Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 2018.01.02 Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 1 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Approved Minutes Regular Meeting on January 2, 2018 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council Chambers. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG The pledge of allegiance was led by Linda Fields. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, Keighran, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. STUDY SESSION a. SOLID WASTE RATES Mayor Brownrigg explained that the study session on solid waste rates was scheduled for two reasons. The first reason is because the South Bayside Waste Management Authority (SBWMA) renegotiated the contract with Recology, and a rate increase is coming. The second reason is because Council should think through the City’s rate structure, as the rates haven’t been increased since 2012. Finance Director Augustine gave a presentation on the background and policy options Council has for the City’s solid waste rates, noting that there were three major cost inputs when determining the City’s revenue requirements to cover the costs. Mayor Brownrigg explained the three major cost inputs. The Recology Contract and the Transfer Station are the first two cost inputs, and they are overseen by SBWMA. The third cost input is the City’s expenses. He explained that the total cost of the three for Burlingame in 2018 is estimated to be $11.17 million. Finance Director Augustine further reviewed the three costs. She stated that the Recology contract is approximately 53% of the total cost and is based on: route labor hours, other route hour costs, containers in service, and number of customer accounts. The recycling and disposal costs account for approximately 31% of the total cost. This cost is based on: recycling, compostable materials, and trash. She explained that the Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 2 advantage of SBWMA’s ownership of the transfer station is that the revenues from recyclables help to offset the cost. Lastly, the City’s expenses, which accounts for 16% of the total cost, include: landfill post-closure expenses, street sweeping, steam cleaning of public containers, a rate stabilization reserve, and the franchise fee to reimburse for wear/tear on city streets. Finance Director Augustine explained that the projected City expenses in 2018 are the following: 1. Street Cleaning - $300,000 2. Landfill Fund (5%) - $340,000 3. Steam Clean Trashcans - $163,000 4. Franchise Fee (GF) - $712,000 Next, Finance Director Augustine reviewed the role of SBWMA. She explained that SBWMA has 12 member agencies. She stated that SBWMA’s role is to provide consolidated management of service providers for the entirety of solid waste operations. This provides the City with a more cost-effective set of services then could probably be provided if the City acted on its own. Mayor Brownrigg explained how the total budget is offset through recycling revenues. However, he stated that the recycling market is volatile, and prices are not stable. Vice Mayor Colson discussed an article that she read about the changes in the global economy for recycling. The article stated that China had shut down the intake of recycling from the United States, which was creating a buildup in the Los Angeles ports. She asked how this impacted Burlingame. SBWMA Executive Director Joe La Mariana stated that there is a significant change in the market that SBWMA sells material to. He explained that there has been a political shift in China that has tightened up the quality of materials that they will accept. He stated that what has arisen is two issues: (1) the price of materials (as more and more recycling materials are available), and (2) the movement of the materials. He explained in the future, SBWMA hopes to still sell the materials but because more are available, the pricing will decrease. Vice Mayor Colson asked if this would impact the future cost of solid waste in Burlingame. Mayor Brownrigg replied in the affirmative, stating that as recycling revenue decreases, landfill costs may increase. Finance Director Augustine reviewed the timeline concerning the extension of the contract for solid waste collection services. She stated that the agreement would be brought to Council in a few weeks. However, she added that the City should expect an increase in Recology compensation of 13% by 2021. Finance Director Augustine stated that the City’s last rate increase was in 2012. She explained that currently the City’s most popular residential rate is the 30 gallon can per week, which costs $23.85 a month. She compared this rate to those in other cities: Los Altos ($31.50), Los Gatos ($24.41), Alameda ($38.68), Palo Alto ($43.75), and Menlo Park ($23.40). She stated that Menlo Park increased their rates for 2018, and their 32 gallon can is now $32 a week. Councilmember Keighran asked when the above mentioned cities had last increased their rates. Finance Director Augustine stated that she would have to get back to Council with that information. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 3 Finance Director Augustine stated that the revised agreements with Recology will lead to a one-time reset of expenses. She stated that this reset is anticipated to require a 10% increase in expenses to each city in 2021. Additionally, she stated that the City’s Rate Stabilization Reserve has been reduced to $855,000 to cover the last three years of increased expenses (2016-$177,000; 2017 - $215,000; and 2018 - $273,000). Therefore, she stated that issues to be considered are: 1. Current rates do not cover costs – when should they be reset and how much? 2. Should the City set guidelines for rate increases, keeping in mind the one-time increase in 2021? 3. Should the City keep the current fee structure? Next, Finance Director Augustine reviewed the City’s Agency fees in 2018: 1. Landfill Post-closure – currently set at 5% ($340,000), used for maintenance and monitoring of old (closed) landfill site 2. Street Sweeping - $300,000 3. Public Containers Steam Cleaning - $162,800 4. Rate Stabilization – 1-2%, will be set at 0% for calendar year 2018 – has been used in recent years to hold off rate increases 5. Franchise Fees - $732,000 Therefore, the City’s total fees for 2018 are $1.65 million, or 16% of the total costs. She then outlined the City’s options including: setting a policy to increase rates; set rates so that the 10% increase in 2021 does not hit in a single year; or leave City fee structure as is. Mayor Brownrigg stated that rate increases tend to be done at the beginning of the year. So the next rate increase would not be done until January 1, 2019. Finance Director Augustine agreed and stated that staff would be coming back with more specific options in the summer. Vice Mayor Colson asked if the 1-2% target for the Rate Stabilization Reserve referred to taking 1-2% of the revenue each year and putting it in the reserve. Finance Director Augustine stated that the 1-2% is the amount that is included in agency fees. The Rate Stabilization Reserve is just the surplus or deficit of that year added to the previous year’s surplus or deficit. Councilmember Beach asked if staff had any recommendations for increasing or decreasing agency fees. Finance Director Augustine replied in the negative. City Attorney Kane stated that the City needs to figure out where to address the cost of illegal dumping, i.e. mattresses and sofas on the street. She explained that illegal dumping is increasing both in frequency and the number of complaints that the City receives. Mayor Brownrigg asked if illegal dumping was a City problem or a landowner problem. City Attorney Kane stated that the responsibility lies first with the people that are doing the illegal dumping, but they are rarely caught. She stated that there are a few hotspots in the City where people come from elsewhere and dump furniture, etc. She added that Recology has been very responsive to this issue. Councilmember Keighran agreed that illegal dumping was a growing concern in the community. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 4 Councilmember Ortiz asked if staff had an estimate of the total cost of illegal dumping. City Attorney Kane replied in the negative. Councilmember Ortiz asked if there was a Proposition 218 limitation on what can or can’t be included in the agency fees. City Attorney Kane stated that there is a split of authority on the applicability of Proposition 218. She explained that the City has always been conservative, and the City needs to ensure that the fees relate to the functions that ratepayers are being charged for. Mayor Brownrigg asked Council for their recommendation on the frequency of rate increases. He explained that the necessary rate increase between now and 2022 is 15-16%. Therefore, he asked if this should be spread out over each year or every other year. He referenced sample rate models that showed an increase of 4% per year would result in an increase in residential monthly rates in the first year from $23.85 per month for a 30-gallon can to $24.80 per month. Vice Mayor Colson stated that the City should work backwards on the math and start with the premise that by 2021, the City is at a net neutral. She stated that her personal take is that the waste services are outstanding. She stated that it is important for the City to communicate to the public why the rates are going up, as to prevent the City from running through its reserves. She explained that if this is properly communicated, she believed the community would back the increases. Councilmember Ortiz agreed with Vice Mayor Colson. He stated that the dollar amount of the increase is very reasonable. Mayor Brownrigg asked if there was a preference of increasing rates every year versus every other. Councilmember Keighran stated it should be done every year so as not to see a double digit increase. Councilmember Beach stated that even a 10% increase is only $2.30 a month. She stated that it is important to increase rates in order to ensure a healthy reserve for future emergencies. Mayor Brownrigg summarized the Council’s guidance stating that a system should be set up that incorporates the increase coming in 2021; there was a preference for smaller annual increases every year; and the Council wants to ensure that the City maintains a healthy reserve. Mayor Brownrigg opened up the item for public comment. No one spoke. Mayor Brownrigg asked staff to review the issue of illegal dumping. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor Brownrigg reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the City. 6. PRESENTATIONS There were no presentations Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 5 7. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no public comments. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Brownrigg asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Colson removed 8b. Councilmember Keighran made a motion to adopt 8a, 8c, 8d and 8e; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. a. ADOPTION OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 18, 2017 City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council adopt the City Council Meeting Minutes of December 18, 2017. b. CONFIRMATION OF THE MAYOR’S COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS FOR 2018 City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council adopt the Mayor’s Council Assignments for 2018. Vice Mayor Colson described the process of coordinating which Councilmember will be on which committee. She voiced her concern that Councilmember Keighran had significantly fewer committee assignments than the other Councilmembers. She explained that Councilmember Keighran is only on two committees, while she is on nine and thought it should be more balanced. Vice Mayor Colson added that some of the committees, like the Dog Park Advisory Group, should be consolidated into the Parks Master Plan Committee. Mayor Brownrigg explained the challenge of working with everyone’s schedules. He stated that he was open to suggestions. Vice Mayor Colson discussed the benefit of having Councilmember Keighran on the Economic Development Subcommittee as she has institutional knowledge of the businesses and development in the City. She stated that she would step off this committee so that it could benefit from Councilmember Keighran’s knowledge. Mayor Brownrigg expressed his belief that the Economic Development Subcommittee is an important and vital committee. He explained that he believed that assignment to this committee should have a more mechanical rotation with the Vice Mayor and the third-in-line being assigned to the committee. He stated that this committee touches all issues in Burlingame. Accordingly, he felt that it was important that assignment to this committee rotate. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 6 Councilmember Keighran stated that she was available for early morning and evening meetings. She asked that she be assigned to the Emergency Services Council because the meetings are held in the building where she works, and she has a health care background. Councilmember Beach stated that she would give Councilmember Keighran that assignment. Mayor Brownrigg agreed to the change. Councilmember Keighran stated that the Council of Cities had a vote in December for the Domestic Violence Commission, and she was chosen as the alternate. Mayor Brownrigg asked the City Clerk to add this to the list of assignments. Vice Mayor Colson added that she is on the County’s Housing and Community Development Committee and Councilmember Beach is on the Transportation Authority. Mayor Brownrigg asked the City Clerk to add these to the list of assignments. Councilmember Keighran asked about the removal of the Parks & Recreation Liaison Committee. Mayor Brownrigg stated that in consultation with staff, those responsibilities were covered by the Parks Master Plan Committee. He suggested reviewing the committees assigned to Parks and Recreation matters. Councilmember Keighran agreed with the Mayor and stated that the Liaison Committee and the Dog Park Advisory Committee discussed options that fit under the Parks Master Plan Committee. She added that Vice Mayor Colson’s former Commission position and knowledge of user groups should be utilized on this committee. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that the Parks Master Plan Committee is a short-term position. City Manager Goldman suggested a Parks & Recreation Committee with two councilmembers and then creating sub-groups with Park & Recreation Commissioners to cover specific matters or projects. Mayor Brownrigg suggested pulling this item and putting it on the next Council agenda. He asked his colleagues to let the City Clerk know of any additional committees they are on outside of what is listed. Councilmember Beach stated that she is on Parks Master Plan Committee. She stated that if this committee interested Councilmember Keighran, she would relinquish that assignment to her. Mayor Brownrigg invited Councilmember Keighran to join him on the Post Office/Town Square Advisory Group. Councilmember Keighran agreed. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 7 Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. c. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO EPS INC., DBA EXPRESS PLUMBING, FOR THE EASTON ADDITION, RAY PARK, AND NEIGHBORHOOD SEWER REHABILITATION PROJECT PHASE 3, CITY PROJECT NO. 84192, AND APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BELLECCI & ASSOCIATES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES RELATED TO THE PROJECT DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 01-2018 and Resolution Number 02-2018. d. ADOPTION A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE ADMINISTRATION (CDTFA) FOR IMPLEMENTATION AN DADMINISTRATION OF BURLINAGME’S LOCAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX; AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING INDIVIDUALS AUTHORIZED TO EXAMINE CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS OF THE CDTFA PERTAINING TO THE TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAXES COLLECTED PURSUANT TO THOSE AGREEMENTS Finance Director Augustine requested Council adopt Resolution Number 03-2018 and Resolution Number 04-2018. e. AUTHORIZATION TO CONTRACT WITH HINDERLITER DE LAMAS AND ASSOCIATES FOR TRANSACTION TAX AUDIT AND INFORMATION SERVICES; AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXAMINIATION OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE ADMINISTRATION’S SALES, USE AND TRANSACTIONS TAX RECORDS Finance Director Augustine requested Council adopt Resolution Number 05-2018. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS There were no public hearings. 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH FUNG COLLABORATIVES AND APPROVE AN ADDITIONAL GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,833 Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad requested Council adopt Resolution Number 06-2018. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad gave an update on the public art project to honor Anson Burlingame. She explained that since the creation of the committee in February 2017, the group has met Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 8 three times. She listed the members of the committee: Mayor Brownrigg, Councilmember Beach, Ruth Waters (Peninsula Art Museum), Russ Cohen (Burlingame Historical Society), David Chai (expert on Anson Burlingame), Janet Martin (community member), and Leslie Holzman (community member). She added that Lance Fung and John Tally from Fung Collaboratives had been hired as consultants on the project. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad discussed the committee’s public outreach on the project. She stated that they hosted two public workshops to educate the community on public art and the history of Anson Burlingame. Additionally, surveys were distributed to the public to gather their input. She discussed the findings of the surveys and public workshops and how the committee used this information to create an RFQ and an RFP. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad explained that an RFQ is a request for qualifications. The committee would choose two artists from the RFQ process and send them the RFP. The RFP would include a request for the artists to complete renderings of what they envision the art piece to be. She explained that the project’s total budget is estimated at $140,000: $10,000 for the first two phases, $100,000 for the art piece, $25,000 for Fung Collaboratives, $1,000 for advertising costs, and $4,500 for the artists’ renderings. She stated that one of the challenges for the committee is asking for funding when they don’t know what the project looks like. Therefore, staff is requesting $13,833 to publish the RFQ and RFP to develop preliminary renderings to aid in the fundraising efforts. Mayor Brownrigg introduced Lance Fung from Fung Collaboratives to discuss the project’s next steps. Mr. Fung discussed the importance of public art and what it can do for the City. He stated that he was impressed by the community’s passion for this project. Mayor Brownrigg stated that 2018 is the 150th anniversary of the Burlingame Treaty. He stated that the City is also obtaining a more standard commemoration of Anson Burlingame in the form of a bust and a collection of his writings that will be displayed at the Library. He thanked Congresswoman Speier and Senator Hill for their assistance. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up to public comment. Burlingame resident Linda Field asked for clarification on how the RFP differs from the RFQ. Mr. Fung stated that many cities combine the RFQ and the RFP. But the industry standard has shifted in recognizing that it is exploitative for the artist to combine the two. He explained that when the two are combined, it requires the artist to give their qualifications and ideas for the project. Many cities will then combine ideas from the different proposals. Mr. Fung explained that by splitting the RFQ and RFP, the City will first receive qualifications from a number of artists in order to determine whose style and experience is the best fit for the City. After the committee determines which two they are interested in, the artists will be asked to participate in the RFP. In the RFP, the artists will submit renderings, for which they will be paid. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 9 Councilmember Keighran asked if the RFQ only involves reviewing the artists’ qualifications. Mr. Fung stated it goes beyond that as the artists will be asked to discuss their approach, give examples of previous works, and submit recommendations. Councilmember Keighran stated she thought it would be important to have specific questions about the project included in the RFQ. Mr. Fung agreed and stated that the RFQ has questions about the artist’s approach. Councilmember Keighran stated that she would feel more comfortable if there were questions included in the RFQ concerning the artist’s proposal for the project. Mayor Brownrigg closed the public comment. Councilmember Beach discussed her experience on the Public Art Committee. She stated that she was excited about not just commemorating a historical event but also adding significant cultural value to the City. She explained that she believed that staff and the committee were approaching this project correctly by going through a process of organizing the community’s ideas, challenging artists, and raising funds. Vice Mayor Colson thanked Mayor Brownrigg and Councilmember Beach for their work. Mayor Brownrigg discussed the process of raising funds for the project and the importance of having artist renderings to aid in this cause. Vice Mayor Colson made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 06-2018; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. b. UPDATE REGARDING HOME FOR ALL COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PILOT PROGRAM Planning Manager Gardiner began by introducing Pat Brown from Home for All. Ms. Brown stated that Home for All grew out of a task force looking at the gap between the number of jobs created in San Mateo County and the number of housing units. She explained that they found a significant gap; approximately 77,000 new jobs and only 4,000 housing units created in the past ten years. This large gap contributed to the significant challenge the county faces with housing at all levels. She stated that after a year of working together, the task force created an action plan called Home for All. She stated the task force found three issues that contributed to the problem: 1) policy, 2) funding, and 3) community will. Ms. Brown explained that Home for All created the Community Engagement Pilot Program to address the issue of community will. Under this pilot program, cities were asked to develop proposals on how they might use consulting assistance and a small amount of funds to develop broader community knowledge and engagement related to housing. She stated that they received six applications, four of which were funded: Burlingame, Half Moon Bay, Portola Valley, and Redwood City. She thanked the City for their interest and enthusiasm. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 10 Planning Manager Gardiner stated that the City’s community engagement project is two-tracked: 1. Village at Burlingame – the affordable housing development on Parking Lot F and 2. Affordable housing policies and programs. Planning Manager Gardiner stated staff’s goal is to reach members of the community who aren’t traditionally part of the civic process. Staff began outreach to these community members through a series of “pop-up” interviews at the Library and then on Burlingame Avenue. Individuals were asked their opinions about Burlingame, housing, and other matters. Additionally, he explained that staff is creating an extensive list of community groups to reach out to about affordable housing. Planning Manager Gardiner stated that staff will be holding a community meeting on February 10, 2018, tentatively at the Burlingame Recreation Center. He stated that from 9 am to 11 am, there will be facilitated discussions. Then from 11 am to 12 pm, staff will discuss ongoing development projects in the city. Planning Manager Gardiner stated that the goals of the community meeting are: 1. Create a better understanding of how varied residents see the future of housing in Burlingame 2. Increase community understanding of housing issues, including how unmet housing needs affect the entire community 3. Create awareness of current and potential housing solutions, and what the City and community may be able to do 4. Develop capacity (and appetite) for constructive dialog: the “community’s conversation” Mayor Brownrigg thanked Home for All, Planning Manager Gardiner, Vice Mayor Colson, and Councilmember Keighran for their work on this effort. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. Burlingame resident Cynthia Cornell asked if the “pop-ups” were advertised and asked to see the list of community groups that staff would be outreaching to. Planning Manager Gardiner stated that Housing for All Burlingame is included. He stated that the “pop-ups” will be advertised in the future. Vice Mayor Colson discussed the “pop-ups” and how they can be informative to the community. She discussed locating the “pop-ups” in different areas to inform residents about projects in their neighborhoods. Councilmember Keighran explained that the “pop-ups” are another opportunity to educate the community on what the City is doing. She added that the consultants should attend the Goal Setting session, as it is another opportunity for them to hear from the community. Council discussed various locations, not on City property, for the community meeting on February 10, 2018. c. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO THE TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION Mayor Brownrigg stated that the following seven applicants were interviewed by then-Mayor Ortiz, Vice Mayor Brownrigg, Councilmember Colson, and Councilmember Keighran on December 5, 2017: Jeff Londer, Daniel Devoy, Irving Agard, Andrew Ahlers, Greg Mand, Lynn Israelit, and Sean Pitonak. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 11 Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Beach stated that she was unable to attend the December 5th interviews, but the interviews were recorded, and she listened to them in order to make her decision. City Clerk Hassel-Shearer gave each Councilmember a ballot to vote for two candidates each for a three-year term. She then read the ballot of each Councilmember. Jeff Londer was unanimously chosen by the Council and Lynn Israelit was chosen by a vote of 4 (Councilmember Ortiz voted for Greg Mand). Mayor Brownrigg thanked all the candidates for their time. Congratulations to Jeff Londer and Lynn Israelit on their appointments to the Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission. d. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPOINTMENT TO THE STORM DRAIN MEASURE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE Mayor Brownrigg stated that the two applicants, Susanna Chan and Matt Feemster, were interviewed on December 5, 2017, by then-Mayor Ortiz, Vice Mayor Brownrigg, Councilmember Colson, and Councilmember Keighran. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Beach stated that she was unable to attend the December 5th interviews, but the interviews were recorded, and she listened to them in order to make her decision. City Clerk Hassel-Shearer gave each Councilmember a ballot to vote for one candidate to serve a four year term. She then read the ballot of each Councilmember. Susanna Chan was unanimously chosen by the Council. Mayor Brownrigg thanked both candidates for their time. Congratulations to Susanna Chan on her appointment to the Storm Drain Measure Oversight Committee. e. DISCUSSION OF THE COMPOSITION AND SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THE MEASURE I OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE AND DETERMINATION OF A PREFERRED SELECTION PROCESS City Manager Goldman presented the staff report concerning the composition and scope of responsibilities for the Measure I Oversight Committee and determination of a preferred selection process. City Manager Goldman gave the background of Measure I. She stated that in November 2017, Burlingame voters approved Measure I, a retail transactions and use tax of a quarter percent, which effectively increases the sales tax rate in Burlingame from 8.75 percent to 9 percent. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 12 City Manager Goldman explained that Ordinance 1944, which was a part of the Measure, requires a separate external audit of the collections and expenditures of the new transactions tax. She stated that Ordinance 1944 also requires the establishment of a Citizens’ Oversight Committee. In reference to the Citizens’ Oversight Committee she explained: 1. The Committee must have no fewer than three persons, and the members shall be residents of the city or representatives of businesses located in the city. 2. Beginning with the fiscal year that ends June 30, 2018, the City’s independent auditors shall, as part of their annual audit of the City’s financial statements, review the collection and expenditure of revenue from the tax. The committee shall annually review the auditor’s findings regarding the revenues and expenditures. 3. By January 31, 2018, the City Council shall adopt a resolution establishing the composition of the committee and defining the scope of its responsibilities. She stated that Finance Director Augustine reviewed how other cities handled sales tax oversight committees. She explained that Ms. Augustine focused on Belmont and South San Francisco and that the staff report contains information about how the two cities structured their committees. City Manager Goldman stated that generally committees consist of five to seven members and meet one or two times a year to review annual audited reports. She explained that the details of committee operations range from detailed bylaws to simple mission statements. She stated that when specifying duties of the committee, most cities relied on the language of the approved ballot measure. Additionally, most committees had no budgetary decision or contractual authority. City Manager Goldman stated that staff is asking the City Council to determine how many members to appoint to the Oversight Committee. She explained that there is widespread interest for this committee and suggested at least five members. She stated that the City Council could designate one or more seats to business representatives. She added that Council should determine length of term, whether or not to have term limits, and whether terms should be staggered. City Manager Goldman discussed the scope of the Oversight Committee. She explained that at a minimum, the committee shall annually review the auditor’s findings regarding the revenues and expenditures and transmit a statement regarding that review to the Council. In addition, the committee shall provide oversight of any bonds that are backed in whole or in part by the Measure I revenues. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Ortiz stated he thought the committee should have five members – four residents and one business owner. He liked the idea of staggering terms and suggested two residents appointed for two-year terms, two residents appointed for four-year terms, and the business owner appointed for a four-year term. Vice Mayor Colson agreed that it should be five members with three residents and two local business leaders. She suggested for the two local business leaders, Council give preference to those that live in Burlingame. She stated she would stagger terms and have three-year terms. Additionally, she explained that she noticed in other cities the councilmembers on the audit committee are non-voting members of the oversight committee. She suggested doing the same. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 13 The City Attorney suggested keeping the language flexible, and having the Council state preferences, so that if the applicant pool is different than desired, adjustments can be made. Councilmember Keighran agreed with Vice Mayor Colson that the committee should be five members with three residents and two business owners. She stated that she would like to see a few members have strong financial backgrounds. She suggested no term limits and using the same process as the other City commissions. Mayor Brownrigg asked Councilmember Keighran what she thought of Vice Mayor Colson’s suggestion of having audit committee members attend the oversight committee meeting as non-voting delegates. Councilmember Keighran stated that she was fine with it as long as they didn’t have voting rights. Councilmember Beach concurred with Vice Mayor Colson’s recommendations. She stated that she believed that staff should design a mission statement for the oversight committee. Councilmember Beach asked if there was any downside to having councilmembers (audit committee) at the oversight committee meetings. Councilmember Ortiz discussed his experience with the school bond oversight committee and how school board members were on the committee. He stated that it gave the board members a chance to address any concerns that arose. Councilmember Keighran asked if the school board members were voting members or non-voting members. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he believed they were voting members. Councilmember Keighran stated that she believed the bias would be taken away if they were non-voting members. Mayor Brownrigg discussed Council’s consensus that the committee be composed of five members with three residents and two local business owners. He stated that the Council also had a preference that members have financial backgrounds, serve three-year terms, staggered, no term limits, use a process similar to the other City commissions, and that the two audit members sit in the meetings as non-voting members. Councilmember Ortiz made a motion to adopt the above mentioned preferences; seconded by Councilmember Keighran. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Vice Mayor Colson asked about developing questions for the Oversight Committee interviews. Councilmember Ortiz suggested that the questions be limited to two or three to allow the Council to ask additional questions that come up. Mayor Brownrigg stated he would count on City Manager Goldman to create open questions that would cover the Council’s preferences. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 14 Vice Mayor Colson said they should develop a mission statement and include it in the application. f. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH MIG FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PARKS MASTER PLAN Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad requested Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement for professional services with MIG for the development of a Parks Master Plan. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad explained that in FY 2017-18, CIP funds were approved for the City to undertake its first citywide Parks Master Plan. She explained that the Parks Master Plan will set the framework for decision makers in the planning, maintenance, development, and/or rehabilitation of Burlingame’s parks and recreational facilities by providing a systematic and prioritized approach to implementation of parks and recreation projects. She explained that the creation of the plan will most likely take 16-18 months. To guide this process, an advisory committee was created composed of: Councilmember Ortiz, Councilmember Beach, Parks and Recreation Commissioners Lewis and Matthews, Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad, Recreation Supervisor Acquisti, Parks Supervisor Holtz, and Senior Planner Keylon. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that the City received seven proposals, and three proposers were selected for interviews. She stated that the three consultants had similar fees and comparable community outreach. However, MIG stood out for a number of reasons including: 1. The firm’s involvement in numerous parks master plans in comparable jurisdictions in the Bay Area 2. The firm’s experience with and approach to preparing a parks master plan, including the sub- consultants on the team who specialize in Fee Nexus Studies and community surveys 3. The firm’s recognized leadership in community engagement, with the proposal including a comprehensive community participation and outreach plan 4. The firm’s current experience working with the Burlingame community through the Envision Burlingame General Plan update process 5. The overall expertise and energy of the team assembled for the project Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that MIG’s fee is $199,555. She explained that the fee includes an existing parks and facilities analysis, community engagement and surveying, a funding and implementation plan, and a final Parks Master Plan to be approved by the City Council. She stated that based on her experience in other projects; there is never enough community engagement. Therefore, because MIG’s proposal came in under budget, staff is asking for the optional usage of $50,000 for additional community engagement as needed. Councilmember Keighran asked why Council wasn’t brought into this process earlier. She suggested that Council input should have been requested when the proposals were narrowed from seven to three. She compared it to the Bayfront golf course RFP. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that staff followed the same process that they used for the Community Center Master Plan. Councilmember Keighran asked about the Nexus Fee Study included in the agreement. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that a lot of cities have fees that support improvements within the city Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 15 parks. However, she explained that the City does not have these fees, and therefore a nexus study needs to be done to determine what the appropriate fees would be. Councilmember Keighran asked how much the Nexus Fee Study cost. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that it was included in the total cost, but she would get back to her with an exact amount. Councilmember Keighran stated that she believed the proposed Nexus Fee Study was premature as Measure I was just passed, and some of those funds might be used towards the parks. She added that the City was also negotiating a lease with Topgolf that could generate funds for the parks. Therefore, she felt that the City should first review how they will be using these funds before conducting a Nexus Fee Study. City Manager Goldman stated that conducting the study doesn’t commit the City to levying any fees; it just provides the City with information that the Council can then determine how to use. Councilmember Ortiz stated that the Council doesn’t always review proposals when vendors are chosen for City projects. He added that by having Councilmembers on the subcommittee for the Parks Master Plan, the process was more open than usual. City Manager Goldman agreed and added that Councilmembers were not on the subcommittee that selected MIG to assist in updating the General Plan. Councilmember Ortiz asked why the Parks Master Plan RFP process included a subcommittee. City Manager Goldman stated that staff wanted additional feedback. Councilmember Ortiz stated that his understanding of the Parks Master Plan is that it is a guideline for how best to allocate the City’s very limited recreation resources. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that the plan will also assist the City in obtaining grants to fund projects like re-doing the tennis courts. Vice Mayor Colson explained that the other two finalists’ proposals should have been included in the staff report so that she could explain to residents that ask why MIG was chosen. Mayor Brownrigg asked the Councilmembers who were on the subcommittee to explain why MIG was chosen. Councilmember Ortiz stated that MIG was chosen based on their experience with the City, presentation, and approach to the project. Councilmember Beach stated that the decision to award the contract to MIG was unanimous among the committee members. Vice Mayor Colson stated that more written data on the other two finalists was needed in the staff report to justify awarding the $250,000 contract to MIG. She explained that this would serve as a public record for future reference. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 16 City Manager Goldman suggested pulling the item and having staff bring it back with more information on how the decision was made. Mayor Brownrigg explained that he believed that the process by which MIG was chosen was thorough and open. He stated that then-Mayor Ortiz had created the subcommittee to review the proposals in order to ensure Council and public input. Mayo r Brownrigg explained that he understood why there was a subcommittee on this matter to winnow down the choices and make a recommendation, but he wasn’t sure it should continue. City Manager Goldman stated that she believed this was one of the committees that Council had earlier discussed wrapping into a Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee. Vice Mayor Colson suggested that for the benefit of the public, the three finalists’ proposals should be posted on the website. Councilmember Keighran stated that because Councilmembers were on the subcommittee, she would have liked to hear updates as this process was progressing. Mayor Brownrigg asked Councilmember Keighran about Council’s involvement in the hiring of consultants for previous area specific plans like the North End. Councilmember Keighran stated that Council wasn’t involved, and that is why this is different. City Manager Goldman stated that Council was involved in the Lot F and N proposal selection. She added that the City might need to take a step back and determine when Council subcommittees should be involved in selection processes. Mayor Brownrigg stated that the item would be pulled so that more detail could be added. Mayor Brownrigg explained that he was in favor of including the Nexus Fee Study because if under the General Plan update new neighborhoods are created, a fee study would be necessary to create open space. Councilmember Beach thanked staff for having the vision to budget for this project. She stated that the Parks Master Plan would allow the Council to prioritize what the community wants. g. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH BURLINGAME YOUTH BASEBALL ASSOCIATION FOR USE OF CITY-OWNED FIELDS FOR RECREATIONAL BASEBALL USE, CONCESSION SALES, AND STORAGE Mayor Brownrigg moved this item up to after item 10e. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 17 Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad requested Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Burlingame Youth Baseball Association (“BYBA”) for use of City-owned fields for recreational baseball use, concession sales, and storage. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad explained that the City is currently undertaking a review of all of its agreements with youth sports organizations. She explained that staff began with BYBA and that the proposed agreement is a consolidation of a few agreements the City currently has with BYBA for various amenities. She discussed two items in the agreement that BYBA requested. The first item was a request for the City to waive permit fees for future improvements. The second item was a request for the City to decrease the administrative fee from 10% to 5% for emergency repairs. Councilmember Keighran asked why BYBA would have exclusive rights to storage units and the scoreboard. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that BYBA purchased and installed the storage units, and therefore if BYBA leaves, they can take the storage units. She stated that this was the same for AYSO and Burlingame Girls Softball (“BGS”). Councilmember Keighran asked why the City didn’t have the exclusive rights to the storage units since they are on City property. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that BYBA installed and paid for the storage units. Councilmember Keighran stated that she is also concerned about the exclusive rights BYBA has to the batting cages. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that per the original agreement, which has been incorporated into the amended agreement, other groups can use the batting cages, but they have to get BYBA’s permission. Councilmember Keighran asked what “BYBA and its subtenant” referred to concerning the concession stand. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that BYBA had trouble staffing the concession stand, so one of BYBA’s sponsors was providing this service. Councilmember Keighran asked who would be liable if an accident occurred at the concession stand. City Attorney Kane stated that BYBA would be liable. But as a practical matter, the City would likely be a codefendant. She explained that the City tried to clarify where the responsibility runs in the amended agreement and that if an accident happened, the City would utilize BYBA’s insurance. Councilmember Keighran asked if BYBA had exclusive rights on signage. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad replied in the negative. Mayor Brownrigg stated that the agreement gives signage approval to the Director of Parks and Recreation. Councilmember Keighran asked if improvements are needed, is it BYBA’s responsibility or the City’s? Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that it depends on the improvements. For example if the BYBA purchased scoreboard needs maintenance, because the City uses it, the City would fix it. But if it was the batting cages or their storage units, BYBA would fix it. Councilmember Keighran asked where liability falls if BYBA’s maintenance is done incorrectly and there is a lawsuit. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that this would be covered by BYBA’s insurance. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 18 Councilmember Beach asked where the agreement discusses signage. Vice Mayor Colson stated that it was on page 2 under subsection a.vii of the agreement. City Attorney Kane stated that the importance of that section is that it is subordinate to other City rules and ordinances. Councilmember Beach discussed whether the City would offer the same fee waivers and reduction in emergency repair fees to other youth sports organizations. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Ortiz asked if BYBA had exclusive use of the batting cages because they built and maintain them. Additionally, he asked if other groups get to use the batting cages. Recreation Manager Tim Barry stated he wasn’t sure when the batting cages were built, but the original agreement included the language that BYBA had exclusive use of the batting cages. He stated that he believed only BYBA and BHS use the batting cages. Vice Mayor Colson discussed the improvements that BGS has done to the fields and asked if they had a similar agreement. City Attorney Kane stated that staff is currently reviewing all agreements. Vice Mayor Colson stated that when her children began playing softball, BGS requested City land to put in their own batting cages. She explained that it was never resolved. She stated she found it problematic that baseball has access to two batting cages but that girls’ softball has access to no batting cages in Burlingame. She explained that she had an issue with the City entering an agreement that gives one organization 45 years of exclusive rights to batting cages. She requested language be incorporated in the agreement that BGS be allowed usage of the batting cages for ten hours a week. She explained that if this is not done, then space needs to be designated to BGS to build a batting cage. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. BYBA co-president JP LaChance stated that BYBA built and maintains the batting cages. He stated that during the season, they have over 500 kids using the batting cages, and accordingly they fill all the slots. He explained that this is the reason slots haven’t been available to other organizations. Mr. LaChance stated that although BYBA has three agreements with the City that are all still in effect, the City came to them and asked to consolidate and amend the agreements. Mayor Brownrigg asked if BYBA considered charging BHS for their use of the Washington Park batting cage. Mr. LaChance replied in the negative. Recreation Manager Barry stated that the same kids played in both leagues, and therefore the fee was waived. Vice Mayor Colson asked if BYBA would be willing to work with BGS to schedule time for the girls to use the batting cages. Mr. LaChance replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Keighran asked when the batting cages were built. Mr. LaChance said he didn’t know the exact year, but Vice Mayor Colson’s estimate of 20 years ago seemed accurate. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 19 Burlingame resident Will Evans discussed his concern about BYBA’s exclusive rights to the batting cages, Bayside Fields, Washington Park, and Cuernavaca Field. Burlingame resident Dan Lyons discussed his concern about giving BYBA exclusive rights to the fields. Councilmember Ortiz asked if BYBA had exclusive rights to the fields, or if field usage was subject to the City’s user group policy. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that BYBA didn’t have exclusive rights to the fields. City Attorney Kane added that BYBA’s exclusivity applies only to the batting cages, concession stand, and storage facilities. Councilmember Beach stated that she was concerned that the City might not have enough facilities for all the user groups, and accordingly it becomes the City’s responsibility to budget for additional facilities. Mayor Brownrigg stated that it was his understanding that the purpose of the proposed agreement was to clean up and memorialize agreements that already exist. He explained that therefore he treated this as a simple question of whether or not the City should waive fees (as this would be the new language added to the agreement). However, he stated that the conversation has gone in a much broader direction about equity. He explained that this is a conversation that the City should have, but might not be germane to the report in front of them. Mayor Brownrigg compared BYBA to BAC in how BYBA runs baseball for the City. He discussed how BYBA has spent money to improve facilities and create a good program for the youth. He added that he would like to see BGS gain access to the batting cages. Also, he stated that he felt that BHS should be charged for their usage of the batting cages. Vice Mayor Colson asked why the City rents to BHS when BGS doesn’t get time at the batting cages. She explained that BHS should build their own batting cages. Vice Mayor Colson stated that she was in agreement to waive the fees for BYBA. Vice Mayor Colson stated that she, personally, would not sign the agreement with BYBA without a firm commitment that BGS will get ten hours a week at the batting cages. Councilmember Beach stated that she agreed with Vice Mayor Colson in getting BGS time at the batting cages. She stated that she would be interested to hear BYBA’s perspective on replacing BHS’ time at the batting cages with time for BGS. Councilmember Keighran stated that she had an issue with the philosophy of the agreement and therefore wouldn’t be approving the agreement. She explained that just because the City had agreements with BYBA in the past that granted them an exclusive right to facilities (batting cages, concession stand, and storage) doesn’t mean this should continue. She stated that the facilities are on public property and should be open to the public. She added that it gives a message of pay to play and that shouldn’t be the way the City functions. Burlingame City Council January 2, 2018 Approved Minutes 20 Councilmember Ortiz stated that the City’s relationship with BYBA is longstanding. He stated there is no exclusivity when it comes to the fields. He explained that he didn’t share the concern about the exclusivity to the storage units but that he agrees with his colleagues’ concerns about the batting cages. Councilmember Keighran voiced her concern that user groups change, and that the proposed agreement with BYBA was for 25 years. Therefore, if a new baseball group or softball group came in, they would also be excluded. She stated that it creates a general message that if you build a facility, it gives you exclusivity. Vice Mayor Colson discussed the conversations that the City had with the Burlingame Dragons, who had offered to pay for stadium seats at Murray Field. If the City had allowed this, would the Dragons have had exclusive rights to the stadium seats and not allowed other user groups to use them? She stated that the City would never have allowed the Dragons to do this. Mayor Brownrigg summarized the Council’s discussion stating that there was a strong request for an agreement to be made that allotted BGS time at the batting cages. He stated that Council agreed with the waiver of the fees. City Manager Goldman stated that there is also BYBA’s request to reduce the emergency repairs fee from 10% to 5%. Mayor Brownrigg stated that Council agreed to reduce this fee. Vice Mayor Colson stated that the City needs to discuss and determine their philosophy when it comes to maintaining these facilities and the ability of all user groups to enjoy the facilities. Additionally, she stated that in the Parks Master Plan, it should be determined where they can build batting cages for girls’ softball. 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Council reported on various events and committee meetings they each attended on behalf of the City. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Vice Mayor Colson asked for an update on Topgolf. Mayor Brownrigg asked City Attorney Kane to find an appropriate forum to provide an update. 13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The agendas, packets, and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Parking & Safety Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission and Library Board of Trustees are available online at www.burlingame.org. 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Brownrigg adjourned the meeting at 10:16 p.m. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk