HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2019.12.02• City of Burlingame BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Meeting Agenda - Final
City Council
Monday, December 2, 2019 6:00 PM Council Chambers
STUDY SESSION - 6:00 p.m. - Council Chambers
a. Discussion of Short -Term Rentals
Attachments: Staff Report
Note: Public comment is permitted on all action items as noted on the agenda below and in the
non -agenda public comment provided for in item 7.
Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and
hand it to staff, although the provision of a name, address or other identifying information is
optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in
light of the number of anticipated speakers.
All votes are unanimous unless separately noted for the record.
1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m. - Council Chambers
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION
5. UPCOMING EVENTS
6. PRESENTATIONS
a. Presentation by Gatepath
b. Update from HIP Housing
C. Update from the San Mateo County Mosquito and Vector Control District
d. Information on the upcoming US Census
City of Burlingame Page 1 Printed on 1112712019
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final December 2, 2019
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON -AGENDA
Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. Members of the public wishing to
suggest an item for a future Council agenda may do so during this public comment period. The Ralph M.
Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter
that is not on the agenda.
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent calendar items are usually approved in a single motion, unless pulled for separate discussion.
Any member of the public wishing to comment on an item listed here may do so by submitting a speaker
slip for that item in advance of the Council's consideration of the consent calendar.
a. Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes for November 18, 2019
Attachments: Meeting Minutes
b. Adoption of a Resolution Reiecting All Bids Received for the 1740 Rollins Road and 842
Cowan Road Pump Stations Repairs, City Project No. 85830
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
Bid Summary
Project Location Map
C. Adoption of a Resolution Accepting Grant Funds from the California Libraries Cultivating
Race. Equity, and Inclusion Initiative Grant Program
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
d. Adoption of a Resolution Accepting Grant Funds from the Burlingame Library Foundation
for Community Room Upgrades
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Public Comment)
a. Adoption of a Resolution Approving and Levying 2020 San Mateo County Tourism
Business Improvement District Assessments on Hotel Businesses within the District
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Public Comment)
City of Burlingame Page 2 Printed on 1112712019
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final December 2, 2019
a. "Sea Change Burlingame" Summary Presentation
Attachments: Staff Report
Bayfront Reaches Diagram
Adaptation Photo Renderings
Road Map
Work Plan
Presentation Slides
b. Landscape Maintenance of California Drive from Lincoln Avenue to Murchison Drive for
Bike Lane Safety
Attachments: Staff Report
Map of California Drive from Lincoln Avenue to Murchison Drive
C. Discussion of Programs to Assist Renters Facing No -Cause Evictions and Authorization
to Provide Supplemental Funding to Samaritan House for this Purpose
Attachments: Staff Report
d. Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the City of Burlingame to Become a Noncharter
Additional Member of the California Community Housing Agency (CalCHA)
Attachments: Staff Report
Memorandum - Considerations
Resolution
Attachment A — CaICHA Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement
Attachment B — CaICHA Additional Member Signature Page
Attachment C — CaICHA Purchase Option Agreement
Attachment D — CaICHA No Liability Letter
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council Members report on committees and activities and make announcements.
a. Mayor Colson's Committee Report
Attachments: Committee Report
12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The agendas, packets, and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Safety & Parking
Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks & Recreation Commission, and Library Board of Trustees
are available online at www.burlingame.org.
City of Burlingame Page 3 Printed on 1112712019
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final December 2, 2019
14. 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 8:00a.m.
to 5:00p.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 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - Next regular City Council Meeting
Monday, December 16, 2019
VIEW REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING ONLINE AT www.burlingame.org/video
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda
will be made available for public inspection at the Water Office counter at City Hall at 501 Primrose
Road during normal business hours.
City o/ Burlingame Page 4 Printed on 11/27/2019
'RLI -
BA UME
REPORT
9r
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: December 2, 2019
AGENDA ITEM NO:
MEETING DATE
Study Session
December 2, 2019
From: Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director — (650) 558-7253
Kathleen Kane, City Attorney — (650) 558-7263
Subject Discussion of Short -Term Rentals
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council discuss residential short-term rentals and provide
direction regarding any future work on the issue.
BACKGROUND
Residential short-term rentals are defined as dwelling units that are rented for periods lasting
fewer than 30 days. Common examples include renting a room, house, or an apartment for a
week or weekend for a short stay or for several weeks. Short-term rentals are most commonly
offered and rented through online hosting platforms such as Airbnb, VRBO, Hostmaker, Sonder,
Vacasa, and HomeAway.
While short-term rentals can provide income to residents and broader lodging options than the
existing hotel market, there can be significant downsides to these uses. The popularity and
profitability of short-term rentals has spurred an industry where dwellings are used exclusively for
short-term rentals, removing housing stock that could otherwise be available for longer lease
terms. A rotating series of renters in residential neighborhoods can create traffic, noise, parking,
and safety concerns for neighborhoods.
The short-term rental industry has grown and evolved at a fast pace in recent years. Once a small,
informal part of the economy, it is now larger and more established. Its growth in popularity,
coupled with an increase in the professionalization of the industry, including the emergence of
full-time rentals and hosts that do not live in the units they are renting, have raised the profile of
this issue and led many jurisdictions to consider regulation and taxation.
The City's existing transient occupancy tax applies to short term rentals when they meet the
municipal code's definition of "hotel," which is as follows: "Hotel" means any structure, or any
portion of any structure, which is occupied or intended or designed for occupancy by transients
for dwelling, lodging or sleeping purposes, and includes any hotel, inn, tourist home or house,
motel, studio hotel, bachelor hotel, lodginghouse, roominghouse, apartment house, dormitory,
public or private club, mobile home or house trailer at a fixed location, or other similar structure
or portion thereof. Therefore, a residential unit or portion thereof which is "occupied ... by
1
Residential Short -Term Rentals December 2, 2019
transients for dwelling, lodging or sleeping purposes" is required to collect transient occupancy
tax on behalf of the City. The City does not currently have a program for monitoring or collection
of TOT from short-term rentals. Operators running short term rentals are also required to secure
a business license. Currently, there are seven registered short-term rentals in Burlingame, but
the City doesn't have access to data regarding how many nights per year they are rented out, or
whether owners are on the premises during such rentals. Looking at online advertisements for
short-term rentals (which do not provide addresses), it appears as though fewer than ten percent
of rentals are registered with the City. However, it can be difficult to ascertain whether the rentals
listed are in frequent or occasional use.
The City has received complaints regarding fewer than ten locations relating to short-term rentals
in the last three years. The majority of these were related to the fact of a short-term rental existing
in a nearby residence. The relevant property owners were referred to the Finance Department
and secured business licenses. One complaint related to overflowing garbage bins. One location
has generated several different complaints by neighbors, including renters coming and going at
various times, ride share drivers blocking the street for drop off and pickup, the owner not being
on site, and work without permits.
DISCUSSION
The short-term rental market has various components. A variety of activities fall under the general
category of short-term vacation rental, ranging from occasionally renting an extra bedroom to
leasing an entire home or residential unit on a short-term basis year-round. While some cities
have chosen to regulate all rentals the same way, these different types of activities have different
potential impacts.
One of the ways to categorize vacation rentals is to identify those rentals that are hosted or
unhosted. Hosted rentals may include just bedrooms or sometimes accessory buildings or
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), and have an owner or resident living on the property. This type
of rental is perceived to be less of an issue because there is someone living on-site who can
respond to problems that might arise.
Unhosted rentals may include the entire home and sometimes an accessory building or ADU, that
are vacant and do not have an owner or resident living on the property. These types of short-term
rentals can be owned by investors, who are buying them to rent as a business, or by local
homeowners who are away temporarily. There are also hosts that rent their home as an unhosted
rental for corporate retreats, either during the day or overnight.
It is additionally important to distinguish if units are dedicated for year-round short-term rental or
available only for a limited time. Units that are rented on a short-term basis year-round will be
removed from the jurisdiction's housing stock as a potential source of local housing.
The number and composition of short-term rentals in a jurisdiction can be challenging to
determine given the wide array of listing platforms, as well as the lack of transparency in the
listings themselves. However, a number of data aggregators have emerged in recent years that
download and analyze listings from the most commonly used platforms, and in some instances
Residential Short -Term Rentals December 2, 2019
assist municipalities in enforcing short-term rental regulations. Host Compliance and AirDNA are
two examples, but there are many others.
As a potential snapshot of short-term rentals in Burlingame, AirDNA provides the following figures
(as of November 2019):'
• There are 116 active rentals within Burlingame.
• 58% of the listings (67 listings) are for an entire home or unit; 41% (48 listings) are for a
private room in a home or unit. There is also one listing (1 %) offering a shared room.
• 30% of the listings are available full-time, implying that the room or unit is dedicated
exclusively to short-term rental.
• 86% of the listings are listed on Airbnb; 7% are listed on HomeAway; and 7% are listed
on both platforms.
• There is an average of 3.9 guests per rental.
• 41% of the listings allow one-night stays; 24% require two nights; 12% require three
nights; 10% require between four and six nights; and 8% require seven to 29 nights. 5%
require 30 nights or more.
As a point of reference, 116
listings
is roughly equivalent to
the size
of one of the medium-sized
hotels in Burlingame such
as the
Bay Landing Hotel (130
rooms)
or Hilton Garden Inn
(132
rooms).
Regulatory Options. There are many levels of regulation to consider. The challenge is to decide
which types of rental activities a jurisdiction wants to encourage, regulate, or not allow. The
graphic below illustrates a continuum of regulatory choices related to short-term rentals.
Many jurisdictions apply different levels of regulation to different types of short-term rentals. For
example, the graphic below indicates the range of different listing types and suggests that different
approaches may be desirable or appropriate for different types of listings and whether or not the
listing is an occasional or dedicated (year-round) rental:
https://www.airdna.co/vacation-rental-data/app/us/california/burlingame/burlingame/overview - accessed
11/24/19
3
Residential Short -Term Rentals December 2, 2019
Shared Bedroom
Private Bedroom
Accessory Unit
imia-
j�
Entire Unit or Home
0
Shared Bedroom
a
If
Private Bedroom
a
Accessory Unit
a
Entire Unit or Home
L�„.. .
Below is an overview of some of the more common approaches jurisdictions have implemented
to regulate short-term rentals:
Collecting Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT): Listing services like Airbnb have been willing to
collect a TOT and remit it to jurisdictions on a semi-annual basis. Listing services also have
agreed with some jurisdictions to remove illegal listings or those that pose a significant code
enforcement challenge. A number of local cities, including Redwood City, San Francisco, and
Berkeley, have negotiated deals where their hotel tax is automatically collected. These
arrangements generally require cooperation with the listing companies and fewer limitations on
listed properties.
Requiring Permits: A common strategy for cities looking to regulate short-term rentals is to
require a local permit. It is important to balance the cost and difficulty fora potential host to acquire
a permit with the need for regulation. If it is too expensive or difficult to get a permit, casual hosts
may be discouraged from applying. However, a professional host may not be discouraged by
such regulation. Also, an overly cumbersome permitting system may result in people renting their
homes without permits. Nonetheless, permits are a potentially important strategy to help cities
understand and regulate the short-term rental market.
For the permitting process, there are many decisions to make such as cost, what department will
issue permits, notices to neighbors, business license requirements, length of permit, and the
revocation process. Jurisdictions have also shown interest in requiring online listings to display
host permit numbers, which both hosts and sites have been resistant to do.
Occupancy, Parking and Noise Complaint Resolution Options: Limits on occupancy,
parking, and noise can help address many conflicts that might be anticipated to come up, such
as increased traffic, negative impacts to neighborhood character, and disruptions. A common
4
Residential Short -Term Rentals December 2, 2019
occupancy limit on the number of people is two times the number of bedrooms plus two people.
Other strategies include allowing no more than four guests at a time.
Rentals in Burlingame are already required to comply with existing noise and public nuisance
regulations, as is every unit in the city. Noise and public nuisance violations can be difficult to
document, but the Police Department and Code Enforcement functions are actively engaged in
enforcing the code standards as complaints arise. Additional potential requirements include
posting noise notices in units and revoking permits for those units with repeated violations.
Management and Residency Requirements: Management and residency requirements are
particularly helpful to regulate un -hosted units, and ensure that if issues arise, there is someone
available to promptly respond. One popular management policy is to require a manager, owner,
or responsible party to respond on-site within a given time limit, such as within 15 minutes or up
to one hour. Other cities have taken a more lenient approach and required that someone be
available by phone 24/7 to resolve issues.
Neighboring Jurisdictions: Neighboring jurisdictions in San Mateo County have taken a variety
of the above approaches in regulating short-term rentals. Table 1 below provides a summary of
neighboring jurisdictions:
TABLE 1
SHORT-TERM RENTALS — NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES
Jurisdiction
Allowed
Business
License
TOT Collected
Host Required
Atherton
No — prohibited in
N/A
N/A
N/A
all residential
districts
Belmont
Yes — allowed by
Yes — no separate
Yes
No
right
short-term rental
permit
Hillsborough
No — must be 31
Yes (for long-term
N/A
N/A
days or more
rentals)
Millbrae
Yes
Yes — short-term
Yes — TOT
Yes, for 265
rental permit and
certificate
nights out of the
business license
required, collected
year
required
monthly
Redwood City
Yes
No — short-term
Yes — TOT
Yes, if the unit is
rental registration
certificate required
to be rented for
form required, but
more than 120
no separate
nights per year
business license
San Carlos
No — prohibited in
N/A
N/A
N/A
all residential
districts
San Mateo
Yes
Yes — business
Yes — TOT
No
tax certificate
certificate
required (same as
required, collected
bus license)
monthly
5
Residential Short -Term Rentals December Z 2019
Other Jurisdictions: Staff also surveyed a sampling of other jurisdictions outside the immediate
area as reference:
TABLE 2
SHORT-TERM RENTALS — SAMPLE OF OTHER COMMUNITIES
Jurisdiction
Allowed
Business
License
TOT Collected
Host Required
N/A
Los Altos
No — prohibited in
N/A
N/A
all residential
districts
Monterey
No — prohibited in
N/A
N/A
N/A
all residential
districts
Orinda
Yes
No — short-term
Yes — TOT
Yes — while the
registration form
certificate
City considers
required, but no
required, then
stricter ordinance
separate business
paid quarterly with
requirements
license required
TOT return form
Santa Cruz
Yes
Yes — short-term
Yes — TOT
Yes — ADU and
permit required,
certificate required
non -hosted short -
limited to 250
term rentals
licenses on first-
prohibited
come, first -serve
basis
Santa Monica
Yes
Yes — Home-
Yes — monthly
Yes
Share Business
License and
Home -Share
Permit required
Sausalito
No — prohibited in
N/A
N/A
N/A
all residential
districts
Enforcement: Jurisdictions have found it much easier to develop short-term rental regulations
than to enforce them. Although many cities require hosts to register for licenses, they frequently
are only able to respond to complaints.
It can be difficult to know who is in compliance without involving the hosting platforms or data
aggregators. One option jurisdictions have is to make it illegal for sites to list rentals from
unregistered hosts. Another option is to require host license numbers on listings. Unless a
jurisdiction decides on a complete ban on short-term rental activity, regulations will be difficult to
enforce without requiring an enforcement role from the rental sites. Efforts to enact strict
regulations on short-term rentals or to require specific actions by listing services have resulted in
significant litigation from the hosting companies across the state. Should the City Council direct
staff to develop regulations, a confidential legal risk analysis will be part of staff's
recommendations.
6
Residential Short -Term Rentals
FISCAL IMPACT
December 2, 2019
The current number of short-term rental listings is roughly equivalent to the size of one of the
business -class hotels in Burlingame such as the Bay Landing Hotel (130 rooms) or Hilton Garden
Inn (132 rooms). Should the City enact a program to collect transient occupancy tax (TOT) from
short-term rentals, the additional revenue could be comparable to that of a medium-sized hotel,
or approximately $600,000-700,000.
7
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
CITY 0
BURLINGAME
e
DH4TED J uE �
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL
Unapproved Minutes
Regular Meeting on November 18, 2019
1. CALL TO ORDER
A duly noticed meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council
Chambers at 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
The pledge of allegiance was led by US Navy Lieutenant Commander Michael Bender.
3. ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, Keighran, Ortiz
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION
There was no closed session.
5. UPCOMING EVENTS
Mayor Colson reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the city.
6. PRESENTATIONS
a. PRESENTATION OF VETERANS DAY CERTIFICATES
Mayor Colson thanked Vice Mayor Beach, a US Army Veteran, for establishing the annual tradition of
recognizing veterans in the community.
Mayor Colson presented Veterans Day Certificates to the following residents:
• US Navy Lieutenant Commander Michael Bender — served from 1973-1975
• US Navy Gil Borgardt — retired in 1979 with 30 years of service
• US Air Force Briant Chun -Hoon — served from 1966-1972
1
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
• US Army Carroll Schmitz — served from 1941-1946, a WWII veteran, and was at Omaha Beach.
Mayor Colson thanked Vice Mayor Beach for her service in the US Army.
Vice Mayor Beach stated that it is important to take a moment to remember and thank our veterans.
Thank you to our veterans for your service!
b. PRESENTATION TO XAVIER BRUENING FOR BECOMING THE CALIFORNIA
HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION IN GRECO WRESTLING
Mayor Colson introduced Xavier Bruening, a sophomore at Burlingame High School, who recently
competed in the US Nationals representing California in both Freestyle and Greco Wrestling. She stated that
Xavier won four matches for California, and his cadet team was ranked second nationally behind Illinois.
Mayor Colson presented Xavier with a certificate for becoming the California Heavyweight Champion in
Greco Wrestling.
Congratulations to Xavier Bruening!
c. PRESETNATION BY THE SAFESPACE YOUTH ACTION BOARD
Mayor Colson announced that November 17 through November 23 is United Against Hate Week. She
explained that the City is joining with other Bay Area cities to stop the hate and implicit biases that are a
dangerous threat to the safety and civility of our neighborhoods, towns, and cities.
Mayor Colson introduced Rishika Sen, Novak Chernesky, and Samer Bahu from Safespace to give a
presentation on what their organization has been doing.
Rishika Sen, a high school senior, explained that the San Mateo County Adolescent Report found that 70%
of survey respondents reported feelings of depression, nervousness, or emotional stress. Rishika noted that
out of the 70%, 38% of females and 23% of male respondents reported having suicidal thoughts.
Rishika stated that Safespace is a youth organization that is driven to removing the stigma against mental
health. Rishika noted that Safespace creates and implements initiatives to change the conversation around
mental health by empowering peers to speak out and seek help when needed. Rishika stated that currently
Safespace's membership includes over 60 students from 15 schools on the Peninsula.
Novak Chernesky, a high school junior, stated that Safespace's goals are to:
• Create a stigma -fee community where no one feels ashamed of mental health
• Ensure access to mental health education and resources for all students in San Mateo private and
public schools
• Work with community leaders to start safe and open conversations around mental health
2
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
• Create accessible and inclusive resources for the San Mateo community
Novak stated that in connection with United Against Hate Week, Safespace wanted to engage with the
community about the importance of mental health. Novak discussed the toll bullying and hate crimes take
on an individual's mental health. Novak stated that it is on the community to ensure that all feel safe and
accepted.
Samer Bahu, a high school junior, discussed the racism and hate that he experienced as a Palestinian
American. Samer discussed how the actions of his peers affected his mental health and his schoolwork.
Samer stated that anyone going through mental health struggles should not give up as they are capable and
can conquer it.
Novak let the public know that if they would like to learn more about Safespace, they can visit
www.safespace.org and follow Safespace on social media @safespaceusa.
Mayor Colson thanked Safespace for their presentation.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he spent time with some of the other members of Safespace at
Representative Speier's event. He thanked Safespace for the work that they do. He explained the members
of the City Council were all parents and had firsthand experience about the increased stresses that youth face
today. He thanked Safespace for providing a space for students to feel comfortable addressing their mental
health.
Councilmember Ortiz thanked Samer for sharing his story and stated that a lot of people would feel better
hearing his story.
d. COMMENDATIONS FOR LIEUTENANT LAURA TERADA AND INSPECTOR RAFAEL
NORIEGA
Police Chief Matteucci stated that during the early morning hours of September 5, 2019, BHS was
vandalized with anti-Semitic, homophobic, and racist graffiti. The graffiti resulted in significant damage and
immeasurable trauma to the students, staff, and Burlingame community. Chief Matteucci explained that the
case was assigned to Lieutenant Terada and Inspector Noriega with the expectation that the crime would be
solved quickly and efficiently. On October 17, 2019, after an extensive investigation and with assistance
from BHS, SMUHSD, and the Anti -Defamation League, a suspect was arrested in connection with the crime.
Police Chief Matteucci commended Lieutenant Terada and Inspector Noriega for their skillful investigation,
diligence, and the composure they displayed.
Mayor Colson and the Council thanked Lieutenant Terada and Inspector Noriega for their hard work.
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
e. PRESENTATION BY THE ANTI -DEFAMATION LEAGUE
Anti -Defamation League Associate Director Vlad Khaykin extended his gratitude to the Burlingame Police
Department for their professionalism on how they handled the graffiti case at the Burlingame High School.
Mr. Khaykin began by discussing the history of the Anti -Defamation League ("ADL"). He explained that
the ADL is one of the oldest civil rights, anti -hate, and anti -extremism organizations in the country. The
ADL was founded in 1913 with the mission to "stop the defamation of the Jewish people and secure justice
and fair treatment for all." He noted that the ADL's mission recognizes the idea that none of us are free until
all of us are free.
Mr. Khaykin reviewed the work that the ADL has done since its inception including:
• 1930s — tracking, monitoring, and exposing extremist hate groups in the United States
• 1954 — filed an amicus brief in Brown v. Board of Education arguing that segregation in schools
"disadvantages" and "irreparably damages" children.
• 1964 — mobilized support for the Civil Rights Act
• 1965 — worked with Dr. Martin Luther King and others to help pass the Voting Rights Act
• 1981 — helped to draft the model hate crime statute, which has been adopted by 45 states, and on the
federal level
• 2009 — assisted in updating the hate crime laws with the passage of the Mathew Shepard and James
Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act
• 2015 — worked on the Obergefell v. Hodges case to legalize marriage equality
Mr. Khaykin stated that the property damage at Burlingame High School was a hate crime. He explained
that a hate crime is a crime where someone is targeted because of one of their protected class identities (race,
religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc.).
Mr. Khaykin explained that hate crimes have been on the rise for the past several years. He stated that
Jewish people account for more than 50% of hate crimes that target people on the basis of their religion or
perceived religion. To contrast this statistic, he noted that Jewish people represent less than 2% of the US
population. He explained that between 2015 and 2016, the ADL saw a 34% increase in anti-Semitic
incidents, followed by a 57% increase in 2017. He stated that school campuses were seeing larger increases
in anti-Semitic incidents, with an 89% increase at college and university campuses and 94% for grades K-12.
Mr. Khaykin showed a clip from the 2017 Charlottesville rally, which was the largest gathering of white
supremacists in the US in decades. He stated that the individuals chanted "Jews will not replace us" and
"blood and soil".
Mr. Khaykin stated that in 2018, nearly every single extremist -related killing in the United States was
committed by someone with ties to far -right extremists. He noted that of those, 78% were white
supremacists.
4
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
Mr. Khaykin quoted Eric Ward, a civil rights strategist and researcher of white nationalism, who stated that
anti-Semitism is "the fuel that White nationalist ideology uses to power its anti -Black racism, its contempt
for other people of color, and its xenophobia — as well as the misogyny and other forms of hatred it holds
dear ... Black people [will] not win our freedom without tearing it down."
Mr. Khaykin explained that the white nationalist groups have been working on growing their movement. He
noted that between 2017 and 2018, there was a stark increase in white supremacist propaganda and
recruiting, including on college campuses.
Mr. Khaykin discussed the role of the internet in proliferating hateful ideologies. He reviewed writings from
different white supremacist organizations that encourage their members to utilize the internet to spread their
message.
Mr. Khaykin stated that every single campaign of genocide in history was preceded by a campaign of words.
He showed the pyramid of hate, which depicts the way in which bigotry escalates from stereotyping and
insensitive remarks to discrimination.
Mr. Khaykin discussed the six things that can be done to combat hate:
• Elected officials and others in authority must speak out forcefully
• Review ADL Hate Symbols Database and report hate incidents, propaganda online and offline
• Raise your voice in Congress: www.adl.org/take-action
• Call on lawmakers to address online hate: www.adl.org/backspace-hate
• Review ADL Community Security Manual and secure your communal and religious institutions
• Bring ADL's programs and resources to your school, community, home, etc.
Mayor Colson thanked Mr. Khaykin for his presentation.
7. PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no public comments.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Colson asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the
Consent Calendar. Councilmember Keighran removed items 8c and 8f. Councilmember Brownrigg
removed items 8h and 8i.
Councilmember Ortiz made a motion to approve items 8a, 8b, 8d, 8e, 8g, 8j, 8k, 81, and 8m; seconded by
Councilmember Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
5
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 4, 2019
City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council adopt the City Council Meeting Minutes for November 4,
2019.
b. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 12, 2019
City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council adopt the City Council Meeting Minutes for November 12,
2019.
e. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE BANNING THE SALE OF FLAVORED TOBACCO
PRODUCTS, INCLUDING VAPING LIQUIDS
Councilmember Keighran recused herself from this item due to her work with Supervisor Canepa on the
County's ordinance.
Mayor Colson opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Ordinance 1970; seconded by Vice Mayor Beach. The
motion passed by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Keighran recused).
Councilmember Brownrigg noted that the passage of Ordinance 1970 made the City one of the strictest anti-
vaping jurisdictions in the country. He thanked Councilmember Keighran for her work at the County on this
matter.
Mayor Colson noted that the work that Councilmember Keighran had done at the County was leading the
effort across the county.
d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION REJECTING ALL BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE
SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS ALONG VANCOUVER AVENUE, BROADWAY,
ROLLINS ROAD, EL CAMINO REAL, AND EASEMENTS OF LA MESA DRIVE,
ALTURAS DRIVE, AND LOS MONTES DRIVE, CITY PROJECT NO. 85570
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 138-2019.
e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTIN APPROVING THE ADDITION OF ONE NEW FULL-TIME
EQUIVALENT MANAGEMENT ANALYST POSITION
HR Morrison requested Council adopt Resolution Number 139-2019.
f. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
AN AGREEMENT WITH S.R. BRAY, LLC DBA POWER PLUS FOR THE POWER
6
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
SERVICE TO THE TEMPORARY RECREATION FACILITIES DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW COMMUNITY CENTER AT AN INSTALLATION COST
OF $75,880.20, A MONTHLY COST OF $405.00, AND AN ADD -ALTERNATE COST OF
$7,546.96, CITY PROJECT NO. 83240
Councilmember Keighran stated that when she reviewed the two bids that the City received, the higher bid
was double the cost of the lower bid. She asked why the high bid was so much higher. Parks and Recreation
Director Glomstad stated that there aren't many companies that do this type of work and that she didn't think
the high bid understood the RFP.
Mayor Colson opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Councilmember Keighran made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 140-2019; seconded by
Councilmember Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
g. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH MIG FOR PREPARATION OF AN UPDATE OF THE CITY'S
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE
AGREEMENT AND INCREASE THE CONTRACT AMOUNT BY $75,075 TO COVER
EXPENSES RELATED TO THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
UPDATE, AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR)
CDD Gardiner requested Council adopt Resolution Number 141-2019.
h. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR, AND RECEIPT
OF, SB 2 PLANNING GRANTS PROGRAM FUNDS FOR THE NORTH ROLLINS ROAD
SPECIFIC PLAN
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that the City is hiring a consultant to assist in designing the new North
Rollins Road neighborhood. He explained that he is concerned that the 1.5 -year timeframe could result in
important work getting missed.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that because this is a new neighborhood and is not around existing
housing, he would prefer that the consultants be more prescriptive and show options to the community
instead of holding community brainstorming sessions.
Mayor Colson opened the item up to public comment. No one spoke.
Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 142-2019; seconded by
Councilmember Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
7
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
i. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ANNUAL REPORT ON THE STATUS
OF IMPACT FEES COLLECTED AS OF JUNE 30, 2019, PURSUANT TO THE
MITIGATION FEE ACT (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66000 ET SEO.), AND
MAKING REQUIRED FINDINGS RELATED TO THE CITY'S DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEES
Councilmember Brownrigg asked for information about 21 Element's Multi -City Commercial Linkage
Feasibility Study. CDD Gardiner stated that a few years ago, there was a nexus study that established
commercial linkage fee ranges. He explained that 21 Elements is undertaking a refresher to that study that
looks at what is feasible within current development economics.
Councilmember Brownrigg discussed a project that is in the pipeline that is tearing down a one-story
building to create a six -story building. He explained that the developer is going to put in four floors of
commercial space and two floors of residential units. He stated that the developer's reasoning was that
commercial makes more money. Therefore, he explained that if the City's focus is on creating more
housing, then the linkage fees may need to be re-examined to ensure that the developers build units.
Vice Mayor Beach asked if there was a timeframe for when the City would conduct a total review of the
public facilities impact fees. She noted that the last time this was done was 2008. Finance Director
Augustine stated that staff has not budgeted for a review and staff is currently at capacity with other projects.
Vice Mayor Beach asked the City Manager to evaluate the need for a public facilities impact fee study. City
Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative.
Mayor Colson opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 143-2019; seconded by
Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
j. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREMENT WITH ECS IMAGING, INC. FOR ADDITIONAL
FULL USER LICENSES AND UPGRADE FORMS LICENSE, AND APPROVING A
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,045
City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council adopt Resolution Number 144-2019.
k. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING THE SUBSTITUTION OF FACILITIES SUBJECT TO
THE FACILITY LEASE AND SUBLEASE ASSOCIATED WITH THE LEASE REVENUE
REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2010, AND APPROVING THE TAKING OF ALL
NECESSARY OR DESIRABLE ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
Finance Director Augustine requested Council adopt Resolution Number 145-2019.
8
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
1. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT, PERIOD ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2019
Finance Director Augustine requested Council accept the Quarterly Investment Report, period ending
September 30, 2019.
m. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE AFSCME LOCAL 829 BURLINGAME
ASSOCIATION OF MIDDLE MANAGERS UNIT AND THE CITY OF BURLINGAME,
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE MEMORANDUM ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY
HR Morrison requested Council adopt Resolution Number 146-2019.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. CONSIDERATION OF AN URGENCY ORDINANCE PROVIDING INTERIM JUST CAUSE
EVICTION PROTECTIONS TO TENANTS
City Manager Goldman stated that on October 8, 2019, Governor Newsom signed AB 1482 into law. AB
1482 goes into effect on January 1, 2020. The legislation contains two main elements: 1) a prohibition on
evictions without just -cause, and 2) an imposition of a rent cap.
City Manager Goldman stated that during public comment at the November 4, 2019 City Council meeting,
members of the public requested that the Council adopt an urgency ordinance that would prohibit evictions
without just -cause as some Burlingame renters have received eviction notices that are effective prior to
January 1, 2020. She added that the public was concerned that others may receive eviction notices prior to
AB 1482 becoming effective.
City Manager Goldman stated that the Council held a special study session to discuss the matter and
determine whether or not to ask staff to bring an urgency ordinance to the Council for consideration. At the
end of the study session, three Councilmembers asked that an urgency ordinance be drafted and agendized
for the November 18, 2019 Council meeting.
City Manager Goldman stated that at the time of the study session, Daly City, Redwood City, and San Mateo
had all passed measures. She noted that this matter is on the agenda in Foster City and at the San Mateo
County Board of Supervisors and that San Carlos passed a measure the previous week.
City Manager Goldman stated that the City Attorney drafted an ordinance for the Council's review. She
explained that the proposed ordinance, as drafted, would prohibit rental property owners from issuing no-
fault eviction notices from October 8, 2019 through December 31, 2019 that do not otherwise comply with
AB 1482's requirements for such evictions. She stated that if people receive an eviction for cause, those
would still go through. She noted that if the urgency ordinance is adopted by the City Council, it would go
into effect immediately and lapse on January 1, 2020.
9
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
City Manager Goldman stated that because it is an urgency ordinance, it would require four affirmative
votes.
Mayor Colson asked the City Clerk to read the title of the proposed ordinance. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer
read the title.
Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the proposed ordinance;
seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Mayor Colson opened the public hearing.
Erik Winkler stated that he believed rent control and just -cause eviction are bad public policy. He implored
the Council to not.adopt the urgency ordinance.
Eileen stated that she had received a no-fault eviction and was finding it difficult to find a new unit. She
asked the Council to not make renters feel expendable.
Marsha Kunz discussed her support for property rights and urged the Council to not adopt the urgency
ordinance.
Paul Beaudreau stated that he was against the urgency ordinance because he believed it would set a
dangerous precedent that moves the City closer to San Francisco's rent control.
Lucy Palasek and Steven Green urged the Council to adopt the urgency ordinance to help the vulnerable
members of the community.
Cynthia Wukotich encouraged the City to pass the urgency ordinance. She asked if the City would be hiring
a housing officer to assist tenants and landlords with the implementation of AB 1482.
Gene Bordegaray discussed the 2016 citizen initiative for rent control and just -cause eviction that was voted
down. He asked that the Council side with the majority and not adopt the urgency ordinance.
Brian Adler urged the Council to vote no. He stated that the ordinance is unnecessary and burdensome to
mom and pop property owners.
Katherine Goniotakis stated that she has lived in the same apartment for 24 years and received a 60 -day
eviction notice. She asked that the Council protect the City's renters and adopt the ordinance.
Maria Realyvasquez, a local property manager, discussed her experience since the passage of AB 1482 and
stated that the relationship between tenants and landowners has become adversarial.
Frank Vella, a local property manager, stated that rent control creates problems and doesn't assist tenants.
He urged the Council not to adopt the ordinance.
10
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
Steve Stluka stated that he has chosen not to evict as a local property owner but those that have chosen to
evict are within their legal right. He discussed the extensive legal proceedings that would be created if the
Council adopts the ordinance.
Alisa Ruiz -Johnson urged the Council not to adopt the ordinance. She explained that the City should donate
and take care of those who are vulnerable in the community without infringing on property rights.
Ross Bruce asked Council to not adopt the ordinance and instead consider other measures to assist with those
who are vulnerable in the community.
SAMCAR representative Gina Zari stated that it is egregious to pass a retroactive ordinance especially since
the citizens have repeatedly voted down just -cause eviction and rent control. She noted that SAMCAR
created a task force to assist in finding and funding relocations for those who were evicted.
California Apartment Association representative Rhovy Antonio discussed legal issues that could arise as a
result of adopting the ordinance. She urged the Council to vote against the ordinance.
Mayor Colson closed the public hearing.
Vice Mayor Beach asked if the City Attorney had any comment concerning the legal issues that Ms. Antonio
raised.
City Attorney Kane discussed Ms. Antonio's comment concerning the legal liability under the proposed
ordinance when a tenant receives a no-fault eviction, moves out, and the unit has been promised to another
individual. She explained that the ordinance limits its scope to covering only the instances where the
individual who has received the no-fault eviction is still in possession of their unit.
City Attorney Kane discussed Ms. Antonio's comment about legal possession versus illegal possession. She
stated that the proposed ordinance states possession, and the Council could amend the language of the
ordinance to apply strictly to legal possession. She noted that because the ordinance is an urgency ordinance,
Council can make edits from the dais.
Vice Mayor Beach asked to see if any member of the public issued a no-fault eviction notice between
October 8 and October 31. No member of the public came forward.
Councilmember Keighran asked if the City received any verifiable data in regard to the issuance of no-fault
evictions. City Attorney Kane replied in the negative. She explained that the City doesn't have an existing
data reporting that would be set up to cover this situation and track trends.
Mayor Colson stated that she is aware of one notice of eviction during the October 8 through October 31
time period. However, she explained that she worked with the landlord and the tenant to reach a resolution.
11
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
Councilmember Keighran asked under the proposed ordinance, if a tenant was given a 60 -day notice with a
move out date of November 30, and the tenant didn't move out, would the proposed ordinance tie the
landlord's hands. City Attorney Kane stated that if the move out date was November 30, then the tenant
would not be covered under the proposed ordinance because their 60 -day notice would have been issued on
September 30. She stated that if the move out date is moved up so that it fits under the proposed ordinance,
if the eviction is for cause, then the landlord would be within their rights to evict.
Councilmember Ortiz asked if it was common before AB 1482 to issue 60 -day no-fault eviction notices
when a cause exists. City Attorney Kane replied in the affirmative. She stated that for cause evictions can
create difficulties, and therefore some landlords prefer to give no-fault evictions.
Councilmember Brownrigg asked the City Attorney to discuss what Governor Newsom did on October 27
and how it affects the proposed ordinance. City Attorney Kane stated that on October 27, as a result of the
wildfires, Governor Newsom signed an emergency declaration. Under the declaration, landlords can't
increase rent by more than 10%, nor can they evict a tenant and then re -rent the unit for more than 10% of
what they were previously charging.
Councilmember Brownrigg asked if this was a thirty -day emergency ordinance. City Attorney Kane replied
in the affirmative and added that emergency declarations get extended in order to draw down FEMA funds.
Councilmember Ortiz asked if the emergency declaration was retroactive or if it was effective from October
27 forward. City Attorney Kane replied that it was effective October 27 forward.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that assuming someone issued a 60 -day notice where there was a cause but the
cause wasn't listed, could the landlord issue another 60 -day notice for cause if the ordinance is adopted. City
Attorney Kane replied in the affirmative. She stated that it would restart the clock.
Councilmember Keighran voiced concerns about the proposed ordinance. She stated that in order for the
City to adopt an urgency ordinance, there had to be verifiable data showing the need for the Council to act
expeditiously. She explained that no such data had been brought to the Council.
Councilmember Keighran stated that she reviewed the definition of an urgency ordinance and found one
ordinance that stated: the City Council needs to declare that there is an immediate threat to the public peace,
health, and safety; having verifiable, factual information will help the position of the City to survive a legal
challenge. She stated that she was concerned that the City hadn't met this requirement, and therefore
passage would open the City up to liability.
Councilmember Keighran discussed the 2016 citizen initiative for rent control and just cause eviction. She
explained that the measure had failed by 67.6%. She stated that it is important that the Council respect the
voters' decision.
Councilmember Keighran voiced concern about the proposed ordinance being retroactive. She noted that in
the Menlo Park staff report, it states that retroactive application of a city ordinance will be reversed if it
12
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
substantially changes the legal rights and obligations of a party. She stated that if the City adopts a
retroactive ordinance, it would be a dangerous precedent for the City.
Councilmember Keighran suggested that instead of adopting the proposed ordinance, the City should create
an emergency fund for no-fault evictions. She discussed Legal Aid's outline of what is not considered a no-
fault eviction under AB 1482 including: owner or family member intends to occupy the unit; withdrawal of
the unit from the rental market; compliance with a court order or local ordinance that requires vacancy, and
the intent to demolish or substantially remodel the unit with permits.
Councilmember Keighran stated that if the City created an emergency fund, it could be used for: 1) helping
with a rent gap, 2) relocation fees, and 3) security deposit. In addition, she noted that the City should work
with HIP Housing, Star Vista, Samaritan House, and other organizations to assist the community.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he appreciated Councilmember Keighran's suggestion. However, he
felt that the City was being asked to clean up after both the State Legislature and the landlords who evicted
tenants without cause. He stated that it affects very few people but also very few landlords. He explained
that most of the City's landlords are good at their job, but there are some that are bad actors who raise
individuals rents by 50-60%.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he agreed with the California Apartment Association Senior Vice
President of Public Affairs Deborah Carlton who stated that suggestions that landlords ought to remove
tenants that are below market rate renters, while they still could, is unconscionable. Therefore, this has led
him to consider a retroactive ordinance for the first time.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that his concern about the retroactivity of the ordinance is that it isn't good
precedent. However, he believed that the liability would be minimal as most residents would not be affected
by the proposed ordinance.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that the Council has routinely voted against rent control. He noted that the
Council wrote the argument against the 2016 citizen initiative. He explained that he believed AB 1482
would end up hurting the people it was trying to protect, and that landlords would end up making more
money than before.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that the issue he wrestles with is whether the City should try to help the
few people that received an unconscionable no-fault eviction notice. He noted that San Carlos and San
Mateo both approved a similar ordinance.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that the Council's discussion wasn't about rent control or just -cause eviction.
He explained that the issue before the Council is that under AB 1482, rent control is retroactive, but just -
cause eviction protections are not retroactive. He stated that AB 1482 was flawed and that the Governor's
emergency declaration doesn't assist the individuals who received no-fault evictions between October 8 and
October 27. He explained that the proposed ordinance is a stop gap and stated that while he doesn't believe
cities should enact retroactive ordinances, this was a unique situation.
13
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
Vice Mayor Beach stated that this is a philosophical debate about property rights and public policy. She
noted that she has leaned into property rights because she believes that there are tremendous consequences of
just -cause evictions and rent control. She explained that she believed just -cause evictions and rent control
cause further harm to those that the laws are trying to protect.
Vice Mayor Beach noted that she learned from SAMCAR that the median rent in Burlingame is $1900. She
explained that this means that a lot of people in Burlingame are paying below market rate and that the City is
fortunate to have good landlords.
Vice Mayor Beach stated that she is concerned about retroactivity and potential liability. However, she
explained that the City is trying to address a 23 -day window where individuals received no-fault evictions as
a result of AB 1482. She stated that she leans into approving the ordinance with reservation. She noted that
she also approved of Councilmember Keighran's suggestion of an emergency fund.
Mayor Colson stated that she reviewed Oregon's rent control law that is similar to AB 1482. However, she
explained that the difference is that Oregon's law went into effect immediately. Therefore, she stated that
Governor Newsom and the Legislature must have had some rationale to delay just -cause evictions under AB
1482.
Mayor Colson stated that she agreed with Councilmember Keighran that in order to have an urgency
measure there must be an urgency. She noted that she didn't believe the City had met this standard. She
stated that was included in emails asking tenants to come to Council if they had received a no-fault eviction.
However, she stated that none of the no-fault evictions discussed in the hearing and in emails would be
assisted by the proposed ordinance.
Mayor Colson discussed the work that the Council has done to create affordable housing including the
development on Lots F and N. She explained that the Council will continue to create affordable housing,
work with developers to create affordable units, and work with non -profits on this issue. She stated that
these methods are what have been proven to be effective when assisting the most vulnerable. She added that
she was in support of Councilmember Keighran's suggestion for an emergency fund.
Mayor Colson stated that Daly City and Redwood City didn't pass retroactive ordinances, and Pacifica voted
down the ordinance.
Councilmember Ortiz made a motion to adopt the urgency ordinance; seconded by Councilmember
Brownrigg.
Councilmember Brownrigg asked Councilmember Ortiz if he would like to amend his motion to include the
City Attorney's proposal to define possession as legal possession. Councilmember Ortiz agreed and
amended his motion.
Mayor Colson asked the City Clerk for a roll call vote.
14
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
AYES: Councilmembers: Beach, Brownrigg, Ortiz
NOES: Councilmembers: Colson, Keighran
Because the ordinance was an urgency ordinance, four votes in favor were needed to pass, and therefore this
measure failed 3-2.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he would like to explore the notion of a prospective ordinance and
Councilmember Keighran's suggestion of an emergency fund.
City Manager Goldman stated that creating an emergency fund was not noticed, and therefore this issue
would need to be brought back to Council at a future date.
Mayor Colson stated that a prospective ordinance would only be symbolic because it would duplicate the
State legislation and would have no impact on current tenants.
Councilmember Keighran stated that she wouldn't agree with a prospective ordinance because it doesn't help
anyone. She stated that the 60 -day no-fault notice needed to be filed by October 31, and 30 -day notices
(which apply to those who have been in their units for less than a year) aren't protected because they aren't
covered under AB 1482.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that he agreed with Councilmember Keighran.
Councilmember Keighran stated that she did want the Council to consider emergency funding. She noted
that the funding could be retroactive to October 8.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he agreed with an assistance program that goes back to October 8. He
noted that adopting a prospective ordinance would tell landlords that you are going to have to give a reason
for an eviction after January 1, 2020, and the City wants you to start doing that now.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that if the eviction takes place after January 1, 2020, you have to give notice
under AB 1482.
The Council discussed the regulations around evictions and when an eviction would require a cause.
Mayor Colson stated that the only real way to assist those being evicted in this situation is to create an
emergency fund.
City Attorney cautioned the Council that the City needs to be careful about the gift of public funds. She
noted that staff will review options for the Council.
Mayor Colson thanked the community for coming out and sharing their opinions.
15
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
10. STAFF REPORTS
a. CONSIDERATION OF THREE APPOINTMENTS TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION
Mayor Colson stated that vacancies are due to the expiring terms of Commissioners Christine Ardito, Ian
Milne, and Bob Palacio. She noted that the Council originally was set to interview candidates on October
22. However, while Bob Palacio submitted his application to reapply, he later decided to withdraw prior to
the interview date. She explained that the Council has a policy to extend the deadline for the application any
time an incumbent chooses not to reapply. Therefore, on October 22, the Council decided to extend the
deadline to October 31, 2019.
Mayor Colson stated that on November 14, 2019, the Council interviewed eight additional candidates. She
noted that there were three Councilmembers present and that the other two Councilmembers listened to a
recording of the interviews.
Mayor Colson stated that the eligible candidates for the three appointments are: William Reagon, Fred
Bauer, Andrea Pappajohn, Daniel Devoy, Craig Darling, James Haggarty, Aric Agresi, Shaeda Urbani, Ian
Milne, and Christine Ardito.
Mayor Colson opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
In the first round of ballots, Christine Ardito and Ian Milne each received three votes, and therefore they
were reappointed. However, no other candidate received three votes, and therefore the Council was asked to
vote a second ballot for one candidate.
Prior to the second round of ballots, the Council discussed the candidates.
In the second round of ballots, Andrea Pappajohn received a majority of the votes.
Congratulations to Christine Ardito and Ian Milne for their reappointment, and congratulations to Andrea
Pappajohn on her appointment.
Thank you to all the candidates for applying.
b. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
A SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT TO THE AFSCME LOCAL 829 MAINTENANCE UNIT
AMEND THE COMPENSATION AND BENEFIT PLAN FOR THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME DEPARTMENT HEAD AND UNREPRESENTED CLASSIFICATIONS,
AND ADOPT A NEW SALARY SCHEDULE
HR Director Morrison stated that before the Council was a resolution to execute modifications to the
compensation and benefit plan for the Department Head and Unrepresented Group and AFSCME Local 829
16
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
Maintenance Unit. She noted that the resolution included an updated salary schedule to account for
minimum wage increases in 2020.
HR Director Morrison stated that the Department Heads are the only unit that have their life insurance tied to
their salary. She explained that the current benefit is annual salary at a maximum of $250,000. She stated
that this was administratively burdensome, created technical and programming issues, and was an unequal
benefit across the unit. She explained that the City proposes to simplify the matter and establish a $250,000
life insurance plan for all Department Heads.
Mayor Colson opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 146-2019; seconded by
Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRE -QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMMUNITY CENTER PROJECT
Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that in order to ensure quality bids for the new Community
Center, staff pre -qualified the bidders. She stated that the City used the Department of Industrial Relations
questionnaire so that it was an equitable and fair process.
Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that the City received seven submittals. Three of the bidders
didn't meet either the bonding requirements, the recommended revenue volume, similar project criteria, or
were under significant litigation and had bad references and safety records. Therefore, staff proposed to
remove those three bidders and pre -qualify four bidders:
• Alten Construction
• BHM Construction, Inc.
• Amoroso Construction
• Lathrop Construction Associates, Inc.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that Council has talked in the past about ensuring that the City audits the
work of the construction firm. He asked if this would be done by a different firm. Parks and Recreation
Director Glomstad replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he has had conversations about ensuring that the apprentices that are
used come from certified programs. He asked if this would be built into the contract. Parks and Recreation
Director Glomstad replied that this was an option.
Mayor Colson opened the item up for public comments. No one spoke.
Vice Mayor Beach made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 147-2019; seconded by Councilmember
Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
17
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCMENTS
a. MAYOR COLSON'S COMMITTEE REPORT
Mayor Colson asked that the Council submit a year-end committee report to the City Clerk by December 9,
2019. Council agreed.
12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Brownrigg discussed the program that has been adopted by Menlo Park and other cities that
creates a financing mechanism to buy large multi -family buildings and then preserve them for the missing
middle. He noted that this is a time sensitive matter and asked that the Council agendize this item.
City Manager Goldman replied that this would be on the December 2, 2019 meeting.
13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The agendas, packets, and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Safety & Parking
Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Library Board of Trustees
are available online at www.burlingame.org.
14. ADJOURNMENT TO BURLINGAME FINANCING AUTHORITY
1. Call to Order
Chair of the Board Colson called the Burlingame Financing Authority meeting to order at 10:25 p.m.
2. Roll Call
MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, Keighran, Ortiz
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
3. Board Action
a. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE BURLINGAME FINANCING AUTHORITY
AUTHORIZING THE SUBSTITUTION OF FACILITIES SUBJECT TO THE FACILITY
LEASE AND SUBLEASE ASSOCIATED WITH THE LEASE REVENUE REFUNDING
BONDS, SERIES 2010; AND APPROVING THE TAKING OF ALL NECESSARY OR
DESIRABLE ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
Chair Colson stated that the Burlingame Financing Authority was being asked to authorize the substitution of
facilities subject to the facility lease and sublease associated with the lease revenue refunding bonds, series
2010; and approve the taking of all necessary or desirable actions in connection therewith.
18
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 12/02/19
Chair Colson opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Boardmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Burlingame Financing Authority Resolution 002-2019;
seconded by Vice Chair Beach. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
15. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Colson adjourned meeting at 10:28 p.m. in memory of Paula Parres.
Respectfully submitted,
Meaghan Hassel -Shearer
City Clerk
19
Burlingame City Council November 18, 2019
Unapproved Minutes
c'TY
�Avaw�i
To:
Date:
From
AGENDA NO: 8b
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: December 2, 2019
Honorable Mayor and City Council
December 2, 2019
Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works — (650) 558-7230
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Rejecting All Bids Received for the 1740 Rollins
Road and 842 Cowan Road Pump Stations Repairs, City Project No. 85830
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution rejecting all bids received for the
1740 Rollins Road and 842 Cowan Road Pump Stations Repairs, City Project No. 85830, and
authorize staff to re -advertise the project.
BACKGROUND
The City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) identified the upgrade of the 1740 Rollins Road
and 842 Cowan Road Pump Stations as high priority improvements. The 1740 Rollins Road
Project consists of two stormwater and one sewage pump station. The second stormwater pump
station is located at 842 Cowan Road and receives flows from Millbrae. The Cowan pump station
is operated and maintained by the City Burlingame, but the capital, operation, and maintenance
costs are shared 60/40 between the two municipalities, with 60% paid by City of Burlingame and
40% by the City of Millbrae.
This project is part of the original 1740 Rollins Road and 842 Cowan Road Pump Station Project,
which was previously advertised for bids on May 23, 2019, with the bid opening on July 18, 2019.
The bids were rejected for this project because the bids received were significantly higher than
the engineer's estimate, and staff had identified a number of project components for value
engineering to save money. As a result of the value engineering, the current project scope was
separated from the original 1740 Rollins Road and 842 Cowan Road Pump Station Project to
accelerate this portion of the work. The scope of this project includes installation of protective
coatings, replacement of flap gates, and other repairs at both pump station facilities.
DISCUSSION
The reconfigured project was advertised for bids on October 15, 2019, and the bids were opened
on November 12, 2019. The City received two bid proposals in the amounts of $724,000 and
$1,149,066. Trinet Construction, Inc. is the apparent low bidder with its bid amount of $724,000.
However, the apparent low bidder failed to submit the bidder's bond along with their bid proposal,
which is a mandatory requirement for Public Works projects. Therefore, Trinet Construction's bid
1
Resolution Rejecting All Bids Received for the 1740 Rollins Road and December 2, 2019
842 Cowan Road Pump Station Repairs Project
proposal is non-responsive and is disqualified. The second bid proposal was submitted by Pipe
and Plant Solutions, Inc. in the amount of $1,149,066, which is unreasonably higher than the
engineer's estimate of $627,000 given the scope of work under this project. For these reasons,
staff recommends that the Council reject all bids received and allow staff tore -advertise the project
to seek more competitive and qualified bids.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Exhibits:
• Resolution
• Bid Summary
• Project Location Map
2
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME REJECTING
ALL BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE 1740 ROLLINS ROAD AND 842 COWAN ROAD PUMP
STATION REPAIRS
CITY PROJECT NO. 85830
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2019, the City issued a notice inviting sealed bids for the 1740
Rollins Road and 842 Cowan Road Pump Station Repairs, City Project No. 85830; and
WHEREAS, on November 12, 2019, all bid proposals were opened before the City Clerk and
representatives of the Public Works Department; and
WHEREAS, the City received two bid proposals in the amounts of $724,000 and $1,149,066;
and
WHEREAS, Trinet Construction, Inc. is the apparent low bidder with its bid amount of
$724,000 but failed to submit the bidder's bond along with their bid proposal, which is a mandatory
requirement; therefore, the apparent low bidder's bid is non-responsive and is disqualified; and
WHEREAS, Pipe and Plant Solutions, Inc. is the second bidder with its bid amount of
$1,149,066, which is unreasonably higher than the engineer's estimate for this project; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that the City Council reject all bids received for the project
and authorize staff to re -advertise the project to seek qualified contractors with more competitive
bids.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, and ORDERED, that all bids for the above-named
project are rejected; all bonds and security received in connection with the bids received shall be
returned to the bidders; and City staff is authorized to re -advertise the project in accordance
therewith.
Donna Colson, Mayor
I, MEAGHAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the
foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 2"d day of
December, 2019, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk
City of Burlingame
1740 Rollins Road 842 Cowan Road Pump Station Repairs, City Project No. 85830
Bid Summary
Engineers Estimate
Trinet Costruction
Pipe and Plant Solutions
Unit Cost
ITotal Cost
Unit Cost
Total Cost
Unit Cost
Total Cost
For furnishing all labor, equipment, and materials, complete, all
as shown on the Contract Drawings and specified herein, for
1.0
debris removal, concrete surface cleaning and preparation, and
application of protective lining system to the interior concrete
wet well surfaces of the 1740 Rollins Road Stormwater Pump
Station.
1
LS
$130,000
$130,000
$150,000
$150,000
$338,677
$338,677
For furnishing all labor, equipment, and materials, complete, all
as shown on the Contract Drawings and specified herein, for
2.0
debris removal, concrete surface cleaning and preparation, and
application of protective lining system of the interior concrete
surfaces of the 1740 Rollins Road Stormwater Pump Station
Discharge Box.
1
LS
1 $70,000
$70,000
1 $150,000
$150,0001
$97,265
$97,265
For furnishing all labor, equipment, and materials, complete, all
as shown on the Contract Drawings and specked herein for
removal and replacement of flapvalves, ladders, and access
30
hatches, installation of aluminum handrailing, and modification of
vent piping at the 1740 Rollins Road Stormwater Pump Station
Discharge Box.
1
LS
$135,000
$135,000
$114,000
$114,000
$197,250
$197,250
For Mobilization/Demobilization for all work at the 1740 Rollins
4.0
Road Pump Station site.
1
LS
$32,000
$32,000
$30,000
$30,000
$54,000
$54,000
For Environmental/NPDES Compliance for all work conducted on
5.0
the 1740 Rollins Road Pump Station site.
1
LS
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$25,000
$25,000
For furnishing all labor, equipment, and materials, complete, all
as shown on the Contract Drawings and specified herein, for
debris removal, concrete surface cleaning and preparation, and
6.0
application of protective lining system of the interior concrete
wet well surfaces of the 842 Cowan Road Stormwater Pump
Station.
1
LS
$120,000
$120,000
$140,000
$140,000
$296,874
$296,874
For furnishing all labor, equipment, and materials, complete, all
as shown on the Contract Drawings and specified herein for
7.0
removal and replacement of stormwater discharge pipe flap
valves at the 842 Cowan Road Stormwater Pump Station site.
1
LS
1 $75,000
1 $75,000
$100,0001
$100,000
$61,000
$61,000
For Mobilization/Demobilization for all work at the 842 Cowan
8.0
Road Pump Station site.
1
LS
1 $25,000
$25,000
$30,000
$30,000
$54,000
$54,000
For Environmental/NPDES Compliance for all work conducted on
9.0
the 1740 Rollins Road Pump Station site.
1
LS
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$25,000
$25,000
Subtotal
$597,000
$724,000
$1,149,066
Contingency (5%)
$30,000
Total Estimateed Construction Cost
$627,000
$724,000
1 1
$1,149,066
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
1740 Rollins Road and 842 Cowan Road Pump Station Repairs
City Project Nos. 85830
BVRL,INGAME AGENDA NO: 8c
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: December 2, 2019
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: December 2, 2019
From: Bradley McCulley, City Librarian — (650) 558-7404
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Accepting Grant Funds from the California
Libraries Cultivating Race, Equity, and Inclusion Initiative Grant Program
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting $5,000 of grant
funding from the California Libraries Cultivating Race, Equity and Inclusion Initiative Program and
amending the Library's operating budget for Fiscal Year 2019-20.
BACKGROUND
The CALIFA Group, in partnership with the Marin County Free Library and the Santa Monica
Public Library, received a $225,000 grant from the California State Library for CREI: California
Libraries Cultivating Race, Equity, and Inclusion Initiative to be implemented in FY 2019-20. The
Burlingame Library was chosen to participate in an immersive process designed specifically for
government organizations. CREI will provide coordinated training, and the work will focus on skills
building, support, collegial mentorship, and the development of a tailored Vision Statement and a
Racial Equity Action Plan with strategies for implementation.
DISCUSSION
Four library staff have committed to becoming a Core Team for moving the racial equity work
forward. These staff members will attend all training and meeting dates; create and share both a
public and internal facing statement about racial equity; and develop and deploy a Racial Equity
Plan. Staff will work with the Human Resources Director on reviewing City hiring practices in
conjunction with the best practice standards for racially equitable hiring practices.
FISCAL IMPACT
The grant funds the cost of trainings and materials associated with the above mentioned
deliverables. There will be no fiscal impact to the City's General Fund, other than staff time
associated with administering this grant.
Exhibit:
• Resolution
1
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2019-20 ADOPTED
BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA LIBRARIES
CULTIVATING RACE, EQUITY AND INCLUSION GRANT
WHEREAS, the Library was awarded funds in the amount of $5,000 from the California
Libraries Cultivating Race, Equity and Inclusion Grant; and
WHEREAS, the Library plans to use these funds to attend trainings, create and share
both a public and internal facing statement about racial equity, and develop a Racial Equity
Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that there is a need to accept and
appropriate the $5,000 from the California Libraries Cultivating Race, Equity and Inclusion Grant
towards these activities.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
The City Manager is authorized to adjust the Fiscal Year 2019-20 budget to include the
necessary appropriations for the expenditure of the grant funds described above.
Donna Colson, Mayor
I, MEAGHAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the
foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 2nd
day of December, 2019, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk
STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO:
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: December 2, 2019
MEETING DATE
From: Bradley McCulley, City Librarian — (650) 558-7404
December 2, 2019
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Accepting Grant Funds from the Burlingame
Library Foundation for Community Room Upgrade
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting $100,000 of grant
funding from the Burlingame Library Foundation and amending the Library's operating budget for
Fiscal Year 2019-2020.
BACKGROUND
Usage of the Library Lane Community Room has increased exponentially since it was renovated
in 1997. The Library offers programs in this room an average of 30 - 40 times per month. This
space is utilized for a wide array of events such as author presentations, movie nights, children
story times, crafts, `maker' (how-to) classes, outside community events, and many different City
and County agency meetings, including special City Council meetings.
DISCUSSION
The objectives of the
upgrade are to
improve the
acoustics, modernize presentation
and meeting
technologies, provide
better lighting,
and create a
more versatile and positive patron
experience.
FISCAL IMPACT
There will be no fiscal impact to the City's General Fund, as the $100,000 grant will be utilized to
cover the expenses of improvements to the Lane Community Room.
Exhibit
• Resolution
1
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2019-20 ADOPTED
BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS FROM THE BURLINGAME LIBRARY
FOUNDATION
WHEREAS, the Burlingame Library Foundation awarded funds in the amount of
$100,000 to the Library; and
WHEREAS, the Library plans to use these funds to make upgrades to the Lane
Community Room; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that there is a need to accept and
appropriate the $100,000 from the Burlingame Library Foundation towards these activities.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
The City Manager is authorized to adjust the Fiscal Year 2019-20 budget to include the
necessary appropriations for the expenditure of the grant funds described above.
Donna Colson, Mayor
I, MEAGHAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the
foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 2nd
day of December, 2019, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk
CITY Ort.
STAFF REPORT
g1{.
9vortwe
To:
Date:
From:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
December 2, 2019
AGENDA NO: 9a
MEETING DATE: December 2, 2019
Carol Augustine, Finance Director— (650) 588-7222
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Approving and Levying 2020 San Mateo County
Tourism Business Improvement District Assessments on Hotel Businesses
within the District
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing to consider any protests to the San
Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID) assessments; close the public
hearing and ask the City Clerk to report out any protests filed with the City; determine whether a
majority (in relation to the total number of hotel rooms in the district — 18,029 rooms) protest has
been made; and, if a majority protest has not been made, adopt a Resolution approving and
levying assessments for 2019.
BACKGROUND
The San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID) was formed in 2001 to
revitalize the San Mateo County Convention & Visitors Bureau (SMCCVB). Prior to that time, the
Bureau's marketing and sales efforts had been funded with a share of transient occupancy tax
revenues from those cities that chose to participate. By 1999, this inconsistent funding stream
had resulted in layoffs and a reduction in activities at the Bureau, leading hoteliers to express their
dissatisfaction in the inadequate marketing of the area and their properties. The Board hired
Anne LeClair as the Bureau's new CEO in May 2000, with specific direction to form a TBID to
provide adequate and consistent funding for the Bureau's activities. At that time, Burlingame was
forwarding over $425,000 of TOT dollars annually to the Bureau. Because Burlingame had the
most hotel rooms and had the greatest interest in seeing the TBID formed, the City agreed to act
as "Lead Agency" for the TBID. Following multiple meetings with hotels and city councils in the
County, the Bureau proposed the TBID, and the City of Burlingame held all of the required
hearings in 2000, with the TBID going into effect in 2001. Board slots were allocated based upon
the number of hotel rooms in the various cities, with Burlingame allotted four, the most of any city.
Since the San Mateo County TBID's formation, the Burlingame City Council has held the annual
reauthorization hearing for the TBID, and the City has overseen the various cities' tourism fee
assessment payments.
The TBID now has 14 cities, along with unincorporated San Mateo County, participating. The
District uses annual assessments of its 171 member hotel businesses to fund its successful and
wide-ranging promotional activities. On November 4, 2019, the City Council approved the
1
2020 Assessments for the Tourism Business Improvement District December Z 2019
Bureau's 2019 annual report, filed by the District Advisory Board with the City Clerk. The report
states the District's activities and accomplishments during the past year. Among other
achievements, the Board reported that 27,955 room nights had been definitely generated from
the Bureau's activities from October 2018 through September 2019, as well as numerous
banquets, not including individual corporate or leisure traveler nights generated through
promotion of the area as a whole. Meeting leads generated for San Mateo County and Palo Alto
properties had a potential economic impact of approximately $18.2 million. The District Board is
recommending that the Council adopt and levy the 2020 assessments on the hotel businesses
within the District to support similar activities in the coming year.
At the November 4th meeting, the City Council adopted a Resolution stating its intention to levy
the annual assessments and to schedule a hearing for December 2, 2019. Notices of the public
hearing and the proposed assessments were provided to the cities and members of the District
by the District staff.
The assessments requested by the District are consistent with the original authority for
assessments enacted in 2001 at the time of District formation, and the method of computing the
assessments has not changed from last year. Total assessments for the TBID in 2020
approximate $2.4 million.
DISCUSSION
The City Council should take the following actions:
• Conduct a public hearing on the proposed District assessments for 2020
• Determine whether a majority protest has been made
• If a majority protest has not been made, adopt the Resolution approving and levying
assessments for the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District for the
year 2020
FISCAL IMPACT
Assessment revenues provide funding for operations and activities of the San Mateo County
Tourism Business Improvement District. The City charges the Bureau an annual fee based on
costs of services attributable to administration of the assessments to non -Burlingame hotels. For
the 2020 assessment, the fee is $9,300. There is no other direct fiscal impact to the City.
Exhibit:
• Resolution Approving Assessments for 2020
2
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME APPROVING AND LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR
THE SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND
APPROVING DISTRICT PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES FOR THE YEAR 2020
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 36500 et seq.,
the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District ("District" herein) has been
established for the purpose of promoting tourism in the District; and
WHEREAS, the District Advisory Board has requested the Burlingame City Council to
establish calendar year 2020 assessments for the District; and
WHEREAS, on November 4, 2019, the City Council approved the District report and
adopted a resolution of intention declaring its intent to impose assessments for the calendar year
2020 and setting and noticing a public hearing about the proposed assessments for December 2,
2019; and
WHEREAS, notices were provided to the hotel businesses within the District as required
by law; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Streets & Highways Code, a public hearing on the proposed
assessments was duly held on December 2, 2019, at 7:00 p.m. before the City Council of the City
of Burlingame, at the Council Chambers at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Streets and Highways Code, the City
Council determined at the conclusion of the public hearing that a majority protest had not been
made as to the proposed assessments or as to any proposed program or activity for the District;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed assessments and method of computing the assessments appear
reasonable and consistent with the ordinance establishing the District, as amended, and the
underlying State law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Burlingame does hereby
resolve, determine, and find as follows:
1. Upon close of the public hearing, written protests to assessments, improvements or
activities were not received which constituted a majority protest as defined in Government Code
sections 36500 and following; accordingly, the Council finds that there was no majority protest to
the assessments.
2. The City Council does hereby levy an assessment for the calendar year 2020 on hotel
businesses within the District as described in City of Burlingame Ordinance Nos. 1648, 1678,
and 1774, as further amended, for the purpose of funding services, programs, and activities of the
District.
3. The types of services, programs, and activities to be funded by the levy of assessments
on businesses in the District for the calendar year 2020 are set forth in Exhibit "A", incorporated
herein by reference.
4. The basis for assessments for the calendar year 2020 on all hotels within the District
are set forth in Exhibit "B", the Assessment Formula Chart, incorporated herein by reference.
5. The assessments for the calendar year 2020 on hotel businesses within the District
are set forth in Exhibit "C", incorporated herein by reference.
6. New businesses shall not be exempt from assessment.
Donna Colson, Mayor
I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 2"d day of
December, 2019, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
NOES:
Councilmembers:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk
2020 Assessment Resolution
EXHIBIT A
SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
SAN MATEO COUNTY/SILICON VALLEY CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU
PLANNED ACTIVITIES FOR 2020
For the calendar year 2020, the Bureau plans to continue all of its normal activities, including but not
limited to:
* Develop more robust electronic marketing strategy across all platforms to further extend
the reach of the Bureau and Partners;
* Exhibiting in trade shows;
* Conducting individual familiarization (FAM) and site tours for planners;
* Conducting FAM tours for international travel agents from overseas;
* Conducting FAM tours for members of the food and travel media from around the U.S.;
* Conducting individual FAM tours for travel media;
* Using multiple social media channels to push out stories on the area;
* Conducting ad campaigns with Google to promote both our region and members we serve;
* Advertising in meeting planner publications;
* Advertising in leisure publications;
* Promoting the area to international and domestic media with regular releases of editorial;
* Creating multiple blogs every month to promote various aspects of the area;
* Creating updated visitor guides, electronic maps and specialty brochures, such as our Dog Friendly
Guide;
* Continue to assist film producers, helping them identify locations, secure permits and hotel
accommodations;
* Conduct sales outreach to recruit conferences, special events, tour and travel groups to the area;
* Assist with the promotion of job fairs for area community college and adult school students to help
employers in the hospitality industry find team members;
* Continue promoting the "As Fresh as it Gets" farm -to -table program, connecting restaurants with
farmers and farmers with consumers at local farmers markets;
* Continue to work with BART to make ticket purchases via our website a more streamlined experience,
allowing guests to purchase tickets prior to arriving in the area.
SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
ASSESSMENT FORMULA CHART
CATEGORY
ZONE A - ASSESSMENT FOR YEAR 2020
ZONE B - ASSESSMENT FOR YEAR 2020
ZONE C - ASSESSMENT FOR YEAR 2020
Hotel with full service
$360 per sleeping
room x 69.5% X (District months in 2020)
$360 per sleeping
room X 55% X (District months in 2020)
$360 per sleeping
room x 68% X
(District months in 2020)
and more than 20 sleeping
12
12
12
rooms
Hotel with limited service
$180 per sleeping
room X 60% X (District months in 2020)
$180 per sleeping
room X 40% X (District months in 2020)
$180 per sleeping
room X 60% X
(District months in 2020)
and 1,000 square feet or more
12
12
12
of meeting space
and more than 20 sleeping
rooms
Hotel with limited service
$90 per sleeping
room X 60% X (District months in 2020)
$90 per sleeping
room X 40% X (District months in 2020)
$90 per sleeping
room X 60% X
(District months in 2020)
and some meeting space
12
12
12
but less than 1,000 square
feet and more than 20
sleeping rooms
Hotel with standard service
$54 per sleeping
room X 60% X (District months in 2020)
$54 per sleeping
room X 40% X (District months in 2020)
$54 per sleeping
room X 60% X
(District months in 2020)
and more than 20 sleeping
12
12
12
rooms
Hotel with full service,
$54 per sleeping
room X 30% X (District months in 2020)
$54 per sleeping
room X 25% X (District months in 2020)
$54 per sleeping
room X 30% X
(District months in 2020)
limited service, or standard
12
12
12
service, and 20 sleeping
rooms or less
ZONE A - Includes all cities in the District except coastal cities and Palo Alto.
ZONE B - Includes Half Moon Bay, Pacifica and most additional unincorporated areas.
ZONE C - Palo Alto
1 of 6 ** SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS (ALL ZONES) FOR 2020 **
Burlingame Name of Property
Bay Landing
Crowne Plaza SFO
DoubleTree by Hilton SFO
Embassy Suites SFO - Waterfront
Hampton Inn & Suites
Zone
A
A
A
A
A
Category/Assessment
$ 90.00
$ 360.00
$ 360.00
$ 360.00
$ 54.00
# Rooms ANNUAL Assessment
130 $ 7,020.00
309 $ 77,311.80
395 $ 98,829.00
340 $ 85,068.00
77 $ 2,494.80
Monthly Assessment
$ 585.00
$ 6,442.65
$ 8,235.75
$ 7,089.00
$ 207.90
Hilton Garden Inn
A
$
180.00
132
$
14,256.00
$
1,188.00
Hilton SF Airport Bayfront
A
$
360.00
400
$
100,080.00
$
8,340.00
Holiday Inn Express SFO South
A
$
90.00
146
$
7,884.00
$
657.00
Hyatt Regency SFO
A
$
360.00
789
$
197,407.80
$
16,450.65
Red Roof Plus+
A
$
54.00
213
$
6,901.20
$
575.10
SFO Marriott Waterfront
A
$
360.00
688
$
172,137.60
$
14,344.80
Vagabond Inn Executive
A
$
54.00
90
$
2,916.00
$
243.00
Room Total
3709
Total:
$
772,306.20
San Mateo Name of Property
Zone
Category/Assessment
# Rooms
ANNUAL Assessment
Monthly Assessment
Americas Best Value Inn
A
$
54.00
53
$
1,717.20
$
143.10
Best Western Coyote Point
A
$
54.00
99
$
3,207.60
$
267.30
The Catrina Hotel
A
$
54.00
57
$
1,846.80
$
153.90
Extended Stay America
A
$
54.00
136
$
4,406.40
$
367.20
Hillsdale Inn
A
$
54.00
90
$
2,916.00
$
243.00
Hilton Garden Inn
A
$
180.00
156
$
16,848.00
$
1,404.00
Holiday Inn & Suites
A
$
360.00
110
$
27,522.00
$
2,293.50
Residence Inn
A
$
54.00
160
$
5,184.00
$
432.00
San Mateo Marriott
A
$
360.00
476
$
119,095.20
$
9,924.60
San Mateo SFO Airport Hotel
A
$
54.00
110
$
3,564.00
$
297.00
Stone Villa Inn
A
$
90.00
45
$
2,430.00
$
202.50
Room Total
1492
Total:
$
188,737.20
South San Francisco Name of Property
AC Hotel SFO/Oyster Point Waterfront
Airport Inn
All Seasons Lodge
Zone
A
A
A
Category/Assessment
$ 360.00
$ 54.00
$ 54.00
# Rooms
187
34
13
ANNUAL Assessment
$ 46,787.40
$ 1,101.60
$ 210.60
Monthly Assessment
$ 3,898.95
$ 91.80
$ 17.55
Americana Inn Motel
A
$
54.00
17
$
275.40
$
22.95
Americas Best Value Inn SFO
A
$
54.00
21
$
680.40
$
56.70
Best Western Plus Grosvenor Hotel
A
$
360.00
206
$
51,541.20
$
4,295.10
Comfort Inn & Suites SFO
A
$
54.00
166
$
5,378.40
$
448.20
Courtyard Oyster Point
A
$
180.00
197
$
21,276.00
$
1,773.00
Days Inn
JA
1 $
54.00
1 25
$
810.00
1 $
67.50
2 of 6 ** SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS (ALL ZONES) FOR 2020 ** REVISED DRAFT/ As of 1-1-20
Deluxe Inn
A
$
54.00
20
$ 324.00
$
27.00
Embassy Suites SFO
A
$
360.00
312
$ 78,062.40
$
6,505.20
Four Points by Sheraton
A
$
54.00
101
$ 3,272.40
$
272.70
Hampton Inn
A
$
54.00
100
$ 3,240.00
$
270.00
Hilton Garden Inn SFO North
A
$
180.00
169
$ 18,252.00
$
1,521.00
Holiday Inn Express & Suites
A
$
54.00
87
$ 2,818.80
$
234.90
Holiday Inn SF Int'I Airport
A
$
360.00
224
$ 56,044.80
$
4,670.40
Home2 Suites by Hilton SFO North
A
$
180.00
155
$ 16,740.00
$
1,395.00
Hotel Focus SFO
A
$
54.00
117
$ 3,790.80
$
315.90
Hotel Nova SFO by Fairbridge
A
$
54.00
45
$ 1,458.00
$
121.50
Hotel V
A
$
54.00
51
$ 1,652.40
$
137.70
La Quinta Inn & Suites
A
$
54.00
171
$ 5,540.40
$
461.70
Larkspur Landing
A
$
90.00
111
$ _ 5,994.00
$
499.50
Park Pointe Hotel
A
$
180.00
175
$ 18,900.00
$
1,575.00
Ramada Limited Suites
A
$
54.00
45
$ 1,458.00
$
121.50
Residence Inn Oyster Point
A
$
90.00
152
$ 8,208.00
$
684.00
Royal Inn
A
$
54.00
17
$ 275.40
$
22.95
Travelers Inn
A
$
54.00
20
$ 324.00
$
27.00
Travelodge SFO North
A
$
54.00
199
$ 6,447.60
$
537.30
Room Total
3137
Total:
$ 360,864.00
Millbrae Name of Property
Zone
Category/Assessment
# Rooms
ANNUAL Assessment
Monthly Assessment
Aloft SFO
A
$
90.00
298
$ 16,092.00
$
1,341.00
The Dylan Hotel at SFO
A
$
54.00
58
$ 1,879.20
$
156.60
EI Rancho Inn, Best Western Signature Collectior
A
$
54.00
219
$ 7,095.60
$
591.30
La Quinta Inn & Suites SFO
A
$
54.00
100
$ 3,240.00
$
270.00
Marriott Fairfield Inn & Suites SFO
A
$
54.00
80
$ 2,592.00
$
216.00
Millwood Inn & Suites
A
$
54.00
34
$ 1,101.60
$
91.80
The Westin S.F. Airport
A
$
360.00
418
$ 104,583.60
$
8,715.30
Room Total
1207
Total:
$ 136,584.00
Foster City Name of Property
ZoneT$$a
tegory/Assessment
# Rooms
ANNUAL Assessment
Monthly
Assessment
Crowne Plaza Foster City -San Mateo
A
360.00
356
$ 89,071.20
$
7,422.60
Courtyard San Mateo -Foster City
A
_
180.00
147
$ 15,876.00
$
1,323.00
TownePlace Suites San Mateo -Foster City
A
$
54.00
1j1$
3,920.40
$
326.70
Room Total
6
Total
108,867.60
3 of 6 ** SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS (ALL ZONES) FOR 2020 ** REVISED DRAFT/ As of 1-1-20
Half Moon Bay Name of Property
Zone
Category/Assessment
# Rooms
ANNUAL Assessment
Monthly Assessment
Beach House Hotel
B
180.00
54
$
3,888.00
$
324.00
Best Western Plus Cameron's Inn
B
$
90.00
46
$
1,656.00
$
138.00
Coastside Inn
B
54.00
_
52
1,123.20
93.60
Half Moon Bay Inn
B
$
54.00
15
202.50
16.88
Half Moon Bay Lodge
B
180.00
81
$
5,832.00
$
486.00
Mill Rose Inn
B
54.00
6
$
81.00
$
6.75
_
The Miramar Inn & Suites
B
54.00
27
583.20
48.60
Nantucket Whale Inn
B
$
54.00
7
$
94.50
7.88
Quality Inn
B
$
90.00
54
$
1,944.00
$
162.00
The Ritz-Carlton
B
360.00
261
51,678.00
4,306.50
San Benito House
B
54.00
12
162.00
13.50
Zaballa House Bed & Breakfast
B
54.00
16
216.00
18.00
Room Total
631
Total:
67,460.40
Unincorporated County Name of Property
Zone
Category/Assessment
# Rooms
ANNUAL Assessment
Monthly Assessment
Atherton Inn
B
$
54.00
5
$
67.50
$
5.63
Best Western Plus Executive Suites
B
$
54.00
29
$
626.40
$
52.20
Canyon Ranch Wellness Retreat
B
$
360.00
38
$
7,524.00
$
627.00
Costanoa
B
$
90.00
172
$
6,192.00
$
516.00
Cypress Inn on Miramar Beach
B
$
54.00
18
$
243.00
$
20.25
Grand Hyatt at SFO
A
$
360.00
351
$
87,820.20
$
7,318.35
Harbor View Inn
B
$
54.00
17
$
229.50
$
19.13
Inn at Mavericks
B
$
54.00
6
$
81.00
$
6.75
Inn Suites at Oceano
B
$
54.00
11
$
148.50
$
12.38
Ocean View Inn
B
$
54.00
9
$
121.50
$
10.13
The Oceanfront Hotel
B
$
54.00
8
$
108.00
$
9.00
Oceano Hotel & Spa
B
$
360.00
95
$
18,810.00
$
1,567.50
Pacific Victorian Bed & Breakfast
B
$
54.00
3
$
40.50
$
3.38
Pescadero Creek Inn
B
$
54.00
4
$
54.00
$
4.50
Seal Cove Inn
B
$
54.00
10
$
135.00
$
11.25
-
Room Total
776
Total:
122,201.10
4 of 6
** SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS (ALL ZONES)
FOR 2020 ** REVISED DRAFT/ As of 1-1-20
Redwood City
Name of Property
Atherton Park Inn & Suites
Best Western Inn
Budget Inn
Zone
A
A
A
Category/Assessment
$ 54.00
$ 54.00
$ 54.00
# Rooms
38
26
40
AN NUAL Assessment
$ 1,231.20
$ 842.40
$ 1,296.00
Monthly Assessment
$ 102.60
$ 70.20
$ 108.00
Capri Motel
A
$
54.00
50
$
1,620.00
$
135.00
Comfort Inn
A
$
54.00
52
$
1,684.80
$
140.40
Courtyard Redwood City
A
$
180.00
177
$
19,116.00
$
1,593.00
Days Inn
A
$
54.00
68
$
2,203.20
$
183.60
Deluxe Inn
A
$
54.00
27
$
874.80
$
72.90
Garden Motel
A
$
54.00
17
$
275.40
$
22.95
Good Nite Inn
A
$
54.00
123
$
3,985.20
$
332.10
Holiday Inn Express RWC Central
A
$
54.00
61
$
1,976.40
$
164.70
Pacific Euro Hotel
A
$
54.00
55
$
1,782.00
$
148.50
Pacific Inn
A
$
54.00
75
$
2,430.00
$
202.50
Pullman San Francisco Bay
A
$
360.00
421
$
105,334.20
$
8,777.85
Redwood Creek Inn
A
$
54.00
38
$
1,231.20
$
102.60
Redwood Motor Court
A
$
54.00
12
$
194.40
$
16.20
Sequoia Inn
A
$
54.00
22
$
712.80
$
59.40
TownePlace Suites Redwood Shores
A
$
54.00
95
$
3,078.00
$
256.50
Room Total
1397
San Bruno
Name of Property
Zone
Category/Assessment
Total:
# Rooms
$ 149,868.00
ANNUAL Assessment
Monthly Assessment
Bayhill Inn
A
$
54.00
24
$
777.60
$
64.80
Comfort Inn & Suites
A
$
54.00
29
$
939.60
$
78.30
Courtyard by Marriott
A
$
180.00
147
$
15,876.00
$
1,323.00
Days Inn
A
$
54.00
48
$
1,555.20
$
129.60
Gateway Inn & Suites
A
$
54.00
31
$
1,004.40
$
83.70
Hotel Aura SFO
A
$
54.00.
49
$
1,587.60
$
132.30
Ramada Limited
A
$
54.00
61
$
1,976.40
$
164.70
Regency Inn
A
$
54.00
31
$
1,004.40
$
83.70
Ritz Inn
A
$
54.00
23
$
745.20
$
62.10
Staybridge Suites
A
$
180.00
92
$
9,936.00
$
828.00
Super 8
A
$
54.00
54
$
1,749.60
$
145.80
Villa Montes Hotel
A
$
90.00
41
$
2,214.00
$
184.50
Room Total
630
Total:
$
39,366.00
5 of 6 ** SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS (ALL ZONES) FOR 2020 ** REVISED DRAFT/ As of 1-1-20
Belmont
Name of Property
Zone
Category/Assessment
# Rooms
ANNUAL Assessment
Monthly Assessment
Bel Mateo Motel
Belmont Palms
Extended Stay America
Holiday Inn Express & Suites
A
A
A
A
$
$
$
$
54.00
54.00
54.00
90.00
23
14
108
82
$
$
$
$
745.20
226.80
3,499.20
4,428.00
$
$
$
$
62.10
18.90
291.60
369.00
Homewood Suites by Hilton
Hotel Belmont
Hyatt House
Motel
Silicon Valley Inn
A
A
A
A
A
$
$
$
$
$
90.00
54.00
90.00
54.00
54.00
96
16
132
273
23
$
$
$
$
$
5,184.00
259.20
7,128.00
8,845.20
745.20
$
$
$
$
$
432.00
21.60
594.00
737.10
62.10
SpringHill Suites Belmont
A
$
90.00
168
$
9,072.00
$
756.00
Room Total
935
Total:
$
40,132.80
San Carlos
Name of Property
Zone
Category/Assessment
# Rooms
ANNUAL
Assessment
Monthly
Assessment
Americas Best Value Inn
A
$
54.00
32
$
1,036.80
$
86.40
Country Inn & Suites
A
$
54.00
50
$
1,620.00
$
135.00
Extended Stay America
A
$
90.00
116
$
6,264.00
$
522.00
Fairfield Inn & Suites
A
$
54.00
112
$
3,628.80
$
302.40
LiA Hotel
A
$
54.00
35
$
1,134.00
$
94.50
Residence Inn Redwood City -San Carlos
A
$
90.00
204
$
11,016.00
$
918.00
San Carlos Inn
A
$
54.00
10
$
- 162.00
$
13.50
Room Total
559
Total:
$
24,861.60
East Palo Alto
Name of Property
Zone
Category/Assessment
# Rooms
ANNUAL Assessment
Monthly Assessment
Palo Alto
Four Seasons Silicon Valley
Name of Property
Americas Best Value Sky Ranch Inn
A
Zone
C
$ 360.00
Category/Assessment
$ 54.00
200
# Rooms
29
$ 50,040.00
ANNUAL Assessment
$ 939.60
$ 4,170.00
Monthly Assessment
$ 78.30
Berbeda Place
C
$
54.00
18
$
291.60
$
24.30
Cardinal Hotel Palo Alto
C
$
54.00
60
$
1,944.00
$
162.00
The Clement Hotel
C
$
54.00
23
$
745.20
$
62.10
Comfort Inn Stanford
C
$
54.00
70
$
2,268.00
$
189.00
Coronet Motel
C
$
54.00
21
$
680.40
$
56.70
Country Inn Motel
C
$
54.00
27
$
874.80
$
72.90
Cowper Inn
C
$
54.00
14
$
226.80
$
18.90
Creekside Inn
C
$
180.00
136
$
14,688.00
$
1,224.00
6 of 6 ** SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS (ALL ZONES) FOR 2020 ** REVISED DRAFT / As of 1-1-20
Crowne Plaza Palo Alto
Dinah's Garden Hotel
Garden Court Hotel
Glass Slipper Inn
Hilton Garden Inn Palo Alto
Homewood Suites by Hilton Palo Alto
C
C
C
C
C
C
$
$
$
$
$
$
360.00
360.00
360.00
54.00
180.00
90.00
195
129
62
25
174
138
$ 47,736.00
$ 31,579.20
$ 15,177.60
$ 810.00
$ 18,792.00
$ 7,452.00
$
$
$
$
$
$
3,978.00
2,631.60
1,264.80
67.50
1,566.00
_ 621.00
Hotel Keen
C
$
54.00
42
$ 1,360.80
$
113.40
Hotel Parmani
C
$
54.00
36
$ 1,166.40
$
97.20
Oak Motel Palo Alto
The Nest Palo Alto
Nobu Hotel Palo Alto
C
C
C
$
$
$
54.00
54.00
360.00
42
54
77
$ 1,360.80
$ 1,749.60
$ 18,849.60
$
$ _
$
113.40
145.80
1,570.80
The Palo Alto Inn
C
$
54.00
23
$ 745.20
$
62.10
Sheraton Palo Alto
C
$
360.00
355
$ 86,904.00
$
7,242.00
Stanford Motor Inn
C
$
54.00
37
$ 1,198.80
$
99.90
Stanford Terrace Inn
C
$
90.00
80
$ 4,320.00
$
360.00
Travelodge Palo Alto Silicon Valley
C
$
54.00
29
$ 939.60
$
78.30
The Westin Palo Alto
C
$
360.00
184
$ 45,043.20
$
3,753.60
The Zen Hotel
C
$
54.00
37
$ 1,198.80
$
99.90
Room Total
2117
Total:
$ 309,042.00
Pacifica Name of Property
Zone
Category/Assessment
# Rooms
ANNUAL Assessment
Monthly
Assessment
Americas Best Value Inn
B
$
54.00
25
$ 540.00
$
45.00
Holiday Inn Express
B
$
54.00
38
$ 820.80
$
68.40
Inn at Rockaway
B
$
54.00
44
$ 950.40
$
79.20
Lighthouse Hotel
B
$
180.00
97
$ 6,984.00
$
582.00
Pacifica Beach Hotel
B
$
90.00
52
$ 1,872.00
$
156.00
Sea Breeze Motel
B
$
54.00
20
$ 270.00
$
22.50
Room Total
276
Total:
$ 11,437.20
Brisbane Name of Property
Zone
Category/Assessment
# Rooms
ANNUAL Assessment
Monthly
Assessment
DoubleTree by Hilton SFO North
A
$
360.00
210
$ 52,542.00
$
4,378.50
Homewood Suites by Hilton SFO North
A
$
90.00
177
$ 9,558.00
$
796.50
Room Total
387
Total:
$ 62,100.00
B L71NGAME AGENDA NO: 10a
aSTAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE. December 2, 2019
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: December 2, 2019
From: Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director — (650) 558-7253
Andrea Pappajohn, Sustainability & Climate Management Fellow — (650) 558-
7271
Subject: "Sea Change Burlingame" Summary Presentation
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council receive a summary presentation of the "Sea Change
Burlingame" initiative.
BACKGROUND
During the City Council's goal -setting session in January 2019, the Council identified five
infrastructure initiatives for special focus over the next year. The Mayor then assigned two
Councilmembers to champion each initiative. One of the initiatives is sea level rise shoreline
protection improvements. Mayor Colson and Councilmember Brownrigg are the Councilmembers
assigned to the initiative.
Separately, the City received a grant from San Mateo County to evaluate sea level rise as it relates
to Burlingame and identify potential near-term and long-term adaptation strategies that would be
applicable to the particular site conditions of the Bayfront. The study, known as "Sea Change
Burlingame," has provided a high-level assessment that will inform policies and future planning
efforts.
Additionally, the countywide Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District has been formed to allow
San Mateo County and its cities to coordinate across jurisdictional lines; avoid duplication of efforts
and build expertise; and create a unified voice that would better position the County and its cities
to obtain state and federal funds for addressing flooding, sea level rise, coastal erosion, and storm
water infrastructure improvements.
DISCUSSION
Sea Change Burlingame builds upon the San Mateo County Sea Level Rise Vulnerability
Assessment (accessible at www.seachangesmc.org). As a first step, the work plan combined the
findings of the Vulnerability Assessment together with an analysis prepared separately by the
Stanford University Sustainable Urban Systems Initiative classes last year to create a consolidated
"existing conditions" risk and vulnerabilities overview. Building upon that assessment, the work plan
9
SeaChange Burlingame December 2, 2019
has identified potential near-term and long-term adaptation strategies that would be applicable to
the particular site conditions of the Bayfront.
The goal of the study has been to develop an implementable sea -level rise adaptation plan for
Burlingame's shoreline, residents, and businesses. In order to help inform the adaptation
strategies, City staff and its consultant, ESA, held strategic outreach and coordination meetings
with Bayfront area stakeholders on July 10th, and with the broader community on October 16th. The
City also formed a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of staff from the City and
neighboring communities to provide feedback.
The approach outlined in the study and presented in these meetings organized the Bayfront into a
series of subareas, or "reaches," each of which share common physical characteristics (refer to
attached diagram). The adaptation approach within each reach may vary, based on the variations
in characteristics, as well as existing and future development patterns. In some instances, a levee
may be appropriate, whereas in other areas a floodwall may be more feasible given space
constraints. Other areas, such as the land owned by the Transportation Authority along the shore
at the eastern end of Broadway, may be suitable to "nature -based" adaptation measures that
combine engineering and naturalistic elements. Some of these approaches have been illustrated
in photo renderings (attached). The presentation and the risk and vulnerabilities memorandum from
the October 16th meeting can be downloaded from the project page at
www.burlingame.org/seachangeburlingame.
An objective of "Sea Change Burlingame" has been to identify a course for the City to consider to
address sea level rise in the coming years. The study has concluded with a "Road Map" (attached)
that outlines steps for the next five years ("Near Term"), as well as the years beyond ("Medium to
Long Term"). It describes a path to implementing adaptation solutions by first gaining more specific,
detailed information about the nature of the shoreline and flooding issues, by describing the actions
and decisions the City will need to make related to water level planning and neighbor coordination,
and then identifying critical path studies necessary to address sea level rise.
A "Next Steps Memorandum" will be the final deliverable and will further outline and provide greater
detail to the approach outlined in the Road Map. The memorandum can be referenced in future
work planning such as annual goal setting and budgeting.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this staff report.
Exhibits:
• Bayfront Reaches Diagram
• Adaptation Photo Renderings
• "Burlingame Road Map to Sea Level Rise Adaptation" diagram
• Work plan Gantt Chart
2
Burlingame Shoreline Reaches
Elevation (feet NAVD88)
: Shoreline–reaches Q 5.01 - 6 13.01 - 14
-- Streams
IM 6.01 -7
FMM 14.01 -15
-- Streets
I--1 7.01-8
M 15.01 -16
M0.24-1
CO 8.01-9
-16.01-17
M 1.01-2
19.01-10
= 17.01-18
®2.01-3
® 10.01-11
18.01-19
3.01-4
1-1 11.01-12
® 19.01-20
O 4.01-5
i3 12.01-13
0
1,000 2,000
4,000
Fee,
ri
/ r
r \ y 9
r,
r
j
w. �... _
}RIAC}1
-12 LANG
V
t
Ad
,r
s � '
L�
' � ``•• ��'o t` '%�� _' ��"i .i ro'� ; '6 = `!: � \ire's, �l�X
� °k C� 4 � ^�� ```.4 � . � ,� t ``�, ''\ � �i' �_ � ! •,ems ' �S � �, .
r
'
(umoys
jjV xadde)
6wpped pospi PanowaJ
jo moi 99n91 pempoog
e aaeuiwila 6ugsix3
Aew aanaI
PePuaax3
61
A
pasodad
. o.�I
'
yv
v
w
h
kR�014.
�
r
gseq INS
uollongsuoo peaq ql!m
qoeaq of uoglsueJl canal
coeds oggnd 6uizllelln9> >o} /glun}joddo
jals/o jo/pue pues asmo;o pasudwoo goeag
uaouoa w paslea canal
6wlsixD
Ai1����0�\la���,.0�� 'W+ \\\\W mv.A '.
"N'
•
' ssei
off ti dx
AeMg6IH a�ogs (eg ^
'Y
• y
gnlo a6pu8
,e
• ..,,. , _"�. "
aseal
a
,,
� .�uoilnjoS IieNb
N011dldV(IV CNVE)Nl
coq eH puei�.:
39NVHO d3S
5 -YEAR WORK PLAN
DECISION POINTS
Decide on Design Criteria
Determine Funding Sourc
Sea Cha
5-15 YEARS 15-30 YEARS
DECISION POINTS_
Decide on Priority Projects
• Raise Funds"
implement Priority Projects
_••� LONG-TERM PROJECTS
PRIORITY 1. Implement Adaptation Strategy
v
2. Additional Improvements to
�fbXuftentof�op7pii�,[e. PROJECTS Raise Shoreline Crest Elevations
.5 vears) 3. Raise Creek Levees
sting and new resources on the topics offend use tools, funding options, and groundwater studies1. Monitor SLR and Flooding Projections
2. Craft and Sign MOU with OLU Cities, SFO, FSLRRD on Creek and Shoreline Protection 2. Follow and participate in Regional
SLR Adaptation
3. Begin Public and Stakeholder Outreach 3. Plan for Retrofit/Realignment of
Buildings in Footprint of Levee
To:
Date:
From:
Subject:
STAFF REPORT
Honorable Mayor and City Council
December 2, 2019
AGENDA NO: 10b
MEETING DATE: December 2, 2019
Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director — (650) 558-7307
Syed Murtuza, Public Works Director — (650) 558-7234
Landscape Maintenance of California Drive from Lincoln Avenue to
Murchison Drive for Bike Lane Safetv
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council review and provide direction to staff regarding the
landscaping maintenance of California Drive from Lincoln Avenue to Murchison Drive for bike lane
safety.
BACKGROUND
While much of the landscaping adjacent to the east side of California Drive is located on the
property owned by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, the City's Parks Division staff
has been maintaining the landscaping from Lincoln Avenue to Murchison Drive in order to prevent
it from encroaching into the street. In the past, the maintenance activities occurred on a bi-annual
basis and required 220 staff hours to complete. Much of the landscaping is directly adjacent to the
curb and visually blocks the view of the area of train tracks.
The landscaping is comprised of:
1. Casuarina — "Pine like" tree with soft feathery branches, fast growing, rapidly encroaches
on bike lane.
2. Oleander- Flowering shrub, prevalent on the north end, moderate growth.
3. Leptospermum — Mature woody shrub with small leaves, fast growing, when trimmed
reveals a woody structure.
4. Blackberry — Thorny vine prevalent on south end, long runners encroach in bike lane.
5. Coast Live Oak- Woody tree cut as a shrub. When trimmed reveals a woody structure.
6. Rapheolepis — Flowering shrub on north end, easily maintained with regular pruning.
With the recent improvements along California Drive and the installation of the designated bike
lane, the Public Works Department requested that the Parks Division increase the landscape
maintenance frequency to four times per year. This would help to ensure a clear bike path by
preventing vegetation encroachment into the bike lane while still maintaining the visual screen for
the residents along California Drive.
1
Landscape Maintenance of California Drive from Lincoln Avenue to Murchison Drive December 2, 2019
Given the current staffing levels in the Parks Division, the additional work would result in negative
impacts to other areas under the purview of the Parks Division. In addition, the new street lining
configuration increases the complexity of rerouting traffic to complete the work. Parks Division and
Public Works staff determined that the additional work could be completed by a landscape
contractor, and funds in the amount of $65,000 for 4 trimmings per year were approved in the FY
2019-20 budget for this work.
DISCUSSION
On March 5, 2019, the City issued a proposal requesting bids for this landscape maintenance work
and received one bid in the amount of $65,000 per maintenance trimming. Staff believes that the
complexity and extensiveness of traffic control required for safety contributed to the high cost.
Staff met again to discuss possible solutions and developed two options:
1. Increase the budget to accommodate the additional cost to maintain the landscaping four
times per year and continue to budget for the maintenance each year.
2. Have the landscape contractor significantly lift and cutback the landscaping along California
Drive and perform maintenance once annually.
Under the first option, the City will need to increase the budget to approximately $260,000 per year.
Under the second option, the annual cost will be approximately $69,000, along with any staff costs
associated with maintenance by Parks Division staff on an as -needed basis. The work included in
the second option includes cutting the landscaping back to approximately 3' along the length of
California and removing limbs on trees and large shrubs below 8'. The challenges with significantly
lifting and cutting back the landscaping include:
1. An increased view of the train tracks
2. Increased direct access to the train tracks (many areas along the train tracks do not have
protective railroad fencing)
3. A potential perception of an increase in sound and dust from the train tracks
4. The removal of the current green landscaping wall in certain locations, thereby exposing
the dead undergrowth and leaving a more "woody -like" appearance.
FISCAL IMPACT
Increasing the frequency of maintenance to four times a year using an outside contractor is
estimated to cost approximately $260,000 annually, while once a year maintenance by an outside
contractor is estimated to cost $69,000 annually. Under this second option, there will still be some
costs associated with Parks Division staff doing spot maintenance as needed. The Parks Division
budget for FY 2019-20 includes sufficient funding for the landscape contractor to maintain the
landscape one time. Should the City Council wish to increase the frequency this year, funds can
be appropriated from the General Fund balance for this purpose and included as an ongoing
expense in future budgets.
Exhibit:
. Map of California Drive from Lincoln Avenue to Murchison Drive
O 0R i RFF�q} 2BRFTy ��P�
F � 'p�
V �O
yO �O Z
�� (32 RO v
Ic
/ Mq�' Q Ptir O \ v'9 SSP O
Q-
JF�`O
�p� OP�� c �v P� F A 00C9 9gYs
sTP 00 qST G �P y0
� �oR ��o � qCe M rtiiOON �o`� MFgoO M pR � �o� oo M a RF y/cti
� 2'9,pC, J�� eq<B F gRCF ly-9 R � CN O /y e� gRSTFN �qY
SF p <) CO Oq Y O ORT RO
QO01 �C RONq �qY N cq
s F 7,k qRc SFN �qY y%y�qr N P �o �ti
i FSgO ��G MO00 OCO P Q- RO �\ ~ �ri�.r
q ly'9 GAP NqC �'q � } rP 3e (aRN�h W �o Q
Y Op MONTF O y'q BOJ "i cy yc �9TEl qr P
CTCr
RPY OR ORIF
CT o RpCq
A N
c0
S1R� WAY �Py cg9R/C q`F CyOCq C9�/F q�F
gReN 2 \JSP qINN
CD/V/q h CO 60S O�q CO q`c/STq j�/
California Drive from Lincoln Avenue to Murchison Drive
Project Location Map
MRUNGAM
QW�'E STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 10c
- MEETING DATE: December 2, 2019
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: December 2, 2019
From: Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager — (650) 558-7243
Subject: Discussion of Programs to Assist Renters Facing No -Cause Evictions and
Authorization to Provide Supplemental Funding to Samaritan House for this
Purpose
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council discuss programs to assist renters facing no -cause evictions
and authorize the provision of supplemental funding to Samaritan House for this purpose.
BACKGROUND
During public comment at the November 4 City Council meeting, several members of the
Burlingame community requested that the City adopt an urgency ordinance to prohibit evictions
without "just cause" as some Burlingame renters have received eviction notices that are effective
prior to January 1, 2020, and they are concerned that others may receive eviction notices prior to
AB 1482 becoming effective on January 1, 2020.
On November 12, the City Council held a special study session to discuss the matter and determine
whether or not to ask staff to bring an urgency ordinance to the City Council for consideration. The
staff report from the November 12 meeting is attached. At the end of the study session, three
Councilmembers asked that an urgency ordinance be drafted and agendized for the November 18
City Council meeting.
At the November 18 meeting, the City Council heard public comment and discussed the proposed
urgency ordinance. Although three members of the City Council voted in favor of the urgency
ordinance, it failed as urgency ordinances require four votes to pass.
DISCUSSION
During the discussion on November 18, Councilmember Keighran suggested that instead of
adopting the proposed urgency ordinance, the City create an emergency fund to assist those
renters facing no-fault evictions during this interim period before AB 1482 goes into effect on
January 1, 2020 and prohibits no-fault evictions statewide. Councilmember Keighran stated that a
City emergency fund could be used for help with a rent gap, relocation fees, and security deposits.
1
Renter Assistance Programs December 2, 2019
Subsequent to the meeting, representatives from the California Apartment Association (CAA) and
the San Mateo County Association of Realtors (SAMCAR) provided information to City staff about
their programs to assist renters.
California Apartment Association Program
CAA Tri -County members founded the Housing Industry Foundation (HIF) 30 years ago to assist
families facing unforeseen circumstances that jeopardize their housing stability. HIF has an
Emergency Housing Grant program that gives individuals and families up to $2,500 to assist with
security deposits, rent, and/or utilities. The grants can be processed within 24 hours, and the grant
is issued directly to the landlord, property manager, or the owner of the housing unit. Community
members in San Mateo County are eligible to apply for the grant, which is administered by HIF's
partner organizations. For Burlingame renters, HIF's local partner organization is Samaritan
House. Additional information can be found at the following link: https://www.hifinfo.org/need-
housing-assistance/.
SAMCAR Program
SAMCAR's program is less formal. They have created a task force to help place tenants who need
help securing an apartment, and they provide some funding assistance if rents are raised above a
certain threshold. Renters can access the SAMCAR program by contacting the Association directly
at (650) 696-8200.
City Funding
During the budget cycle each year, the City allocates funding ($55,000 total for FY 2019-20) to
various community groups that provide services to the Burlingame community. This year, the
Council allocated $5,290 to Samaritan House for its Core Services programs, and another $4,925
to Samaritan House's Safe Harbor shelter. Through its homelessness prevention program,
Samaritan House helps families avoid a major crisis and homelessness with emergency rent or
assistance with utility bills. This helps families to avoid eviction and remain in their homes.
Samaritan House housing and shelter programs are described and can be accessed through the
following link: https://samaritanhousesanmateo.org/service/housing-services/.
The City Council may wish to increase its contribution to Samaritan House in order to help those
Burlingame renters who received no-fault eviction notices on or after October 8 when Governor
Newsom signed AB 1482 into law. A City contribution of $15,000, specifically reserved for
Burlingame renters, could help these tenants with security deposits and relocation assistance.
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact of this action is up to $15,000. The City Council's community funding
programming has already been obligated for this fiscal year. Therefore, funds will need to be
appropriated from undesignated fund balance during the mid -year budget update.
2
MINN AGENDA ITEM NO: 10d
BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: December 2, 2019
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: December 2, 2019
From: Lisa Goldman, City Manager — (650) 558-7204
Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director — (650) 558-7253
Kathleen Kane, City Attorney — (650) 558-7204
Subject: Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the City of Burlingame to Become
an Additional Member of the California Community Housing Agency
(CaICHA)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council consider the opportunity to become a noncharter
additional member of the California Community Housing Agency (CaICHA).
BACKGROUND
A new bond -financing program was recently created, with the stated purpose of supporting rental
housing affordable for middle and moderate -income households earning less than 120 percent of
the AMI. The California Community Housing Agency (CaICHA) was formed pursuant to a joint
exercise of powers agreement (the Agreement) between two original members, Kings County and
the Housing Authority of Kings County. Under the auspices of this Joint Powers Agreement (JPA)
agency, multi -family developments are acquired through public bond financing. The bonds are
issued with a 30 -year term, with amortization beginning in year 15. Rents are capped (with
maximum annual increases) for existing tenants satisfying the target AMI. For existing tenants
who earn in excess of the target AMI, rents may be raised as suggested by the market (and now
capped under AB 1482). Once existing tenants who earn in excess of the target AMI leave their
units, the units are rented to tenants satisfying the income requirement. Therefore, how quickly
the multifamily project reaches the target AMI depends on its existing tenants and the speed of
turnover, as well as there being sufficient demand for the units among prospective tenants earning
the target income. The JPA is exempt from property taxes on the multifamily developments it
holds.
In accordance with the Agreement, additional cities, counties, and other local government entities
may, and have, joined CaICHA (additional members). CaICHA is authorized to issue revenue
bonds and to conduct a range of activities including acquisition, ownership, maintenance, and
operation of any property. Under the Agreement, bonds are issued as limited obligations of
CaICHA and not of the additional member and are payable solely out of the revenues and receipts
derived from the project being financed.
The Agreement expressly provides that CaICHA is a public entity separate and apart from its
1
California Community Housing Agency (CaICHA) December 2, 2019
members, and that the debts, liabilities, and obligations of CaICHA do not constitute debts,
liabilities, or obligations of any members. Bonds issued for any particular project will be
indebtedness solely of CaICHA, and payable only from revenues of the project.
The JPA Agreement states that only members of the Kings County Board of Supervisors may be
voting board members of the JPA. The Board members do not receive a separate stipend,
although their expenses may be reimbursed. Additional members, such as Burlingame, have no
voting rights or guarantee of direct influence on the JPA's investment, policy, or operational
decisions. CaICHA states that it has adopted a policy to not issue bonds for a project unless the
governing body of an additional member in which the proposed project is located approves the
issuance of the bonds, although this and other policies may be modified from time to time. The
JPA board has retained two private entities to run the operations of the JPA. While additional
members can make their wishes known, there is no structural guarantee in the JPA Agreement
itself that additional member jurisdictions can control future purchases by the JPA.
To participate in this new program, the City would need to become a non-voting member of
CaICHA.
DISCUSSION
CaICHA has proposed purchasing a multifamily rental apartment complex in Burlingame for
conversion to below market rate rental housing. The purchase does not include any financial
investment from the City. Existing tenants who qualify would be offered below market rents that
would increase at no more than 4 percent per year. As vacancies occur, new tenants would need
to income qualify for the below market rate program to be eligible to lease units.
As proposed by the JPA, the City could enter into a Purchase Option Agreement that allows the
City, at its sole discretion, to purchase or sell the property between year 15 and year 30 (the end
of the life) of the bonds. The City may also assign this purchase option to another entity, provided
that assignment is approved by the JPA Board. To maintain housing affordability past 30 years,
the most likely outcome would be for the City to assign its purchase option to a nonprofit housing
organization. If approved by the City Council, the City will be provided with a Purchase Option
Agreement for future properties in Burlingame (including but not limited to the property currently
being considered). The Purchase Option agreement provides that surplus cash generated by the
project may be held for the City's use if it decides to exercise the option. In order to exercise the
purchase option, the City would need to pay off any remaining debt on the asset as well as fees
and costs of the JPA and its managers. The JPA Board has the authority to dispose of the property
at the end of the bond term if the City does not exercise a Purchase Option.
CaICHA represents that it cannot sell or transfer the property during the initial 15 years and can
only sell or transfer the property between years 15 and 30 with the City's approval, and that the
property will be encumbered with a regulatory agreement that will be enforced by CaICHA.
According to the JPA, a professional property management company with experience managing
market rate and below market rate properties will manage the property.
CaICHA would be acquiring an existing market rate complex. While there is no guarantee CaICHA
California Community Housing Agency (CaICHA) December 2, 2019
will be selected as the buyer, passing the resolution creates future opportunities for CaICHA to
acquire similar properties in Burlingame to create and preserve affordability.
In evaluating the program, several considerations should be weighed against the program
benefits. To provide assistance with this evaluation, staff has consulted with Bill Lowell, who has
experience with the County of San Mateo Department of Housing (DOH), as well as the Home for
All initiative, and has provided assistance to the City on other housing program endeavors.
Attached to this staff report is a memo from Mr. Lowell outlining areas of consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT
No financial expenditures, liabilities, or obligations would be created by joining CaICHA or
executing the purchase option agreements. However, if a project is purchased through the tax-
exempt funding model, the development would be eligible for the welfare tax exemption, resulting
in a loss of revenue to the City and other agencies benefitting from local taxes. While the value
of the currently anticipated acquisition is unknown, an estimate of $100M for the purchase price
would have losses to the City of $170,000 per year in property tax, $290,000 in loss to the County,
$470,000 in loss to the State for education, and $70,000 to other County entities. Should the JPA
acquire other properties in Burlingame, future property tax losses would adhere as well.
If the purchase option agreement is exercised between year 15 and year 30 (the end of the life of
the bonds), a fiscal impact could result from the acquisition cost. Surplus cash flow from the
property could be used to offset the cost of exercising the purchase option.
Exhibits:
■ Memorandum — Considerations
■ Proposed Resolution
■ Attachment A — CaICHA Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement
■ Attachment B — CaICHA Additional Member Signature Page
■ Attachment C — CaICHA Purchase Option Agreement (sample, subject to revision)
■ Attachment D — CaICHA No Liability Letter
3
Date: November 21, 2019
From: Bill Lowell
Consultant
To: Lisa Goldman, City Manager
Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director
On November 18, 2019, Lisa Goldman, Kevin Gardiner, Council Member Michael
Brownrigg and Bill Lowell met with Jordan Moss, Founder of the Catalyst Housing
Group. The meeting's purpose was to review Mr. Moss's proposal for Burlingame to join
a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) known as California Community Housing Agency or
CaICHA so that the JPA can purchase rental properties in Burlingame.
CaICHA was formed in January 2019 by Kings County and the Kings County Housing
Authority. Ca1CHA's board consists of the County's Board of Supervisors which also sits
as the Board of Directors for the Housing Authority.
The purpose of CaICHA is to acquire large rental complexes in order to deed restrict the
properties to maximum rents associated with moderate income limits and to further
restrict the properties so that annual rent increases are limited to annual CPI increases
with a maximum amount of 4% per annum.
Ownership of the acquired properties is by the JPA. As a governmental entity, CaICHA is
exempt from property taxes. The savings resulting from this tax exemption are used to
lower and restrict rents and to pay for all costs associated with property and asset
management.
CaICHA has a potential acquisition located in Burlingame. Its by-laws require that prior
to committing to a purchase, the relevant municipality must join the JPA. There are no
costs associated with becoming part of the JPA. In addition to the rental savings for
moderate -income households, another potential benefit is that any time from 15 years of
ownership and longer, the city can take ownership of the property for the cost of the
outstanding debt balance. According to the model, the property provides sufficient cash
flow to meet all bond repayments plus upkeep and management. The apartment complex
would then become a deed restricted housing asset for the community in perpetuity.
CaICHA has completed two transactions, one in Santa Rosa and one in Fairfield.
The model seeks to fill a void of subsidy availability for moderate -income households.
Public subsidies are only available to projects serving households with income below
80% of Area Median Income (AMI) and, depending on the structure of the funding
subsidy, below 50-60% of AMI. Households earning 80-120% of AMI (commonly
referred to as moderate -income) are sometimes considered a "missing middle" because
they earn too much to qualify for subsidized housing and perhaps not enough to afford
market rate housing.
Areas for Consideration:
The model would most likely provide $100-300 per month of rent relief according
to an example presented. Furthermore, rental increases would be limited to the
lower of CPI or 4%. The question arises as to whether this is a good enough trade
for the loss of property tax revenue. The monthly rental savings are important, but
not substantial. The annual increase limitation may be less compelling as a result
of the passage of AB 1482, which limits increases to 5% plus CPI up to a
maximum of 10%. Is the additional potential limit on annual increases (AB 1482
limits vs. Ca1CHA limits) a sufficient trade for the lost tax revenue?
2. Would it be possible for the Ca1CHA model to also work in lower AMI bands?
Would additional capital make this work? To their credit, Ca1CHA has produced a
model that requires only one form of subsidy, i.e. relief from property taxes.
However, renters in lower economic situations can also use rent relief. As I noted,
AB 1482 is now substantially covering a cap on annual rent increases thus
reducing the importance of the model's annual cap.
3. I am neither an attorney nor an accountant. Documents regarding future transfer
of properties, default provisions and other unforeseen changes to the model, e.g.
change of asset manger or JPA founders, should be reviewed by an attorney.
4. Is there any potential issue with the city, in effect, providing rental assistance for
moderate -income households, but not lower income households who are also
subject to a rapidly inflating market? Catalyst's model may also be helpful if it
can be expanded to include a potential infusion of local capital in order to reach
lower income renters, most of whom do not reside in below market rate
apartments.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING
THE CITY TO BECOME A NON -CHARTER ADDITIONAL MEMBER OF THE CALIFORNIA
COMMUNITY HOUSING AGENCY ("CALCHA"); SUPPORTING CALCHA'S ISSUANCE OF
TAX-EXEMPT BONDS FOR THE PRODUCTION, PRESERVATION, AND PROTECTION OF
MIDDLE INCOME RENTAL HOUSING; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
ENTER INTO PURCHASE OPTION AGREEMENTS WITH CALCHA FOR ESSENTIAL
MIDDLE-INCOME RENTAL HOUSING CREATED WITHIN CITY LIMITS
WHEREAS, one of the primary goals of the City of Burlingame is to meet the growing
housing needs of its residents by actively supporting the production, preservation, and
protection of market -rate and affordable rental housing for all; and
WHEREAS, no existing Federal or State subsidies currently exist to meaningfully
address the growing shortfall of protected middle-income rental housing; and
WHEREAS, CaICHA is a Joint Powers Authority created to produce, preserve, and
protect quality affordable rental housing made available to California's essential middle-
income workforce; and
WHEREAS, CaICHA intends to acquire existing rental properties within City limits and
restrict future occupancy to middle-income households earning no more than 120% of area
median income; and
WHEREAS, CaICHA will finance its acquisitions through the issuance of tax-exempt
bonds, and in order for CaICHA to issue tax-exempt bonds in the City, Burlingame must be a
non -charter Additional Member of CaICHA; and
WHEREAS, the City proposes to become a non -charter Additional Member of CaICHA
pursuant to Section 12 of the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement Relating to the California
Community Housing Agency; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to becoming a non -charter Additional Member of CaICHA,
any existing rental housing within City limits which CaICHA intends to acquire and finance
with tax-exempt bonds must receive support and approval from the City; and
WHEREAS, the City proposes to support and approve CalCHA'S issuance of tax-
exempt bonds for the acquisition of existing rental properties as a means towards the
preservation and protection of essential middle-income rental housing within City limits; and
WHEREAS, CalCHA'S issuance of tax-exempt bonds will provide public benefit
through the production, preservation, and protection of below -market -rate rental housing, as
well as the granting of all surplus project revenues to the City; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to one or more purchase option agreements (the "Purchase
Option Agreements"), between CaICHA and the City, CaICHA will grant the City the option,
RESOLUTION NO.
but never the obligation, to purchase each essential middle-income rental housing property
commencing on the date fifteen (15) years after CalCHA's acquisition of such property; and
WHEREAS, the City will maintain the option to exercise such Purchase Option
Agreements for a period of fourteen (14) years following the commencement dates of the
Purchase Option Agreements for each essential middle-income rental housing property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to authorize the City Manager to enter into
Purchase Option Agreements with CaICHA for all CalCHA-financed middle-income rental
housing created within the City limits.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED:
SECTION 1. The City Council authorizes the City to become a non -charter Additional
Member of CaICHA and authorizes the City Manager to execute the Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement Relating to the California Community Housing Agency, subject to approval as to
form by the City Attorney.
SECTION 2. The City Council supports and approves CalCHA'S issuance of tax-
exempt bonds as a means towards the production, preservation, and protection of essential
middle-income rental housing within City limits.
SECTION 3. The City Council authorizes the City Manager to enter into Purchase
Option Agreements with CaICHA for all CalCHA-financed middle-income rental housing
created within City limits, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
SECTION 4. The authority granted by the City Council pursuant to this resolution is
specifically conditioned upon the City and CaICHA entering into an indemnification agreement
in which CaICHA agrees to indemnify and defend the City against liabilities and litigation
related to participation in CaICHA and all related agreements. The terms of the
indemnification agreement shall be to the satisfaction of the City Manager and the City
Attorney.
SECTION 5. The City Manager is authorized to execute and deliver any documents
and to perform all acts consistent with the intent of this resolution, including making any
revisions, corrections, or alterations to documents referred to herein to correct minor errors
or to comply with the requirements of law, as long such actions do not increase the City's
obligations.
Donna Colson, Mayor
2
RESOLUTION NO.
I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the
foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council, held on the 2"' day
of December, 2019, and as adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NAYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City
ATTACHMENT A
JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT
RELATING TO THE CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY HOUSING AGENCY
THIS AGREEMENT, dated as of January 29, 2019, among the parties executing this
Agreement (all such parties, except those which have withdrawn as provided herein are referred
to as the "Members" and those parties initially executing this Agreement are referred to as the
"Charter Members"):
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 5 of the California Government
Code (in effect as of the date hereof and as the same may from time to time be amended or
supplemented, the "Joint Exercise of Powers Act"), two or more public agencies may by
agreement jointly exercise any power common to the contracting parties; and
WHEREAS, each of the Members is a "public agency" as that term is defined in Section
6500 of the Joint Exercise of Powers Act; and
WHEREAS, each of the Members is empowered by law to promote economic, cultural
and community development, including, without limitation, the promotion of opportunities for
the creation or retention of employment, the stimulation of economic activity, the increase of the
tax base, and the promotion of opportunities for education, cultural improvement and public
health, safety and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, each of the Members may accomplish the purposes and objectives described
in the preceding preamble by various means; and
WHEREAS, each Member is also empowered by law to acquire, construct, improve,
operate and dispose of real property for a public purpose; and
WHEREAS, the Joint Exercise of Powers Act authorizes the Members to create a joint
exercise of powers entity with the authority to exercise any powers common to the Members,
including but not limited to acquiring, constructing, improving, operating and disposing of real
property for a public purpose, all as specified in this Agreement, and to exercise the additional
powers granted to it in the Joint Exercise of Powers Act and any other applicable provisions of
the laws of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, a public entity established pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act is
empowered to issue or execute non-recourse debt, which may include bonds, notes, commercial
paper or any other evidences of indebtedness, leases, installment sale or other financing
agreements or certificates of participation therein (herein "Obligations"), and to otherwise
undertake financing programs under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act or other applicable
provisions of the laws of the State of California to accomplish its public purposes; and
4132-5793-2569.6
Kin
gs Cour, err ermr:rrt�, } '�
WHEREAS, the Members have determined to specifically authorize a public entity
authorized pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act to issue non-recourse Obligations
pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act or other applicable provisions of the laws of the
State of California; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Members to use a public entity established pursuant to
the Joint Exercise of Powers Act to undertake the financing and/or refinancing of projects that
provide, preserve and support affordable local housing for low-income, moderate -income and
middle-income families and individuals within the jurisdictions of the Members, including, but
not limited to, capital or working capital projects, purchase or acquisition of property,
receivables, commodities, bonds, other revenue streams or assets of any kind, liability or other
insurance, or retirement programs, or facilitating Members use of existing or new financial
instruments and mechanisms in the furtherance of this purpose; and
WHEREAS, by this Agreement, each Member desires to create and establish the
"California Community Housing Agency" for the purposes set forth herein and to exercise the
powers provided herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Members, for and in consideration of the mutual promises and
agreements herein contained, do agree as follows:
Section 1. Purpose.
This Agreement is made pursuant to the provisions of the Joint Exercise of Powers Act.
The purpose of this Agreement is to establish a public entity for the joint exercise of powers
common to the Members and for the exercise of additional powers given to a joint powers entity
under the Joint Powers Act or any other applicable law, including, but not limited to, the
issuance of non-recourse Obligations for any purpose or activity permitted under the Joint
Exercise of Powers Act or any other law; provided, however that such purpose shall be solely for
the acquisition, construction, rehabilitation, ownership, operation, maintenance, administration
and/or financing of multifamily housing for low-income, moderate -income and middle-income
families and individuals (the "Purpose"). Such Purpose will be accomplished and said power
exercised in the manner hereinafter set forth.
Section 2. Term.
This Agreement shall become effective in accordance with Section 17 as of the date
hereof and shall continue in full force and effect until such time as it is terminated in writing by
all the Members; provided, however, that this Agreement shall not terminate or be terminated
until all Obligations issued or caused to be issued by the Agency (defined below) shall no longer
be outstanding under the terms of the indenture, trust agreement, resolution or other instrument
pursuant to which such Obligations are issued.
2
4132-5793-2569.6
Section 3. A enc .
A. CREATION AND POWERS OF AGENCY.
Pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, there is hereby created a public
entity to be known as the "California Community Housing Agency" (the "Agency"), and
said Agency shall be a public entity separate and apart from the Members. Its debts,
liabilities and obligations do not constitute debts, liabilities or obligations of any
Members, and the Obligations of the Agency shall only be non-recourse obligations.
M-100596101MV
The Agency shall be administered by the Board of Directors (the "Board," or the
"Directors" and each a "Director") whose members shall be, at all times, members of the
Board of Supervisors (the "Board of Supervisors") of Kings County, California, with
each such Director serving in his or her individual capacity as Director of the Board. The
term of office as a member of the Board shall terminate when such member shall cease to
be a member of the Board of Supervisors and the successor to such member of the Board
of Supervisors shall become a member of the Board.
Notwithstanding the preceding paragraph, the Board may by resolution or
bylaws provide for changes in the qualifications, composition and number of Directors,
the appointment of Directors, successors, their respective terms of office and any other
provisions relating to the qualification and office of the Directors, including provision for
alternative Directors (in which case all references in this Agreement to any Director shall
be deemed to refer to and include the applicable alternate Director, if any, when so acting
in place of a regularly appointed Director).
The Board shall be the administering agency of this Agreement and, as such,
shall be vested with the powers set forth herein, and shall administer this Agreement in
accordance with the purposes and functions provided herein.
Directors shall not receive any compensation for serving as such, but shall be
entitled to reimbursement for any expenses actually incurred in connection with serving
as a. Director, if the Board shall determine that such expenses shall be reimbursed and
there are unencumbered funds available for such purpose.
C. OFFICERS; DUTIES; OFFICIAL BONDS.
The officers of the Agency shall be the Chair, Vice -Chair, Secretary and
Treasurer (defined below). The Board, in its capacity as administering agent of this
Agreement, shall elect a Chair, a Vice -Chair, and a Secretary of the Agency from among
Directors to serve until such officer is re-elected or a successor to such office is elected
by the Board. The Board shall appoint one or more of its officers or employees to serve
as treasurer, auditor, and controller of the Agency (the "Treasurer") pursuant to Section
6505.6 of the Joint Exercise of Powers Act to serve until such officer is re-elected or a
successor to such office is elected by the Board.
3
4132-5793-2569.6
Subject to the applicable provisions of any resolution, indenture, trust agreement
or other instrument or proceeding authorizing or securing Obligations (each such
resolution, indenture, trust agreement, instrument and proceeding being herein referred to
as an "Indenture") providing for a trustee or other fiscal agent, and except as may
otherwise be specified by resolution of the Board, the Treasurer is designated as the
depositary of the Agency to have custody of all money of the Agency, from whatever
source derived and shall have the powers, duties and responsibilities specified in
Sections 6505, 6505.5 and 6509.5 of the Joint Exercise of Powers Act.
The Treasurer of the Agency is designated as the public officer or person who has
charge of, handles, or has access to any property of the Agency, and such officer shall file
an official bond with the Secretary of the Agency in the amount specified by resolution of
the Board but in no event less than $1,000.
The Board shall have the power to appoint such other officers and employees as it
may deem necessary and to retain independent counsel, consultants and accountants.
The Board shall have the power, by resolution, to the extent permitted by the Joint
Exercise of Power Act or any other applicable law, to delegate any of its functions to one
or more of the Directors or officers, employees or agents of the Agency and to cause any
of said Directors, officers, employees or agents to take any actions and execute any
documents or instruments for and in the name and on behalf of the Board or the Agency.
D. MEETINGS OF THE BOARD.
(1) Ralph M. Brown Act.
All meetings of the Board, including, without limitation, regular,
adjourned regular, special, and adjourned special meetings shall be called,
noticed, held and conducted in accordance with the provisions of the
Ralph M. Brown Act (commencing with Section 54950 of the
Government Code of the State of California), or any successor legislation
hereinafter enacted (the "Brown Act").
(2) Regular Meetings.
The Board shall provide for its regular meetings; provided,
however, it shall hold at least one regular meeting each year. The date,
hour and place of the holding of the regular meetings shall be fixed by
resolution of the Board. To the extent permitted by the Brown Act, such
meetings may be held by telephone conference.
(3) Special Meetings.
Special meetings of the Board may be called in accordance with
the provisions of Section 54956 of the Government Code of the State of
0
4132-5793-2569.6
California. To the extent permitted by the Brown Act, such meetings may
be held by telephone conference.
(4) Minutes.
The Secretary of the Agency shall cause to be kept minutes of the
regular, adjourned regular, special, and adjourned special meetings of the
Board and shall, as soon as possible after each meeting, cause a copy of
the minutes to be forwarded to each Director.
(5) Quorum.
A majority of the Board shall constitute a quorum for the
transaction of business. No action may be taken by the Board except upon
the affirmative vote of a majority of the Directors present at the meeting,
except that less than a quorum may adjourn a meeting to another time and
place.
E. RULES AND REGULATIONS.
The Agency may adopt, from time to time, by resolution of the Board such
bylaws, policies or rules and regulations for the conduct of its meetings and affairs as
may be required.
Section 4. Powers.
The Agency shall have the power, in its own name, to exercise the common powers of the
Members and to exercise all additional powers given to a joint powers entity under any of the
laws of the State of California, including, but not limited to, the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, for
the Purpose authorized under this Agreement. Such powers shall include the common powers
specified in this Agreement and may be exercised in the manner and according to the method
provided in this Agreement. The Agency is hereby authorized to do all acts necessary for the
exercise of such power, including, but not limited to, any of all of the following: to make and
enter into contracts; to employ agents and employees; to acquire, construct, improve, own,
maintain and operate, or provide for maintenance and operation, and sell, lease, pledge, assign,
mortgage or otherwise dispose, of any property, improvements, commodities, leases, contracts,
receivables, bonds or other revenue streams or assets of any kind relating to the Purpose; to
exercise the power of condemnation; to incur debts, liabilities or obligations; to receive gifts,
contributions and donations of property, funds, services, and other forms of assistance from
person, firms, corporations and any governmental entity; to sue and be sued in its own name; to
establish and collect fees; to form public benefit nonprofit corporations or other affiliate entities
to accomplish any of its Purposes; to make grants, loans or provide other financial assistance to
governmental, nonprofit and for profit organizations to accomplish any of its Purposes; and
generally to do any and all things necessary or convenient to accomplish its Purposes. The
boundaries of the Agency shall encompass the boundaries of all the Members and the powers of
the Agency may be exercised anywhere within those boundaries or to the extent permitted by the
laws of the State of California, including, but not limited to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act,
4132-5793-2569.6
outside of those boundaries, which may be outside of the State of California, provided that the
power of condemnation may only be exercised within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Charter
Members.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Agency may issue or cause to be
issued Obligations, and pledge any property, contracts or revenues as security to the extent
permitted under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, or any other applicable provision of law.
The manner in which the Agency shall exercise its powers and perform its duties is and
shall be subject to the restrictions upon the manner in which a California county could exercise
such powers and perform such duties. The manner in which the Agency shall exercise its powers
and perform its duties shall not be subject to any restrictions applicable to the manner in which
any other public agency could exercise such powers or perform such duties, whether such agency
is a party to this Agreement or not.
Section 5. Fiscal Year.
For the purposes of this Agreement, the term "Fiscal Year" shall mean the fiscal year as
established from time to time by resolution of the Board, being, at the date of this Agreement, the
period from July 1 to and including the following June 30, except for the first Fiscal Year which
shall be the period from the date of this Agreement to June 30, 2019.
Section 6. Disposition of Assets.
At the end of the term hereof or upon the earlier termination of this Agreement as set
forth in Section 2, after payment of all expenses and liabilities of the Agency, all property of the
Agency both real and personal shall automatically vest in the Members in the manner and
amount determined by the Board in its sole discretion and shall thereafter remain the sole
property of the Members; provided, however, that any surplus money on hand shall be returned
in proportion to the contributions made by the Members.
Section 7. OblilZations.
From time to time the Agency shall issue Obligations, in one or more series, for the
purpose of exercising its powers and raising the funds necessary to carry out its Purposes under
this Agreement, including but not limited to acquiring, constructing, improving, operating and
disposing of real property for a public purposes.
The services of bond counsel, financing consultants and other consultants and advisors
working on the projects and/or their financing or refinancing or on post -issuance compliance or
administration may be used by the Agency. The expenses of the Board shall be paid from the
proceeds of the Obligations, payments made by Obligation obligors or other third parties, or any
other unencumbered funds of the Agency available for such purpose.
4132-5793-2569.6
Section 8. Obligations Only Limited and Special Obligations of Agency.
The Obligations, together with the interest and premium, if any, thereon, shall not be
deemed to constitute a debt of any Member or pledge of the faith and credit of the Members or
the Agency. The Obligations shall be only special non-recourse obligations of the Agency, and
the Agency shall under no circumstances be obligated to pay the Obligations except from
revenues and other funds pledged therefor. Neither the Members nor the Agency shall be
obligated to pay the principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Obligations, or other costs
incidental thereto, except the Agency from the revenues and funds pledged and available
therefor, and neither the faith and credit nor the taxing power of the Members nor the faith and
credit of the Agency shall be pledged to the payment of the principal of, premium, if any, or
interest on the Obligations nor shall the Members or the Agency in any manner be obligated to
make any appropriation for such payment.
No covenant or agreement contained in any Obligation or related document shall be
deemed to be a covenant or agreement of any Director, or any officer, employee or agent of the
Agency in his or her individual capacity, and neither the Board of the Agency nor any Director
or officer thereof executing the Obligations shall be liable personally on any Obligation or be
subject to any personal liability or accountability by reason of the issuance of any Obligations.
Section 9. Accounts and Reports.
All funds of the Agency shall be strictly accounted for. The Agency shall establish and
maintain such funds and accounts as may be required by good accounting practice and by any
provision of any Indenture (to the extent such duties are not assigned to a trustee of Obligations).
The books and records of the Agency shall be open to inspection at all reasonable times by each
Member.
The Treasurer of the Agency shall cause an independent audit to be made of the books of
accounts and financial records of the Agency by a certified public accountant or public
accountant in compliance with the provisions of Section 6505 of the Joint Exercise of Powers
Act. In each case the minimum requirements of the audit shall be those prescribed by the State
Controller for special districts under Section 26909 of the Government Code of the State of
California and shall conform to generally accepted auditing standards. When such an audit of
accounts and records is made by a certified public accountant or public accountant, a report
thereof shall be filed as a public record with each Member and also with the county auditor of
each county in which a Member is located; provided, however, that to the extent permitted by
law, the Agency may, instead of filing such report with each Member and such county auditor,
elect to post such report as a public record electronically on a website designated by the Agency.
Such report if made shall be filed within 12 months of the end of the Fiscal Year or Years under
examination.
The Treasurer is hereby directed to report in writing on the first day of July, October,
January, and April of each year to the Board and the Charter Members which report shall
describe the amount of money held by the Treasurer for the Agency, the amount of receipts since
the last such report, and the amount paid out since the last such report (which may exclude
7
4132-5793-2569.6
amounts held by a trustee or other fiduciary in connection with any Obligations to the extent that
such trustee or other fiduciary provided regular reports covering such amounts.)
Any costs of the audit, including contracts with, or employment of, certified public
accountants or public accountants in making an audit pursuant to this Section, shall be borne by
the Agency and shall be a charge against any unencumbered funds of the Agency available for
that purpose.
In any Fiscal Year the Board may, by resolution adopted by unanimous vote, replace the
annual special audit with an audit covering a two-year period.
Section 10. Funds.
Subject to the applicable provisions of any Indenture, which may provide for a trustee or
other fiduciary to receive, have custody of and disburse Agency funds, the Treasurer of the
Agency shall receive, have the custody of and disburse Agency funds pursuant to the accounting
procedures developed under Sections 3.0 and 9, and shall make the disbursements required by
this Agreement or otherwise necessary to carry out any of the provisions of purposes of this
Agreement.
Section 11. Notices.
Notices and other communications hereunder to the Members shall be sufficient if
delivered to the clerk of the governing body of each Member; provided that, to the extent
permitted by law, the Agency may provide notices and other communications and postings
electronically (including, without limitation, through email or by posting to a website).
Section 12. Additional Members/Withdrawal of Members.
Qualifying public agencies may be added as parties to this Agreement and become
Charter Members upon: (1) the filing by such public agency with the Agency of an executed
counterpart of this Agreement, together with a copy of the resolution of the governing body of
such public agency approving this Agreement and the execution and delivery hereof; and (2)
adoption of a resolution of the Board approving the addition of such public agency as a Charter
Member. Upon satisfaction of such conditions, the Board shall file such executed counterpart of
this Agreement as an amendment hereto, effective upon such filing.
Qualifying public agencies may also be added as Non -Charter Members ("Additional
Members") of the Agency upon: (1) the filing by such public agency with the Agency of a
resolution of the governing body of such public agency requesting to be added as an Additional
Member of the Agency, and (2) adoption of a resolution of the Board approving the addition of
such public agency as an Additional Member. An Additional Member may limit in the
aforementioned resolution the scope of its Additional Membership to what is necessary or
appropriate to facilitate the financing or refinancing of one or more specified projects or
programs.
4132-5793-2569.6
A Member may withdraw from this Agreement upon written notice to the Board;
provided, however, that at least one Member shall be a Charter Member and no such withdrawal
shall result in the dissolution of the Agency so long as any Obligations remain outstanding. Any
such withdrawal shall be effective only upon receipt of the notice of withdrawal by the Board,
which shall acknowledge receipt of such notice of withdrawal in writing and shall file such
notice as an amendment to this Agreement effective upon such filing.
Section 13. Indemnification.
To the full extent permitted by law, the Board may authorize indemnification by the
Agency of any person who is or was a Director or an officer, employee or other agent of the
Agency, and who was or is a party or is threatened to be made a party to a proceeding by reason
of the fact that such person is or was such a Director or an officer, employee or other agent of the
Agency, against expenses, including attorneys fees, judgments, fines, settlements and other
amounts actually and reasonably incurred in connection with such proceeding, if such person
acted in good faith in a manner such person reasonably believed to be in the best interests of the
Agency and, in the case of a criminal proceeding, had no reasonable cause to believe the conduct
of such person was unlawful and, in the case of an action by or in the right of the Agency, acted
with such care, including reasonable inquiry, as an ordinarily prudent person in a like position
would use under similar circumstances. The Board may purchase a policy or policies of
insurance in furtherance of any indemnification obligation created or otherwise in protection of
Directors, officers, employees or other agents.
Section 14. Contributions and Advances.
Contributions or advances of public funds and of the use of personnel, equipment or
property may be made to the Agency by the Members for any of the Purposes of this Agreement.
Payment of public funds may be made to defray the cost of any such contribution or advance.
Any such advance may be made subject to repayment, and in such case shall be repaid, in the
manner agreed upon by the Agency and the Member making such advance at the time of such
advance. It is mutually understood and agreed to that no Member has any obligation to make
advances or contributions to the Agency to provide for the costs and expenses of administration
of the Agency, even though any Member may do so. The Members understand and agree that a
portion of the funds of the Agency that otherwise may be allocated or distributed to the Members
may instead be used to make grants, loans or provide other financial assistance to governmental
units and to nonprofit organizations to accomplish any of the governmental unit's or nonprofit
organization's purposes.
Section 15. Immunities.
All of the privileges and immunities from liabilities, exemptions from laws, ordinances
and rules, and other benefits which apply to the activity of officers, agents or employees of
Members when performing their respective functions within the territorial limits of their
respective public agencies, shall apply to the same degree and extent to the Directors, officers,
employees, agents or other representatives of the Agency while engaged in the performance of
any of their functions or duties under the provisions of this Agreement.
4132-5793-2569.6
Section 16. Amendments.
Except as provided in Sections 3B and 12 above, or to cure any error, omission or
ambiguity in this Agreement, this Agreement shall not be amended, modified, or altered except
with (i) written consent of all holders of any outstanding bonds of the Agency, (ii) written
consent of each of Charter Member, and (iii) negative consent of each Additional Member. To
obtain the negative consent of each such Additional Member, the following negative consent
procedure shall be followed: (a) the Agency shall provide each such Additional Member with a
notice at least sixty (60) days prior to the date such proposed amendment is to become effective
explaining the nature of such proposed amendment and this negative consent procedure; (b) the
Agency shall provide each such Additional Member who did not respond a reminder notice with
a notice at least thirty (30) days prior to the date such proposed amendment is to become
effective; and (c) if no such Additional Member objects to the proposed amendment in writing
within sixty (60) days after the initial notice, the proposed amendment shall become effective
with respect to all Members.
Section 17. Effectiveness.
This Agreement shall become effective and be in full force and effect and a legal, valid
and binding obligation of each of the Members on the date that the Board shall have received
from two of the Charter Members an executed counterpart of this Agreement, together with a
certified copy of a resolution of the governing body of each such Charter Member approving this
Agreement and the execution and delivery hereof.
Section 18. Partial Invalidity.
If any one or more of the terms, provisions, promises, covenants or conditions of this
Agreement shall to any extent be adjudged invalid, unenforceable, void or voidable for any
reason whatsoever by a court of competent jurisdiction, each and all of the remaining terms,
provisions, promises, covenants and conditions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby,
and shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.
Section 19. Successors.
This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors of
the parties hereto. Except to the extent expressly provided herein, no Member may assign any
right or obligation hereunder without the consent of the other Members.
Section 20. Miscellaneous.
This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be an
original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
The section headings herein are for convenience only and are not to be construed as
modifying or governing the language in the section referred to.
10
4132-5793-2569.6
Wherever in this Agreement any consent or approval is required, the same shall not be
unreasonably withheld.
This Agreement shall be governed under the laws of the State of California.
This Agreement is the complete and exclusive statement of the agreement among the
Members, which supersedes and merges all prior proposals, understandings, and other
agreements, whether oral, written, or implied in conduct, between and among the Members
relating to the subject matter of this Agreement.
ll
4132-5793-2569.6
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed
and attested by their duly authorized representatives as of the day and year first above written.
Charter Member:
KINGS COUNTY
By
Name: Yde Neves
Title: J( hairman JAN 2 9 2019
ATTEST: {
B,
Y
Name: Melanie Curtis
Title: Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
Charter Member:
HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE
COU0)re
TY OF KINGS
By WO�-4
Name', Joe Neves
Title% Chairman
Name
Title:
4132-5793-2569.6
12
ATTACHMENT B
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Additional Members hereto have caused this Agreement to
be executed and attested by their proper officers thereunto duly authorized.
Dated:
Additional Member Name:
By:
Its:
ATTEST:
By:
Its:
[Signature Page to Joint Powers Agreement Relating to the California Community Housing Agency]
ATTACHMENT C
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
California Community Housing Agency
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
405 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Attention: Jesse Albani
PURCHASE OPTION AGREEMENT
By and Between
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY HOUSING AGENCY
and
CITY OF [CITY]
Dated as of [DATE]
Relating to
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY HOUSING AGENCY
ESSENTIAL HOUSING REVENUE BONDS, [SERIES]
([PROPERTY NAME])
and
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY HOUSING AGENCY
SUBORDINATE ESSENTIAL HOUSING REVENUE BONDS, [SERIES]
([PROPERTY NAME])
4156-7346-8947.9
PURCHASE OPTION AGREEMENT
This PURCHASE OPTION AGREEMENT ("Option Agreement ") is made effective as of
[DATE] ("Effective Date") by and between the CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY HOUSING
AGENCY a joint exercise of powers agency organized and existing under the laws of the state of
California (including its successors and assigns, "Owner") and City of [CITY] ("Host ").
BACKGROUND
WHEREAS, the Owner proposes to issue Bonds (as hereinafter defined) to finance Owner's
acquisition of the certain multifamily rental housing project (the "Project") located at [ADDRESS]
in [CITY], California, located on the real property site described in Exhibit A hereto; and
WHEREAS, the Owner intends to offer the Project to the Host pursuant to this Option
Agreement.
AGREEMENT
In consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, and such other good and valuable
consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Owner and Host mu-
tually agree as follows:
Section 1. Grant of Option. Owner hereby grants to Host an option ("Option") to pur-
chase the Optioned Property (as herein defined) upon payment of the Option Price (as herein pro-
vided) within the Option Term (as herein defined) and in compliance with and observance of all
of the terms and conditions of this Option Agreement.
Section 2. Definitions. Capitalized terms used in this Option Agreement shall have the
meanings assigned to them in this Section 2; capitalized terms used in this Option Agreement and
not defined in this Section 2 or elsewhere herein shall have the meanings assigned to them in the
Indenture (herein defined).
(a) "Authority Indemnified Parties" — the Owner and each of its officers, governing
members, directors, officials, employees, attorneys, agents and members.
(b) "Bonds" — collectively, (i) the. California Community Housing Agency
Essential Housing Revenue Bonds, [SERIES] ([PROPERTY NAME]) (the "Series A Bonds"),
and (ii) the California Community Housing Agency Subordinate Essential Housing Revenue
Bonds, [SERIES] ([PROPERTY NAME]) (the "Series B Bonds"), with such other series and sub -
series designations as may be set forth in the Indenture, originally issued to finance Owner's ac-
quisition of the Project and related transaction costs.
(c) "Bond Trustee" — Wilmington Trust, National Association or any successor trus-
tee under the Indenture.
(d) "Closin ' — shall have the meaning set forth in Section 9 hereof.
4156-7346-8947.9
(e) "Conveyance" — that transaction or series of transactions by which Owner shall
transfer, bargain, sell and convey any and all right, title or interest in and to the Optioned Property
to Host.
(f) "Extraordinary Costs and Expenses" — shall have the meaning set forth in the
Indenture.
(g) "Indenture" — the Indenture of Trust dated as of [DATE] between Owner, as is-
suer, and the Bond Trustee, as trustee, pursuant to which the Bonds were issued.
(h) "Manager" — Catalyst Housing Group LLC and its successors and assigns.
(i) "Option Price" — the sum of the amounts set forth below:
i. an amount sufficient to either prepay, redeem in whole or fully defease
for redemption on the earliest call date all Project Debt; plus
ii. any fees or other amounts not identified in clause (i) that may be necessary
to effect the complete release from and discharge of any lien, mortgage or other en-
cumbrance on the Optioned Property; plus
iii. any amounts due to Owner (including the Authority Indemnified Persons,
as provided in the Indenture), the Bond Trustee or any predecessor or successor, or any
other Person under any indenture, loan agreement, bond, note or other instrument re-
lating to any Satisfied Indebtedness (including, without limitation, indemnification
amounts, Owner's Extraordinary Costs and Expenses, recurrent and extraordinary fees
and expenses, and reimbursable costs and expenses of any kind or nature); plus
iv. Transaction Costs; minus
V. The amount of any Project Debt assumed by Host; and minus
vi. Any funds held by or for Owner under the Indenture applied to the retire-
ment of Project Debt.
(j) "Option Exercise Date" — the date fifteen (15) years from the issuance of the
Bonds.
(k) "Option Term"— shall commence on the Option Exercise Date and, if not exer-
cised, shall terminate at 11:59 p.m. local time on the date that is fourteen (14) years from the
Option Exercise Date.
(1) "Optioned Property" — means all of Owner's right, title and interest (which in-
cludes fee simple title to the real property) in and to all property and assets used in or otherwise
related to the operation of the Project including, without limitation, all real property and interests
in real property, all tangible and intangible personal property including furniture, fixtures, equip-
ment, supplies, intellectual property, licenses, permits, approvals, and contractual rights of any
4156-7346-8947.9
kind or nature together with the right to own and carry on the business and operations of the Pro-
ject.
(m) "Outstanding" — with respect to Bonds, as of any given date, all Bonds which
have been authenticated and delivered by the Trustee under the Indenture, except: (i) Bonds can-
celled at or prior to such date or delivered to or acquired by the Trustee or prior to such date for
cancellation; (ii) Bonds deemed to be paid in accordance with Article VIII of the Indenture; and
(iii) Bonds in lieu of which other Bonds have been authenticated under the Indenture.
(n) "Project Debt" — any debt secured by the Project and incurred to finance or re-
finance Owner's acquisition of the Project and related transaction costs, including any portion of
the Bonds and any bonds, notes or other indebtedness issued by Owner to refund the Bonds in
whole or in part.
(o) "Transaction Costs" — to the extent not otherwise described herein, any costs or
expenses of any kind or nature associated with or incurred by Owner and Host in connection with
the consummation of the Conveyance, any refinancing of the Project or assumption of Project Debt
regardless of whether such costs and expenses are customarily borne by the seller or purchaser in
any such transaction, including but not limted to taxes, recording fees and other impositions,
Owner's and Host's legal and other professional fees, fees for verification agents, bidding agents,
escrow agents, custiodians or trustees, assumption fees, prepayment fees, the cost of the appraisal,
surveys, inspections, title commitments, title insurance premiums and other title -related fees, and
all amounts required for indemnification of Authority, Trustee and Manager.
Section 3. Effectiveness; Term and Termination. The Option shall become effective
on the Option Exercise Date and may be exercised during the Option Term. Owner agrees that it
will not enter into any agreement to sell all or any part of the Optioned Property during the Option
Term, without the specific written request of the Host and written consent of the Owner, which
consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, and delivery of an Opinion of Bond Counsel to the
Owner substantially to the effect that such sale will not, in and of itself, adversely affect the exclu-
sion of interest on the Bonds from gross income for purposes of federal income taxation. After
expiration of the Option Term, Host shall not be precluded from purchasing all or any portion of
the Optioned Property from Owner at a price and on the terms agreed upon by Host and Owner,
but Owner shall not be precluded from seeking or agreeing to sell, or consummating the sale of,
all or any portion thereof to any third person.
Section 4. Manner of Exercise.
(a) Owner's Notice. At least six (6) months prior to the Option Exercise Date, Owner
shall provide Host notice of the Option Exercise Date; provided, however, that failure to provide
such notice shall not affect the sufficiency or validity of any proceedings taken in connection with
the exercise of the Option.
(b) Host's Notice. To exercise the Option, Host shall provide a notice (an "Exercise
Notice") to Owner at any time prior to the end of the Option Term.
4156-7346-8947.9
(c) Owner's Response. Within fifteen (15) business days of its receipt of the Exercise
Notice, Owner shall provide Host with written estimate of the amounts comprising the Option
Price.
(d) Host's Response. Within fifteen (15) business days of its receipt of Owner's es-
timate under Subsection (c), Host shall notify Owner in writing either (i) that it is withdrawing its
Exercise Notice, or (ii) that it intends to proceed with the purchase of the Optioned Property.
(e) Fixing of Option Price; Contractual Obligation. Unless Host notifies Owner in
writing that it is withdrawing its Exercise Notice within fifteen (15) business days of its receipt of
Owner's estimate under Section 4(c) hereof, Host shall deliver to Owner a purchase agreement
therefor in form and substance satisfactory to Owner and its counsel subject to the terms and con-
ditions of this Option Agreement. Unless Owner shall have objected to the form of purchase agree-
ment within fifteen (15) business days of its receipt thereof, Owner shall be deemed to have ac-
cepted the terms of the purchase agreement without the need for the signature of Owner thereon,
and Host shall be obligated to purchase and Owner shall be obligated to sell and convey to Host
good and marketable title to the Optioned Property at the Option Price within ninety (90) days
thereafter.
Section 5. Determination of Option Price. Unless the parties otherwise agree, Owner
shall cooperate with Host and provide Host with all information and records in its possession, and
access to counsel and other professionals, to assist Host in determining and updating the Option
Price.
Section 6. Surplus Cash. The Owner shall cause the Trustee to create an account (the
"Excess Revenue Fund") under (i) the Indenture or (ii) in the event that the Bonds have been retired
and the Indenture discharged, a separate trust agreement identifying Owner as trustor, a trustee
selected by Owner as trustee, and Host as beneficiary, into which excess revenue over expenses
shall be deposited. Upon the commencement of the Option Term, after full payment of the fees,
charges and expenses of the Owner and the Trustee and other amounts required to be paid pursuant
to the Indenture or other documents relating to then -outstanding Project Debt, amounts remaining
in the Excess Revenue Fund shall be transferred to the Host. Thereafter, amounts in the Excess
Revenue Fund shall be transferred to the Host periodically.
The Host shall apply amounts in the Excess Revenue Fund to the payment of
the Option Price and thereafter shall apply such funds in its sole discretion.
Section 7. Terms of Conveyance.
(a) The Conveyance shall be in the nature of a grant deed in which Owner shall de-
liver one or more deeds, bills of sale, or other instruments of transfer without recourse or warranty
of any kind or nature.
(b) The Optioned Property will be conveyed to Host in AS IS CONDITION, WITH
ALL FAULTS, and without representations or warranties of any kind or nature as to the condition
of the Property. Host acknowledges that Owner will convey the Optioned Property AS IS and that
OWNER IS MAKING NO WARRANTIES AND REPRESENTATIONS, EXPRESS OR IM-
PLIED, with reference to the condition of the Property. HOST WAIVES ANY AND ALL
4156-7346-8947.9
CLAIMS AGAINST OWNER, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, CLAIMS BASED IN
PART, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY AND
STRICT RESPONSIBILITY, IN CONTRACT, IN WARRANTY, IN EQUITY, OR UNDER
ANY STATUTE, LAW OR REGULATION ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY OUT OF
ANY CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY.
(c) There shall be no partial transfer and that, upon consummation of the Convey-
ance, Owner shall be fully divested of any and all right, title or interest in and to the Optioned
Property.
(d) Upon payment of the Option Price, as adjusted for any prorations, credits and
charges, Owner shall convey title to the Optioned Property by quit claim deed reasonably satisfac-
tory in form and substance to Host.
Section S. Closin . The closing of the Conveyance ("Closin ') shall take place not later
than the ninetieth (90t'') calendar day following the date on which the parties agree on the terms of
the purchase agreement pursuant to Section 4(e) hereof at such time within normal business hours
and at such place as may be designated by Host.
(a) Prorations. All general and special real property taxes and assessments, and rents
shall be prorated as of the Closing, with Host responsible for all such items to the extent arising or
due at any time following the closing. General real property taxes shall be prorated at the time of
Closing based on the net general real property taxes for the year of Closing.
(b) Limitation. If, after taking into account all adjustments and prorations, the net
amount due Owner at Closing is less than the Option Price, the Option Price, as the case may be,
shall instead be the Option Price, it being understood and agreed that in no event shall Owner
receive proceeds less than the amount necessary to fully retire or defease, as the case may be, the
Series A Bonds and the Series B Bonds and otherwise satisfy all of the payments constituting the
components of the Option Price.
Section 9. Recording. This Option Agreement, and any amendment thereto, shall be
recorded with the recorder's office of the County of Solano; provided, that in the event Host fails
to exercise the Option, then upon termination of the term of this Option Agreement, Host shall
cooperate with Owner to remove any such recorded Option Agreement or amendment thereto from
title to the Optioned Property upon Owner's reasonable request therefor and, in any event, by no
later than thirty (30) days after the expiration of the original term of this Option Agreement. In the
event that, within said time, Host fails to so cooperate and provide its original signature to a ter-
mination of such recorded Option Agreement or amendment thereto, then Host hereby irrevocably
constitutes and appoints Owner as Host's true and lawful attorney (and agent -in -fact) to execute
in Host's name any such termination.
Section 10. Possession. Physical possession of the Optioned Property shall be delivered
to Host at the time of Closing.
Section 11. Title Insurance, Title Defects.
4156-7346-8947.9
(a) Within fifteen (15) business days after it receives the Option Exercise Notice,
Owner shall provide Host with a title commitment (the "Title Commitment") in the customary
ALTA form of Standard Owner's Policy of Title Insurance in Host's favor, for the amount equiv-
alent to the Option Price (whichever is applicable), with a commitment to insure good and mar-
ketable fee simple title to the Optioned Property in Host, issued by a title insurance company li-
censed to do business in the State of California and acceptable to Host (the "Title Company'). The
policy shall show the status of title to the Optioned Property and show all exceptions, including
easements, restrictions, rights-of-way, covenants, reservations, and other conditions of record, if
any, affecting the subject real estate. Accompanying the Title Commitment, Owner shall also have
Title Company furnish Host with true, correct, complete, and legible copies of all documents af-
fecting title to the subject real estate. The cost and expense of such Standard Owner's Title Com-
mitment shall be payable as a Transaction Cost. Host shall pay the additional premium due if Host
elects to obtain an extended coverage policy of title insurance and/or extended coverage endorse-
ments. Owner shall cooperate with Host, at no expense to Owner, by providing an affidavit to Title
Company to induce Title Company to issue to Host at Closing a "GAP" endorsement to the Title
Commitment showing the effective date of the Title Commitment to be the time and date of Clos-
ing.
(b) If the Title Commitment shows exceptions to title which are unacceptable to Host,
Host shall, within ten (10) business days after receipt of the Title Commitment and not later than
twenty (20) business days before the date for Closing, notify Owner of such fact and Owner shall
have twenty (20) business days after Owner receives Host's written objections to cure such defects
and to present a Title Commitment on the basis of which Closing may occur or to notify Host that
Owner will not cure same. If Owner cannot or will not cure such defects within such twenty (20)
day period and thereafter convey title to the Property as required in this Agreement, then Host shall
have the right (at Host's option) to either:
(i) Rescind the Option Exercise Notice and Owner may proceed to close the
sale under the terms of the third -party offer, if there is a third -party offer; or
(ii) Accept whatever title Owner can or will convey, without reduction in the
purchase price because of such title defects. Any exceptions to title disclosed on the
Title Commitment to which Host does not timely object to in writing or to which Host
objects but thereafter accepts by Closing shall be included as a "Permitted Exception."
Section 12. Assignment. The Host shall not assign the Option without the prior written
consent of the Owner, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, and delivery of an Opin-
ion of Bond Counsel to the Owner substantially to the effect that such assignment will not, in and
of itself, adversely affect the exclusion of interest on the Bonds from gross income for purposes of
federal income taxation. Notwithstanding the foregoing, neither party to this Option Agreement
shall assign its interests, obligations, rights and/or responsibilities under this Option Agreement
without the prior written consent of the other party.
Section 13. No Individual Liability. No Authority Indemnified Person shall be individ-
ually or personally liable for the payment of any sum hereunder or be subject to any personal
liability or accountability by reason of the execution and delivery of this Option Agreement , or
4156-7346-8947.9
by any proceedings for the determination of the Option Price, or Host's exercise or waiver of same,
or otherwise except in the case of such Authority Indemnified Person's own willful misconduct.
Section 14. Notices, Governing Law, Binding Effect and Other Miscellaneous Provi-
sions.
(a) Notices. All notices provided for in this Option Agreement shall be in writ-
ing and shall be given to Owner or Host at the address set forth below or at such other address as
they individually may specify thereafter by written notice in accordance herewith:
If to Owner: California Community Housing Agency
1400 W. Lacey Blvd., Building 1
Hanford, California 93230
Attention: Michael LaPierre
With a copy to: Catalyst Housing Group
21 Ward Street, Suite 2
Larkspur, California 94939
Attention: Jordan Moss
If to Host: City of [CITY]
[ADDRESS]
Attention: [NAME, DEPARTMENT]
Such notices shall be deemed effective upon actual delivery or upon the date that any such delivery
was attempted and acceptance thereof was refused, or if mailed, certified return receipt requested,
postage prepaid, properly addressed, three (3) days after posting.
(b) Consents and Approvals. All consents and approvals and waivers required
or asserted hereunder shall be in writing, signed by the party from whom such consent, approval,
waiver or notice is requested, provided that no written consent or approval of Owner shall be re-
quired for any action that Host may, in its reasonable good faith judgment, find it necessary to take
in the event of an emergency.
(c) Cooperation. Owner will keep Host advised of its complete name at all
times, including any change of such name. Host will keep Owner advised of its complete name at
all times, including any change of such name.
(d) Pronouns. Where appropriate to the context, words of one gender include
all genders, and the singular includes the plural and vice versa.
(e) Amendments. This Option Agreement may not be modified except in a writ-
ten instrument signed by Host and Owner.
(f) Complete Agreement. This Option Agreement together with all schedules
and exhibits attached hereto and made part thereof supersedes all previous agreements, under-
standings and representations made by or between the parties hereto.
4156-7346-8947.9
(g) Governing Law. This Option Agreement shall be governed by and con-
strued in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without regard to conflicts of law
principles. All claims of whatever character arising out of this Option Agreement, or under any
statute or common law relating in any way, directly or indirectly, to the subject matter hereof or to
the dealings between Owner and any other party hereto, if and to the extent that such claim poten-
tially could or actually does involve Owner, shall be brought in any state or federal court of com-
petent jurisdiction located in Kings County, California. By executing and delivering this Option
Agreement, each party hereto irrevocably: (i) accepts generally and unconditionally the exclusive
jurisdiction and venue of such courts; (ii) waives any defense of forum non-conveniens; and (iii)
agrees not to seek removal of such proceedings to any court or forum other than as specified above.
The foregoing shall not be deemed or construed to constitute a waiver by Owner of any prior notice
or procedural requirements applicable to actions or claims against or involving governmental units
and/or political subdivisions of the State of California that may exist at the time of and in connec-
tion with such matter.
(h) Legal Construction. In case any one or more of the provisions contained in
this Option Agreement shall for any reason be held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalid provision shall be deemed severable,
and shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provisions of this Option Agreement,
all of which shall remain fully enforceable.
(i) Term. This Agreement shall terminate upon the earlier of (a) the Convey-
ance or (b) the first date on which all Project Debt has been retired and Owner has made an absolute
assignment to Host of all future Surplus Cash.
0) Captions. The captions used in this Option Agreement are solely for con-
venience, and shall not be deemed to constitute a part of the substance of the Option Agreement
for purpose of its construction.
[SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW]
4156-7346-8947.9
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Option Agreement as of the date set
forth above.
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY HOUSING
AGENCY
CITY OF [CITY]
WE
Signature Page to Purchase Option Agreement
4156-7346-8947.9
A Notary Public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the
individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness,
accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of
On before me, ,
(insert name and title of the officer)
Notary Public, personally appeared
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
4156-7346-8947.9
(Seal)
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF REAL PROPERTY
4156-7346-8947.9
ATTACHMENT D
May 30, 2019
California Community Housing Agency
2999 Oak Road, Suite 710
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
Attn: Michael LaPierre
Re: California Community Housing Agena
C
Orrick
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
The Orrick Building
405 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-2669
+1 415 773 5700
orrick.com
Justin Cooper
E jcooper@orrick.com
D +1 415 773 5908
F +1 415 773 5759
The California Community Housing Agency ("CaICHA") was formed pursuant to a Joint
Exercise of Powers Agreement (the "Agreement") between two original members, Kings County
and the Housing Authority of Kings County (the "Charter Members"). In accordance with
Section 12 of the Agreement, additional cities, counties and other local government entities may,
and have, joined CaICHA (each a Non -Charter Member or "Additional Member' and, together
with the Charter Members, the "Members"). You have asked whether an Additional Member is
exposed to liability by virtue of its decision to become a member of CaICHA and/or its approval
of bonds proposed to be issued by CaICHA.
CaICHA is a political subdivision of the State of California created under the California Joint
Powers Act (California Government Code Section 6500 and following) (the "Act") and the
Agreement. Pursuant to the Act and the Agreement, CaICHA is authorized to issue revenue
bonds and to acquire, construct, improve, own, maintain and operate, or provide for maintenance
and operation, and sell, lease, pledge, assign, mortgage or otherwise dispose, of any property.
In order to meet state law, federal income tax law, and policy requirements for the issuance of
certain bonds, CaICHA has adopted a policy to not issue bonds or other forms of indebtedness
unless the governing body of an Additional Member (or Charter Member, as the case may be) in
which the proposed project (the "Project) is located approves the issuance of bonds for the
Project.
4157-7883-6252
C
Orrick
Page 2
Pursuant to applicable state law, CaICHA policies, and the documents providing for the issuance of
bonds by CaICHA, the bonds are issued as limited obligations of CaICHA, not of any Charter
Member or Additional Member, and are payable solely out of the revenues and receipts derived
from the Project being financed.
Specifically, Section 8 of the Agreement provides that "[t]he Bonds, together with the interest
and premium, if any, thereon, shall not be deemed to constitute a debt of any Member or pledge
of the faith and credit of the Members... Neither the Members nor ... shall be obligated to pay the
principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds, or other costs incidental thereto..."
(emphasis added). The Agreement also expressly provides that CaICHA is a public entity
separate and apart from the Members, and "[i]ts debts, liabilities and obligations do not
constitute debts, liabilities or obligations of any Members."' Accordingly, bonds issued for any
particular Project will be indebtedness solely of CaICHA.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have further questions with respect to this matter.
Sincerely yours,
ls/ Justin Cooper
Justin Cooper
1 See Cal. Government Code Section 6508.1. "...the debts, liabilities, and obligations of the agency shall be
debts, liabilities, and obligations of the parties to the agreement unless the agreement specifies otherwise."
4157-7883-6252
BURLINGAME
Memorandum
To: City Council
Date: December 2, 2019
From: Mayor Donna Colson
Subject: Committee Report
November 14, 2019
Teacher Housing Meeting HFA
• Palo Alto Educator Housing - Mercy Housing and City with other districts and pledges to
build on 1.5 acres of land to build between 90-120 units available to teachers in the
participating districts as well as Ravenswood, Menlo Park City District, and Sequoia
Union High School District
• Concerns over funding from the big tech industry and that the "contributions" are really
just land contributions and short-term loans, but we may need longer0term loans up to 15
years.
• How do you not violate fair housing laws. If you are having a desperate impact, but are
focused on a community benefit that you have a significant interest such as housing your
teaching staff (court has not weighed in on this) and if you include classified staff, this
helps.
• Other option is can you form a JPA to cross jurisdictional work with to develop housing.
Can form separate legal entity that have own existence (CGAG, HEART, PCE) and then
how do you hold accountability; distribute assets if you need to move away from the
format.
• What unique powers do schools have that other agencies may not have..AB 1157 amended
Section 17391 of the Ed Code to provide a school district is not required to surplus land if
you can use the land for teacher or school district employee housing - it is unclear if this
exemption from surplus applies to the property will be used for housing or employees of
other local government agencies - may need to tweak the so that if the school district
employees are the major benefactor.
• Notion of COPS (Certificate of Participation) financing and setting up a different entity
and you designate the income from the housing to pay for the COPS - but you can only use
these for Capital Outlay purposes - includes development of rental housing for school
district employees (what about other employees such city employees - may not include
local government agencies or counties or even College District Employees.
• School Districts may issue bonds and could work together with City land and could do
this, but if the city owns the land could issue lease revenue bonds or other bonds and then
could prioritize city employees and school district employees as well.
• Differences in Property Tax Considerations - School District and City owned land are
typically exempt from property taxation.
1
Colson Committee Report
December 2, 2019
• A private interest in exempt public property may create a possessory interest in the
property - interest that is independent durable and exclusive of rights held by others.
However, if you lease and then create a possessory interest, then your business can be
taxed.
• The State Board of Equalization - has long held that the employees are exempt from the
possessory lease hold interest, but that may not be tested and is likely not relevant, but if
you are working across jurisdictions, then you might have tax implications.
• Income tax issues - everything you get from your employer is subject to tax and if housing
is provided and if BMR is provided, then the value given and should be taxed. There are
exemptions - about required housing, and not a condition of employment.
• Exception - Lodging located in proximity, are you paying what others are being charged,
annual rent equal to at least 5% of the appraised value of the lodging, employee pays
adequate
Future Dates
Jan 9
Feb 13
March 12
April 9
Thursday, November 21, 2019
Library Burlingame Stands United Against Hate -Had over 100 people attend the Potluck
and then join for the candlelight vigil
Friday, November 22, 2019
Meeting Enterprise Corporation
Update on the business concepts for consolidation of the rental car and repair/sales for their
Burlingame business
Sub -Committee recommended that we move to present detail to full Council
Meeting with Mom's Against Poverty
Discussion around CCFD Toy Drive and needs for Dec 15 wrap day
Update on local work and funding activities
Meeting with BHS Parent Group Representative
• Update on funding and other BHS priorities as well as feedback from Burlingame Stands
United Against Hate
Meeting with the Burlingame Audit Team
Met with the Audit team at Maze and staff who provided an update on the Burlingame
CAFR
2
Colson Committee Report
Monday, November 25, 2019
HCDC Meeting
December 2, 2019
• DOH Ken Cole moving over to Director of Human Services
• Ray Hodges is the new interim Director of DOH
• Rose Cade moved to Alameda County
• NOFA Funding Update
• FY 19/20 - Several projects completed -
o Colma Vets 65 Units committed $1.2 MM and $3.3 HFA and opened in October
almost all have HUD vouchers either homeless or at risk
o Bay Oaks Rehab 38 Unit existing multi -family complete
o Rotary Terrace Senior SSF for VLI and ELI opened in September
o Arroyo Green - $9 MM funding and just broke ground 100% senior housing and
childcare center on site - Located in RWC
o Bay Meadows - Just began construction 67 units affordable family housing located
next to Hillsdale Caltrain and part of Bay Meadows master plan
o Redwood Oaks - HIP Housing Revolving loan funds (Rehab) - removing
swimming pool and adding housing/office
FY 2020/21 HUD Funding and NOFA Schedule
o Estimates for approving our funding priorities - the dollar amount is determined in
April
FY 2020 State ESG funding (Emergency Solutions Grants)
o State has Federal block grants that will work from County - we will see some
directly ourselves, but this will be handled by the County
Funding Priorities GY 2020/21 Annual Action Plan Funding Priorities
o Homeless - 1,512 people but increased to 1,253 in 2017 and 2013 was the highest
of over 2,000
o Unsheltered 637 to 901 was people living in cars
o Have asked for presentation to HCDC with shorter version that can go to the City
Council for information
Update on Current Projects opening or near completion
DAHLIA - Software to allocated affordable housing units
o Pilot program for consolidated way for people to take a look and make a list of
units who are available. You need a list of affordable housing developers and then
residents have to fill out lots of applications and often drop them off in person.
Goal is to launch a single point of where these units can be consolidated. Phase 1 -
identified the problem points and then Phase 2 - is get a few projects on the list to
beta test
Foster City is the test case - launched with 2 listings and had 2000 views and it was
on the DOH homepage and listed on both FC as well - received 30 applications for
2 units (these were BMR inclusionary units - people self selected out and so all the
applicants were qualified due to the fact that they were able to surface the min and
max incomes and household size
Hoping to have more access in late spring and hoping to get more regional funding
- so far it has been funded via Measure K funds
• LIHTC Training
o Have both 4% which are not competitive (over the counter and by right) and total
15% of the dollars compared then there are 9% credits which are awarded generate
3
Colson Committee Report
December 2, 2019
85% of the total pool - the benefit of the 9% is much higher, but harder to get
(competitive)
o Rental units with tenants earning nor more than 60% of AMI
o Investors earn $ for $ credits against their federal tax liability, investors also get to
take tax benefits from losses, tax credits are generally received over first 10 years
of operation, some are recaptured bu IRS if they are not used after 15 years.
o Investor (Corporation whoever) - Equity fund - buy tax credits 70 cents on dollar
and most comes in on LP and then GP gets about 1 % of the project
o With LIHTC come tax-exempt bonds - limited partner investor general equity
o Requires 20% below 50% AMI and then 80% below 50% AMI and 60% AMI
4