Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 2021.08.16 Regular SessionCITY BURLINGAME q $AaiEo JLkE � BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Approved Minutes Regular City Council Meeting on August 16, 2021 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date via Zoom Webinar at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG The pledge of allegiance was led by Vice Mayor Ortiz. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, O'Brien Keighran, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION a. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6) CITY DESIGNATED REPRESENATIVES: TIMOTHY L. DAVIS, HR DIRECTOR SONYA M. MORRISON, CITY MANAGER LISA K. GOLDMAN, CITY ATTORNEY MICHAEL GUINA, FINANCE DIRECTOR HELEN YU-SCOTT EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATIONS: POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, POLICE SERGEANTS ASSOCIATION, ASSOCIATION OF POLICE ADMINISTRATORS, TEAMSTERS, DEPARTMENT HEADS AND UNREPRESENTED City Attorney Guina stated that direction was given, and there was no reportable action. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor O'Brien Keighran reviewed upcoming events in the city. 6. PRESENTATIONS There were no presentations. Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON -AGENDA Jennifer Pfaff thanked staff for their assistance in putting on Art in the Park. 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if anyone on Council or members of the public would like to remove an item from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Brownrigg pulled item 8j. Mayor O'Brien pulled item 8e. Vice Mayor Ortiz made a motion to adopt items 8a, 8b, 8c, 8d, 8f, 8g, 8h, 8i, 8k, 81, 8m, and 8n from the Consent Calendar; seconded by Councilmember Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR THE JULY 6, 2021 CLOSED SESSION City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested approval of the City Council Meeting Minutes for the July 6, 2021 Closed Session. b. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR THE JULY 6, 2021 REGULAR SESSION City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested approval of the City Council Meeting Minutes for the July 6, 2021 Regular Session. c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SERVICE CONTRACT WITH CARD CONNECT FOR CREDIT CARD PROCESSING FEES COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEW REGISTRATION SOFTWARE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad requested Council adopt Resolution Number 094-2021. d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RECTRAC, LLC D/B/A VERMONT SYSTEMS, FOR REGISTRATION SOFTWARE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $32,620 Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad requested Council adopt Resolution Number 095-2021. e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $156,016.36, CITY PROJECT #84730 2 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes Mayor O'Brien Keighran explained that usually items over a certain amount are first brought to Council for approval. However, because Council was on summer break, staff acted quickly to purchase this playground equipment prior to the 8% increase in cost. She thanked staff for making this decision. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Mayor O'Brien Keighran made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 096-2021; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by roll call, 5-0. f. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. TO PROVIDE GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS SOFTWARE, IN THE AMOUNT OF $105,000 DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 0972021. g. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE FOR THE 2021 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES' ANNUAL CONFERENCE City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council adopt Resolution Number 098-2021. h. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS CONFIRMING THE APPOINTMENT OF FINANCE DIRECTOR/TREASURER AND DESIGNATING CERTAIN EMPLOYEES AS OFFICIAL SIGNATORIES ON CITY BANKING AND INVESTMENT ACCOUNTS City Manager Goldman requested Council adopt Resolution Number 099-2021, Resolution Number 100- 2021, and Resolution Number 101-2021. i. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH CENTRALSQUARE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC FOR AN UPGRADE OF BUILDING PERMIT SOFTWARE IN THE AMOUNT OF $143,775.00 CDD Gardiner requested Council adopt Resolution Number 102-2021. j. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO BAY AREA LIGHTWORKS, INC. FOR THE BROADWAY PEDESTRIAN STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $698,500, AND APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH NICKITAS 7280 FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $120,375 Councilmember Brownrigg stated that this item concerns Broadway pedestrian street lighting improvements. He asked whether this project goes beyond safety improvements and would include aesthetic elements. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative. Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes Councilmember Brownrigg asked if the light fixtures would match the Broadway Overpass. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Beach made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 103-2021 and Resolution Number 104- 2021; seconded by Councilmember Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. k. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PERSONNEL CHANGES, AND APPROVING THE CITY OF BURLINGAME PAY RATES AND RANGES (SALARY SCHEDULE) HR Morrison requested Council adopt Resolution Number 105-2021. 1. OPEN NOMINATION PERIOD TO FILL ONE VACANCY ON THE TRAFFIC SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION City Manager Goldman requested Council open the nomination period to fill one vacancy on the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission. m. ANNUAL RENEWAL OF THE BURLINGAME AVENUE AREA BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (DBID): RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2020-21 ANNUAL REPORT: DECLARING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO ESTABLISH AND LEVY ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-22: AND SETTING REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING FOR SEPTEMBER 20, 2021 Finance Director Yu -Scott requested Council adopt Resolution Number 106-2021. n. AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SEND A LETTER TO THE CITY'S STATE LEGISLATORS REGARDING CONTINUATION OF REMOTE MEETINGS City Manager Goldman requested the Council's authorization for the Mayor to send a letter to the City's State Legislators regarding the continuation of remote meetings. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES AMENDING CHAPTERS 15.04 AND 15.08 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE SEWER CAPACITY CHARGES AND INTRODUCE WATER CAPACITY CHARGES FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT NAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS (CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15378, 15601(b)(3) DPW Murtuza stated that at the July 6, 2021 meeting, Council reviewed the water and sewer infrastructure capacity charges. He explained that water and sewer infrastructure charges are one-time fees paid upfront as 4 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes a condition of development. He noted that these fees are designed to recover the cost of capacity and existing infrastructure that benefits new development and redevelopment. DPW Murtuza explained that the charges provide a separate source of revenue that offsets the overall funding needs for the water and sewer system. He stated that in the absence of capacity charges, the existing utility rate payers would assume the burden of new development in the city. DPW Murtuza stated that currently the City doesn't levy water infrastructure capacity charges on new projects. He noted that the City does levy sewer capacity charges on new developments. However, the current sewer capacity charges were established in 1982 and need to be updated. DPW Murtuza stated that at the July 6 meeting, staff assumed that the minimum water size meter for capacity calculation was 5/8 inch for non-residential developments. However, staff later found out that 3/4 inch is the minimum meter size that is currently used for non-residential developments. Therefore, the minimum water meter size and the respective capacity charge calculations have been updated. This adjustment resulted in minor changes to the water capacity charges. DPW Murtuza stated that the proposed water and sewer capacity charges are summarized in the staff report. He explained that charges for the residential category are broken down by single family, multi -family dwellings, and ADUs. He noted that there would be no capacity charges for remodels to single-family homes. However, for existing multi -family dwellings, charges would apply to new units. He added that any ADU smaller than 150 square feet will have no fee. DPW Murtuza noted that the proposed ordinances include a provision for adjusting the fees for construction cost inflation. He added that staff would undertake an annual review of the fees. DPW Murtuza stated that at the July 6 meeting, the Council expressed a desire to give concessions for affordable housing. Currently, the City provides significant concessions for affordable housing units in terms of density bonuses, relaxed height restrictions, and parking requirements. DPW Murtuza stated that staff was unable to find other agencies that provided concessions on capacity charges for affordable housing. He noted that if the Council decides to grant concessions for affordable housing, the City will need to backfill the cost with General Fund money. He explained that this is because water and sewer enterprise systems are governed by Proposition 218. Additionally, he stated that staff reached out to developers, and none indicated issues with the charges. DPW Murtuza stated that Council requested information regarding other fees that the City charges for new development. He noted that this was is included in the staff report. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked the City Clerk to read the titles of the proposed ordinances. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer read the titles. Vice Mayor Ortiz made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the ordinances; seconded by Councilmember Beach. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 5 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Councilmember Beach thanked staff for their work on this item. She noted that she thought it was the right thing to do in order to ensure that new development pays their fair share of the costs of the water and sewer infrastructure. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he believed this was a commonsense approach. He asked why Proposition 218 is triggered if the City decides to grant concessions for affordable housing. City Attorney Guina stated that because the fee charge may be subject to Proposition 218 challenges if done incorrectly, the conservative approach is to stay away from these potential charges. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that in light of budget constraints, he wouldn't propose putting the City in the way of potential litigation. However, he noted that it was disappointing. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that after reviewing the staff report, it was clear that the City has a lot of incentives for affordable housing. Therefore, she explained she was okay with not offering concessions on sewer and water capacity charges in conjunction with affordable housing. Councilmember Colson noted that the affordable housing developers that responded stated that they are fine with the fees. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to bring the proposed ordinances back for a second reading; seconded by Vice Mayor Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE CONTINUATION OF LONG-TERM PARKLET PROGRAM AFTER THE TEMPORARY PROGRAM EXPIRATION DATE OF SEPTEMBER 6, 2021 AND DISCUSSION OF COMMUNITY EVENT STREET CLOSURES City Manager Goldman explained that at the beginning of the pandemic, the City initiated a series of measures to facilitate safe outdoor dining. She noted that the measures included implementing temporary street closure programs for both Downtown Burlingame Avenue and Broadway and installing parklets on side streets in the Downtown Burlingame Avenue area. She stated that subsequently, the City terminated the temporary street closure program on Burlingame Avenue and converted to a parklet program due to concerns of overcrowding, lack of public adherence to social distancing protocols, and complaints from businesses regarding access and parklet impacts. The City continued to allow the Broadway street closure for a number of months as there were no complaints of large gatherings or violations of social distancing protocols, and the Broadway Business Improvement District ("BID") was supportive of the street closures. City Manager Goldman stated that eventually, the City transitioned the Broadway street closure program to the temporary parklet program. Additionally, the City extended the parklet program in all districts through Labor Day (September 6) 2021. She noted that Council asked that the staff bring the program back for review prior to the end date to ensure that Council could determine whether or not to extend it. 6 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes City Manager Goldman stated that on May 12, 2021, the Economic Development Subcommittee discussed whether a fee structure should be considered for parklets in the future. She explained that several fee programs were discussed as potential models. She noted that the Economic Development Subcommittee agreed that the parklet program should be referred to the Council prior to conducting any additional fee research. City Manager Goldman stated that the Council should first determine whether they wish to extend the parklet program. If the answer is yes, then the Council should determine how long the extension should be and whether the City should charge a fee. City Manager Goldman stated that at the July 8 Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission (TSPC) meeting, the Commissioners discussed the continuation of the parklets program. She noted that after extensive deliberations, the TSPC indicated support for charging a fee for parklets and revocation of under-utilized parklets. She added that the TSPC expressed concerns regarding the impact of loss of public parking in the downtown area in the larger context of an increase in parking demand due to more people returning to the downtown, the closure of Lot E, and parklets reducing the overall parking supply in the commercial districts. She stated that the TSPC also expressed concern that parklets may be under-utilized during the cooler weather due to people opting for indoor dining. City Manager Goldman discussed how it has been tricky to clean and maintain the downtown sidewalks as a result of the parklets. She explained that the sidewalks in front of restaurants have significant deposits of grease and stain that are time-consuming for staff to remove, and the deposits tend to return shortly after cleaning. City Manager Goldman stated that PG&E let the City know that there are underground utilities that may be impacted by the parklets. She stated that if the Council chooses to continue this program, staff will need to revise the permit to ensure that PG&E has access to these underground utilities. CDD Gardiner stated that staff looked at fee models for long-term parklet programs. He explained that there are not a lot. He stated that the objective is to offset lost parking revenues and capture some of the value of the land itself. He noted that staff reviewed Mountain View's program, which has been in place for over 20 years. He discussed Mountain View's fees: • New application: $759 • Annual rent $6 per square foot in addition to $1,200 per parking space removed • Permit renewal is approximately $200 • Minimum 5-year license term and indemnity agreement CDD Gardiner also reviewed Los Gatos' parklet program. He noted that this program is notable for the use of pre -approved design guidelines through use of a consultant. He stated that the program offers a subsidy of construction costs, covering $40,000 or 75% of the construction cost, whichever is less: • Engineering fees: $3,900 (charged for work with the pre -approved design consultant) • Application processing fee: $1,000 7 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes • Building permit fee: $1,700 • Encroachment Permit fee: $2,100 • Parklet construction fees (two parking spaces): Estimated $20,000 to $40,000 (up to 75% subsidized) CDD Gardiner stated that recently, the City of South San Francisco agreed to adopt an annual parklet permit program. The permit will cost $500 and be renewed annually, though the program structure has not yet been finalized. City Manager Goldman next reviewed street closures. She stated that at the July 14, 2021 Economic Development Subcommittee meeting, members discussed revisiting street closures in the commercial areas. She explained that the subcommittee discussed closing the street for community events. She noted the importance of not closing down cross streets this time in order that they remain open to traffic. She stated that DBID and Broadway BID representatives at the meeting were not in support of implementing the street closures at this time and indicated that they would like to observe how the recovery from the pandemic goes before considering street closures. City Manager Goldman stated that the subcommittee recommended that staff conduct a community survey to gauge opinions on street closures. She noted that the survey was launched July 29 and concluded August 12, 2021. Preliminary results from the survey reflect the opinions of 228 respondents. 176 support street closures in some capacity. Of these, 181 indicated that Burlingame Avenue makes the most sense for street closures. She noted that a majority of respondents favored weekends and special events only for the closures. City Manager Goldman stated that the estimated parking loss as a result of street closures will be approximately 111 spaces on Burlingame Avenue, which is 82 spaces more than the spaces (29) currently occupied by parklets. She added that similarly the total number of parking spaces on Broadway would be approximately 74, compared to 11 spaces currently occupied by parklets. City Manager Goldman stated that there are currently 43 parklets in both districts totaling 88 lost parking spaces. She explained that the lost parking revenues Downtown are estimated at $15,000 to $20,000 a month. She added that the lost parking revenues in the Broadway district are estimated at $3,500 to $4,000 a month. Mayor O'Brien Keighran discussed the increased amount of cleaning that has become necessary. She asked if staff knew what the cost of the increased cleaning was. DPW Murtuza stated that the City is spending approximately 20 hours a week on additional cleaning. He added that this is about $200 to $300 per parklet per month. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked when PG&E will get back to the City with data on where the utility lines are. City Manager Goldman stated that she was unsure and would need to get back to Council with this information. 8 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if the City should enact an indemnity agreement with each business that has a parklet. City Attorney Guina replied in the affirmative. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if it would be feasible to utilize design review personnel for the design review of parklets (if this is the direction Council chooses). CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up for public comment. Alex Holtz stated that he was in favor of Los Gatos' parklet program for the City. (comment submitted via publiccomment(d),burlin _ a�g). Adrienne Leigh stated that she was in favor of the parklet program but wanted to see design requirements. She added that she only wanted to see a small fee enacted. (comment submitted via publiccomment(d),burlin _ a�g). A Sixto's representative stated that they are in favor of the parklet program continuing and are happy to pay a fee. However, they didn't want to see the street closure program brought back. (comment submitted via publicc omment(d),burlingame. org). Jennifer Pfaff stated that she concurred with the emails that the Council received. She noted that she felt that the parklets have added a new and welcomed dimension to the two downtown areas. Jon Kevranian stated that he wanted to see design requirements for the parklets so that they aren't just orange barricades. He also discussed customer complaints about parking. Jason Cooper stated that he was in favor of the parklet program. He noted that his business' parklet was their lifeline. A Broadway Grill representative stated her support of continuing the parklet program. A business owner stated that her concern with the parklet program is the wear on the street. She noted that she has one parking spot in front of her store in between two parklets that has gotten very dirty. Mayor O'Brien Keighran closed public comments. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that the City needs to stay on top of cleaning the two downtown districts. She suggested including the cost of the increased cleaning in the fee for utilizing a parklet. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that he was in favor of keeping the program. However, he noted that he has concerns about the underutilization of parklets and wanted to ensure that the program clearly outlines that the number of days that a parklet must be in use. Additionally, he voiced concern about the City's loss of parking revenue. 9 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that he liked the Los Gatos parklet program. He noted that he liked the idea of pre - approved design guidelines and wanted to see a little more consistency amongst the parklets. Councilmember Colson stated that she supports the extension of the parklet program. She suggested doing one-year extensions so that the City is given some flexibility. She added that she would suggest requiring businesses to use the parklets for at least four days a week. Councilmember Colson stated that she agreed that Burlingame Avenue has become dirtier. She suggested increasing the amount of time that staff spends cleaning the Avenue. Councilmember Colson supported design guidelines that would be easy to manage and would ensure safety and ADA requirements are in place. She added that she supported a fee to replenish lost parking revenue. She noted that some of the restaurants are generating more revenue than they had pre -pandemic due to the increased size of their business. Councilmember Colson stated that she agreed with the Mayor that the City needed to have businesses with a parklet sign an indemnification agreement. Councilmember Beach stated that she supports extending the program. She noted that she thought the City has to get into a post -pandemic world before committing to a permanent program. She added that there should be reasonable fees associated with the program. She stated that she would defer to staff on when the fees should be rolled out. She noted that the fees should cover the cost of additional necessary street cleaning. Councilmember Beach stated that she liked the Mountain View model. She added that she was in favor of design guidelines and indemnification. She suggested that the City could manage the underutilization of the parklets by setting the fee at an appropriate level. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he agreed with his colleagues that the program should be extended. He noted that he wanted more information on a potential fee structure for the parklets. City Manager Goldman stated that if the Council is interested in moving forward with extending the parklet program and instituting a fee, staff will conduct further research on what the fee should be. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he believed the fee should include the cost of cleaning. However, he wasn't sure that the City needed to recover lost parking revenues. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she wasn't in favor of making the parklets permanent yet, but did want to extend the program for another year. She added that she believed that there needed to be consistent design review guidelines. However, she wanted staff to review the design of the parklets and not the Planning Commission. She agreed with Councilmember Colson that the parklets should be used for four days a week. She added that she was flexible about covering the cost of lost parking revenue. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if the City needed additional feedback. 10 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes City Manager Goldman reviewed what she had heard: • Extend the parklet program for one year with a review in August 2022 • Interest in indemnification language • Interest in fees to cover cleaning and potential other costs • Increase cleaning on Burlingame Avenue • Consensus that the parklets are used at least four days a week City Manager Goldman asked if the Council wanted design guidelines to be for new parklets or would it also cover parklets that are already built. Councilmember Beach stated that it would be helpful in relation to the fee conversation if staff brought back information on how parking fees are used in the city. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that he was in favor of pre -approved design guidelines. He added that the design guidelines should apply to existing parklets as well as new parklets. Councilmember Colson suggested that the design guidelines encompass regulations concerning safety and ADA requirements. She added that she would like to see the businesses cover the orange barriers. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he concurred with Councilmember Colson and Vice Mayor Ortiz. He noted that he believed it would be hard to force existing parklet owners to change their parklets. He added that he agreed with Councilmember Beach that the parklet fee could deter the underutilization of some of the parklets. Mayor O'Brien Keighran concurred with Councilmember Colson that she wanted to see the orange barriers covered up. City Manager Goldman stated that what she was hearing is that health and safety are a priority in the design guidelines and at a minimum the barriers should be covered up. Mayor O'Brien Keighran steered the conversation to street closures. She noted that she thought the City should get through this year and then re-evaluate whether to reprise the street closure program. Councilmember Brownrigg concurred with Mayor O'Brien Keighran. He noted that the reason that the City ended the street closures was because there were too many people without masks. He stated that he would suggest reviewing this program in the spring when the weather improves. He added that there was a lot of positive feedback about the street closure from the community. Vice Mayor Ortiz concurred with Councilmember Brownrigg. He stated that the street closure didn't need to happen every weekend but it could be done once or twice a month. 11 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes Councilmember Colson stated that she was inclined to defer discussion of this program until the spring. She added that the Town Square project will also take a lot of pressure off street closures. She suggested rotational street closures. Councilmember Beach stated that she agreed with her colleagues that this should be deferred until the spring. She suggested having the Economic Development Subcommittee study where street closure programs were effective. She also suggested having the program only exist on a few blocks for a consistent period of time. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she believed staff had direction on this item. b. DISCUSSION OF THE CITY'S CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR COUNCIL ELECTIONS City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that the City's current campaign contribution limits are set by Ordinance 1801. She noted that the limits were established by reviewing the average contributions that candidates received from organizations and individuals in previous elections. Under Ordinance 1801, individuals can give up to $500 to a candidate, and organizations can give $1,000. She explained that this number is adjusted every even year using the CPI. Therefore, the current limits are: • Individuals - $719.93 • Organizations - $1,439.87 City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that in 2019, the Governor signed into law AB 571, which amended the Political Reform Act of 1974. She stated that under AB 571, beginning January 1, 2021, a state contribution limit would apply, by default, to any city and county candidates when that city or county had not already enacted contribution limits. She noted that the default limit for the upcoming cycle is $4,900. She added that under this program, the State acts as the administrator and enforcement agent for these limits. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer reviewed the City's current program. She explained that the City Clerk's Office administers the program. She noted that she creates a database for each candidate's financials so that she can ensure that contributions stay under the City's limits. She added that because Ordinance 1801 doesn't include provisions concerning penalties for violating the Ordinance, enforcement is covered by the General Provisions of the Municipal Code. She explained that the fines increase daily until the individual corrects the situation. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that administration of the program takes a considerable amount of time. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that included in the staff report is a table of San Mateo County municipalities and whether they have their own limits or default to the State limit. She noted that 14 of the 20 cities in the county use the State's limit. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that staff is looking for Council to consider two options: 1. Repeal the City's campaign contribution ordinance so that the State's default limits apply, or 2. Amend the ordinance to simplify the process 12 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes Councilmember Beach stated that she was surprised that so many cities in San Mateo County didn't have their own campaign contribution ordinances. She asked if AB 571 was leading cities to discuss establishing their own limits. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer responded in the negative. She explained that most of the cities in the county didn't have their own limits prior to AB 571. She added that when neighboring clerks had brought this item up for discussion, the councils decided to not establish their own limits. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he didn't support following the State's default limit as he felt that the limit was too high for any election, especially a district election. He noted that he supports amending the City's ordinance so that increases are an even number like $50 each election cycle. He added that individuals and organizations should be treated the same in regards to contribution limits. Vice Mayor Ortiz concurred with Councilmember Brownrigg. He discussed doing away with an escalator for increasing the contribution limit. Councilmember Colson stated that she didn't have a problem repealing the City's ordinance and utilizing the State default limit, as that was what a majority of the other cities in the county were doing. She noted that several of the cities that were using the State's default limit were also moving to district elections. She explained that she believed it was up to the candidate to self -police the contribution amounts they would accept. She added that the contributions that candidates receive are open to the public for review. Councilmember Colson stated that she was more concerned with the overall total amount that candidates were raising for their campaigns. Councilmember Beach stated that she was concerned with the amount of staff time that is being spent administering the program. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer noted that a new California law requires the City Clerk's Office to post campaign statements on the City's website within 72 hours of their due date. She explained that as a result, the Clerk's Office has 72 hours to review campaign statements to ensure that candidates are compliant. Councilmember Beach noted that she fully supports changing the contribution limits so that individuals and organizations are capped at the same amount. Councilmember Beach stated that she felt that the State default limit of $4,900 was very high. However, she noted that she agreed with Councilmember Colson's point that contributions are open for public review. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she was in favor of the State default limit. She noted that campaign statements are available to the public for review, and the public can determine how they feel about contributions that are made to candidates. Mayor O'Brien Keighran discussed the support candidates get from volunteers and in -kind contributions. She noted that these free services also impact campaigns. 13 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes Councilmember Colson asked if candidates are able to use their Council campaign funds to fund their race for a different office. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that this would be a question for the FPPC. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that to utilize his Council campaign account for his State Senate campaign, he had to first get approval from the individuals who had contributed to his Council campaign. He added that more often, individuals use their campaign accounts to support other candidates. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that if the goal is to limit money in politics, then they need to start setting limits for campaign contributions. He explained that he was not in favor of increasing the contribution limit to $4,900. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that it makes him uncomfortable that under the State default limit, four donors could match what he raised in the last election. Councilmember Colson stated that there are many ways to get around the contribution limits. Therefore, she felt that it was on the candidates to set their limits. She reinforced that everything is available to the public to review. Councilmember Beach stated that it seems excessive to allow a couple to give $4,900 each for a City district election race. She explained that if district elections are trying to be more equitable, then this might go against that. However, she noted that because district elections are in presidential and gubernatorial election years, they might be more expensive. She added that she thought an escalator was necessary because in her experience, the cost of campaigns increases in each election cycle. Councilmember Colson suggested setting a cap on what candidates can raise. She asked if this was feasible. City Attorney Guina stated that he would need to look in this. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he would support Councilmember Colson's cap on campaign expenditures. However, he was unsure if this was feasible. Councilmember Beach noted that campaign funds can be used for other expenses like attending events and conferences. Accordingly, she explained she wouldn't be in favor of capping the total amount. Councilmember Colson asked if there are City funds set aside for Council to attend conferences. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked staff to look into whether a cap could be implemented. Councilmember Brownrigg suggested setting contribution limits for people and organizations at $1,000 with a reasonable escalator. Vice Mayor Ortiz suggested an escalator of roughly 4%, approximately $40 a year. 14 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes Councilmember Colson stated that if the City can't legally impose a cap, staff could hand out information to potential candidates on what the average cost of a campaign is. She added that candidates could agree amongst themselves to a limit. Councilmember Colson stated that she was okay with a $1,000 contribution limit with a $50 escalator every election cycle. Councilmember Beach stated that it is hard to gauge how much a campaign costs until all the reports are in. She noted that the City has never had an election cycle during a gubernatorial or presidential year. She thought that maybe the City should wait until after these elections happen to better understand the costs. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked staff to bring back the item for further discussion and answers to the Council's questions. c. UPDATE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF HYBRID MEETINGS FOR CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND TRAFFIC SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MEETINGS City Clerk Hassel -Shearer gave the Council a brief update on the implementation of hybrid meetings for City Council, Planning Commission, and Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission meetings. She explained that staff is focusing on those three bodies because their meetings are held in the Council Chambers and were broadcast pre -pandemic. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that on March 17, 2020, the Governor issued an Executive Order that allowed legislative bodies to meet telephonically or by other means. She explained that staff worked quickly to install and implement Zoom meetings for all of the City's legislative bodies. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer discussed the increased public participation that the City has seen as a result of implementing Zoom meetings. She noted that it has allowed people who wouldn't regularly be able to attend the City's meetings to attend from the comfort of their own home. Additionally, she stated that it has allowed for staff to more easily schedule consultant presentations. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that on June 11, 2021, the Governor issued an Executive Order requiring legislative bodies to return to in -person meetings beginning in October, 2021. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that her office has been looking into implementing hybrid meetings where individuals will be able to continue to log into the Zoom Webinar or can come to the meeting in person. She noted that in order to do this, the City will need to improve the Council Chamber's audio and visual technology. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer noted that currently all of the technology companies that handle this implementation are very busy. Therefore, she stated that while staff is working hard on this matter, it likely won't happen at the beginning of October. 15 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes City Clerk Hassel -Shearer reviewed the different aspects of the Council Chamber improvements including new presentation screens, individual screens for Council, and audio upgrades. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that these improvements will be paid for with PEG funds. Councilmember Colson asked if there will be a mask mandate for the Council Chambers. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. She noted that there is no way to enforce six feet social distancing in the chambers. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Brownrigg thanked staff for making this happen. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she has definitely seen an increase in participation. She added that it has been a great way to gain participation from families and senior citizens. Vice Mayor Ortiz thanked the City Clerk's Office for their work on this item. Councilmember Colson asked that she continue to receive her agenda packet electronically. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that she would be looking into this aspect as well. 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS There were no reports. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Colson asked for policy on the use of electronic devices for the agenda packet. Council agreed to agendize this item. 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.burlin ag me.org. 16 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor O'Brien Keighran adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m. in memory of five -time Mayor Rosalie O'Mahony and Anastasia Cole. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Meaghan Hassel -Shearer City Clerk 17 Burlingame City Council August 16, 2021 Approved Minutes