Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PR - 2005.04.21MEETING MINUTES Regular Meeting of the Burlingame Parks & Recreation Commission L' Thursday, April 21, 2005 The regular meeting of the Burlingame Parks & Recreation Commission was called to order by Chairman Larios at 7:00 pm at Burlingame City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Erickson, Heathcote, Larios, Lawson, Muller Commissioners Absent: Dittman, Schreurs Staff Present: City Manager Nantell, Parks & Recreation Director Schwartz Others Present: Pouneh Almasi (1604 Davis Drive); Mike Blondino (Staff; Marge Colapietre (367 El Paseo, Millbrae); Grant Gilliam (2305 Ray Drive); Liz Harrelson (Reporter); Greg Milano (Staff); Terry Nagel (City Council); John Root (728 Crossway) MINUTES The minutes of the March 17, 2005 Regular Commission meeting were approved as submitted. PUBLIC COMMENTS — None The agenda was adjusted by Chairman Larios to allow more members of the public be present for the shared Parks & Recreation services agenda item. OLD BUSINESS A. Pershing Park Playground Rehabilitation — Schwartz reported that the work will begin next week on the rehabilitation of Pershing Park's playground and should be completed in late May. REPORTS A. Staff— Director Schwartz reported on the following: 1. A committee of City Managers will be meeting with representatives from San Mateo County to discuss a potential sales tax proposal that would generate a revenue source for county parks agencies. There was discussion over the potential split of funds between the different jurisdictions, the maintenance of effort and sales tax process. 2. Registration is underway for the Summer recreation programs. Staff accepted $137,000 of registrations on the first day of sign-ups. 3. An offer has been made to a Tree Crew Maintenance Worker applicant and he will begin work on April 25th Parks & Recreation Commission Minutes April 21, 2005 — page 2 4. Pershing Park playground construction will begin next week and is scheduled to be completed in June. 5. Pathways at Bayside Park have been repaired. 6. Registration for summer recreation programs is now on -going, with registrations being accepted via the internet. The volume of registrants shut down the City phone system and overloaded the computer system for the first two hours, but the system is back up and operating. Over $135,000 of class registration was taken on the first day of registration. 7. 3rd annual Burlingame -Millbrae Community Golf Tournament — May 23rd 8. Art in the Park will be held in Washington Park on June 1 lth & 12th 9. The attached monthly finance report indicates approximately $100,000 more Recreation revenue than the same period of the previous fiscal year. OLD BUSINESS B. Shared Parks & Recreation Services with Millbrae — Manager Nantell gave an overview of the proposal to share Recreation services with the City of Millbrae. The two cities have shared a Parks & Recreation Director for the past two years and should move forward with a long-term decision. Although finances are a key, this is not only driven by financial issues and should not be considered as a short "IN term money issue. Nantell cited several examples of issues in the County, such as the "woefully inadequate infrastructure" and $30 million a year that is spent on salaries for City Managers and Department Heads. The impact on citizens and employees of shared services for the short-term is not worth the struggle. Nantell discussed the benefits of Recreation programming specialists, rather than generalists. Similar to doctors, the recreation now has more professionals specializing in one area of recreation programming to improve the quality of the services provided. Department heads need to be up to date on the rules and regulations of their professional areas and cannot also be expected to be experts in HR regulations. Such specialization can exist with larger program staffs. Nantell spoke of the efficiencies that could be gained through a merger, citing brochure productions and budget preparation as two examples. He noted the amount of time spent by the Director in meetings each month that could be reduced. Becoming more efficient will allow the staff to be more creative in their programming for the community, but also stated that staff needs to balance control with the quality of services. Schwartz pointed out several examples where a larger staff serving the two cities could be more efficient. Having two staff members attend league meetings representing two middle schools in Burlingame and Millbrae is not as efficient as having one staff member attend the same staff meeting representing three middle ''1 schools in South San Francisco. L Parks & Recreation Commission Minutes April 21, 2005 — page 3 Nantell discussed the reasons such mergers do not happen, such as loss of control, residents wanting their own identity or the loss of contact with staff if the community is expanded. He stated that there are always trade-offs; that things are not necessarily better or worse, just different. Commissioner Lawson asked for a more specific definition of what we are now considering. Schwartz replied that the current proposal only includes merging the Recreation Divisions of the two cities. Because of the difference in operations and types of special projects between the two Parks Divisions, they are not being considered at this time, but nothing in the current proposal would preclude a future Parks merger. Commissioner Heathcote stated that he has attended all of the meetings on this topic so far and has many concerns including loss of personnel, which City Council would oversee the merged operation, would commissions be merged, are the benefits the same for each city and does a larger staff mean better programs. He also said that he does not think the salary for the Director of the merged Department should be reduced from the current level. Heathcote asked if the pay scales of the two cities are the same and stated that any merger should not focus upon potential savings, but on the quality of the programs. Commissioner Muller asked if this merger may result in a loss of front office personnel. Schwartz stated that both departments have already lost staff to budget reductions and no further positions will be lost because of this merger. However, both cities still have difficult budget situations in the future and may face further reductions. Staff will need to ensure that any budget reductions in one city do not affect the services provided to the other city. Muller asked how policies between the two divisions would be set, such as equating the prices of classes and senior citizens discounts. Schwartz replied that these decisions would be made by staff recommendations to whichever commission oversees the merged division. Muller asked how this arrangement could be undone by either party, if need be. Nantell stated that this is fully described in fire merger where it would be more difficult because of the capital items shared between the cities. Schwartz stated that this would be more difficult for the parks division because of the equipment that would be purchased for the cities to share. Also, if the two cities were ever to jointly construct a facility — such as a gymnasium and/or teen center — provisions for use and terms of use would need to be spelled out in the agreement. Muller also asked about resident/non-resident fees and the number of people that would sign up for classes. Schwartz replied that these would be other items that staff and the commission would have to discuss in more detail. Commissioner Erickson illustrated the need to look down the road 30 years and plan for the future. Parks & Recreation Commission Minutes April 21, 2005 — page 4 Chairman Larios is not keen on the idea of a merger. Larios asked if Burlingame would be supplementing Millbrae and stated that this merger would mean our top Parks and Recreation administrator would not always be available because of commitments to Millbrae. He asked how the benefits of such a merger compare for each city and said that Burlingame is doing things so well, others are attaching themselves to us. He shared a concern of our staff resources being taken away. Nantell agreed that we need to maintain the quality of the programs, but pointed out that Millbrae's recreation operation is slightly more efficient than Burlingame's. He stated that we are all good people doing good things, but Larios' concern of subsidizing an under -funded community is one shared by some council members. Larios also expressed concern over separating the Parks and Recreation divisions. Schwartz agreed with the cooperation between the two divisions, cited the improved coordination since the Burlingame Parks Department was relocated to the Recreation Center several years ago and pointed out that Burlingame's Parks and Recreation divisions would remain in the same department. In response to Larios' question about how much control would a consortium have over each city, Nantell explained that each city would have control over their assets, but would contribute to a joint budget. 1 Commissioner Heathcote commented that the Millbrae Parks & Recreation Commission requested that the City Managers and Director draft a proposal and bring it back to the Commissions. Nantell pointed out the "Catch-22" that, if such a proposal had been drafted and presented, some would complain that it was done without public input. He also relayed the frustration of staff, citing one Supervisor who exclaimed "just make a decision". Heathcote said the proposal should have a two to five year test cycle and that he has more confidence of Millbrae's ability to recover after seeing City Manager Ralph Jaeck's 5-year plan. Schwartz discussed the process to date and planned. A process planning meeting was held in March with Burlingame Council members Galligan and O'Mahony, Millbrae Council members Hershman and Quigg, City Managers Jaeck and Nantell, Director Schwartz and approximately 20 members of the public. The Council members asked staff to meet with staff, commissions and the public and develop a timeline for the process. Last week, the Managers and Director held meetings with staff from each Recreation Division. The Millbrae Parks & Recreation Commission meeting earlier this week discussed the potential merger, as will the Millbrae Senior Advisory Committee meeting on April 27a'. The schedule after that was left open to take into account the progress at the Commission meetings. Schwartz suggested that staff draft a proposal and bring it to each Commission for their May meetings. Larios suggested that the May meeting be a joint meeting of the Commission. Heathcote expressed concern for —1 a joint meeting, stating that the Millbrae Commission did not get far into the Parks & Recreation Commission Minutes April 21, 2005 — page 5 discussion because of the lack of details and the feeling of being betrayed by the Millbrae Council in the past. He wondered if the Millbrae Commission needed more time before having a joint meeting. After discussion, it was agreed that Schwartz will work with the Commission Chairmen to arrange a joint meeting at a time/place/location that is acceptable to both. Chairman Larios then opened the discussion to members of the public. Marge Colapietre stated that she has been a Millbrae resident for 35 years and owns a small business in Millbrae. She spoke of the huge volunteer effort in Millbrae and agreed with Heathcote that Millbrae's Commission did not get far in the discussion; that Burlingame's meeting was much more efficient. Millbrae is a tiny community that has accomplished a lot because of their volunteers and asked the Burlingame Commissioners not to discount the fact that Millbrae residents are personally invested in their community. She pointed out that things in Millbrae got bad because of the City's management; that past Councils micro -managed the community and City staff. She stated that before a joint meeting is attempted, the Millbrae Commission needs to be brought up to par, but the meeting should be held sooner rather than later. Nantell spoke about the differences in the City Administrator and City Manager forms of government — pointing out that Millbrae's current City Council made a switch to the Manager style only a few months ago. John Root said that he has lived in Burlingame for 28 years. He complimented the Millbrae City Manager's presentation of the five year plan and stated that the Director appears to be held in high esteem in Millbrae. He likes the idea of the merger on the face of it, but said that proposed savings would be important to many Burlingame residents. He suggested a series of FAA's would be helpful to the Commissioners and the public; that people need to see something in writing. Larios stated that a merger needs to have benefit for Millbrae as well as Burlingame. He asked staff to arrange for the next meeting and pointed out that the joint meeting would save time, avoid a duplication of questions and would stimulate the discussion. Colapietre said Millbrae has been told that this merger is because of the money situation and thought the first meeting would be to learn how to cut costs. Millbrae does not want the topic to drag on, but, at the Millbrae Commission meeting, Jaeck suggested that time is not a factor. NEW BUSINESS - None Parks & Recreation Commission Minutes April 21, 2005 — page 6 REPORTS B. Commissioners - None NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the Parks & Recreation Commission is scheduled to be held on Thursday, May 19, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at Burlingame City Hall, but may be rescheduled to meet with the Millbrae Parks & Recreation Commission. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 9:22pm. Respectfully submitted, Randy Schwartz Director of Parks & Recreation ---4 -"y