Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 2016.02.01 Burlingame City Council February 1, 2016 Approved Minutes 1 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Approved Minutes Regular Meeting of February 1, 2016 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 Supervisor Dave Pine. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, Keighran, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor Keighran reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the City. 6. PRESENTATIONS a. PRESENTATION OF THE YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE Burlingame Recreation Coordinator Nicole Rath introduced the Youth Advisory Committee (“YAC”). Burlingame High School (“BHS”) student, Lexi Monych discussed the role of YAC. She explained that YAC is composed of a group of 13 students from Burlingame that communicate the issues and interests of the youth to the Council and Parks and Recreation Department. BHS student Maia Herman outlined the recent accomplishments of YAC. She stated that YAC participated in the YAC social which was an exchange of ideas and events with other students in the Bay Area. As well, she stated that YAC made donations to Thanksgiving food drives, assisted the Parks and Recreation Department with the Christmas Tree Lighting and wrapped over a 1,000 presents during the holiday season. BHS student, Emily Williams shared with the Council three upcoming events: (1) The Princess Project – collecting prom dresses for those in need; (2) February 11, 2016 Valentine’s Day Dance for seniors; and (3) YAC is finalizing details for their Mission ImPastaBle event on April 20, 2016. Burlingame City Council February 1, 2016 Approved Minutes 2 Councilmember Brownrigg asked what YAC thought about a skate park. YAC representative Maia Herman thought it would be a great idea and would promote exercise and health. b. SMC MOSQUITO DISTRICT’S 100TH ANNIVERSARY San Mateo County Mosquito and Vector Control Board Representative Joe Galligan shared a brief history of the district’s 100 years of existence. He explained that mosquito and vector control boards were created by the state legislature after data from a University of California Berkley professor showed that these districts could help safeguard the health and comfort of citizens through a planned program to monitor and reduce mosquitoes and other vectors. After the state passed legislation the first district was set up in San Mateo County. Megan Caldwell, the Public Health Education and Outreach Officer for San Mateo County Mosquito & Vector Control District discussed the district’s role in vector board disease surveillance and prevention. Ms. Caldwell discussed the Zika Virus stating that the United States does not currently have mosquitos transferring the Zika Virus. However, she stated that the mosquito that transfers the virus does exist in San Mateo County. Accordingly, the district will be monitoring the situation. Ms. Caldwell also discussed citizens’ concerns of flooding at the old drive-in theater. She stated that currently the sump-pump at the site is not operational. Accordingly, the district is working on ensuring that the sump-pump is operational before the weather warms. As well, she asked that residents continue looking for sources of standing water so issues could be addressed as they arise. 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS Burlingame resident Mike Kesselman spoke on the subject of the study session concerning the Post Office/Lot E potential development. He encouraged the Council to work with a nonprofit organization, such as a museum, that would be a benefit to the community. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Keighran asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any items from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Brownrigg pulled item 8c. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt items 8a, 8b, 8d and 8e of the Consent Calendar; seconded by Vice Mayor Ortiz. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 19, 2016 CC Hassel-Shearer requested Council approve the City Council Meetings of January 19, 2016. b. OPEN NOMINATION PERIOD TO FILL ONE VACANCY ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION City Manager Goldman requested Council to open the nomination period to fill one vacancy on the Planning Commission. Burlingame City Council February 1, 2016 Approved Minutes 3 c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION UPHOLDING THE DETERMINATION OF THE BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION AND AUTHORIZING THE REMOVAL OF THE PROTECTED-SIZE TREE LOCATED AT 2325 POPPY DRIVE Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad requested Council adopt Resolution Number 6-2016. Vice Mayor Ortiz made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 6-2016; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-1 (Councilmember Brownrigg voted against). d. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS CONSENTING TO INCLUSION OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME PROPERTIES IN THE CALIFORNIA HOME FINANCE AUTHORITY PACE PROGRAMS AND ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIP IN CALIFORNIA HOME FINANCE AUTHORITY Sustainability Coordinator Michael requested Council adopt Resolution Number 7-2016 and Resolution Number 8-2016. e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE UPDATED SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLAN DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 9-2016. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION TO JOIN IN THE JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT TO ESTABLISH THE PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY AUTHORITY IN SAN MATEO COUNTY; AND INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION PROGRAM Sustainability Coordinator Sigalle Michael presented her staff report requesting Council adopt Resolution Number 10-2016 and introducing an ordinance to authorize the implementation of a Community Choice Aggregation program. Ms. Michael explained that Community Choice Aggregation, more commonly referred to as Community Choice Energy (“CCE”) is a program that allows municipalities to pool their energy demand to purchase electricity with a high renewable source content separately from the local investor owned utility. She continued by stating that in San Mateo County the CCE program is called Peninsula Clean Energy (“PCE”). Ms. Michael stated that PCE would purchase electricity from renewable energy sources and PG&E would deliver the energy, maintain the lines and bill customers. She explained that CCEs exist in both Sonoma and Marin County and are successful. Ms. Michael went on to discuss the benefits and risks of a Community Choice Energy program. Some of the benefits she listed were: (1) local community control; (2) competitive, stable, and cheaper rates; and (3) cleaner power supply. Some of the risks she listed were: (1) opt-out rate uncertain; (2) program size uncertain; and (3) future Community Choice Energy legislation and regulatory changes. Burlingame City Council February 1, 2016 Approved Minutes 4 She explained to the Council that the County prepared a Joint Powers Authority agreement in compliance with the Public Utilities Code. The City would need to sign the JPA agreement in order to become a member-city of the Peninsula Clean Energy program. Sigalle Michael restated that customers would not see a difference in service as PG&E would continue to provide billing, customer service, and line maintenance. However, there would be a new section on each customer’s PG&E bill that would apply to the PCE electric generation charges. Lastly, she explained as the default electricity provider, PCE, would need to send out at least 4 opt-out notices to all citizens. Accordingly, if the City joined, residents would be given several opportunities to opt out of the PCE and rejoin PG&E. She explained that this program was slated to launch in October, 2016. For more information on Peninsula Clean Energy she provided the website: www.PeninsulaCleanEnergy.com. Mayor Keighran asked whether there would be financial penalties if the City became dissatisfied with the pricing and decided to withdraw from the JPA agreement. City Attorney Kane stated that after the program is launched the JPA will be incurring costs. Therefore an exit cost would be dependent on when a member wanted to leave and what costs the JPA had accrued. Mayor Keighran asked if a customer opted out of the PCE, if they could later rejoin. Supervisor Dave Pine stated that if a customer opted out, they would have to stay with PG&E for a year before they could rejoin. Councilmember Brownrigg asked about the budget for the JPA staff. Supervisor Pine stated that they are working on a pro forma and he would be happy to share it with the Council. He stated that Marin currently has a staff of about 40 people but that they are also involved in several additional projects. However, he stated that Sonoma County’s JPA has a staff of about 20 people which is closer to what he envisioned for San Mateo County. Accordingly, he stated that the administrative staff cost will be very low. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he was concerned about the budget because if PG&E decided to lower their rates to compete with PCE, he didn’t want the cost of the administrative staff to be an issue. Councilmember Beach asked if it was correct that entrance into the JPA did not involve startup costs to Burlingame and that participating customers would sustain the salaries of the staff. Supervisor Pine replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Beach asked if operating surpluses could be invested in renewable green energy. Supervisor Pine replied in the affirmative giving the example of Marin County using their surplus to create 165 megawatts of green energy. Vice Mayor Ortiz asked if there were examples of municipalities leaving the program and what the cost was to leave the program. Secondly, he asked why the City or County didn’t just enter into a JPA with either Marin or Sonoma County. Supervisor Pine stated that there were no examples of municipalities leaving the program and that in fact cities outside of Marin County are entering into Marin’s JPA. As for the Vice Mayor’s second question, Supervisor Pine stated they decided against joining up with Marin or Sonoma County for two reasons: (1) the desire to maintain local control; and (2) the fact that San Mateo County is significantly bigger than either Marin or Sonoma County. Councilmember Colson pointed out that in the agreement the County is able to seek reimbursement of setting this program up by passing the costs on to the customers/ratepayers. Supervisor Pine replied that this is the intention but that it would be done over time. Councilmember Colson stated her concern that while the PCE Burlingame City Council February 1, 2016 Approved Minutes 5 should ensure a high percentage of renewable energy is used that the PCE ensure a competitive rate with PG&E. Supervisor Pine stated PCE would not be able to guarantee that their rate remained lower than PG&E, as they are seeking a high percentage of clean energy. Councilmember Brownrigg asked about the rate increases and if customers would be directed to the City if they had issues with the increase. Supervisor Pine stated that their intention was to only allow annual rate increases. As well, he explained that the JPA would have a call center to respond to customer questions and that questions/notices would not flow through the municipality. Councilmember Colson stated that there was a lot of concern from all the cities that PCE have a financially viable structure. She stated that a component of that were the reserves and the types and amounts of reserves that would be set in place. She stated that most of the emphasis was on rate stabilization reserves. Therefore with rate stabilization reserves, the JPA would be able to monitor rates and decide what to do before increasing rates. Supervisor Pine responded that this was correct. Vice Mayor Ortiz asked if the PCE raised the rates above PG&E’s rates would customers have to wait a year to opt out. Supervisor Pine stated they could opt out at any point. Accordingly, Vice Mayor Ortiz stated this was a good incentive to keep rates competitive. Councilmember Beach asked if PG&E and PCE would publish their rates annually so that customers could compare the rates. Supervisor Pine responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson asked if entering into the JPA would help the City reach its clean energy targets. Sigalle Michael replied in the affirmative. Mayor Keighran asked the City Clerk to read the title of the ordinance. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the ordinance; seconded by Vice Mayor Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Keighran opened the public hearing. Burlingame residents Mike McCord and Jeff Londer spoke in favor of Peninsula Clean Energy. Mayor Keighran closed the public hearing. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion directing staff to bring the proposed ordinance back at the next meeting and made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 10-2016; seconded by Vice Mayor Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. APPROVAL OF ANNUAL REPORT ON THE STATUS OF IMPACT FEES COLLECTED AS OF JUNE 30, 2015, PURSUANT TO THE MITIGATION FEE ACT, GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66000 et seq. Finance Director Augustine presented her staff report requesting Council adopt Resolution Number 11-2016. Burlingame City Council February 1, 2016 Approved Minutes 6 She explained that the City has 4 impact fees: (1) Public Facilities Impact Fees; (2) North Burlingame and Rollins Road Fees; (3) Bayfront Development Fees; and (4) Burlingame Avenue Parking In-Lieu Fees. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that with roughly $250,000 in the Parking In-Lieu Fee if a parking facility moved forward this money could be used to make a second level subject to Council action. Vice Mayor Ortiz made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 11-2016; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. b. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGES TO THE COMPENSATION AND BENEFIT PLAN FOR THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DEPARTMENT HEAD AND UNREPRESENTED CLASSIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EECUTE THE PLAN ON BEHALF OF THE CITY HR Director Loomis requested Council adopt Resolution Number 12-2016. She explained that the compensation and benefit plan for department heads and unrepresented classifications would match the changes granted to AFSCME. Councilmember Beach made a motion to adopt Resolution 12-2016; seconded by Councilmember Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 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 There were no items requested. 13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS December 10, 2015 Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission, November 17, 2015 Library Trustee Minutes 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Keighran adjourned the meeting at 8:26 p.m. in memory of David Carr. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer City Clerk