ensure that a thorough study is done before even remotely
considering this. Because it just doesn't make sense.
Right now it is simple. Landlords and tenants essentially agree on a rate and rents are done. The market
naiurally controls this. Rent control removes this. Since a portion of renters would be renting below market,
year after year. That upsets the natural equilibrium.
And when you have an attractive, popular area like Burlingame you have more tenants desiring housing in the
area. So if you get in as a tenant andget a'deal', and stick around, you'll be one of the few. The rest of everyone
coming in pays market. It's inherentlaunfair to landlords AND new residents paying market. Landlords don't
receive what the market would pay tirem. New residents that may be great contributors to the community AND
can pay market are kePt out.
We'd do all this versus allowing the market treat everyone equally which the current laws allow? It just doesn't
make sense.
Nor do we want to encourage big property-firms to demo existing buildings to build say, luxury condos, to
avoid that law about ro r.ni-.orrtrol on buildings built since 1995. In a desirable area where there is a market
for that I am sure that would happen.
Anyway, what I have appreciated about Burlingame living here the last 9 years is how the city council is very
studious & thoughtful. Thank you for your consideration.
Regards,
Sonja Shevelyov
600 Bayswater Ave (Lyon Hoag neighborhood)
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kstelzerl"0@aol.com
I\4onday, August 01, 2015 12:19 PM
GRP-Council
Rent control measure
Dear Burlingame Council Members:
I urge the council to go for option 3 so that more study can be done on the rent control proposal and landlords/investors
caribe heard from. I have been a renter on the peninsula for 20 years and also have a property management business in
Burlingame. lvly clients are individuals, not corporations or investors. I understand both sides. I think other measures
could !e taken io make housing more affordable than strict rent control. State laws are already very skewed in favor of
renters. Owners who have to rent out their homes to relocate for business for limited periods of time need to be able to
move back into their homes as they need to without penalties, and likewise owners who wish to remodel or remove their
home from the rental market should have the right to do so without penalty. I have had to move many times with young
children over the years because the owner wanted to sell their home or make other changes. lt comes with being renter
and the owners'freedom should not be taken away or penalized.
Thank you for your consideration
t<alhu steLzeY
Kathy Stelzer
Partner
Cambridge Property Management
533 Airport Blvd., #400
Burlingame, CA 94010
650-548-2566 office
650-81 4-137 2 cell Kathy
kstelzerl0 @aol.com
License #00764567
1
CLK-Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
to:
Subject:
tommclo@ netscape.net
Monday, August 01,2016 12:36 PM
GRP-Council
Rent Stabilization must be on Nov. ballot
During tonight's City Council meeting, please vote to certify for the November, 2016 election the Rent
Stabilization measure. The voters have a right to vote on it. There is no need to delay it, certainly not at an
extra SIOO,OO expense. The adequate number of valid signatures have been collected and verified by Mark
church,s office. Both the city Attorney and city Clerk recommend placinS the initiative on the ballot. Thank
you.
Tom McCloskey
828 El Camino Real
Burlingame
1
CLK-Meag han Hassel-Shearer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
tommclo@ netscape.net
N,4onday, August 0L,2016 12:36 PM
GRP-Council
Rent Stabilization must be on Nov. ballot
During tonight's City Council meeting, please vote to certify for the November, 2016 election the Rent
Stabilization measure. The voters have a right to vote on it. There is no need to delay it, certainly not at an
extra S1OO,0O expense. The adequate number of valid signatures have been collected and verified by Mark
Church,s office. Both the City Attorney and City Clerk recommend placing the initiative on the ballot. Thank
you.
Tom McCloskey
828 El Camino Real
Burlingame
1
Burlingame City Council
Re: Rent Control lssue
August 1,2016
I am a property owner of a condo in Burlinga me but not a resident of the city
lwish to express two concerns regarding the rent control issue.
1.This measure is completely unfair to out of city owners since we cannot vote on it.
Yet we would be affected the most by it.
lnformation has been printed that Burlingame consists of close to 50 % renters.
This creates an unfair advantage stacked against out of city owners.
With such a high percentage of renters, the measure has a high chance of passing.
2.Another unfair point is the requirement to pay displaced tenants three months
worth of rent. That is totally out of line.
One month's rent would be reasonable.
For both of these reasons, I think this measure is unfair.
Non resldent owners need to provide input on it as well.
Sincerely,
Maria lskiw
*1a,*> &rMr-
Owner of 1110 Bayswater Ave. #306 Burlingame
Resident of San Bruno
Ms. Marla lskiw
549 4th Ave
San Bruno CA 94066-451 1
Burlinga me City Council
Re: Rent Control lssue
August 1,20L6
I am a property owner of a house in Burlingame but not a resident of the city'
I wish to express two concerns regarding the rent control issue.
1.This measure is completely unfair to out of city owners since we cannot vote on it
Yet we would be affected the most by it.
lnformation has been printed that Burlingame consists of close to 50 % renters.
This creates an unfair advantage stacked against out of city owners.
2.Another unfair point is the requirement to pay displaced tenants three months
worth of rent. That is totally out of line.
One month's rent would be reasonable.
For both of these reasons, lthink this measure is unfair'
Non resident owners need to provide input on it as well
Sincerely,
Roman lskiw
%*^r%;
Owner of 1248 Paloma Ave. Burlingame
Resident of San Bruno
I ISi-990t6 vJ 'oulug rrBS.e^Y qlf 6rs
,rq{sl uBurou ffi
Burlingame CIty Councll
Re: Rent Control lssue
August 1,2016
I am a property owner of a house in Burlingame but not a resldent of the clty.
I wish to express two concerns regarding the rent co.ntrol lssu.er
For both of these reasons, I think thls measure ls unfalr.
Non resident owners need to provide lnput on lt as well.
l.This measure is completely unfair to out of city owners since we cannot vote on it.
Yet we would be affected the most by lt. : '
tnformation has been prlnted that Burllngame,conslsts of close to 50 % renters.
. , This creates an unfalr advantate Stacked agalnst out of clty owners,
2.Another unfair point ls the requirement to pay displaced tenants three months
worth of rent. That is totally out of line. 'i
One month's rent would be reasonable. : ; " r l
Sincerely,
Was, I D.^orl..(tlg/tb+*plqr
r.sid.*$ o 4 M; t[L r".
o w Ler o4 5/$- 4l* q.r, ftd Er.rt;\o^.
Ynlz
v? crrtltt:d
-us aJ )lt :11 ao C?-I.,'..aq,- I :s? fn
(C Citv of / tingame
MONTHLY PERMIT ACTIVITY
June 201 6
THIS MONTH
#
4 46,000
6 109,860
THIS MONTH
LAST YEAR F. Y. 2016 F. Y.2015DIFF DIFF
Perrnit Type
WATER HEATER
SWIMMING POOL
SIGN
ROOFING
RETATNING WALL
PLUMBING
NEW SFD
NEW COMMERCIAL
NEW 5 UNIT APT OR CO
NEW 3 OR 4 UNIT APT
MECHANICAL
KITCHEN UPGRADE
FURNACE
2 8,500 1 69,000 -88
3 11,000 -3s
13 638,264 -70
4 7,200
t4 188,874
I 30,000
12 68,565 19 71,366 -4
I 630,000 1 750,000 -16
##
98s
o//o
372
I l3
9
#
2
7
30
182
o//o
6t9
-12
a1
13 25,762
13 260,741
34 183,924
182 3,412,084
2 25,000
187 924,166
12 8,637,300
2 35,200,000
56 488,707
40 1,076,779
41,660
3,585
147,000
169,366
3,862,409
4 93,500
204 890,841
l8 11,079,575
41 337,249
33 807,154
5 19,795
77
73
4
I
2 9,745
3 51,500
I 1,500
7
aJ
45
26
ll0
259
ELECTRICAL SERVICE 5,388 2 1,500
City of Burlingame
MONTHLY PERMIT ACTIVITY
June 2016
THIS MONTH
#
THIS MONTH
LAST YEAR F. Y. 2016 F. Y.2015DIFF DIFF
Perrnit Type
ELECTRICAL
###o//o o//1)
26
a
9
95
l5 422,141
BATHROOM UPGRADE 6 83,400
l0 76,210
9 144,700
454
-42
-6
-88
175 2,083,467
67 1,039,304
371 25,055,412
I 19 29,679.828
150 1,658,291
65 1,060,683
334 22,956,075
95 I 5,213,988
ALTERATION RESIDENTI 34 2,486,046 25 2,639,423
ALTERATION NON RES 6 64,500 7 548,750
Totals:104 4,115,086 96 5,043,443 -18 1,283 108,079,523 1,172 58,301,011 85
)))
TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION
Approved Minutes
Regular Meeting of Thursday, June 9, 2016
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:04 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL
2
3
MEMBER PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Akers, Bush, Londer, Wettan
Martos
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
\-Prior to the approval of minutes, Chair Londer recognized Council Member Beach in
attendance.
Motion: To accept the minutes of May 12,2016 with the following three edits:
. Page two, item 7a, paragraph one - change the word missing to remaining;
. Page two, item 7b, paragraph two - correct Sergeant Ford's name; and
o Page six, item 8d, paragraph one - change Wettan to Akers.
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON-AGENDA
No public comments
6. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
M/S/C: Wettan/Akers; 41011
Mr. Chou provided the Commission with an update on the Carolan Avenue Complete
1
\-
i
a) Carolan Avenue Complete Streets Update
Streets Project. Mr. Chou recognized the Commission has previously provided input
and was instrumental in coming up with some of the design work related to the project.
He also stated that while staff can look into any Commission comments and requests
that are generated from this update, it will have to be done in a very limited time frame
before the planned construction phase; as staff did not want to negatively impact the
grant funding schedule for the project.
Mr. Chou explained that, as heard at previous TSPC meetings, the City has had
difficulties with Caltrans regarding the required archeological studies. This has held up
the project. He continued that, as of today, Caltrans has not responded to the City to
confirm approval of the archeological studies submitted for the project. Mr. Chou said the
City's expectation is to go ahead with submitting the plans and specifications to Caltrans
for the construction funding obligation (E76) later this month unless the archeological
studies are rejected. He reiterated that the studies were a requirement of federal grant
funds.
Mr. Chou reviewed the striping plan and "road diet." Some design details that were
pointed out include:
. High visibility crosswalk at the intersection at Morrell Avenue;
o Turn pockets for the North Park Apartments;
. Bicycle boxes at Broadway and Oak Grove intersections;
. 9'Parking areas northbound and southbound;
. 5-6'Bike lanes with 3'buffers northbound and southbound;
. New signage for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists;
r Raised curbs and buffers at each intersection; and
. Landscaping in selected locations such as Cadillac Way and Toyon Drive.
Mr. Chou went on to explain the bike lane transition/crossover at the Carolan and Oak
Grove intersection for those vehicles making a right on to Oak Grove. He also noted that
the City has funds programmed for a future project to install signals at Oak Grove and
Carolan, as does Caltrain as part of their Electrification Project.
Commissioner Wettan voiced his concerns about how bicyclists would interact with cars
turning right on Oak Grove from Carolan traveling southbound. He said it is troubling
because it's a pathway to Burlingame High School with students possibly biking to
school. He noted that he understands there were many constraints that factored into the
current design but felt having cars on both sides of the bicyclists, coupled with people
rushing in the morning to get somewhere, is a safety concern.
Mr. Chou explained the challenges and logic behind the current design. He indicated it
was a difficult balance because if a dedicated bike lane were to be moved to the
curbside, there would now be a sight visibility problem with the northbound traffic having
trouble seeing bicyclists. Mr. Chou said the current design is the accepted design
2
standard and is the best way for riders to be seen.
Chair Londer indicated that he shared the same concern as Commissioner Wettan. He
noted that many of the drivers traveling towards Burlingame High School may be less
experienced behind the wheel.
Vice-Chair Akers inquired about the anticipated users for Carolan Avenue, the traffic
flow, and lhe entrance to the Rosalie O'Mahony Pedestrian Bridge. Mr. Chou indicated
that the City's data showed there are not many student bicyclists traveling through that
corridor, but mostly service workers. tvlr. Chou acknowledged that this may change. ln
regards to the flow inquiry, Mr. Chou said the plan is to encourage northbound bicycle
traffic to utilize Cadillac Way where there is less traffic. He also indicated a new signal
has been agreed upon with Caltrans at Rollins and Cadillac Way. He indicated that the
City is planning a separate follow-up project to improve the Carolan/Cadillac intersection
with additional bike safety features. Mr. Chou shared that the follow-up design project
would look similar to a signalized intersection-but is not. He said currently the City is
having a conceptual discussion about bicycle-only signals and indicated staff is working
with the design team to determine appropriate use and effectiveness. Lastly, Mr. Chou
pointed out that the entrance to the Rosalie O'Mahony Pedestrian Bridge will be further
south, closer to Cadillac Way.
Commissioner Bush inquired about the priority of bicyclists traveling through the Rollins
and Cadillac intersection. Mr. Wong replied by indicating that staff talked with the design
team to possibly create a standalone signal that is pedestrian actuated (no flashing). He
said this feature is not currently shown on the plans.
Commissioner Bush shared that he is not as concerned with the bike lane crossover on
Carolan and Oak Grove, as he has observed and ridden through similarly designed
areas such as Page Mill in Palo Alto. He also noted that his observations have indicated
that there is not much morning traffic in the area in question and he did not share the
same level of concern as other Commissioners. Commissioner Bush did inquire about
moving the signal prior to the crossover of cars and bikes going southbound on Carolan
so people stop before the crossover occurs. Mr. Chou indicated that the crossover
occurs approximately 400 feet prior to the intersection.
Commissioner Bush also inquired about moving the bike lane inside of the parked cars
similar to bike lanes he has observed in New York in order to provide increased safety
and to reduce the chances of being "doored." Mr. Chou said the City looked at several
alternatives which included moving the bike lanes, including cycle tracks and diagonal
parking, but found during the public comment period that the majority of riders preferred
the current design as presented. He went on to say he could ask the design team to pull
up the alternative drawings from a year ago to see what the concept looks like again;
however, the project needed to move forward so as not to negatively affect federal grant
money for the project.
3
Commissioner Wettan and Vice-Chair Akers reiterated their safety concerns for the
younger and inexperienced bicyclists utilizing the southbound bike lane at Carolan
Avenue and Oak Grove. Vice-Chair Akers acknowledged that staff has vetted the best
possible engineering solution on a street that isn't a great place for a bike lane being
utilized by high school students. He said this is a challenge given the close proximity of
the High School but if the advanced rider is the main user of this particular bike lane, it
would be worth doing. He also added that he is hopeful this will not deter the option of
having a bike lane along California Drive. ln response, Mr. Chou articulated that the
original concept of the bike lane on Carolan Avenue was for recreational and commuter
bicyclists. He also stated that a bike lane along California Drive for the school population
would be beneficial.
Vice-Chair Akers stated that the Oak Grove and Cadillac intersection needs to be a high
priority after the conclusion of this project.
Chair Londer opened public comment
Elaine Breeze representing Summer Hill Apartment Communities expressed her
gratitude with the City's outreach efforts and indicated she is thrilled about the poect.
She also inquired about enlarging the bike boxes to which Mr. Wong indicated that staff
would look into the request.
Chair Londer closed public comment.
b) Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
Mr. Wong provided an update as to what's occurred to date with the BPAC efforts-
more specifically the draft charter. The Charter expands duties of the current BPAC,
establishes a structure, and reporting process. The Charter was presented to the City
Council on April 18, 20'16. There are some shared concerns between the City Council
and BPAC supporters regarding the proposed structure being limited to 3-5 members,
composition of membership, how members are selected, and continuing a free
exchange of ideas and concerns. Based on all the feedback staff has received, there are
t\ivo options which would allow the BPAC to proceed without being regulated by the
Brown Act.
The first option involves adopting a structure similar to that of the City's Citizen's
Environmental Council (CEC). This structure provides a free-flowing discussion without
being bound by the Brown Act. The CEC has an open membership, with directors and
members who are represented on the City's TSPC, Planning Commission, Park and
Recreation Commission, Beautification Committee, and various PTAs. This group has a
4
Option #'1 - Communitv-based BPAC
diverse membership which was desired by many members of the current BPAC.
. Not bound by the Brown Act.
r This option would have an open membership, with directors and members.
. Community based BPAC would not be affiliated with the City, but an independent
group.
o No restriction on the number of members, nor how often they would meet.
o Responsible for costs of being a tax-deductible charitable organization
(501(c)(3).
. Staff members would be invited to group meetings to provide expertise or provide
updates on City projects. This effort would include staff from both from Public
Works and Planning Departments.
Option #2 - Presentation-based BPAC
The second option would be to have open discussions, with the public in attendance.
These meetings would similar to the public outreach meetings which occurs for some of
the City's larger capital improvemenUplanning projects. At these meetings a discussion
is initiated with a brief presentation, followed by questions, and then comments from the
public regarding the specific project. The process involves a notification with a venue,
date, time, and topic; this is usually done via E-news and emails.
. This structure also provides a free-flowing discussion without being bound by the
Brown Act.
o This option would have no formal membership.
o This group would not be affiliated with the City, but if they so choose they could
be an independent group free to meet without City staff in attendance.
. Staff would in turn take the information gathered at the meeting and incorporate it
into the project, or work in collaboration with the TSPC Chair and Vice-Chair to
place it onto the TSPC agenda for further discussion.
. This option also would allow for other City staff members to be invited to group
meetings in order to provide expertise or provide updates on particular City
projects. This effort would include staff from both from Public Works and
Planning Departments.
A third option was developed after options one and hvo were presented to BPAC
supporters based on cost concerns associated with being a tax-deductible charitable
organization (501(cX3). The third option is a City-based BPAC which would be subject to
the Brown Act but would allow for City funding and regular staff support. Meetings would
occur on a bi-monthly basis under a City-based BPAC.
All three options meet the requirements for various funding agencies.
Chair Londer opened up public comment.
5
Laurie Simonson spoke in favor of a City-based BPAC that meets on a monthly basis
(versus every other month). She stated that the history of the BPAC is important when
deciding which option to choose. Based on her previous experience, she felt the City-
based BPAC is the best option because it provides the most structure, specifically a
Chair and formal agenda. She added that in the past, meetings would be "high-jacked"
therefore the items needing to be addressed would not get the amount of attention
necessary and public comments were not regulated to a time-frame. Ms. Simonson was
unsure if a Presentation-based BPAC with a non-standing committee would fulfill the
MPO requirements for federal funding and suggested that staff look into this. Ms.
Simonson indicated that she would be relocating and will be unable to spearhead the
BPAC. She stressed that if the City continues to linger with their BPAC efforts, much
interest of the BPAC supporters may be lost.
Chair Londer closed public comment.
Commissioner Wettan felt the draft Charter was good overall, specifically pointing out
the structure and feedback mechanisms; but is concerned with the lack of independence
it would provide to the BPAC. He stated the value of the BPAC lies in their ability to have
independent views. Commissioner Wettan felt the Presentation-based BPAC is too
much like an Ad-Hoc committee and may softly put BPAC out of existence. He said that
if the City-based model can only be as it's currently written, he favors the Community-
based model as the ability to be more independent is of high importance.
Commissioner Bush stated that he has been in touch with former members of the BPAC
and there is a lot of concern about whether or not the draft Charter incorporates the
ideas and concerns raised by the group, and therefore people have been losing interest
and stepping down. He stated that this is of great concern to him. Commissioner Bush
indicated that the Community-based model essentially gives the impression that the City
does not want a BPAC due to the lack of staff involvement and assistance to drive policy
decisions at the City level. He also felt that the BPAC would not survive under the
community model because you are relying on the good will of the public. He is similarly
concerned with the Presentation-model because it lacks continuity. Ultimately,
Commissioner Bush favored the City-based model as adhering to the Brown Act doesn't
appear to be of concern. ln closing, he noted that he is concerned with meeting on a bi-
monthly basis under the City-model because it's challenging to keep momentum and get
things done if the group meets every other month instead of monthly.
Vice-Chair Akers supports a Community-based BPAC to start with but feels the question
the City faces is what would be the best adjunct to the TSPC, which already devotes a
substantial amount of time to bicycle related issues. He felt there is value in
accommodating a type of information exchange that is less constrained than the TSPC.
Startup costs can be paid through a City-grant and if the Community-based model does
not work, the City can shift to the City-based model.
6
Chair Londer supports the Community-based BPAC but questioned what is driving the
need to be a (501(c)(3) under the community model. Since the CEC has a community
like structure, Chair Londer shared some of his positive experiences with that particular
commission and the current model they follow.
After additional clarification and discussion, Vice-Chair Akers made the following motion:
The Commission recommends that the Council support and encourage the
creation of a community-based Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee.
The City should be prepared to provide meeting space, staff support, and, at an
appropriate time, grant funding to suppo( the organization.
We believe that a community-based BPAC is more likely lo be effective than a
City committee, which would be subject to the Brown Act and other constraints-
The Commission notes the success of the Citizens Environmental Council, which
may serve as a useful model for a community-based BPAC.
M/S/C: AkersMettan; 3/1 /1
c) Parking lmpact Notification Process
This discussion was initiated with the intent to review the noticing practices as a result of
a particular group of residents not receiving notice from the City regarding new parking
restrictions on a portion of California Drive. The group of residents that were not notified
is located behind California Drive on Hamilton Lane.
Chair Londer suggested the City extend the noticing boundaries past the bare minimum
required as to include all that may be directly impacted by the changes. He also
suggested placing signage in the project area to increase communication to pedestrians
and bicyclists.
Commissioner Wettan felt this is an unusual circumstance as staff has been diligent with
notifying the public and thinks a quick turnaround time may have played a role. A larger
concern of Commissioner Wettan was prioritization as he felt we rushed this project and
we have the same issues-only more severe-north of Dufferin.
Vice-Chair Akers echoed other Commissioner's comments about the general satisfaction
with staff regarding public noticing. On a go fonvard basis, he suggested that staff use
good judgment by determining who will be impacted and the best way to communicate it.
7
7. INFORMATION ITEMS
a) Engineering Division Reports
US101/Broadway lnterchange Project - Stage 3 construction continues. Soil
stabilization and mixing work continues on both sides of the southern limits of the
overpass ramp area. Utility and road work on Bayshore Boulevard has also
begun. PG&E to close US101 and Broadway for several 10-minute durations to
raise transmission towers and pull new transmission lines across US101 on the
morning of June 10.
California Drive Roundabout - 2nd community public meeting held on May 24 in
the Lane Room. The City received positive feedback regarding the roundabout
concept over a signalized intersection. Next community meeting is planned for
fall of this year. There will be a presentation on specific design components
based on comments from the 2nd public meeting and presentation/discussion of
aesthetic elements for the roundabout.
-
a
a
a
a
a
O
TSPC Email Communications - No new communications for June.
City Hall Traffic Study - 2nd presentation held on May 23 in the Lane Room.
Lower turnout than previous meeting, but positive feedback from the attendees.
Finalized concepts to be presented to the Commission at upcoming meeting.
ECRUFloribunda Update - Southbound turn restriction signs install by Caltrans
the first week of June. Duration of pilot study reduced to 18-months.
Hoover School Update - Notices for the crosswalk relocation at Hillside Circle
and Alvarado Avenue have been posted, and an encroachment permit has been
obtained for the raised crosswalk in front of the school.
a
^
TSPC Priority List (Updated June 2016):
TSPC Led Effort
8
1 Downtown ModalAccess
2 B/PAC setup 6/9/16: ltem 6a
3 School Speed Limit Notices/Review
4 School Traffic lssues 3/10/16: ltem 6a
5 California Drive Commuter bike route A1 il16: ltem 6b
6 California Drive parking restrictions 2/11/16: ltem 6b
7 Broadway Parking 3/10/16: ltem 6c
8 Public Shuttles/Transit
I Downtown Speed Limit Review
10 Review TSPC Mandate
\-
Staff Update via Report
b) Police Department Reports
Sergeant Ford provided the following information.
There were a total of 29 accidents since the last TSPC meeting with speed being the
number one collision factor. Two accidents occurred at El Camino Real and Floribunda.
The first was a right-of-way violation that caused the collision on June 18 and another
accident occurred today therefore no details were available yet. Sergeant Ford reminded
the group that when thinking about these stats, half of the intersection at El Camino Real
and Floribunda belongs to the Town of Hillsborough.
Tomorrow, June 10, is Railroad Train Track Safety Day. The PD will use this as an
opportunity to educate people and to focus on Broadway looking for people that stop on
the railroad tracks at a red light. Social media, such as Facebook and Twitter will be
used to get the word out.
The Traffic Unit handled the Diva Race on the east side last weekend. The team did a
good job of advertising the event as there were very little complaints.
There will be a check point on Thursday, June 23 as part of an OTS grant.
The Bike Rodeo event last week in South San Francisco was a success. This Saturday,
June 11, there will be another Bike Rodeo at North Fair Oaks in Redwood City with the
Sherriff's Office and CHP.
9
11 Joint agreements with Caltrans Countyrride
12 ECR Corridor I nfrastructure 4/14/16 & 5/12/16
13 Bay Trail
14 Fee Schedules
15 Joint Commission Meeting (City Council)
1 Caltrans' ECR/Floribunda (Completed)6/9/16: ltem 7a
2 Hoover School Update 6/9/16: ltem 7a
3 Downtown Parkinq Strateqies 3/10/16: ltem 6b
4 City Hall Traffic Calmins/Floribunda 6/9/16: ltem 7a
5 California Roundabout 6/9/16: ltem 7a
6 General Plan - Circulation Element
7 Bike\Ped Plan Update: fi,vd to BPAC
8 Taxi Requlation: Update by BPD
9 Carolan Complete Streets Update 6/9/16: ltem 6b
10 Grant Opportunities
11 Grade Separation 4/14/16: ltem 6b
12 Traffic Brochure Completed
13 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC
\-.
At the next TSPC meeting the newest Traffic Officer, Garrett Penn will attend in
Sergeant Fords place.
Sergeant Ford received an email from Pat Giorni regarding complaints discussed on
NextDoor pertaining to school zones on Trousdale between 280 and Quesada, more
specifically vehicles not stopping at stop signs. Sergeant Ford wanted to let the
Commission and staff know he responded to Ms. Giorni. Since the school year, the PD
has conducted 200 kaffic stops on Trousdale alone and there have been 62 selected
traffic enforcement calls in that area. Sergeant Ford also provided Ms. Giorni with a link
for Stanley Roberts' People Behaving Badly ride along with the BPD, which captured a
lot of video for the show along Trousdale.
Vice-Chair Akers inquired about Sergeant Ford's contacts at SFO related to cab drivers
as he has noticed cabs speeding back and forth to the airport late at night with a fair
amount of regularity. He suggested that Sergeant Ford call his contact at SFO or SFPD
and/or if feasible, conduct targeted enforcement along the northern stretch of El Camino
Real between the hours of 10 - 1 1 pm. Commissioner Wettan suggested creating an
educational pamphlet for cab drivers.
Vice-Chair Akers also inquired about NextDoor and whether or not it's monitored, and if
we can encourage people to post to it. Sergeant Ford indicated it's citizen-based and not
monitored. Sergeant Ford said we can post to the site, but we don't have the capability
to monitor it. He requested that if anyone sees anything he should be aware of, cut and
paste the details and send to him via email.
c) Farmer's lvlarket
Chair Londer and Commissioner Martos attended last month's Farmer's Market and
they did not receive any comments or complaints. There will be another Farmer's
Market on June 19 (Father's Day) to which Chair Londer and Commissioner Wettan
indicated they were available.
d) TSPCChair/Commissioner'sCommunications
Commissioner Wettan noticed that while making a right turn on Rollins from Broadway,
the sidewalk seems widely separated. Commissioner Wettan said he received a
pedestrian access complaint at that location. Mr. Wong took note and will look into it.
10
8. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
a) Downtown Parking (MartosMettan)
No update.
b) Broadway Parking (BushMettan)
No update.
c) BPAC (Akers/Londer)
No update.
d) School Speed Limits (Akers/Londer)
No update.
9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
. City Hall Streets Plan / Traffic Calming (July)
. Working session regarding Broadway parking (July)
. Working session for Commission and Subcommittees (July/August)
. Hoover School opening and school speed limits (August)
. Public shuttles and transit is the next item on the priority list
10:05 p.m.10. ADJOURNMENT
11