HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2008.01.07 CITY 0
BURUNGAME
0
�o mo
�A11T[A JVu66
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
Monday January 7,2008
STUDY SESSION - 6:00 p.m. Conference Room A
a. Council Policies& Procedures
1. CALL TO ORDER—7:00 p.m.—Council Chambers
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—Regular Council Meeting of December 17, 2007
5. PRESENTATION
a. Presentation&Acceptance of the FY 2006/07 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report(CAFR)
b. Remember Judge Robert F. Kane, long time resident of Burlingame and former Ambassador to
Ireland
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for design review, hillside area
construction permit, special permit, and variance for upper and lower level additions to a single-
family dwelling with attached garage, on property at 2724 Martinez Drive, located within a single
family residential zone
b. Final Adoption of Amendment to Business License Ordinance to include Contract Municipal
Recreation Employees in payment exemptions
c. Public Hearing to approve expenditure of Supplemental Law Enforcement Services funds also
referred to as COPS (Citizens Options for Police Spending)
1
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS—At this time,persons in the audience may speak on any item on the agenda or any other matter
within the jurisdiction of the Council. The Ralph M.Brown Act(the State local agency open meeting law)prohibits Council from
acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are requested to fill out a"request to speak"card located on the table by the
door and hand it to staff. The Mayor may limit speakers to three minutes each.
8. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a. Authorize design of a Centennial Project at Washington Park instead of the Burlingame Train
Station— Discuss/Approve
b. Council discussion and direction on potential June 2008 Ballot Measure for funding deferred
capital improvements—Discuss/Direct
9. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Approval of Labor Agreement with Teamsters Local 856
b. Recommendation to confirm revised 2008 City Council Assignments
c. Adoption of Resolution fixing the Employer's contribution under the Public Employees' Medical
and Hospital Care Act effective January 1, 2008
d. Approve 2008 City of Burlingame Investment Policy
e. Approval of a three year agreement with Municipal Auditing Services (MAS)to conduct a
Business License Tax Audit and Enforcement Program; Approval of a forty-five (45) day
business license tax amnesty period commencing March 1, 2008; and, adoption of a Resolution
of the City Council designating Municipal Auditing Services as an authorized City
representative to examine sales and use records
f. Resolution accepting Mills Canyon Sewer&Access Road repairs project by Hillside Drilling
g. Resolution accepting the SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System) Project by
Fluidiqs, Inc.
h. Request to attend Out of State Conference for Librarian Amy Pelman
10. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS—At this time,persons in the audience may speak on any item on the agenda or any other matter within
the jurisdiction of the Council. The Ralph M.Brown Act(the State local agency open meeting law)prohibits Council from acting on any
matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are requested to fill out a"request to speak"card located on the table by the door and hand it to
staff. The Mayor may limit speakers to three minutes each.
12. OLD BUSINESS
13. NEW BUSINESS
14. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
a. Department Reports: Police,November, 2007
2
b. Two letters from Comcast concerning programming adjustments
15. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION IN MEMORY OF JUDGE ROBERT F. KANE
CLOSED SESSION
a. Threatened Litigation (Government Code § 54956.9(b)(1), (3)(C)): Claim of Day Yan and Sharon
Tsuei (CSAA)
16. ADJOURNMENT
Notice: Any attendees 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 at this site.
NEXT MEETING—TUESDAY,JANUARY 22, 2008
3
CITY 0 STAFF REPORT
BURUNGAME AGENDA
ITEM# Study Session
MTG.
DATE: 01/07/08
�NATED DYNE N
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
BY
DATE: December 31,2006
APPROVE
FROM: Jim Nantell 558-7205 BY
SUBJECT: Study Session to Discuss the Draft Council Policies and Pr cedures
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council review the draft of Council Policies and Procedures that were
developed by the Council Subcommittee of Mayor Rosalie O'Mahony and Council Member Cathy Baylock and
provide direction as to any changes or additions.
BACKGROUND: In June of 2006 the City Council participated in a League of California team building
workshop. The curriculum of the workshop discussed the potential value of Council policies and procedures
that could articulate the council's agreed upon way of doing business. As a result, the Council agreed that a
subcommittee of the Council would work with the City Manager and with the advice of the City Attorney
would develop a draft policy and procedure document.
The City Manager secured copies of similar documents from other cities and the subcommittee pulled those
policies and procedures from those documents that they felt should be included and then created others that
they felt would be beneficial for the Burlingame City Council.
In October staff distributed a draft of the policies and procedures for the City Council's review. It was also
agreed at that time that we would schedule a study session after the holidays for the Council to discuss the
draft document. There are two pieces of proposed language on which the Council Subcommittee had
differences of opinion; otherwise the Council subcommittee agreed on the draft language. The two pieces of
language are shown in red text on pages 10 & 11. The red text on other pages denotes suggested additions
made by the City Manager and Attorney as a result of their review in preparation for the Council study
session.
Beyond Policies and Procedures
During this study session the staff would like to take the opportunity to also have the Council re-confirm your
agreement with Council decisions that are contained in other documents and those are shown as exhibits to
this report. Their inclusion is not meant to necessarily suggest that they need to be changed but we felt this
study session was a chance to re-confirm the Council's desires.
a. The recently revised procedures for appointments to City boards and commissions.
b. The authority for the mayor to vote on appointments made by the Council of Cities and the Cities
Selection Committee. Staff believes that at the least, the 1984 Resolution should be updated to
properly reflect the Council of Cities name.
c. Reimbursement policies for Council attendance at events or meetings of other organizations.
d. Ties votes on appeals.
Staff would like feedback from the City Council about the possibility of requiring New Commissioners to
attend a new commissioners training with in the first two years of appointment and prior to serving as a Chair
a commissioner must attend Commissioner Chairperson training. We have experienced some situations
where commissioners encounter situations that they would have been better prepared for had they attended the
new commissioner training that we offer every year. Many new Commissioners are not attending and we
think it would be helpful to make it clear that it is expected. Although we currently do not offer any training
for commission chairs we have received a suggestion that it may be helpful to make sure Commissioners
receive training before thrusting them into the role of Chair person.
One final area that we would like to get direction from the Council on is a staff recommendation to modify the
Council meeting at which the Mayor is rotated in election years. As the Council knows the last two election
years we have held two ceremonial meeting because the election certification was not completed by the
County in time to allow the rotation of Mayor and seating of new Council Members to occur at the same
meeting. For that reason we would suggest that in election years the rotation of the Mayor should be
scheduled for the same meeting as the certification of the election results. That would mean in election years
the rotation of the Mayor would likely be delayed to the first or second meeting in December rather than the
usual second meeting in November. Making this change will avoid the need to have two ceremonial meetings
with in a month or six weeks which is hard to accommodate without making the public sit through a number
of business agenda items.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Resolution No. 117-1999 Council Policy on Rotation of Council Officers
B. Procedures for Appointments to City Commissioners and Boards
C. Dec. 29, 1998 Memo from former Mayor Mary Janney re: City Representatives to County/Regional
Agencies
D. Dec. 19, 2005 Memo from City Attorney re: Reimbursement Policies and Chapter 700 of 2005 Statues
E. July 16, 2003 Memo from City Attorney re: Effect of Tie Votes
F. Draft Tentative Timeline for June 2008 General Obligation Bond Measure
6th Draft COUNCIL POLICY Attachment A
CITY OF BURLINGAME CATEGORY: Council
January 7,2008 PAGE: 1.1.1
SUBJECT: Council Conduct
"Conduct is three-fourths of our life and its largest concern."--Matthew Arnold
The Three Rs of Burlingame Government Leadership:
Roles,Responsibilities and Respect
This Code of Conduct is designed to describe the manner in which Councilmembers should treat
one another,city staff,constituents,and others they come into contact with in representing the
City of Burlingame.
The contents of this Code of Conduct include:
•Overview of Roles&Responsibilities(Pages 1-3)
•General Policies&Protocol (Pages 3-6)
•Council Conduct with One Another(Pages 6-7)
•Council Conduct with City Staff(Pages 8)
•Council Conduct with the Public(Pages 9)
•Council Conduct with Other Public Agencies(Pages 11)
•Council Conduct with Boards and Commissions(Pages 12)
•Council Conduct with the Media(Pages 13)
• Sanctions(Pages 14)
•Principles of Proper Conduct(Pages 15)
•Checklist for Monitoring Conduct(Page 15)
•Glossary of Terms(Pages 16)
The constant and consistent theme through all of the conduct guidelines is"respect."
Councilmembers experience huge workloads and tremendous stress in making decisions that
could impact thousands of lives.Despite these pressures,elected officials are called upon to
exhibit appropriate behavior at all times. Demonstrating respect for each individual through
words and actions is the touchstone that can help guide Councilmembers to do the right thing in
even the most difficult situations.
L OVERVIEW OF ROLES&RESPONSIBILITIES
"Leadership is an action,not a word."--Richard Cooley
Other resources that are helpful in defining the roles and responsibilities of elected
officials can be found in the Leadership Guide for Mayors and Councilmembers cued:nan.
published by the League of California Cities. Dd OW:6
DW-RW:6
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 1 Janu 200
A. MAYOR
1. Serves at the pleasure of the Council
2. Acts as the official head of the City for all ceremonial purposes
3. Chairs Council meetings
4. Calls for special meetings
5. Recognized as spokesperson for the City on matters that the Council has
taken a position on.
6. Selects substitute for City representation when Mayor cannot attend
7. Makes judgment calls on issuance of proclamations
8. Appoints subcommittees and makes council assignments
9. Serves as the liaison between the Council and the City Manager and City
Attorney in regards to employee relations involving those two Council-
appointed positions.
9. Leads the Council as an effective,cohesive working team
10. Signs documents on behalf of the City
11. Serves as official delegate of the City to events and conferences
12. Determines Council meeting agendas in concert with the City Manager and
City Clerk.
B. VICE MAYOR
1. Serves at the pleasure of the Council
2. Performs the duties of the Mayor if the Mayor is absent or disabled
3. Chairs Council meetings at the request of the Mayor
4. Represents the City at ceremonial functions at the request of the Mayor
C. ALL COUNCILMEMBERS
All members of the City Council,including those serving as Mayor and Vice
Mayor,have equal votes.No Councilmember has more power than any other
Councilmember,and all should be treated with equal respect.
All Councilmembers should:
1. Fully participate in City Council meetings and other public forums while
demonstrating respect,consideration,and courtesy to others
2. Prepare in advance of Council meetings and be familiar with issues on the
agenda
3. Represent the City at ceremonial functions at the request of the Mayor
4. Be respectful of other people's time. Stay focused and act efficiently during
public meetings.
5. Serve as a model of leadership and civility to the community
6. Inspire public confidence in Burlingame government
7. At the discretion of Council member provide contact information to the
Manager's Executive Assistant in case an emergency or urgent situation arises
while the Councilmember is out of town
8. Demonstrate honesty and integrity in actions and statements Deleted:6
Deleted:6 --
Council Policy-Council Conduct 1.1.1 2 Janu 200
9. Participate in scheduled activities to increase team effectiveness and review
Council procedures,such as this Code of Conduct
10.Respond to phone calls or e-mails from staff on requests for scheduling
meetings in a timely fashion(ideally within 48 hours).
11.Communicate suggested items for future Council meeting agendas during the
new business portion of the Council meeting or directly to the Mayor.
D. MEETING CHAIR
The Mayor will chair official meetings of the City Council,unless the Vice
Mayor or another Councilmember is designated as Chair of a specific meeting.
1. Uses parliamentary procedure for meeting management
2. Maintains order,decorum,and the fair and equitable treatment of all
speakers
3. Keeps discussion and questions focused on specific agenda item under
consideration
4. Makes rulings with advice,if requested,from the City Attorney.Chair
rulings may be overturned if a Councilmember makes a motion as an
individual and the majority of the Council votes to overrule the Chair.
H. GENERAL POLICIES&PROTOCOL
"Wherever there is a human being,there is an opportunity for kindness."—Seneca
A. CEREMONIAL EVENTS
Requests for a City representative at ceremonial events will be handled by City
staff.The Mayor will serve as the designated City representative.If the Mayor is
unavailable,then City staff will determine if event organizers would like another
representative from the Council. If yes,then the Mayor will recommend which
Councilmember should be asked to serve as a substitute.
Invitations received at City Hall are presumed to be for official City representation.
Invitations addressed to Councilmembers at their homes are presumed to be for
unofficial,personal consideration.
B. CORRESPONDENCE SIGNATURES
Councilmembers do not need to acknowledge the receipt of correspondence,or
copies of correspondence,during Council meetings. City staff will prepare official
letters in response to public inquiries and concerns.These letters will carry the
signature of the appropriate staff person unless the Mayor requests that they be
signed by the Mayor or another Councilmember.
Correspondence with members of the community on operational matters will be
sent out under the signature of the appropriate staff person or the City Manager. _
Deli AW:December
Letters or any other mailings with a council member's signature(or the names of Deleted,6
one or more Councilmembers in the letter)that are to be sent out to more than 199DekaW:6
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 3 7anu 2004
people at City expense will be reviewed by the City Attorney to ensure they do not
violate legal limitations.
C. E-MAILS
Each councilmember is provided with a City e-mail address. This e-mail address
should be used by Councilmembers for sending and receiving e-mail regarding
official City business.If a Councilmember receives an e-mail regarding official
City business at private e-mail address,the Councilmember should forward the e-
mail to the City Clerk for record purposes. Of course,the City e-mail address
should not be used for sending or receiving e-mails regarding a Councilmember's
campaign or other political activities.
D. ENDORSEMENT OF CANDIDATES
Councilmembers have the right to endorse candidates for all Council seats or other
elected offices.It is inappropriate to publicize endorsements during Council
meetings or other official City meetings.
E. INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
During the Council Report portion of the meeting agenda,Councilmembers should
report on specific assignments and committees that they have attended on behalf of
the council.Examples are the League of Cities,Council of Mayors,Airport
Roundtable,SamTrans,Chamber of Commerce,C/CAG,etc. In addition the
Mayor will acknowledge any of the community events that the Council or Mayor
was invited to attend and who attended them,(include any other council members
who were in attendance with the Mayor or who had attended at the Mayor's
request). Under State law,Councilmembers are required to report on any meetings
that they attended and for which the City paid any costs for attendance.
F. PUBLIC MEETING HEARING PROTOCOL
The applicant shall have the right to speak first.The appellant,if the applicant is
not the appellant,will speak second.The Chair will determine the length of time
allowed for these presentations. The Chair will then allow members of the public
to comment on the matter presented.The Chair will determine how much time will
be allowed for each speaker,with 3 to 5 minutes the standard time granted.
Speakers will not be permitted to give their time to others so as to allow other
speakers to have more than the standard time granted. The applicant will be
allowed to make closing comments. If the appellant is not the applicant,then the
Chair may allow the appellant to make closing comments before the applicant
makes closing comments. The Chair has the responsibility to rim an efficient public
meeting and has the discretion to modify the public hearing process in order to oekdW:
make the meeting run smoothly. Councilmembers may only ask relevant questions
for clarification of stated facts and they will not express opinions during the public Deleted:6
[Weted:6 --�
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 4 Jana Zpp
hearing portion of the meeting except to ask pertinent or focused questions of the
speaker or staff. Questions should be directed through the Chair to affirm the
respect due the Chair by both Councilmembers,speakers,and the audience. "I
think"and"I feel"comments by Councilmembers are not generally appropriate
until after the close of the public hearing. Councilmembers should refrain from
arguing or debating with the public during a public hearing and shall always show
respect for different points of view.
G. TRAVEL EXPENSES
The policies and procedures related to the reimbursement of travel expenses for
official City business by Councilmembers are outlined in the City Purchasing
Manual
H. AWARDS
Other than proclamations which the Mayor is authorized to issue,awards to
members of the public,community organizations or to businesses shall be
authorized only by an action of the majority of the City Council. Such
authorization may include empowering a council appointed committee to make
such awards. This does not preclude awards of heroism or bravery by department
heads or awards by the City Manager or their designees for employee
performance.
I. COMMITTEE FORMATION
Request by Council members to create a committee or task force to undertake
projects,do research,or develop recommendations shall require a council
majority vote.
J. IDENTIFICATION.
The City provides each Councilmember with a City identification card and
business cards to be used for any official site visits. While identification in the
form of badges used to be issued to Councilmembers,the California Attorney
General has determined that use of these types of badges may contravene State law,
so badges will not longer be issued nor used.
K. SETTING COUNCIL MEETING AGENDAS
The Mayor determines Council meeting agendas in concert with the City Manager
and City Clerk. Council members should communicate suggested items for future
Council meeting agendas during the new business portion of the Council meeting or
directly to the Mayor. If two or more Council members request an item be1p aced „ber
on a future agenda the Mayor will do so with in a reasonable period of time. ADeIeW:6
Council vote can be taken to place an item on a specific meeting date.:6
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.l.l 5 Janu 200
L. GIFTS AND FAVORS
Members shall not take any special advantage of services or opportunities for
personal gain,by virtue of their public offices that are not available to the public in
general. They shall refrain from accepting any gifts favors or promises of future
benefits which might compromise their independence of judgment or action or give
the appearance of being_compromised.
M. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Councihncmbers shall respect the confidentiality of information concemingthe property,
personnel or affairs of the City whether disclosed in closed session or others ise They shalt
neither disclose confidential information without prover legal authorization.nor use such
information to advance their personal financial or other private interests
III. COUNCIL CONDUCT WITH ONE ANOTHER
"In life,courtesy and self-possession,and in the arts,style,are the sensible impressions of
the free mind,for both arise out of a deliberate shaping of all things and from never being
swept away,whatever the emotion,into confusion or dullness."—William Butler Yeats
Councils are composed of individuals with a wide variety of backgrounds,personalities,
values, opinions,and goals.Despite this diversity,all have chosen to serve in public
office in order to preserve and protect the present and the future of the community.In all
cases,this common goal should be acknowledged even as Council may"agree to
disagree"on contentious issues.
A. IN PUBLIC MEETINGS
1. Use formal titles-The Council should refer to one another formally during
public meetings as Mayor,Vice Mayor or Councilmember followed by the
individual's last name.
2. Practice civility and decorum in discussions and debate-Difficult
questions,tough challenges to a particular point of view,and criticism of
ideas and information are legitimate elements of a free democracy in action.
This does not allow,however,Councilmembers to make belligerent,
personal,impertinent,slanderous,threatening,abusive,or disparaging
comments.No shouting or physical actions that could be construed as
threatening will be tolerated.
3. Honor the role of the Chair in maintaining ord -It is the responsibility of
the Chair to keep the comments of Councilmembers on track during public
meetings. Councilmembers should honor efforts by the Chair to focus
discussion on current agenda items.If there is disagreement about the _
agenda or the Chair's actions,those objections should be voiced politely and �n�ea
with reason,following procedures outlined in parliamentary procedure. Deleted:6
Deleted:6
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 6 Jmuary A 200>
4. Demonstrate effective problem-solving approaches-Councilmembers have
a public stage to show how individuals with disparate points of view can
find common ground and seek a compromise that benefits the community as
a whole.
5. When bringing an idea to the"council of the whole"council member(s)
should avoid presenting the matter as accomplished fact or done deal but
rather as request for support.
6. Whenever possible,council members should try to give staff a heads up
regarding questions that he/she has on an item that is on the Council's
agenda.Questions will often come to mind when Council members are
reviewing the staff reports and council members are encouraged to leave
voice mail or e-mail messages regarding the matter with the appropriate
staff member and if using e-mail,it is helpful to leave a copy for the City
Manager so the Manager is aware of the desired information.This policy is
designed to ensure that staff can be prepared to answer the question in a
complete fashion that will provide adequate information to facilitate the
Council's decision or direction on the matter.Failure to do so may result in
staff not having the necessary information available to the discussion and
thus delay action on the item.Understandably discussion of an item by the
public and other fellow council members may lead to an unanticipated
question by one or more Councilmembers.
B. IN PRIVATE ENCOUNTERS
1. Continue respectful behavior in private. The same level of respect and
consideration of differing points of view that aretdeemed appropriate for odecea:;s
public discussions should be maintained in private conversations.
2. Be aware of the insecurity of written notes,voicemail messages,and e-mail.
Technology allows words written or said without much forethought to be
distributed wide and far.Would you feel comfortable to have this note faxed
to others?How would you feel if this voicemail message was played on a
speaker phone in a full office?What would happen if this e-mail message
was forwarded to others?Written notes,voicemail messages and e-mail
should be treated as potentially"public"communication and records.
3. Even private conversations can have a publicpresence-Elected officials are
always on display—their actions,mannerisms,and language are monitored
by people around them that they may not know.Lunch table conversations
will be eavesdropped upon,parking lot debates will be watched,and casual
comments between individuals before and after public meetings noted.
4. The Council is a legislative body and as such makes decisions by majority.
Once decided,it is a decision of the Council as a whole.Councilmembers
who are on the minority side of a vote are expected,like staff members,to
support the decision of the majority and although they understandably may
be asked to explain their perspective and why they did not vote to support
the motion,they should refrain from criticizing the Council majority and Deleted:neemba
staff as they work forward to implement the Council's direction. odea:6
Ddsted:6
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 7 Janu 200
IV. COUNCIL CONDUCT WITH CITY STAFF
"Never let a problem become an excuse."--Robert Schuller
Governance of a City relies on the cooperative efforts of elected officials,who set policy,
and City staff,who implements and administers the Council's policies.Therefore,every
effort should be made to be cooperative and show mutual respect for the contributions
made by each individual for the good of the community.
1. Treat all staff as professionals
Clear,honest communication that respects the abilities,experience,and dignity of
each individual is expected.Poor behavior towards staff is not acceptable.
2. Limit contact to specific City staff
Questions of City staff and/or requests for additional background information
should be directed only to the City Manager,City Attorney,or Department Heads.
The Office of the City Manager should be copied on any Councilmember
requests, except those to the City Attorney.Requests for follow-up or directions
to staff should be made only through the City Manager,or the City Attorney when
appropriate.When in doubt about what staff contact is appropriate,
Councilmembers should ask the City Manager for direction.Materials supplied to
a Councilmember in response to a request will usually be made available to all
members of the Council so that all have equal access to information.
3. Council should forward citizen complaints or questions via Citizen Connect or
directIN to the appropriate staff members for follow-up,with copies to the City
Manager and City Clerk. The City Clerk receives a-mails addressed to"Grp-
Council"and will automatically forward them to the appropriate staff person to
follow up. Staff receiving that complaint/question is expected to respond or at
least acknowledge receipt of the complaint/question with some sense of the
timing of the anticipated follow up.
4. Suggestions on how to implement a council policy or approaches to operational
duties/services should be made through the City Manager and/or the City Council.
5. Requests to work with staff(or to have a Council liaison assigned to work with
staff on a specific project must be discussed and approved by the Council.
6. Do not disrupt City staff from their jobs. Councilmembers should not disrupt
City staff while they are in meetings,on the phone,or engrossed in performing
their job functions in order to have their individual needs met.
7. Never publicly criticize an individual employee.Council should never express
concerns about the performance of a specific City employee in public,to the
employee directly,or to the employee's manager.Comments about staff
performance should only be made to the City Manager through private
correspondence or conversation.Comments about staff in the office of the City
Attorney should be made directly to the City Attorney.
8. Do not get involved in administrative functions.Councilmembers must not
attempt to influence City staff on the making of appointments,awarding of Dew:D..b r
contracts,selecting of consultants,processing of development applications,or Deleted:6
Deleted:6
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 8 January,?
- - - ;
granting of City licenses and permits.Municipal Code Section 3.04.050 prohibits
Council interference in administrative functions.
9. Check with City staff on correspondence before taking action.
Before sending correspondence,Councilmembers should check with City staff to
see if an official City response has already been sent or is in progress.
10. Do not attend meetings with City staff unless requested by staff.Even if the
Councilmember does not say anything,the Councilmember's presence implies
support,shows partiality,intimidates staff,and hampers staffs ability to do their
job objectively.
11. Limit requests for staff support.Routine secretarial support will be provided to all
Councilmembers. All mail except when marked"personal"or"confidential"
for Councilmembers is opened by the City Clerk staff,or City Manager's
Executive Assistant,unless other arrangements are requested by a
Councilmember.Mail addressed to the Mayor is reviewed first by the City Clerk
or Deputy City Clerk or City Manager's Executive Assistant who notes suggested
action and/or follow-up items.
12. Requests for additional staff support-even in high priority or emergency
situations--should be made to the City Manager who is responsible for allocating
City resources in order to maintain a professional,well-run City government.
13. Do not solicit political support from staff.Councilmembers are barred from
soliciting any type of political support(financial contributions,display of posters
or lawn signs,name on support list,use of city employees pictures on campaign
material etc.)from City staff(Burlingame Municipal Code Section 3.52.100).
City staff may,as private citizens with constitutional rights,support political
candidates but all such activities must be done away from the workplace.
V. COUNCIL CONDUCT WITH THE PUBLIC
"If a man be gracious and courteous to strangers,it shows he is a citizen of the world,and
that his heart is no island cut off from other lands,but a continent that joins to them."
--Francis Bacon
A. IN PUBLIC MEETINGS
Making the public feel welcome is an important part of the democratic process.
No signs of partiality,prejudice or disrespect should be evident on the part of
individual Councilmembers toward an individual participating in a public forum.
Every effort should be made to be fair and impartial in listening to public
testimony.
1. Be welcoming to speakers and treat them with care and gentleness.The way
that Council treats people during public hearings can do a lot to make them
relax or to push their emotions to a higher level of intensity.
2. Be fair and equitable in allocating public hearing time to individual
speakers
The Chair will determine and announce limits on speakers at the start of the :6
public hearing process. Generally,each speaker will be allocated three veered:6
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 9 Janu 200
minutes with applicants and appellants or their designated representatives
allowed more time.If many speakers are anticipated,the Chair may shorten
the time limit and/or ask speakers to limit themselves to new information
and points of view not already covered by previous speakers.No speaker
will be turned away unless he or she exhibits inappropriate behavior.Each
speaker,except the applicant and sometimes the appellant,may only speak
once during the public hearing unless the Council requests additional
clarification later in the process. After the close of the public hearing,no
more public testimony will be accepted unless the Chair re-opens the public
hearing for a limited and specific purpose. The mayor alone may thank the
speakers at the conclusion of the public comment.
3. Practice active listening. It is disconcerting to speakers to have
Councilmembers not look at them when they are speaking. It is fine to look
down at documents or to make notes,but reading for a long period of time
or gazing around the room gives the appearance of disinterest.Be aware of
facial expressions,especially those that could be misinterpreted as
"smirking,"disbelief,anger or boredom.
4. Ask for clarification,but avoid debate and argument with the public.Only
the Chair—not individual Councilmembers--can interru_..pt a sneaker during
a presentation.However,a Councilmember can ask the Chair for a point of
order if the speaker is off the topic or exhibiting behavior or language the
Councilmember finds disturbing.If speakers become flustered or defensive
by Council questions,it is the responsibility of the Chair to calm and focus
the speaker and to maintain the order and decorum of the meeting.
Questions by Councilmembers to members of the public testifying should
seek to clarify or expand information.It is never appropriate to belligerently
challenge or belittle the speaker. Councilmembers'personal opinions or
inclinations about upcoming votes should not be revealed until after the
public hearing is closed.If a speaker becomes disorderly or refuses to leave
the podium after appropriate requests,the Chair should call a recess.
5. No personal attacks of any kind,under any circumstance.Councilmembers
should be aware that their body language and tone of voice,as well as the
words they use,can appear to be intimidating or aggressive. However,
speakers have the right to make personal attacks,although the Chair can
attempt to keep a speaker on point.
6. Follow parliamentary procedure in conducting public meetings.The City
Attorney serves as advisory parliamentarian for the City and is available to
answer questions or interpret situations according to parliamentary
procedures.Final rulings on parliamentary procedure are made by the Chair,
subject to appeal by a Councilmember to the full Council.
B. IN UNOFFICIAL SETTINGS
1. Make no promises on behalf of the Council or City.Councilmembers will Dde :u�ne,
frequently be asked to explain a Council action or to give their opinion :6
about an issue as they meet and talk with constituents in the community. It DeIeW
Meted:6
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 10 Janu 200 ,
is appropriate to give a brief overview of City policy and to refer to City
staff for further information.It is inappropriate to overtly or implicitly
promise Council or City action,or to promise City staff will do something
specific(fix a pothole,remove a library book,plant new flowers in the
median,etc.).
2. Make no personal comments about other Councilmembers.It is acceptable
to publicly disagree about an issue,but it is unacceptable to make
derogatory comments about other Councilmembers,their opinions and
actions.
3. Remember that despite its nearly 30,000 population figure,Burlingame is a
small town at heart. Councilmembers are constantly being observed by the
community every day that they serve in office. Their behaviors and
comments serve as models for proper deportment in the City of Burlingame.
Honesty and respect for the dignity of each individual should be reflected in
every word and action taken by Councilmembers,24 hours a day,seven
days a week.It is a serious and continuous responsibility.
4. Ensure that your involvement in other community events,and organizations
are kept separate from your role as a City Councilmember.
VL COUNCIL CONDUCT WITH OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES
"Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest."—Mark Twain
1. Be clear about whether a Council Member is representing the Qty or personal oetetea:
interests.It_is important to realize that corning from an elected official,many
people including other government officials may perceive any statements or
positions of a Council member as either the official government position of the
member or of the City. If a Councilmember appears before another governmental
agency or organization to give a statement on an issue,the Councilmember must
j clearly state: 1)whether his or her statement reflects personal_opinionor is the Deleted:if
official stance of the City,2)if a�osition as an elected official_,whether this is
the majority or minority opinion of the Council.Ifthe Councilmember is
representing the City,the Councilmember must support and advocate the official
City position on an issue,not a personal viewpoint.If the Councilmember is _Deleted:s
representing another organization whose position is different from the City,the Deleted:ing
Councilmember should withdraw from voting on the issue if it significantly Deleted:,except in those situations
impacts or is detrimental to the City's interest.Councilmembers should be clear where they have been appointed by the
Mayor or Coum l as the City of
about which organizations they represent and inform the Mayor and Council of ;' &rclingame's reritwaftfive to the other
their involvement. goven-ental body,should
Deleted:do so
2. Except in those situations where the Council Member has been%Mointed by the :`,.�_an -
Mayor or Council as the City of Burlingame's representative to the other " Derated:
governmental body_a Council Membe>Fshould Vea ,before another governmental `,;'.' Dated:
agency as a City officiallonly;with the consent]of the majority of the City Council. j= „
council members should not join or participate on a countywide subcommittee on ;' Derated:6
regional matter without concurrence of the majority of the City Council. Delated:6
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 11 JMuagA,2004
- ------------f
f
3. Correspondence also should be equally clear about representation.City letterhead
may be used when the Councilmember is representing the City and the City's official
position. A copy of official correspondence should be given to the City Clerk to be
filed in the Council Office as part of the permanent public record. It is best that City
letterhead not be used for correspondence of Councilmembers representing a
personal point of view,or a dissenting point of view from an official Council
position.However,should Councilmembers use City letterhead to express a personal
opinion,the official City position must be stated clearly so the reader understands the
difference between the official City position and the minority viewpoint of the
Councilmember.
VII, COUNCIL CONDUCT WITH BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
"We rarely find that people have good sense unless they agree with us."
—Francois,Duc de La Rochefoucauld
The City has established several Boards and Commissions as a means of gathering more
community input. Citizens who serve on Boards and Commissions become more
involved in government and serve as advisors to the City Council. They are a valuable
resource to the City's leadership and should be treated with appreciation and respect.
1. If attending a Board or Commission meeting,be careful to only express personal
opinions. Councilmembers may attend any Board or Commission meeting,which
are always open to any member of the public. Any public comments by a
Councilmember at a Board or Commission meeting should be clearly made as
individual opinion and not a representation of the feelings of the entire City
Council.Be careful not to use the position to intimidate or pressure the Board or
Commission.
2. Limit contact with Board and Commission members to questions of clarification.
It is inappropriate for a Councilmember to contact a Board or Commission
member to lobby on behalf of an individual,business,or developer. It is
acceptable for Councilmembers to contact Board or Commission members in
order to clarify a position taken by the Board or Commission.
3. Remember that Boards and Commissions serve the Council and the community,
not individual Councilmembers-The City Council appoints individuals to serve
on Boards and Commissions, and it is the responsibility of Boards and
Commissions to follow policy established by the Council.But Board and
Commission members do not report to individual Councilmembers,nor do
Councilmembers have the power or right to threaten Board and Commission
members with removal if they disagree with an individual Councilmember about
an issue.Appointment and re-appointment to a Board or Commission should be
based on such criteria as expertise,ability to work with staff and the public,and
commitment to fulfilling official duties.A Board or Commission appointment
should not be used as a political "reward." DdeW,6
Deleted:6
f Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 12 LMu 2004
4. Be respectful of diverse opinions-A primary role of Boards and Commissions is
to represent many points of view in the community and to provide the Council
with advice based on a full spectrum of concerns and perspectives.
Councilmembers may have a closer working relationship with some individuals
serving on Boards and Commissions,but must be fair and respectful of all
citizens serving on Boards and Commissions.
5. Keep political support away from public forums-Board and Commission
members may offer political support to a Councilmember,but not in a public
forum while conducting official duties. Conversely,Councilmembers may
support Board and Commission members who are running for office,but not in an
official forum in their capacity as a Councilmember.
6. Inappropriate behavior can lead to removal-Inappropriate behavior by a Board or
Commission member should be noted to the Mayor,and the Mayor should
counsel the offending member. If inappropriate behavior continues,the Mayor
should bring the situation to the attention of the Council and the individual is
subject to removal from the Board or Commission.
VIII. COUNCIL CONDUCT WITH THE MEDIA
"Keep them well fed and never let them know that all you've got is a chair and a whip."
--Lion Tamer School
Councilmembers are frequently contacted by the media for background and quotes.
1. The best advice for dealing with the media is to never go"off the record"-
Most members of the media represent the highest levels of journalistic integrity
and ethics,and can be trusted to keep their word.But one bad experience can be
catastrophic.Words that are not said cannot be quoted.
2. The Mayor is the official spokesperson for a City position. The Mayor is the
designated representative of the Council to present and speak on the official City
position.Fan individual Councilmember is contacted by the media,the
Councilmember should be clear about whether their comments represent the
official City position or a personal viewpoint.
3. Choose words carefully and cautiously-Comments taken out of context can
cause problems.Be especially cautious about humor,sardonic asides,sarcasm,or
word play. It is never appropriate to use personal slurs or swear words when
talking with the media.
4Discussion Forums(or Blogs)
For Council members participating in on-line discussion forums(blog). It is
suggested that Councilmembers treat questions from a"blog"participant as you
would a reporter from other media.
Councilmembers may want to share your logic on any decision that was made as DeIeW;Dxmbw
part of a past City Council action,or to share factual information on a subject Weted:6
being discussed on the blog,but Councilmembers should avoid speculating as to ;6 ---�
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 13 Janu 200
how they would vote on a matter that has yet to come before the Council for
action.Engaging in an online debate,particularly when more than one other
Council member is likely to view your comments,may violate the Brown Act.
On-line discussions,as well as letters to the editor,will give Council members
valuable perspectives to take into consideration.If you are pressed for a response,
and feel compelled to do so,you are encouraged to indicate that the perspectives
you see being expressed are ones that you feel are important to consider when the
matter comes before the City Council but avoid committing yourself to a specific
action prior to hearing all the various perspectives that will be presented in a
future public meeting.
5. Press Releases
In an effort to avoid any perception of bias,unless authorized by the majority of
the City Council,members of the City Council should refrain from writing or
drafting press releases regarding City matters.
IX. SANCTIONS
"You cannot have a proud and chivalrous spirit if your conduct is mean and paltry;for
whatever a man's actions are,such must be his spirit."--Demosthenes
1. Public Disruption
Members of the public who do not follow proper conduct after a warning in a
public hearing may be barred from further testimony at that meeting or removed
from the Council Chambers.
2. Inappropriate Staff Behavior
Councilmembers should refer to the City Manager any City staff that does not
follow proper conduct in their dealings with Councilmembers,other City staff,or
the public. These employees may be disciplined in accordance with standard City
procedures for such actions. (Please refer to the section on Council Conduct with
City Staff for more details on interaction with Staff.)
3. Councilmembers Behavior and Conduct
City Councilmembers who intentionally and repeatedly do not follow proper
conduct may be reprimanded or formally censured by the Council or lose
committee assignments(both within the City of Burlingame and with inter-
government agencies).
Councilmembers should privately point out to the offending Councilmember
infractions of these procedures. If the offenses continue,then the matter should
be referred to the Mayor in private.If the Mayor is the individual whose actions
are being challenged,then the matter should be referred to the Vice Mayor.
It is the responsibility of the Mayor to initiate action if a Councilmember's
behavior may warrant sanction.If no action is taken by the Mayor,the alleged :nnba
violation(s)can be brought up with the full Council in a public meeting. (WOW:6
l"e'zte -6 1
Council Policy-Council Conduct 1.1.1 14 Janu 2001
If violation of these procedures is outside of the behaviors observed by the Mayor
or Councilmembers,the alleged violation should be referred to the Mayor.The
Mayor should ask the City Manager and/or the City Attorney to have the
allegation investigated and report the findings to the Mayor. It is the Mayor's
responsibility to take the next appropriate action.These actions can include,but
are not limited to:discussing and counseling the individual on the violations;
recommending sanction to the full Council to consider in a public meeting;or
forming a Council ad hoc subcommittee to review the allegation;the
investigation and its findings,as well as to recommend sanction options for
Council consideration.
X. PRINCIPLES OF PROPER CONDUCT
Proper conduct IS ...
Keeping promises
Being dependable
Building a solid reputation
Participating and being available
Demonstrating patience
Showing empathy
Holding onto ethical principles under stress
Listening attentively
Studying thoroughly
Keeping integrity intact
Overcoming discouragement
Going above and beyond,time and time again
Modeling a professional manner
Proper conduct IS NOT ...
Showing antagonism or hostility
Deliberately lying or misleading
Speaking recklessly
Spreading rumors
Stirring up bad feelings,divisiveness
Acting in a self-righteous manner
It all comes down to respect.Respect for one another as individuals,respect for the
validity of different opinions,respect for the democratic process and respect for the
community that we serve.
XL CHECKLIST FOR MONITORING CONDUCT
Will my decision/statement/action violate the trust,rights or good will of others?
Deleted:n�t,�
What are my interior motives and the spirit behind my actions? CDd*tW:6
Deleted:6
Council Policy-Council Conduct 1.1.1 15 Janu 2004
If I have to justify my conduct in public tomorrow,will I do so with pride or shame?
How would my conduct be evaluated by people whose integrity and character I respect?
Even if my conduct is not illegal or unethical,is it done at someone else's painful
expense?Will it destroy their trust in me?Will it harm their reputation?
Is my conduct fair?Just?Morally right?
If I were on the receiving end of my conduct,would I approve and agree,or would I take
offense?
Does my conduct give others reason to trust or distrust me?
Am I willing to take an ethical stand when it is called for?Am I willing to make my
ethical beliefs public in a way that makes it clear what I stand for?
Do I exhibit the same conduct in my private life as I do in my public life?
Can I take legitimate pride in the way I conduct myself and the example I set?
Do I listen and strive to understand the views of others?
Do I question and confront different points of view in a constructive manner?
Do I work to resolve differences and come to mutual agreement?
Do I support others and show respect for their ideas?
Will my conduct cause public embarrassment to someone else?
XII. GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Attitude-The manner in which one shows one's dispositions,opinions,and feelings
Behavior-External appearance or action;manner of behaving;carriage of oneself
Civility-Politeness,consideration,courtesy
Conduct-The way one acts;personal behavior
Courtesy-Politeness connected with kindness
Decorum-Suitable; proper,good taste in behavior DeIeWd:Dacmber
DWeW:
Manners-A way of acting;a style,method,or form;the way in which thing are doneDdeted:6
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 16 Janua 2001
Point of order-An interruption of a meeting to question whether rules or bylaws are
being broken,such as the speaker has strayed from the motion currently under
consideration
Point of personal privilege-A challenge to a speaker to defend or apologize for
comments that a fellow Council member considers offensive
Propriety-Conforming to acceptable standards of behavior
Protocol-The courtesies that are established as proper and correct
Respect-The act of noticing with attention;holding in esteem; courteous regard
Possible things to add:
1. Add a legislative subcommittee that will review and determine how to handle support for
proposed state legislation See possible language below:
Legislative action by the State and Federal legislative bodies can often result in situations wherethe
need to send correspondence regarding a proposed bill arises with less than adequate time to place
an item on the agenda for Council formal action. The City Manager is authorized to prepare
correspondence on legislative matters as long as the position being taken is consistent with the
position taken by the League of California Cities and/or the CCAG(City and County Association of
Governments). In those cases were no position has been taken by either of those bodies then
correspondence shall be approved by the Mayor or Deputy Mayor in the Mayor's absence prior to
being sent. In all cases the full Council should receive copies of the correspondence sent out and
shown under acknowledgements at the next meeting. Should a council member have questions or
concerns with the position being taken they should raise it for discussion under the
acknowledgements at the meeting.
2. Add some language about appropriate professional attire should be worn to council meetings.
Deleted:December
Deleted:6
Deleted:6
Council Policy—Council Conduct 1.1.1 17 Janua 200
RESOLUTION NO. 117-1999 ATTACHMENT 6
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
ADOPTING CITY COUNCIL POLICY ON ROTATION OF COUNCIL OFFICERS
WHEREAS, Section 36802 of the Government Code requires the City of Burlingame have a Mayor and
Vice Mayor; and
WHEREAS, by Council tradition the Council has rotated the office of Mayor and Vice Mayor annually
at the second meeting in November of each year; and
WHEREAS,the Council desires to insure an equitable rotation of officers amongst all persons elected
to the City Council,
NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED and DETERMINED by the CITY COUNCIL of THE
CITY OF BURLINGAME that the following procedure shall govern the appointment of Council officers:
1. Rotation of the office of Mayor and Vice Mayor shall occur annually at the second City Council
meeting in November of each year.
2. The Vice Mayor shall become Mayor if eligible and a new Vice Mayor shall be appointed from the
remainder of the councilmembers next in order of position on the rotation list described below. If the Vice
Mayor is ineligible, unable, or declines to serve as Mayor,then councilmembers next in order of position on the
rotation list described below shall fill both the offices of Mayor and Vice Mayor.
3. A rotation list based on seniority of consecutive years in the office of councilmember and this
resolution is established pursuant to Exhibit A.
4. As changes in Council membership occur, the rotation list shall be updated as follows:
A. The outgoing mayor shall be placed ahead of any councilmembers newly elected in the November
general election, if any, but below all continuing and re-elected council-members
B. A newly elected or appointed councilmember shall be placed at the bottom of the rotation list upon
taking office. If more than one councilmember is elected or appointed at the same time, the newly elected or
appointed councilmembers shall draw straws to determine their position relative to each other at the bottom of
the rotation list.
1
C. If a councilmember declines to serve as either mayor or vice mayor when it is that councilmember's
turn to serve,the declining councilmember shall be placed on the rotation list ahead of any councilmembers
newly elected in the November general election, if any, and below all continuing and re-elected
councilmembers. If however,more than one councilmember at the same time declines to serve as either mayor
or vice mayor when it is their turn to serve, the declining councilmembers shall be placed in the same relative
order to each other as before but below all other councilmembers on the rotation list.
5. The same process for rotation of officers contained in this resolution shall be used if the office of
mayor or vice mayor becomes vacant at a time other than the second Council meeting in November of each
year. However, if the vacancy occurs because the mayor or vice mayor is no longer able or willing to serve in
that office, the outgoing officer shall be placed below all other councilmembers on the rotation list.
6. For purposes of this resolution, "the November general election"refers to the City general election
that has occurred on the first Tuesday of November immediately preceding the second Council meeting for that
November.
Mayor
I, Judith A. Malfatti, 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 I`day of November, 1999, and
was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: GALLIGAN, KNIGHT, JANNEY, O'MAHONY, SPINELLI
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE
City Clerk
[U:\FILES\COUNREPS\mayorlist2007.ccr.wpd]
2
EXHIBIT A
ROTATION LIST FOR OFFICES OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR
(November 1, 1999)
1. Mayor Mary Janney
2. Vice Mayor Marti Knight
3. Councilmember Rosalie O'Mahony
4. Councilmember Joe Galligan
5. Councilmember Mike Spinelli (Immediate Past Mayor)
3
ATTACHMENT C
PROCEDURES FOR APPOINTMENTS TO CITY COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS
1. Application Dates.
a. The City Manager will report when the term of office of a commissioner or board
member will be expiring to the City Council approximately thirty(30) days in
advance. The City Manager will also report any board or commission vacancy to
the City Council.
b. The City Council will then determine what deadlines for applications will apply
for each board or commission. Generally, deadlines will be three (3) or more
weeks following the Council's determination. The City Council may extend the
deadlines as the Council may deem appropriate.
2. Advertisement. The City Clerk will post notice of the vacancies and deadlines at City
Hall,the Main Library, and such additional places as the City Clerk determines may be
helpful. For unscheduled vacancies, the City Clerk will also post notices as required by
Government Code section 54974.
3. Applications.
a. A standard application form together with supplemental questions will be
provided by the City Manager to persons interested in appointment to a vacant
office.
b. Incumbent commissioners and board members seeking reappointment, as well as
new applicants, will complete the application forms and return them to the City
Manager by the designated deadline in order to be considered for appointment.
However, a board member or commissioner who has been appointed to fill an
unexpired term within the previous twelve(12) months will not be required to
complete and file an application.
C. Applicants are expected to have attended at least one meeting of the board or
commission for which they are seeking appointment.
d. Applications will only be accepted for specific vacancies. Persons who have
applied for previous vacancies will be kept on an interest list for a period of two
(2)years by the City Manager and be mailed notices of pending vacancies during
that period.
4. Interviews.
a. The City Council will interview all of the applicants, including incumbents, who
have submitted applications by the designated deadline. Pursuant to the Brown
Act,these interviews will be conducted at an open and public meeting.
5/7/2007
1
b. If an applicant is unable to interview with the Council at the time appointed by the
Council because of a personal emergency or other compelling reason, the Council
will make an attempt to reschedule the appointment but is not required to do so.
The Council may conduct interviews by telephone so long as the requirements of
the Brown Act are met. However, a candidate who is unable to be interviewed
will be dropped from consideration.
C. Normally,the appointments to the vacant positions will not be made immediately
following the interviews, but will rather be made at the next meeting of the City
Council.
5. Appointments.
a. Appointments are made at regular or special meetings of the City Council by open
motion and voting. Ballots will not be used.
b. If there is more than one office to fill on a board or commission, the Mayor may
direct that the voting be conducted on an applicant pool basis; in other words,the
City Clerk is asked to read the name of each candidate with each Councilmember
entitled to vote for the number of applicants equal to the number of open
positions, with a majority vote required to appoint an applicant; if the Council is
unable to reach a majority vote to fill the offices, an applicant receiving the fewest
votes will be dropped through each voting cycle, until the required number of
appointments are made.
C. If the Council is unable to reach the necessary number of appointments for
whatever reason, the Council may then proceed to seek additional applicants,
continue the appointment process, or take such other action as the Council may
deem appropriate.
6. Terms of Office. Commissioners and board members are appointed for only a single
term, and there is no expectation of reappointment. Terms of office will comply with the
provisions of the Municipal Code, or in the case of the Library Board of Trustees, the
California Education Code.
7. Local Appointment List. The City Clerk shall maintain and provide the Local
Appointment List as required by Government Code section 54972 and following.
5/7/2007
2
ATTACHMENT D
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF BURLINGAME
DATE: December 29, 1998
TO: Fellow Councilmembers
FROM: Mary Janney, Mayor
RE : City Representatives to County/Regional Agencies
As you requested for the meeting of the City Selection Committee/Council of Cities meeting on
December 18, 1998, I voted as follows:
Marland Townsend for the Bay Air Quality Management Board;
Malcolm Dudley for the Transportation Authority;
Pam Rianda for the Transportation Authority; and
Sue Lempert for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Marland and Malcolm were selected without opposition. Pam Rianda was defeated by Naomi
Patridge on the second ballot. Sue Lempert was selected on the first ballot.
As you know, I was very concerned about how binding votes affected the office of mayor and
Council consistency with the way selections have been handled in the past,so I asked Dennis,Larry,
and Judy to do some research.
What we found was that instruction to the mayor on voting has been,at best,sporadic and that there
is a distinction between Cities Selection Committee and Council of Cities on this issue. I also think
that the 1984 resolution probably doesn't work, and we should further discuss how we expect the
City's representatives to represent us on our many multi-agency boards and agencies.
Let me begin the with the Cities Selection Committee/Council of Cities.
The Council of Cities was formed to discuss city issues in the County;I believe it was originally the
Council of Mayors. The Council of Cities selects representatives to the following multi-agency
boards and commissions:
Community Development Committee
Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board
Transportation Authority
Criminal Justice Council
December 29, 1998
Page 2
The Cities Selection Committee is created by State statute (Gov't Code Sections 50270 etc.)to be
composed of the mayors of the cities in the County and appoints members to the following:
ABAG
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
California Identification Board
Children's Executive Council
LAFCO
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Supplemental Law Enforcement Oversight Committee
Transit District
The Selection Committee also makes recommendations for Coastal Commission and ratification of
the final transportation plan for the County as developed by C/CAG.
The Council of Cities and the Cities Selection Committee have been combined in San Mateo County.
The County provided me with a list of the selections/appointments that have been made by these 2
committees in the past 4 years, which is attached. We then went back and looked through the
minutes of City Council meetings to see what instruction had been given regarding these
appointments. We found only 5 occasions when the Council was either requested to or did provide
direction to the Mayor regarding selections or decisions at the Council of Cities/Cities Selection
Committee. I know there may have been informal discussions among councilmembers or we may
have missed an entry in the minutes. However, it does appear that direction on voting has been
sporadic.
I have also attached Resolution 32-84 (together with the minutes on the item), which attempted to
prevent the mayor from voting at Council of Mayors meetings unless the City Council had already
stated a position. The vote on the resolution was 3-2,with Vic Mangini and Dave Martin opposed.
The Resolution actually creates more confusion than its resolves:
— The Council of Mayors no longer exists;
— An abstention usually counts as a vote in favor of the majority vote–so in a 10-9 vote
at the Council of Cities, Burlingame's abstention would count as an 11th vote for the
majority;
— Sometimes there is no Council meeting scheduled before a Committee agenda is
circulated and a Committee meeting occurs;
December 29, 1998
Page 3
It is impossible to tell where discussions will lead at any meeting,even if the agenda is
available before a Council meeting; nominations for positions can be made at the
Committee meeting itself; and
— It could take away Burlingame's vote on many issues.
When this type of voting direction to mayors on the Council of Cities/Cities Selection Committee
was brought to the attention of the then-Assistant District Attorney(now County Counsel)in 1988,
Tom Casey determined that this direction was preempted by State law with regard to the Selection
Committee. I have attached a copy of his opinion as well.
Apparently in response to that opinion,the Cities Section Committee adopted rules of procedure that
spell out when direction can be given to the mayor– in connection with a Council of Cities vote--
and when it cannot–in connection with a Cities Selection Committee vote. A copy of the rules is
attached.
I believe that we need to think about what we expect of our representatives to the many JPA's,
regional agencies, and multi-agency boards and commissions, including the Cities Selection
Committee and the Council of Cities. Do we want them to be just messengers and to only vote the
way that the Council majority expressly directs them to vote,or do we expect them to represent the
Council and the City and apply their best judgment in a manner consistent with City policies?
RESOLUTION NO.. 32 -84
COUNCIL OF MAYOR'S VOTING POLICY
RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME
that:
WHEREAS, the Mayor of this City represents the views
of this Council and the Citv of Burlingame at the San Mateo
County Council of Mayors, and
WHEREAS, issues are raised from time to time at meetings
of the Council of Mayors which have not been the subject of prior
discussion by this Council or upon which this Council has not
expressed a position.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby declared to be the policy
of this Council that the Mayor or any other representative of this
City to the San Mateo County Council of Mayors shall not vote for
or against any item or issue,other than procedural matters such
as approval of minutes,upon which this Council has not determined
or stated a position.
"Za or
I, JUDITH A. MALFATTI, 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
21st day of May ,1984, and was adopted thereafter
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: AMSTRUP, BARTON, PAGLIARO
NOES: COUNCILMEN: MANGINI, MARTIN
5/16/84 ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: NONE
ity Clerk
Doug Turner, Burlingame Group, reviewed the reason for requesting a
time extension. The restaurant chain with which they had been
negotiating has decided to put a restaurant in another location. They
have an informal agreement with an hotel chain for the hotel but they
need time to review the building plans.
Council agreed unanimously by roll call vote to approve the request
for the Burlingame Group time extension. The CIF request would be
reviewed in August and the Ramada allocation would be reviewed in
June.
RESOLUTION 31-84 - REQUESTING PARTICIPATION IN THE PROGRAM FOR _
REHABILITATION OF STREETS UTILIZED BY TRANSIT VEHICLES
i
Director of Public Works reviewed his memorandum of May 15, 1984 in -
which he recommended council adopt this resolution accepting
provisions of the county program and stating Burlingame's desire to
participate in the program for rehabilitation of city streets used by
transit vehicles.
Council questioned why certain roads were not included in the map of
roads to be improved. Director of Public Works replied the roads used
by transit but not included in the map were either state highways or
county roads.
Councilman Martin moved adoption of Resolution 31-84. Seconded by
Councilman Mangini, carried unanimously by voice vote.
VACANT LOT AT 1610 HUNT
Mayor Amstrup reviewed the City Manager's memorandum of May 14, 1984
in which he reviewed a request to purchase the lot for $85,000. The
lot had previously been appraised for $100,000 and he recommended
getting new appraisal and calling for public bids.
Council concurred with City Manager's recommendation.
ANNUAL JOINT MEETING OF COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION
Council agreed to the date of June 9, 1984 for the annual meeting and
suggested consideration of a breakfast meeting.
RESOLUTION 32-84 - COUNCIL OF MAYORS VOTING POLICY
Mayor Amstrup reviewed his desire for a policy statement on voting for
the Council of Mayors. Councilwoman Barton noted while she was Mayor
she had had occasion to come back to council for direction on certain
matters she was asked to vote upon. She agreed this resolution was
needed. Councilman Pagliaro also supported the idea.
Councilmen Martin and Mangini saw no need for this resolution,
council members know the position of this council and should not need
to delay a vote. Councilman Martin noted that any Mayor or
representative can abstain from voting at any time.
Mayor Amstrup stated that some members of Council of Mayors do make
personal statements at those meetings, and he would only speak as
representative of this council.
Councilman Pagliaro moved adoption of Resolution 32-84. Seconded by
Councilwoman Barton, carried on roll call vote, Councilmen Mangini and
Martin voting no.
CLOSURE OF CITY DUMP
City Manager reviewed his memorandums of May 16 and May 9, 1984 in
which he recommended that council announce the closure date of July
30, 1984 for the City Dump. Staff will prepare signs noting
alternative dump sites for the public's information. San Carlos and
Ox Mountain sites will be available for dumping. Staff will also seek
consultant proposals for developing a master plan for Bayside Park.
Council agreed to the closure date and hoped the press would
publicize this information.
11123
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA
May 21, 1984
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. The meeting
was called to order at 8 p.m. by Mayor Irving S. Amstrup.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Led by City Planner, Margaret Monroe.
ROLL CALL
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: AMSTRUP, BARTON, MANGINI, MARTIN, PAGLIARO
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: NONE
MINUTES
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 7, 1984 and the Study Meeting of
May 15, 1984 were approved.
PUBLIC HEARING - SECOND READING - ORDINANCE 1275 - ESTABLISHING STOP
SIGNS ON MITTEN, MALCOLM, STANTON, AND HINCKLEY ROADS AT GILBRETH
ROAD
Director of Public Works reviewed his memorandum of April 13 in which
he recommended council hold public hearing and take action. The
Public Works department and the Traffic, Safety, Parking Commission
both recommend addition of these stop signs.
Mayor Amstrup opened the public hearing. There being no comments, the
hearing was closed.
Councilman Mangini moved adoption of Ordinance 1275. Seconded by
Councilwoman Barton, carried unanimously by roll call vote.
PUBLIC HEARING - SECOND READING - ORDINANCE 1276 - ESTABLISHING
PENALTIES FOR REPEAT PARKING VIOLATIONS
City Attorney reviewed his memorandum of April 20, 1984 in which he
recommended council hold public hearing and take action.
Councilman Mangini inquired about the amount of the fine. City
Attorney reviewed first parking ticket would be $5 and repeat ticket
in the same parking spot would be $15.
Mayor Amstrup opened the public hearing.
Alan Horn, resident, stated $15 is too cheap, he felt fine should be
$25 or $50 for second ticket.
Mayor Amstrup closed the public hearing.
Councilman Martin moved adoption of Ordinance 1276. Seconded by
Councilman Pagliaro, carried unanimously by roll call vote.
TRAFFIC ALLOCATIONS - MAY 1984
City Planner reviewed her memorandum of May 14, 1984 in which she
recommended council review the two requests for time extensions and
take action. Burlingame Group is requesting an extension of four
months on occupancy of their three structures and the CIF project is
requesting an eleven month extension on occupancy. She noted that
Ramada was granted an allocation but they have not submitted an
application to BCDC and until they do so the clock does not begin to
run on their construction time line.
Councilman Pagliaro was concerned about the Ramada project and stated
council should review it to determine Ramada's intent. Council
concurred and requested City Planner write to Ramada regarding
council's concerns. Council stated the eleven month delay for CIF was
too long and council would like to review this project in August.
- 1
ATTACHMENT E
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF BURLINGAME
CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: December 19, 2005
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney
RE : Reimbursement Policies and Chapter 700 of 2005 Statutes
INTRODUCTION
In November,the City Council briefly discussed Chapter 700 adopted by the California Legislature
regarding reimbursement policies, and the Council approved a supplemental listing of events and
meetings for which councilmembers could be reimbursed. The Council directed staff to review other
agencies' reimbursement policies and provide the Council with a variety of possible approaches for
consideration.
DISCUSSION
A. Historical Background
Burlingame Municipal Code § 2.04.030(b) limits reimbursements to councilmembers as follows:
Reimbursement.The salaries prescribed in this section are exclusive of any amounts payable
to each member of the council as reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses incurred
in the performance of official duties. Actual and necessary expenses shall not include
mileage for any activity within the county.
The City Council adopted an expense reimbursement policy in February 2003 that applied to all City
officers and employees, including the City Council. In February of this year, the Council adopted
some minor revisions to the policy as part of adoption of the City's Revised Purchasing Procedures.
A copy of the City's current expense reimbursement policy is attached as Attachment A.
Apparently, some local agencies in the Sacramento Valley have had troubles with payments made
to members of their governing boards in the past few years;there have been questionable expenses
and some high payments for meeting attendance. In response, the California Legislature adopted
revisions to the Government Code in the last session that establish compensation and reimbursement
standards for all local agencies in the State(Chapter 700, 2005 Statutes, aka AB 1234). A copy of
the relevant sections is attached as Attachment B.
Mayor and Council
Re: Reimbursement Policies and Chapter 700 of 2005 Statutes
December 19, 2005
Page 2
The new law takes effect on January 1, 2006, and establishes the following principles regarding
expense reimbursements for councilmembers (and any other board or commission members who
receive any reimbursements):
1) A written policy must be adopted "specifying the types of occurrences that qualify a
member of the legislative body to receive reimbursement of expenses".
2)The policy may also establish reimbursement rates; if it does not, IRS standards control.
3) Rates for lodging or transportation cannot exceed government and group rates that are
offered unless the additional expense is approved by the City Council at a public meeting before the
expense is incurred.
4)Expense reports must be filed within a reasonable time after the expense is incurred, and
all of the reports are public records.
5) The persons receiving reimbursement for a meeting must give a brief report about the
meeting at the next regular meeting of the body of which they are a member.
6)Every councilmember and board and commission member who receives reimbursement
for expenses from the City must receive at least 2 hours of approved training in ethics laws during
the year 2006.
Last month,the Council approved a resolution specifying the types of events and meetings for which
reimbursement of expenses were appropriate. A copy of the resolution is attached as Attachment
C.
B. City Compliance
The adopted City policies are almost fully in compliance with the new law. The reimbursement
policy was adopted at a public meeting;the policy specifies the types of eventsyand further identifies
the accepted organization sponsors of the events; the policy establishes the maximum rates for
reimbursement for a variety of expenses, relying on Federal per diem rates as a guide in most
instances;lodging at conference hotels is specifically permitted. The Council already offers reports
of meetings that have been attended at each Council meeting, and expense reimbursements are
already public record in Burlingame.
Two small changes appear to be required by the new law. First,the maximum lodging rate allowed
should be the conference hotel rate unless the rate is not available;this would allow a member to stay
at a different hotel so long as the expense is not greater than the group rate at the conference hotel,
Mayor and Council
Re: Reimbursement Policies and Chapter 700 of 2005 Statutes
December 19, 2005
Page 3
and would comply with the new law by taking the conference rate if it is less than the Federal per
diem rate (the Federal per diem rate is almost always less).
Second,the maximum transportation rate should be the group/government rate for travel;this would
allow a member to use a private vehicle,for example,so long as the expense reimbursement claimed
did not exceed the group rate available; once again, this would comply with the new law by using
the maximum group transportation rate if it less than the rates allowed by the City policy.
These changes can be brought to the Council for approval next month.
C. Other Agencies'Policies
We surveyed the other city attorneys in the County and did not find any other city that had an
adopted written policy on expense reimbursements. The County has a policy statement that seems
to have worked fairly well for the Board of Supervisors. The County policy is attached as
Attachment D.
Attached as a further example is the reimbursement policy for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes as
Attachment E.
With the adoption of the new law, the League of California Cities has developed a draft sample
reimbursement policy that seeks to address the various components of the new law. A copy of the
draft sample is attached as Attachment F.
D. Alternatives and Issues
Types of Events. The current City policy specifies the types of events or meetings in the following
way: l)Performance of official duties,such as attending meetings of boards or commission of which
the person is a member as well as training in ethics laws(which is broadly defined in the new law);
and 2) Attendance at meetings or events sponsored by a specific list of organizations, such as the
League of California Cities, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, etc.
The League of California Cities sample policy uses more generalized descriptions:
1. Communicating with representatives of regional, state and national government on
city/county/district adopted policy positions;
2. Attending educational seminars designed to improve officials' skill and information
levels;
3. Participating in regional, state and national organizations whose activities affect the
city's/county's/district's interests;
Mayor and Council
Re: Reimbursement Policies and Chapter 700 of 2005 Statutes
December 19, 2005
Page 4
4. Recognizing service to the city/county/district (for example, thanking a longtime
employee with a retirement gift or celebration of nominal value and cost);
5. Attending city/county/district events;
6. Implementing a city/county/district-approved strategy for attracting or retaining
businesses to the city/county/district,which will typically involve at least one staff member;
and
7. [For those agencies that pay meeting stipends,for example,water districts] Meetings
such as those listed above for which a meeting stipend is expressly authorized under this
policy.
Page 2 of Sample Policy.
The County, on the other hand, also lists expenses that will not be authorized, such as political
functions. Rancho Palos Verdes' policy more closely resembles Burlingame's, with a listing of
specified sponsor organizations.
It may be appropriate to provide a more generic description of events or meetings; however,
predetermined certainty on the appropriateness of an expense is very helpful to Finance staff and
avoids acrimony over a particular event or expense. In addition, the new law allows variations, so
long as the variation is approved before the expense is incurred.
Fundraisers. Nonprofit organizations have regular events that are fundraisers for the organizations,
such as luncheons,dinners,auctions,and so forth. Councilmembers are often invited to these events,
and some of the organizations are ones to which the City provides direct financial support. However,
the ticket for attendance usually includes a fairly large surcharge above the direct cost of dinner or
lunch in order to raise funds for the organization.
The first question is probably whether attendance by a councilmember should be considered as a part
of official duties so that reimbursement of expenses is warranted? If so,which organizations should
be included?
The second question is whether the contribution portion is a reasonable and necessary expense that
the City should pay or whether a councilmember should be expected to bear that portion of the cost?
The County's policy does not reimburse for all fundraisers as follows: "An event which is primarily
a fund-raiser for an organization, non-profit or otherwise. It is recognized however that would be
appropriate to claim the cost when a meal is provided at this type of function, although the
reimbursement shall not exceed $150."
Staff has suggested that we work with charitable organizations in the coming year to identify an
attendance cost that might apply to elected officials when the organization dearly wants elected
Mayor and Council
Re: Reimbursement Policies and Chapter 700 of 2005 Statutes
December 19, 2005
Page 5
officials to attend for the visibility created, but recognizing that the cost of attendance can quickly
add up.
City Functions. The Council should also determine whether councilmembers should be reimbursed
for attendance at a City function,such as a retirement dinner for a City employee. The County policy
does provide for reimbursement,probably because attendance at a number of these types of events
can quickly add up to a lot of money. There is also some expectation that one or more
councilmembers will attend to show support for the employees.
Amount of Expense. As can be seen in the Sample Policy, some agencies establish a maximum
annual amount of expenses that can be reimbursed to each councilmember. In Burlingame, the
Council has established an overall budget from which all councilmembers draw,and the account is
never overdrawn. If the Council would like to establish individual maximum amounts,it could do
so,and given the variety of events,it might be appropriate to ensure that the person serving as mayor
has an additional increment available.
Expense Allowances. Some agencies in the past have simply established expense allowances that
are paid regardless of actual expenses incurred. These have be car or computer allowances.
However, it appears to be the consensus of city attorneys that the new law prohibits these types of
allowances for members of councils, boards, and commissions; instead, expenses have to be
approved on an individual, auditable basis.
Other agencies,such as Rancho Palos Verdes,limit reimbursement for attendance at some meetings
to only authorized attendees. For example,if the City had a representative to ABAG attending,then
an additional City official would not be entitled to reimbursement. This seems like a difficult system
to administer,particularly when most events and meetings are often of interest to the entire Council.
F. Next Steps
In January, staff will bring forward the two small changes discussed above to ensure compliance
with the new law. However,the Council may wish to consider further changes to the policy;perhaps
those could be discussed at a study meeting in the coming few months. Staff would be happy to
provide any further information that might be of assistance.
It is expected that the League of California Cities will complete development of educational
programs to meet the training requirements of the new law, and staff will let the City Council and
the Planning Commission know about training opportunities that satisfy the new law as the year goes
along.
Mayor and Council
Re: Reimbursement Policies and Chapter 700 of 2005 Statutes
December 19, 2005
Page 6
CONCLUSION
My principal goal on this issue is to have a clear, direct policy on expense reimbursements, so that
officials and City staff can readily administer and explain the policy. I want to minimize
uncomfortable decisions about particular expenses by establishing the rules in advance as much as
possible. As Bill Clinton and Tom DeLay learned,these types of issues can divert a lot of attention
from important matters that must be addressed.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-2005
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
SPECIFYING OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS FOR WHICH REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS
OF ATTENDANCE IS AUTHORIZED
RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY of BURLINGAME that:
WHEREAS,the City Council has adopted a Purchasing Manual specifying the procedures
and policies for reimbursement of expenses; and
WHEREAS, the Chapter 700 of the 2005 California Statutes requires the City Council to
specify what official functions are subject to reimbursement for attendance costs for
Councilmembers if a function does not fit into the three narrow categories identified by the
Legislature; and
WHEREAS,attendance at meetings and events ofthe following organizations are an integral
part of service as a Councilmember for the City in representing the City's interests and hearing and
learning about and sharing the far-reaching concerns of the community:
—Association of Bay Area Governments
—Burlingame Chamber of Commerce
—California Legislature
—Cities Selection Committee
—Council of Cities (Council of Mayors)
—League of California Cities, both Peninsula Division and State
— League of Women Voters (North San Mateo County and South San Mateo County
chapters)
—Metropolitan Transportation Commission
—North County Council of Cities
—Peninsula Policy Partnership
— SAMCEDA
—San Mateo County Convention& Visitors Bureau
— San Mateo County Progress Seminar
WHEREAS, reimbursement of the costs of attendance at these events and meetings to
Councilmembers is appropriate and should be authorized,
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved:
1. In addition to reimbursement for functions and activities specified in Chapter 700 of 2005
California Statutes,reimbursement for the costs of attendance by Councilmembers at meetings and
events of the following organizations is authorized:
—Association of Bay Area Governments
—Burlingame Chamber of Commerce
1
—California Legislature
—Cities Selection Committee
—Council of Cities (Council of Mayors)
—League of California Cities, both Peninsula Division and State
— League of Women Voters (North San Mateo County and South San Mateo County
chapters)
—Metropolitan Transportation Commission
—North County Council of Cities
—Peninsula Policy Partnership
—SAMCEDA
—San Mateo County Convention&Visitors Bureau
—San Mateo County Progress Seminar
Mayor
I, DORIS MORTENSEN, 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
7t'day of November, 2005, and adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER: BAYLOCK, GALLIGAN,NAGEL, O'MAHONY
NOES: COUNCILMEMBER: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER: NONE
City Clerk
2
ATTACHMENT F
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF BURLINGAME
CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: July 16, 2003
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney
RE: Effect of Tie Votes and Common Need for Three Affirmative Votes at Council Level
One of the issues that is not clearly defined in State law or the Municipal Code is the effect that a
tie vote has on administrative appeals at the Council level. This memorandum is intended to provide
the Council with an outline of the effects of tie votes on Council decision-making. Tie votes have
different impacts depending on the motion made or the matter before the Council.
DISCUSSION
Tie votes are generally construed to be "no action" under both law and procedural rules;therefore,
a tie vote usually acts to defeat the particular motion that was being voted upon. However,because
a tie vote constitutes "no action,"the Council may choose to make additional motions to attempt to
reach a more definitive decision on the matter. Additional action is solely within the discretion of
the Council, and the Council can allow the matter to simply expire with the tie vote.
A. Ordinances
State law requires that a routine ordinance be adopted by a majority of the Council (at least
3 affirmative votes);therefore,two affirmative votes(whether in a tie or a majority of a quorum of
3 Councilmembers) is insufficient to adopt an ordinance. Gov't Code § 36936. Such a vote on an
ordinance defeats the proposed ordinance if no further action is taken.
B. Resolutions.
A resolution now requires a majority of the Council as well, 3 affirmative votes; therefore,
a tie vote defeats the proposed resolution if no further action is taken. Gov't Code § 36936.
C. Urgency Ordinances.
State law requires that at least four members of the Council vote affirmatively for an urgency
ordinance. Gov't Code § 36937(b). Therefore, a tie vote naturally defeats the urgency ordinance.
D. Planning._Applications.
1. Appeals to the City Council from the Planning Commission.
An appeal from the Planning Commission on a decision that would have been final with the
Mayor and Council
Re: Effect on Tie Votes at Council Level
July 16, 2003
Page 2
Planning Commission had the appeal not been filed,is subject to section 25.16.070 of the Municipal
Code. Generally, an appeal establishes an entirely new or de novo process and whatever decision
is made by the council is the decision imposed upon the applicant for the planning application. The
Municipal Code provides little guidance as to the effect a tie vote might have: "After having held
such hearing, the council shall make and file its order determining the matter and may approve,
disapprove, or modify the order of the commission." Section 25.16.085 goes on to state: "The
determination and order of the commission, or, if appeal or review is had under the foregoing
provisions, the determination and order of the council, is final and conclusive on the applicant."
This implies that the Council's decision(a"no approval of the application") would be the result.
In addition, City action on applications is taken by resolution. As discussed above, a
resolution can only be adopted by a majority of the Council—three votes.
Therefore,if an applicant is unable to attain 3 affirmative votes from the Council to approve
an application, it appears that the application stands denied.
2. Planning Ordinances or General Plan Amendments.
Many planning applications in the Town require adoption of a planned development
ordinance, zoning code amendment, or general plan amendment. All of these require, like routine
ordinances,the affirmative majority vote of the Council (3). Therefore, a tie vote or a vote of 2-1
constitutes a failure to adopt the ordinance or general plan amendment. Because the Commission
has no authority to adopt these,the Commission's recommendation cannot be adopted by default.
E. Follow-Up Procedure
When a tie vote occurs or when a motion fails, Councilmembers may make other motions
concerning an application or proposal and can alter the proposal or ordinance before the Council.
Of course,if adoption of a routine ordinance at its second reading is before the Council,then it will
probably be necessary to reintroduce the ordinance in its amended form in order to validate it and
to provide the required pre-adoption publication.
Finally,there are other procedures or proposals under State law that require either a majority
of the Council (3) or a super majority (usually four-fifths or 4 affirmative votes) to approve a
proposal. These include such things as overriding assessment protests and adopting a resolution of
necessity to proceed with eminent domain.
If you would like to discuss this issue further, please let me know.
CITY 0
BURUNGAME
m
�oA o0
$Astto�uNe 0
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL
Unapproved Minutes
Regular Meeting of December 17, 2007
STUDY SESSION
a. BUSINESS LICENSE AUDIT
FinDir Nava made a presentation on the city's Business License Tax provisions and discussed the objectives
of an audit in 2008 to educate the business community of license requirements and increase revenue for the
city. Discussion was continued to Old Business during the Council's regular meeting that followed.
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. Mayor Rosalie M. O'Mahony called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Led by Rudy Horak.
3. ROLL CALL
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Baylock, Deal, Keighran, Nagel, O'Mahony
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: None
4. MINUTES
Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to approve the minutes of the December 3, 2007 regular Council
meeting; seconded by Vice Mayor Keighran. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
CLOSED SESSION
CA Anderson advised that Council met in closed session and directed staff regarding the following:
a. Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6:
City Negotiators: Deirdre Dolan, Jim Nantell, IEDA
Labor Organization: Teamsters Local 856
PRESENTATION
1
Burlingame City Council December 17,2007
Unapproved Minutes
a. SHARED VISION 2025 PROJECT FOR SAN MATEO COUNTY
At the request of the Board of Supervisors, Marshall Wilson, Public Communications Manager for San
Mateo County, encouraged those who live or work in the county to take an on-line survey that asks people to
tell the county what their most important goal is for San Mateo County.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR
DESIGN REVIEW, HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT, AND SIDE AND FRONT
SETBACK VARIANCES FOR A MAIN AND LOWER LEVEL ADDITION TO AN
EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AT 3105 MARGARITA AVENUE, LOCATED
WITHIN A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE
CA Anderson requested Councilman Deal recuse himself because as the Planning Commission Chairman, he
had voted on this item during the November 13, 2007 Planning Commission meeting. Councilman Deal left
the Council Chambers.
CDD Meeker reviewed the staff report and requested Council to conduct a public hearing on the appeal of
the application for Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, and setback variances for a main and
lower level addition to a single-family dwelling at 3105 Margarita Avenue and to consider public testimony
and the analysis contained in the staff report.
Mayor O'Mahony opened the public hearing. The following citizens spoke: Mike Kerwin, applicant; John
Maniscalco, architect; Frank Sulgit, appellant; Helaine Darling, 3100 Margarita Avenue; Amy Sosnick,
formerly of 3105 Margarita Avenue; Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; Brian Murphy, 3101 Margarita
Avenue; and Michael Pattison, 1559 Los Montes. There were no further comments from the floor, and the
hearing was closed.
After Council discussion, Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to deny the appeal and uphold the
Planning Commission's November 13, 2007 approval of the requests and to require the project plans to be
revised to show the repair/replacement of the fence between 3105 Margarita Drive and 3101 Margarita
Drive, as directed by the Planning Commission; and at Mayor O'Mahony's request, added to the motion the
following modification to the conditions of approval: that applicant and neighbors work with the City
Arborist to identify the appropriate species and optimal location for the three (3) replacement trees to be
planted on the property to ensure that the trees do not grow to a height greater than 15 feet and that they are
placed anywhere on the property that will not adversely impact views from the uphill property; seconded by
Councilwoman Keighran. The motion was approved by roll call vote, 4-0.
Councilman Deal returned to the dais.
6. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Rudy Horak, 1332 Edgehill Drive, spoke on the newly enhanced Broadway crosswalk at Paloma. John
Gieseker and Peter Comaroto, both of San Mateo County Association of Realtors, spoke on the Business
License Audit. There were no further comments from the floor.
7. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
2
Burlingame City Council December 17,2007
Unapproved Minutes
a. AUTHORIZING THE CITY'S MEMBERSHIP IN THE INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR
LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES (ICLEI)IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN
THE BURLINGAME CITYWIDE CLIMATE CONTROL ASSESSMENT PROJECT
MA Gottsche reviewed the staff report and requested Council to authorize the city's membership in ICLEI
and to adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the Statement of Interest for Joint Venture
Silicon Valley and ICLEI to conduct a greenhouse gas emissions evaluation of the city.
Mayor O'Mahony stated that C/CAG(City/County Association of Governments)recently authorized
payment of$6,500 to each city in the county executing the Statement of Interest for Joint Venture Silicon
Valley to conduct the gas emissions evaluation for their city.
Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to authorize the city's membership in ICLEI and to adopt Resolution
No. 91-2007 authorizing the City Manager to execute the Statement of Interest that would expend $13,000
for Joint Venture Silicon Valley and ICLEI—Local Government for Sustainability to conduct a greenhouse
gas emissions evaluation of the City; seconded by Councilman Deal. The motion was approved unanimously
by voice vote, 5-0.
b. RECOMMENDATION TO CONFIRM MAYOR'S COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS FOR 2008
CC Mortensen reviewed the staff report and requested Council confirm the Mayor's Council Assignments
for 2008.
Council concurred with the following changes to the Council Assignments: Add 6.b. Board Policy
Committee and assign O'Mahony, delete 17, Deal to Green Advisory Committee, Nagel to ICLEI, Deal to
Sub-Regional Housing Needs Allocation, and Nagel to Utilities and Sustainability Task Force. Staff will
present the revised list to Council at the next meeting.
C. AMEND BUSINESS LICENSE ORDINANCE TO INCLUDE MUNICIPAL RECREATION
IN PAYMENT EXEMPTION
Kate Crowder, a participant in the County's Management Talent Exchange Program and currently working
in the City Manager's office, reviewed the staff report and requested Council introduce an ordinance to
amend Section 6.04.240 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to include municipal recreation programming in
organizations exempt from requirement of a license fee to conduct services.
Mayor O'Mahony requested CC Mortensen read the title of the proposed ordinance amending Section
6.04.240 to correct statutory citation and clarify that City recreation program providers are exempt from
Business License Taxes. Vice Mayor Keighran made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed
ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman
Nagel. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor O'Mahony requested CC
Mortensen publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilwoman Nagel requested removal of Items a. and c. from the Consent Calendar for further discussion.
3
Burlingame City Council December 17,2007
Unapproved Minutes
b. APPROVE ROTATION LIST FOR OFFICES OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR
CA Anderson requested Council approve the rotation list for Mayor and Vice Mayor for the coming year.
d. WARRANTS & PAYROLL
FinDir Nava requested approval for payment of Warrants #29233-29726 duly audited, in the amount of
$1,931,857.88 (excluding Library checks#29233-29271); Payroll checks #170073-170403 in the amount of
$3,699,170.41 for the month of November 2007.
Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to approve Items b. and d. of the Consent Calendar; seconded by
Vice Mayor Keighran. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
a. RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT 2008 CITY COUNCIL CALENDAR
Councilwoman Nagel requested changing the date of the February 27 Budget Session to accommodate her
planned enrollment in the CERT class provided by Central County Fire Department unless another agency
would provide comparable training. FC Dornell stated that the agencies have been working on standardizing
the training; therefore, Councilwoman Nagel could take the class from another agency.
Councilwoman Nagel made a motion to adopt the 2008 City Council Calendar; seconded by Vice Mayor
Keighran. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
C. RESOLUTION NO. 90-2007 TO APPROVE UNIVERSAL WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
THREE-YEAR AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE ELECTRONIC RECYCLING EVENTS IN
BURLINGAME
Councilwoman Nagel asked how we would know that electronic waste is disposed of properly. FinDir Nava
stated that Universal Waste Management is a bona fide recycler licensed by the state, and the state oversees
this type of business.
Vice Mayor Keighran made a motion to approve Resolution No. 90-2007 approving an agreement with
Universal Waste Management, Inc. to provide electronic recycling events in the City and authorizing the
City Manager to execute the agreement; seconded by Councilwoman Nagel. The motion was approved
unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
9. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
Council reported on various events and committee meetings each of them attended on behalf of the City.
Mayor O'Mahony moved to Item 12.a. due to public interest.
12. NEW BUSINESS
a. SET APPEAL HEARING FOR 2724 MARTINEZ DRIVE
Council set January 7, 2008, as the hearing date for the Planning Commission appeal for 2724 Martinez
Drive.
4
Burlingame City Council December 17,2007
Unapproved Minutes
10. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, spoke on the newly enhanced Broadway crosswalk at Paloma. There were
no further comments from the floor.
11. OLD BUSINESS
Mayor O'Mahony continued the Council Study Session on the Business License Audit.
After staff responded to Council questions, Council agreed to consider approval of a Business License audit
at the next meeting and requested that the amnesty period be 90 days instead of 30 days.
Mayor O'Mahony requested a list of Business License Tax fees in other cities for possible consideration of
structuring the tax differently in the future.
13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
a. Commission Minutes: Parks &Recreation,November 15, 2007; Beautification, December 6, 2007;
Planning, December 10, 2007
b. Department Reports: Fire,November 2007; Building,November 2007; Finance, November 2007
c. Letter from Comcast with programming update
d. Installation of Bronze Lions at Main Library
14. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION
Mayor O'Mahony adjourned the meeting at 9:41 p.m.
CLOSED SESSION:
CA Anderson advised that Council met in closed session and directed staff regarding the following:
a. Conference with Real Property Negotiators pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8:
Property: Assessor Parcel Nos. 029-201-320 (260 El Camino Real) and City of
Burlingame Parking Lot K
Agency Negotiators: Jim Nantell, Syed Murtuza, Art Morimoto, Bill Meeker and
Larry Anderson
Negotiating Parties: William Butler Trust & Cullinane KB/L M 2000 Trust
Under Negotiation: Access across Parking Lot K to serve 260 El Camino Real
b. Pending Litigation(Government Code § 54956.9(a):
Angela Ostini vs. City of Burlingame, USDC (ND Cal.) Case No. C071011 WHA
C. License/Permit Application pursuant to Government Code § 54956.7:
Applicant: One person employed by VIP Taxi (continued from December 3, 2007)
5
Burlingame City Council December 17,2007
Unapproved Minutes
14. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor O'Mahony adjourned the meeting at 10:19 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Doris J. Mortensen
City Clerk
6
Burlingame City Council December 17,2007
Unapproved Minutes
STAFF REPORT
BURUNGAME AGENDA
ITEM# 5a
MTG.
hcD" 9Dm DATE January 7,2008
DAATEDJ NE O
To: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMI T
BY
DATE: January 7, 2008
AP
FROM: Jesus Nava, Finance Director/Treasurer BY
650-558-7222
SUBJECT: Transmittal of the FY 2006-07 Comprehensive Annu 1 Financial Report (CAFR)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept the CAFR and supplementary audit reports.
BACKGROUND: The audit was performed by the independent auditing firm of Caporicci and Larson,
C.P.A.s. The CAFR was completed on November 19, 2007. The City Council Audit Committee, consisting
of Councilmembers O'Mahony and Baylock, met on November 291h to review the city's "clean" audit report.
The Report to City Council and Management noted "control deficiencies" in the following two areas:
1. Deposits Payable—Report on Deposit Detail (Planning Department)
2. 10%Retention on Contracts (Public Works Department)
City management has reviewed the auditor's recommendations and provided responses, which are included in
the report. Implementation of the auditor's recommendations will occur in the next six months.
The auditors also conducted two separate audits of Burlingame hotels for compliance with city's Transient
Occupancy Tax (TOT) Ordinance. Two hotels were audited, the Holiday Inn Express and the Vagabond Inn.
No findings were observed.
Finally, audits of two long-term parking lots were conducted for compliance with the requirements of the
city's Business License Tax Ordinance. The lots were Anza Parking & Sky and Burlingame Airport Parking.
No findings were observed for Anza Parking & Sky. Certain deficiencies were noted for Burlingame Airport
Parking. These deficiencies have been corrected.
Special recognition goes to Mary Asturias, Financial Services Manager and Amy Bernardo, Accountant for
their work on this audit and the resulting financial report.
ATTACHMENTS:
FY 2006-07 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Report to City Council and Management (for the year ended June 30, 2007)
Transient Occupancy Tax Audit Report for Holiday Inn Express
Transient Occupancy Tax Audit Report for Vagabond Inn
Business License Tax Audit Report—Anza Parking & Sky
Business License Tax Audit Report—Burlingame Airport Parking
xyM1rKu"%N
*,: k BURLINGAME
15
U� 1998/'2W8 A
(�GIffHP•IiTF Py(�(Je}pfiAlt
CITY OF BURLINGAME, CA
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2006-07
Period Ended June 30, 2007
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 1
a
Audit Annual ud t Process
• Auditor reviews internal controls
• Fiscal year ends
• Third parties verify financial transactions
• Year-end financial statements are prepared
• Auditor reviews and renders opinion on
financial statement presentations
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 2
1
BURLINGAME CAFR & Audit Process
• Auditors issue "Letter to Management"
• Audit and CAFR presented to Council
Audit Committee
• Council Audit Committee recommends
acceptance of CAFR to the full Council
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 3
9)
CAFR Contents
• Table of Contents
• Transmittal Letter
• Auditor's Opinion
• Management's Discussion & Analysis
• Financial Statements
• Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
• Required Supplementary Information
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Deportment 4
2
Butz"NGAME'
Transmittal Letter
• Information on legal requirements
• Profile of city government
• Information on budget process & policies
• Information on economic conditions
• Information on financial policies
• Certificates of Achievements
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 5
�� Management's Discussion &
BYIRLFNCI[M�
;,
• Provides required supplementary
information
— narrative analysis of the financial statements
and changes in financial position
• Comparison of General Fund budget to
actual revenue and expenditures
• Describes changes in capital assets & long-
term debt
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 6
3
Financial Statements
• Government-wide Financial Statement
— Statement of Net Assets
— Statement of Activities and Changes in Net
Assets
• Fund Financial Statements
— Governmental Funds
— Proprietary Funds
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 7
4) Governmental Funds
• Activities that are supported by taxes
instead of user charges
• Objective is on having enough funds to
cover expenditures in a fiscal year
• Taxes charged have no relation to costs of
providing service
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 8
4
a Fund T
Governmentalypes
• General Fund
— Chief operating fund of the city
— Accounts for all financial resources except those
required to be accounted for in another fund
• Capital Projects Fund
— Used to account for construction & acquisition
• Debt Service Fund
— Used to account for interest and principal payments
on long-term debt
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 9
m l Activities
Governn eta
Governmental Activities
Expenses&Program Revenue-FY07
11 Program Revenues 0 Expenses'.
$20 -
c
O
$15 ---------
� I
$10
$5
$-
re`a`Go,t Sakes b��o�°c��5114 e\ac%'\P"
OPe< &ae�<
Ge Qv Q� Qat�s+�e sro�`e 9
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 10
5
aGovernmental Funds
Governmental Activities - Revenues By Source-FY07
Sales Tax
21% Transient
Occupancy Tax
Property Tax 24%
26
55,
_ Franchise Tax
Capital Grants& 2o/6
Contributions -
Business
1%
- License Tax
Charges for 2%
Operating Grants& Service Intergov't Investment
Contributions 16% Taxes — Income
6% 1% 2%
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department
BURLINGAME Governmental Funds
Governmental Activities
Changes In Net Assets -FY07
*—Assets --f—Liabilities Total Net Assets:
N $180 -- --.._ -
c
4
° $160
$140 -
$120 — -
$100
$80
$60
$40 — -
$20
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
November 29,--007 Burlingame Finance Department I'
6
°R"N;AME General Fund
General Fund FY07
--*—Total Revenue Total Expenditures
tn
$44
C
O i
$40 --- - -- — ---
I
$32
$2$
FY03 FY04'rr FY05 FY06 FY07
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 13
f' \
BURL'NGaME General Fund Balance
General Fund Balance
As A Percentage of Expenditures
E)penditures Fund Balance % of Expenses
U) $40 50%
c $35
_0 $30 40%
$25 30%
$20
$15 s 20%
$10,
10%
$5
i
FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 14
7
BUR�NAr�E General Fund Reserve As Rainy
Day Funds
• Buffer against economic
downturns
• Provide funds for unexpected
expenses o o
° Savings for anticipated expenses? o Q °
• Savings for special purposes
s i d
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 1 S
BUR Council Designations
E g
City of Burlingame,CA
General Fund Designated'Reserves
FY03' FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07I
Economic Stability $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000;000 $ 2,000,000 $2,000,000
Catastrophic Losses 2;000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
CalPERS 3;300,000 2,800,000 2,800,000 2,800,000 2,800,000
Contingency 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000
Centennial 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000
Total Designated: $ '7,820,000 $ 7,330,000 $ '7,340,000, $ 7,350;000 $7,300,000-
FY 03-5500,000 transferred from
CaIPERS Reserve To Workers
Compensation Fund Resezve
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 16
8
a
Proprietary Funds
p Y
• Called "Business-Type" activities because
they operate similar to private business
• Cost of service determines user charges
• Attempts full cost recovery including future
costs (reserves)
• Capital assets add to value of funds
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 17
BURUNGAME Proprietary Fund
op ry s
• Water Fund
— Accounts for the activities of the water system
• S ewer Fund
— Accounts for the activities of the sewer system
• Parking Fund
- Accounts for the activities of parking districts
• Internal Service Funds
— Accounts for costs between city departments
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department is
9
B� " SAME Proprietary Funds
Business Type Activities
Changes In Net Assets - FY07
(Assets - -Liabilities -S-Total Net Assets: '
$140 _ _ —...__ -_w.__ .........
c ,
c $120
�9 $1,00
$$0 —- -- -- —_'
$60
$40 -- - - ----
$20
f i
i
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 19
Business-Type Activities
Revenue By Source
Business Type Activities-Revenues By Source-FY07
Charges for
Services
94
'nkry
n
Capital Grants& Franchise Tax
Contributions -- 4/
2%
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 20
10
BURL�NGA h1E. Business-Type Activities
Ex enses & Program Revenue
Business-Type Activities
Expenses&Program Revenues-FY07
■Program Revenues ■Expenses
N
$12 ----- — —T_..__. ----------
C
O
$10
$8 ---
$6
I
$4 --
$2
$_
Water Sewer Waste Parking
management
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 21
t3URLINGAME Water Fund
Water Fund-F'Y07
y .
-0 Total Revenue-f-Total Expenses-f-Ending Net Assets
";�,.. .. ...._._... ...,.._._._.
c _
0
� $10
1
$8 --
i
I r�
$4 –..... __—
FY03FY04 FY05 FYOS FYO>
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department
11
B�R"NAM S ewer Fund
sewer.:
_ � 1.
—0 Total Revenue —M--Total Expenses mak—Ending Net Assets tl
$25 -
3
$40 i
$S
f
FYtl3 FYO4F�'OS FY06
.._. _
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 23
�uR"NGR � Parking Fund
Parkin -FY07
,7
Total Revenue -Total Expenses Ending Net Assets
---
�a
r
FYO4 u� {
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 24
12
Letter to Management
• Deposits Pg able
— Community Development Department
— Need for subsidiary ledger for recording deposits
— Using deposits payable
• 10% Retention On Contracts
— Public Works Department
— Recording and Relief of Liability at start and end of
project
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 25
aNext Steps
• Council Audit Committee review of CAFR
and Audit Opinion
—November 28, 2007
• Acceptance of the annual financial report by
the full City Council
— January 7, 2008
November 29,2007 Burlingame Finance Department 26
13
5,h
On December 22 Burlingame lost a distinguished son with the
passing of Justice Robert Kane. The seventh son of a seventh
son to James and Helen Kane, Bob was born to make a
difference on the Ides of March 1926.
Bob spent his youth in Burlingame—at Saint Catherine's he
was an altar boy, at BHS he was a star who would later be
entered into the school's Hall of Fame. Bob was a USC Trojan,
and began his distinguished legal career with Ropers Majeski
Kohn & Bentley.
Judge Kane was right here in these chambers on November 17,
1997 when he swore in his nephew, the newly-elected
Councilman Joe Galligan. The Kane family had lived in one of
the homes that were built on the present City Hall location.
Governor Reagan appointed Bob to San Mateo County's
Superior Court and later appointed him to the Appellate Court's
First District. In 1982 President Reagan appointed him to
adjudicate a treaty dispute at the Court of the Hague.
Judge Kane was appointed United States Ambassador to
Ireland in 1984. His is the unique privilege of being the first
and only member of the Burlingame family to hold that honor.
During his tenure in Ireland, he and his wife Keke biked around
much of Leinster in search of the Kane family roots. They
found those roots in the village of Fethard, east of the Rock of
Cashel, in County Tipperary. His grandparents had emigrated
Hon. Chair
SenatorJackie Speier !' 4
Co-Chairs
Pat Kinsella s
Rolando Pasquali +"
Treasurer
Patricia N.Mayer
t ROSALIE O ' MAHONY
Steering Committee
Bob&SaritaAhern Dorothy Lee for Burlingame City Council
Debbie Baker Jay&Heidi Leupp
Nancy Brock Diane Magner
Frank&Carol Cooke Sam&Gloria Malouf
Dan &Karen Duggan Frank&Esther McDermott
John&Ann Fallon Oliver&RoseMcElbone
Ed&Nancy Fineman Bob&Jennifer Morse
Eileen M. Floyd Jim Murray
Greg&Diane Haupt Gary&Marilyn Norton
John&Ellen Hunter Denis&Katie O'Brien
Phil&Mara Levy Kahn Rolando&Mary Pasquali
Pat&Phyllis Kinsella Patricia K. Stratigos
Patricia M. Toff
Donna Wright
Endorsements
Randy&Linda Adkins Dave&Pat Mayer
Julius&Nina Aires Niall&Yvonne McCarthy
Jim&Barbara Arena Russ&Nancy McGovern
Norm&Sandra Bennett Rod&Marty Miller
Ray&Bekka Brayer Hugh&Molly M;tcbell
Jeff j'&Ellie Byrd Bill&Cindy Montgomery
Frank&Maureen Cafferkey Bob&Leona Moriarty
Liam&Tberesa Cafferkey Carol Muller
Frank&Charlene Campos Jerry&Paula Murnane
Jeanne Carney Dave&Anne Nannini
Claire Cavanaugh Mike&Cathy Nilmeyer
Brian&Breda Cassidy Frances Nolan
Paul&Maggie Constantino Liam&Anna O'Brien
Deborah Cotcbett Tom&Muriel O'Duyer
Ann&Bernie Cotter Tony&Eileen O'Sullivan
Clara Crook Harold Otto
Jerry&JoAnn Deal Nick&Kathy Pappageorge
Jim&Michelle Delia Nick&Mary Peras
John&Concha Edmundson Gene&Barbara Peterson
Oren Field John&Nicole Piccetti
Gabe&Josie Friel Colleen Rafferty
Jack Friend Craig&Carol Rossi
Gabe&Josie Friel Bob&Ricki Rouse
Mike&Donna Gaul Dorotby Santos
Jeannie Hall Gilmore Tom&Dana Seaney
Megs&Sean Gogarty Aldo Simonetti
Dick Gregory Robert&Heather Sinclair
Jim&Mary Griff n Jim&Loretta Stephenson
Paul&Rebecca H.Hackleman Mark&Teresa Stoye
Marie Haseleu Andrew&Sarah Stypa
Jack&Maggie Heffernan Bill Tiedeman
Harrison Holland Al &Loretta Tripp
Mike&Bari Howard Ray&Judy Valente
Boyd&AngelaJohnson Marcelle Vernazza
Bill&Kathy Jones Jim&Karen Wagstaffe
Kevin&Jetta Kinsella John Ward
Ralph&Joan Lane Liz&Ed Watson
Michael&Lisa Liberty Marie&Kieran Woods
Mike&Maureen Lennon Peter&Ellen Wickman
Neal&Carla Lucett Betty Wuestefeld
Joe&Bernadette Lynch
Vic&Grace Mangini
royal List Committee to Re-Elect Rosalie O'Mahony I.D. #930839
•-� 1427 Floribunda Ave. #206, Burlingame, CA 94010
to the United States from Fethard,Tipperary, in the late 19-
th century.
No wonder,then,that Burlingame's parting Good Bye,
Slainte,to Justice Kane was at Saint Catherine's where his
remains were welcomed in by a Ione piper to the tune of Danny
Boy,and escorted to his final resting place to the piper's tune of
"It's a Long Way to Tipperary".
Justice Kane was a giant of a man,to whom we are grateful for
his contributions to our people,and of whom Burlingame is
immensely proud that he was part of our first hundred years.
Burlingame says Good Bye,Slainte,to Justice Kane.
This meeting will adjourn in his memory later tonight.
Rosalie M.O'Mahony
Mayor,City of Burlingame
January 7,2008
Hon. Chair
SenatorJackie Speier ! ,, . A
Co-Chairs `
Pat Kinsella
Rolando Pasguali
Treasurer c• ` ',
Patricia .N: .ltal'er
Or
ROSALIE O ' MAHONY
Steering Committee
Bob &Sarita Ahern DorotbyLee for Burlingame City Council
Debbie Baker Jay&Heidi Leupp
Nancy Brock Diane Magner
Frank & Carol Cooke Sam & Gloria Malouf
Dan &Karen Duggan Frank &Esther McDermott
John &Ann Fallon Oliver&Rose McElhone
Ed&Nancy Fineman Bob &Jennifer Morse
Eileen M. Floyd Jim Murray
Greg&Diane Haupt Gary &Marilyn Norton
John &Ellen Hunter Denis&Katie O'Brien
Phil&Mara Levy Kahn Rolando &Mary Pasguali
Pat&Phyllis Kinsella Patricia K Stratigos
Patricia M. Toft
Donna Wright
Endorsements
Randy &Linda Adkins Dave&Pat Mayer
Julius&Nina Aires Niall& Yvonne McCarthy
Jim &Barbara Arena Russ&Nancy McGovern
Norm &Sandra Bennett Rod&Marty Miller
Ray &Bekka Brayer Hugh &Molly Machell
Jeff&Ellie Byrd Bill& Cindy Montgomery
Frank &Maureen Cafferkey Bob&Leona Moriarty
Liam & Theresa Cafferkey Carol Muller
Frank & Charlene Campos Jerry &Paula Mu mane
Jeanne Carney Dave &Anne Nannini
Claire Cavanaugh Mike& Cathy Nilmeyer
Brian &Breda Cassidy Frances Nolan
Paul&Maggie Constantino Liam &Anna O'Brien
Deborah Cotchett Tom &Muriel 0'Du yer
Ann &Bernie Cotter Tony&Eileen O'Sullivan
Clara Crook Harold Otto
Jerry &JoAnn Deal Nick &Kathy Pappageorge
Jim &Michelle Delia Nick&Mary Peras
John & Concha Edmundson Gene &Barbara Peterson
Oren Field John &Nicole Piccetti
Gabe&Josie Friel Colleen Rafferty
Jack Friend Craig& Carol Rossi
Gabe&Josie Friel Bob &Ricki Rouse
Mike &Donna Gaul Dorothy Santos
Jeannie Hall Gilmore Tom &Dana Seaney
Megs&Sean Gogarty Aldo Simonetta
Dick Gregory Robert &Heather Sinclair
Jim &Mary Grill n Jim &Loretta Stephenson
Paul&Rebecca H. Hackleman Mark & Teresa Stoye
Marie Haseleu Andrew &Sarah Sopa
Jack &Maggie Heffernan Bill Tiedeman
Harrison Holland Al &Loretta Tripp
Mike &Bari Howard Ray &Judy Valente
Boyd&AngelaJohnson Marcelle Veruzzza
Bill&Kathy Jones Jim &Karen Wagstaffe
Kevin &Jetta Kinsella John Ward
Ralph &Joan Lane Liz&Ed Watson
Michael&Lisa Liberty Marie&Kieran Woods
Mike&Maureen Lennon Peter&Ellen Wickman
Neal& Carla Lucett Betty Wuestefeld
Joe &Bernadette Lynch
Vic & Grace Mangini
Partial List Committee to Re-Elect Rosalie O'Mahony I.D. #930839
�- ` 1427 Floribunda Ave. #206, Burlingame, CA 94010
I
RLIE
AGENDA ITEM NO: 6a
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: January7 2008
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY:
DATE: December 20, 2007 APPROVED BY:
FROM: William Meeker, Community Development Director— (650) 558-7255
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR
DESIGN REVIEW, HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT, SPECIAL PERMIT, AND
VARIANCE FOR UPPER AND LOWER LEVEL ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE-FAMILY
DWELLING WITH ATTACHED GARAGE, ON PROPERTY AT 2724 MARTINEZ DRIVE,
LOCATED WITHIN A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE.
RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council should conduct a public hearing on the appeal of the application for Design Review, a
Hillside Area Construction Permit, a Special Permit for an attached garage, and a front setback Variance
for upper and lower level additions to an existing single-family dwelling and attached garage at 2724
Martinez Drive, and consider public testimony and the analysis contained within the staff report. Action
regarding the appeal should include specific findings supporting the Council's decision, and should be
affirmed by resolution of the City Council. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the
record. The City Council may consider two alternatives:
1. deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's action approving the application for Design
Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, Special Permit for an attached garage, and front
setback Variance for an upper and lower level addition to an existing single-family dwelling; or
2. uphold the appeal, and modify the Planning Commission's decision by revising the conditions of
approval for the project.
BACKGROUND:
Project Description:
The property at 2724 Martinez Drive is currently developed with a single family house with an attached
two-car garage. The applicant intends to demolish most of the exterior walls of the existing structure,
relocate the garage to the opposite side and lower level of the house, and add to the left rear and lower
level of the structure. The proposed house and attached garage will have a total floor area of 4,038
square feet (0.43 FAR) where 4,097 square feet (0.44 FAR) is the maximum allowed.
The project includes an attached, two-car garage that meets the parking requirement for the proposed
four-bedroom house. The required front setback to an attached two-car garage is 35'-0", and therefore a
front setback Variance (for a front setback of 15'-6" to the proposed garage) was requested. Additionally,
since the garage is being relocated to the opposite side and lower level of the house, it is considered a
new attached garage and a Special Permit for an attached garage is required. All other Zoning Code
requirements have been met in the project design. The following permits have been approved for the
project:
■ Design Review for an attached garage and substantial construction to an single family dwelling (C.S.
25.57.010, a, 1 and 4);
CITY COUNCIL MEETING—January 7,2008
Public Hearing—Appeal RE:2724 Martinez Drive
• Hillside Area Construction Permit(C.S.25.62.020);
• Special Permit for an attached garage(C.S.25.28.035,a);and
• Variance for front setback to an attached two-car garage (15'-5" proposed where 35'-0" is the
minimum required for a two-car garage)(C.S.25.28.072,b,2,B).
The Planning Commission staff report(dated November 26,2007)is attached to this report and contains
a detailed analysis of the proposal.
Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA),per Section 15303 Class 1(e)(1)of the CEQA Guidelines,
which exempt additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more
than 50%of the floor area of the structures before the addition.
Prior Planning Commission Action:
Planning Commission Approval: At its meeting of November 26, 2007, the Planning Commission
approved the property owner's request for Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, Special
Permit,and Variance for substantial construction to the existing single-family dwelling at 2724 Martinez
(see attached minutes). The new residence will include 4,038 square feet of floor area and will include
an upper and lower level. A Special Permit is required to allow the construction of a new attached
garage,and a front setback Variance is required for a 15'-5"setback to the new garage. A Hillside Area
Construction Permit is also required. The Commission approved the applications on a vote of 6-0-1
(Commissioner Terrones absent).
In their action,the Commission added the following conditions per a request from the uphill neighbor at
1600 Granada Drive:Condition#2)that trees shown on the landscape plan for the rear-yard shall not be
permitted to exceed a height of 15-feet from the base of the lower patio, and shall be maintained at a
height of no greater than 15-feet;#3)that the neighbors at 1600 Granada Drive (Thompsons)and the
applicants(Pans)shall review and agree upon the placement of the trees in the rear-yard landscape plan
in order to mitigate any future view issues; #4)that no shrubs, or future shrubs, shall be permitted to
grow to a height greater than the maximum allowable fence height permitted by the City of Burlingame,
and shall be maintained at a height of no greater than that measurement;#5)that no additional trees
shall be planted in the existing airport view corridor where trees do not currently exist; #6)that trees
planted within the front-yard shall not be permitted to grow to the height exceeding the height of the peak
of the roof,and shall be maintained at a height of no greater than that measurement;
Appeal of Planning Commission's Action: On December 6, Jesse Geurse, designer of the proposed
project at 2724 Martinez Drive,Burlingame,appealed the Planning Commission's action on behalf of his
clients(see attached letter), identifying five of the conditions of approval noted above as the reason for
the appeal. Mr.Geurse was present at the November 26,2007 Planning Commission meeting when the
project was approved with the added conditions, however, his clients were not present at the meeting,
and were unable to raise their objection to the additional conditions.
Attachments:
Appeal Letter from Jesse Geurse,designer(on behalf of Wayne Pan)
November 26,2007 Planning Commission Minutes
Proposed conditions submitted by Bruce and JoAnn Thompson, 1600 Granada Drive,at November 26,
2007 Planning Commission meeting
November 26,2007 Planning Commission Staff Report
Notice of Appeal Hearing—Mailed October 26,2007
City Council Resolution(proposed)
2
Geurse Conceptual Designs, Inc.
405 Bayswater Avenue Burlingame, California 94010
December 5, 2007
City of Burlingame DEC 6 2007
attn: Dorice -
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
re: Pan Residence located Appealing neighbor implemented conditions of approval in City
conditions of approval approved by the planning commission November 26, 2007
Dear Members of the Burlingame City Council,
This appeal is being made for my clients major renovation located at 2724 Martinez Drive.
The appeal is directed at conditions of approval items no. 2, 3, 4. 5, 6. that were implemented by
the adjacent neighbor during planning commission approval. The Pan's would like these items
erased from the conditions of approval and re-worded in a more generally way as to not take their
homeowner rights away. We will try to resolve this issue prior to the Council hearing.
Sincerely,
Jesse Geurse
f
Honorable Mayor & City Council :
Please schedule an Appeal ;Hearing for
2724 Martinez 1s-rive to be heard at the
January 7 , 2008 Council meeting .
City Clerk
RECEIVED
DEC - C; 2007
CIT ,/ OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes November 26,2007
documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division
before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled;
11. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection,a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the
roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department;and
12. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the
architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.)to verify that the project has been built
according to the approved Planning and Building plans.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi.
Additional Commission comments:
Commissioners Cauchi and Auran noted that they had spoken to the neighbors who indicated that they did
not have problems with the design of the project.
Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner
Terrones absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:26 p.m.
4. 2724 MARTINEZ DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, HILLSIDE AREA
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT,FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AN ATTACHED
GARAGE FOR SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION AND FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING-(JESSE GEURSE,GEURSE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN,APPLICANT AND
DESIGNER;AND WAYNE PAN,PROPERTY OWNER) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN
Reference staff report dated November 26,2007,with attachments. Community Development Director
Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fourteen (14) conditions were
suggested for consideration.
Chair Deal opened the public hearing.
Jesse Geurse,405 Bayswater Avenue,Burlingame;represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
Discussed the appropriate species of tree or shrub in the rear yard;use a tree that will not grow
beyond 15-feet in height or maintain it at that maximum height.
• Chair Deal acknowledged that he had visited the property.
• Requested that the applicant have a landscape contractor clean up the front yard.
Public comments:
Bruce and JoAnn Thompson,1600 Granada Drive,Burlingame;and Una Kinsella,501A Vermont Street,
San Francisco;thanked the architect and applicants for working with them to bring back a an acceptable
plan that addresses their concerns. They noted that they would like additional conditions imposed relative
to landscaping and provided a written document entitled"Conditions of Approval',dated November 26,
2007 for consideration by the Commission.
Additional Commission comments:
• Asked for clarification of view impacts from tree in front-yard(impacts view from bedroom)
• Suggested having trees in front yard maintained at a height no greater than the peak of the roof;
otherwise the property will not be properly landscaped.
4
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes November 26, 2007
• Asked if the Thompson's suggested conditions had been reviewed by the project architect and
applicant (not yet—architect indicated that though he wasn't certain his client would agree to the
conditions, he didn't see them as a huge matter, and would work with the landscape architect).
• With respect to the Thompson's suggested conditions;clarify the meaning of"view corridor"to mean
"airport'view corridor.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Vistica moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended
conditions, including conditions as suggested by Bruce and JoAnn Thompson in their November 26, 2007
"conditions of approval"submittal, as modified by the Commission:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date
stamped November 16, 2007 sheets T.0, L1.0, DM.1, DM.2, and A.0 through A.8, and that any
changes to building materials, exterior finishes,footprint orfloorarea of the building shall require an
amendment to this permit;
2. that trees shown on the landscape plan for the rear-yard shall not be permitted to exceed a height of
15-feet from the base of the lower patio, and shall be maintained at a height of no greater than 15-
feet;
3. that the neighbors at 1600 Granada Drive (Thompsons)and the applicants (Pans)shall review and
agree upon the placement of the trees in the rear-yard landscape plan in orderto mitigate any future
view issues;
4. that no shrubs, or future shrubs, shall be permitted to grow to a height greater than the maximum
allowable fence height permitted by the City of Burlingame,and shall be maintained at a height of no
greater than that measurement;
5. that no additional trees shall be planted in the existing airport view corridor where trees do not
currently exist;
6. that trees planted within the front-yard shall not be permitted to grow to the height exceeding the
height of the peak of the roof, and shall be maintained at a height of no greater than that
measurement;
7. that the chimney height of the kitchen vents as shown on the plans shall not exceed the
manufacturer's minimum; and that if a chimney for a fireplace, the height shall not exceed 2-feet
above all surrounding surfaces within 10-feet of the chimney (the minimum specification of the
Building Code).
8. that trees noted for removal on the landscape plan shall be removed in advance of issuance of a
building permit for the project;
9. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's December 15, 2006 memo, the City Engineer's
December 15, 2006 memo, the Fire Marshal's December 13, 2006 memo, and the NPDES
Coordinator's December 13, 2006 memo shall be met;
10. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site
shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to
comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District;
11. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which
would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural
5
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes November 26, 2007
features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review;
12. that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new
structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer;
13. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer,or another
architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the
architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as
window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification
documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division
before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled.
14. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the
roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department;
15. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the
architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built
according to the approved Planning and Building plans;
16. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single
termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street;and that these venting
details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued;
17. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,
2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
18. that the project shall complywith the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which
requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction
plan and meet recycling requirements;any partial orfull demolition of a structure,interior or exterior,
shall require a demolition permit;
19. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new
residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in
Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance,to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water
runoff;
20. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and
21. that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program, and a complete
Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of
permit application.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi.
Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner
Terrones absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:50 p.m.
IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS
Commissioner Cauchi recused himself since he lives within 500-feet of the property at 612 Concord Way.
5. 612 CONCORD WAY,ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND SECOND
STORY ADDITION (BAHMAN AVAL, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; JOHN AND PATRICIA EATON,
6
-15�r -r (14- W
ju, xE--
Conditions of approval:
Nov. 26, 2007
Re: 2724 Martinez
• No tree in the landscape plan in the back yard exceed 15ft from the base of the
lower patio and be maintained at that height
• That the Thompsons and Pans review and agree upon the placement of the trees in
the backyard landscape plan in order to mitigate any future view issues
• That no shrubs or future shrubs grow taller than the maximum allowable fence
height of the City of Burlingame and be maintained at that height
• That no additional trees be planted in the existing view corridor where trees do
not currently exist.
• No tree in the front yard exceed the height of the roof gutters and be maintained at
that height
• The chimney height of the kitchen vents as shown on the plans does not exceed
the manufacturers minimum
r'
Iw
g K
Ij
.. Y
,
I
IJ
WIWI
tti ,a' �� <
!
i
-.' a �r.?v,' .w.,-r,�..r'1?.�rr s§t,"z•+°.. . €�• .. �� ..�:' `-+.�.�:� ,fit..
cin.
It-m#
City of Burlingame FF Regular Actio
Design Review,Hillside Area Construction Permit,
Special Permit and Variance
Address: 2724 Martinez Drive Meeting Date: 11/26/07
Request: Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit,Special Permit for an attached garage,and
front setback Variance for substantial construction and a first and second story addition to a
single family dwelling.
Applicant/Architect:Geurse Conceptual Design,Inc. APN:025-022-070
Property Owner:Wayne Pan Lot Area:9364 SF
General Plan:Low Density Residential Zoning:R-1
CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 Class 1(e)(1)-additions to existing
structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the
structures before the addition.
History: On May 29,2007 the Planning Commission reviewed and denied without prejudice a proposed
main and lower level addition to an existing single family dwelling at 2724 Martinez Drive. The action was
based on view blockage created by the proposed addition. The applicant has revised the project to
respond to the Commission's concerns. The minutes from the May 29,2007 action hearing are attached.
Summary: The existing two-story house with an attached two-car garage contains 3,581 SF(0.38 FAR)of
floor area and five bedrooms. The applicant is proposing to remove most walls of the existing structure,
which is considered substantial construction and therefore design review is required. The applicant is also
proposing to add approximately 330 SF of floor area primarily to the upper level of the house and convert
an existing bedroom and playroom on the lower level to a garage,storage area,and mud room. With the
proposed project,the floor area will increase to 4,037 SF(0.43 FAR)where 4,097 SF (0.44 FAR) is the
maximum allowed. The proposed house will be 60 SF below the maximum allowed FAR.
The proposed house will have four bedrooms. Two parking spaces, one covered (10' x 20') and one
uncovered(9'x 20')are required. The proposed two-car attached garage(20'x 20')will meet the parking
requirements. Because the existing attached garage is being replaced with living space and a new
attached garage is being added to the lower level on the opposite side of the house,a special permit for an
attached garage is required. Additionally, since the new garage will be setback 15'-6" from the front
property line and a 35'-0" front setback is required for a two-car garage, a front setback variance is
required. All other zoning code requirements have been met. The following applications are required:
• Design Review for substantial construction to a single family dwelling and attached garage (CS
25.57.010,a,5);
• Hillside Area Construction Permit for a new single family dwelling(CS 25.62.020);
• Special Permit for an attached garage(CS 25.28.035,a);and
• Variance for front setback for an attached two-car garage(15'-5"proposed where 35'-0"is the
minimum required for a two-car garage)(CS 25.28.072,b,2,B).
Design Review, HA CP, Special Permit and Variance 2724 Martinez Drive
Table 1 — 2724 Martinez Drive
Lot Area: 9364 SF Plans date stamped: November 16, 2007
EXISTING PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D
SETBACKS
Front (upper level): 14'-6" 191-611 15'-0" (141-311 avg)
(lower level): 17 15'-6" 1 (to garage) 35'-0"
Side (right, upper lvi): 81-211 (no change) 7I-0ff
i
(right, lower Ivi): 91-211 (no change) 7I-0ff
(left): 8'-11" 71-611 71-Off
.........
................. . ................ .
........................
-011
-011 1 1
15
Rear (upper level): 55 61 -0" (to mud room)
(lower level): 401-711 32'-0" (to M13) 20I-091
............ ............................
Lot Coverage: 2,943 SF 3§668 SF 3,746 SF
31 % 39 ,60/
40%
... ...... ........................ ...................................
3,581 SF 4,038 SF 4 097 SF
2
I
FAR:
0.38 FAR 0.43 FAR 0.44 FAR
# of bedrooms: 5 j 4
------------- ......
Parking: 1 covered
2 covered 2 covered (10' x 20')
(20' x 22') (20' x 20')
1 uncovered
(9' x 20')
Height: 23 231-21' I 30'-0"
DH Envelope: complies complies CS 25.28.075
Front setback variance to garage is required (16-6" is proposed where 35'-0" is the minimum required).
2 (0.32 x 9,364 SF) + 1100 SF = 4,097 SF (0.44 FAR)
Staff Comments: See attached. Please note that story poles have been constructed and will be certified
prior to the November 26, 2007 Planning Commission meeting. Also note that, although a full-sized
landscape plan is not provided in the revised plan set (date stamped November 16, 2007), an 11"x17"
landscape plan is attached to this report. The landscape plan does not vary substantially from what was
proposed on the plans previously reviewed by the Planning Commission (date stamped May 8, 2007),
other than the lawn area behind the proposed addition has been expanded due to the reduced depth of the
master bedroom addition.
Regular Action Calendar (May 29, 2007): At the Planning Commission's meeting on May 29, 2007, the
Planning Commission denied the project without prejudice due to view blockage issues. The Commission
complimented the design and noted that positive changes were made to the project following the study
session, but had the following additional comments(May 29, 2007 Planning Commission Minutes):
1. The view blockage was caused primarily by the extension of the rear roof element, and the
proposed master bedroom addition should be dropped to patio level.
0 The height of the proposed master bedroom addition was lowered by Z-OVI I and it's length
reduced (from 21 '-6" to 7'-10") (Revised main level floor plan, Sheet A.1 , and left side elevation,
Sheet A.6, date stamped November 16, 2007).
2
Design Review,HA CP,Special Permit and Variance 2724 Martinez Drive
2. The multiple story pole scenarios are confusing.
The story poles currently constructed at the site show the project that is proposed,and do not
include alternate scenarios.
3. The applicant should work with the neighbors to address view blockage issues.
. The applicant worked with the uphill neighbors to address view blockage issues. Included in the
staff report is a letter from the uphill neighbors(date stamped November 21,2007),commenting on
the proposed design.
Design Review Criteria:The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by
the Council on April 20,1998 are outlined as follows:
1. Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood;
2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood;
3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure;
4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties;and
5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components.
Required Findings for Hillside Area Construction Permit:Review of a Hillside Area Construction Permit
by the Planning Commission shall be based upon obstruction by construction of the existing distant views
of nearby properties. Emphasis shall be given to the obstruction of distant views from habitable areas
within a dwelling unit(Code Sec.25.61.060).
Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a Special Permit for an attached garage,the Planning
Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property(Code Section 25.51.020 a-d):
(a) The blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or
addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and
neighborhood;
(b) the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new
structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure,street and neighborhood;
(c) the proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city;and
(d) removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is
consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mitigation for the removal that is
proposed is appropriate.
Required Findings for a Variance: In order to grant a Variance for the front setback the Planning
Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property(Code Section 25.54.020 a-d):
(a) there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property
involved that do not apply generally to property in the same district;
(b) the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the applicant,and to prevent unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship;
3
Design Review, HA CP, Special Permit and variance 2724 Martinez Drive
(c) the granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the
vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience;
(d) that the use of the property will be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of
existing and potential uses of properties in the general vicinity.
Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative
action should be by resolution and include findings made for design review, hillside area construction
permit, special permit and variance. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated. At the public
hearing the following conditions should be considered:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date
stamped November 16, 2007 sheets T.0, 1-1.0, DMA, DM.2, and A.0 through A.B, and that any
changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an
amendment to this permit;
2. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's December 15, 2006 memo, the City Engineer's
December 15, 2006 memo, the Fire Marshal's December 13, 2006 memo, and the NPDES
Coordinator's December 13, 2006 memo shall be met;
3. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site
shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to
comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District;
4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which
would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural
features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review;
5. that prior to undernoor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new
structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer;
6. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or
another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that
the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as
window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification
documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division
before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled.
7. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the
roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department;
8. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the
architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built
according to the approved Planning and Building plans;
9. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single
termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these
venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is
issued;
10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,
2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
11. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance
4
Design Review,HA CP, Special Permit and Variance 2724 Martinez Drive
which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste
Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure,
interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit;
12. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new
residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in
Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water
runoff;
13. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and
14. that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program, and a complete
Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of
permit application.
Lisa Whitman
Zoning Technician
C. Jesse Geurse, Geurse Conceptual Designs Inc.
405 Bayswater Avenue
Burlingame, CA 94010
5
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 29, 2007
runoff;
17. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 15=consetion
game Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and
18. that the project is subject to the state-mandate ogram, and a complete
Irrigation Water Management Plan must b miffed with landscape and irrigation plans at time of
permit application.
The motion was seconde . Osterling.
C. Terrone ed for a voice vote on the motion to approve with the added landscape condition. The
mo ' assed 3-1-1-2 (C. Brownrigg dissenting, Chair Deal abstaining, C. Cauchi and C.Vistica absent).
ppeal procedures were advised. This it
concluded at 8:55 p.m.
8. 2724 MARTINEZ DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, HILLSIDE AREA
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT, FRONT SETBACK VARIANCEAND SPECIAL PERMIT FORAN ATTACHED
GARAGE FOR SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION AND FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING -(JESSE GEURSE, GEURSE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN,APPLICANT AND
DESIGNER; AND WAYNE PAN, PROPERTY OWNER) (44 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA
WHITMAN
Reference staff report May 29,2007,with attachments. CDD Meeker presented the report,reviewed criteria
and staff comments. 14 conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chair Deal opened the public hearing. Jesse Geurse, 405 Bayswater Ave; Bruce and Joann Thompson,
1600 Granada Drive; Una Kinsella, 501 A Vermont St, San Francisco; Chris Wong, 2720 Martinez Dr;and
Pat Giomi, 1445 Balboa Ave, spoke. Issues noted: story poles installed with three additional scenarios;
additional drop can be implemented into residence; photos provided do not depict current story poles;
alternatives show flexibility; most significant view will be blocked;disappointed that property owners didn't
work with neighbors; confused by options in story poles; blue option obviously blocks a significant view;
opportunity for design to be developed that will protect neighbors view; privacy issues downhill; design
against traditional ranch style in neighborhood; front porch is unusable; ask Commission to deny without
prejudice; and would like to work with neighbors. There were no further comments and the public hearing
was closed.
Commissioners comments: confused what project is presented in story poles; no way to move forward with
any alternative scheme; have to vote on what is in plans, blue story pole scheme;alternate story poles were
to develop new plans for project;front porch to right is unusable; like design and detail,good revisions have
been made; issue is with view blockage and extension of roof element; neighbors should communicate to
address view blockage issues;addition away from neighbor on downhill helps reduce privacy impacts;and
master bedroom should be dropped to patio level.
C. Terrones moved to deny the application without prejudice, based on the view blockage issue. The
motion was seconded by C. Brownrigg.
Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion to deny without prejudice. The motion passed 5-0-2 (C.
Cauchi and C. Vistica absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9:34 p.m.
9
PLANT LIST-PAN RESIDENCE 2724 MARTINEZ BURUNGAME, CA 2/20107
TREE5
NC.&x++r Nam- n
A ANuhe.%Ub--STRAW'BIRRY TRH 24'BOY MOOMME
B lane nabYe 5arato 5b'-WY LAUPXL --24-'WY-----F' T
C daxchm'Ruhrvm'•RED DNaRr MART.TRa IS GALLON SLOW
O D pa4naWm 5a p Rad-JAPANE5C~X 24-MX SLOW
E Rvnua isbme-ROWtpJNG Ct T 7KZIN SLOW
F Gtrw -6h Tree 15 GALLLiN MODMATE
G t eW-FWT TREE S GALLON MODERATE
O n loan MuMo an JAPAN6f MACK PINEN SLOW
I eduu atlanho '6lalo r.nWx•WECRNG ATLAS CEDAR 15 GALLON 5IOW
HRUBS
I meAM Jspauca-CAMn11A S GALLON MO TE �eR
--FZXLLbWMODERATE
Iu'SaMem Mda-AZALEA S GALLON MODCRATC
4 mn mage-MUGO PINE 5 GALS MODERATE -
M 5 sndna domaWo Nme-P M.,*"N "a S MORIRATE
{' 6 amua'Rmbd-CREEPING RO9OAARY 5G4LLpR FA51
7 aTjmlee Belle-AUSTRALIAN rLGLDIA IGALON FAST
B rope mucron 5N Weed-LILY nW IUON MODERATE
9 crod 'Dr Rm-MARr RED DAYULY I GALLON M5T
12' 10 a apauca'Mt Rrd-JAPANESE PIEREB 5 GALLON MODERATE U
11 Y Y-ERIN --M—OD-M—ATE-
-12 Ne Mh^d'n-YRWn OR(7NO ROOrJt05E S GALLON FAST �•
DINES
V-I !K aTlappy Ws,MeY-MRDpIMRGA SGALLON ANDOERATC
V rae,elr»pemvn aam+Iadra-5 J4544N rA i 4wvt'(o
v �mml pelyamM stud-rINN JASMINE S FAST
WOODV4 rnP� -CP.EITIN,a Rc LuGw LND7ERATE
ASCALE: NTS :1ROUNDCOVER5
6-IhpFyies Grid r-COMING MAN I N C `.'V
G-2 bio XIi4 b --LANTANA I GALLON rAST ^^,EA
WD
M co
C
U
vnOR51WlKR►YmYIEALLGVLR Fwmrua a�,eID.510dOJ,Uf11TC•51R A.Ratnenx WATDpW70UN6 No
OHIO TNG E60RfIM71P1LI.1p156iG NLlAOIRNA80Rl%LIEi11YM WNIffCI1BYWLtEBP01SRTOMATidfION F= ,
4O9FXE Nm11IGT.
C)GRADl59WOYR r'
L FIOSIM DR/RINZ AMY IPOMWLT
51UIDNRD
O 5NA.M FfDrM TALm ANT M MM 5TNM :O
MMOOt hUMON SNAL INKA NNNWM RAR R 2%IMM N=OIILW.ti
.CII DD91m QYRCR N[RIN651tN1Ir l6m d Al YI mOG1Bt51t]E[5.STIFE ILTrMGNTICRIWDY N6 RNITS°fOFLI
(E)MON xNm �10R*T
TREES T(
RACM511V1 TATAN ALL rB0.4151G=5VYro C3.rLM rSeanm NOW A5FM Or=A RtIWAVIOL
IALTm91WLIRDA7C IR7I2TIm rCRDaiIIIGTWO B/R6TWICT6d'mKrIDUiRMLT<NIK AIL'AAOM11L3 NTM .
ATTR=IDM"G-WDOCDMMMLMC5CARAFZMdT5R UMCOWAC 0.
:ro AMGKTIRAI ALO GAS AND WMCkl.Tm ANY OWaAN101D,RrNS ND 4TOGA11016 WS:VWC lO1WG SImCTiAJ: A�
ONS NO GRADRIG,501.1.6Au NO OmTW(.1L
DNrMCTm B RLxneec Fm oaEtvxz wrm 5p5IlOC7O,F00.11N6 AJ6 txtwlc ND ORNIAR R5JLA/JOIr5Ia0r1
1AlIa MCf ASLAMfmO]I61W1CTION DOD.AOIf.rtDImI®Tm@ITIIMLIIACCGC M051UUD a119tD TOIRNMWRG
>
rMA WW IMYWJZ 3"0690NR05"M WEITMOM 91JT MILL NO If UTLMM NgmO E0.16TWt0U 1060E Q
AA®OYC AXn=AND DIO=KI5NC NO UAalM rm DDC@Nlm WW05i M MLD NO ACTWA ILD 0MINUMI6. Z
(N)EVERGaIR*o`LLVWyD"'M Cc
REPLACENMIRM M WINr OWWT D 516LTiD➢BPB:IE11 NO AIRCNNINM OIT.RDUM DIOdONdT rMW M7LI FLKX NOW' LL
7REE5 '2ITRmroMOR MIINM WflIfdWAY.TIID WOR,WYNOlAi W05rNWNM WGRT R'MT,ILR tUIa DIAPD,NO FARFOO W J
U ¢
(E)MONTEREY CY U
TREE5 TO BE REAW
.140175z
ANIWCAIM*0A`=WLES5MW ICS,SNNL MaILMAM AAO RMMMM ADEM Cr W QPCHM MRI FNEM 1760 W
r sca IAz IM loon 517NPL lar. Z
J
NOONENM SWLL M FAS OF DMM 5LVI AS UUM 5FDF 1 CLAY?= FDILCI WT6BW C,031AR;ZITWN 01[EL]I Cc
WLR M?!IWM.9QMLOAL055nAl RNKMrDUOW91G aYDaT�SIMR CAIVRG TDA AfDWDRA MfRW�JGGWLKh�, m
LrCim9fYLLMDOI.LETICFZOFTiECOWAMMu Y1 MWNLSANDWC1711N/T1M0WLLR5fJJDrLT. N]C W
!&UMMWrUTALOIMSa WPmrmS MD®TD41MaAPADDRBG411 (('``(('' w
MRIA SINLLMrCIDIm ARpM)NLNIII5I RULON5RAIOLAWLBI`I165WJlM WOLJ YdTNAEIAMCr dJARRS I.1_ >
V MALWY/J0rl 12045M cl:
O
M5%LLMruCLM FOOL=WALMa11NLn4LYAL'MMZTYMAGRLID/ORNAVAL15RAALIGTONYWlM TMJ
$6 M W/LTALNiDS NSIWLTL1456 LL
WLIL'<m?W-DA arr91WLMATLm V(WCDIITM.FM IICTVIT AND OVIOOIOM Brnt WIOCNSiftl MAmvm z
YC5OkMAFOf=. NRClAON 4WlM/2LYORK ro WNr'AOM'LD EOIRC11010. F-
2
iSINLLM57AFID MN iNO rL'LcBIR iRRmz0.l lDira=TWW: bf` II=WMTAOWA'MT6m50MPS
A RGADOUR i1QWiL1 LRM IlO STIJL
cli
V
OILING ALCA151W1 M 07dC1®WRN A UYAO MA WOf.WMM INOJ®Q 2 OOC•NO L1!5M71OIC'-071NN l7[
CV
rAn COWIRLIm51NLLVUMYTVM BMGLWTRC1 TOIMTTKMKKWODL D0a%WAIONOrRN1 1WAI.Lm
➢mrr[D RU11®,YAn+A LLIiMPRNLIDTOMOMLRSTATRO nNa Q'IN➢fC.
awe A97YICTFANOT t2URAJIIQ RANT LNIBDY N oml I'L6TAR OI.Cro OMr101G MA6I5 Q LIDt
K NCIO SEPTEMBER 19.2007
RERPATMAY591MLLM4'TNQWTM10MWKr IRO.0 D110RTN1 S.R.
YSIWl Mi GlOR1DlDNOIf7 CMMM
M ae- �]IL�
- UNDSUPE
LA
ENTrORnDf9tVLMim NO Om uL)MM WWE64SSL/LTi PLAN
,F/-\l`�\\,��7WLRQA)6 AID MKGVMO YALL M TWPAL)mM WEafM r C7NRKIOR
71L50C91W1 MGNtm'JJOITNRR'JpD
M MADN6r0.1W1106 amC ^azT c Lr L1 . 0
SCALE: 1YAam51w v"wyl ALLmAmrwrYUCADPF6UroMAawwlum APM&T MILE ON .
ARIid IDB.L9]ON DfaIARdt rRpIM WO D11Mm❑Tf diDRL� �.._: x_ c "z.�
N01 mr-
PLL--% 'd1NI?3 if-, 1-#3=PT
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT 501 PRIMROSE ROAD P(650)558-7250 F(650)696-3790
�y cirr c*
BU_RCITY E APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Type of application: Design Review Conditional Use Permit Variance
Special Permit Other Parcel Number: 025-022-070
Project address:
APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER
'* Name: GEURSE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN,INC. Name: WAYNE PAN
Address: 405 BAYSWATER AVENUE Address: 150 CHATEAU DRIVE
City/State/Zip: BURLINGAMP CA 94010 City/State/Zip: HILLSBOROUGH.CA 94010
Phone(w): 650558.9324 Phone(w): (650)344-1789
(h); 6503433093 (h):
({): 650558.9324 (fl;
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER
Name: GEURSE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN,INC.
Address: 405 BAYSWATER AVENUE PIease indicate with an asterisk
City/State/Zip: BURLINGAMI;CA94010 the contact person forthis project
Cjec
Phone(w): 650558.9324 RECEI V E D
(h): 6503433093 DEC 11 2006
650558.9324 CITY OF BURUNGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ADDITION TO THE RESIDENCE INTERIOR REMODEL
AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE• ere y rt fy under penalty of perjury that the information
given herein is true and co t to t of my knowledge and belief.
Applicant's signature: . Date: 12/11/06
I know about the pro d ication and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this
application to the Pl ing Commission.
Property owner's signature: Date: 12/11/06
PCAPP.FRM
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT 501 PRIMROSE ROAD P(650)558-7250 F(650)696-3790
2007
,rr , CIT'Y O
cF BU LLINGAME
VARIANCE A�CATIOt
r
The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance
(Code Section 25.54.020 a-d). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning
Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request.
Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these
questions.
a. Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to
your property which do not apply to other properties in this area.
Currently the existing residence has an attached two car garage having a 1T-11-1/2"setback on
the upper side of the lot.The existing location is not common to the majority of the neighboring
properties.We are proposing to relocate the attached two car garage to lower split level which
would need a variance for a 15'-5-1/2"front garage setback.The relocation would match the
existing property garage locations. See sheet AO for average garage setbacks.The proposed
relocation is within the average setback.
b. Explain why the variance request is necessaryfor the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right and what unreasonable property loss or unnecessary
hardship might result form the denial of the application.
We are requesting the variance due to location of the new garage. The garage location will match
setbacks of those that exist within the neighborhood-If variance was not granted the garage
would be required to be setback 35'-0"beneath the main level residence thus creating a FAR
issue that would hinder the project.
D....L.:.. ...G.. olw +. i.n—i — of /An nrn r—f In nntin►f urill nn} Ito dotri»sontni nr
L. a:.�ptuut rosy use proposes _0 ... .1—tovF-- ............. .... .................. ...
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or to public health, safety,
general welfare or convenience.
Adjacent property owners would not be affected due to new location of garage.The new location
does a couple of things. It is less visual to the street and is in the same garage setback as the
majority of the residence garage. It is also on the lower level aloowing more visibilty of the
residence.
d How will the proposed project be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and
character of the existing and potential uses on adjoining properties in the general
vicinity?
The new redesign and garage relocation would match existing residence in profile and also the
new design takes advantage of new roof design which substantially works in favor for all
neighbors.The existing gable end of the residence roof has been redesigned to accommodate a hip
design which really streamlines the residence in many aspects. We think that the overall design
of the project will dramatically inhance the neighborhood appeal.
Cit., of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650)558-7250 F(650)696-3790 www.burlineame.ore
CITY OF BURLINGAME ECEIVED
SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION
MAR - 9 2007
CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance(Code
Section 25.50). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning Commission in making
the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink.
Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions.
i. Explain why the blend of mass,scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new
construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the
existing street and neighborhood
The new attached garage would be in scale and mass to all neighboring properties.The majority
of all the residences on the street have the garage on the lower portion of the grade.The new
addition will also benefit the residence due to the reason the the existing roof will be revised from
a gable end to a hip allowing for a slimmer mass and bulk of the residence.In our opinion the
project would fit well within it's envoirment.
2. Explain how the variety of roof line,facade,exterior finish materials and elevations of
the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure,street
and neighborhood.
The addition and new attached garage was re-design in craftsman style architecture. The overall
profile of mass and bulk fit in the the general facade of the street facade.New roof lines were
designed as a hip roof sgstems thus allowing minimal impact on visaul views from adjacent
neighbors.
3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines
adopted by the city(C.S. 25.57)?
The addition and new attached garage are consistent with all residential design guidlines with
the exception for the garage front setback.The garage setback is consistent with all average
setbacks of all neighbors on the street block.So,the overall apprearence of the residence would
compliment the profile of the street.
4. Explain how the removal of any trees located within thefootprint of any new structure or
addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements. What
mitigation is proposed for the removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is
appropriate.
No existing trees are to be removed due to this project.
SPECPERM.FRM
MEASUREMENT FROM MAIN FLOOR(100.00)
NEW FINISH FLOOR AT MASTER BEDROOM
(99.00')FOR REFERENCE ONLY
jj�(106.79) _ _ - 109') ------ -------�
6'-9-1/2" I ���----- --- ---------�-
jk(109.66) •�� N (106.29')
� I +6,-3-1/2„
II
I r-
I I
T� I
illi I ------------ ------- -----JL
IliI ----------------------
Illi � l i i i i I /i l
MAIN FLOOR O U-0"
-------------
K�7I
I
I �
I
"11T- ,T------------R`-
- -��°
_
Illi / \ i I III i
-T
D O i
i
I �
r A
STORY POLE DIAGRAM
DESCRIPTION: DATE
STORY POLE DIAGRAM REVISED 11-15-07
Geurse Conceptual Designs, Inc. SCALE:NOT TO SCALE '0604
T'I7I.E SHEET:
PANRESIDENCE SPA2724 MARTINEZ DRIVE
BURLINGAME,CA 94010
Bruce and JoAnn Thompson RECEIVED
1600 Granada Dr.
Burlingame, CA 94010 NOV 2 1 2007
650-697-4166
CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
Re: 2724 Martinez
Dear Commissioners:
We are writing this letter in support of the project at 2724 Martinez Dr. with a
recommendation related to the tree size in the landscape plan. We thank the Planning
Commission for being instrumental in facilitating the discussions between the Pan Family
architect, Jesse Guerse, and our architect, Una Kinsella. The final outcome of the
proposed project is mutually beneficial to both families.
We request that a condition of approval be that the trees planted in the backyard of the
Pan residence grow no higher than 15ft from the lower patio grade. The Pine trees that
will be removed are currently in excess of 30ft. and we have trimmed these trees and
existing dense evergreens for 20 years to maintain the view. We request that trees
planted in the front grow no higher than the rain gutter height of the reconstructed home
as exists currently with the exception of the Acacia scheduled for removal.
The following was provided to us by Nancy Curits, Landscape Designer, with
Middlebrook Gardens in San Jose:
"In doing some research on alternative-evergreen, small to moderate sized trees...I actually
think the Strawberry Tree isn't such a bad choice....
"Strawberry tree is an adaptable, long lived multi stemmed tree or shrub with heavy
fruiting that ranges from 15-30 feet tall and wide,attractive to birds,full sun to part shade,
occasional deep watering"...
The range in the height 15-30' is very large considering the Thompson's concern for preserving
their view and it is the 30' tall that concerns us the most.
We need to keep in mind that a lot of circumstances need to go into allowing for the tree to grow
30' tall...water, appropriate soil, health of the plant, care the plant receives, weather etc. The 30'
tall usually means that in nature—not in a manipulated garden setting -at most it has the
potential to been found to get 30' tall.
There is a dwarf variety named the 'Elfin King' and it grows to 6'tall. I am sure we would prefer
this variety...but it may not provide enough screening for the homeowner who is paying for it.
Some alternatives to the Arbutus unedo that are evergreen,would provide screening and
would be considered in the small to medium tree/shrub category are...
Arctostaphylos manzanita 'Dr. Hurd' (Manzanita)6-15' tall, 8-12'wide (CA Native) (evergreen
shrub can be trained into small tree)
Arctostaphylos densiflora (Vine Hill Manzanita) 'Howard McMinn' 5-7' tall, 6-10' wide; 'Sentinel' 6-
8'tall 5'wide (CA Native) (evergreen shrub can be trained into small tree)
Dodonaea viscosa (Hop Bush) 10-15'tall and wide(evergreen shrub can be trained into small
tree)
1
R E C EiVED
Re: 2724 Martinez Dr.
NOV 2 1 2007
Thompson letter CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
Heteromeles arbutifolia (Toyon) 10-20' tall, 10-15' wide (CA Native) (evergreen tree or shrub)
Myrica californica 10-30' tall and wide (CA Native) (evergreen tree or shrub)
Prunus ilicifolia (Hollyleaf Cherry) 10-25' tall and wide (CA Native) (evergreen tree or shrub)
Prunus lusitanica (Portugal Laurel) 15-25' tall and wide (evergreen tree or shrub)
Some alternatives that are NOT evergreen
Lagerstroemia indica -
Hybrids include Lagerstroemia 'Comanche' to 12' tall, 'Hopi to 8' tall, Tipan' to 13' tall, 'Miama' to
16—20' tall, 'Tuskegee' to 15' tall.
Lagerstroemia indica 'Seminal' 6-12' tall, 'Pink Velour' to 10' tall
Cercis occidentalis (Western Redbud) 12-20' tall (CA Native)
Cotinus coggygria (Smoke Tree) 10-15' tall and wide
It is my recommendation that some of the above listed alternatives be considered in the re-
landscaping of 2724 Martinez Dr. If the called out Arbutus unedo does get planted, I recommend
the Landscape Architect consider calling out the dwarf variety"Elfin King". If the dwarf variety of
the Arbutus unedo does not provide enough screening for the homeowner or satisfy Burlingame's
tree replacement specifications, then I would suggest the Landscape Architect consider planting
the Arbutus unedos at the existing "patio" grade approximately 6 — 10 feet from the (existing)
fence. That would at least give the Thompson residence approximately 4 feet more of a
potentially unobstructed view of the Bay. "
The preservation of our view was the primary goal for us to support the project and we feel we
have achieved it. The tree planting and subsequent growth could negatively impact the view thus
negate the goal. We further ask that all trees be trimmed and maintained on a regular basis.
We thank the Pan Family for their cooperation and to Jesse Guerse for facilitating the final
outcome which is the preservation of our view that we have enjoyed for over 30 years. We thank
the commission for encouraging neighbors to work together to solve a problem.
Sincerely,
I LA
Bruce and JoAnn Thompson
2
Project Comments
Date: December 13,2006
To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist
(650)558-7230 (650)558-7271
X Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal
(650)558-7260 (650)558-7600
❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650)558-7254 (650)342-3727
❑ City Attorney
From: Planning Staff
Subject: Request for application for design review, hillside area construction
permit,front setback variance and special permit for attached garage
for a new single family dwelling and attached garage at 2724
Martinez Drive,zoned R-1,APN: 025-022-070
Staff Review: December 18,2006
1) All construction must comply with the 2001 California Building Codes(CBC),the Burlingame
Municipal and Zoning Codes,and all other State and Federal requirements.
2) Provide fully dimensioned plans.
3) Provide a complete demolition plan that indicates the existing walls,walls to be demolished,
new walls,and a legend.NOTE:The Demolition Permit will not be issued until a Building
Permit is issued for the project.
4) According to the City of Burlingame Municipal code"when additions,alterations or repairs
within any twelve-month period exceed fifty percent of the current replacement value of an
existing building or structure,as determined by the building official,such building or structure
shall be made in its entirety to conform with the requirements for new buildings or structures."
Therefore,this building must comply with the 2001 California Building Code for new
structures.
5) Comply with the new,2005 California Energy Efficiency Standards for low-rise residential
buildings.Go to http://www.eneray.ca.gov/title24 for publications and details.
6) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that
complies with the egress requirements. Prop cle w,n d ow s�zf-S,
7) The garage cannot have any openings into a room used for sleeping purposes.NOTE:The
play room in the lower level is considered a room that can be used for sleeping purposes.
Show compliance with this requirement by providing a door at the entry to the room.
8) Provide guardrails at all landings.NOTE:All landings more than 30"in height at any point are
considered in calculating the allowable floor area.Consult the Planning Department for details
if your project entails landings more than 30"in height.
9) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers.
10)Provide lighting at all exterior landings.
11)The fireplace chimney must terminate at least two feet above any roof surface within ten feet.
12)NOTE:Plans that specifically address items 6 and 7 must be re-submitted before this
project can move forward for Planning Commission action.
Reviewer, � Date:
Project Comments
Date: December 13, 2006
To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7230 (650) 558-7279
Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7260 (650) 558-7600
❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 558-7254 (650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
From: Planning Staff
Subject: Request for application for design review, hillside area construction
permit, front setback variance and special permit for attached garage
for a new single family dwelling and attached garage at
2724 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1 , APN: 025-022-070
Staff Review: December 18, 2006
Rbar: _- Date: ��� ---
C� V
Project Comments
Date: October 23, 2007
To: U City Engineer U Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7230 (650) 558-7271
U Chief Building Official U Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7260 (650) 558-7600
U City Arborist U NPDES Coordinator
(650) 558-7254 (650) 342-3727
U City Attorney
From: Planning Staff
Subject: Request for application for design review, hillside area construction
permit, front setback variance, and special permit for attached garage
for a new single family dwelling at 2724 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1,
APN: 025-022-070.
Staff Review: October 23, 2007
) L
1-,74 r- C
b� 5
Review e __ . .:. Date:
Project Comments
Date: December 13, 2006
To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7230 (650) 558-7271
❑ Chief Building Official d Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7260 (650) 558-7600
❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 558-7254 (650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
From: Planning Staff
Subject: Request for application for design review, hillside area construction
permit, front setback variance and special permit for attached garage
for a new single family dwelling and attached garage at 2724
Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 025-022-070
Staff Review: December 18, 2006
Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence.
1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter.
2. Provide backflow prevention device/double check valve assembly—
Schematic of water lateral line after meter shall be shown on Building
Plans prior to approval indicating location of the device after the split
between domestic and fire protection lines.
3. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall
clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings
shall be approver) by the Fire Department prior to installation.
giEcENED
DEC I 2006
<
clrr OF Gl1Rl it� rt�lE
��p,NNING DEP�
Reviewed by: �� Date:
17- Project Comments
Date: December 13, 2006
To: Y City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7230 (650) 558-7271
❑ Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7260 (650) 558-7600
❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 558-7254 (650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
From: Planning Staff
Subject: Request for application for design review, hillside area construction
permit, front setback variance and special permit for attached garage
for a new single family dwelling and attached garage at 2724
Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 025-022-070
Staff Review: December 18, 2006
1. See attached.
2. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works —
Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information.
Reviewed by: V V ' - • Date: 12/15/2006
>, 9LIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS
Project Name: , J2!�
-Project Address: 2774- z
c "t yv-vaing requirements apply to the project
A property boundary survey shall be preformed by a licensed land
surveyor. The survey shall show all property lines, property corners,
easements, topographical features and utilities. (Required prior to the
building permit issuance.) 5rt { t, t, Vs 1-U TA,
The site and roof drainage shall be shown on plans and should be made to
drain towards the Frontage Street. (Required prior to the building permit
issuance.)
3. The applicant shall submit project grading and drainage plans for
approval prior to the issuance of a Building permit.
4 The project site is in a flood zone, the project shall comply with the City's
flood zone requirements.
5 A s11�amitary sewer lateral tW is required for the project in accordance with
the City's standards.
6, The project plans shall show the required Bayfront Bike/Pedestrian trail
and necessary public access improvements as required by San Francisco
Bay Conservation and Development Commission.
Sanitary sewer analysis is required for the project. The sewer analysis
shall identify the project's impact to the City's sewer system and any
sewer pump stations and identify mitigation measures.
Submit traffic trip generation analysis for the project.
Submit a traffic impact study for the project. The traffic study should
identify the project generated impacts and recommend mitigation
measures to be adopted by the project to be approved by the City
Engineer.
a The project shall file a parcel map with the Public Works Engineering
Division. The parcel map shall show all existing property lines, easements,
monuments, and new property and lot lines proposed by the map.
Page ] of 3
is developmentTLANNING REVIEW COMR'IENTS.doc
L-I-BLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
-A latest preliminary title report of the subject parcel of land shall be
submitted to the Public Works Engineering Division with the parcel map
for reviews.
Map closure/lot closure calculations shall be submitted with the parcel
map.
The project shall submit a condominium map to the Engineering Divisions
in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.
The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage public
improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and other necessary
appurtenant work.
The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage streetscape
improvements including sidewalk, curb, gutters, parking meters and poles,
trees, and streetlights in accordance with streetscape master plan.
16 By the preliminary review of plans, it appears that the project may cause
adverse impacts during construction to vehicular traffic, pedestrian traffic
and public on street parking. The project shall identify these impacts and
provide mitigation measure acceptable to the City.
17 The project shall submit hydrologic calculations from a registered civil
engineer for the proposed creek enclosure. The hydraulic calculations
must show that the proposed creek enclosure doesn't cause any adverse
impact to both upstream and downstream properties. The hydrologic
calculations shall accompany a site map showing the area of the 100-year
flood and existing improvements with proposed improvements.
a�Any work within the drainage area, creek, or creek banks requires a State
Department of Fish and Game Permit and Army Corps of Engineers
Permits.
No construction debris shall be allowed into the creek.
The project shall comply with the City's NPDES permit requirement to
prevent storm water pollution.
Any widening of the driveway is subject
to City Engineer's approval.
_.. The plans do not indicate the slope of the driveway, re-submit plans
showing the driveway profile with elevations
Page 2 of 3
to development\PLANNING REVIEW CONUVIENTS.doc
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
-- The back of the driveway/sidewalk approach shall be at least 12" above
the flow line of the frontage curb in the street to prevent overflow of storm
water from the street into private property.
_. For the takeout service, a garbage receptacle shall be placed in front. The
sidewalk fronting the store shall be kept clean 20' from each side of the
property.
For commercial projects a designated garbage bin space and cleaning area
shall be located inside the building. A drain connecting the garbage area to
the Sanitary Sewer System is required.
Page 3 of 3
'>-Fe development\PLANNING REVIEW CONVAENTS.doc
Project Comments
Date: December 12, 2006
To: City Engineer Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7230 (650) 558-7271
Chief Building Official Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7260 (650) 558-7600
City Arborist NPDES Coordinator
(650) 558-7254 (650) 342-3727
City Attorney
From: Planning Staff
Subject: Request for application for design review, hillside area construction
permit, front setback variance and special permit for attached garage
for a new single family dwelling and attached garage at 4ft -
zoned R-1, APN: 029-301-040
Staff Review: December 18, 2006
1) Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City
NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution including but not
limited to ensuring that all contractors implement construction Best Management
Practices (BMPs) and erosion and sediment control measures during ALL phases
of the construction project (including demolition). Include appropriate stormwater
BMPs as Project Notes. These BMPs include but are not limited to the following:
• Store, handle, and dispose of construction materials and wastes properly
to prevent contact and contamination of stormwater;
• Control and prevent the discharge of all potential pollutants, including
pavement cutting wastes, paints, concrete, petroleum products, chemicals,
\A/aczh \Natar nr sediments, and non-stormwater dicrharnPc to ctnrm riraln--
and watercourses;
• Use sediment controls or filtration to remove sediment when dewatering
site and obtain all necessary permits;
• Avoid cleaning, fueling, or maintaining vehicles on-site except in a
designated area where wash water is contained and treated;
• Protect adjacent properties and undisturbed areas from construction
impacts using vegetative buffer strips, sediment barriers or filters, dikes,
o mulching, or other measures as appropriate;
• Perform clearing and earth moving activities only during dry weather;
0 • Limit and time application of pesticides and fertilizers to prevent polluted
( t runoff;
S
• Limit construction access routes and stabilize designated access points,
- • Avoid tracking dirt or other materials off-site; clean off-site paved areas
and sidewalks using dry sweeping method;
• The Contractor shall train and provide instruction to all employees and
subcontractors regarding the construction BMPs.
1 of 2
Project Comments Con't— 405 Bayswater Ave.—NFSD with attached
garage.
2) The public right of way/easement shall not be used as a construction staging
and/or storage area and shall be free of construction debris at all times. The
easement shall be protected from any site runoff.
3) Implement Erosion and Sedimentation Controls(if necessary):
a. Install and maintain all temporary erosion and sediment controls
continuously until permanent erosion control have been established;
b. Address method(s)for diverting on-site runoff around exposed areas and
diverting off-site runoff around the site;
c. Address methods for preventing erosion and trapping sediment on-site.
4) Provide notes,specifications,or attachments describing the following:
a. Construction,operation and maintenance of erosion and sediment control
measures,including inspection frequency;
b. Methods and schedule for grading,excavation,filling,clearing of
vegetation,and storage and disposal of excavated or cleared material.
Brochures and literatures on stormwater pollution prevention and BMPs are available for
your review at the Planning and Building departments. Distribute to all project
proponents.
For additional assistance,contact Eva J.at 650/342-3727.
Reviewed by: /� Date: 12/13/06
2of2
RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION,
DESIGN REVIEW, SPECIAL PERMIT, AND VARIANCE
RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for
design review, special permit for an attached garage, and front setback variance for substantial
construction and a first and second story addition to a single family dwelling at 2724 Martinez
drive, zoned R-1 , Wayne Pan, property owner, APN: 025-022-070;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
November 26, 2007, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other
written materials and testimony presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that:
1 . On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and
comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is
no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on
the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19 Section: 15301 Class
1 (e)(1 ) - additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an
increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the structures before the addition.
2. Said design review, special permit, and variance are approved, subject to the conditions
set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such design review, special permit,
and variance are as set forth in the minutes and recording of said meeting.
3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official
records of the County of San Mateo.
Chairman
Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame,
do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting
of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of November, 2007 by the following vote:
Secretary
EXHIBIT"A"
Conditions of approval for categorical exemption, design review, special permit, and
variance.
2724 Martinez Drive
Effective December 7,2007
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning
Department date stamped November 16, 2007 sheets T.0, 1-1.0, DMA, DM.2, and A.0
through A.8, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or
floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit;
2. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's December 15, 2006 memo, the City
Engineer's December 15, 2006 memo, the Fire Marshal's December 13, 2006 memo,
and the NPDES Coordinator's December 13,2006 memo shall be met;
3. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on
the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall
be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District;
4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or
garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing
windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch,shall be subject
to Planning Commission review;
5. that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation
of the new structure(s)and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer;
6. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential
designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an
architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design
which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as
shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing
compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the
final framing inspection shall be scheduled.
7. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the
height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building
Department;
8. that prior to final inspection,Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance
of the architectural details(trim materials,window type,etc.)to verify that the project has
been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans;
9. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a
single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street;and
that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans
before a Building permit is issued;
10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform
Fire Codes,2001 Edition,as amended by the City of Burlingame;
-2-
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for categorical exemption, design review, special permit, and
variance.
2724 Martinez Drive
Effective December 7, 2007
11. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling
Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects
to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full
demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit;
12. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the
new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as
identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site
sedimentation of storm water runoff;
13. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and
14. that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program, and a
complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and
irrigation plans at time of permit application.
-3-
CITY OF BURLINGAME
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
6U?L111
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010 �_ �w 016H16:,04325
PH: (650) 558-7250 ® FAX: (650) iqp
www.burlingame.org 00.26®
_ - � � _
.. .. �` /ylRy
MaDed From 940'10
Site: 2724 MARTINEZ DRIVE ' '
US PC3SiACE ..
The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the PUBLIC HEARING
following public hearing on MONDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 2007
at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose NOTICE
Road, Burlingame, CA:
Application for Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit,
Front Setback Variance and Special Permit for an attached
garage for substantial construction and first and second story
addition to a single family dwelling at 2724 MARTINEZ
DRIVE zoned R-l. APN 025-022-070
Mailed: November 16, 2007
(Please refer to other side)
t/6"l%/7C/ame
A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to
the meeting at the Community Development Department at 501 Primrose
Road, Burlingame, California.
If you challenge the subject applications) in court, you may be limiter] to
raising only those issi ins you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or
prior to the public hearing.
Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their
tenants about this notice.
For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you.
William Meeker
Community Development Director
(Please refer to other side)
PUBLICHEARING NOTICE
.�. °• s�J'"'.[„�"�� �� C 'tr f1,�. ry f c =; it
s
Z�
t
tY
r
ON
✓` :¢� ` ...p��Y' ;q, • x*.i
�� ' •,� ��.. � � S,4*� fir C
K O•
VV
.4
r
rpNkXl
•� �. �
_�+ w
u
SAO i4 Jt c�1�•r Jj<'r x
2724 Martinez Drive
• V
p
Yli$ w
t
yyyyy5
9
a
ry w
^_ ,• �, _�',.'� fix;: � ,, ,� �`"
CITY OF BURLINGAME
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD � 65 0161=1r�04325
BURLINGAME, CA 94010 A.
a
PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650)t?� '�00.260
www.burlingame.org
`r.9ai?edFrorn 940141
US P05TACE
Site: 2724 MARTINEZ DRIVE
The City of Burlingame City Council announces the following public PUBLIC HEARING
hearing on MONDAY,JANUARY 7,2008 at 7:00 P.M.in the City NOTICE
Hall Council Chambers,501 Primrose Road,Burlingame,CA:
Appeal to the City Council of the Planning Commission's decision on an
application for Design Review,Hillside Area Construction Permit,Front
Setback Variance and Special Permit for an attached garage for
substantial construction and upper and lower level addition to a single
family dwelling at 2724 MARTINEZ DRIVE zoned R-l.
APN 025-021-070
Mailed: December 28,2007
(Please refer to other side)
City of Burlingame
A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to
the meeting at the Community Development Department at 501 Primrose
Road, Burlingame, California.
If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing,
described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or
prior to the public hearing.
Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their
tenants about this notice.
For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you.
William Meeker
Community Development Director
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
(Please refer to other side)
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DENYING THE
APPEAL OF JESSE GEURSE,OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S NOVEMBER 13,2007,
APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW,HILLSIDE AREA
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT,SPECIAL PERMIT FOR ATTACHED GARAGE,AND FRONT
SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A MAIN AND LOWER LEVEL ADDITION TO A RESIDENCE AT
2724 MARTINEZ DRIVE,ON PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN A SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL(R-1)ZONE
RESOLVED,BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME THAT:
WHEREAS, on November 26, 2007, the Planning Commission approved Design
Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, Special Permit, and Front Setback Variance, and
adopted a Categorical Exemption related to the construction of a main and lower level addition
to an existing residence on property located at 2724 Martinez Drive(APN: 025-022-070), and
owned by Wayne and Genise Pan,150 Chateau Drive,Hillsborough,California;and
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission's November 26,2007 approval was appealed by
Jesse Geurse on behalf of the property owners,and the City Council conducted a public hearing
on the appeal on January 7, 2007; denying the appeal and upholding the Planning
Commission's approval.
NOW,THEREFORE,IT IS RESOLVED AND DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT:
1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and
comments received and addressed by this council, it is hereby found that there is no
substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the
environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19, Section: 15301 Class
1(e)(1) - additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an
increase of more than 50%of the floor area of the structures before the addition.
2. Said design review, hillside area construction permit, special permit, and variance are
approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit"A"attached hereto. Findings for
such design review,hillside area construction permit,special permit,and variance are as
set forth in the staff report,minutes,and recording of said meeting.
3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official
records of the County of San Mateo.
Mayor
I, Doris Mortensen, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing
g
resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17`
day of December,2007 by the following vote:
1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO.
City Council Agenda—January 7, 2007
APPEAL—2724 Martinez Drive
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
2of2
EXHIBIT A
Conditions of Approval —2724 Martinez Drive
Approved by the City Council on January 7, 2007
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning
Department date stamped November 16, 2007 sheets T.0, L1.0, DMA, DM.2,
and A.0 through A.8, and that any changes to building materials, exterior
finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this
permit;
2. that trees shown on the landscape plan for the rear-yard shall not be permitted to
exceed a height of 15-feet from the base of the lower patio, and shall be
maintained at a height of no greater than 15-feet;
3. that the neighbors at 1600 Granada Drive (Thompsons) and the applicants
(Pans) shall review and agree upon the placement of the trees in the rear-yard
landscape plan in order to mitigate any future view issues;
4. that no shrubs, or future shrubs, shall be permitted to grow to a height greater
than the maximum allowable fence height permitted by the City of Burlingame,
and shall be maintained at a height of no greater than that measurement;
5. that no additional trees shall be planted in the existing airport view corridor where
trees do not currently exist;
6. that trees planted within the front-yard shall not be permitted to grow to the height
exceeding the height of the peak of the roof, and shall be maintained at a height
of no greater than that measurement;
7. that the chimney height of the kitchen vents as shown on the plans shall not
exceed the manufacturer's minimum; and that if a chimney for a fireplace, the
height shall not exceed 2-feet above all surrounding surfaces within 10-feet of the
chimney (the minimum specification of the Building Code).
8. that trees noted for removal on the landscape plan shall be removed in advance
of issuance of a building permit for the project;
9. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's December 15, 2006 memo, the
City Engineer's December 15, 2006 memo, the Fire Marshal's December 13,
2006 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's December 13, 2006 memo shall be
met;
10. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth
moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and
such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District;
11. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors,
or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or
changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch,
shall be subject to Planning Commission review;
1 of 2
EXHIBIT A
Conditions of Approval — 3105 Margarita Avenue
Approved by the City Council on December 17, 2007
12. that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor
elevation of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by
the City Engineer;
13. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential
designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an
architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved
design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays,
are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting
framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building
Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled.
14. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot
the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building
Department;
15. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note
compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify
that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building
plans;
16. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to
a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the
street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the
construction plans before a Building permit is issued;
17. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and
Uniform Fire Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
18. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris
Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and
alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling
requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall
require a demolition permit;
19. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction
of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management
practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent
erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff;
20. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame
Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and
21. that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program, and
a complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape
and irrigation plans at time of permit application.
2of2
� CITY o� STAFF REPORT
BURLINGAME AGENDA 6b
ITEM #
a� D0 MTG.
Dq`
ATED JUNE 9 DATE January 7, 2008
DA6
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMIT E
BY
DATE: January 7, 2008
APP OVED
FROM: Jesus Nava, Finance Director/Treasurer BY =�nW
SUBJECT: Final Adoption of Amendment to Business License rrdinance to Include Contract
Municipal Recreation Employees in Payment Exemptions
Recommendation:
That the City Council adopt the amendment to the Business License Ordinance exempting recreation contract
employees from the Business License Tax.
Background:
The amendment to the ordinance was introduced by the City Council at its meeting of December 17, 2007.
The amendment clarifies the original intent of the ordinance by creating a categorical exemption for recreation
contract employees.
Discussion:
The Business License Ordinance requires businesses that operate within the city limits to apply for a business
license and pay a $100 per annum tax. The ordinance exempts nonprofit and charitable organizations from
the tax. The original intent of the ordinance was not to require umpires, coaches and instructors of municipal
recreation programs (contract employees) to pay the tax to provide such services. In addition, municipal
recreation providers receive a substantially small compensation and the $100 business license fee would cause
many to opt not to provide such service. The ordinance amendment exempts municipal recreation service
providers (including coaches, referees and instructors) from payment of the Business License. The following
language is added to the ordinance:
(fj Nothing in this title shall be deemed or construed to require the payment of a license tax by any person
to conduct or officiate any recreation program or activity provided or sponsored by the city.
The issue of whether the merchants participating in the Farmers Market sponsored by the Burlingame
Chamber of Commerce will be subject to the business license tax has arisen. Technically they are conducting
business (sales) within the City of Burlingame and the Ordinance does not provide an exemption for them.
Specifically, the ordinance requires the payment of the tax and states: "Every person not having a fixed place
of business within the city who engages in business within the city, including contractors. " (Chapter 6.08.020
(b)). It the Council has an interested in creating a exemption for the Chamber of Commerce farmers market,
then Council can direct staff to prepare such an amendment.
City Council Agenda Report
Final Adoption of Amendment to Business License Ordinance to Include Contract Municipal Recreation
Employees in Payment Exemptions
Page 2.
Fiscal Impact•
There is no fiscal impact because Parks and Recreation contract employees were deemed exempt from the
ordinance. The amendment clarifies that exemption.
Attachments:
Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Amending Sections 6.04.240 to Correct Statutory Citation and Clarify
that City Recreation Program Providers are Exempt from Business License Taxes
Draft Language exempting Farmers Market Vendors from Business License Taxes (via email from Larry
Anderson, City Attorney(dated January 2, 2008)
1 ORDINANCE NO.
2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING SECTIONS 6.04.240
TO CORRECT STATUTORY CITATION AND CLARIFY THAT CITY
3 RECREATION PROGRAM PROVIDERS ARE EXEMPT FROM BUSINESS
LICENSE TAXES
4
5 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows:
6
7 Section 1. The City has not collected business license taxes from persons who provide
8 recreation programs for the City. This ordinance is intended to affirm that interpretation by
9 ordinance. This ordinance also updates a statutory reference regarding State law.This ordinance
10 does not increase any business license tax or impose any new tax on any person.
11
12 Section 2. Section 6.04.240 is amended to read as follows:
13 6.04.240 Exemptions
14 (a) Charitable and Nonprofit Organizations. The license provisions of this code shall
15 not be deemed or construed to require the payment of a license fee to conduct,manage or carry
16 on any business, or require the payment of any license fee from any institution or organization
17 which is conducted,managed or carried on solely for the benefit of charitable purposes or from
18 which profit is not derived either directly or indirectly by any person,if such business is exempt
19 from the payment of bank and corporation taxes by Sections 23 701 of the Revenue and Taxation
20 Code, nor shall any license be required for the conducting of any entertainment, concert,
21 exhibition,lecture or scientific,historical,religious or moral services whenever the receipts of
22 such entertainment, concert, exhibition or lecture are to be appropriated to any church, school
23 or to any religious or benevolent purpose within the city; nor shall any license be required for
24 the conducting of any entertainment, dance, concert, exhibition or lecture by any religious,
25 charitable,fraternal,educational,military,state,county or municipal organization or association
26 whenever the receipts of any such entertainment,dance,concert,exhibition or lecture are to be
27 appropriated for the purpose and objects for which such association or organization was formed
1 and from which a profit is not derived either directly or indirectly by any person; provided,
2 however, that nothing herein contained shall be deemed to exempt any institution or
organization from complying with the provisions of any of the ordinances of the city requiring
4 such institution or organization to obtain a permit from the city council to conduct, manage or
5 carry on such business.
6 (b) Interstate Commerce.Nothing in this title shall be deemed or construed to apply to
7 any person transacting or carrying on any business exempt by virtue of the Constitution or
8 applicable statutes of the United States or of the state of California from payment of such
9 licenses as are herein prescribed. Such person shall file a verified statement with the license
10 collector setting forth all of the facts showing that he or she is entitled to such exemption. The
11 statement shall contain the name and location of the person for which the orders are to be
12 solicited or secured, the name and address of the nearest local or state manager, the kind of
13 goods,wares or merchandise to be delivered,the place from where the same are to be shipped
14 or forwarded,the method of solicitation or taking orders,the location of any warehouse,factory
15 or plant within the state of California, the method of delivery, the name and address of the
16 applicant, and any other facts necessary to establish such claim of exemption.
17 (c) Veterans. Any veteran, as defined by Section 16001 and Section 16001.5 of the
18 Business and Professions Code of the state of California, shall be exempt from the payment of
19 license fees for peddling or soliciting upon presentation of proof of such exemption satisfactory
20 to the license collector.
21 (d) Minors,Sixteen Years and Younger.Every natural person of the age of sixteen(16)
22 years or under, whose annual gross receipts from any and all businesses are four thousand
23 dollars ($4,000.00) or less, shall be exempt from payment of any license tax under the
24 provisions of this title.
25 (e) Senior Citizens. Every natural person of the age of sixty-five (65) years or over,
26 whose annual gross receipts from any and all business are four thousand dollars($4,000.00)or
27 less, shall be exempt from payment of any license tax under the provisions of this title.
- 2 -
l (f) Nothing in this title shall be deemed or construed to require the payment of a license
2 tax by any person to conduct or officiate any recreation program or activity provided or
sponsored by the city.
4
5 Section 3. This ordinance shall be published as required by law.
6
7
Mayor
8
9 I,DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that
10 the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th
11 day of December,2007,and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on
12 the day of , 2008, by the following vote:
U
14 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
1 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
16
17
18 City Clerk
19 U:\FILES\ORDINANC\buslicexemption.fin.wpd
20
21
22
23
24
2>
26
27
Page 1 of 1
FIN-Nava, Jesus
From: ATTY-Anderson, Larry
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 11:56 AM
To: MGR-Nantell, Jim; FIN-Nava, Jesus
Subject: Farmers Market
Jim and Jesus, here is very rough draft language that would exempt vendors at the Farmers Market and vendors at other
community events from having to pay for a business license.
Would you please let me know what you think, and then let me know where you think we should go from here. I told
Georgette that I would draft some language for discussion purposes.
(2) The license provisions of this code shall not be deemed or construed to require the payment of a license
fee to conduct, manage or carry on any business in the city that consists solely of selling foodstuffs, live plants, art
work, or handicrafts at an event or market in the city that is operated by any religious, charitable, fraternal,
educational, military, state, county or municipal organization or association. However, nothing herein contained
shall be deemed to exempt any such person from complying with the provisions of any of the ordinances of the city
requiring such a person to obtain a permit from the city to conduct, manage or carry on such a business.
1/3/2008
t AGENDA 6c
ITEM#
STAFF REPORT �TE Janarv720OR
TO: HONORABLE.MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
BY____dackVan Euen,.Chief of Police
DATE: Decemher21,2007
APPROVED
FROM: .lade Van FifPn, .hi f of Poli.. BY Jim Nantall,ity nager i�'/
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to Approve Expenditure of SLESF(Supplemental Law Enforcement Services
Funds),also referred to as COPS(Citizens Options for Police Spending)
RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council should hold a public hearing and adopt a resolution for the purpose of approving the
Police Chiefs plan to use Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Funding(SLESF)allocated to the City
of Burlingame.This hearing should be placed on the agenda for the regularly held City Council Meeting of
January 7,2008.
BACKGROUND:
The State of California has awarded the City of Burlingame$100,000 in SLESF(Supplemental Law
Enforcement Services Funding),or also referred to as COPS(Citizens Options for Police Spending)
funding for this fiscal year(2007-2008).In order to receive this funding,there must be a public hearing at a
regularly scheduled city council meeting to review and approve the spending plan for the funds.The Chief
of Police is responsible for developing the spending plan.
The spending plan for consideration is the same as approved in past years by the City Council.The entire
amount of the SLESF/COPS funding will be used to pay the salary and benefits of one plus(1)Burlingame
Police Officer.This expenditure fulfills the mandate of Governor Schwarzenegger that COPS funds be
used for police personnel costs.
ATTACHMENTS:
Public Hearing Notice
Resolution
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
APPROVING THE PLAN OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE FOR EXPENDITURE OF
CITIZENS OPTIONS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) FUNDS
RESOLVED, by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California that;
WHEREAS, the State of California has established the Citizens Options for Public Safety
(COPS) programs and appropriated money from the State general fund for certain public safety
programs for the 2007-2008 fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the State has awarded the City $100,000 in COPS funding; and
WHEREAS, the Chief of Police has proposed that this funding be used to fund one
additional police officer position pursuant to the COPS funding guidelines; and
WHEREAS, notice of this proposal and this public hearing has been published as required
by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing and received and considered
testimony from all persons interested in the matter who appeared at the hearing,
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
1. The plan proposed by the Chief of Police to use the COPS funding for provision of
one additional police officer is approved.
2. These funds will be used to supplement existing services as required by State law and
shall not be used to supplant any existing funding for the Burlingame Police Department.
MAYOR
I, DORIS MORTENSEN, 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 _ of
, 2008, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY CLERK
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
City of Burlingame
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Burlingame
will hold a public hearing on January 7,2008,at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers
located at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California to consider the plan of the
Burlingame Chief of Police to use the grant funds from the Supplemental Law
Enforcement Services Funding, also referred to as the California Citizen Options for
Police Spending(Government Code Section 30061 and following)to pay for the salaries
and benefits of an additional police officer in the City. The City Council will receive
testimony on the proposed plan from all interested persons who appear at the Council
meeting. To receive additional information about the proposed plan,or to provide written
comments, interested persons may contact the City Clerk located at 501 Primrose Road,
Burlingame,CA 94010, phone 650-558-7203.
okwMiz
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA
ITEM # 8a
MTG. 7 January 2008
DATE
To: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
BY 1•
DATE: December 28, 2007
APPR D
FROM: Parks & Recreation Director (558-7307) BY
SUBJECT: BURLINGAME'S CENTENNIAL PROJECT �r
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council amend the Centennial
Project to the west end of Washington Park as outlined below and authorize staff to move
forward with the design and fundraising phases of the project.
BACKGROUND:
Early in 2007, Council authorized staff to do a preliminary study of a Centennial Plaza at the
west side of the Burlingame Avenue Train Station. Since then, the Parks & Recreation
Commission held a public meeting to determine the community's vision of the Plaza and the
Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission held public meetings and the Public Works Department
had a study performed to determine the parking impacts.
During these meetings, there was a general Ireement that the Train Station was an appropriate
place to be commemorated on the City's 100 anniversary, but there were mixed feelings on the
viability, costs, phasing, amenities and safety of using this area as a public meeting place as well
as the parking impacts on the Burlingame Avenue and surrounding businesses.
In November, the Centennial Executive Committee approved for Council consideration a
proposal that would create usable space behind the tennis courts at the west end of Washington
Park. The proposal would include a 20' x 20' bandstand for performances during Music in the
Park, Art in the Park and other occasions; four bocce ball courts; new seating areas and would
renovate the horseshoe courts and chipped bark areas. This proposal appears to meet the
interests of a wide range of the community's residential and business members - - Creating a
space designed for public use and events in a safe environment without negatively impacting the
downtown parking.
This area has been discussed as a potential site for a future Recreation Center. While the
footprint of that Center has never been specifically designed, Staff believes that the proposed
Centennial Project would not preclude a new Center in the area; that the new Center could be
incorporate around the Project.
While there is still a strong community sentiment to "clean up" the parking and landscaped areas
around the Train Station, this could be done in conjunction with the Historical Society's plans to
create a community museum in the Station, rather than as a separate Centennial project. Another
idea brought forward during the discussion is to install a driveway northbound in front of the
Station from South Lane to North Lane to be used as a drop off area. Public Works staff will
evaluate the proposal, which would require a U Turn on southbound California Drive at South
Lane, when the new Station is opened and the traffic and parking patterns and demands are more
defined.
BUDGETIMPACT:
The anticipated budget impacts associated with this project are:
Construction Costs—The estimated project costs are broken down as follows:
Bocce courts, trellis structure, horseshoe pits and related costs: $325,000
Bandstand, paving, lighting, landscaping and associated costs: $275,000
Desi ng_& Engineerings
Topographic survey, design, engineering: $90,000
Amending the Centennial Project to the proposed area in Washington Park at this time does not
authorize construction, but does authorize staff to continue the design and engineering phase.
Funding
City Funding—For five consecutive years,the City Council allocated $10,000 to a fund to be
used for the City's Centennial Celebration. While the celebration was being planned, the Events
Committee established a goal of generating enough revenue from the events, donations and
merchandise so that the initial $50,000 could be used as part of the Centennial Project. While it
is too early to tell the effectiveness of the Events Committee's work, the revenue received to date
is on track with their anticipated budget. Staff anticipates the need for additional City funds to
be loaned to this project for the initial engineering and design work before donations from the
community can be secured
Community Funding—From its conception,the Centennial Project was foreseen as to be
funded by community donations. Private individuals, service organizations and corporations will
all be invited to help make the Centennial Project a reality. Recognition opportunities include
sponsorship of the bandstand, bocce courts, horseshoe pits, as well as smaller gifts being
acknowledged by plaques on the USGS monument. The Executive Committee has not yet
sought donations; choosing to wait for a final project that can be unveiled to the public. The
Washington Park project will cost slightly less than the proposal for the Train Station Plaza and
the project can be done in phases if need be.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Conceptual renderings of the Centennial Project in Washington Park
(E)DROP-OFF
(E)TENNIS COURTS \ \\
STAMPED,COLORED CONCRETE PAVI G
REFURBISH(E)USGS MONUMENT FOR DONOR DONOR PLAQUES* FLAGPOLE ,\\
SEATWALL AROUND MONUMENT
WITH FLOWERING COLORLANDSCAPE SCREEN -.
/y
\ Y'
10'X 72'BOCCE COURTS WITHT�
F
)REDWOOD TREES` rt SYNTHETIQ SURFACE
(E)TREES
3 iY
•s• �""` "-.r 4 d A V I
�$EATWALL WITH MULTI-TRUNK TREE Z Q
!`
CL
d'
� yR
{LIGHT POLE t„� �� ° 7 -SHADE STRUCTURE I BANDSTAND(20'X 20') J H
r t W V)
aIL
r .F rARY IN-THE-PARK"AREA
TRELLIS WITH BENCHES AND DRINKING
FOUNTAIN AT SOUTH ENO
HORSESHOE PITS (10 X'SO')
NEW ASPHALT PAVING MULTI-TRUNK TREE LAWN' QQQ g
I
(�l 4 4.' o
"BELCHESQ
/ VIEWDIRECTION Of PERSPECTIVE SKETCH 2� 5
Z
j 4 ° SEE SHEET 2 W z
(E)TREES V m a
1- - o s"io'. m• so' NORTH
� 1
I 2
�m
r '
r r 1 �z
�5L
o . Ito
AA
6{ e Ai+ sI r+�t,]i I" U4 Imo✓} K � L +` .
��\`
m�aLO s4, ui
UMei'.a,
An11 i,L.vCL
" ""'
4,51
tL
5
117
CITY ,� STAFF REPORT
BIJ_RLINGAME AGENDA
ITEM # 8b
MTG.
•*� °� DATE January 7, 2008
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
BY
DATE: December 28 2007 r,
APPROVED
FROM: Jim Nantell 558-7205 BY
suBJEcr: Council Discussion and Direction on Potential June 2008 Ballot Measure for Funding Deferred
Capital Improvements
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council not pursue a June 2008 General Obligation Bond election
for storm drainage improvements and
a. Direct staff to contract with NBS to undertake the study required for the formation of a citywide
Community Facilities District,
b. Direct staff to do additional research on the legal basis for creating storm drainage property fee,
c. Provide staff direction relative to the development of a budget reduction option that could fund an
ongoing $2 million for a "pay as you go" storm drainage improvement program.
BACKGROUND: After the unsuccessful ballot initiative of November 2006, the City Council continued to
review options to fund $44 million in deferred capital improvements of which the vast majority consisted of
storm drainage improvements. Staff presentations were made at a Special City Council meeting of December
131 2006 and at the regular meetings of January 2, 2007, January 16, 2007 and February 21 , 2007.
At the February 21 st meeting, staff presented options around the two most likely financial vehicles to secure
the necessary funding, a GO Bond or a Community Facilities District Tax. At that time the Council, for many
reasons, including other competing elections and the hope of passage of (SBA12) State Legislation sponsored
by Senator Leyland Yee, deferred the decision until 2008.
Community Facilities District
Although SBA 12 failed to secure enough support to be placed on the ballot, Senator Yee was successful in
keeping the bill alive by converting it to a two year bill. Given the fact that SBA 12 requires a 2/3rds vote of
the legislature, which will require significant support from Republicans in the legislature, the chance of
success are realistically less than one would want. Staff recommends against continuing suspending action
pending the out come of SBA 12. At the very minimum we recommend that we use the first part of 2008 to
undertake the development of a possible Community Facilities District Tax (CFD). That way by the time we
know the fate of SBA12 the Council will have all the information you need to determine whether to go
forward with a GO Bond Measure for November of 2008 or a Community Facilities District Tax Measure for
the November ballot. CFD can also be presented through a mail in ballot the date of which is determined by
the City Council.
Staff believes that the Council should use the previously budgeted funds to do more analysis on the
Community Facilities Tax (CFD) because the group that fought Measure H (2006 City sponsored GO Bond
Measure) will support a CFD approach but have pledged to fight another GO Bond. When you take into
¢c A
34 'fir
ve
rt�msrsae.
ivUbd Ri'd' ,rut.
li rir,ugo i, ,',ubu 179li 3.i 1 iU ,.:t .i 5113f:'I"G (.1.Y &it:..:y 'A
-Q;ru; PAIS",a!i r,
hn::r rit r NON .. AM n;, .tt 'cR
ti,;
'Wil ,{,,: ,;it zsv::ilo=f;::cC
i1
consideration that Measure H received 64%. or 2.6% less than required and the recent Burlingame School
District GO Bond Measure received only 62% without any opposition getting the last 2.6% of the voters with
organized opposition is a daunting task.
As per the February 20, 2007 Memo from the City Manager (Attachment A) although the majority of property
owners would pay more under a CFD approach than they would under a GO Bond (assumes both are
structured to raise the same amount of funds), the CDF would be a more equitable method and would avoid
the situation where recent homeowners paying would be paying as much as 20 times more than other long
term homeowners. It is the later situation that generated all the opposition to Measure H.
GO Bond Measure for June 2008
If the Council prefers the more traditional GO Bond approach staff would reluctantly suggest that we reduce
the amount being funded and thus the amount paid by the tax payers as another way to respond to the new
home owners attack against Measure H. Attachment B reviews five different funding amounts and the
ramifications based on different property assessed values.
Two other observations, as the Council knows any ballot measure requires private fund raising to pay for the
campaign costs waiting to fund a campaign for a November ballot measure would put us midway between the
funding raising associated with last November's council election and the next council election in November
2009. Secondly, although conventional wisdom has often argued for placing tax measures on a smaller turn
out election with the logic being the campaign works hard to get out the yes votes, the consultants conducting
our per election polling of voters indicated in the case of funding the storm drainage improvements we would
do better at higher turn out elections. November 2008 being a presidential election should be a high voter turn
out election.
Storm Drainage Propggy Fee
As the Council may recall some court cases associated with the use of Storm Drainage Property Fee has led to
caution around pursuing that option. Attachment B shows that it is otherwise an attractive option as it only
requires a simple majority of the property owners vs. the 2/3rds voter majority required with a GO Bond or
Community Facilities District. Given that more time has transpired since those court cases we are suggesting
that Council concur with staff recommendation to under take additional research relative to those cities that
have recently implemented a storm drainage property fees.
Alternatives to New Revenues to Fund Storm Drainage Improvements
Should we continue to fail to achieve the voters approval of funding storm drainage improvements there are
two obvious other options. The first is the one that has effectively been used in the last six years since the
General Fund revenues have been insufficient to adequately fund storm drainage improvements through our
annual CIP. That is the "default option" of just accepting the existing level of our storm drainage
infrastructure and plan to live with the periodic impacts associated with significant storms. Another obvious
option is to decide that adequate storm drainage infrastructure is a basic responsibility and therefore identify
and implement budget reductions that would fund an ongoing $2 million per year for "a pay as you go" storm
drainage improvement program.
Information that was not available during the Measure H campaign was what we do if there is no additional
funding for storm drainage improvements. If the Council agrees that investing in our storm drainage
infrastructure is a responsibility that we can not ignore then, absent additional funds, we need to look at budget
reductions to fund a minimal pay as you go storm drainage improvement program. Developing what one
might call"the back up option"allows the voters to have that information when they are considering the ballot
measure. Although many may feel they don't care about storm drainage problems because it doesn't impact
their property they may feel differently if they realized failure to fund this basic responsibility means reducing
the funding for other services they do care about(i.e. cleaning up downtown,reduced traffic enforcement, less
library hours and park maintenance)may result in their support of additional funding for storm drainage
improvements. On one hand development of the "back up option"may be seen as unfair because it looks
like black mailing the voters to vote yes, if the Council believes budget reductions are necessary if we don't
get additional funding then not disclosing that to the public is unfair as well.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
The FY07-08 adopted budget contains a total of$190,000 to pursue the creation of a citywide community
facilities district. The appropriation covers the cost of the NBS consultant study($50,000); the cost of
printing voter educational materials ($50,000) and the cost for conducting a special election($90,000). Only
the cost of the study would be expended at this time.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Review five different G.O. Bond funding amounts and the ramifications based on different property
assessed values.
B. February 20, 2007 Memo from the City Manager re: Pros and Cons of CFI? vs. GO Bond.
C. Pros and Cons of the Five Alternative Funding Approaches Recommended for Consideration
D. Revenue Brainstorming Worksheet(full array of approach options)
E. Tentative Timeline for June 2008 Ballot Measure
ATTACHMENT A
OPTION 1
$44 MILLION BOND (AS IN MEASURE H)
STORM DRAIN PROJECTS
1. EASTON CREEK (COMPLETE) $7,500,000
2. BURLINGAME/RALSTON CREEKS $9,000,000
3. SANCHEZ/TERRACE CREEKS $10,500,000
4. MILLS CREEK $1,000,000
5. EL PO RTAL/TRO US DALE CREEKS $500,000
6. BAYFRONT AREA, CURBS, GUTTERS,
PUMPS AND BRIDGES $8,500,000
TOTAL OF STORM DRAIN PROJECTS $37,000,000
BUILDINGS (HEALTH & SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS)
1. RECREATION CENTER $3,300,000
2. CITY HALL $2,500,000
3. POLICE STATION, FIRE STATION AND
PARKS CORPORATION YARD $1,200,000
TOTAL OF BUILDINGS PROJECTS $7,000,000
NOTE: PROJECT COSTS SHOWN HERE ARE ESTIMATES ONLY, THE ACTUAL COST WILL BE
DEPEND ON CONTRACTORS BIDS AT THE TIME OF ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION AND
ENGINEERING.
Page 1 of 5
ATTACHMENT A
OPTION 2
$41 MILLION BOND
STORM DRAIN PROJECTS
1. EASTON CREEK(COMPLETE) $7,500,000
2. BURLINGAME/RALSTON CREEKS $10,000,000
3. SANCHEZ/TERRACE CREEKS $11,000,000
4. MILLS CREEK $1,000,000
5. EL PORTALITROUSDALE CREEKS $500,000
6. BAYFRONT AREA,CURBS, GUTTERS,
PUMPS AND BRIDGES $9,000,000
TOTAL OF STORM DRAIN PROJECTS $39,000,000
RECREATION CENTER SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS $2,000,000
TOTAL OF ALL PROJECTS $41,000,000
NOTE: POLICE STATION,FIRE STATION, PARKS CORP YARD
IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT INCLUDED
NOTE:PROJECT COSTS SHOWN HERE ARE ESTIMATES ONLY,THE ACTUAL COST WILL BE
DEPEND ON CONTRACTORS BIDS AT THE TIME OF ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION AND
ENGINEERING.
Page 2 of 5
ATTACHMENT A
OPTION 3
$39 MILLION BOND
STORM DRAIN PROJECTS
1. EASTON CREEK (COMPLETE) $7,500,000
1. BURLINGAME/RALSTON CREEKS $10,000,000
2. SANCHEZ1TERRACE CREEKS $11,000,000
3. MILLS CREEK $1,000,000
4. EL PORTALffROUSDALE CREEKS $500,000
5. BAYFRONT AREA, CURBS, GUTTERS,
PUMPS AND BRIDGES $9,000,000
TOTAL OF STORM DRAIN PROJECTS $39,000,000
NOTE 1: RECREATION CENTER, POLICE STATION, FIRE STATION, AND PARKS
CORP YARD IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT INCLUDED
NOTE: PROJECT COSTS SHOWN HERE ARE ESTIMATES ONLY, THE ACTUAL COST WILL BE
DEPEND ON CONTRACTORS BIDS AT THE TIME OF ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION AND
ENGINEERING.
Page 3 of 5
ATTACHMENT A
OPTION 4
$37 MILLION BOND
STORM DRAIN PROJECTS
1. EASTON CREEK $6,000,000
(PUMP STATION AND FORCEMAIN)
2. BURLINGAME/RALSTON CREEKS $10,000,000
3. SANCHEZ/TERRACE CREEKS $11,000,000
4. MILLS CREEK $1,000,000
5. EL PORTAL/TROUSDALE CREEKS $500,000
6. CURBS, GUTTERS, PUMPS & BRIDGES $6,500,000
TOTAL OF STORM DRAIN PROJECTS $35,000,000
RECREATION CENTER SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS $2,000,000
TOTAL OF ALL PROJECTS $37,000,000
STORM DRAIN PROJECTS NOT INCLUDED:
• EASTON CREEK LEVEE AND CATCH BASIN
IMPROVEMENTS $1,500,000
• BAYFRONT IMPROVEMENTS $2,500,000
TOTAL $4,000,000
NOTE: POLICE STATION, FIRE STATION AND PARKS CORP YARD
IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
NOTE: PROJECT COSTS SHOWN HERE ARE ESTIMATES ONLY, THE ACTUAL COST WILL BE
DEPEND ON CONTRACTORS BIDS AT THE TIME OF ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION AND
ENGINEERING.
Page 4 of 5
ATTACHMENT A
OPTION 5
$35 MILLION BOND
STORM DRAIN PROJECTS
1. EASTON CREEK $6,000,000
(PUMP STATION AND FORCEMAIN)
2. BURLINGAME/RALSTON CREEKS $10,000,000
3. SANCHEZ/TERRACE CREEKS $11,000,000
4. MILLS CREEK $1,000,000
5. EL PORTAL/TROUSDALE CREEKS $500,000
6. CURBS, GUTTERS, PUMPS & BRIDGES $6,500,000
TOTAL OF STORM DRAIN PROJECTS $35,000,000
STORM DRAIN PROJECTS NOT INCLUDED:
• EASTON CREEK LEVEE AND CATCH BASIN
IMPROVEMENTS $1,500,000
• BAYFRONT IMPROVEMENTS $2,500,000
TOTAL $4,000,000
NOTE 1: RECREATION CENTER, POLICE STATION, FIRE STATION, AND PARKS
CORP YARD IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT INCLUDED
NOTE: PROJECT COSTS SHOWN HERE ARE ESTIMATES ONLY, THE ACTUAL COST WILL BE
DEPEND ON CONTRACTORS BIDS AT THE TIME OF ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION AND
ENGINEERING.
Page 5 of 5
Summary
Average Tax Levy Comparison
d
4
$26.01 $27.49 $28.97 $30.45 $30.22
I I $91 .02 $96.21 $ 101 .38 $ 106.58 $ 105 .78
$ 130.03 $ 137.44 $ 144.83 $ 152.26 $ 151 . 11
III $ 182.04 $ 192.42 $202.77 $213 . 16 $211 .55
III I I i ♦ $260.06 $274.88 $289.67 $304.52 $302.22
II III $312.07 $329.86 $347.60 $365 .42 $362.66
vt„r'Et� :zp ,
DE
AFF„
♦ RosA
Attachment B
CITY OF BURLINGAME
TO: Mayor Nagel and Council Members
DATE: Oct. 20,2007
FROM: Jim Nantell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Final Version of Analysis of CDF vs. GO Bond
It is important to remember that the CDF example developed by the consultant is for
illustration and the actual approach we would develop may vary from the one that is
presented Although it may not be the exact CDF approach we might end up using, it is
the only one we have to compare against the GO Bond approach. The GO bond figures
are ultimately estimates as well—as variables such as the interest rate environment at
time of issuance and assessed value growth rates, are ultimately uncertain. With that
said, I have developed the following comparison.
% of Number of Assessed Value Cost/Yr. CFD Cost
Residential Parcels for$37 M for Single
Parcels GO Bond Family
/Condo
10.83% 827 100,000 or less $22.18 (1) $175/$123
13.75% 1050 100,000 to 200,000 $45.62 $175/$123
6.72% 513 200,000 to 300,000 $68.43 $175/$123
6.39% 488 300,000 to 400,000 $91.24 $175/$123
5.97% 456 400,000 to 500,000 $114.05 $175/$123
6.34% est. 477 500,000 to 620,000 $141.42 $175/$123
7.85% 607 620,000 to 750,000 $ 171.08 $175/$123
57.85% 4418 Subtotal ofparcels that pay more under CDF
9.86% 753 750 to 1,000,000 $228.10 $175/$123
3.77% 288 1.0 to 1.2 million $273.72 $175/$123
3.63% 277 1.2 to 1.5 million $342.15 $175/$123
2.07% 158 1.5 to 2 million $456.20 $175/$123
.73% 56 Over 2 million Varies $175/123
20.07% 1532 Subtotal ofparcels that pay more under GO Bond
(1)the figure of$22.81 came from dividing the$125 average amount paid under a GO bond for a home assessed at
$548,397 as shown in the power point presentation previously sent to the city council by 5.48 to get the cost for each
100,000 assessed value.
Note the remaining 22.09%of the parcels are multi-residential and we don't know their
assessed value.
The point were the GO and CFD meet is an assessed value is $767,000
So that means 58% of the residential parcels pay more under CFD approach; where as
20%of the residential parcels pay more(and any where from 10 to 20 times greater than
those parcels assessed at$100,000 or less)under the GO bond approach.
GO Bond CFD
+Maximizes use of previous investment in +Provides a flat amount for all single
Public Education on CIP Needs family and a flat amount for condominiums
+ Is prior to the expected School District which should be perceived as more fair.
Measure in November and avoids being +Responds to higher assessed property
third local tax measure to Burlingame owners concerns, 28%of residential
voters. parcels.
+ Allows 58%of residential parcels (many +Avoids a situation where 28%of the
of which are seniors on fixed incomes)to residential parcels are paying anywhere
take advantage of relatively lower assessed from 10 to 20+times as much as those with
values. assessed values of under 100,000.
-Results in 20% of residential parcels +Results in less debt and payment from
(many young families)paying many times tax payers.
more than the long time property owners. +Avoids maximum tax payments of the
-May be hard to muster a group to do the GO Bond which for 35%of the residential
campaigning because it is so close to Nov. parcels exceeds the $175 (which is the
06 election and competes with Nov 07 annual tax under CFD). For 7%of the
election. parcels that amount is more than twice the
- Will continue to have opposition from $175.
new property owners whose arguments +Avoids a ballot campaign at the same
seemed to resonate with more than just that time frame as council election, which
segment of voters during the measure H hopefully will allow more volunteers.
campaign. +Allows more time to develop and
-Places more of a burden on recent and compare specific CDF approach to GO
future commercial/industrial property Bond approach.
owners + more friendly to newer and
future businesses(as with the residential
sector, a GO bond would put more of a
burden on new commercial/industrial
property owners vs. those that have been in
Burlingame for a long time)
+provides certainty to renters and
businesses that lease property in
Burlingame(under GO these constituents
would likely have no idea what the
assessed value of the property is)
-Puts the decision well past a year from the
public information associated with
Measure H.
-Results in 58%of residential parcels
paying more than GO Bond approach and
could result in seniors (21% of registered
voters)voting against it.
-Delays placement before the voters to
next year and very shortly after a school
district measure which is on the heels of
the High School Districts measure. Voters
may be "new tax weary".
The analysis of the consultant shows that we can develop a CDF approach that could
fund the same amount of improvements and stay with in(or close to)the $160 annual
cost that tax payers are likely to support(as identified by the phone survey last spring). It
also shows that it will not require shifting a disproportionate amount from residents to
non residential parcels.
That leaves the political strategy question of which approach stands the greatest chance
of succeeding with the voters both from of a standpoint of which segments of the voting
public pay less under the two options and from a standpoint of which date the measure is
placed before the voters.
Jim Nantell
Attachment C.
BALLOT MEASURE REVIEW
FINANCING OPTIONS
December 5, 2006
Participants_ Jim Nantell, Larry Anderson, Jesus Nava, Randy Schwartz, Syed Murtuza, Jane Gomery
MELLO-ROSS GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND
(COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT). $130 average/parcel - $44million
$130 average/parcel - $35million
JN, SM, JG, RS JN, SM, RS
PRO CON PRO CON
Date of election is flexible Requires 66.66% voter Redistributes overtime Requires 66.6% of the voter
approval approval
Community Facilities District Negative public opinion Can not be repealed Opposition will fight
can be tailored to maximize
support
Tax structure is flexible Lien against property. Allows some mixed uses Can't use toward long term
(caps) maintenance
Mail-in ballot option City pays and administers Can easily borrow against No cap allowed
election
Addresses opponents' Requires consultant to Public educated on issue Election dates not flexible
concerns determine tax structure from election
Unrepealable Requires debt reserve Most commonly used No special categories for
— approach. different prop owners
Not a debt of the city Confusing to explain to Will fund maximum amount
voters
Nexus to improvements Higher costs for all because Allows senior deferral if
includes all facilities of administration qualified
Council creates district No debt reserve
FLAT PARCEL TAX (General Tax) STORM DRAIN PROPERTY FEE
$160 average/parcel - $20million $130 average/parcel - $44million
SM, JG
PRO CON PRO CON
Easy to explain Required 66.66% voter 50% + 1 vote—Property No mix of uses -specific
__approval owner OR 2/3 citizens vote
Fair(addresses opposition Less revenue Clear Nexus—relates Subject to repeal
issue) directly to need
Accepted in area Loose commercial bump Allows mail-in (date is For 50% -Only property
flexible) owners vote
Could be used for CIP & Places more burden on Addresses opponents' Takes time& is costly to
maintenance. homeowners issues. develop..
Mix use possible Subject to repeal Vote is not weighted. Higher cost burden to
residential properties
Seniors exemption possible No C.O.L.A. Could be used for Requires consultant to
maintenance and GIP determine tax structure
Probably more support from More problematic to borrow Can borrow against
voters
Burden on single family Could generate needed
residents (regressive) amount
Election date flexible
Page 1 of 2
Attachment C.
FINANCING OPTIONS — BALLOT MEASURE REVIEW
December 5, 2006 (Continued)
UTILITY USERS TAX (General Tax)
Less Revenue)
PRO CON
50% + 1 of the vote Lack voter support
Flexibility in uses Less amount of revenue
Easy to administer Subject to appeal
Fairly applied (Tax payer No link to funding need
affects amount.
C.O.L.A. Only at council election
Optional sunset Problematic to borrow
against
Can choose which/all utility
and amount for each
Uses funds for C/P and
maintenance
Address opposition
OPTIONS REVIEWED BUT NOT RECOMMENDED
Y Assessment District(legal issues because it must be direct benefit,less
revenue, impact to commercial properties,weighted property owner vote)
Y General Purpose Tax(subject to repeal and not supported by voters)
Y Sales or Use Tax(difficult to get support)
Business License Fee(unfair to commercial)
➢ T.O.T. (reduces competitive edge for hotels)
S:\A Public Works Directory\2006 FLOOD PROT-SAFETY BONDUJUNE BALLOT MEASURE\Table of financing options
12-5-06.doc
Page 2 of 2
REVENUE BRAINSTORMING WORKSHEET
REVENUE SOURCE Statutory Basis Vote Requirement Mail-in Allowed? When Held Advantages Disadvantages Comments
General Obligation Bond -- General fund Only for acquisition Ad valorem tax
bound
only a revenue source by GC 43600 2/3 No Any time or improvement of
receiving bond proceeds real property adjusted each year
Has a difficult Popular in various
Community Facilities Can be reputation in the parts of state;
District GC 53311 2/3 Yes Any time ST balanced/ State -- need to bonds are not
apportioned provide some general fund
benefit analysis obligations
XIIIA(4)(a)/XIIIID(3) Any time ST Simple to Flat tax on
Parcel Tax 2/3 Probably not Council administer and Used by schools
(a)(2) election GT explain everyone
GC 37101/R&T 50% if general; 2/3 ifAny time ST Taxes non- Only taxes Could go to gross
Business License Tax 17041 .5 special No if GT -- Yes if ST : Council voters business receipts versus flat
election GT tax
Any time ST Common tax - Does not Takes
Utility Users Tax Fenton vs. City of 50% if general; 2/3 if No if GT -- Yes if ST Council taxpayer can necessarily relate administration
Delano special election GT control how to needs or sources effort
much paid
Across the Limited to library
Library Tax GC 53717 2/3 Yes Any time ST board No balancing facilities and
services
Public Safety --
can be
Police & Fire Protection GC 53970/53978 2/3 Yes Any time ST apportioned to Parcel Tax Limited to Fire and
Police Services
' locations/zones
Must Uusually limited to
Municipal Improvement S&H 10000 Majority of ballots cast Yes Any time Broad authority identify/specify certain geographic
Act of 1913 Assessments benefits to each
parcel area
Must Limited to
Specifies identify/specify landscaping,
Landscaping & Lighting S&H 22500 Majority of ballots cast Yes Any time projects, can be benefits to each lighting and park &
Act of 1972 used for ongoing parcel; requires rec facilities;
services annual assessment administration
like BID intensive
m
z
v
1 12/3/2007
REVENUE BRAINSTORMING WORKSHEET
REVENUE SOURCE Statutory Basis Vote Requirement Mail-in Allowed? When Held Advantages Disadvantages Comments
Must Limited to
Specifies identify/specify drainage, flooding,,
Benefit Assessment Act of GC 54703 Majority of ballots cast Yes Any time projects, can be benefits to each and street lighting
1982 used for ongoing parcel; requires
services annual assessment administration
like BID Iintensive
Any time ST Would violate Prop
be
Ad Valorem Property Tax 'XIIIA(1(b)) 2/3 Probably not Council Tagged to ,Tagged to values 13 can't
election GT values balaa can't
or
apportioned
° Any time ST
Payroll Tax R&T 17041.5
:50% if general; 2/3 if No if GT--Yes if ST Council Taxes daytime Income tax in drag 'Probably
special population unpopular
election GT
Can seek
Any time ST Legislative
Sales & Use Tax R&T 7287 2/3 No if GT--Yes if ST Council None Graffiti tools only authority for
election GT broader authority;
anti-competitive
question
Can go to Adopted in 2003
50% if General; 2/3 if Any time ST general fund; 0.25 percent session; similar
Transactions & Use Tax R&T 7285.9 special No if GT--Yes if ST ',Council spread among increments only; provision did not
election GT the community anti-competitive pass County vote
in November 2006
50% if general; 2/3 if Any time ST Taxes non- Anti-competitive--
Transient Occupancy Tax R&T 7280 special No if GT--Yes if ST Council voters already high
election GT
Probably
Documentary Transfer Tax.See ad valorem tax unconstitutional or
violation of statute
to raise rate
Devoted to
specific purpose; Difficult to calculate
For storm drainage: ° clear on a parcel-by- Administratively
Property-Related Fees H&S 5471 50% Yes Any time relationship; can parcel basis; does intense
be used for not provide clear
capital or financing vehicle
operations
2 12/312007
ATTACHMENT E
DRAFT TENTATIVE TIMELINE FOR GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND ELECTION
January 7— City Council Meeting—preliminary decision on whether to proceed with June
election
January 22— City Council Meeting—Resolution of intention/necessity adopted(4 affirmative
votes required)and ordinance introduced(Gov't Code § 43607)
NLT January 30— Notice of introduction of ordinance published in newspaper of general circulation
February 4— City Council Meeting—Ordinance adopted(4 affirmative votes required) calling
election(Gov't Code§43608)and resolution calling election adopted
NLT February 11 — Notice of special election published in newspaper of general circulation
NLT February 18— Ordinance published in newspaper of general circulation for seven days
NLT March 7 — Deadline for submission of measure and resolution to County of San Mateo
NLT March 7— Deadline for submission of tax rate statement by City Manager to City Clerk
March 13 — Random Draw for Measure Letter Assignments
March 14— Last day to file primary arguments for or against measures
March 24— Last day to file rebuttal arguments for or against measures
March 24— Deadline for filing impartial analysis
May 19— Voter registration closes
June 3— Election Day
Timeline--1 12/31/2007
� y STAFF REPORT
BURLJNGAME AGENDA
ITEM# 9a
z MTG.
DATE 7 January 2008
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
BY -
DATE: January 7, 2008 r
"PROVED .,
FRoM: Deirdre Dolan, Human Resources Director BY r'
SUBJECT: Approval of Labor Agreement with Teamsters Local 856
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that Council approve the resolution authorizing the City Manager to incorporate the
tentative agreement between Teamsters Local 856 and the City of Burlingame into the Memorandum of
Understanding(MOU) for this unit. The comprehensive tentative agreement is attached to this report as
Exhibit A.
BACKGROUND:
Teamsters Local 856 represents the Police Department Communications Dispatchers. The Teamsters labor
agreement expired on November 30, 2007 after a three-year term. The City and Teamsters have been meeting
since July to negotiate the terms of a new agreement. The City reached tentative agreement with the
Teamsters unit on December 10, 2007, and the Teamsters ratified the agreement on December 14. The major
components of the tentative agreement are as follows:
Term: 4 years; December 1, 2007 through November 30, 2011.
Salary: 2.0% increase retroactive to the first pay period in December 2007;
2.0% increase effective the first pay period in December 2008;
3.0% increase effective the first pay period in December 2009; and
3.0% increase effective the first pay period in December 2010
Retirement: Implement the 2.5%at 55 retirement formula effective no later than March 31, 2008
Retiree
Medical: The Teamsters agreed to a reduction in the retiree medical benefit for future employees.
Employees hired after implementation of the 2.5% at 55 retirement formula will receive 100%
of the lowest cost single coverage after 10 years of service; 75% of the lowest cost employee
plus one dependent coverage after 15 years of service; and 100% of the lowest cost employee
plus one dependent coverage after 20 years of service with the City of Burlingame.
Other changes agreed to in negotiations are included in the attached Exhibit A.
BUDGETIMPACT:
The fiscal year 2007-2008 budget included funding for the salary and benefit cost increases associated with
the new agreements. The projected annualized cost increases are as follows:
• Salary increase costs: $11,756
• Retirement plan cost increase: $14,695
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution for Teamsters Local 856 Agreement
Exhibit A—Comprehensive Tentative Agreement
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
APPROVING CHANGES TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL 856
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Burlingame:
WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame and the Teamsters Local 856 have met and
conferred in good faith on the terms and conditions of employment as provided by State
law; and
WHEREAS, the City and Teamsters have reached agreement on certain changes
to be made to the existing terms and conditions of employment and Memorandum of
Understanding between the City and Teamsters; and
WHEREAS, the proposed changes are fair and in the best interest of the public
and the employees represented by Teamsters;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED:
1 . The changes in existing salary of the employees represented by Teamsters as
contained in Exhibit A hereto are approved.
2. The City Manager is authorized and directed to execute the terms contained in
Exhibit A and incorporate them into the Memorandum of Understanding between
Teamsters Local 856 and the City of Burlingame.
MAYOR
I, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was introduced at a special meeting of the City Council held
on the 7 h day of January, 2008, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
CITY CLERK
Exhibit A
Tentative Agreement
Teamsters Local 856 Negotiations
December 10, 2007
Maior Economic Items
1. Term: 4 years (December 1, 2007 through November 30, 2011)
2. Salary:
Effective the first pay period in December, 2007: 2.0% increase
Effective the first pay period in December, 2008: 2.0%increase
Effective the first pay period in December, 2009: 3.0% increase
Effective the first pay period in December, 2010: 3.0% increase
The concept to pay to 3rd in the survey market will be eliminated.
3. Retirement: 2.5%at 55 formula will be implemented effective no later than
March 31, 2008.
The City agrees to reopen the MOU if the 2.5% at 55 formula does not become
effective by March 31, 2008 due to failure to reach agreement with all
miscellaneous employee labor organizations.
4. Medical:
For the term of this agreement, the City's contribution for medical insurance will
be up to a maximum of the Kaiser family premium rate.
The City maintains the ability to modify the technical language in this section in
order to coordinate with the changes in the retiree medical benefit. The benefit
level will remain the same.
5. Retiree Medical:
Current employees:
Employees hired prior to the effective date of the 2.5% at 55 retirement
formula who retire with a minimum of five years of service with the City will
receive the current retiree medical benefit, up to a maximum of the Kaiser
family premium rate.
New employees hired on or after the effective date of 2.5% at 55:
Years of Service Monthly Contribution
0-end of SP year Minimum monthly amount as governed by the Ca1PERS
of service Health System.
10 years to the 100% of the lowest medical premium provided through
end of the 14th CalPERS approved medical providers for employee only.
year of service
Exhibit A
Years of Service Monthly Contribution
15 years to the 75% of the lowest medical premium provided through
end of the 19P Ca1PERS approved medical providers for employee+1
year of service dependent.
20 years of 100% of the lowest medical premium provided through
service or more CalPERS approved medical providers for employee+1
de endent.
Other Economic Items
6. Vision Plan: The cost of repair of glasses will be included as a covered item.
7. Vacation: The vacation accrual rate at 25 years of service will increase to 24 days
per year(addition of 1 day).
8. Sick leave accrual: Maximum sick leave accrual will increase to 2,000 hours.
9. Training Differential: Employees assigned to train new dispatchers will receive an
18.75% pay differential during the period of active assignment to this duty.
10. POST Certification Differential: If during the term of this agreement POST
establishes Intermediate and Advanced certifications for Public Safety
Dispatchers, the City will provide a 5% premium pay differential to an employee
who earns an Intermediate POST certificate and a 7% premium differential to an
employee who earns an Advanced POST certificate.
11. Call Back pay: An employee recalled to work outside of and not continuous with
regularly scheduled hours shall be paid a minimum of four(4)hours at the rate of
one and one-half(1-1/2)times the employees regular rate of pay. Work may be
provided for the employee during this time.
12. Deferred Compensation: The City will provide a contribution to an employee's
deferred compensation account in an amount equal to the employee's contribution
up to a maximum of forty five dollars($45) per biweekly pay period.
13. Bilingual Pay: The City will provide a 5% differential for employees designated
as bilingual service providers.
14. Employees are eligible to receive double time when working alone for more than
30 minutes, excluding breaks and meal periods.
Non-Economic Items
15. Seniority: Seniority begins on the first day of permanent employment with the
City of Burlingame. Seniority will be used to determine shift bid assignments,
overtime coverage, days off and vacations.
Exhibit A
If an employee is rehired after separating service for more than six (6) months, the
prior employment shall not be attributed for seniority purposes for shift bidding,
overtime coverage, and time off scheduling. The rehired employee's seniority
date for shift bidding, overtime coverage, and time off scheduling will be the date
of rehire.
16. Shift Bid: The full time Dispatcher with the most seniority will bid first and this
will continue until the least senior full time Dispatcher has completed their bid.
Shift bids will be posted twice per year, no later than May 1 and November 1 of
each year.
17. Work Schedule: Dispatchers are assigned to work a schedule of 8, 10, or 12 hours
shifts. Monthly dispatch schedules will be posted one(1)month in advance,
between the first and the fifth day of the designated posting month.
18. Overtime: Overtime is authorized time worked in excess of an employee's
normal daily work schedule. Overtime shall be compensated at one and one half
times the employee's regular rate of pay for every hour of overtime worked.
Overtime will be offered in order from the most senior dispatcher to the least
senior dispatcher. Per Diem dispatchers will be assigned remaining overtime slots
only after this process has been completed. If necessary to mandate overtime,
such overtime will be assigned in order from the least senior dispatcher to the
most senior dispatcher.
19. Vacation Scheduling: Vacations will be scheduled once per year. The vacation
bid for the following calendar year will be posted no later than November 1 of the
prior year. Vacation bidding shall be conducted in the order of seniority with the
full-time dispatcher with the most seniority bidding first and will continue until
the least senior full-time dispatcher has completed their vacation bid.
Dispatchers will be allowed to modify scheduled vacation days if an opening
exists on the vacation schedule, provided that the Administrative Sergeant is
given notice at least seventy two(72)hours in advance of such proposed change.
20. Family Medical Leave Act: Administrative Policy will be revised to provide more
information on employee leave rights.
21. Reclassification policy: Administrative Policy will be revised to insure employee
receives timely notification of status of request.
��ICITI
� STAFF REPORT
BURUNGAME AGENDA "b
ITEM#
1cO9 °°e
MTG.
°A•n°���E6' DATE 1/7/08
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
BY
DATE: December 21, 2007
APPROVED
FROM: Doris Mortensen, City Clerk By
650-558-7203
SUBJECT: Recommendation to confirm revised list of Council Assignments for 2008
RECOMMENDATION:
To review, make changes if necessary and confirm the revised list of City Council Assignments for 2008.
BACKGROUND:
The revised list reflects assignment changes made at the December 17, 2007 regular Council meeting.
One new assignment is needed as follows:
Housing Endowment and Regional Trust (HEART) is requesting a Council member be selected to represent
the City at their monthly meetings. (Council Assignment#23). The representative is not a voting member of
HEART. Only C/CAG-appointed Board members are voting members.
EXHIBIT:
Revised Council Assignments—2008
CITY OF BURLINGAME
COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS
REVISED - 2008
1. ABAG—City Delegate Quarterly Baylock (alternate Deal)
2. Airport Land Use Commission Quarterly meetings held Keighran (alternate Deal)
(subcommittee of C/CAG) at Burlingame City Hall
3. Airport Round Table 1St Wednesday each Deal (alternate Keighran)
month, 7 p.m.
4. Audit Committee Meets 2-3 times per Baylock and O'Mahony
year, including once in
December
5. Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Last Thursday of month Baylock
Committee (BPAC) + extra meetings in
C/CAG ap ointment with no term end February-March
6a. BAWSCA (Bay Area Water Supply and 4-year term (ends 2011) O'Mahony
Conservation Agency)
6b. Board Policy Committee Meets monthly O'Mahony
7. Budget Responsibilities: Each council (There are no budget chairs.
member to meet with appropriate Department heads will make
department head(s) to review budget reports; council members will
elaborate)
• CA, CM, CC, FIN, HR Nagel
• Parks & Recreation Keighran
• Library Deal
• Fire and Police Baylock
• Community Development/Public O'Mahony
Works
8. Centennial Executive Committee Monthly, usually on O'Mahony and Keighran
Fridays, 3 to 5 p.m. at
Rec Center
9. Central County Fire Board 1St Tuesday in May and Baylock and Nagel
November, 4 p.m., at (2-year terms)
Hillsborough Town Hall
10. Chamber of Commerce Liaison 2° Tuesday of each Baylock and Keighran
month, noon-1:30 p.m. (alternate Deal)
11. City/County Association of Governments 2 nd Thursday of each O'Mahony(alternate Nagel)
(C/CAG) month, Legislative
Committee meets at 5,
regular meeting at 7
12. City/Schools Liaison Committee 3 times a year, usually Nagel and Keighran
Wed. or Thurs. during (alternate Deal)
lunch
Propose switching to
Fridays
13. Civic Engagement Subcommittee As needed Nagel and Keighran
14. Congestion Management Committee Monthly, 3-5 p.m. at Not applicable; need to be
(CMAC, subcommittee of C/CAG) San Mateo City Hall appointed by C/CAG.
15. Council of Cities 4h Friday of month in All
different city
16. Council Protocol Subcommittee As needed Baylock and O'Mahony
17. Economic Development Committee As needed Keighran
18. Emergency Services Council (quarterly) 3 rd Thursday in January, Nagel (alternate Baylock)
April, June and
September, 5:30 p.m. at
Hall of Justice in
Redwood City
19. Fire ALS Joint Powers Authority Twice annually as group Nagel
agrees, usually at 6 p.m.
Next meeting is Feb. 7
at 6 p.m., location TBA
20. Grand Boulevard Task Force Quarterly, 10 a.m.-noon, Deal
location varies
21. Green Advisory Committee (SBWMA) Meeting January 2008 Deal
22. Green Ribbon Task Force Baylock and Nagel
23. Housing Endowment and Regional Trust 4 1h Wednesday of month
(HEART) at 3 p.m. in Belmont
24. ICLEI (International Council for Local Nagel
Environmental Initiatives-Local
Government for Sustainability)
25. Peninsula Congestion Relief Alliance Every other month on Deal (alternate Gomery)
Tues. or Thurs. at 8 a.m.
26. Peninsula Division League of California 4 dinner meetings per All
Cities year,plus January
reception for newly
elected council members
27. Regional Financing Authority(RFA) 4-year term (ends July O'Mahony
Manages bond issuance process 2007)
28. Policy Advisory Committee for Sub- To be determined Deal
Regional Housing Needs Allocation
(reports to ABAG)
29. Safeway Subcommittee Varies Baylock and Keighran
30. Specific Area Plan Committee Keighran and Deal
31. Transportation Authority Re-elected 1/26/07 for O'Mahony
two-year term
32. Utilities and Sustainability Task Force 3T Thursday of each Nagel
(reports to C/CAG) month at BAWSCA
conference room, San
Mateo
33. Warrants Review Monthly review O'Mahony
CITY STAFF REPORT
AGENDA
.... ... ITEM# 9c
MTG. 7 January 2008
DATE
NI.Tiv+tw.a d'.
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
BY
DATE: January 7, 2008 I
APPROVED
FROM: Deirdre Dolan,Human Resources Director BY
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution Fixing the Employer's Contributidn Under the Public Employees'
Medical and Hospital Care Act Effective January 1,2008
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Council approve the attached resolution increasing the City's contribution towards
medical premiums to a maximum of $1,223.74 per month for members of Teamsters Local 856, and
correcting the contribution from $1,223.24 to $1,223.74 for AFSCME Local 2190 and Local 829, Burlingame
Association of Middle Managers (BAMM), Department Head and Unrepresented Groups, Police Officers
Association (POA), Association of Police Administrators, and International Association of Fire Fighters
(IAFF). These changes will be effective retroactive to January 1, 2008.
BACKGROUND:
The health plan resolution for AFSCME Local 829 and Local 2190, BAMM, POA, Association of Police
Administrators, Department Head and Unrepresented Group and IAFF that Council approved at your
November 5, 2007 meeting contained an error in the amount of the 2008 Kaiser HMO rate for family
coverage. The correct amount is $1,223.74; the resolution submitted to Council on November 5, 2007 stated
the amount as $1,223.24. In addition,the City recently concluded contract negotiations with Teamsters Local
856 and agreed to increase the City's contribution to equal the Kaiser HMO rate for family coverage. The
attached resolution therefore corrects the previous amount for AFSCME Local 829 and Local 2190, BAMM,
POA, Association of Police Administrators, Department Head and Unrepresented Group and IAFF, and
includes Teamsters Local 856 in the corrected amount.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The cost of this benefit increase is included in the 2007-2008 fiscal year budget approved by Council.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution Fixing Employer Contribution Rate for AFSCME Local 2190 and 829, BAMM, POA, Police
Administrators, IAFF, Teamsters Local 856, and Department Head and Unrepresented Group
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF BURLINGAME FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION UNDER THE
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT
RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of Burlingame:
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 22825.6 provides that a local agency
contracting under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act shall fix the
amount of the employer's contribution at an amount not less than the amount required
under Section 22825 of the Act; and
WHEREAS,the City of Burlingame, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, is
a local agency contracting under the Act for participation by members of the American
Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)Local 829 and
AFSCME Local 2190, Burlingame Association of Middle Managers(BAMM),
Teamsters Local 856, Department Head and Unrepresented Groups,the International
Association of Fire Fighters(IAFF), Police Officers Association(POA) and the
Association of Police Administrators;therefore be it
RESOLVED, that effective January 1, 2008 the employer's contribution for each
employee or annuitant shall be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of his/her
enrollment, including the enrollment of his/her family members in a health benefits plan
up to a maximum of$1,223.74 per month; Plus administrative fees and Contingency
Reserve Fund Assessments.
MAYOR
I, DORIS MORTENSEN, 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 7th day of January 2008, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
CITY CLERK
CITY 0 STAFF REPORT
BURUNGAME AGENDA 9d
ITEM#
MTG.
OR-JUNE
DATE January 7,2008
6
To: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMIT i
BY
DATE: January 7, 2008
APP VE
FROM: Jesus Nava, Finance Director/Treasurer BY
650-558-7222
SUBJECT: 2008 City of Burlingame Investment Policy
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve the City of Burlingame's investment policy for 2008.
BACKGROUND:
State law requires that the City Council annually review and approve the policy for investment of City funds.
There are no changes to the policy.
ATTACHMENTS: 2008 Statement of Investment Policy
CITY OF BURLINGAME, CA
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY
January 2008
PURPOSE
This statement contains guidelines for the prudent investment of the City's temporarily
idle cash in accordance with Government Code sections 53600, et. seq. The ultimate
goal of the City's Investment Policy is to protect the City's pooled cash while producing
a reasonable rate of return on investments.
OBJECTIVES
1. Accurately monitor and forecast expenditures and revenues to ensure
investment of moneys to the fullest extent.
2. Invest in a range of instruments to insure diversification of the City's
portfolio.
3. As a primary objective, safeguard the principal of funds. The secondary
objective will be to meet the liquidity needs of the City. The third objective is to
achieve a return on the investment of funds.
4. Investments will be in compliance with governing provisions of the law.
ACCEPTABLE INVESTMENT INSTRUMENTS
Acceptable investments authorized for purchase by the finance director/treasurer are:
1. U.S. Government and Agency Securities (notes, bills or bonds of the U.S.
Government and its agencies.)
2. Certificates of Deposit(deposits placed with commercial banks,savings and loan
companies and/or thrift and loan companies, which meet the financial criteria
established by the City.)
3. Bankers'Acceptances
4. Commercial Paper
5. Demand Deposits
6. Money Market Funds/Mutual Funds
7. Repurchase Agreements
8. Passbook Savings Accounts
9. Negotiable Certificates of Deposit (deposits with commercial banks and/or
savings and loan companies which meet the financial criteria established by the
City.)
10.Local Agency Investment Funds(State Pool)
11.County Investment Fund(San Mateo County Pool)
12.Guaranteed Investment Contracts (collateralized with Government Securities,
physically delivered to an acceptable safekeeping account.)
Page 1 of 3
The State pool and San Mateo County Pool invests in additonal Government Code
authorized investments that are not approved for direct purchase by the finance
director/treasurer. These pools shall provide a current investment policy and monthly
reports for review by the finance director/treasurer. The finance director/treasurer is
authorized to invest in these pools provided they reasonably appear to be in
conformance with their investment policies, which are attached for reference to this
policy.
REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS - TERM LIMIT AND SAFEKEEPING
The City will require physical delivery of the securities backing the repurchase
agreements to an acceptable safekeeping account of a third party in the City's name as
stated in Code Section 53601(1). Repurchase agreements will be used solely as short
term investments not to exceed 30 days.
MATURITY LIMIT
State law requires that the maturity of any given instrument should not exceed five
years unless specifically approved by City Council. Those over two years will be
confined to U.S. Government and Agency securities.
RESTRICTION ON INVESTMENT POLICIES AND CITY CONSTRAINTS
Section 53600 et. seq. of the State of California Government Code outlines the
collateral requirements for certain types of investments and also limits the percentage
of total investments which can be placed in certain classifications. Investments must
meet the time schedules as indicated by the cash flow projections of the City.
Investments will ordinarily be held until maturity unless an advantageous exchange or
profit can be made. In such cases, a documented analysis will be prepared and
approved by the Finance Director/Treasurer. Investment decisions will not be
influenced by forecasts or speculation regarding interest rates. The actual level of
interest rates at any given time weighed with the soundness of the institution or
investment instrument will be the primary basis of consideration.
CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT: INSTITUTION FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS
All institutions must have a minimum of $100 million in assets. Institutions have a
demonstrated history of positive earnings and must carry a minimum 3.5% equity ratio
and must hold that ratio for at least one year prior to the City's investment. All
institutions must be located within the State of California. For collateralized or
negotiable certificates of deposit, the institution must have a minimum $1 billion in
assets, in addition to meeting the above criteria.
The City requires physical delivery of all negotiable securities to an acceptable
safekeeping account at a designated depository.
Page 2 of 3
DELEGATION OF INVESTMENT AUTHORITY
Pursuant to Burlingame Municipal Code Section 3.13.040 and Government Code
Section 53607, the Finance Director/Treasurer is authorized to invest and reinvest
money of the City, to sell or exchange securities so purchased, and to deposit such
securities for safekeeping in accordance with and subject to this investment policy.
Approved by City Council on January 7, 2008.
Jim Nantell
City Manager
Jesus Nava
Finance Director/Treasurer
ATTEST:
Doris Mortensen
City Clerk
Page 3 of 3
CITY 0 STAFF REPORT
BURLINGAME AGENDA
ITEM# 9e
MTG.
SCO QDAATED JYHED 9D0 DATE Januar•7,2008
To: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMI T
BY
DATE: January 7,2008
AP ROVED
FROM: Jesus Nava, Finance Director/Treasurer BY
SUBJECT: Approval of a Three Year Agreement with Municipal Auditing Services (MAS) To
Conduct a Business License Tax Audit and Enforcement Program; Approval of a 45-day
Business License Tax Amnesty Period Commencing March 1, 2008; and,Adoption of a
Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Designating Municipal Auditing
Services As An Authorized City Representative To Examine Sales and Use Records
Recommendation: That the City Council:
1. Approve A Three Year Agreement With Municipal Auditing Services (MAS) To Conduct A Business
License Tax Audit And Enforcement Program;
2. Approve A 45-day Tax Amnesty Period to Commence March 1, 2008 and End April 15, 2008; and,
3. Adopt a Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Burlingame Designating Municipal Auditing
Services As An Authorized City Representative To Examine Sales And Use Records
Background:
The city has been contemplating a business license tax audit and enforcement program for two years. The
goals of the program are:
o Gain greater compliance with Business License Tax Ordinance
o Ensure the fair and equitable collection of business license tax
o Educate business community of license requirements and tax
o Gather complete information about persons and companies conducting business in Burlingame
o Increase revenue for the General fund
A 45-day amnesty period is recommended to give businesses that have no knowledge of the city's business
license tax ordinance an opportunity to come into compliance with the requirements of the ordinance without
suffering fines or penalties. The ordinance allows the city to recover the tax up to three years in arrears, in
addition to the current year. During the amnesty period,non-compliant businesses can pay the business
license for the current year as well as up to three years in arrears depending on the start date of their business.
Businesses that believe that they are exempt from the ordinance and wish to protest the payment of the
business tax will be required to complete the business license tax application;pay all amounts due; and submit
their protest in writing outlining the reasons while they believe they are exempt from the tax. The City will
review all documents and make a determination on the applicability of the tax.
1
If the taxpayer is still aggrieved,they are protected by the Ordinance Appeal's process under Section 6.04.210.
It should be noted that the City Manager's decision is the"final administrative determination." There is no
appeal to the City Council. If the taxpayer remains aggrieved, they have recourse via the Courts.
Discussion
Penalties Structure: Municipal Ordinance Section 6.04.070 controls the penalty structure, and contains the
following highlights:
• 6.04.070 (b): 25% late penalty after August 1.
• 6.04.070 (1 &2): 5%penalty every 15 days
• 6.04.070(3): 25% fraud penalty(reserved for City Attorney use)
• 6.04.070 (4): 1% interest per month
• 6.04.070 (d): Cost Recovery
Back Office Operations: MAS will act as a representative of the city in all dealing with taxpayers. MAS
will mail all letters,handle all mail,provide a bilingual call center, and a toll free phone number. MAS will
quality control all taxpayer submitted paperwork and payments for accuracy. MAS will process taxpayer's
accounts into small batches of 10-20 items for transmittal to the City. If the City approves all the items within
the batch, the MAS enclosed invoice is sent to AP for payment. MAS will provide all additional consulting
services as required by the City in support of this program.
Timeline Estimates: Timeline serves to estimate timeframes for accomplishing major tasks and may be
modified and adjusted to meet the needs of the City of Burlingame and MAS.
• December 2007
o Timeline refinement
o Contract refinement
o Program refinement
o Amnesty program refinement
o Preliminary work on data set request (Business Tax)(City Vendor Data)
• January
o Contract approval
o Program approval
o Resolution passed
o Amnesty program approval
o Receipt of data sets
o Data set analysis and integration
o Business tax and City vendor data sets delivered
o Sales tax data ordered
o Amnesty program introduced to community
• February 2008
o Contact letters reviewed and finalized
o Authorization letters reviewed and finalized
o Data issue revisited (if needed)
o Program points finalized
o Program presentation to City and MAS staff
o Amnesty program promoted to community
2
• March 2008
o Amnesty program active
o Sales tax data delivered
o Sales tax data analyzed and integrated
• April 2008
o Amnesty program ends (April 15, 2008)
o MAS mails first letters
Fiscal Impact:
The cost for collecting taxes, fines and penalties will be recovered from the delinquent taxpayer as outlined in
the Business License Tax Ordinance, therefore there will be no outlays for collection services.
The amount of potential revenue to be recovered from the audit and enforcement program is currently
unknown. The city collects approximately $480,000 per year from individual business license taxes.
Attachments:
City of Burlingame—Municipal Auditing Services Consultant Agreement (Draft)
Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Burlingame Designating Municipal Auditing Services As An
Authorized City Representative To Examine Sales And Use Records
Business License Tax Audit Presentation, Dated December 17, 2006 (PowerPoint)
3
CITY OF BURLINGAME
MUNICIPAL AUDITING SERVICES CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
APPROVAL DATE:
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into in the State of California by and between the
City of Burlingame, hereinafter called"City" and Municipal Auditing Services,
hereinafter called "Consultant". It is hereby agreed as follows:
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the City desires to contract for auditing/ accounting services,
hereinafter referred to as "Services or Work Product"; and,
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has the professional ability, means and technical
skills to accomplish the services and provide the work product required by this
agreement; and,
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT desired to provide the services to accomplish the
terms of this agreement; and,
WHEREAS, THE CITY AND CONSULTANT desire to set forth in writing the
obligations and responsibilities of each party relating to providing the services.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual benefits which
will accrue to the parties hereto in carrying out the terms of this Agreement, and for other
good and valuable consideration on the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, it is mutually understood and agreed as follows:
1. Retention of Consultant:
City hereby retains Consultant in accordance with the terms of this Agreement to
do and perform field auditing, accounting, support and consulting services as may
be required by the City.
2. Personnel:
All of the services will be performed by Consultant or under its supervision, and
all personal engaged in the work shall be fully qualified, and shall be authorized
and permitted under State and local laws to perform such services, and shall be
acceptable to City.
3. Performance Specification and Products:
Consultant shall perform the tasks and deliver the products and services as may be
required by City, and Consultant shall also provide such additional accounting
and financial services as are from time to time requested by the City.
4. Compensation and Payment:
Consultant agrees to provide the work product and services at a rate of 50%of
discovery/deficiency/collection identification(tax,penalty, interest, and costs (if
allowed by law) for all applicable years. In no event will Consultant be entitled to
"forward" year billing of accounts. In the event that the City waives or forgives
tax or penalties,the Consultant is entitled to compensation based upon the
original amount.
5. Method of Payment:
Consultant shall invoice City either monthly or semi-monthly. Payment shall be
for the work described on the invoice and satisfactorily completed. Invoices shall
include case identification and amount of correction and Consultant payment
amount. City shall pay invoices within thirty(30) days from the date of invoice.
6. City Management:
Jesus Nava,Finance Director/Treasurer,or her designee or successor, shall
represent the City in all matter pertaining to the administration of this Agreement,
including without limitation, Coordination of all necessary meetings, conferences,
determination of the amount and level of work to be performed, and review and
approval of all work product submitted by the Consultant.
7. No benefit to arise to local employees:
No member, officer, or employee of the City, or its designees or agents, and no
public official who exercises authority over responsibilities with respect to the
project during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter, shall have any interest,
direct or indirect, in any agreement or sub-agreement, or the proceeds thereof, for
work to be performed in connection with the project performed under this
agreement.
8. The Consultant as an independent contractor:
Consultant is, and at all times, hereafter shall be, an independent contractor of
City during the term of this agreement. Consultant specifically recognizes and
acknowledges its status as an independent contractor and not as an employee of
the City. Consultant's personnel shall be employees of Consultant and not
employees of the City. Consultant shall pay all salaries and wages, Workers
Compensation insurance, employer's social security taxes when applicable, and
unemployment insurance and similar taxes relating to employees and shall be
responsible for all withholding taxes. Consultant shall comply with all Federal
and State regulations relating to the employer/employee relationship including but
not limited to minimum wage, non-discrimination, equal opportunity, Workers
Compensation, hazardous/unsanitary or dangerous surroundings, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq. And the Immigration Reform and Control
Act of 1986 8 U.S.C. 245(a).
9. Ownership of Materials and Documents:
All work product and material prepared by Consultant for City shall be the
property of City once payment has been made, and Consultant shall deliver such
materials to City according to the terms of this agreement. However, Consultant
shall have the right to make duplicate copies of such materials and documents for
its files or other purposes as may be authorized by the City. Consultant shall be
held free and clear of any liability resulting from City's use of materials and
documents for work unrelated to this agreement.
10. Release of Information/ Conflict of Interest:
All information gained by Consultant in performance of this agreement shall be
considered confidential and shall not be released by the Consultant without the
City's prior written authorization excepting that information which is public
record and subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act,
Government Code Section 6250 et seq. Consultant, its officers, employees,
agents, or sub contractors, shall not voluntarily provide declarations, letter of
support, testimony at dispositions,response to interrogatories, or other
information concerning the work performed under this agreement, or cooperate in
any way with a party who may be adverse to the City or whom Consultant
reasonably should know may be adverse to the City in any subsequent litigation.
Response to a court order shall not be considered"voluntary"provided
Consultant gives City notice of such court order. Consultant shall incur no
liability under this agreement for materials submitted by it,which are later
released by City, its officers, employees, or agents. Consultant shall also incur no
liability for statements made by it at any public meeting conducted by City, or for
any document released by it for which prior written City authorization was
obtained.
If Consultant or any of its officers, employees, consultants, or sub contractors
does voluntarily provide information in violation of this agreement, City has the
right to reimbursement and indemnity from Consultant for any damages caused
by Consultant's conduct, including Attorney's fees.
Consultant will promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees,
agents or sub contractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena,
notice of deposition,request for documents, interrogatories,request for
admissions, or other discovery request or court order from any party regarding
this agreement and the work performed thereunder. City retains the right,but not
the obligation, to represent Consultant and/or to be present at any deposition,
hearing, or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and
to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests
provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does
not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response.
City warrants that Consultant will have fully met the requirements of this
provision by obtaining City's written approval prior to providing documents,
testimony, or declarations; consulting with City before responding to subpoena or
court order; in the case of depositions upon providing notice to City of same; or
providing City the opportunity to review discovery response prior to submission.
For purposes of this section, a written authorization from City shall include a
"faxed" letter.
Consultant covenants that neither they nor any officer or principal of their firm
have any interest in, or shall they acquire any interest, directly or indirectly which
will conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of their services
hereunder. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of this
agreement, no person having such interest shall be employed by them as an
officer, employee, agent, or sub contractor. Consultant further covenants that
Consultant has not contracted with nor is performing any services directly or
indirectly with any developer(s) and/or property owner(s) and/or firm(s) and/or
partnership(s) owning property in the City and further covenants and agrees that
Consultant and/or its subcontractors shall provide no service or enter into any
agreement or agreements with any developer(s) and/or property owner(s) and/or
firm(s) and/or partnership(s) owning property in the City prior to the completion
of the work under this agreement.
11. Indemnification:
Consultant agrees to indemnify, protect, and hold harmless the City and its
officers, employees, and volunteers, against any and all claims or actions arising
from Consultant's acts, errors, or omissions in performing services pursuant to
this agreement and for any costs or expenses incurred by City on account of any
claim therefore, including Attorney's fees.
12. Insurance:
Consultant shall secure and maintain throughout the term of this agreement the
following types of insurance issued by companies which are admitted and
authorized to do business in California as insurance carriers,with limits as shown:
Workers Compensation: A program of Workers' Compensation insurance or state
approved Self-Insurance program in an amount and form to meet all applicable
requirements of the Labor Code of the State of California, including Employer's
Liability covering all persons providing services on behalf of the Consultant and
all risks to such persons under this agreement.
Comprehensive General and Automobile Liability Insurance: This coverage shall
include contractual coverage and automobile liability coverage for owned hired
and non-owned vehicles. The policy shall have per occurrence limits for bodily
injury and property damage of not less than one million(1,000,000). If
Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate
limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work
or services performed under this agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be
twice the required occurrence limit. Said insurance coverage shall be at least a
broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage
(Occurrence Form CG 0001) and Insurance Services Office Form Number CA
0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability Code 1 (any auto).
13. Policies Primary and Non-contributory_
All insurance policies required above are to be primary and non-contributory with
any insurance of self-insurance programs carried or administered by City.
14. Notification:
All notices and written communications sent to City under the agreement shall be
sent to the following address, unless authorized to be sent elsewhere by City:
Mr. Jesus Nava
Finance Director/Treasurer
501 Primrose Rd
Burlingame CA 94010-3997
650-558-7222
All such being sent to Consultant shall be sent to:
Mr. Kevin L. Weigant
Municipal Auditing Services
P.O. Box 3465
Pinedale CA 93650-3465
559-291-5990
15. Effective Date:
This agreement shall become effective on the date of signature. The contract
period shall start upon the Consultants first generated letters. In the event that the
Consultants operations are interrupted (for any reason), the period of interruption
shall be added to the end of the contract period.
16. Entire Agreement:
This agreement is the complete, final, entire agreement, and exclusive expression
of the agreement between the parties hereto and supersedes any and all other
agreements, either oral or in writing,between the parties with respect to the
subject matter herein. Each party to this agreement acknowledges that no
representations by any party which are not embodied herein and that no other
agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this agreement shall be valid
and binding.
17. Assignment or Substitution:
City has an interest in the qualifications of and capability of the persons and
entities who will fulfill the duties and obligations imposed upon Consultant by
this agreement. In recognition of that interest,neither any complete or partial
assignment of this agreement may be made by Consultant nor changed,
substituted for, deleted, or added to without the prior written consent of City.
Any attempted assignment or substitution shall be ineffective, null and void.
18. Modification of Agreement:
The terms are subject to modification by mutual agreement between City and
Consultant which such changes shall be incorporated by written amendments to
this agreement. The parties agree that the requirements for prior written changes,
amendments, or modifications to this agreement may not be waived and any
attempted waiver shall be void.
19. Savings Clause:
If any provision of this agreement is found to be invalid, void, or unenforceable,
the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force and effect
without being impaired or invalidated in any way.
20. Term of Agreement: Termination:
The terms of this agreement shall be three (3) years with two (2)two year
automatic extensions. The contract may be terminated by either party on 30 days
written notice to the other. In the event of an early termination, the Consultant is
entitled to compensation based upon all work in process.
21. Authority to Execute:
The person or persons executing this agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants
and represents that he has the authority to execute this agreement on behalf of his
business entity and warrants and represents that he has the authority to bind
Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder.
This Agreement is executed by the parties in Burlingame, California.
City of Burlingame:
Jesus Nava Date
Finance Director/Treasurer
Consultant:
Municipal Auditing Services
Kevin L. Weigant Date
Chief Operating Officer
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
DESIGNATING MUNICIPAL AUDITING SERVICES AS AN AUTHORIZED CITY
REPRESENTATIVE TO EXAMINE SALES AND USE RECORDS
RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY of BURLINGAME that:
WHEREAS,the City Council has adopted a business license tax on persons doing business
in the City of Burlingame; and
WHEREAS,pursuant to California law,the City of Burlingame has adopted a sales and use
tax ordinance that imposes a tax and provides that it can be administered and collected by the State
Board of Equalization using the same and existing statutory and administrative procedures followed
by the State Board of Equalization in administering and collecting California State Sales and Use
Taxes; and
WHEREAS,pursuant to Revenue&Taxation Code§7056(b),the City of Burlingame may
designate by resolution any officer,employee,or any other person to examine all of the sales and use
tax records of the Board pertaining to sales and use taxes collected for the City; and
WHEREAS,the City of Burlingame has entered into a non-exclusive agreement for revenue
audits and information services with the firm of MUNICIPAL AUDITING SERVICES L.L.C. as
an authorized consultant to examine such sales tax allocation records maintained by the Board on
behalf of the city of Burlingame; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred,
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED:
1. The City Council of the City of Burlingame hereby certifies to the State Board of
Equalization that MUNICIPAL AUDITING SERVICES L.L.C.is a designated representative of the
City of Burlingame for purposes of examining all of the sales and use tax records collected by the
Board on behalf of the City of Burlingame in order to audit and review the business license tax
returns and compliance for the City of Burlingame.
2. Pursuant to California Revenue&Taxation Code § 7056(b),the Council hereby certifies
that MUNICIPAL AUDITING SERVICES L.L.C. (hereinafter "Consultant") meets all of the
following conditions:
(a)Consultant has an existing contract with the City to examine sales and use tax records of
sales and use taxes collected for the City; and
1
(b) Consultant is required by that contract to only disclose information contained in, or
derived from,those sales and use tax records to an officer or employee of the City who is authorized
by resolution to examine the information; and
(c)Consultant is prohibited by the contract with the City from performing consulting service
for a retailer during the term of the contract; and
(d) Consultant is prohibited by the contract from retaining the information contained in, or
derived from,those sales and use tax allocation records after the contract has expired.
Mayor
I, DORIS MORTENSEN, 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
day of , 2008, and adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBER:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER:
City Clerk
2
0
ac
VON MON
`lrirFutii��:��rrrtrnrt
Business License Tax Audit
City of Burlingame, CA
Finance Department
December 17, 2007
Business License Facts
• Ordinance adopted in 1978
• License is a tax not a fee
• Currently $100.00 per year
• Initial application fee of $35 (one time)
• License year is July 1 thru June 30
• 4,732 licenses currently issued
• Annual revenue approximately $480,000
December 17,2007 2
1
Who Needs A License?
rF = u « General Provisions
• Any business, trade, profession, calling
and occupation transacting business in the
city limits
• Business definition in ordinance: "includes
professions, trades and occupations of all
and every kind of calling, whether or not
carried on for profit."
December 17,2007 3
Who needs a License?
—le-01111- Specific Provisions
• Every person conducting or carrying on
the business of:
— Selling any goods, wares, merchandise,
commodity or service
— Conducting or carrying on any profession,
trade, occupation, calling or business
• Every person not having a fixed place of
business within the city who engages in
business within the city, including
contractors
December 17,2007 q
2
Who needs a License?
Specific Provisions
• Every person conducting a home
occupation
— As allowed by the city's land use regulations
• Every person conducting or carrying on
the business of selling Christmas trees,
except where such business is conducted
in connection with a licensed business
December 17,2007 5
Evidence of Doing Business
• Use of signs, circulars, stationary, phone
directory and other means of advertising
• Holding a governmental license, permit or
authority to conduct business
— Including Tax ID numbers
• Making sales, taking orders and rendering
commercial services
• Any similar acts
December 17,2007 g
3
Exemptions
• Charitable and Nonprofit Organizations
• Interstate Commerce
• Veterans Peddling or Soliciting
• Minors (16 years or younger) with gross
receipts of $4,000 or less
• Seniors (65 or older) with annual gross
receipts of $4,000 or less
• Parks & Recreation contract employees
December 17,2007 7
Exclusions
• Public Utilities that pay a city franchise fee
• Banks
• Insurance Companies and Associations
• Any person that the city cannot license
under the U.S. or State Constitution
• License collector may require a verification
statement from persons claiming
exemption or exclusion from license tax
December 17,2007 8
4
Payment — New Businesses
• Complete application
• Pay application fee of $35.00
• Pay License tax of $100.00
• New applicants can get prorated tax based
on start date of business:
— 1St quarter of tax year = $100.00
— 2nd quarter of tax year = $ 75.00
— 3rd quarter of tax year = $ 50.00
— 4th quarter of tax year = $ 25.00
December 17,2007 g
Payment — Existing Business
• License renewal notice sent in June
• Payment due date of July 1
• Payment delinquent on August 1
— 25% late payment penalty is added
— 5% penalty for every 15 days payment is late
— 1 % interest per month on delinquent amount
— Collection or cost recovery fees
December 17,2007 10
5
Penalties & Fees
• Ordinance Section 6.04.070 controls the penalty
structure, and contains the following highlights:
• 6.04.070 (b) - 25% late penalty after August 1 .
• 6.04.070 (1 & 2) — 5% penalty every 15 days
(capped at 100% of tax due)
• 6.04.070 (3) — 25% fraud penalty (reserved for
City Attorney use)
• 6.04.070 (4) — 1 % interest per month
• 6.04.070 (d) — cost recovery for collection of
delinquencies, deficiencies, other amounts owed
December 17,2007 11
Audit Objectives
• Gain greater compliance with ordinance
• Educate business community of license
requirements and tax
• Gather complete information about
persons and companies conducting
business in Burlingame
• Increase revenue for the General fund
December 17,2007 12
6
-` Audit Timeline
• January 2008
— Council approves contract with MAS
— Council approves Resolution
— Audit program approval
— Amnesty program approval
— Receipt of initial data sets
— Data set analysis and integration
— Business tax and city vendor data sets
delivered
— Sales tax data ordered
December 17,2007 13
` * Audit Timeline
• January 2008
— Amnesty program introduced to community
— Contact letters reviewed and finalized
— Authorization letters reviewed and finalized
— Data issue revisited (if needed)
— Program points finalized
— Program presentation to City and MAS staff
December 17,2007 14
7
Audit Timeline
• February 2008
— Amnesty program promoted to community
— Sales tax data delivered
— Sales tax data analyzed and integrated
— Prepare City and MAS staff on approved
aspects of Amnesty program
December 17,2007 15
y Audit Timeline
• March 2008
— Amnesty program active
• April 2008
— Amnesty program ends
— MAS mails first letters
December 17,2007 16
8
Audit Services Agreement
• MAS — Municipal Auditing Services, L.L.C.
• Three year agreement
• City agent for purposes of accessing:
— State Board of Equalization Sales Tax data
— Franchise Tax Board tax return data
— City of Burlingame Business Tax data
— City of Burlingame Federal Tax data
— City of Burlingame Utility data
December 17,2007 17
C-0 Audit Services Agreement
• Manage and handle all administrative
duties and tasks
• Compensation for services
— 50% of Discovery/Deficiency/Collection for all
applicable years
— Maximum collection fee possible = $510.00
per business (4 year delinquency)
December 17,2007 18
9
Maximum Tax Liability
#1 #2 #3 SUB #4
YEAR TAX LATE PENALTY INTEREST TOTAL RECOVERY TOTAL
2004-2005 $100.00 $25.00 $100.00 $48.00 $273.00 $136.50 $409.50
2005-2006 $100.00 $25.00 $100.00 $36.00 $261.00 $130.50 $391.50
2006-2007 $100.00 $25.00 $100.00 $24.00 $249.00 $124.50 $373.50
2007-2008 $100.00 $25.00 $100.00 $12.00 $237.00 $118.50 $355.50
$400.00 $100.00 $400.00 $120.00 $1;020.00 $510.00 $1,530.00
1 6.04.070(b)-Late payment penalty @ 25%
2 6.04.070(1&2)-5%penalty every 15 days(suggested max of 100%)
3 6.04.070(4)-Interest 1%per month
4 6.04.070(d)-Cost recovery(MAS fees)
December 17,2007 19
Amnesty Period
• Give businesses the chance to comply
without fines and penalties
• Starts Saturday, March 1 , 2008
• Ends Monday, March 31 , 2008
• Total of 31 days amnesty period
December 17,2007 20
10
Conditions of Amnesty
• Must provide true date of start of business
— Application is statement of declaration
• Must pay initial application fee of $35.00
• Must pay license tax for every year in
business (up to a maximum of 4 years)
— 1 year = $100 + $35 = $135.00
— 2 years = $200 + $35 = $235.00
— 3 years = $300 + $35 = $335.00
— 4 years = $400 + $35 = $435.00
December 17,2007 21
9 Advertising Y Amnest Period
'frno-...,i P66„ar
• Press releases and press conference M
• Two quarter-page advertisements in local
press (one newspaper)
• Website announcement
• List-serve Email Announcement
• Public Access TV announcement
• Chamber of Commerce newsletter
December 17,2007 22
11
Questions
F"
r
aahz
December 17,2007 23
12
CITY
Agenda Item 1,
BURLINGAME
Meeting Date ?/0'9
°p•� FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Memorandum
DATE: January 4,2008
TO: Burlingame City Council
FROM: Jesus Nava, Finance Director/Treasurer
SUBJECT: Business License Tax Audit
We continue to refine the process by which we will determine what"persons" are subject to the
business license tax and whether individuals are employees of a business or an independent
contractor. Part of the difficultly with the audit is that it has not been done before and there are
some unknowns, such as the level of compliance with the tax; the amount of revenue that may be
generated; and the employer-employee relationships that exist within the city that may expose
certain persons to the tax.
The Business License Tax Ordinance is broadly written to encompass "every person"conducting
business within the city limits. Specifically it states:
6.08.020 License taxes.
The following persons shall pay an annual license tax of one hundred dollars ($100.00).
(a) Every person conducting or carrying on the business consisting of selling any
goods, wares and merchandise or commodities, or services, or conducting or carrying on any
profession, trade, occupation, calling or business not otherwise specifically taxed by this chapter.
(b) Every person not having a fixed place of business within the city who engages in
business within the city, including contractors.
(c) Every person conducting a home occupation as defined by Section 25.08.350 of
this code.
(d) Every person conducting or carrying on the business of selling Christmas trees,
except where such business is conducted in connection with another regularly established place
of business for which a license has been issued. (Ord. 1125 § 3 (part), (1978); Ord. 1459 § 2
(part), (1992); Ord. 1669 § 1, (2001))
The ordinance does provide specific exemptions but they are limited to non-profit and charitable
organizations; businesses protected by the U.S. Constitution and Interstate Commerce laws;
veterans peddling or soliciting; minors (16 years or younger) and senior citizens (65 and older)
whose gross receipts from any and all businesses are $4,000 or less. It should be noted that even
though an exemption is given,proof of exempt status can still be requested under the ordinance.
1
An amendment to the ordinance is also before the Council that will exempt persons providing
services as part of the city's recreation programs.
In preparation for the audit, staff organized a business owners' focus group to introduce the audit
program, solicit their feedback and identify any"pitfalls"that may exist. At that meeting,
representatives of the real estate industry asked how brokers and agents would be treated under
the ordinance and audit. I explained that the Business License Tax application requires all
businesses applying for a license to list the number of employees that work for the business and
that city staff would use that information to determine who was an employee and who was not.
I further explained that during the formation of the Burlingame Avenue Business Improvement
District, affected businesses were given the opportunity to inform the city about whether
individuals performing services on behalf of a business were employees or independent
contractors.
You will recall that the Burlingame BID fees were based on the type of business (restaurant,
retail, etc.) and the number of employees working for the business. At that time, many business
owners inform us that they had limited number of employees and that many of the persons
working in their establishments were independent contractors. Beauty salons and nail parlors in
particular emphasized the "non-employee"relationship and the city proceeded to require the
independent contractors to obtain their own personal business licenses after the tax was paid.
At that time, the city used the U.S. Internal Revenue Service's general rule to determine whether
these individuals were independent contractors, mainly is use of the IRS Form 1099 to report
amounts paid to an independent contractor. Staff did not physically verify every employer
relationship with their independent contractors we simply took the word of the business owner
given the fact that the business owner controls the designation and is liable to the IRS and
California State Franchise Board for any errors in determining employee status.
At the City Council meeting of December 17, 2007,the City Attorney indicated that there was a
method of determining whether real estate professionals were employees or independent
contractors. Larry has prepared a written opinion to guide us in the audit. It is attached to this
memorandum for your review. (See Attachment A.)
In addition, staff has performed a cursory review of the Business License Tax Ordinances of
neighboring cities to see how they treat real estate professionals for purposes of paying the tax.
That information is also attached for your review. (See Attachment B.)
Another issue that has surfaced is whether owners of rental properties are subject to the tax. The
general practice among our neighboring cities is that owners of single family rental properties are
not taxed. However, multifamily complexes (apartments) are considered businesses and are
subject to the tax as are property management companies. Multifamily status is ascertained using
the zoning codes of each respective city as well postal and utility records that may indicate
multifamily status (one meter serving multiple units or multiple meters at a physical address). In
2
regards to property management companies, the consensus is that they are hired to provide a
professional service, therefore the tax applies.
The specific municipal code sections are attached as well. (See Attachment B.)
As I mentioned earlier, there will be unknowns given that this is a new program. However, the
Finance staff is experienced in dealing with administrative ambiguity. As tax collector and
administrator for the city, I am constantly required to use my judgment and discretion in
administering the laws and taxing authority of the city. If a matter remains unclear, I seek help
and guidance from the city manager, city attorney and peers, as in this case.
My experience has been that we have treated our residents and businesses respectfully and fairly
in their dealings with city hall. When errors are made, we acknowledge and correct them. And
when ordinances require strong enforcement, we have done so without prejudice or impunity.
The Council can expect us to continue in this vein and feel confident that we will do our best to
be fair and just in administering the audit and collecting the tax. In the end, we are simply
working to get businesses to comply with the law and pay the tax so that we can use the funds to
fulfill the needs of the public. We understand that the city will not come out ahead if we gain the
means but lose our legitimacy to govern in the process.
I will be ready to answer questions about the audit at the City Council meeting. Have a
wonderful weekend.
3
i
ATTACHMENT A
M E M O R A N D U M -
CITY OF BURLINGAME
CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: January 3, 2008
TO: Jesus Nava, Finance Director
FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney yr
RE : Business Taxation of Real Estate Professionals
ISSUE PRESENTED
How does the business license tax ordinance of the City apply to the business of real estate in the
City?
DISCUSSION
Section 6.04.040 provides the basic requirement to obtain a business license as follows:
No person shall transact and carry on any business,trade or profession,calling or occupation
in the city without first having procured a license or without first having paid to the city the
license tax provided herein, and to do so without complying with all such regulations shall
constitute a separate violation of this code for each and every day that such business is so
carried on.
"Person" is then defined in Section 6.04.020(1) as follows:
(i) "Person"includes all domestic and foreign corporations,associations,syndicates,
joint stock corporations, partnerships of every kind, clubs, Massachusetts business or
common law trusts,societies and individuals transacting and carrying on any business in the
city of Burlingame, other than as an employee.
[emphasis added].
Within a real estate office, there are a number of roles. There may be a principal broker, other
brokers, salespersons who work through or with a broker or brokers, and other professionals and
assistants. The issue posed by Section 6.04.020 is which professionals are employees and which are
not.
Naturally,the business through the principal broker is subject to the license tax. The employees of
the brokerage, such as secretaries and assistants, are not subject to the tax. The difficulty comes
Jesus Nava, Finance Director
Re: Business Taxation of Real Estate Professionals
January 3, 2008
Page 2
when other persons in the brokerage are not treated as employees,but as independent contractors—
either through books of business or by tax treatment in the provision of 1099's.
State law gives us the basic definitions, and the California Department of Real Estate gives us
additional information. Attached is the basic authority for real estate brokers and real estate
salespersons.
As can be seen, a real estate broker as licensed by the State has broad authority to offer a wide
variety of services. However, a real estate salesperson as licensed by the State can only offer
services when the salesperson"is employed by a licensed real estate broker." B&P Code § 10132.
Therefore, it appears that a salesperson, as a matter of State law, is an employee of a broker and
therefore not subject to a business license obligation under Section 6.04.020(i)'s definition.
In addition,the Department of Real Estate license check system gives the City an additional tool of
to determine whether a broker is "employed by other brokers or corporations" by searching to
determine preliminary employment status. A presumptive indicator is that the broker has received
a 1099 rather than a W-2, representing that the broker is not employed but is an independent
contractor.
CONCLUSION
It is my recommendation that the business license tax be applied to real estate brokerages as follows:
1. A brokerage office and the principal broker at the office is subject to a single business
license tax.
2. Employees in the office, whether staff, brokers, or salespersons, who receive W-2's are
not subject to a business license tax.
3. Salespersons in the office, even if they receive 1099's as supposed independent
contractors,are not subject to a business license tax as they can only practice their profession if they
are employees of a broker.
4. Brokers in the office if they receive 1099's are subject to the business license tax as
independent contractors and not employees of the office or corporation. This would be consistent
with how beauticians and cosmetologists, for example, have been classified.
This recommendation is also consistent with advice I have given regarding previous interpretations
of Chapter 6.04 in the past.
BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE
§ 10131.
A real estate broker within the meaning of this part is a person who, for a compensation
or in expectation of a compensation,regardless of the form or time of payment, does or
negotiates to do one or more of the following acts for another or others:
(a) Sells or offers to sell,buys or offers to buy, solicits prospective sellers or puchasers of,
solicits or obtains listings of, or negotiates the purchase, sale or exchange of real property or a
business opportunity.
(b)Leases or rents or offers to lease or rent, or places for rent, or solicits listings of places
for rent, or solicits for prospective tenants, or negotiates the sale, purchase or exchanges of
leases on real property, or on a business opportunity, or collects rents from real property, or
improvements thereon, or from business opportunities.
(c) Assists or offers to assist in filing an application for the purchase or lease of, or in
locating or entering upon, lands owned by the state or federal government.
(d) Solicits borrowers or lenders for or negotiates loans or collects payments or performs
services for borrowers or lenders or note owners in connection with loans secured directly or
collaterally by liens on real property or on a business opportunity.
(e) Sells or offers to sell, buys or offers to buy, or exchanges or offers to exchange a real
property sales contract, or a promissory note secured directly or collaterally by a lien on real
property or on a business opportunity, and performs services for the holders thereof.
10131.01.
(a) Subdivision(b) of Section 10131 does not apply to
(1)the manager of a hotel, motel, auto and trailer park,to the resident manager of an
apartment building, apartment complex, or court, or to the employees of that manager, or(2) any
person or entity, including a person employed by a real estate broker, who, on behalf of another
or others, solicits or arranges, or accepts reservations or money, or both, for transient occupancies
described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision(b) of Section 1940 of the Civil Code, in a
dwelling unit in a common interest development, as defined in Section 1351 of the Civil Code, in
a dwelling unit in an apartment building or complex, or in a single-family home, or(3) any
person other than the resident manager or employees of that manager,performing the following
functions who is the employee of the property management firm retained to manage a residential
apartment building or complex or court and who is performing under the supervision and control
of a broker of record who is an employee of that property management firm or a salesperson
licensed to the broker who meets certain minimum requirements as specified in a regulation
issued by the commissioner:
(A) Showing rental units and common areas to prospective tenants.
(B) Providing or accepting preprinted rental applications, or responding to inquiries from
a prospective tenant concerning the completion of the application.
(C) Accepting deposits or fees for credit checks or administrative costs and accepting
security deposits and rents.
(D) Providing information about rental rates and other terms and provisions of a lease or
rental agreement, as set out in a schedule provided by an employer.
(E) Accepting signed leases and rental agreements from prospective tenants.
(b) A broker or salesperson shall exercise reasonable supervision and control over the
activities of nonlicensed persons acting under paragraph(3) of subdivision(a).
(c) A broker employing nonlicensed persons to act under paragraph (3) of subdivision(a)
shall comply with Section 10163 for each apartment building or complex or court where the
nonlicensed persons are employed.
10131.1.
(a) A real estate broker within the meaning of this part is also a person who engages as a
principal in the business of making loans or buying from, selling to, or exchanging with the
public, real property sales contracts or promissory notes secured directly or collaterally by liens
on real property, or who makes agreements with the public for the collection of payments or for
the performance of services in connection with real property sales contracts or promissory notes
secured directly or collaterally by liens on real property.
(b) As used in this section:
(1) "In the business" means any of the following:
(A) The acquisition for resale to the public, and not as investment, of eight or more real
property sales contracts or promissory notes secured directly or collaterally by liens on real
property during a calendar year.
(B) The sale to or exchange with the public of eight or more real property sales contracts
or promissory notes secured directly or collaterally by liens on real property during a calendar
year. However, no transaction negotiated through a real estate licensee
shall be considered in determining whether a person is a real estate
broker within the meaning of this section.
(C) The making of eight or more loans in a calendar year from the person's own funds to
the public when those loans are held or resold and are secured directly or collaterally by a lien on
residential real property consisting of a single dwelling unit in a condominium or cooperative or
on any parcel containing only residential buildings if the total number of units on the parcel is
four or less. However, no transaction negotiated through a real estate broker who meets the
criteria of subdivision(a) or(b) of Section 10232 shall be considered in determining whether a
person is a real estate broker within the meaning of this section.
(2) "Sale," "resale," and "exchange" include every disposition of any interest in a real
property sales contract or promissory note secured directly or collaterally by a lien on real
property, except the original issuance of a promissory note by a borrower or a real property sales
contract by a vendor, either of which is to be secured directly by a lien on real property owned by
the borrower or vendor.
(3) "Own funds" means either of the following:
(A) Cash, corporate capital, or warehouse credit lines at commercial banks, savings
banks, savings and loan associations, industrial loan companies, or other sources that are liability
items on the person's financial statements, whether secured or unsecured.
(B) Cash, corporate capital, or warehouse credit lines at commercial banks, savings
banks, savings and loan associations, industrial loan companies, or other sources that are liability
items on the financial statement of an affiliate of the person, whether secured or unsecured.
(4) "Own funds" does not include funds provided by a third parry to fund a loan on
condition that the third party will subsequently purchase or accept an assignment of the loan.
10131.2.
A real estate broker within the meaning of this part is also a person who engages in the
business of claiming, demanding, charging, receiving, collecting or contracting for the collection
of an advance fee in connection with any employment undertaken to promote the sale or lease of
real property or of a business opportunity by advance fee listing, advertisement or other offering
to sell, lease, exchange or rent property or a business opportunity, or to obtain a loan or loans
thereon.
10131.3.
A real estate broker within the meaning of this part is also a person who, for another or
others, for compensation or in expectation of compensation, issues or sells, solicits prospective
sellers or purchasers of, solicits or obtains listings of, or negotiates the purchase, sale, or
exchange of securities as specified in Section 25206 of the Corporations Code.
The provisions of this section do not apply to a broker-dealer or agent of a broker-dealer
licensed by the Commissioner of Corporations under the provisions of the Corporate Securities
Law of 1968.
10131.4.
A real estate broker within the meaning of this part is also a person who acts for another
or others for compensation or in expectation of compensation, to do one or more of the following
acts:
(a) To sell or offer for sale, buy or offer to buy, solicit prospective sellers or purchasers,
solicit or obtain listings, or negotiate the purchase, sale, or exchange of mineral, oil, or gas
property.
(b) To solicit borrowers or lenders for or negotiate loans on mineral, oil, or gas property,
or collect payments for lenders in connection with these loans.
(c) To lease or offer to lease or negotiate the sale, purchase, or exchange of leases on
mineral, oil, or gas property.
(d) To rent or place for rent, mineral, oil, or gas property or to collect rent or royalties
from mineral, oil, or gas property or improvements thereon.
(e) Other than as an officer or employee of the state or federal government, to assist or
offer to assist another or others in filing an application for the purchase or lease of, or to locate or
enter upon mineral, oil, or gas property owned by the state or federal government.
10131.45.
A real estate broker within the meaning of this part is also a person who engages in the
following businesses as a principal:
(a) Except as provided in subdivision (d) of Section 10133.35, buying or leasing, or
taking an option on mineral, oil, or gas property for the purpose of sale, exchange, lease,
sublease, or assignment of a lease of the property or any part of the property.
(b) Offering mining claims or any interest therein for sale or assignment.
BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE § 10132.
A real estate salesman within the meaning of this part is a natural person who, for a
compensation or in expectation of a compensation, is employed by a licensed real estate broker to
do one or more of the acts set forth in Sections 10131, 10131.1, 10131.2, 10131.3, 10131.4, and
10131.6.
Attachment B.
BUSINESS LICENSE - REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY CATEGORIES
The following information is derived from the Municipal Codes of each jurisdiction.
City of San Mateo
5.24.180 Real Estate Broker-- Stockbroker.
Every person conducting the business of real estate broker or stockbroker shall pay an
annual business tax of fifty dollars plus five dollars for each salesman associated with or
employed by such broker. (Ord. 2004-10 § 1, 2004; Ord. 1984-5 § 50, 1984; Ord. 1977-
20 § 22, 1977).
City of Redwood City
Sec. 32.153. Specified Businesses:
Every person who commences, conducts, engages in or carries on any business described
or whose business designation is listed hereinafter in this Section shall pay a business
license tax comprised of the base tax plus the unit tax amount times the number of units
calculated, respectively, for each such classification of business as hereinafter specified:
Real estate brokerage: $37.00 plus $24.00 per each salesperson and employee
City of Millbrae
7.05.110 Business classifications.
Each business in the city shall be classified into one of the following business
classifications:
M. Real Estate Agents. Any independent contractor who is not an employee of a real
estate broker or, notwithstanding MMC 7.05.010(A), any employee of a real estate
broker,who brings buyers and sellers together for negotiations, or negotiates or arranges
terms and conditions for buyers and sellers, for the purpose of effecting a sale of real
property.
N. Real Estate Brokers. Any premises from which there is conducted the business of
bringing buyers and sellers together for negotiations, or from which negotiations or
arrangements of terms and conditions for buyers and sellers take place, for the purpose of
effecting a sale of real property.
7.05.120 Tax rates.
Business license taxes for each business in the city shall be calculated in the manner
described below; provided, however, that if gross receipts are the indicated tax measure
but cannot be calculated or reasonably determined for any particular business, the tax
shall be based upon its cost of operations
Attachment B.
14. Real Estate Brokers $210 (flat fee)
15. Real Estate Agents $53 (flat fee)
City of Foster City
Chapter 5.08 DEFINITIONS
5.08.050 Gross receipts.
As used in this article, "gross receipts" includes the total of amounts actually received or
receivable from sales and the total amounts actually received or receivable for the
performance of any act or service, of whatever nature it may be, for which a charge is
made or credit allowed, whether or not such act or service is done as a part of or in
connection with the sale of materials, goods, wares or merchandise. Included in"gross
receipts" shall be all receipts, cash, credits and property of any kind or nature, without
any deduction therefrom on account of the cost of the property sold, the cost of materials
used, labor or service costs, interest paid or payable, or losses or other expenses
whatsoever.
Excluded from "gross receipts" shall be the following:
H. As to a real estate agent or broker, the sales price of real estate sold for the account of
others except that portion which represents commission or other income to the agent or
broker;
5.24.010 Rates.
Every person who engages in business at a fixed place of business within the city shall
pay a license tax based upon gross receipts from zero ($0) to five million dollars ($5 m.)
at the following rates and in the following classifications:
RATES
Classification"A" Seventy-five cents per one thousand dollars of gross receipts or
fractional part thereof. Maximum tax: Three thousand seven hundred fifty dollars.
Attachment B.
BUSINESS LICENSE - RENTAL OF REAL PROPERTY
CATAGORIES
City of San Mateo
Ordinance does not apply to property owners, but it does apply to property managers
because they have been hired to perform a professional service.
City of Redwood City
Sec. 32.153. SPECIFIED BUSINESSES:
Every person who commences, conducts, engages in or carries on any business described
or whose business designation is listed hereinafter in this Section shall pay a business
license tax comprised of the base tax plus the unit tax amount times the number of units
calculated, respectively, for each such classification of business as hereinafter specified:
Residential Property Rental: $37.00 plus $13 per unit of dwelling space in excess of
three units (applied only to apartment complexes; city checks zoning and utility records
to determine multifamily status)
Nonresidential Property Rental: $30.00 plus $10 per 1,000 sq. ft. or fraction
(Tax amounts adjusted 5% for inflation for FY92, FY93, FY94 and FY95)
City of Millbrae
7.05.110 Business classifications.
Each business in the city shall be classified into one of the following business
classifications:
P. Rental of Real or Personal Property, Commercial. Any person engaged in the
business of renting or letting real or personal property, including but not limited to, a
building, structure, warehouse, equipment, computer, office machine or tools, to a tenant
or lessee for the purpose of conducting business. This classification includes property
owners and those who are in the business of leasing space for the express purpose of
subletting for commercial uses. This classification also includes property owners who are
in the business of leasing office machines, equipment and tools to a lessee for the purpose
of conducting business. Leasing agents and property managers are included under the
services classification.
Q. Rental of Property, Residential. Any person engaged in the business of renting or
letting a building or structure with three or more units for purposes of dwelling, sleeping
Attachment B.
or lodging(i.e., apartments, boardinghouses and other residential property rentals). This
classification does not include hotels or motels, which are classified under services.
7.05.120 Tax rates.
Business license taxes for each business in the city shall be calculated in the manner
described below; provided, however, that if gross receipts are the indicated tax measure
but cannot be calculated or reasonably determined for any particular business, the tax
shall be based upon its cost of operations
17. Rental of property, commercial - $64 plus $10.60 per 1,000
18. Rental of property, residential - $64 plus $5.30 per unit
City of Foster City
Chapter 5.08 DEFINITIONS
5.08.050 Gross receipts.
As used in this article, "gross receipts" includes the total of amounts actually received or
receivable from sales and the total amounts actually received or receivable for the
performance of any act or service, of whatever nature it may be, for which a charge is
made or credit allowed, whether or not such act or service is done as a part of or in
connection with the sale of materials, goods, wares or merchandise. Included in"gross
receipts" shall be all receipts, cash, credits and property of any kind or nature, without
any deduction therefrom on account of the cost of the property sold,the cost of materials
used, labor or service costs, interest paid or payable, or losses or other expenses
whatsoever.
5.24.010 Rates.
Every person who engages in business at a fixed place of business within the city shall
pay a license tax based upon gross receipts from zero ($0)to five million dollars ($5 m.)
at the following rates and in the following classifications:
RATES
Classification"A" Seventy-five cents per one thousand dollars of gross receipts or
fractional part thereof. Maximum tax: Three thousand seven hundred fifty dollars.
Enforced on multifamily complexes (apartment complex or other residential complexes),
but not single family unit owners
Agenda 9f
Item
k Meeting
BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: January 7, 2008
C' SUBMITTED BY
61
APPROVED BY
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
DATE: DECEMBER 26, 2007
FROM: PUBLIC WORKS
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING MILLS CANYON SEWER AND ACCESS
ROAD REPAIRS PROJECT BY HILLSIDE DRILLING, CITY
PROJECT NO. 81700
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached
resolution accepting the Mills Canyon Sewer and Access Road repairs project by
Hillside Drilling in the amount of $342,000.
BACKGROUND: During the winter months in early 2006, a series of storms caused
a mudslide above the Mills Canyon sewer access road. The Council authorized staff
to design and construct a retaining wall to protect the access road from further
damage.
On September 18, 2006, the Council awarded a construction contract for the Mills
Canyon Sewer and Access Road repairs project to Hillside Drilling in the amount of
$297,369. The work included construction of pier and lagging retaining walls,
repaving sections of access road and drainage improvements. The project will result
in safe maintenance access to a vital portion of the Burlingame Manor Subdivision
sanitary sewer system.
DISCUSSION: The project has been completed satisfactorily in compliance with the
plans and specifications. The final project construction cost is $342,000 which is
$44,631 (15%) above the original contract amount due to the following reasons:
• Complexity of and unforeseen conditions associated with drilling piers into the
hillside. The contractor encountered hard rock when drilling in several
locations. ($10,100)
• Additional slope area and roadway were identified that needed to be repaired
and stabilized. ($34,531)
Staff worked with the State Office of Emergency Services and FEMA (Federal
Emergency Management Agency) to obtain reimbursement of costs associated with
the design and construction of the retaining wall. However, the project was deemed
ineligible for reimbursement by FEMA after several reviews.
CADocuments and Settings\ilouie\Local Settingffemporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\Y5LQ7PKN\8I700Acceptance.doc
BUDGET IMPACT:
The following are estimated final project costs:
Construction including extra work $342,000
Construction inspection, management and testing 49,000
Total $391,000
There are adequate funds available in the project budget to cover the costs.
EXHIBITS: Resolution, Final Progress Payment, Location Map
c: City Clerk, Hillside Drilling
ictor Vo
Associ e ngineer
CADocwnents and Settings\jlouie\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Out look\Y5LQ7PKN\81700Acceptance.due
1
RESOLUTION NO. -
ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS -MILLS CANYON SEWER AND ACCESS ROAD REPAIRS
PROJECT
BY HILLSIDE DRILLING
CITY PROJECT NO. 81700
RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame,California,and this Council does
hereby find, order and determine as follows:
1. The Director of Public Works of said City has certified the work done by HILLSIDE
DRILLING., under the terms of its contract with the City dated September 18,2006, has been completed
in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the City Council and to the satisfaction of the
Director of Public Works.
2. Said work is particularly described as City Project No. 81700.
3. Said work be and the same hereby is accepted.
Mayor
I,DORIS MORTENSEN,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 day of
, 2007, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
SAA Public Works Directory\Author,By Name\Joanne Louie\RESOLUTION ACCEPTANCE.wpd
CONTRACTOR: HILLSIDE DRILLING CITY OF BURLINGAME DATE: November-21-07
ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 70130 PROGRESS PAYMENT FINAL FOR THE MONTH OF: November-07
POINT RICHMOND, CA 94807 MILLS CANYON SEWER AND ACCESS ROAD REPAIRS PURCHASE ORDER # 10365
TELEPHONE: (510) 234-6532 FAX (510) 234-3131 CITY PROJECT NO. 81700
•«+..x ++++.+..++++....+...+..............I.....+....++.. . «+..........++x ++......... . ..... . ....a........++ +..x........ ......++.++ ++...........++++ + ++«+............ . ....++++•+++++++
ITEM : UNIT BID UNIT BID QUANTITY 8 AMOUNT PREVIOUS AMOUNT
# .+..x+++TEM ai +++ +•ax+•+
DESCRIPTION +•+•+•++ + «+•++PR*CE*{+++ +.QUANTITY+ + SIZE + ++«+AMOUN++«+x + ++TO«DATE
+x ++++PAID.+• +++++++0*DATE
•+++ +++x++«PAID+a««. • THIS PMT.
...r.. .+..+..+.x+
FEMA Category B Work
1 Mobilization & Demobilization $11,469.00 1.00 LS $17,469.00 1.00 100.008 $17,469.00 $17,469.00 $0.00
2 : Construction Survey and Site Preparation $17,500.00 1.00 LS $17,500.00 1.00 100.008 $17,500.00 $17,500.00 $0.00
3 Clearing and Grubbing $20,000.00 1.00 LS $20,000.00 1.00 100.008 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $0.00
4A Concrete Piers $125.00 660.00 : VLF $82,500.00 578.60 87.678 $72,325.00 $72,325.00 $0.00
4B Lagged Sections $50.00 390.00 SF $19,500.00 563.60 144.518 $28,180.00 $28,180.00 $0.00
4C Disposal of Soil $65.00 140.00 CY $9,100.00 173.00 123.578 $11,245.00 $11,245.00 $0.00
5 : Class 1 Permeable Material, in place $400.00 12.00 : TONS $4,800.00 24.00 200.008 : $9,600.00 $9,600.00 $0.00
6 :Asphalt Concrete Restoration Along New Wall $23.00 1,400.00 SF $32,200.00 2,008.00 143.438 $46,184.00 $46,184.00 $0.00
7 Core barrel drilling hours $300.00 15.00 SF $4,500.00 20.00 133.338 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $0.00
8 Restoration, Finish Grading and Revegetation $5,000.00 1.00 : LS $5,000.00 1.00 100.008 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $0.00
9 Concrete Sack Transitions on End of Walls $90.00 30.00 SF $2,700.00 39.50 131.678 $3,555.00 $3,555.00 $0.00
10 Clean, Reconstruct and Line Ditch $22.00 72.00 LF $1,584.00 129.00 179.178 $2,838.00 $2,838.00 $0.00
FEMA Category C Work '
1 Mobilization & Demobilization $2,000.00 1.00 LS $2,000.00 1.00 100.008 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $0.00
2 Construction Survey and Site Preparation $2,000.00 1.00 LS $2,000.00 1.00 100.008 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $0.00
3 :Clearing and Grubbing $3,000.00 1.00 LS $3,000.00 1.00 100.008 : $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $0.00
4A Concrete Piers $140.00 110.00 : VLF $15,400.00 115.50 105.008 $16,170.00 $16,170.00 $0.00
4B Lagged Sections $40.00 80.00 SF $3,200.00 70.00 87.508 $2,800.00 $2,800.00 $0.00
4C Disposal of Soil $65.00 20.00 CY $1,300.00 25.00 125.008 $1,625.00 $1,625.00 $0.00
5 Class 1 Permeable Material, in place $300.00 3.00 : TONS $900.00 9.00 300.008 $2,700.00 $2,700.00 $0.00
6 :Asphalt Concrete Restoration Along New Wall $27.00 400.00 SF $10,800.00 710.00 177.508 $19,170.00 $19,170.00 $0.00
7 :Core barrel drilling hours $300.00 5.00 SF $1,500.00 0.008 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
8 Restoration, Finish Grading and Revegetation $2,000.00 1.00 LS $2,000.00 1.00 100.008 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $0.00
9 Concrete Sack Transitions on End of Walls $90.00 20.00 SF $1,800.00 18.80 94.008 $1,692.00 $1,692.00 $0.00
Alternate Work Items
ALTA1 Asphalt Concrete - Dig-out repairs at Various Loca: $12.00 1,700.00 : TONS $20,400.00 3,828.90 225.238 $45,946.80 $45,946.80 $0.00
ALTA2 Crack Sealing $5,000.00 1.00 : EACH $5,000.00 0.008 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
ALTA3 Slurry Seal $0.65 : 12,640.00 : EACH $8,216.00 0.008 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
ALTA4 Rip Rap Placed Below Culvert Discharge $150.00 20.00 : EACH $3,000.00 20.00 100.008 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $0.00
• ORIGINAL BID : $297,369.00 -
CHANGE ORDERS: '
CO 1
CO 2
CO 3
CHANGE ORDERS __ $0.00
++++++++++++++a+r:++++++a++++a+aa+++++++++++++++++++++++ a r++++++++.:++++ +++++++++a+ :++++a +a++++++++++++++ ++++.+++++++ ++++a+.++++ ++++a++++++++++++ a++a++:+++++.+++a ++•+.++a++a++++++
DATE
SUBTOTAL *`*`** $297,369.00 *******`* `***:`** $341,999.80 $341,999.80 $0.00
PREPARED--BY: November-21-07 LESS FIVE PERCENT RETENTION ********`*` ****`**** ($17,099.99) : ($34,199.98) $17,099.99
+
CHECKED BY: SUBTOTAL`WITHOUT DEDUCTIONS
*******`* `****`*` $324,899.81 $307,799.82 $17,099.99
APPROVED BY AMOUNT DUE FROM CONTRACTOR *****`*`* ** $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
CITY ENGINEER: ++++++++++ +++++++ ++++++++++:+::+ a++++++•+++ +:+++++a++ -------- -------------'- ---------------
APPROVED BY TOTAL THIS PERIOD +*`************ **`****`* ****"** $324,899.81 $307,799.82 $17,099.99
CONSULTANT:
S:fA Pub&c Works DirectoMProjects19733\Progress Payment Is,Sheet(Progress Payment 3) 122008 PAGE 1 of 1
LOCATION MAP
4 jj L
P44 CT
i L
0
MILLS CANYON SEWER
S� AC ROAD REPAIRS
AL
Q %
Agenda 9
Item # _ g
Meeting
BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: Jan 7, 2008
SUBMITTED B
APPROVED 6Y le
,
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
DATE: December 28, 2007
FROM : PUBLIC WORKS
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE SCADA (SUPERVISORY
CONTROL AND DATA ACQUISITION SYSTEM) PROJECT BY
FLUIDIQS, INC. , CITY PROJECT NO. 79400
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached
resolution accepting the SCADA Project by Fluidiqs, Inc., formerly Control
Manufacturing Company, in the amount of $1 ,625,782.
BACKGROUND: SCADA is a computerized data collection and integration system
composed of remote control stations which collect and transmit operational data on
City facilities by radio communication to a central control station . The SCADA
system provides a central control to remotely operate and monitor the functions of
pump station facilities, backup generators, tanks, reservoirs, flow meters, pressure
reducing stations for the water, sewer and storm drain systems.
On December 10, 2002, the Council awarded a construction contract for the SCADA
Project to Control Manufacturing Company in the amount of $973,336 for integrating
nineteen remote stations, central control and programming. Subsequently, the
Council approved two separate contract amendments to add eleven additional
remote stations in the amount of $499,943. The total contract amount approved by
Council is $ 1 ,473,279.
The work included furnishing and installing all equipment, materials, labor, startup
and training, necessary to install, complete in place, a "state of the art" SCADA
system. The project will result in an improved and more efficient maintenance
operation and emergency response to the water, sewer and storm drain system
facilities. In addition , the system provides the capability to historically record, trend
and anticipate system maintenance.
S:\A Public Works Directory\StaffReports\79400Staff ReportSCADA Rev IDecOTdoc
DISCUSSION: The project has been completed satisfactorily in compliance with the
plans and specifications. The final construction cost is $1,625,782 which includes
$152,503 (10.4%) of change order work. The change order work consisted of
additional pump controls, instrumentation, wastewater treatment facility interface
controls, generator controls, enclosure modifications, San Francisco Water
Department turnout controls, additional programming and training.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The following are estimated final project costs:
Construction including Change Orders $1,625,782
Construction inspection project management and testing $ 180,000
Total Project Cost $1,805,782
The project was funded by Water enterprise funds (54%), Sewer Enterprise funds
(31%) and General funds (15%).
EXHIBITS: Resolution, Final Progress Payment
c: City Clerk, Fluidiqs, inc.
(21171 4�"
Eos Doug Bell
Sr, Engineer
SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\79400 Staff ReportSCADA Rev 1 Dec07.doc
RESOLUTION NO. -
ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS - SCADA (SUPERVISORY CONTROL AND DATA
ACQUISITION SYSTEM)PROJECT
BY FLUIDIQS, INC.
CITY PROJECT NO. 79400
RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame,California,and this Council does
hereby find, order and determine as follows:
1. The Director of Public Works of said City has certified the work done by FLUIDIQS, INC.,
under the terms of its contract with the City dated December 10,2002, has been completed in accordance
with the plans and specifications approved by the City Council and to the satisfaction of the Director of
Public Works.
2. Said work is particularly described as City Project No. 79400.
3. Said work be and the same hereby is accepted.
Mayor
I,DORIS MORTENSEN,City Clerk ofthe City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of
, 2007, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
SAA Public Works Directory\Author,By Name\Joanne Louie\RESOLUTION ACCEPTANCE.wpd
Fluidiqs,Inc. CITY OF BURLINGAME DATE: 26-Dec-07
2650 Napa Valley Corporate Dr., FINAL PROGRESS PAYMENT For the month: December 07
Napa,CA 94558 SCADA Integration Project City PO#: 13125, 13450, 13659
707-258-84001258-8465 fax
CMC Job#2926 City Project#79400
UNIT BID UNIT BID QUANTITY % AMOUNT PREVIOUSLY AMOUNT
ITEM DESCRIPTION PRICE QTY SIZE AMOUNT TO DATE PAID TO DATE PAID 11 THIS PAYMENT
Contract Bid Items
1 Phase 1 Contract $ 35,006.00 1 LS $ 973,336.00 1.00 100.0% $ 973,336.00 $ 973,336.00 $ -
2 Phase 2 Contract $ 54,443.00 1 LS $ 234,836.00 1.00 100.0% $ 234,836.00 $ 234,836.00 $ -
3 Phase 3 Contract $ 55,504.00 1 LS $ 265,107.00 1.00 100.0% $ 265,107.00 $ 265,107.00 $ -
Total Original Contract $1,473,279.00 100.00% $ 1,473,279.00 $1,473,279.00 $
Total Change Orders $0.00 100.00% $152,503.00 $118,784.00 $33,719.00
Total Contract(Orig.+CCOs) $1,473,279.00 110.35% $1,625,782.00 $1,592,063.00 $33,719.00
TOTAL ORIGINAL CONTRACT $1,473,279.00 $1,473,279.00 $1,473,279.00 $0.00
TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS $0.001 $152,503.00 $118,784.00 $13,719.00
CONTRACT TOTAL(Original Contract+Change Orders) $1,473,279.00 $1,625,782.00 $1,592,063.00 $33,719.00
LESS 0%RETENTION 0% $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
SUBTOTAL WITHOUT DEDUCTIONS $1,473,279.00 $1,625,782.00 $1,592,063.00 $33,719.00
AMOUNT DUE FROM CONTRACTOR $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
TOTAL THIS PERIOD $1,473,279.00 $1,625,782.00 $1,592,063.00 $33,719.00
PREPARED BY: -Z 7107
CHECKED BY:
APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER:
APPROVED BY CONSULTANT:
CHARGED TO FUND ACCOUNT: 320,326,327 -79400-210
CITY OF BURLINGAME
SCADA Integration Project SUB NAME&ADRESS
CMC Job#2926
0
FINAL PROGRESS PAYMENT
26-Dec-07
TO DATE PRIOR CURRENT
ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY UOM TOTAL QTY AMOUNT 1 AMOUNT 1 AMOUNT
A�� CITY oZ STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM# 9h
BURUNGAME Burlingame Public Library MEETING DATE: 1/7/08
January 2, 2008
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED BY
FROM: Alfred Escoffier, City Librarian APPROVED BY: !�
SUBJECT: Request to Attend Out of State Conference
Recommendation: To approve attendance at out-of-state conference for Librarian Amy Pelman.
Background: The mid-winter Conference of the American Library Association will be held in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania from January 11- January 13th. Librarian Amy Pelman is currently a member
of the ALA's Young Adult Library Services Association (YALSA) programming committee. The main
program will be "Partnerships Advocating for Teens." Amy will also be the library's representative to
the Tutor.com Database program that provides an online tutor for Burlingame and Hillsborough
students.
Amy will also be hearing several teen authors speak about their works and attending the vendor exhibits.
We are proud that Amy is serving in this national capacity to help direct library programming for teens.
Amy is directly working with teens at Burlingame High School, as well as the other high schools in
Burlingame and Hillsborough, helping bring them into the library to take advantage of our many
resources and services and to get them involved in reading for pleasure. This is one age group where we
often lose young people from reading for pleasure.
Budget Impact: The total cost of registration, hotel and transportation costs will not exceed $ 1,200.00.
Funds will not come from the general fund, but rather from the Trustees Special Fund.
r7 POLICE DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME City of Burlingame Jack L.VanEtten
Chief of Police
November,2007
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:
I want to again thank the members of the City Council for their continued support and for approving
the temporary over-hiring of police officer positions in anticipation of retirements in the next fiscal
year.This should allow the police department the opportunity to have"street ready"officers available,
maintain our staffing levels,and save overtime costs when our current officers retire.
I've previously mentioned the police department routinely and continuously receives information from
the public regarding a number of criminal,traffic and parking related matters.All of these matters are
immediately addressed,prioritized(based on the safety of the community),and depending on
staffing levels,handled in the most effective manner possible.When necessary,overtime is used and
(or)additional outside resources are also brought into assist current staff with specific problems or
unusual criminal activities.The police department anticipates returning motorcycle officers back into
traffic to handle traffic and selective enforcement complaints by January,2008.Once again this year,
the police department will pursue a motor officer grant through the state office of traffic safety in
hopes of increasing our motorcycle traffic officers from two to three. I'm happy to report that our
School Resource Officer has returned back to our schools.Two of our four new officers are now
street ready and have been released from our Training Program.The remaining new officers will
probably be ready to be released for solo field duty later in December.
The police department continues in a"transitional stage"of moving from an older,more experienced
department to a younger one.Two new officer trainees were hired and began the 6 month police
academy in September. I swore in the new Police Commander, Edward Wood at the December 3,
2007 City Council meeting.The police department continues to test for police officers,parking
enforcement officers and for communications dispatchers,as we anticipate additional openings in all
of these areas due to retirements.
Moving citations continue to be down from last year,but with officers recently receiving training with
radar,citations have gradually increased for the month of November,2007.This has now been a
consistent increase for the last 2 months in a row. Parking citation totals continue to show increases
over last year during the same time period. I've also included the most recent selective traffic
enforcement areas related to addressing traffic related complaints in our community that are routinely
being monitored by our patrol officers.This information also includes the types of violations that are
occurring.The police department is constantly monitoring the statistical information at all selective
enforcement sites for future enforcement and reference.As mentioned,several officers have recently
attended radar school and they will be assigned to selective speed enforcement(as needed in some
1111 Trousdale Drive-Post Office Box 551-Burlingame,California 94011-0551-(650)777-4100-Fax (650)697-8130
areas) to address speeding vehicle concerns by our residents. Citizen Speed Watch is about ready to
begin and we are moving forward with the purchase of new portable radios and a repeater to
enhance our communications for officers in the south portion of Burlingame.
The police department continues to reach out and ask the public to help fund the purchase of
additional police K-9's. The Burlingame community has contributed greatly and I'm proud to say that
the police department will reach its goal to place additional K-9's back into the police department. The
K-9's will help protect our community and our dedicated police officers, as well as provide tracking
and drug detection.
The police department completed a recent Neighborhood Watch presentation at the Recreation
Center to better educate our community about ways to better protect themselves and their property.
The information contained in the attached monthly police department report is displayed in both
numbers and percentages. Remember that the percentages of certain crimes might've dramatically
increased or decreased in percentage (compared to the previous month or year). When reviewing the
police department report also consider the actual numbers of various crime categories in conjunction
with the percentages. Even though the percentages may have increased or decreased, the actual
number change may be slight or negligible. Feel free to contact me at anytime if you have any
questions or concerns about the numbers or percentages.
As always, I continue to be so proud of the dedication and sacrifices made by all of the employees of
the police department. Our employees work tirelessly day and night (and place themselves in harm's
way) to protect and serve the citizens in our great community. On behalf of all our employees, I thank
you for your continued support of the Burlingame Police Department.
Kindly feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Respectfully
ack 2Van �
tten
Burlingame Police Department
MEMORANDUM
To: All Patrol Personnel
From: Sgt. Williams
Date: 12/14/2007
Subject: Selective Enforcement
As time permits,please advise your teams to attempt selective enforcement in the listed
areas:
Location Violation Description Time of offense Date Reported
Calif. Dr. 22350 VC Speeding Commute hours 12/13/07
El Camino 22350 VC Speeding All hours 10/31/07
(n/of Broadway)
Crossway 22350 VC Speeding AM Commute 10/25/07
Douglas Ave. 22350 VC Speeding AM/PM Commute 10/11/07
Howard Ave. 22350 VC Speeding All hours 10/11/07
(East end)
Howard(w/b)@ 22101(d)VC Turn required All hours 9/30/07
Cal.
Carolan Ave. 22350 VC Speeding All hours 9/29/07
Davis Dr. 21950 VC yield to ped Morning 9/26/07
(1800 blk.)
Carolan@North 22450 VC Stop sign School commute 9/17/07
Lane
Toyon&Morre1122350 VC Speeding Morning 9/4/07
1400 Bellevue 22350 VC Speeding All hours 8/22/07
Hillside Dr. 22350 VC Speeding All hours 8/25/07
Howard/ECR 21950 VC yield to ped All hours 8/01/07
Blgm Ave. 21200 VC Bicycle viol. All hours 7/26/07
13.52.100 CO (riding on sidewalk)
12-11-07 SUMMARY OF PART ONE OFFENSES PAGE: 1
FOR: NOVEMBER, 2007
Prev
Last Act Act YTD YTD
Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD... YTD... Change % Change
Murder and Nonnegligent Manslaughter 0 0 1 0 1
Manslaughter by Negligence 0 0 0 0 0
Rape By Force 0 0 4 6 -2 -33.33
Attempt to Commit Forcible Rape 0 0 0 0 0
Robbery Firearm 0 0 8 5 3 60.00
Robbery Knife 0 0 3 2 1 50.00
Robbery Other Dangerous Weapon 0 0 2 2 0 0.00
Robbery Strong-Arm 0 1 8 19 -11 -57.89
Assault - Firearm 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00
Assault - Knife 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00
Assault - Other Dangerous Weapon 2 1 19 25 -6 -24.00
Assault - Hands,Fists,Feet 0 0 6 10 -4 -40.00
Assault - Other (Simple) 11 25 142 176 -34 -19.32
Burglary - Forcible Entry 4 4 44 59 -15 -25.42
Burglary - Unlawful Entry 6 2 63 79 -16 -20.25
Burglary - Attempted Forcible Entry 2 2 5 5 0 0.00
Larceny Pocket-Picking 0 0 0 0 0
Larceny Purse-Snatching 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00
Larceny Shoplifting 1 3 30 40 -10 -25.00
Larceny From Motor Vehicle 31 14 219 230 -11 -4.78
Larceny Motor Veh Parts Accessories 12 9 125 115 10 8.70
Larceny Bicycles 4 3 22 22 0 0.00
Larceny From Building 6 9 68 113 -45 -39.82
Larceny From Any Coin-Op Machine 2 1 13 11 2 18.18
Larceny All Other 12 1 89 56 33 58.93
Motor Vehicle Theft Auto 1 4 76 70 6 8.57
Motor Vehicle Theft Bus 1 5 4 17 -13 -76.47
Motor Vehicle Theft Other 1 0 3 9 -6 -66.67
------- ------ ------ ------
96 84 954 1,075
96 84 954 1,075
2-11-07 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 1 +
CITY REPORT FOR: NOVEMBER, 2007
Prev
Last Act Act YTD YTD
'rime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD. .. YTD... Change % Change
.11 Other Offenses 27 26 347 371 -24 -6.47
.nimal Abuse 0 0 1 0 1
.nimal Nuisance 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00
.rson 0 0 10 34 -24 -70.59
.ssists to Outside Agencies 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycle Violations 0 0 0 0 0
Bigamy 0 0 0 0 0
comb Offense 0 0 0 0 0
tomb Threat 0 0 1 0 1
3ribery 0 0 0 0 0
:heck Offenses 0 0 4 13 -9 -69.23
:hild Neglect/prot custody 9 3 77 51 26 50.98
1omputer Crime 0 0 0 0 0
:onspiracy 0 0 0 0 0
:redit Card Offenses 1 0 7 2 5 250.00
;ruelty to Dependent Adult 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00
:urfew and Loitering Laws 0 0 2 0 2
)eath Investigation 4 3 28 39 -11 -28.21
)isorderly Conduct 0 0 5 13 -8 -61.54
)river's License Violations 0 0 2 4 -2 -50.00
)riving Under the Influence 7 6 70 59 11 18.64
)rug Abuse Violations 0 2 47 34 13 38.24
)rug/Sex Registrants/Violations 0 0 0 3 -3 -100.00
)runkeness 4 7 60 72 -12 -16.67
Embezzlement 0 3 3 7 -4 -57.14
Escape 0 0 0 0 0
Extortion 0 0 1 0 1
False Police Reports 0 0 2 2 0 0.00
False Reports of Emergency 0 0 0 4 -4 -100.00
Fish and Game Violations 0 0 1 0 1
Forgery and Counterfeiting 2 2 30 35 -5 -14.29
Found Property 7 10 68 65 3 4.62
Fraud 1 1 23 21 2 9.52
'ambling 0 0 0 0 0
3arrassing Phone Calls 0 3 44 43 1 2.33
2-11-07 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 2
CITY REPORT FOR: NOVEMBER, 2007
Prev
Last Act Act YTD YTD
.rime Classification.................... Current Year. . YTD... YTD... Change % Change
[it and Run Accidents 4 3 45 41 4 9.76
:mpersonation 2 1 10 5 5 100.00
:ncest 0 0 0 0 0
:ndecent Exposure 1 0 9 9 0 0.00
:ntimidating a Witness 0 0 0 0 0
,idnapping 0 0 0 0 0
,ewd Conduct 0 0 1 1 0 0.00
,iquor Laws 0 0 1 3 -2 -66.67
,ittering/Dumping 0 0 0 0 0
4arijuana Violations 2 3 30 21 9 42.86
4ental Health Cases 6 4 88 83 5 6.02
4issing Person 1 4 52 45 7 15.56
4issing Property 10 7 84 90 -6 -6.67
4unicipal Code Violations 6 9 84 73 11 15.07
4arcotics Sales/Manufacture 0 1 1 4 -3 -75.00
)ffenses Against Children 0 0 9 7 2 28.57
)ther Assaults 11 25 142 176 -34 -19.32
)ther Juvenile Offenses 4 1 15 3 12 400.00
)ther Police Service 1 2 28 43 -15 -34.88
Pandering for immoral purposes 0 0 0 0 0
Parole Violations 1 0 4 4 0 0.00
Perjury 0 0 0 0 0
Possession of Burglary Tools 0 0 0 0 0
Possession of drug paraphernalia 0 0 0 0 0
Possession of obscene literature;picture 0 0 0 0 0
Probation Violations 1 0 5 10 -5 -50.00
Prostitution and Commercial Vice 0 0 2 6 -4 -66.67
Prowling 0 0 3 8 -5 -62.50
Resisting Arrest 0 0 4 5 -1 -20.00 -
Restraining Orders 1 0 2 1 1 100.00
Runaways (Under 18) 0 0 2 0 2
Sex Offenses 1 0 2 3 -1 -33.33
Sex Offenses against Children 0 0 1 2 -1 -50.00
Sodomy 0 0 0 0 0
Stalking 0 0 0 0 0
.2-11-07 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 3
CITY REPORT FOR: NOVEMBER, 2007
Prev
Last Act Act YTD YTD
:rime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD... YTD... Change Is Change
Statutory Rape 0 0 0 0 0
Stolen Property;Buying;Receiving;Possess 1 2 9 14 -5 -35.71
Suspended License 2 5 25 39 -14 -35.90
Pax Evasion 0 0 0 0 0
Perrorist Threats 1 0 10 5 5 100.00
Cowed Vehicle 32 31 382 348 34 9.77
Prespassing 2 3 12 12 0 0.00
Pruants/Incorrigible Juva 0 0 1 0 1
JS Mail Crimes 0 0 0 0 0
✓agrancy 0 0 0 0 0
✓andalism 19 20 207 251 -44 -17.53
✓ehicle Code Violations 0 1 21 13 8 61.54
✓iolation of Court Order 4 1 15 14 1 7.14
darrants - Felony 0 3 16 15 1 6.67
darrants - Misd 9 4 62 59 3 5.08
deapons;Carrying,Possessing 0 0 11 11 0 0.00
delfare Fraud 0 0 0 0 0
------- ------ ------ ------
184 196 2,228 2,300
184 196 2,228 2,300
12-11-07 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF CITATIONS PAGE : 1
CITY REPORT
FOR: NOVEMBER, 2007
Prev
Last Act Act
Crime Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current Year. . YTD. . . YTD. . .
Parking Citations 3440 2 , 501 42 , 251 33 , 624
Moving Citations 203 195 1 , 951 2 , 237
------- ------ ------ ---- --
3643 2 , 696 44 , 202 35 , 861
------- ------ ------ ------
------- ------ ------ ------
3643 2 , 696 44 , 202 35, 861
BURLINGAME
Officer Productivity. . . . generated on 12/11/2007 at 02 : 20 : 19 PM
Reported On: All Officers Report Range : 11/01/2007 to 11/30/2007
Data Type Reported on: PARKING
Valid % All Voids % All
officer: ID: Cnt Valid Cnt Voids Valid
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALVISO 355 736 22.36 22 40.00 97.10
DOTSON 509 937 28.47 10 18.18 98.94
FEITELBERG 508 834 25.34 13 23.64 98.47
GARRETT 501 177 5.38 6 10.91 96.72
SMITH 654 607 18.44 4 7.27 99.35
Total 3291 55
Page 1 of 1
Comcast Cable
Comcast® P.O.Box 147
San Ramon,CA 94583
Office:925.973.7000
December 10, 2007 Fax:925.901.7015
mm.comcast.com
Mr. Jesus Nava
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Mr. Jesus Nava:
As you may already be aware, it is our goal at Comcast Cable to ensure that your
office remains informed of the programming services and price plans we offer to
our subscribers who reside in your community.
As a courtesy to your office we are sending you this letter to inform you of a price
adjustment to our Pay-Per-View movies.
Effective December 11, 2007, the prices for some Pay-Per-View movie releases
are changing. The price for On Demand and PPV "New Releases" will increase
from $3.99 to $4.99 and the price for On Demand International Film Channel will
increase from $5.99 to $6.99.
Customers will be informed of the price adjustment via a message on their billing
statement prior to December 11, 2007.
If you should have any questions or concerns regarding the matter, please feel free
to contact vour local Government Affairs Director, Lee-Ann Peling at (415) 715-
0549.
Sincerely,
jj
Vl�'I
Lit Giv ns-Russell
Government Affairs
Franchise Compliance Manager
Bay Market
Ccomicast Comcast Cable
® P.O.Box 5147
San Ramon,CA 94583
Office:925.973.7000
December 18, 2007 Fax:925.901,7015
www.comcast.com
Mr. Jesus Nava
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Mr. Jesus Nava:
As you may already be aware, it is our goal at Comcast to ensure that you office remains
informed of the programming services we offer to our customers who reside in your community.
In pursuit of attaining our goal we are sending you this letter as our notice of intention to adjust
the current programming.
Effective January 9, 2008 Comcast will add the KTVU-DTLAT channel to our channel lineup.
The programming will be added to channels 187 and 622 on the Limited Basic level of service.
KTVU is picking up LATV as a multicast channel—this means that our customers will be
required to rent a Digital Control Terminal in order to view the programming.
LATV is the nation's first Latino bilingual music and entertainment network distributed via
digital multicast and is a pioneer in bicultural youth broadcasting. LATV has been on the air in
the Los Angeles market since 2001. The network is ad-supported and offers original, exclusive
and live programming featuring top performers in the Latin music world. Targeting the 12-34
year old Latino, LATV's programming bouquet offers a range of content that include multi-
genre music, lifestyle and entertainment.
Customers will be informed of the addition via a message on their Digital Control Terminal.
If you should have any questions or concern regarding the matter please feel free to contact your
local Government Attairs Director, Lee-Ann Peling at (415) 715-0549.
Sincerely,
Mitzi Givens-Russell
Government Affairs
Franchise Compliance Manager
Bay Market