Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - PR - 2005.05.17M SO JOINT MEETING BETWEEN THE BURLINGAME AND MILLBRAE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSIONS Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 7:00 p.m. Millbrae Community Center 477 Lincoln Circle, Millbrae, CA 94030 (650) 259-2360 AGENDA CALL TO ORDER /ROLL CALL Burlingame Commissioners: Dittman, Erickson, Heathcote, Larios, Lawson, Muller, Schreurs Millbrae Commissioners: Bauer, Grossman, Lustenberger, Lynch, Mosqueda , Mutto, Shamieh II PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is the opportunity for members of the public to address the Commission regarding items not otherwise on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act prohibits the Commission from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. The Chairperson may limit speakers to three minutes each. III OLD BUSINESS A. Shared Recreation Services IV REPORTS A. Staff B. Commissioners V ADJOURNMENT Next Meetings: Burlingame Parks & Recreation Commission: June 16, 2005 — 7:00pm Burlingame City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame Millbrae Parks & Recreation Commission: June 21, 2005 — 7:00pm Millbrae Community Center, 477 Lincoln Circle, Millbrae NOTICE: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities should contact the Millbrae Parks & Recreation Department at (650) 259-2360 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the agenda packet is available for review at the Millbrae Community Center, 477 Lincoln Circle, Millbrae, or the ,Burlingame Recreation Center, 850 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame, during normal office hours. r AGREEMENT POINTS For Shared Recreation Services Between the Cities of Burlingame and Millbrae May 9, 2005 Draft Time Frame 1. Three year agreement, with additional three years extensions. 2. Written notice to amend or terminate Agreement to be given by Dec 31't and effective July 1't of any year. City Responsibilities 3. Each City to provide and maintain existing facilities for recreational programs. 4. Each City to provide and maintain existing working offices. 5. Each City to maintain existing Agreements with school districts for recreational opportunities. 6. Each City will retain ownership of property and facilities. 7. Provisions to be developed for future joint ownership of property and/or facilities. 8. Joint hold harmless/indemnification clauses and insurance policies for personnel, facilities, vehicles, etc. Recreation Budgets 9. Split costs and revenues by predetermined percentage, based on historical percentage of funding. 10. Prepare annual report and budget for review by both City Managers. 11. City Managers will consider adjustments to funding formula annually as part of budget process. 12. Special funds (donation accounts, special revenue accounts, trust funds, etc) to be continued independently of jointly funded recreation budget. 13. Staff will work with City Managers to ensure that an inability on the part of either City to fully fund the Recreation programs will not affect the services provided to the other City. Recreation Programs 14. Programs will be open to residents of both Cities at the established resident rate. 15. Programs designated by Director as impacted (examples: preschool or senior special events) will be initially open only to residents of host City. Residents of other City will have next priority for registration before program is opened to residents of other cities. 16. 50% of any expense savings or excess revenues to be placed in a trust fund for capital outlay for the Recreation programs. 17. New non -self supporting programs will be offered to both Cities. If only one City approves program, that City will need to fund program and will retain control. 18. Director, staff representatives, City Managers and other personnel from each City will form transition team to address questions on finances, personnel, computer equipment, program details and other items. Personnel 19. Regular staff to remain employees of existing City for at least first three years. 20. Integrate regular staffs, with no lay-offs due to merger. 21. Commitment to bring salaries & benefits in line with each other of comparable positions. 22. Areas of responsibility & site location for recreation staff to be determined by Director. 23. Director selected by City Managers will have full responsibility and complete authority to direct, supervise and assign recreation personnel of each City. Adjunct Services 24. The parties agree that a 15% administration fee will be paid to the city providing administrative services (legal, financial, FIR, etc). Commissions / Council 25. Establish ad hoc committee comprised of two Parks & Recreation Commissioners from each City to meet quarterly during initial year of recreation to assist with merger of policies. 26. Staff to attend Council, Commission and Committee meetings, as required by agenda items or minimum of quarterly. OR Staff Meeting Notes regarding the Potential Merge of Millbrae and Burlingame Parks and Recreation Departments `- (Notes from April 12 Front Office Staff meeting and April 13 Program Staff meeting) Thoughts General Thoughts • We have been sharing well (Softball/Golf Tourney/Golf classes/Legos/Transportation) • Had fear 2 years ago, now ready to go w/ merger • We are never going back to our little Rec. department • City of 50,000 is small • People have fear - Change is not easily accepted • Need to focus on programs • Recreation and the communities are 99% same • Residents are territorial & afraid of losing their identity • Frustration at the loss of Director's time • Potential for revenue growth w/ increased visibility • The rules & policies need to be combined • There may be a need for more staff Thoughts on Benefits • Burlingame has a strong program - Millbrae can benefit more by working with us • The financial benefits not worth hassle • Haven't seen benefits for Burlingame - all seem to be for Millbrae because Millbrae is short staffed Thoughts on Efficiencies • Could use Mills' pool for Summer programs • We are not working in our areas of expertise/specialties - This would benefit both communities • Millbrae will need to reorganize w/o Director- that will be less efficient • We should continue to share with each other after separating the two cities • Sharing often creates more work - merging to become more efficient • Small may not be efficient, but big is not better • There is negligible duplication in the current operation Thoughts on Participants • Preschool parents would go wild if Village program was open to Millbrae residents at the same time as Burlingame residents • Services will get watered down • Loss of connection with community `- Concerns Concerns of a General Nature • One or two finance departments • How will we set up a system of communications • What will happen 6 months from now? Concerns of Participants • Who gets registration priorities • Can people register for classes in both communities • Will there still be non-res fees for those in the other city or will we switch to single fees? Concerns of Staff • Who will we be employed by • What if Millbrae goes to 2.7% at 55 • Will there be pay equity • Are there union concerns • Right now we are comfortable where we are — why do we have to change • Where will work stations be Concerns of Pro rams • Classes: more or same number • Who will handle program areas (softball, teens, camps, teens, etc.)? • Where and when will these programs be held? Timeline for Discussion of Shared Recreation Services L Between Burlingame and Millbrae Meeting of Council Committee March 23rd Joint Meeting of Recreation Support Staffs April 12th Joint Meeting of Recreation Program Staffs April 13th Meeting of Millbrae Parks & Recreation Commission April 19th Meeting of Burlingame Parks & Recreation Commission April 21st Meeting of Millbrae Recreation Staff May 12th Joint Meeting of Parks & Recreation Commissions May 17th Meeting of Burlingame Recreation Staff May 18th Meeting w/ Union or Bargaining Groups Week of May 23rd Proposed Meeting of Council Committee May 23 - June 3 Anticipated Date to Bring to Burlingame Council June 20 Anticipated Date to Bring to Millbrae Council June 14 or 28 (updated May 9, 2005 - rs) Commission Meeting Notes regarding the Potential Merge of Millbrae and Burlingame Parks and Recreation Departments (Notes from the Millbrae Parks & Recreation Commission meeting on April 19 and the Burlingame Parks & Recreation Commission meeting on April 21) Thoughts • Cities have shared a 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 term money issue • Comparision to larger cities that provide different programs at more than one community center • Benefits of Recreation programming specialists, rather than generalists • Efficiencies that could be gained through a merger will allow staff to be more creative in their programming for the community • A merger needs to have benefit for both cities Concerns Concerns of a General Nature • Timeline • Loss of control • Separating the Parks and Recreation divisions Concerns of a Political Nature • Which City Council would oversee the merged operation • Would commissions be merged • How much control would a consortium have over each city • How can this arrangement could be undone by either party, if need be • Would Burlingame be supplementing Millbrae • Are the benefits the same for each city • How do the benefits of such a merger compare for each city • Oversight • How budget reductions in one city affect the services provided to the other city Concerns of Participants • Resident/non-resident fees • Priority to sign up for classes • Residents wanting their own identity • Loss of community contact with staff • Does a larger staff mean better programs Concerns of Staff • Loss of personnel - - Are staff resources being taken away - - Program staff or front office staff • Efficiencies Concerns of Programs • Logistics • Budget - - Any merger should not focus upon potential savings, but on the quality of the programs 0 How policies between the two divisions would be set, such as equating the prices of classes and senior citizens discounts