Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2021.12.20City of Burlingame BURLINGAME F, Meeting Agenda - Final City Council Monday, December 20, 2021 7:00 PM Regular Meeting and City Council Reorganization BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed into law AB 361 which allows a local agency to meet remotely when: The local agency holds a meeting during a declared state of emergency 2. State or local health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing 3. Legislative bodies declare the need to meet remotely due to present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees On November 15, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution Number 142-2021 stating that the City Council and Commissions will continue to meet remotely for at least thirty days for the following reasons: 1. There is still a declared state of emergency 2. County Health Orders require that all individuals in public spaces maintain social distancing and wear masks 3. The City can't maintain social distancing requirements for the public, staff, Councilmembers, and Commissioners in their meeting spaces Pursuant to Resolution Number 142-2021, the City Council Chambers will not be open to the public for the December 20, 2021 Regular Meeting. Members of the public may view the meeting by logging into the Zoom Webinar listed below. Additionally, the meeting will be streamed live on YouTube and uploaded to the City's website after the meeting. Members of the public may provide written comments by email to publiccomment@burlingame.org. Emailed comments should include the specific agenda item on which you are commenting. Note that your comment concerns an item that is not on the agenda nor on the Consent Calendar. The length of the emailed comment should be commensurate with the three minutes customarily allowed for verbal comments, which is approximately 250-300 words. To ensure that your comment is received and read to the City Council for the appropriate agenda item, please submit your email no later than 5:00 p.m. on December 20, 2021. The City will make every effort to read emails received after that time, but cannot guarantee such emails will be read into the record. Any emails received after the 5:00 p.m. deadline which are not read into the record, will be provided to the City Council after the meeting. Online City of Burlingame Page 1 Printed on 1211612021 City Council Meeting Agenda - Final December 20, 2021 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m. - Online To access the meeting by computer: Go to www.zoom.us/join Meeting ID: 839 2211 5428 Passcode:053222 To access the meeting by phone: Dial 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 839 2211 5428 Passcode:053222 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION 5. UPCOMING EVENTS 6. PRESENTATIONS a. Update from HIP Housing b. UDdate from the Measure I Oversiaht Committee C. Update on Community Center 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 the December 6, 2021 Closed Session Attachments: Meeting Minutes City of Burlingame Page 2 Printed on 12116/2021 City Council Meeting Agenda - Final December 20, 2021 b. ADDroval of Citv Council Meetina Minutes for the December 6. 2021 Reaular Meetina Attachments: Meeting Minutes C. Adoption of an Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Amending Chapter 2.25 of Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code Regarding Limits on Campaign Contributions CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, 15601(b)(3) Attachments: Staff Report Proposed Ordinance Introduction Staff Report and All Attachments - December 6, 2021 d. AdoDtion of an Ordinance of the Citv of Burlinaame Addina ChaDter 2.26 to Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code Authorizing Electronic and Paper Methods of Filing Campaign Financial Disclosure Statements (CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, 15601(b)(3)): and Adoption of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Authorizing the Electronic Filing of Statements of Economic Interests (Form 700) Required by Government Code Section 87200 et seq. and Government Code Section 87300 et seq. Attachments: Staff Report Proposed Ordinance Proposed Resolution December 6, 2021 Staff Report NetFile Agreement e. Adoption of a Resolution AcceDtina the Hoover School Area Sidewalk Improvements on Summit Drive by JJR Construction, Inc. in the Amount of $221,919, City Project No. 84490, Federal Aid Project No. CML -5171(022) Attachments: Staff Report Resolution Final Invoice Package Project Location Map f. AdoDtion of a Resolution ADDrovina the Procurement of Four Vehicles for the Citv's Fleet System as Part of the FY 2021-22 Vehicle Replacement Program in the Amount of $122,787.24 Attachments: Staff Report Resolution Bid Proposals City of Burlingame Page 3 Printed on 12116/2021 City Council Meeting Agenda - Final December 20, 2021 g. Adoption of a Resolution to Continue Conducting City Council and Commission Meetings Remotely Due to Health and Safety Concerns for the Public Attachments: Staff Report Resolution Resolution Number 116-2021 Resolution Number 128-2021 Resolution Number 142-2021 Governor's Executive Order N-29-20 Governor's Executive Order N-08-21 AB 361 h. Adoption of the 2022 Council Calendar Attachments: Staff Report 2022 City Council Calendar i. Acceptance of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2021 Attachments: Staff Report Fiscal Year 2020-21 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Public Comment) 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Public Comment) a. Annual Report of Sustainability Progress Attachments: Staff Report Presentation 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Councilmembers report on committees and activities and make announcements. 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 the Library Board of Trustees are available online at www.burlingame.org. 14. CEREMONIAL City of Burlingame Page 4 Printed on 12116/2021 City Council Meeting Agenda - Final December 20, 2021 a. Rotation of Councilmembers 15. ADJOURNMENT Notice: Any attendees who require assistance, a disability related modification, or language assistance in order to participate in the meeting should contact Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, December 20, 2021 at (650) 558-7203 or at mhasselshearer@burlingame.org. Any individual who wishes to request an alternative format for the agenda, meeting notice, or other writings that may be distributed at the meeting, should contact Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, December 20, 2021 at (650) 558-7203 or at mhasselshearer@burlingame.org. NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 3, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. VIEW REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING ONLINE 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 via www.burlingame.org or by emailing City Clerk Meaghan Hassel -Shearer at mhasselshearer@burlingame.org. If you are unable to obtain information via the City's website or through email, contact the City Clerk at (650) 558-7203. City of Burlingame Page 5 Printed on 12116/2021 CITY O BURLINGAME J. �.arEo ��NE 6 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Closed Session on December 6th, 2021 CALL TO ORDER Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 A duly noticed meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date via Zoom at 6:23 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, O'Brien Keighran, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS There was no public comment. 4. CLOSED SESSION a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION a. INITIATION OF LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(D)(4): ONE CASE b. SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9((D)(2), (E)(3): NINE CLAIMS Direction was given but no reportable action was taken. 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor O'Brien Keighran adjourned the meeting at 6:47 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer City Clerk Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 CITY O BURLINGAME J. �.arEo ��NE 6 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Regular City Council Meeting on December 6th, 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 City Attorney Guina reported that direction was given at the closed session, but no reportable action was taken. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor O'Brien Keighran reviewed upcoming events in the city. 6. PRESENTATIONS a. PENINSULA HUMANE SOCIETY PRESENTATION Peninsula Humane Society President Anthony Tansimore gave an update on the work of the Peninsula Humane Society ("PHS"). He explained that PHS was founded in 1950 by concerned citizens. PHS provides care to the animals in the community and is not affiliated with nor funded by any other humane societies. He stated that PHS is funded by the local community. 1 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 Mr. Tansimore reviewed the services that PHS provides including: • Animal rescue • Sheltering services • Veterinary services • Disaster preparedness • Issuing of dog/cat licenses and collection of license fees Mr. Tansimore also reviewed the privately funded services that PHS assists with including: • Cruelty Investigations — investigate hundreds of cases and when necessary present cases to the District Attorney's Office for prosecution • Adoptions — place thousands of animals each year into loving homes • Spay/Neuter Clinic — provide affordable surgeries for owned pets and a free mobile spay/neuter clinic in targeted areas • Wildlife Care Center — treats sick, injured or orphaned wild animals form San Francisco to northern Santa Clara County • Volunteer Program - more than 1,200 active volunteers who work in almost every department • Humane Education — includes camps for kids, classroom presentations and career -related programs for high school students along with adult/family learning opportunities. • Dog training classes and free animal behavior helpline for the public to help keep pets in their home • TAILS — Transitioning Animals into Loving Homes — a partnership with the San Mateo Sheriff's Department working with minimum security inmates. Mayor O'Brien Keighran discussed taking her dog to Peninsula Humane Society for training. She thanked Mr. Tansimore for his hard work. Councilmember Brownrigg thanked Mayor O'Brien Keighran for putting this on the agenda. He discussed the volunteer work that his wife and son do at PHS and how much cheer PHS brings to the community. Councilmember Beach echoed the sentiments of her colleagues. She commented that PHS offers a great set of education programs and can't recommend them enough. Councilmember Colson thanked the PHS and Mr. Tanismore for all the work they do. She added that her family has adopted a pet from PHS. b. NORTH ROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE CDD Gardiner explained that the City updated its General Plan in 2019. He stated that the Rollins Road Mixed Use area was a chance to create a new neighborhood in Burlingame. He introduced John Moreland and Andrew Levins from KTGY, the consultants retained to assist with the Specific Plan, and Linda Gates, Dana Falk, and Casey Case from Gates + Associates, the landscape architects for the project. 2 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 Ms. Gates thanked the City Council for providing the team with the opportunity to reimagine North Rollins Road by having the foresight to designate it a live/work area. She reviewed the community outreach efforts that were undertaken. She noted the discussions at the different meetings and reviewed the feedback that the team received at each meeting including: Community Advisory Committee • September 2020 and January 2021 o Enhance underutilized area and maintain industrial feel o Provide flexibility and more trees o Walkability, access, and wayfinding o Link to transit o Public art o Celebrate linear corridor o Wider sidewalks Technical Advisory Committee • September 2020 and January 2021 o Outdoor multi -use spaces o Connectivity o Connection to transit o Keep industrial feel o Walkability o Awareness of what's there o Wider sidewalks protected with street trees Planning Commission • September 2020 and February 2021 o Promote a mix of uses o Connected o Place o Incremental evolution o Strong spine along Rollins Road Community Meeting • October 2020 and February 2021 o Maintain industrial feel o Showcase local businesses o Art emphasis o Sustainability o Flexible open spaces o Connected open spaces 3 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 Ms. Gates stated that there were some consistent requests from all the groups, which led to the principles of the project. Mr. Moreland reviewed the project principles: • Create a new mixed-use neighborhood that retains and blends existing uses with new uses and developments • Nurture community connection via a framework of open space that provides a rich variety of recreational experiences • Create a new framework of open spaces that is accessible to all and multi -functional so they serve many uses • Encourage and promote environmentally and economically sustainable development and infrastructure • Celebrate North Rollins' industrial character and unique history • Create opportunity to promote local businesses and community organizations existing in and surrounding the North Rollins area • Encourage creative opportunities for art as a distinguishing characteristic of the neighborhood • Ensure a smooth transition between North Rollins Road and South Rollins Road Mr. Moreland explained that the concepts for the North Rollins Road Specific Plan were based on five key variables: 1. Land Use: Refinement of North Rollins Road Mixed Use Zone 2. Focus Area: Areas within the project area that relate to the surrounding context 3. North Rollins and Adrian Road: Main backbone multi -modal travel ways 4. Open Space: The "public" realm of connections and recreational facilities 5. Utility Easement: Power lines and utility towers on private property. Mr. Moreland reviewed the project's design guidelines: • Urban Design: Open space, streetscape, landscape, and amenities • Site and Building: Eclectic mix of residential, live/work, commercial, and light industrial • Focus Areas: Tailored urban design approaches for different plan areas • Sustainability: Project -specific design solutions Mr. Moreland discussed lanes of traffic, bike lanes, and pedestrian traffic on Rollins Road and Adrian Road. He explained that the sentiment the team kept hearing throughout the process was that the pedestrian, bike, and car lanes should all be separate. He noted that the team discussed the project with the City of Millbrae to ensure that it was compatible. He added that Adrian Road would ultimately see less bike traffic. Ms. Gates discussed creating open spaces in the North Rollins Road Plan. She stressed the importance of walkability and creating parks. Ms. Gates reviewed the next steps: • January 2022 — Draft Specific Plan 4 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 • March 2022 — Final Draft Specific Plan • April 2022 — Specific Plan Adoption Vice Mayor Ortiz thanked the group for the presentation. He discussed the importance of identifying potential open spaces before they become unavailable. Councilmember Brownrigg thanked everyone for the update. He noted the difficulty of transitioning a section of the city from one usage to another and asked if the consultants reviewed successful examples of this transition. Mr. Moreland explained that KTGY has experience designing residential and mixed-use buildings across the country. He added that the consultants had reviewed projects in Santa Barbara that transitioned areas from industrial to resort/destination locations. He noted that they also looked at the Arts District in Los Angeles. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he wasn't worried about the transition from industrial to residential, but about what makes a neighborhood. He asked if it was important to install retail in the new neighborhood. Mr. Moreland responded that retail should be included, but that retail has undergone a change, especially throughout the pandemic. He noted that people want an experience that includes a food component and grocery component. He commented that there will be a commercial element to the new district, as well as additional design criteria and provisions that will hopefully create a sense of place. Councilmember Brownrigg asked if all the parks, aside from the utility easement, are privately developed. Ms. Gates responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Brownrigg asked how the City can make sure the parks will be open to the public. Ms. Gates explained that one park under development is privately funded but will be open to the public, and another privately developed park will be dedicated to the City for use. She noted that the second model, of privately funded and then dedicated to the City (which the City will program, maintain, and operate) is preferred. Councilmember Brownrigg voiced appreciation for the second model. Councilmember Brownrigg asked if there had been any thought on building a pedestrian bridge over the train tracks. Mr. Mowery responded that the team has looked into this and preliminary concepts are on the website. CDD Gardiner added that staff has begun discussions with the school district about school routes and how this might impact the need to create a bridge or tunnel to cross the train tracks. Councilmember Brownrigg asked if there was a County building in that area. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he thought utilizing that property as a library or something similar in nature would help pull the neighborhood together. He thanked the subcommittee and everyone involved for all their hard work on this plan. 5 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 Councilmember Beach thanked everyone for their work. She asked how are the commissions, BPAC, and community groups are being engaged in the process. CDD Gardiner responded the Community Advisory Committee has some members that are involved with the commissions that help bridge the gap. However, he noted that meetings with the various commissions haven't been built into the process. He explained that the Planning Commission has been the only commission that the team has formally met with. Councilmember Beach suggested that staff engage with the other relevant commissions on this project. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson discussed the public input that the project obtained at the community meetings. She asked how the new neighborhood would be connected to Broadway and Millbrae Avenue in order not to feel like an island. Ms. Gates stressed the importance of connecting this neighborhood with Millbrae and with Broadway. She noted that staff has been working closely with Millbrae. Councilmember Colson suggested creating a second farmers market on North Rollins Road to attract community members to that side of town. She added that it has been fun to work on this project and see it come to fruition. Mayor O'Brien Keighran concurred with her colleagues. She noted that this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to develop a new community. Councilmember Colson stated that the project highlights the City Council's readiness to create housing. She thanked staff for their work on the project. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened public comment. Manito Velasco voiced concern about the preferred alternative road plan for Rollins Road. (comment submitted via publiccomment&burlin ag me.org). Mayor O'Brien Keighran closed public comment. 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON -AGENDA There were no public comments. 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the Consent Calendar. No items were removed from the Consent Calendar. Vice -Mayor Ortiz made a motion to adopt the Consent Calendar; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 6 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 15, 2021 REGULAR MEETING City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for the November 15th Regular Meeting. b. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME REPEALING AND REPLACING TITLE 25 (ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE, AND REPEALING TITLE 21 (HISTORIC PRESERVATION) AND TITLE 22 (SIGNS) OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE; CEQA DETERMINATION: NO FURTHER CEQA ANALYSIS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15168,15162,15183) Community Development Director Gardiner requested Council adopt Ordinance Number 2000. c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN TO INCREASE THE FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) FOR OFFICE AND RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ON PROPERTIES FRONTING OLD BAYSHORE HIGHWAY IN THE BAYFRONT AREA AND TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SPECIFICITY TO SEA LEVEL RISE GOALS AND POLICIES (CEQA DETERMINATION: NO FURTHER CEQA ANALYSIS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15168, 15162) Community Development Director Gardiner requested Council adopt Resolution Number 145-2021. d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TENTATIVE AND FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP (PM 20-05), LOT MERGER AND RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS P AND Q, BLOCK 6, MAP OF BURLINGAME LAND COMPANY NO.2 SUBDIVISION AT 601 CALIFORNIA DRIVE; CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3) Public Works Director Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 146-2021. e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PROCURE FURNISHINGS FOR THE NEW COMMUNITY CENTER IN THE AMOUNT OF $428,543.85 Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad requested Council adopt Resolution Number 147-2021. f. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $300,000 WITH 7 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 TRUE NORTH COMPLIANCE SERVICES, INC. TO PROVIDE BUILDING PERMIT AND INSPECTION SERVICES Community Development Director Gardiner requested Council adopt Resolution Number 148-2021. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND LEVYING 2022 SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS ON HOTEL BUSINESSES WITHIN THE DISTRICT Finance Director Yu -Scott explained that the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District ("TBID") was formed in 2001 to revitalize the San Mateo County Convention & Visitors Bureau ("SMCCVB"). She stated that because Burlingame had the most hotel rooms and the greatest interest in seeing the TBID formed, the City agreed to act as "Lead Agency." 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 TBID's formation, the Burlingame City Council has conducted the annual reauthorization hearing for the TBID, and the City has overseen the various cities' tourism fee assessment payments. Finance Director Yu -Scott stated that the City of Palo Alto withdrew from the TBID in January 2021. She noted that the TBID is now comprised of 13 cities along with unincorporated San Mateo County. Finance Director Yu -Scott stated that the assessments for the TBID in 2022 are approximately $1.5 million. Finance Director Yu -Scott explained that after the last meeting, staff made a few minor corrections to the proposed resolution's exhibit. Finance Director Yu -Scott asked the City Clerk if she had received any protests. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer replied in the negative. Finance Director Yu -Scott stated that because no protests were received, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed resolution and approve the annual assessments. SMCSVCVB President John Hutar stated that since July, hotels in San Mateo County have been running at an occupancy rate of approximately 58% to 60%. He noted that they are optimistic about recovery and that they have spent a lot of energy reworking marketing material. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up to public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 149-2021; seconded by Vice Mayor Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 0 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 b. FOURTH PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE TRANSITION FROM AT -LARGE ELECTIONS TO BY -DISTRICT ELECTIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL SEATS City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that this was the fourth hearing regarding the City's transition to district elections for City Council seats. She stated that usually at these hearings, she outlines the outreach efforts that the City Clerk's Office has conducted to educate the public on the transition and obtain public input. However, she explained that at this meeting, she would be reviewing concerns that arose at the November 1 st hearing including: 1. How public input was utilized 2. Census blocks 3. Burlingame Hills 4. Communities of interest Utilization of Public Input City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that at the November 1 st hearing, staff heard that the public was concerned about how the submitted community of interest forms and publicly drawn maps were utilized in the process. She explained that while other jurisdictions, like the County, created a commission to handle the districting process, staff felt it was important to allow all members of the public to participate in the process. Therefore, the City Clerk's Office conducted eight months of public outreach in order to get the public involved in determining how best to draw the district lines. The information that staff collected was then turned over to Redistricting Partners, the City's consultant, to utilize when drawing the maps. She explained that Redistricting Partners looked for trends in the public feedback regarding how people were identifying neighborhoods and drawing their maps. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that Redistricting Partners was not tasked with selecting a publicly drawn map to present to Council. Instead, Redistricting Partners utilized the public input, along with the Census data, to draw the district lines. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that when drawing district maps, there are five State requirements: 1. Equal population size 2. Compact 3. Contiguous 4. Follow governmental boundaries 5. Communities of interest Census Blocks City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that at the November 1 st hearing, the public raised concern about a notch in Draft Map B around Adeline Road. She stated that other members asked if the City could keep all the multi -family units on both sides of El Camino Real in the same district instead of using El Camino Real as a dividing line. 0 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 City Clerk Hassel -Shearer showed a picture of the City's Census Block Map for 2020. She discussed that when the consultants draw district lines, they have to follow census blocks. This is because the census block is the smallest population unit. Therefore, if the consultant was to split up a census block, there would be no way to know what the population was on each side of the split. Accordingly, because El Camino Real was used as a border for all the census blocks, the consultant isn't able to keep the multi -family units together. Instead, the entire census block that includes the multi -family units would need to be brought into that district. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer mentioned the difficulty when moving census blocks to maintain relatively equal population sizes among the districts. Burlingame Hills City Clerk Hassel -Shearer showed the Burlingame General Plan map that outlines the different historical neighborhoods in Burlingame. She explained that she has heard from several Burlingame Hills residents that they are unhappy that their neighborhood isn't fully contained within one district. She noted that there are two issues that led to the Burlingame Hills not being in one district: 1. There is a section of unincorporated San Mateo County that lies between the two sections of Burlingame Hills that are within the City's boundaries. The portion of Burlingame Hills that is unincorporated cannot be taken into consideration when districting because it is not a part of Burlingame. 2. Therefore, in order to keep the Burlingame Hills together, the consultants would need to split up the Mills Estate, Ray Park, and Easton Addition neighborhoods. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that while the goal is to keep neighborhoods whole, it is sometimes impossible. Therefore, although the consultants worked hard to minimize the split of any neighborhoods, it was impossible to not split up the Burlingame Hills. Communities of Interest City Clerk Hassel -Shearer noted that at the November 1 st hearing, the public and Council spent a lot of time discussing what is considered a community of interest. She explained that the California Constitution defines a community of interest as: "a contiguous population that shares common social and economic interests that should be included within a single district for purposes of its effective and fair representation." She stated that Redistricting Partners narrowed down this definition by reviewing the three prongs of a community of interest: 1. What is the community of interest? 2. What is the footprint of that community of interest? 3. What is the relationship to City governance? City Clerk Hassel -Shearer utilized Redistricting Partners' three -pronged approach with the example of a neighborhood having a lot of car break-ins: 1. The community of interest is in creating safety in a neighborhood 10 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 2. The footprint is the neighborhood where the car break-ins are occurring 3. The relationship to City governance is direct because the City could increase police presence in the neighborhood City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that an important part of districting is keeping communities of interest together. She explained that this is done in order to give these communities of interest a voice in governance. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that at the November 1 st hearing, the public asked that the districts be formed by creating east -west bands. She explained that the public asserted that this would create diverse socio-economic districts. However, she stated that this isn't the assignment when it comes to districting. Instead, districting is about putting like with like in order to give those communities an effective voice in governance. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer then discussed different communities of interest she had heard about during her eight months of outreach including: • Individuals concerned about the effects of the Peninsula Interchange project on their neighborhoods • Sea level rise • Development at Mills -Peninsula • Wildfire • Bike routes • Rental community and affordable housing • Neighborhood aesthetics City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that there were several other communities of interest in the city. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer noted that at the November 1 st public hearing, it was suggested that the district lines take into consideration the elementary school attendance lines (excluding Hoover). She explained that this was problematic for several reasons including: 1. The school you send your child to is a community of interest when it comes to school district governance; it does not directly relate to City governance 2. Attendance lines include unincorporated Burlingame 3. Attendance lines are not within the control of the City and can be changed City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that as the Council reviews the four draft maps, they need to consider which one does the best at keeping communities of interest together while adhering to the other rules of districting. Councilmember Brownrigg thanked the City Clerk for managing a complex project. He noted that he wasn't a fan of the process but thought staff made it as logical as possible. He stated that when the City Clerk had discussed communities of interest, they were all policy questions. He explained that the City was transitioning to district elections due to allegations that the City's current election system violated the California Voting Rights Act because it diluted the ability of Asians to elect candidates of their choice. He 11 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 asked how racial demographics played into the districting process. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that under the Federal Voting Rights Act, the Latinx, Asian, and Black populations are communities of interest. However, she pointed out that under the Supreme Court case Shaw, a district can't be drawn solely based on race. She noted that the district encompassing Ray Park and Mills Estate has the largest concentrated Asian population (above 40% Asian). Councilmember Beach asked about the Latinx population in the city. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that there is no concentrated Latinx area. She noted that in all of the districts, the Latinx population is approximately 10% to 15%. Councilmember Beach asked if staff had an overlay of the rental community with the four draft maps. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that she spent a lot of time talking to different community organizations about the rental community. She noted that in utilizing the City's zoning map and in discussions with Housing for All Burlingame members, it was clear that a large concentration of renters could be found in the Downtown Burlingame neighborhood. She added that outside of this neighborhood, renters are fairly spread out. Redistricting Partners CEO Paul Mitchell reviewed the four draft maps. He noted that the maps are based on community input. He explained that input from the community drives the process, with the City providing multiple ways for the public to engage. He added that the community input has to be squared with the requirements of districting. Mr. Mitchell stated that after the November 1 st hearing, Redistricting Partners drew a fourth map based on public feedback. He then reviewed the four maps and how they keep neighborhoods together. Draft Map A • Keeps Downtown Burlingame and Burlingame Park whole • Neighborhoods kept together: Bayfront, Burlingame Gardens, Burlingables, Lyon Hoag, Mills Estate, Burlingame Plaza, and Ray Park • Keeps Burlingame Village and Burlingame Grove together. Splits Burlingame Terrace along Palm Drive • Total deviation is 6.8% Draft Map B • Keeps Lyon Hoag, Burlingables, and Burlingame Gardens together • Keeps Downtown Burlingame and Burlingame Park together. Splits Burlingame Terrace along Palm Drive • Keeps Mills Estate, Burlingame Hills, and Burlingame Plaza together • Total deviation is 4.5% Draft Map C • Keeps Downtown Burlingame and the eastern portions of Burlingame Park together • Keeps Easton Addition together and the eastern portion of Burlingame Hills together 12 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 • Keeps Mills Estate, Burlingame Plaza, and Ray Park together. Keeps the western portion of Burlingame Hills together • Keeps the western portion of Burlingame Park, Burlingame Terrace, Burlingame Grove together. Splits Burlingame Village along Oxford Road to Dufferin Avenue. • Total deviation is 4.6% Draft Map D • Utilizes the split in the Districts C and D from Draft Maps A and C by keeping Easton Addition together with the eastern portion of Burlingame Hills • Keeps Mills Estate, Burlingame Plaza, and Ray Park together. Keeps the western portion of Burlingame Hills together • Has a District A similar to those in Draft Maps A and B by keeping Downtown Burlingame and Burlingame Park together but splits Burlingame Terrace along Palm Drive • Lyon Hoag remains whole in District B with Burlingables and Burlingame Gardens • Total deviation is 5.1 % City Manager Goldman noted that the reason the City is transitioning to district elections is because the law firm, Shenkman and Hughes, sent the City a letter alleging violations of the California Voting Rights Act. She added that the City has been working hard to make sure things are done the right way. She stated that the City's goal is to adopt district lines in early 2022, to allow individuals to determine if they will run for office. Mayor O'Brien Keighran thanked the City Clerk and her staff for their work on this item. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the public hearing. Sandra Lang thanked the City Clerk and Paul Mitchell for their work on this item. She asked if the deviation is an internal measurement within each map. Mr. Mitchell stated that deviation refers to two things in districting. The first is the deviation of any district from the ideal district size (utilizing population). The second is the deviation of the entire map. The second deviation reviews the largest district deviation from the smallest district deviation. Lily Chu stated that she doesn't agree with Shenkman's allegations. She asked if there had ever been an Asian American Councilmember. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that to her knowledge she didn't think there had been an Asian American Councilmember. City Manager Goldman concurred. Mark Meyerson stated that he believed all four draft maps were a good faith effort to move to district elections. He asked about how the Anson apartments and other complexes that came online after the Census data factored into the draft maps. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that he was right that because it wasn't online at the time of the 2020 Census, it couldn't be included in the districting. However, she noted that 13 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 there would be a lot of units coming online in the next ten years and would be considered when the city is redistricted in 2030. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer discussed the growth that the city would be seeing in different areas. She noted that these concerns were brought to Redistricting Partners at the beginning of the process. She explained that Mr. Mitchell gave examples of other cities where growth had been predicted in certain areas, and there ended up being more of an equal growth throughout the city. Mr. Mitchell concurred with City Clerk Hassel -Shearer. He reviewed examples of a few cities including Davis and Sacramento and how it had been predicted that housing growth would only occur in certain areas. Laura Hinz thanked the City Clerk and Mr. Mitchell for their presentation and for taking into consideration the comments at the last meeting. She noted that she supported Draft Map D. Jennifer Pfaff thanked the City Clerk for taking the time to answer her questions. She added that given the restrictions, she thought that Draft Map D was the best option for the city. She noted that she appreciated that the Lyon Hoag district included California Drive. Steve Epstein explained that he spent hours using the online mapping tool and submitted a plan that kept the Burlingame Hills together. He voiced disappointment that the Burlingame Hills weren't kept together in any of the draft maps. He reviewed how he was able to do this and voiced concern about the online mapping tool's deviations. Mr. Mitchell stated that he would need to talk with his staff to review the online map submissions. He noted that he hasn't seen an error in the online tool but would look into it. He added that when he draws the submitted maps into his platform, the deviations are coming out correct. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer noted that a majority of the maps that were submitted were hand -drawn maps. She explained that the goal of publicly drawn maps was to see how people identify their neighborhoods. Todd Robinette urged the Council to adopt Draft Map B. Tom Paine urged the Council to reject all four maps and instead work on a map that creates districts that are east -west bands. (comment submitted via publiccomment(a),burlin ag me.org). Jan Cooke urged the Council to adopt Draft Map B. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin - a�g). Mayor O'Brien Keighran closed the public hearing. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he didn't think the transition was great for the City. He noted that he didn't like the fact that because of districting, there would be one person that thought they spoke for a neighborhood instead of the whole Council. He added that he likes to vote for all five Council seats. He stated that with that in mind, he thought that Draft Map D was the right map for the moment. 14 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he didn't believe if he was elected by district, that his specific district would be his only concern. Instead, he explained that while he may be elected by -district, he would represent the whole city. Councilmember Colson thanked Councilmember Brownrigg for articulating the sentiments of the Council. She thanked Redistricting Partners for taking into consideration public input and drawing Map D. She voiced support for Map D. She added that she thought it fixed earlier concerns that the public had with the initial three maps. She noted that she was sorry that the Burlingame Hills couldn't be kept together but understood the logic for why it wasn't. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that at the last hearing, he voiced his support for Map A. However, he noted that Map D makes small changes that he could get behind and therefore, he supported Map D. He concurred with his colleagues that while you are voted into office by district, you represent the entire city. Vice Mayor Ortiz added that while it would be great to keep the Burlingame Hills together, it would cut through other communities of interest. He noted that he spent a lot of time utilizing the mapping tool and thought compromises had to be made. Councilmember Beach concurred with her colleagues and voiced support for Draft Map D. She added that she liked that in Draft Map D, there are two districts that have connections to the Bayfront and the issue of sea level rise. She also liked that two districts share the concern of Broadway Grade Separation and that the Downtown district leans into multi -unit dwellings. Councilmember Beach concurred with Councilmember Brownrigg that when elected, the individual must represent the city as a whole. Mayor O'Brien Keighran concurred with her colleagues and stated that she thought Draft Map D was the best option. She noted that it incorporated concerns from the last meeting. She added that no map would be perfect. She stated that the public had plenty of opportunities to give input as the City Clerk's Office made themselves available to all. Mayor O'Brien Keighran concurred with her colleagues that it would be important that future Councilmembers don't focus solely on their district but instead represent the city as a whole. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that there was consensus from Council to move forward with Draft Map D. c. INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 2.25 OF TITLE 2 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING LIMITS ON CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15378,15601(B)(3) City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that Council has had several discussions regarding amending or repealing the City's campaign contribution ordinance. She stated that at the November 1 st meeting, the 15 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 Council heard overwhelmingly from the community that the public wanted the City to have its own campaign contribution limits. She noted that at the November 1 st meeting, Councilmembers suggested that the ordinance should include the following: • Making the contribution limit the same for both organizations and individuals • Creating a set dollar amount for the escalator • Decreasing the contribution limit due to the City's transition to district elections • Creating a penalty specific to violations of the City's contribution limits • Establishing a voluntary expenditure limit • Creating a lower threshold for the dollar amount that needs to be reported on campaign disclosure statements City Clerk Hassel -Shearer reviewed how Council's suggestions were implemented in the proposed ordinance. Contribution Limits City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that the proposed ordinance sets the limit as the same for both individuals and organizations. She stated that beginning in 2022, the contribution limit would be $350. She noted that in the past election cycle, the contribution limit for individuals was $719.93, and for organizations it was $1,439.87. She stated that the proposed contribution limit reflects the fact that candidates will only be campaigning to roughly 1/5t' of the city due to the transition to district elections. Escalator City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that under the proposed ordinance, the contribution limit would increase by $25 every two years. She noted that this creates an even number that will be easier for both the City and candidates. In -Kind Contributions City Clerk Hassel -Shearer noted that concerns were raised about individuals receiving in-kind contributions and how potential candidates are educated about regulations surrounding these contributions. She explained that the proposed ordinance references both the State Political Reform Act and the California Code of Regulations regarding in-kind contributions. Moreover, she stated that written into her candidate filing procedures would be a requirement to hand out these sections of State law to potential candidates. Anonymous Contributions and Disclosures in Campaign Statements City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that under State law, candidates and committees are required to report cumulative contributions of $100 or more from a single individual or organization. She noted that in reviewing other cities' regulations, she found that several lowered the reportable amount, as low as $5. She explained that staff was recommending setting the reportable contribution amount to $50. 16 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 Voluntary Expenditure Limits City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that Council previously suggested creating a cap on the total contributions a candidate can raise in an election cycle. However, she explained that after discussing this request with the City Attorney, it was determined that this would infringe upon an individual's First Amendment rights. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that another way to fulfill the Council's request was by implementing a voluntary expenditure limit. She stated that under this program, a candidate would sign an agreement with the City Clerk regarding whether or not they would abide by the voluntary expenditure limit. She noted that for those candidates who agreed to the limit, the City would publish their names on the City's website, social media accounts, and in Chinese, English, and Spanish newspapers. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that the voluntary expenditure limit would be set by utilizing the calculation of $5 per resident in the district, as determined by the last Census. She noted that because the districts wouldn't be fully defined until after the new year, the proposed ordinance set the amount for 2022 at $30,000. She added that the base amount of $5 would increase each election cycle by $0.25. Penalties City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that staff reviewed how other cities enforced their campaign contribution limits. She explained that the language that staff came up with allows for flexibility. While the City can fine a candidate for violating the limits, staff can also turn the matter over to the District Attorney's Office. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked the City Clerk to read the title of the proposed ordinance. City Clerk Hassel - Shearer read the title. Vice Mayor Ortiz made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the ordinance; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the public hearing. Laura Hinz thanked the City Council for improving the campaign contribution ordinance. Mayor O'Brien Keighran closed the public hearing. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that when this item first came to Council, they were considering repealing the City's limits and going with the State program in order to remove the burden of enforcement from staff. He explained that due to the public outcry about how this would create higher limits, Council asked staff to amend the contribution ordinance. He noted that a lot was said about those in favor of going to the State program, and he wanted to clarify that it was to lighten the load of staff. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that he was in favor of the ordinance. 17 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 Councilmember Brownrigg voiced his appreciation for the quick work of the City Clerk and felt that the ordinance was an improvement from what the contribution limit program was before. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he thought the Council should consider the possibility of term limits. Councilmember Colson voiced her support for the proposed ordinance. She added that she believed it created a fair baseline for new candidates to run against incumbents. Councilmember Colson voiced her support for equalizing the limits for organizations and individuals. Councilmember Beach thanked staff for their hard work on this item. Councilmember Beach made a motion to bring back the proposed ordinance for a second reading; seconded by Councilmember Brownrigg. Mayor O'Brien Keighran thanked Vice Mayor Ortiz for articulating how this item came to be. She noted that a meeting with Assemblymember Mullin has been scheduled for the new year to discuss his legislation and how it can be improved. The motion to bring back the proposed ordinance for a second reading passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. d. INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ADDING CHAPTER 2.26 TO TITLE 2 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE AUTHORIZING ELECTRONIC AND PAPER METHODS OF FILING CAMPAIGN FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS: CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15378,15601(B)(3) AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING THE ELECTRONIC FILING OF STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS (FORM 700) REQUIRED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 87200 ET SEQ. AND GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 87300 ET SEQ. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that staff met with NetFile, a company that sells an online platform for filing campaign statements and Form 700s. She explained that she previously worked with this company at the San Mateo County Elections Office. She stated that by purchasing this platform, the City will enable individuals to easily file their Form 700s and campaign statements online. She noted that pursuant to AB 2452, the City needed to adopt an ordinance allowing for the electronic filing of campaign finance disclosure statements. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that this system would assist the City Clerk's Office. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked the City Clerk to read the title of the proposed ordinance. City Clerk Hassel - Shearer read the title. 18 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 Councilmember Colson made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the ordinance; seconded by Vice Mayor Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Vice Mayor Ortiz made a motion to bring back the ordinance for a second reading; seconded by Councilmember Beach. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 10. STAFF REPORTS a. DISCUSSION OF A PARKLET RENT/FEE STRUCTURE, PARKLET DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, AND EXTENSION OF PARKLET PROGRAM THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2022 CDD Gardiner reviewed the background of this item. He explained that at the August 16th meeting, Council discussed: • Extending 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 • Increased cleaning on Burlingame Avenue • Consensus that the parklets are to be used at least four days a week CDD Gardiner stated that staff reviewed this item with the Economic Development Subcommittee. He explained that the Economic Development Subcommittee discussed a fee and rental rate framework for parklets based on previous Council direction. The subcommittee considered a fee framework based on the City of Mountain View's Sidewalk Cafe Program. He stated that Mountain View's program includes the following components: • New application: $769 • Annual sidewalk cleaning fee: $6.00 per square foot of sidewalk space • Annual rent: $1,200 per parking space utilized • Permit Renewal: $205 • Minimum five-year license term and indemnity agreement CDD Gardiner stated that staff contacted the other cities in San Mateo County to determine which jurisdictions were considering longer-term parklet programs. He noted the following: • San Bruno — parklet program is limited to a total of five parklets on San Mateo Avenue. All processing, reviewing, and inspection fees are waived, including deposit for a revocable encroachment permit and/or encroachment permit to allow for a restaurant to provide outdoor dining and install a parklet until December 31, 2022 • South San Francisco — is in the process of implementing a long-term parklet program; the permit will cost $500 and be renewed annually 19 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 • San Mateo — after April 30, 2022, businesses wishing to continue utilizing a parklet will need to apply for a new permit, and will need to adjust their parklet to conform to new design guidelines. Fees will be $500 per permit application plus $250 per parking space used in the parklet. • Redwood City — has been considering an extension of their program but has not yet determined if it will be made permanent. CDD Gardiner stated that he also reviewed the programs of other cities including: • Los Gatos — parklet program has pre -approved design guidelines with an $8,700 application fee. The program offers a subsidy for construction costs, covering $40,000, or 75% of the construction cost • Capitola — long term parklet program is being implemented that would allow up to 25 parklets. Permit fees would be waived; however a $500 deposit would be collected, and there would be an annual rent of $3,400 per parking space per year with an annual CPI adjustment. CDD Gardiner stated that in potentially adapting the Mountain View framework for Burlingame, the value (or rent) applicable to the parking space being occupied by the parklet would need to be determined. He explained that this would be a proportion or fraction of the market rent for fully -improved retail space. The square footage of a typical parklet space in Mountain View is 300 square feet, so at $1,200 per parklet per year, the rent would be $1,200/300 square feet = $4.00 per square foot. CDD Gardiner explained that per Loopnet, the average retail rent in Mountain View is $42.71 per square foot per year. Therefore, the proportion of the parklet rent to the average retail rent would be $4.00/$42.71 = 9%. CDD Gardiner stated that according to Loopnet, the average retail rent in Downtown Burlingame is $55.00 per square foot per year. Utilizing the same 9% ratio of parklet rent to retail rent as used in Mountain View, the annual parklet rent in Burlingame would be 9% of $55.000, which equals $4.95 per square foot per year. The parklets in Burlingame, like those in Mountain View, are typically 300 square feet, so this would suggest an annual parklet rent of $4.95 per square foot x 300 square feet which equals $1,485 per year. CDD Gardiner stated that using this methodology, a sample Burlingame fee and rental rate framework would include: • Cleaning fees: estimated to be $300 per parklet per month • Annual rent: 300 square feet multiplied by $4.95 per square feet = $1,485 • Indemnification/license term • Compliance with Public Health & Safety, and Americans with Disability Act requirements • Basic design standards Councilmember Brownrigg commented that the Economic Development Subcommittee tried, but did not have a lot of input from restaurants. He noted that by law, the cleaning fee has to be cost recovery, and the $300 fee is calculated by Public Works. He stated that he thought this might be a little too high. 20 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 Vice Mayor Ortiz asked how Capitola would determine who gets a parklet. CDD Gardiner replied that it is a lottery. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that staff is looking to ensure that the parklets are utilized. He added that he was confident that the City could come up with a satisfying solution. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if the businesses knew the Economic Development Subcommittee was talking about this issue. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if any concerns were brought up with this potential proposal. CDD Gardiner replied that there was discussion about the ability of parklets to be maintained long-term and their aesthetics. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that it seemed like the conversation was more tailored around aesthetics than price. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that Council cannot assume that this issue is widely understood among the restaurant community, and he doesn't know how they feel about a $5,000 price tag for having a parklet. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up to public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Colson stated that she believes there should be some type of permit fee, but would leave it to staff to determine. She explained that the annual fee could be rounded up to $1,500 to make it easy. She noted that the cleaning fee is needed as she has heard from various people that the streets and sidewalks are very dirty. She added that if the cost to clean the streets is lower than they anticipate, then the fee could always be lowered. Councilmember Colson stated that the established parklet should be transferrable to a new owner but that the new owner should have to get their own permit. She noted that the fee could be prorated. She added that she believed parklets should be revocable between businesses. Councilmember Beach agreed with Councilmember Colson. She stated she liked the framework proposed, and that the cleaning is crucial. She noted she is fine with the parklets being transferrable. She said it doesn't make sense for the parklets to just be torn down only to be rebuilt again as that seems like a waste of money and resources. Vice Mayor Ortiz agreed with Councilmember Colson except on the topic of transferability. He explained that he thought every business should make their own assessment on if a parklet was worth it. Councilmember Brownrigg agreed with all the prior comments. He commented he is happy with whatever is decided on transferability. Mayor O'Brien Keighran agreed with Vice Mayor Ortiz that when a new tenant comes in, the new business should have to submit a new permit, as the needs of the business might be different. She worried that the 21 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 new business might change something around, and the City would not know. She stated that the cleaning fee is needed as the City has invested a lot in the new streets and sidewalks and wants to keep them clean. Councilmember Colson clarified that on transferability, she agrees that the new business should have to submit a new permit. She asked about the sidewalk tables and spacing requirements. DPW Murtuza explained that staff is working with the downtown businesses on obtaining their encroachment permits and meeting ADA standards. City Manager Goldman stated that businesses must comply with ADA requirements within their parklets. DPW Murtuza added that each business has an insurance certificate for their parklet, and that it isn't transferrable. CDD Gardiner commented that as there are fees involved, there would need to be a public hearing. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked what the timeframe would be. City Manager Goldman replied that staff is looking to implement this program as soon as possible. City Manager Goldman asked Council if the rent and fees should be implemented together, or if staff should work on rent first in order to get the process started sooner. Council voiced support for working on the rent first. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt the $1,500 rent program, with cleaning fees to be adopted in the future and with any future fee escalation to be approved by Council; seconded by Vice Mayor Ortiz. The motioned passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS There were no announcements. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked that Council agendize a discussion on license plate readers due to the uptick in car burglaries. The Council agreed to agendize this discussion. 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 _ a�g. 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor O'Brien Keighran adjourned the meeting at 10:24pm in memory of Margie De Wolfe. 22 Agenda Item 8b Meeting Date: 12/20/2021 Respectfully submitted, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer City Clerk 23 BURLINGAME AGENDA NO: 8c STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: December 20, 2021 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: December 6, 2021 From: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk — (650) 558-7203 Subject: Adoption of an Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Amending Chapter 2.25 of Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code Regarding Limits on Campaign Contributions CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15378. 15601(b)(3) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following Ordinance: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 2.25 OF TITLE 2 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING LIMITS ON CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS; CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15378,15061(b)(3) To do so, the Council should: 1. By motion, adopt the proposed Ordinance. 2. Direct the City Clerk to publish a summary of the Ordinance within 15 days of adoption. DISCUSSION On December 6, 2021, the City Council held a public hearing on a proposed Ordinance that would amend Chapter 2.25 of Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code regarding limits on campaign contributions. By a unanimous vote of 5-0, the City Council introduced the proposed Ordinance and requested that it be brought back for a second reading and adoption at the next regularly scheduled meeting. Since no changes to the proposed Ordinance itself were requested, it is now being presented to the City Council for adoption. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed Ordinance is not a "project" within the meaning of Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines because it has no potential for resulting in a physical change in the environment, either directly or ultimately. In the event that this Ordinance is found to be a project under CEQA, 1 Adoption of Amendments to Campaign Contribution Ordinance December 20, 2021 it is subject to the CEQA exemption contained in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty to have no possibility of a significant effect on the environment. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact. Exhibits: • Proposed Ordinance • Introduction Staff Report and All Attachments — December 6, 2021 2 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 2.25. OF TITLE 2 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING LIMITS ON CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS; CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15378,15061 (b)(3) WHEREAS, the City adopted provisions governing campaign contributions to any City Council candidate or to any Council candidate -controlled committee in 2007 and codified in Chapter 2.25 of Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, in 2007, the contribution limits were set as follows: • A candidate or controlled committee for a candidate can receive up to $500 in an election cycle from an individual • A candidate or controlled committee for a candidate can receive up to $1,000 in an election cycle from an organization; and WHEREAS, the contribution limits were automatically adjusted by the Finance Director on March 1 of each even -numbered year to be the product obtained by multiplying the maximum amount specified in this section by a fraction, the numerator of which is the CPI -U, published for the month of December immediately prior to that March 1, and the denominator of which is the CPI -U, published for December, 2006; and WHEREAS, beginning in 2022, City Council elections will no longer be conducted at -large and instead, Councilmembers will be elected by -district, with each council seat election encompassing approximately 20% of the City's population; and WHEREAS, as a result of the decreased population that candidates must campaign to and because the City is committed to open and fair processes, this Ordinance is intended to establish fair contribution limits that will reduce any actual or perceived influence of contributions on City officials while ensuring that candidates can raise the money necessary to conduct effective campaigns for office; and WHEREAS, to create transparency in Council campaigns, this Ordinance establishes equal limits for individuals and organizations, and lowers the threshold for reporting contributions; and WHEREAS, to encourage a diversity of candidates and create an equal playing field, this Ordinance establishes a voluntary expenditure limit. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct, and are hereby incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth in their entirety. Section 2. The City Council hereby finds that the proposed Ordinance is in the public interest. Section 3. Chapter 2.25 of Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code is amended as follows. Additions are reflected by underlined text and deletions with stroke out text Section 2.25.010 Definitions. (a) Unless a term is specifically defined in this chapter, the definitions set forth in Chapter 2, "Definitions," of the State Political Reform Act (Section 82000 et seq. of the Government Code) shall govern the interpretation of the provisions of this chapter. The fOIIO *Rg words have the f0lI0WiRg meaRiRgS wheR used in Or in GGRReGtiGR with the preyisiens of +hiS nhapter• (1) "Candidate" means a candidate for an elective city office. (2) "Controlled committee" means a controlled committee controlled directly or indirectly by a candidate for elective city office or that acts jointly with a candidate for elective city office or another controlled committee in connection with the making of expenditures (3) "Election period" means the following: (A) Except as further limited by subsections (B), (C), and (D) of this subsection, for a candidate or controlled committee in a general municipal election, "election period" means the period beginning on January 1 st after the last general or special municipal election for the affected office seat and ending on December 31st following the next general municipal election for the particular office seat. This election period is normally four (4) years. (B) For a candidate or controlled committee in a special municipal election held to fill a vacancy in an elective city office, "election period" means the period beginning on the day the vacancy in office began and ending on the December 31 st following the special municipal election; provided, however, that for a candidate at the special municipal election who established a controlled committee for the office or accepted contributions before the vacancy occurred, the election period means the period beginning on January 1st following the last general municipal election for the particular office seat affected by the vacancy and ending on the December 31st following the special election. (C) For a candidate or a controlled committee in a special municipal election held to recall an elected city officer, including the elected official who is the subject of the recall election, "election period" means the period beginning on the date that the notice of intention to circulate a recall petition is filed with the city clerk pursuant to the Elections Code and ending on the December 31st following the special municipal election; provided, however, that for any candidate at the special municipal election who established a controlled committee or accepted contributions for the office before the vacancy occurred, the election period means the period beginning on January 1st following the last general municipal election for the particular office affected by the vacancy and ending on the December 31st following the special municipal election. (D) For a candidate who is recalled at a special municipal election or who is not elected at a general or special municipal election and for a controlled committee for such a candidate, "election period" begins again on the January 1 st following the election at which the candidate was recalled or not elected and ends on the December 31 st following the next general or special municipal election at which the person is a candidate again. (4) "Individual" means a natural person. (5) "Organization" means a partnership, joint venture, syndicate, business trust, company, corporation, limited liability company, association, committee, and any other organization or group of persons acting in concert. (b) Contributions, in-kind contributions, and gifts of service are regulated by the Political Reform Act of 1974 and Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations. (b) EXGept as meFe SpeGifiGally defined in this seGtieR, all words and phFases in this int shall have the mo niRg d h interpreted enner`tiRg to the �er�,-, a�-R,��,T,��ea,,,�,�a��--g e Dt rotations established in the r ulatienc re L,tien and eninieno of the er�rcc'��'ctv,-,T�.�ra'mr�n err-mcTe��+m'c'rvnv �-rc�i'cr'c'rv,T� , Fair DelitiGaI Drnntinec Gemmiccien puFsuant to the Pelitinel Reform Ont of 1974, as c a1TfGeRdec mTIQGQ . Section 2.25.020 Limits on contributions. (a) It is unlawful for any individual to make contributions to any single candidate or to any single controlled committee totaling more than . three hundred and fifty dollars ($350.00) in an election period. (b) It is unlawful for any organization to make contributions to any single candidate or to any single controlled committee totaling more than ($1,000.00) three hundred and fifty dollars ($350.00) in an election period. (c) It is unlawful for any candidate or controlled committee to accept contributions from any individual totaling more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) three hundred and fifty dollars ($350.00) in an election period. (d) It is unlawful for any candidate or controlled committee to accept contributions from any organization totaling more than three hundred and fifty dollars ($350.00) in an election period. (e) The maximum amounts specified in this section shall be automatically adjusted bythe finance direntor en Marnh 11 of eanh even _numbered year to be the prod int ebtained by multiplying the maximum amount speGified in this seGtieR by a fras�n the n� �evmerator of whish is the index as defined On this si bse��� m-xc r� �rumcra n-ru-c�a�r-acmes �-r-crn��a�vc , published for the month of DeGemher immediately prior to that Marsh 1 "' andthe d eminater of whi he Incl publish for lie 06 Qea �Qe�c�n ���E e� � . the city clerk each odd -numbered year. The new amount will be adopted by resolution of the City Council to take effect on January 1 of each even -numbered year, beginning on January 1, 2024. The contribution limit will be increased by $25.00 every two years thereafter. Section 2.25.030 Limitation on repayment of personal fog Anonymous contributions Notwithstanding Government Code section 84211, no person shall make an anonymous contribution or contributions to a candidate or a controlled committee totaling fifty dollars ($50.00) or more in an election period. Section 2.25.040 Disclosure in campaign statements. Each campaign statement required to be filed by Article 2 of Chapter 4 of the Political Reform Act of 1974, shall contain, in addition to any other required information: (a) The total dollar amount of contributions received during the period covered by the camoaian statements from persons who have aiven less than $50.00. (b) The full name of each person from whom a contribution or contributions totaling fifty dollars ($50.00) and above has been received, together with the contributor's street address, occupation, and the name of the contributor's employer, if any, or the principal place of business if the contributor is self- emDloved. the amount of the contribution. and the date the contribution was rPCPivprl _ Section 2.25.050 Voluntary campaign expenditure limits and penalties: (a) Each candidate for election to the City Council in November 2022, and for each City Council election thereafter, shall, prior to the time they file their nomination papers with the city clerk, advise the city clerk in writing on a form Provided by the Citv whether or not the candidate will opt to voluntarily limit their campaign expenditures in accordance with the voluntary campaign expenditure limits set forth in this section and by resolution. The agreement to voluntarily limit campaign expenditures shall pertain to all expenditures incurred by the candidate or the candidate's committee in support of their candidacy and shall include all such expenditures that a candidate or candidate's committee is required to report pursuant to the California Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended, whether those expenditures are made before or after the filing of nomination papers. (b) Withdrawal Period: within three (3) business days after the deadline to file nomination papers with the city clerk, a candidate that previously accepted the voluntary campaign expenditure limit will have one (1) opportunity to notify the city clerk that they have decided not to accept the voluntary campaign expenditure limit. The candidate shall thereafter be relieved of abiding by the expenditure limit. (c) Candidates who agree to abide by the voluntary campaign expenditure limit shall receive the followina benefits and incentives at no cost to themselves: (1) The City's website will clearly identify which candidates have agreed to the voluntary expenditure limit (2) The City will publish on social media and in the eNews which candidates have agreed to the voluntary expenditure limit. This will be published twice (once at the next eNews publishing after the withdrawal period and once when the ballots are mailed to residents.) (3) The City will publish Chinese, English, and Spanish notices in newspapers of general circulation the candidates who agreed to the voluntary expenditure limit. (d) Calculation of Voluntary Expenditure Limit: (1) A candidate for district City Councilmember who voluntarily agrees to expenditure ceilings shall not make qualified expenditures exceeding five dollars ($5.00) per resident in the electoral district for each election in which the candidate is seeking elective office. Residency of each electoral district shall be determined by the latest decennial census population figures available for that district. The city clerk shall publish the expenditure limit by resolution at the last meeting of each odd -year that will take effect on the first day of January in the even -numbered year beginning January 1, 2024. (2) The voluntary expenditure limit for the November 2022 election is thirty thousand dollars ($30,000). (3) Beginning in December 2025, the city clerk shall in odd -numbered years increase the expenditure ceiling amounts by twenty-five cents ($ 0.25) per resident. The City Council shall adopt the expenditure limit by resolution at the last meeting of each odd -numbered year. (4) The voluntary campaign expenditure limit called for by this section shall include any expenditures made by the candidate or by the candidate's campaign committee in connection with the preparation and publication of the candidate's statement of qualifications in the sample ballot pamphlet published in accordance with California Elections Code Section 13307. (e) Penalties: Any violation of this section, including the filing of false reports that entitle the candidate to the benefits conferred by this section, shall within seventy-two (72) hours of the City's knowledge of the violation: (1) Be forwarded to newspapers of general circulation in Chinese, English, and Spanish for publication; and (2) Be posted on the City's website; and (3) Be posted in the City's eNews and social media accounts Section 2.25.060 Limitations on repayment of personal loans. Following the date of the election for which a candidate is seeking elective office, it is unlawful for the candidate to repay themselves or for any controlled committee to repay the candidate from contributions to the candidate or the controlled committee for any loan amount incurred during that election's election period by the candidate in excess of twelve thousand dollars ($12.000.00 Section 2.25.070 Penalties Pursuant to Burlingame Municipal Code Section 1.12, the enforcement of violations of the provisions of this chapter, excluding Section 2.25.050, may be prosecuted as an infraction or misdemeanor. (a) Prosecution. Every violation of this chapter shall be a misdemeanor; provided, however, that where the prosecutor has determined that such action would be in the best interest of justice, the prosecutor may specify in the accusatory pleading or citation that the violation shall be prosecuted as an infractinn_ (b) Infraction/Misdemeanor. Any person who violates any of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of an infraction or misdemeanor, punishable as provided in Chapter 1.12 of the Burlingame Municipal Code. Section 4. The City Council finds and determines this Ordinance is exempt from CEQA, in that this Ordinance is not a "Project" as provided in state CEQA Guidelines section 15389. Furthermore the City Council finds and determines this Ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to state CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the Ordinance will have a significant effect on the environment. Section 5. If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion or sections of the Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Burlingame hereby declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional. Section 6. This Ordinance shall go into effect 30 days following its adoption. The City Clerk is directed to publish this ordinance in a manner required by law. Section 7. Section 3 of this Ordinance shall be codified in the Burlingame Municipal Code. Sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 shall not be so codified. Ann O'Brien Keighran, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a public hearing at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of 2021, and adopted thereafter on the _ day of , 2021, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk BURL— INGAME AGENDA NO: 9c STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: December 6, 2021 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: December 6, 2021 From: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk — (650) 558-7203 Subject: Introduction of an Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Amending Chapter 2.25 of Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code Regarding Limits on Campaign Contributions CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, 15601 (13)(3) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a public hearing to introduce an Ordinance amending Chapter 2.25 of Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code regarding limits on campaign contributions by: 1. Requesting the City Clerk to read the title of the attached Ordinance 2. By motion, waiving further reading and introducing the proposed Ordinance 3. Conducting a public hearing on the proposed Ordinance 4. Discussing the proposed Ordinance and by motion determining whether to bring it back for a second reading and adoption 5. Directing the City Clerk to publish a summary of the Ordinance at least five days prior to the proposed adoption. BACKGROUND In 2007, the City Council adopted Ordinance 1801 (Chapter 2.25 of the Burlingame Municipal Code), which established campaign contribution limits and loan reimbursement limits. This Ordinance was written as a result of the 2006 Randall v. Sorrell case in which the Supreme Court ruled that Vermont's campaign contribution limits, the strictest in the country, were unconstitutionally low. As a result, the City Council at the time asked staff to review existing state regulations and provide options for possible City campaign finance regulations. After reviewing the campaign disclosure statements for five prior City Council elections, staff determined the average amount that organizations and individuals contributed to City campaigns. Chapter 2.25.0202, entitled "Limits on contributions," states: (a) It is unlawful for an individual to make contributions to any single candidate to any single controlled committee totaling more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) in an election period. 1 Campaign Contribution Ordinance December 6, 2021 (b) It is unlawful for anyo organization to make contributions to any single candidate or to any single controlled committee totaling more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) in an election period. (c) It is unlawful for any candidate or controlled committee to accept contributions from any individual totaling more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) in an election period. (d) It is unlawful for any candidate or controlled committee to accept contributions from any organization totaling more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) in an election period. Under Chapter 2.25.020, the contribution limits are adjusted each even -numbered year utilizing the Consumer Price Index -All Urban Consumers ("CPI -U"). Since the 2007 adoption of the Ordinance, the campaign contributions have increased as follows: Year Individual Organization 2010 $505.33 $1,010.99 2012 $510.90 $1,021.80 2014 $583.91 $1,167.83 2016 $640.41 $1,280.81 2018 $688.92 $1,377.83 2020 $719.93 $1,439.87 The Council had several discussions beginning August 16, 2021 regarding amending or repealing the City's campaign contribution Ordinance. At the November 1 Council meeting, Council directed staff to bring back an Ordinance amending the City's contribution limits ahead of the next election cycle. Councilmembers suggested that the Ordinance include the following: • Make the contribution limit the same for both organizations and individuals • Create a set dollar amount for the escalator • Decrease the contribution limit now that the City is moving to district elections • Create a penalty specific to violations of the contribution limits • Establish a voluntary expenditure limit • Create a lower threshold for the dollar amount that needs to be reported on campaign disclosure statements DISCUSSION The proposed Ordinance responds to the questions that were initially asked at the August 16, meeting and the suggestions that the Council made at the November 1 meeting. Contribution Limits The proposed Ordinance makes the contribution limit the same for individuals and organizations. Beginning with the 2022 election cycle, staff recommends setting the contribution limit at $350 for both individuals and organizations. During the City's last election cycle in 2020, the contribution limit for individuals was $719.93 and for organizations it was $1,439.87. Given that the City is now moving to district elections, candidates will only need to campaign in their district, which is roughly 1/5th of the City. The 2 Campaign Contribution Ordinance December 6, 2021 proposed contribution rate reflects approximately 50% of the previous individual contribution limit and 25% of the previous organization contribution limit. Escalator The proposed Ordinance establishes an escalator of $25 every two years for the contribution limit. While in previous years the CPI -U was used, the new set escalator will allow the City Clerk to easily administer and enforce the limits and candidates to easily monitor their campaign funds. Additionally, the proposed Ordinance ensures that the public and potential candidates are made aware of the contribution limits by having the City Clerk publish the contribution limit by resolution at the last meeting in December of every odd year. In -Kind Contributions The proposed amendment adds language to the definition section of Chapter 2.25 so that it is clear that the City is adopting the definitions and interpretations of the State Political Reform Act. Additionally, under the definition section, the proposed Ordinance references Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 18215 (attached), which states that the term contribution includes: "(3) Discounted Goods or Services. Any goods or services received by or behested by a candidate or committee at no charge or at a discount from the fair market value, unless the discount is given in the regular course of business to members of the public." These code sections will be handed to any potential candidate when they pull papers for office. Anonymous Contributions and Disclosure in Campaign Statements Pursuant to Government Code Section 84211, candidates and committees are required to report cumulative contributions of $100 and more. For contributions of $100 and more, individuals must report the following information on their campaign statement: 1. Full name 2. Address 3. Occupation/name of business 4. Date of contribution 5. Contribution Amount The State doesn't require such disclosures for contributions under $100. Instead, amounts under $100 can be added to the "Total Contributions Received" column on campaign statements and not individually identified. Several cities have included language in their campaign contribution ordinances requiring committees and candidates to report the information for lower dollar amount contributions. In order to determine an appropriate level for disclosure, staff reviewed the language in other cities' ordinances. Based on the decreased contribution limit and the need to allow for some anonymous donations (due to campaign fundraisers where funds are collected by "passing the 3 Campaign Contribution Ordinance December 6, 2021 hat"), staff included language requiring disclosure for all contributions of $50 and above. This is the same level that the City of Palo Alto uses in its campaign finance ordinance. Additionally, the electronic filing system that is on tonight's agenda allows for the City to lower the threshold dollar amount for reporting. Therefore, it will be easy for both staff and candidates to report donations of $50 and more. Voluntary Expenditure Limits At both the August 16 and November 1 meetings, the City Council discussed whether a cap can be imposed to limit the total amount of contributions raised. A local ordinance that caps the total amount of contributions raised by a candidate is likely to be unenforceable and an unconstitutional infringement on First Amendment rights. Contribution limits impair the contributor's ability to engage in free communication and association. While restrictions on campaign contributions have been recognized, courts have ruled that such restrictions must be supported by a sufficiently important state interest and closely drawn to avoid abridgement of First Amendment freedoms. Courts have only recognized corruption or the appearance of corruption as a sufficiently important governmental interest to support restrictions on campaign contributions. The goals of equalizing opportunities between candidates or reducing the influence of money in political races have been rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court as insufficient rationales to support campaign contribution limits and cannot be used as a basis for limiting campaign contributions, including a total cap of candidate contributions. While the City is unable to enforce a total cap, staff was able to find examples of voluntary expenditure limits, including in Redwood City's ordinance. Under this scenario, a City would ask candidates to agree to a voluntary expenditure limit in exchange for a benefit. The proposed Ordinance includes a voluntary expenditure limit. Under this program, a candidate would sign an agreement with the City Clerk at the time of filing their nomination papers regarding whether they would be abiding by the voluntary expenditure limit or not. Candidates would have a three-day period to withdraw their decision after the candidate filing period closes. The candidates that do agree to the voluntary expenditure limit would be promoted as doing so on the City's website, social media, eNews, and in Chinese, English, and Spanish newspapers of general circulation. If a candidate that signed onto the voluntary limits violated the limits, staff would publish notice of their violation on the City's website, social media, eNews, and in Chinese, English, and Spanish newspapers of general circulation. The proposed Ordinance outlines the process for establishing the voluntary expenditure limit each election cycle. The calculation base is five dollars ($5.00) per resident in the electoral district. The five dollar ($5.00) base will increase each election cycle by twenty-five cents ($0.25). Additionally, the number of residents in each electoral district is determined by the last decennial census. This is the total population reported in the Census, not the registered voter population. C Campaign Contribution Ordinance For example, utilizing the Draft Plan A from the districting hearing: December 6, 2021 Year Calculation District A 6,082 District B 6,510 District C 6,278 District D 6,464 District E 6,082 2024 $5.00 x population $30,410 $32,550 $31,390 $32,320 $30,410 2026 $5.25 x population $31,930.50 $34,177.50 $32,959.50 $33,936 $31,930.50 The base population number will be recalculated after each Ccensus. Therefore, the 2020 Census data will establish the district population bases for the next ten years. However, because the districts have yet to be established for the 2022 election cycle, the proposed Ordinance states that the voluntary expenditure limit for 2022 will be $30,000. In 2024, the rate will be $5.00 multiplied by the 2020 census count for that district. Penalties Staff researched how other cities enforced campaign contribution limits. Large cities like San Francisco and Oakland have set up commissions where members of the public report violations, which are then investigated by an independent body. However, smaller cities like Redwood City and Santa Clara have utilized language similar to that in the proposed Ordinance, which allows the City to view violations as infractions or misdemeanors. This flexibility will provide staff with options depending on the severity of the infraction. The proposed Ordinance attempts to balance the need for transparency, the community's request to keep contribution limits low, and the administrative burden on staff. By streamlining the process and creating even number increases each election cycle, the process will become more manageable for staff while still allowing for local control of contribution limits. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed Ordinance is not a "project" within the meaning of Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines because it has no potential for resulting in a physical change in the environment, either directly or ultimately. In the event that this Ordinance is found to be a project under CEQA, it is subject to the CEQA exemption contained in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty to have no possibility of a significant effect on the environment. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact. Exhibits: • Proposed Ordinance • Ordinance 1801 • Title 2 of California Code of Regulations Division 6 Section 18215 • August 16, 2021 City Council Meeting Minutes • September 20, 2021 City Council Meeting Minutes 5 Campaign Contribution Ordinance • October 18, 2021 City Council Meeting Minutes • November 1, 2021 City Council Meeting Minutes December 6, 2021 21 Me 7 a 10 12 13 11M 15 16 171� 20 21' 22 23 24 25 26 27 W61 +L ORDINANCE NO. 1801 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAM STABLISHING CONTRIBUTION AND LOAN REIMBURSEMENT LIMITS IN CAMPAIGNS FOR ELECTIVE CITY OFFICES The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. election campaigns, The City of Burlingame is committed to open and fair processes, including The high costs involved i n campaigning for public office create the possibility and temptation to accept large contributions that may, lead to the perceMlt..9..on, if not the actuality, of undue influence over an officeholder. In order to minimize this possibility and to malice i6t possible for all candidates to decline such offers, the City Council has reviewed past spending in City campaigns, considered campaign contribution Iimits at both the local and State .level, and received public testimony and comment from citizens on the appropriate and 1necessary levels of contribution limits for the City-, This ordinance is intended to establish fair contribution limits that will reduce any actual or perceived influence of contributions on elected City officials while ensuring that candidates can raise the money necessary to conduct effective I* campaigns for office. Section 2,. Anew Chapter 2.25 i's added as follows: Chapter 2.25 Secti"ons. 2.25.010 2.25.020 2.25.030 2.25.010 CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS Defi nitions. Limits on contri'buti'ons, Limitation on repayment Definitions. of personal loans., (a) The followop ing words have the following meanings when used i n or in connection with the provisions of this chapter: (1) "Candidate" means a candidate for an elective city office. 3/5/2007 u 2 1 3 1 5 1 0 7 1 91 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 IES 19 20 21 22 I 23 24 i 25 26 27 W 10. Ibbs (2) "Controlled commi"ttee" means a controlled committee controlled directly or indirectly by a candidate for elective city office or that acts jointly with a candidate for elective city office or another controlled committee in connection with the making of expenditures. (3) "Election period" means the following,, (A) Except as further I imited by subsections (B), (C), and (D) below, for a candidate or a controlled committee in a general municipal election, " election period" means the period beginning on January 1 after the last general or special municipal election for the affected office seat and ending on December 31 following the next general municipal election for the particular office seat. This election period is normally four (4) years. (B) For a candidate or a controlled committee in a special municipal election held to fill a vacancy in an elective city office, "election period" means the period beginning on the day the vacancy in office began and ending on the December 31 following the special municipal election -8 provided, however, that for a candidate at the special municipal election who established a controlled committee for the office or accepted contributions before the vacancy OP occurred, the election period means the period beginning on January 1 following the last general municipal election for the particular office seat affected by the vacancy and ending on the December 31 foil owing the special municipal election. (C) For a candidate or a controlled committee in a special municipal election held to recall an elected city officer, including the elected official who is the subject of the recall election, "election period" means the period beginning on the date that the notice of intention to circulate a recall petition is filed with the city cleric pursuant to the Elections Code and ending on the December 31 following the special municipal election; provided, however, that for any candidate at the special municipal election who established a controlled committee or accepted contributions for the office before the vacancy occurred, the election period means the period beginning on January 1 following the last general municipal election for the particular office affected by the vacancy and ending on the December 31 following the special municipal election. 1 3/5/2007 ( D) For a candidate who is recalled at a special municipal election or who is not elected 2 k 1 2 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 9 1 10 1 11 1 12 1 13 1 14 I 15 I 16 17 "60A 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 at a general or special municipal election and for a controlled committee for such a candidate, "election per1k iod" begins again on the January 1 following the election at which the candidate was recalled or not elected and ends on the December 31 following the next general or special municipal election at which the person is a candidate again, (4) "Individua (5) Q4 1 " means a natural person,, Organization" means a partnership, joint venture, syndicate, business trust, any other company, corporation, limited liability company, association, committee, and organization or group of persons acting in concert. (b) Except as more specifically defined above, all words and phrases in this chapter shall have the same meaning and be interpreted according to the defini"ti"ons contained 1"n the California Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended (Government Code sections 8 1000 and following), and the definitions and interpretations established inethregulations, resolutions, and opinions of the Fair Political Practices Commission pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended,, 2.25.020 Limits on contributions. (a) It is unlawful for any individual to make contributions to any single candidate or to any single controlled committee totaling more than $500 16n an election period. (b) It is unlawful for any organization to malice contributions to any single candidate or to any single controlled committee totaling more than $1 ,000 in an election period. (c) It is unlawful for any candidate or controlled committee to accept contributions from any individual totaling moire than $5001"n an election period. (d) It is unlawful for any candidate or control] ed committee to accept contributions from any organization totaling more than $1 ,000 i"n an election period. e) The maximum amounts specified in this section sha11 be automati*cally adjusted by the finance director on March lof each even -numbered year to be the product obtained by 90 multiplying the maximum amount specified in this section by a fraction, the numerator of which is the Index as defined below, published for the month of December immediately prior to that 1 3/5/2007 3 2 1 3 1 5 1 0 7 1 101 11 12 13. 14 15 16 1� 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 i March 1, and the denominator of which is the Index published for December, 2 0 0 6. (1) " Index " means the Consumer Price Index -All Urban Consumers (CPI -U), All Items, for San Francisco- Oakland-San Jose, CA (19 8 2- 8 4= 10 0) published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics., Should the Index no longer be published, the finance director shall select a comparable index that the finance di'rector determines measures the increase and decrease in the cost of" living in the San Francisco-Oaklandws San Jose area. (2) The finance director shall send the revised maximum amounts to the city clerk and the city council and make them available to the public., In no event shall the revised maximum amounts be less than the then -current maximum amounts. (3) The revised amounts shall be applicable to total contributions allowed by this section for the entire elect10 ion period as applicable to each candidate or controlled conu-nittee i n which the March 1 adjustment occurs,, 2.25.030 Limitation on repayment of personal loans. Following the date of the elect41 ion for which a candidate is seeking elective office, itis unlawful for the candidate to repay himself or herself or for any controlled committee to repay the candidate from contributions to the candidate or the controlled committee for any loan amount incurred during that election's election period b���y the candidate in excess of $12 , 0 0 0. Section 3. This ordinance shall -be published according to law. Mayo I, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Cleric of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5 `h day 0 ruaif, 2007, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the CityCounciI e l d on tl-ie 5'h day of March, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: CO CILMEMBERS : BAYLOCK, COHEN, G GEL, O'MAHONY 1 3/5/2007 i 1 r 1 2 1 t, mi 5 1 mo I 7 1 9 1 101 11 I 121 13 I 141 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 NOES : COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE 1 3/5/2007 4'. �f . " -I,. f ity Clerk i 0 5 (Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, Title 2, Division 6, California Code of Regulations.) § 18215. Contribution. (a) A contribution is any payment made for political purposes for which a donor does not receive full and adequate consideration. A payment is made for political purposes if it is: (1) For the purpose of influencing or attempting to influence the action of the voters for or against the nomination or election of a candidate or candidates, or the qualification or passage of any measure; or (2) Received by or made at the behest of the following or any agent thereof: (A) A candidate; (B) A controlled committee; (C) An official committee of a political party, including a state central committee, county central committee, assembly district committee, or any subcommittee of such committee; or (D) An organization formed or existing primarily for political purposes, including, but not limited to, a political action committee established by any membership organization, labor union, or corporation. (b) The term "contribution" includes: (1) Certain Payments to Multipurpose Organizations, including Nonprofit or Tax -Exempt Organizations and Federal or Out -of -State Political Organizations Active in California Elections. A payment made by a person to a multipurpose organization as defined in Section 84222 and Regulation 18422 that is used for a contribution or expenditure. A donor to such a multipurpose organization shall be identified and reported as provided in Section 84222 and Regulation 18422. (2) Candidate's Own Money. A candidate's own money or property used on behalf of his or her candidacy. (3) Discounted Goods or Services. Any goods or services received by or behested by a candidate or committee at no charge or at a discount from the fair market value, unless the discount is given in the regular course of business to members of the public. (4) Payments From Lobbyists For Fundraising Costs. A payment made by a lobbyist or a cohabitant of a lobbyist for costs related to a fundraising event held at the home of the lobbyist, including the value of the use of the home as a fundraising event venue. This payment cannot be reimbursed by any person and is attributable to the lobbyist for purposes of the prohibition against a lobbyist making a contribution to specified candidates and elected officers under Section 85702. (5) Payments From Lobbying Firms for Fundraising Costs. A payment made by a lobbying firm for costs related to a fundraising event held at the office of the lobbying firm, including the value of the use of the office as a fundraising event venue. (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the term "contribution" does not include: (1) An expenditure made at the behest of a candidate in connection with a communication directed to voters or potential voters as part of voter registration activities or activities encouraging or assisting persons to vote, if the expenditure does not constitute express advocacy. (2) Volunteer personal services or payments made by a person for his or her own travel expenses, if such payments are made voluntarily without any understanding or agreement that he or she will be repaid. 2 (3) A payment made by an occupant of a home or office, other than a lobbyist or lobbying firm, for costs related to any meeting or fundraising event held in the occupant's home or office, if the total cost of the meeting or fundraising event is $500 or less, exclusive of the fair rental value of the premises. (4) A payment made at the behest of a candidate for a communication by the candidate or any other person that meets all of the following: (i) Does not contain express advocacy; (ii) Does not make reference to the candidate's candidacy for elective office, the candidate's election campaign, or the candidate's or his or her opponent's qualifications for office; and (iii) Does not solicit contributions to the candidate or to third persons for use to support the candidate or oppose the candidate's opponent. (5) A payment made by a candidate or committee for another candidate to attend the paying candidate's or committee's fundraiser. (6) A payment made by a candidate for a communication publicizing his or her endorsement by another candidate, provided that the communication does not expressly advocate the nomination or election of the endorsing candidate or the defeat of an endorsing candidate's opponent. (7) A payment made by a ballot measure committee for a communication in which the ballot measure supported or opposed by the committee is endorsed or opposed by a candidate, and the communication does not expressly advocate the nomination or election of the endorsing candidate or the defeat of the endorsing candidate's opponent. 3 (8) A payment made by any broadcasting station (including a cable television operator, programmer or producer), website, or a regularly published newspaper, magazine, or other periodical of general circulation, including any Internet or electronic publication, that routinely carries news and commentary of general interest, for the cost of covering or carrying a news story, commentary, or editorial. (9) A payment by an organization for its regularly published newsletter or periodical, if the circulation is limited to the organization's members, employees, shareholders, other affiliated individuals and those who request or purchase the publication. This exception applies only to the costs regularly incurred in publication and distribution. Any additional costs incurred are contributions, including, but not limited to, expanded circulation; substantial alterations in size, style, or format; or a change in publication schedule, such as a special edition. (10) A payment for a debate or other forum sponsored by a nonpartisan organization in which at least two candidates appearing on the ballot for the same elective office were invited to participate. (11) A payment for a debate or other forum in which the proponent of a ballot measure and at least one opponent, or their respective representatives, were invited to participate in equal numbers. (12) A payment for a debate or other forum sponsored by a political party or affiliated committee in which a majority of the candidates for that party's nomination were invited to participate. (13) A payment made by a bona fide service, social, business, trade, union or professional organization or group for reasonable overhead expenses associated with the organization's regularly scheduled meeting at which a candidate or an individual representing either side of a 4 ballot measure speaks, if the organization pays no additional costs in connection with the speaker's attendance. (14) A payment received by, directed by, or made at the behest of a candidate for personal purposes. However, these payments may constitute gifts, income, or honoraria, and may be limited or prohibited, under other provisions of the Act. (15) A payment made by a candidate for a communication in support of or opposition to a ballot measure, if the communication features the endorsing candidate or clearly identifies him or her as the sponsor of the communication. This exception does not include a monetary contribution from a candidate or his or her controlled committee to a ballot measure committee. (16) A payment by a sponsor for the establishment and administration of a sponsored committee, as defined in Section 82048.7, provided such payments are reported. Any monetary payment made under this subdivision to the sponsored committee shall be made by separate instrument. "Establishment and administration" means the cost of office space, phones, salaries, utilities, supplies, legal and accounting fees, and other expenses incurred in setting up and running a sponsored committee. (17) A payment by a non-partisan organization not affiliated with any candidate, political party, or committee that has not endorsed or contributed to candidates or measures in the election, to create and operate a website that posts political information. This website must be designed to encourage individuals to vote or to register to vote, and must present any candidate or measure -related content in a nonpartisan manner, giving reasonably equal treatment to candidates for the same office or to both sides of a measure. (18) Uncompensated Internet activity by an individual supporting or opposing a candidate or measure as stated in Regulation 18215.2. 5 (d) A contribution made at the behest of a candidate for a different candidate or to a committee not controlled by the behesting candidate is not a contribution to the behesting candidate. Note: Authority cited: Section 83112, Government Code. Reference: Sections 82015 and 85312, Government Code. HISTORY 1. New section filed 4-30-76; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 76, No. 18). 2. Amendment of subsection (e) filed 1-9-81; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 81, No. 2). 3. Amendment filed 2-17-82; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 82, No. 8). 4. Amendment filed 7-12-84; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 84, No. 28). 5. Relettering of subsection (d) to subsection (e) and new subsection (d) filed 11-26-90; operative 12-26-90 (Register 91, No. 1). 6. Amendment filed 11-7-95; operative 11-7-95 pursuant to Government Code section 11343.4(d) (Register 95, No. 45). 7. Editorial correction of subsection (b)(1) (Register 96, No. 43). 8. New subsection (c)(16) and amendment of Note filed 1-29-97 as an emergency; operative 1- 29-97. Submitted to OAL for printing only (Register 97, No. 5). 9. Permanent regulation filed 6-26-97; operative 6-26-97. Submitted to OAL for printing only (Register 97, No. 26). 10. Repealer of subsections (c)(8)-(c)(8)(ii), new subsection (c)(8), amendment of subsections (c)(14) and (c)(16) and new subsections (c)(17)-(18) filed 12-20-2010; operative 1-19-2011. Submitted to OAL for filing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of 11 Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements and not subject to procedural or substantive review by OAL) (Register 2010, No. 52). 11. Amendment of subsections (b)(1)-(3) filed 4-19-2012; operative 5-19-2012. Submitted to OAL for filing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements and not subject to procedural or substantive review by OAL) (Register 2012, No. 16). 12. Amendment of subsection (b)(1) filed 8-7-2014; operative 8-29-2014 pursuant to section 18312(e)(1)(A), title 2, California Code of Regulations. Submitted to OAL for filing and printing only pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements and not subject to procedural or substantive review by OAL) (Register 2014, No. 32). 13. Amendment filed 4-2-2015; operative 5-2-2015. Submitted to OAL for filing and printing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements and not subject to procedural or substantive review by OAL) (Register 2015, No. 14). 7 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 CDD Gardiner stated a draft of the zoning code would be going to the Planning Commission in October and to the City Council in November. Mayor O'Brien Keighran thanked everyone for their work on this item. c. DISCUSSION OF THE CITY'S CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR COUNCIL ELECTIONS City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that at the August 16, 2021 meeting, the Council was asked whether to amend the City's current campaign ordinance or go with the State law, AB 571. She noted that under AB 571, the FPPC would control the contribution limits for the City Council elections, administer the program, and undertake enforcement of the limits. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that at the August meeting, Council asked the City Clerk to bring the item back for future discussion. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer reviewed the questions that Council asked at the August meeting: 1. Can the City impose a cap on the total amount a candidate can raise? City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that the answer was no because it would infringe on an individual's First Amendment rights. Instead, she stated that the City can impose a voluntary expenditure limit. She reviewed examples of how other cities had set up their voluntary expenditure limits. 2. Do other cities include escalators with their campaign contribution limits? City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that the answer was yes. She stated that while most cities raise contribution limits based on the CPI, she would suggest utilizing a round number like $50. 3. Can the City ensure that the campaign contribution limits include in-kind donations? City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that in-kind contributions are included as they are regulated by State law. However, she noted that by referencing in-kind contributions and the California Code of Regulations in the City's ordinance, it would help to better inform and educate the public. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer reviewed the different methods other cities use to enforce their campaign contribution limits including creating a commission, sending potential violations to their District Attorney, or basing the fine on the amount of the infraction. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer asked for Council direction on campaign contribution limits. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that his initial reaction to the discussion of whether to repeal the City's ordinance or amend it was that the State's contribution limit was too high for the City of Burlingame. However, he explained that since the August 16th meeting, he has further reviewed the issue and decided that the City 20 Burlingame City Council September 20, 2021 Approved Minutes should go with the State limit. He explained that it would save the City Clerk a lot of work and that campaign contributions are open for public review. Councilmember Colson stated that she focused on two sentences in the report regarding the City going with the State limit: "This would make the administration and enforcement of the contribution limits the responsibility of the FPPC at no cost to the City. It would therefore save staff time and create a separation between the City and the enforcement of the contribution limits." She noted that she liked the idea of separating the City Clerk's Office from the enforcement of the limits. She added that a vast majority of the cities in both Santa Clara County and San Mateo County have gone with the State limits. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he was curious as to why Vice Mayor Ortiz changed his mind on this issue since the August 16 meeting. He noted that he believed that the State limit of $4,900 was too high for the City. He thought it made it so that one donor would have a greater impact on a candidate. He added that he thought it was better for politics to have more donors with small donations rather than a few donors with large donations. Councilmember Beach concurred with Councilmember Brownrigg. She noted that she didn't believe a single couple should be able to give $9,800 to a districted election race. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that the vast majority of cities have gone with the State limit, and she noted that donations are open for public review. Therefore, she thought the City should repeal its ordinance and go with the State limit. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that for him it's about the transparency. He noted that all the campaign donations are open to the public. He added that he believed a candidate with a bunch of small donations is more compelling than a candidate with a few large donations. Councilmember Colson made a motion to have the City Clerk bring back an ordinance repealing the City's campaign contribution limits; seconded by Vice Mayor Ortiz. The motion passed by roll call vote, 3-2. (Councilmember Beach and Councilmember Brownrigg voted against). 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that Burlingame became Age Friendly certified by the AARP. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked for an update on the Enterprise project to be agendized. Council agreed to agendize it. 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. 21 Burlingame City Council September 20, 2021 Approved Minutes She reminded everybody that the revised timeline is in effect, and Enterprise has an initial deadline of October 3, 2022. If Enterprise does not meet that deadline, then penalties will apply. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked the subcommittee to continue to meet with Enterprise to try to find a solution. c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGES TO THE COMPENSATION AND BENEFIT PLAN FOR THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DEPARTMENT HEAD AND UNREPRESENTED CLASSIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE PLAN ON BEHALF OF THE CITY Human Resources Director Morrison explained that the compensation and benefit plan for the City of Burlingame Department Head and Unrepresented Classifications expires on December 31, 2021. She stated that the proposed plan is a one-year agreement that includes a COLA increase of 2% and has a fiscal impact of $89,050. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt the resolution; seconded by Vice Mayor Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. d. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE REPEALING CHAPTER 2.25 OF TITLE 2 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO ELIMINATE THE CITY'S CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS AND INSTEAD UTILIZE THE STATE'S PROGRAM (CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15378,15061(B)(3)) City Clerk Hassel -Shearer gave a brief background of the item. She explained that on August 16, staff asked Council to discuss whether to amend the City's campaign contribution ordinance or repeal the City's ordinance and thereby follow the State program outlined by AB 571. Staff asked Council to consider several questions in regards to amending the City's ordinance including whether to make the contribution limits the same for both organizations and individuals, simplifying the escalator, and whether to include a specific enforcement mechanism instead of using the Municipal Code's general provisions. Staff also outlined the State program created pursuant to AB 571. Under the State program, the Fair Political Practices Commission ("FPPC") administers and enforces campaign contribution limits. Additionally, the State sets the campaign contribution limit, which for the upcoming election is $4,900. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that after discussing the staff report, Council asked staff to bring back the item with information about what other cities were doing, whether the City could set a total cap on contributions raised or expenditures, and how to define in-kind contributions. On September 20, staff brought this item back with answers to all the questions including information as to the campaign finance 14 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes limits for all cities in San Mateo County and Santa Clara County. After discussing the item, the Council, in a 3-2 vote, asked staff to bring back an ordinance repealing the City's campaign contribution ordinance to go with the State program. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer explained that at their October 18 meeting, the City Council held a public hearing to introduce an ordinance repealing the City's campaign contribution ordinance. In a 3-2 vote, staff was asked to bring back the proposed ordinance for a second reading. Councilmember Beach asked if the Council decided not to repeal the ordinance, are there any resources that could be provided to the City Clerk to assist with enforcement. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer replied in the affirmative. She explained that language should be added to the City's ordinance regarding penalties, and software could be purchased to streamline the submission of Form 460s. (Candidates and Councilmembers with an open committee must routinely file Form 460s, which include all contributions above $100 and any expenditures that they make) Vice Mayor Ortiz asked if limits could be created for the total amount raised or for the amount spent. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that according to case law from the Supreme Court, the City can't institute caps on how much a candidate can raise. However, she noted that she had researched legislation enacted by other cities on creating a voluntary expenditure limit. This would ask candidates to sign on to an agreed expenditure limit. Councilmember Colson asked where the City posts data about Form 460s. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that a new State law requires City Clerks to post campaign statements within three days of their due date. She noted that she is in the process of creating a webpage on the City's website that will be dedicated to campaign statements. She added that Form 460s are not on the FPPC website. Councilmember Colson asked if the City tracks candidates' committees if they don't win a seat on the Council. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that the FPPC issues an annual fee to individuals who keep their committees open. She explained that in order to close a committee, the individual must file a Form 460 and a Form 410 with the FPPC. These forms show the FPPC that the committee's account has been zeroed out. She noted that she also asks that candidates submit this form to her so that she can be aware of who has an open committee in the City. She added that she has always worked to assist candidates in closing out their committees and meeting campaign statement deadlines because the process can be confusing to anyone who hasn't run before. Councilmember Colson stated that she thought this was a good practice. She asked if she was correct that 14 cities in the county that had opted to follow the State program. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson stated that an unintended consequence of the law is that in order to get the FPPC oversight, cities would need to accept the State contribution limits. She asked if the City Clerk felt it would be worth it in the future to have a conversation to fix that issue. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer replied in the 15 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes affirmative. She explained that she felt the best administrator/enforcer of campaign contribution regulations is the agency that creates the forms and regulations. And for California that would be the FPPC. Vice Mayor Ortiz asked if Councilmember Colson was suggesting having City contribution limits that are enforced by the FPPC. Councilmember Colson replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Brownrigg asked if he was correct that most or all of the 14 cities in the county that are under the State program didn't have their own campaign limits. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer replied in the affirmative. She explained that many of the cities discussed AB 571 when it became law in order to determine whether or not to enact their own limits. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if AB 571 states that it is only meant for cities that don't have their own campaign contribution limits. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer replied that the legislation was put into place to create limits for those that didn't have limits. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if she was correct that AB 571 didn't prevent cities that had limits from repealing their ordinance and going with the State. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer replied in the affirmative. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if she was correct that this item was brought to Council partially for the administrative and enforcement benefits under AB 571. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer stated that she initially looked into amending the City's campaign contribution ordinance. However, after doing further research on AB 571 and discussing the benefits with other city clerks, she added the option of repealing the ordinance in the original staff report. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up for public comment. Former Mayor Terry Nagel stated that she believed the current campaign limits worked and were instituted because candidates at the time were raising large amounts. She asked that the City keep the current limits in place. Mike Dunham voiced appreciation for the number of commenters on this item. He noted that this issue comes down to the fact that voters don't want to worry about candidates being bought by large interests. He explained that the public doesn't want to research a candidate's contributions but rather focus on the candidate's platform. He thought this was accomplished by keeping limits low. Alvin Begun stated that the Council's focus should be on keeping money out of elections. He asked that the City maintain their current limits. Nirmala Bandrapalli urged Council to keep the current limits in place. Brian Berm urged the Council to keep the current limits in place. 16 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Former Councilmember Russ Cohen stated that he believed raising the limits would decrease diversity, equity, and inclusiveness. Therefore, he asked that the Council keep the current limits. Gerald Weisl asked the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin ag me.org). Tim S. asked the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Sophia Chiang asked the Council to keep the limits at their current level. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Graham Mudd stated that the Council shouldn't enable a small number of donors to bankroll a campaign. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Gerard Manning stated that he vehemently opposed the raising of campaign contribution limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ag me.org). Kris Cannon stated that now that the City is moving to district elections, candidates don't need high limits to run their campaign. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin ame.org). Debbie Hirth stated that the City should try to minimize the cost of elections and re-election campaigns. She asked the Council not to repeal the City's current limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlingame. org). Kirk Pessner stated that he didn't believe it was the intent of AB 571 for cities to repeal their local limits to go with the State. He noted that with district elections, the number of voters a candidate needs to reach is only 20% of the city. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Deborah Griffith urged the Council to not raise the limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(abburlingame. org). Gary Rainville stated that with the switch to district elections, raising the limit would give outsized influence to the wealthy few. (comment submitted via publiccomment(d),burlin ame.org). Leslie McQuaide stated that raising campaign contribution limits caters to corporations, special interest companies, and political groups. She urged the Council not to raise the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Bruce Thompson stated that with district elections coming, a campaign donation of $4,900 would seem to be overkill for a single district candidate. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ame.org). Ellis A. Schoichet stated that raising campaign contribution limits will dilute the voices of those with less wealth relative to the voices of those with greater wealth. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin ag me.org). 17 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Bobbi Benson stated that smaller districts shouldn't need more money; in fact they should need less money. She urged the Council not to raise the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin a�g). Ling-yee and Jeb Gibney urged the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin ag me.org). Louie Schaffer stated that increasing the limits would make it easier for rich candidates to run and urged the Council not to raise the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin am�e.org). The Benson family supported not increasing the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Jane G. asked the Council to not increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(kburlin ag me.org). Rosanna Myres asked the Council not to raise the contribution limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org. Krista McCutcheon stated that she is proud that the City is aiming to diversify the voices on Council by creating election districts and asked the Council to seek advice from potential new candidates prior to changing the contribution limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(aburlin ag me.org). Former Councilmember John Root opposed the raising of contribution limits, stating that with district elections on the horizon, campaign needs should be going down. (comment submitted via publiccomment(abburlingame. ori). Laura Hinz stated that by going to district elections, there are fewer people to campaign to and therefore higher limits are not needed. Former Mayor Cathy Baylock stated that the 2007 ordinance was put into place because some of the candidates were raising large amounts of money. She added that she believed, on the advice of the City Attorney at the time, that the limits were guidelines and not enforceable. She urged the Council to keep the current limits in place. Mayor O'Brien Keighran noted that Assembly Member Mullin was in the audience. She asked if there was a possibility to look at AB 571 and see if it could be amended. She discussed the possibility of having the State enforce the limits. Assembly Member Mullin stated that his understanding is that if there are local limits, it is the responsibility of the clerks to enforce those limits. He noted that the FPPC has oversight on communities that don't have their own limit. He explained that he would review potential amendments to the law in regard to enforcement. He added that the City has always had the ability to enact limits that are reflective of their size. He explained that this conversation has raised interesting issues in regard to enforcement and administration of the limits. 18 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Assembly Member Mullin stated that he was happy to talk with the Council and City Clerk about improvements to the legislation. Patricia Brogan urged the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin ag me.org). Stephanie Lee stated that with proposed districts of about 4,000 voting -age residents, campaigns should cost much less than in the past. She urged the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin ag me.org). Marilyn Elperin asked the Council not to raise limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(a?burlin ag me.org). Debra Donaldson asked the Council not to raise the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin ag me.org). Paul Coleman stated that the City needs good people and good ideas running local government, and not leaders sold to the highest bidder. He urged the Council not to raise the limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ag me.org). Jennifer LeBlanc asked the Council not to increase the limits as this would create more barriers for less - connected and less well-off citizens. (comment submitted via publiccomment&burlin ag me.org). Tom Paine and Susan Castner-Paine stated that what is needed is more direct contact between candidates and Burlingame voters through candidate nights, neighborhood meetings, and canvassing. They stated that what isn't needed is more money in elections. (comment submitted via publiccomment(d),burlin ag me.org). Ash McNeely urged the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Lucy Palasek stated that current campaign contribution limits help level the playing field and make elected office attainable to any qualified candidate. She added that district elections will make campaigns less expensive to run. (comment submitted via publiccomment(a-,burlin-ag_meorg). Holly Daley urged the Council not to increase the limits, especially in light of an eventual move to district elections, which is designed to actually lower the cost of running campaigns. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ag me.org). Constance Quirk stated that limits amplify the voices of smaller donors and asked that the Council not increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin ag me.org). Jim Briggs asked the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ag me.org). 19 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Jim Brogan stated that the idea behind district elections is to give a greater representation and voice to certain areas of the city whose interests may be under represented. Therefore, he asked the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin _ a�g). Kim Koivisto and John Giere asked the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Elisa Clowes stated that she was against raising the contribution limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Sandra Lang stated that increasing the limits is counterintuitive. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Jim Taschetta urged the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccomentkburlin ag me.org). Kerry Bitner stated that she felt strongly that the limits shouldn't be increased. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Kerbey Altman asked the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Andrea Gailunas vehemently opposed increasing the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Laura Somers asked the Council not to increase the limits as it would create an unfair playing field and possibly restrict those who can't raise large funds to run for office. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.org). Sandra Osumi stated that raising the campaign contribution cap ensures unfair opportunities for "all" Burlingame residents to be heard. (comment submitted via publiccomment(abburlingame.org). Mayor O'Brien Keighran closed public comment. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that it has been a while since the Council discussed an item that garnered this much attention. He explained that he felt that the public had spoken, and the Council needed to pay attention. He noted that the public has stated campaign limits are important, and the Council should find a way to assist the City Clerk with enforcement. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that he would consider reducing limits with the move to district elections. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that the former Mayor had discussed whether the current campaign limits were enforceable or were guidelines at the time they were adopted. City Attorney Guina replied that his reading of the ordinance is that the limits are currently enforceable. 20 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Councilmember Colson thanked Assembly Member Mullin for taking time out of his evening to attend the Council meeting. She noted that she is glad that he is open to having a conversation with the City Clerk and Mayor about how to strengthen the law. She suggested that he also consider stratifying the limits by city population. She noted that this would allow more cities to have lower limits while still having the enforcement from FPPC. Councilmember Colson stated that she believed this was a productive conversation and heard loud and clear that the public wanted limits. She explained that if the City's campaign contribution limit for citywide election was approximately $700, it would make sense to decrease the number for district elections. She suggested that the Council consider decreasing the limits to $250 or $300 for both individuals and organizations. Councilmember Colson also stated that she would like to see voluntary expenditure limits. She noted that her last campaign raised $50,000, which was more than she needed. She added that she can roll those funds over to the next election, which benefits the incumbent. Therefore, she asked that the Council consider an expenditure limit. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that for her, the discussion was about the enforcement and administration of the program. She noted that the City Clerk does a great job with elections and ensuring that the candidates' paperwork is done correctly. However, she added that the City Clerk is in an awkward position when it comes to enforcing limits. Therefore, knowing that the Assembly Member was willing to work with the City on that portion, she was fine with the City's current campaign contribution limits. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she agreed with her colleagues' suggestion that because the City is moving to district elections, the City should decrease the limits. She added that she would also like to see voluntary expenditure limits. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she believed it was a voter's responsibility to review the candidate's Form 460s. She thanked the City Clerk for posting the 460s under their respective election. Mayor O'Brien Keighran discussed how donations under $99 don't have to be listed on Form 460s. She explained that she thought this should be changed by the legislation in order to create more transparency. Councilmember Brownrigg thanked his colleagues for listening to the public. He noted that he has a great deal of faith in the City Clerk in handling election -related matters. He stated that the City Clerk is no one to mess with, but that he wants to make her life easier. He asked that the City's campaign contribution ordinance be amended. He agreed that individuals and organizations should be treated equally. He added that he looks forward to the discussion of what the limits should be in the context of district elections. Councilmember Brownrigg thanked the public for showing up and making their voices heard on this issue. Councilmember Beach stated that she appreciates colleagues' suggestions to amend the City's current campaign contribution ordinance. She thanked the public for coming out and engaging on this issue. 21 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if the City Clerk had been given direction on this item. City Clerk Hassel - Shearer replied in the affirmative. Mayor O'Brien Keighran noted that she would also like to set up a follow up meeting with Assembly Member Mullin, City Manager Goldman, and City Clerk Hassel -Shearer on this item. 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Council reviewed their committee appointments. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Beach asked that staff bring back a campaign contribution ordinance prior to the 2022 election. The 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. 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor O'Brien Keighran adjourned the meeting at 10:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Meaghan Hassel -Shearer City Clerk 22 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes BURLINGAME AGENDA NO: 8d STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: December 20, 2021 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: December 20, 2021 From: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk — (650) 558-7203 Subject: Adoption of an Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Adding Chapter 2.26 to Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code Authorizing Electronic and Paper Methods of Filing Campaign Financial Disclosure Statements (CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, 15601(b)(3)); and Adoption of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Authorizing the Electronic Filing of Statements of Economic Interests (Form 700) Required by Government Code Section 87200 et seq. and Government Code Section 87300 et seq. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following Ordinance: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ADDING CHAPTER 2.26 TO TITLE 2 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE AUTHORIZING ELECTRONIC AND PAPER METHODS OF FILING CAMPAIGN FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS; CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15378, 15601(b)(3) To do so, the Council should: 1. By motion, adopt the proposed Ordinance. 2. Direct the City Clerk to publish a summary of the Ordinance within 15 days of adoption. Additionally, staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to authorize the electronic filing of Statements of Economic Interests (Form 700). DISCUSSION On December 6, 2021, the City Council held a public hearing on a proposed Ordinance that would add Chapter 2.26 to Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code authorizing electronic and paper methods of filing campaign financial disclosure statements. Staff discussed NetFile, a company that manufactures an online filing system that can be utilized for both filing campaign financial disclosure statements and Form 700s. The City Clerk explained that in order to utilize the system, the City Council would need to: 1 Adoption of an Ordinance for Electronic Filing System December 20, 2021 1. adopt an ordinance allowing for the electronic filing of campaign financial disclosure statements; and 2. adopt a resolution allowing for the electronic filing of Statements of Economic Interests (From 700). By a unanimous vote, 5-0, the City Council introduced the proposed Ordinance and requested that it be brought back for a second reading and adoption at the next regularly scheduled meeting. Since no changes to the proposed Ordinance or resolution were requested, it is now being presented to the City Council for adoption. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed Ordinance is not a "project" within the meaning of Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines because it has no potential for resulting in a physical change in the environment, either directly or ultimately. In the event that this Ordinance is found to be a project under CEQA, it is subject to the CEQA exemption contained in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty to have no possibility of a significant effect on the environment. FISCAL IMPACT The contract with NetFile for the e -filing and administration system for both campaign disclosures and statements of economic interest is $4,900 per year. It will be funded in the City Clerk's Department budget. The cost will be factored into the FY 2022-23 budget as it is being provided to the City for the remainder of this fiscal year at no cost. Exhibits: • Proposed Ordinance • Proposed Resolution • December 6, 2021 Staff Report • NetFile Agreement 2 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ADDING CHAPTER 2.26 TO TITLE 2 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE AUTHORIZING ELECTRONIC AND PAPER METHODS OF FILING CAMPAIGN FINANCE DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS; CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15378, 15601 (13)(3) WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 84615 provides that a legislative body of a local government agency may adopt an ordinance that requires an elected officer, candidate, committee, or other person required to file statements, reports, or other documents required by Chapter 4 of the Political Reform Act, except those whose contributions and expenditures each total less than two thousand dollars ($2,000) in a calendar year, to file such statements, reports, or other documents online or electronically with the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has identified and proposed a web -based system that compiles the requirements of Government Code Section 84615; and WHEREAS, adoption of an ordinance pursuant to Government Code Section 84615 requires the City Council to make a finding that the City Clerk's proposed web -based system contains multiple safeguards to protect the integrity and security of the data, and will operate securely and effectively and will not unduly burden filers; and WHEREAS, the software of the City Clerk's proposed web -based system has been certified by the Secretary of State and meets the requirements set by Government Code Section 84615; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk will operate the electronic filing system in compliance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 84615 and any other applicable laws. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth in their entirety. Section 2. Pursuant to Government Code Section 84615, the City Council finds and determines that the City Clerk's proposed web -based system contains multiple safeguards to protect the integrity and security of the data, and will operate securely and effectively and will not unduly burden filers. Section 3. New Chapter 2.26, "Electronic Filing of Campaign Disclosure Information," is added to Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to read as follows: "CHAPTER 2.26 ELECTRONIC FILING OF CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE INFORMATION Sections: 02.26.010 Required Use of Electronic Filing System. 02.26.020 Paper Filing Not Required After Electronic Filing. 02.26.030 Internet Posting of Data. 02.26.040 Records Retention. Section 02.26.010 Required Use of Electronic Filing System. (A) Except as set forth in subsection B of this Section 02.26.010, any elected officer, candidate, committee, or other person required to file specified statements, reports, forms, or other documents with the City Clerk as required by Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 84100 of Title 9 of the California Government Code, also known as the Political Reform Act), and that has received contributions or made expenditures of $2,000 or more in a calendar year, may electronically file such statement using the City's online filing system according to procedures established by the City Clerk. (B) An elected officer, candidate, committee, or other person may choose not to use the electronic filing system by filing original statements, reports, forms, or other documents in paper format with the City Clerk. (C) The online filing system shall ensure the integrity of the data transmitted and shall include safeguards against efforts to tamper with, manipulate, alter, or subvert the data. (D) The online or electronic filing system shall accept a filing in the standardized record format pursuant to Government Code Section 84615(b). Section 02.26.020 Paper Filing Not Required After Electronic Filing. Any elected officer, candidate, committee, or other person who has electronically filed a statement, report, form, or other document using the City's online system is not also required to file a copy of that document in a paper format with the City Clerk. Section 02.26.030 Internet Posting of Data. Pursuant to Government Code Section 84616, the City Clerk shall ensure that the City's system makes all electronically -filed statements, reports, forms, or other documents available on the internet in an easily understood format that provides the greatest public access. The data shall be made available free of charge and as soon as possible after receipt/deadline. The data made available on the internet shall not contain the street name and building number of the persons or entity representatives listed on the electronically -filed forms or any bank account numbers required to be disclosed by the filer. The City Clerk's office shall also make a complete, unredacted copy of the statement, report, form, or other document available to the Fair Political Practices Commission for Government Code Section 87200 filers. Section 02.26.040 Records Retention. The City Clerk's office shall maintain records according to the City's records retention schedule and applicable State law commencing from the date filed, a secured, official version of each online or electronic statement, report, form, or other document, which shall serve as the official version of that record." Section 4. CEQA Determination. This Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a "project" within the meaning of Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines, since there is no potential of the Ordinance to result in direct or indirect physical change to the environment. In addition, the ordinance is not subject to CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment. Section 5. If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion or sections of the Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Burlingame hereby declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional. Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption. The City Clerk is directed to publish this ordinance in a manner required by law. Section 7. Section 3 of this Ordinance shall be codified in the Burlingame Municipal Code. Sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 shall not be so codified. Ann O'Brien Keighran, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a public hearing at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of December 2021, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting on the day of 2021, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING THE ELECTRONIC FILING OF STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS (FORM 700) REQUIRED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 87200 ET SEQ. AND GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 87300 ET SEQ. WHEREAS, Government Code Section 87500.2 permits the City Council to authorize the electronic filing of statements of economic interests required by Government Code Section 87200 et seq. and Government Code Section 87300 et seq.; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has identified a system by which the City's filers of statements of economic interests ("Form 700") may file such statements online; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 87500.2 and FPPC Regulation 18313.6 require FPPC approval in order for the City's officials to electronically file their respective Form 700s; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk will submit an application pending Council approval of this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: The City Council hereby authorizes, but does not require, the electronic filing of Form 700 by City officials, officers, and employees as required by Government Code Section 87200 et seq. and Government Code Section 87300 et seq., provided that the system for electronic filing is approved by the FPPC pursuant to applicable law. Ann O'Brien Keighran, 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 20th day of December 2021, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk BURL— INGAME AGENDA NO: 9d STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: December 6, 2021 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: December 6, 2021 From: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk — (650) 558-7203 Subject: Introduction of an Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Adding Chapter 2.26 to Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code Authorizing Electronic and Paper Methods of Filing Campaign Financial Disclosure Statements (CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, 15601(B)(3)); and Adoption of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Authorizing the Electronic Filing of Statements of Economic Interests (Form 700) Required by Government Code Section 87200 et seq. and Government Code Section 87300 et seq. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a public hearing to introduce an Ordinance adding Chapter 2.26 to Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code that authorizes electronic and paper methods of filing campaign financial disclosure statements by: 1. Requesting the City Clerk to read the title of the attached Ordinance 2. By motion, waiving further reading and introducing the proposed Ordinance 3. Conducting a public hearing on the proposed Ordinance 4. Discussing the proposed Ordinance and by motion determining whether to bring it back for a second reading and adoption 5. Directing the City Clerk to publish a summary of the Ordinance at least five days prior to the proposed adoption. Additionally, staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the electronic filing of statements of economic interests (Form 700) required by Government Code Section 87200 et seq. and Government Code Section 87300 et seq. BACKGROUND Assembly Bill 2452, which went into effect on January 1, 2013, added Section 84615 to the Government Code. This legislation allows a local government agency to require by Ordinance an elected officer, candidate, committee, or other person who is required to file statements, reports, or other documents under Government Code Section 84100 et seq. of the Political Reform Act to electronically file campaign statements, reports, or other documents (except for filers who receive contributions and make expenditures totaling less than $2,000 in a calendar year). 1 Electronic Filing System Ordinance December 6, 2021 AB 2452 outlines criteria that must be satisfied by a local government agency to require online or electronic filing of statements, reports, or other documents. The system must be available free of charge to filers and the public for viewing filings and must include a procedure for filers to comply with the requirement that they sign statements and reports under penalty of perjury. The California Fair Political Practices Commission ("FPPC") supports and encourages efforts to move from a paper-based reporting system to a more transparent electronic system. Electronic filing makes it easier for officials to comply with reporting obligations and provides the public with the information in a more accessible and consistent format. No ordinance is required for the City to allow electronic filing of statements of economic interests (Form 700). However, the law does require the FPPC to approve all electronic filing systems used by cities for the filing of statements of economic interests. This is to ensure that the system complies with prescribed security and transparency protocols. On January 1, 2021, new legislation (AB 2151, codified in Government Code section 84616), went into effect that requires local government agencies to post campaign statements and reports on their agency's website within 72 hours of each applicable deadline, if they are filed in paper format. If the final day of the 72 -hour period is a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday, the period is extended to the next day that is not Saturday, Sunday, or a holiday. Before posting, the local filing officer (City Clerk) needs to redact personal information on the documents. Additionally, under the new law, the reports and statements of candidates and committees must remain on the City's website for at least four years. DISCUSSION The City Clerk's office accepts the filing of two major categories of economic disclosure documents: 1. Campaign statements, also known as Form 460s, which disclose contributions to local candidate and ballot measure campaigns, and 2. Statements of economic interest, also known as Form 700s, which designated public officials and employees are required to file on an annual basis. There are many advantages to allowing the electronic filing of disclosure documents. All FPPC forms are public records. By shifting to an electronic system, the public can directly access campaign statements on the City's website. The system is also beneficial to those who need to file Form 460s or Form 700s as it provides them multiple prompts to ensure timely filing and stores previous statements. Additionally, for Form 700 filers, it allows a single filing for multiple offices (i.e., for City of Burlingame offices as well as for those of regional agencies on whose boards Councilmembers serve). At the November 1, 2021 Council meeting, the Council discussed ways to ease the City Clerk's workload when it comes to administering and enforcing the City's campaign contribution limit. As a result, staff contacted NetFile to learn more about their online filing system. NetFile's clients include San Mateo County, San Mateo, Redwood City, and several other cities in the county. 2 Electronic Filing System Ordinance December 6, 2021 The Secretary of State's Office requires that if a city utilizes an electronic filing system for campaign disclosure statements, the system must: 1. Ensure the integrity of the data and include safeguards against efforts to tamper with, manipulate, alter, or subvert the data 2. Only accept a filing in the standardized record format developed by the Secretary of State and compatible with the Secretary of State's system for receiving an online or electronic filing 3. Be available free of charge to filers and to the public for viewing filings NetFile's system meets these requirements. For the electronic filing of Form 700s, the proposed electronic system must be approved by the FPPC. An ordinance is not required for this action. Instead, an application is filed with the FPPC, and a $1,000 fee is paid. NetFile will assist the City with the application and cover the cost of the application fee. The cost for NetFile is $4,900 per year beginning July 1, 2022. NetFile has agreed to waive the cost for the initial six months as a result of the economic impact of COVID-19. Additionally, the annual cost of $4,900 is guaranteed for five years. In order to utilize an electronic filing system for campaign statement filings (Form 460s), the State requires City Councils to adopt an ordinance. Therefore, staff has drafted the proposed Ordinance that permits but does not require campaign statements to be filed electronically. The proposed Ordinance also makes the findings required under Government Code Section 84615. Similarly, the proposed resolution permits, but does not require, Form 700s to be filed electronically. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed Ordinance is not a "project" within the meaning of Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines because it has no potential for resulting in a physical change in the environment, either directly or ultimately. In the event that this Ordinance is found to be a project under CEQA, it is subject to the CEQA exemption contained in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty to have no possibility of a significant effect on the environment. FISCAL IMPACT The contract with NetFile for the e -filing and administration system for both campaign disclosures and statements of economic interest is $4,900 per year. It will be funded in the City Clerk's Department budget. The cost will be factored into the FY 2022-23 budget as it is being provided to the City for the remainder of this fiscal year at no cost. Exhibits: • Proposed Ordinance 3 Electronic Filing System Ordinance • Proposed Resolution • Agreement December 6, 2021 2707-A Aurora Ct eaetFile Mariposa, CA 95338 Phone (209) 742-4100 SERVICE AGREEMENT USER NAME System USER NAME -BILL TO City of Burlingame Form 700 E -Filing & Admin System (hosted) and SAME ADDRESS ' 501 Primrose Road Campaign E -Filing & Admin System (hosted) ADDRESS CITY Burlingame STATE CA ZIP 94010 CITY STATE ZIP • PRIMARYCONTAa Meaghan Hassel -Shearer PHONE# (650) 558-7203 AP CONTACT PO# EMAIL mhasselshearer@burlingame.org FAX AP EMAIL AP PHONE # ■ System Cost per System AGREEMENT TERM IS STARTING ON THE DATE IDENTIFIED ABOVE. YOU ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT AND AGREE TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONSOF THIS Form 700 E -Filing & Admin System (hosted) and COVID-19 Crisis Special Program No Strings Attached • Campaign E -Filing & Admin System (hosted) Free service through 6/30/22 Total for both Systems $4,900/year ongoing after that • Start Date: immediately Cost above is guaranteed for up to 5 years after 7/1/22 Features of NetFile Systems -Hosted platform provided by NetFile - Kiosk mode to view unredacted filings in User's office -24/7/365 access for filers and public to use - Unlimited support and training to User -Admin application to manage filers and filings - E-mail based support to filers -Filer application for filers to create and file filings - Includes Ethics & Sexual Harassment Training Tracking -Public viewing portal - NetFile pays for initial $1,000 FPPC Paperless application fee. ■ USER AGREES TO PAY NETFILE FOR SERVICES IDENTIFIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT. AGREEMENT TERM IS STARTING ON THE DATE IDENTIFIED ABOVE. YOU ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT AND AGREE TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONSOF THIS AG R E E M E NT AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE AGREEMENT IS NOT BINDING ON NETFILE UNTIL SIGNED BY BOTH PARTIES. • OMPANY NetFile, Inc. AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE AUTHORIZEDSIGNATURE -Lxx • PRINT NAME PRINT NAME Tom Diebert TITLE TITLE Vice President & C00 DATE DATE 11/10/2021 Service Agreement Terms and Conditions 1. This Agreement provides to User a hosted electronic filing and administration system developed and maintained by NetFile. The system permits filers authorized by User to electronically file their respective FPPC forms. The FPPC forms that are electronically filed are dependent upon which system(s) that User agrees to pay for. If the User agrees to pay for the Form 700 E -Filing and Administration System, their filers will be able to create and electronically file FPPC Form 700 statements. If the User agrees to pay for the Campaign E -Filing and Administration System, their filers will be able to create and electronically file their Campaign Statements. Both systems are covered by NetFile's unlimited support and training policy. All NetFile systems come with a public viewing portal that automatically displays filings online in redacted form. The Form 700 E -filing system meets the requirements of AB 2062 for paperless filing in CA. The Campaign E -Filing system meets the requirements of AB2452 for paperless filing in CA. Both systems allow for paper filed documents to be stored as an unredacted document and uploaded (when redacted by User) to view on the public portal. NetFile pays for User's FPPC application fees. 2. It is the responsibility of NetFile to securely store User data and maintain backups using industry best practices. All data created by User or User's filers is the property of the User. All applications and their source code are the property of NetFile. It is the responsibility of NetFile to provide secure and safe system access for both User and the User's filers using industry best practices. NetFile's systems are guaranteed to have 99% uptime. Any planned maintenance of NetFile systems will be communicated at least a week in advance of the maintenance occurring. 3. NetFile warrants and represents that it is the owner of or has acquired the rights to use (including derivative rights) the software, technology or otherwise that is required to provide all related materials and services set forth in this Service Agreement, without violating any rights of any third party, and there is currently no actual or threatened suit by any such third party based on an alleged violation of such third -party rights by NetFile. 4. NetFile further warrants that (i) the NetFile servers will be free of any Harmful Code (as defined below), and (ii) NetFile will not interfere with or disrupt User or the User's filers use of the System. The term "Harmful Code' means any software code with the ability to damage, interfere with, or adversely affect computer programs, data files, or hardware without the consent or intent of the computer user. This definition includes, but is not limited to, self -replacing and self -propagating programming instructions commonly called "viruses," 'Trojan horses" and "worms." NetFile agrees to implement reasonable procedures adequate to prevent any software, link or code provided to User hereunder from being contaminated with Harmful Code. If NetFile learns of or suspects the existence of any Harmful Code, NetFile will immediately notify User and make every effort to remove the Harmful Code. 5. NetFile shall not discriminate on the basis of race, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age or disability in the solicitation, selection, hiring, or treatment of subcontractors, vendors or suppliers. NetFile shall provide equal opportunity for subcontractors to participate in subcontracting opportunities. NetFile understands and agrees that violation of this clause shall be considered a material breach of the Service Agreement and may result in Service Agreement termination. 6. Subject to the limitations set forth in Section 7 below, NetFile agrees to indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the User, and its employees and filers from and against any claim, injury, liability, loss, cost, and/or expense or damage, including all costs and reasonable attorney's fees in providing a defense to any claim, arising from NetFile's negligent, reckless or wrongful acts, errors, or omissions with respect to or in any way connected with the performance of the Services by NetFile, its agents, subcontractors and/or assigns under this Service Agreement. 7. The maximum liability to the User by NetFile and its licensors, if any, under this Service Agreement, or arising out of any claim by the User related to NetFile's services, products, equipment or software for direct damages, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, shall be limited to the total amount of fees received during the last 12 months by NetFile from the User hereunder up to the time the cause of action giving rise to such liability occurred. In no event shall NetFile or its licensors be liable to the User for any indirect, incidental, consequential, or special damages related to the use of NetFile's services, products, equipment or software or NetFile's failure to perform its obligations under this agreement, even if advised of the possibility of such damages, regardless of whether NetFile or its licensors are negligent. Provided, however, that for any peril or exposure insured against under the insurance required, the limits of liability to the User by NetFile shall not be less than the amount of applicable, valid, and collectible insurance set forth in this Agreement. 8. During the term of this Service Agreement, NetFile shall purchase and maintain in full force and effect, at no cost to User insurance policies with respect to employees assigned to the performance of services under this Service Agreement with coverage amounts as follows: Commercial General Liability Insurance of $2,000,000 each occurrence, $4,000,000 general aggregate, $1,000,000 personal injury; Workers' Compensation Insurance of ($1,000,000) policy limit Illness/Injury by disease, and ($1,000,000) for each Accident/Bodily Injury. 9. NetFile and its employees, agents and representatives will not, without the prior written consent of User in each instance, use in advertising, publicity or otherwise the name of User or any affiliate of User, or any officer or employee of User, nor any trade name, trademark, trade device, service mark, symbol or any abbreviation, agreement or simulation thereof owned by User or its affiliates, nor represent, directly or indirectly, that any product or service provided by NetFile has been approved or endorsed by User, nor refer to the existence of this Service Agreement in press releases, advertising or materials distributed to prospective customers. Notwithstanding the foregoing, NetFile may acknowledge, when asked, that the User is a NetFile client. 10. Either User or NetFile may terminate this Service Agreement without cause by giving the other Party written notice ("Notice of Termination") which clearly expresses that Party's intent to terminate the Agreement. Notice of Termination shall become effective no less than thirty (30) calendar days after a Party receives such notice. After either Party terminates the Agreement, NetFile shall discontinue further services as of the effective date of termination, and User shall pay NetFile for all Services satisfactorily performed up to such date. Upon termination, NetFile will provide a copy of all data created by User within 10 working days of effective termination date. 11. User accepts any and all liability resulting from the placement of documents scanned by the User that are made available on the Internet for public viewing through the services of NetFile. In no event does NetFile accept liability created by any document scanned into the system by the User. 12. Except as otherwise indicated herein, this Agreement will commence on the start date and remain in effect throughout the Term as stated on the signature page. Upon expiration, this Agreement will automatically renew on a quarterly or annual basis unless User provides NetFile with written notice of its intent to cancel. Any extension will be billed in the same manner as set forth herein. 13. This Agreement shall be governed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and the Parties submit to the jurisdiction of said state. This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding of the parties with respect to Service, Maintenance and Support. There are no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, oral or otherwise, not embodied herein or also embodied in any attached agreement. Any and all prior discussions, negotiations, commitments and understandings relating to Service, Maintenance or Support are merged herein. Avovwi To: Date: From: STAFF REPORT Honorable Mayor and City Council December 20, 2021 AGENDA NO: 8e MEETING DATE: December 20, 2021 Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works — (650) 558-7230 Mahesh Yedluri, Senior Civil Engineer — (650) 558-7230 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Hoover School Area Sidewalk Improvements on Summit Drive by JJR Construction, Inc. in the Amount of $221,919, City Project No. 84490, Federal Aid Project No. CML -5171(022) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting the Hoover School Area Sidewalk Improvements on Summit Drive by JJR Construction Inc., City Project No. 84490, and Federal Aid Project No. CML -5171(022), in the amount of $221,919. BACKGROUND On May 17, 2021, the City Council awarded the Hoover School Area Sidewalk Improvements on Summit Drive to JJR Construction, Inc., in the amount of $192,480. Prior to the re -opening of Hoover Elementary on August 24, 2016, the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission (TSPC) and staff identified several near-term and long-term pedestrian safety improvements in the vicinity. The near-term improvements included new pedestrian ramps and crosswalks, a traffic island in front of the school, traffic and parking restrictions, and introduced stop -controls at Hillside Drive and Alvarado Avenue. In addition to the near-term improvements, staff reviewed the feasibility of pedestrian facilities along both Easton Drive and Summit Drive. The study determined that constructing pedestrian facilities along Summit Drive was a more viable alternative. Soon after the reopening of Hoover School, staff applied for and was awarded One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) funds for the construction of pedestrian facilities along Summit Drive. The project constructed sidewalk improvements at, and immediately adjacent to, the new Hoover Elementary School in Burlingame. The project area included Summit Drive from Hillside Circle to Easton Drive. Project work included removal of asphalt pavement on the eastern half of the road; removal of existing wall; regrading of roadway cross slopes; installation of curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway approaches, and asphalt on a portion of the road; and the removal and reinstallation of driveway pavers. Prior to the construction of this project, there was no existing sidewalk along Summit Drive and Easton Drive leading up to the Hoover School site. The project will improve pedestrian access to the school site and will encourage students and parents to walk to the school and also promote outdoor activity for residents in the neighborhood. 1 Acceptance of Hoover School Area Sidewalk Improvements, City Project No. 84490 December 20, 2021 Federal Aid Project No. CML -5171(022) DISCUSSION The project construction has been satisfactorily completed in compliance with the engineering plans and specifications. The final construction cost is $221,919, which is $29,439 (or roughly 15%) above the awarded contract amount, and is within the authorized contingencies. The construction costs came in higher because of additional bid quantities required to meet some of the grade and onsite changes during construction. FISCAL IMPACT The following are the estimated final project expenditures: Construction $221,919 Construction Management and Inspection $65,000 Engineering and Administration $15,000 Total $301,919 There are adequate funds in the Capital Improvement Program to complete the work. The federal grant will cover 88.5% of the construction cost of the project, with the remaining 11.5% and construction management and inspection costs covered by the City's General Fund. Exhibits: • Resolution • Final Invoice Package • Project Location Map 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS — HOOVER SCHOOL AREA SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS ON SUMMIT DRIVE BY JJR CONSTRUCTION, INC. CITY PROJECT NO. 84490 FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO. CML -5171 (022) RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California, and this Council does hereby find, order and determine as follows: 1. The Director of Public Works of said City has certified the work done by JJR Construction, Inc., under the terms of its contract with the City dated June 7, 2021, has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the City Council and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 2. Said work is particularly described as City Project No. 84490 and Federal Aid Project No. CML -5171 (022). 3. Said work be and the same hereby is accepted. Ann O'Brien Keighran, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 20th day of December, 2021, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TEL: (650) 558-7230 FAX: (650) 685-9310 FROM: Mahesh Yedluri TO: Mr. Marco Militante, DLAE Caltrans District 4 P.O. Box 23660 Oakland, CA 94623-0660 The City of Burlingame CITY HALL -501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 www.burlingame.org TRANSMITTAL December 2, 2021 CORPORATION YARD TEL: (650) 558-7670 FAX: (650) 696-1598 RE: Hoover School Area Sidewalk Improvements on Summit Drive, CML -5171(022) (City Project No. 84490) WE ARE SENDING THE FOLLOWING BY: THESE ITEMS ARE TRANSMITTED: ❑ U.S. Mail ❑ For Your Information ❑ Overnight Mail Service ❑ As Requested ❑ Hand Deliver ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ Fax ® For Your Action ❑ Other—Email PDF on 12.02.21 ❑ For your records No. of Copies: Documents Transmitted: 1 PDF file Final Invoice Package & Closeout Package Remarks• Please find the attached closeout package and final invoice for the Hoover School Area Sidewalk Improvements on Summit Drive, CML -5171(022) (City Project No. 84490). Please review and let us know if any changes are necessary. A hard copy invoice will be sent in the mail. Regards, Mahesh Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 17-A Sample Cover Letter and Federal Report of Expenditures Checklist Exhibit 17-A: Cover Letter & Federal Report of Expenditures Checklist Mr. Ephrem Meharena District Director of Transportation Caltrans - Local Assistance 111 Grand Avenue (94612) PO Box 23660 Attention: Mr. Marco Militantee Dear Mr. Ephrem Meharena Submitted for your consideration is: FEDERAL REPORT OF EXPENDITURES LOCAL AGENCY AWARDED CONTRACT City of Burlingame PROJECT: Summit Drive CONTRACTOR: J.J.R. Construction Inc. RESIDENT ENGINEER: Mr. Nick Panayotou Project No: CML -5171(022) Sincerely, Mr. Mahesh Yedluri Local Agency Representative Reviewed by: Mr. Marco Militante District Local Assistance Engineer Page 1 of 3 January 2021 Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 17-A Sample Cover Letter and Federal Report of Expenditures Checklist COVER LETTER -CONTINUED Federal Project No.: CML -5171(022) Description of Project The project will construct sidewalk and pedestrian improvements at, and immediately adjacent to, the new Hoover Elementary School in Burlingame. The project area includes Summit Drive from Hillside Circle to Easton Drive. Project work includes removal of asphalt pavement on the eastern half of the road; removal of existing wall; regrading of roadway cross slopes; installation of curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway approaches, and asphalt on a portion of the road; and the removal and reinstallation of driveway pavers. The project will Contract Chronology 1. Bids Opened 04/27/2021 2. Contract Approved by local agency 05/17/2021 3. First chargeable working day 06/14/2021 4. Contract Time (Working Days) 45 5. Unworkable Days - weather 0 6. Time Extensions - CCOs 0 7. Time Extensions - other 0 8. Number of working days suspended 0 9. Extended Date of Completion 08/11/2021 10. Date work accepted by Resident Engineer 08/11/2021 11. Liquidated damage days charged (calendar or working days) 0 12. Date accepted by implementing agency's governing board 12/20/2021 Page 2 of 3 January 2021 Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 17-A Sample Cover Letter and Federal Report of Expenditures Checklist FEDERAL REPORT OF EXPENDITURES CHECKLIST Federal -aid Project Number: CML -5171(022) Project Name: Hoover School Sidewalk Improvements Project Location: Summit Drive from Hillside Circle to Easton Drive (✓) Final Inspection of Federal -aid Project (See Exhibit 17-B for FHWA High Profile projects) or Local Agency Final Inspection Form (See Exhibit 17-C for Delegated projects; utilized for the majority of projects) (✓) Final Invoice (see LAPM 5-A) (✓) Final Detail Estimate and Detail Estimate Summary (See Exhibit 15-M) (✓) Change Order Summary (See Exhibit 17-E) (✓) Statement of the existence or absence of liquidated damages and/or contractor's claims (See Exhibit 17-E) ( ✓) Date of completion: 08/11/2021 Date of acceptance: 12/20/2021 (✓) Final Report- Utilization of Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE), First -Tier Subcontractors (See Exhibit 17-F) (✓) Final Report- Utilization of Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) for On -Call Contracts (See Exhibit 17-F1) (✓) Materials Certificate (Exhibit 17-G) (✓) * Report of Completion of Structure (two copies) (Shall include one set of "As Built" Plans) (See Exhibit17-1 and Exhibit 17-J) (✓) Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) Certification Status Change (Exhibit 17-0) (✓) Report of Completion of Right of Way (Exhibit 17-K) for Projects with R/W Acquisition Note: A single submittal of all these documents will facilitate timely project closure. * Additional documents required on bridge/major structural project or projects which meet specified conditions (described under Reports at Completion of Contract). Send Original copy to structures. Distribution: (All projects): (1) Original Report of Expenditures (2) Local Agency project files Page 3 of 3 January 2021 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 17-C Final Inspection Form EXHIBIT 17-C FINAL INSPECTION FORM INSTRUCTIONS: Local agency is to complete Items 1-10. DLAE completes Items 11-13 and submits original plus two (2) copies to the Division of Local Assistance. 1. PROJECT NO.: 2. DIST-CO-RTE-AGENCY: 3. COMPLETION DATE: CML -5171 (022) 04 -SM -0 -BURL 08/11/2021 4. LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENTS AS PROGRAMMED: Summit Drive within the City Limit 5. TYPE OF WORK: Project work includes demolition, grading, installation of curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway approaches, and asphalt. 6. CONTRACTOR'S NAME: 7. CONTRACT AMOUNT: J.J.R. Construction, Inc. $ 221,919.06 8. DATE OF CONTRACT ACCEPTANCE: 11/01/2021 9. FINAL INSPECTION. The above listed project was completed and a final inspection has been made. The project was completed as programmed and in compliance with all state and federal requirements. (Check appropriate box) ❑ This project is Delegated and not subject to FHWA oversight. FHWA Final Inspection not required. ❑ This project is an FHWA High Priority project. FHWA Final Inspection required. Mahesh Yedluri 10/27/2021 SIGNATURE (Local Agency Rep): DATE: Senior Engineer TITLE: 10. REMARKS: None 11. DISTRICT REVIEW MADE BY (print name): 12. DATE OF PROJECT REVIEW: 13. PROJECT VERIFICATION: This verification of completion also constitutes approval to pay costs shown in the Final Invoice included in the Report of Expenditures. The person listed above has reviewed the job site and found the project constructed in accordance with the scope and description of the project authorization document and in reasonable conformance with the plans and specifications. SIGNATURE: DATE: District Local Assistance Engineer/ Oversight Engineer Distribution: (1) Local Agency— Retain a copy Page 1 of 1 January 2018 CITY OF BURLINGAME BILLING REQUEST Date: December 1, 2021 Generating Department: Engineering Contact name, phone number: Kevin Okada, x7213 Fund and Acct # (or 2 digit code): 329-84490 Billing Customer or Customer #: Caltrans Name: Caltrans - District 4 Office of Local Assistance Attn: Invoice Coordinator Address: Mail Station 10-B, P.O. Box 23660 City: Oakland State: CA Finance Use only Entered tnkia Date Invoice # BR Incident Date: 5/2021 - 11/2021 Report/lD #: Would you like to be notified if past due (over 90 days)? Yes ® No Amount: $208,208.42 Zip: 94623-0660 Phone: (510) 286-5233 E-mail: marco.militante@dot.ca.gov Site Name: Hoover School Sidewalk Improvements Site Address: Summit Drive City Burlingame State CA 94010 Invoice Description (attach supporting documents if possible): FY21/22 (City Project No. 84490) - Hoover Sidewalk Improvement Project - Construction Reimbursement Do you want back-up sent with the invoice? Yes ® No Frequency: Onee Monthly Quarterly Sem Annually Annually F o� ❑ ❑ Kevin Okada 7213 Requestor Ext # Department Approval STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LOCAL AGENCY INVOICE -Reset Form Prinf Invoice LAPM 5-A (REV 08/2020) Billing No: 1 SECTION 1: INVOICE Local Agency Name MAQ-T5-OBAG2-CO Remittance Address Participating Cost (E-76 Auth. Date) Tax ID City of Burlingame Funds Remaining Prior to this Claim 501 Primrose Road To: 94-6000304 Date Caltrans District Federal/State Proj. No. Advantage Project ID Invoice No. $ 14,826.97 Billing No. Final Inactive 12/01/21 D4 Oakland CML -5171(022) 0418000429 1 $ 1,562.00 $ 1,562.00 1 Invoic® Project Project Description $ $ 0.00 The project will construct sidewalk and pedestrian improvements at, and immediately adjacent to, the new Hoover Elementary School in Burlingame. The project area includes Summit Drive from Hillside Circle to Easton Drive. Total Participating Cost to Date: Fund ® Federal $. - 235,184.03 Authorized ❑ PA&ED [I RIW El CE El NI Type(s): ❑State Total Participating Cost: Phase(s): ❑ PE ❑ RNJ Util ®CON ❑ FA Federal Reimbursement Ratio: 88.53% ❑ E&P ❑ RNV Eng Reimbursable Amount to Date: $ 208,208.42 $; 208,208.42 ❑ PS&E ❑ RNV Acq $ 0.00 Construction Total Federal Appropriation Code MAQ-T5-OBAG2-CO 500,314.00 Participating Cost (E-76 Auth. Date) I From: 1 03/12/21 Funds Remaining Prior to this Claim Participating Cost To: 1 12/01/21 Total Indirect Cost to Date: $ 14,826.97 $ 14,826.97 Total Direct Cost to Date: $ 221,919.06 $ 221,919.06 Total Cost to Date: $ 236,746.03 $ 236,7460"l Less: Non -Participating Cost $ 1,562.00 $ 1,562.00 Other $ $ 0.00 :Other $ $ 0.00 Other $ $ 0.00 Total Participating Cost to Date: $ 235,184.03 $. - 235,184.03 Less: Participating Cost not Reimbursed (Local Funds) $ $ 0.00 Total Participating Cost: $ 235,184.03 $ 235,184.03 Federal Reimbursement Ratio: 88.53% Reimbursable Amount to Date: $ 208,208.42 $; 208,208.42 Less: Cumulative Amount Paid on All Previous Invoices $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Reimbursable Participating Cost: $ 208,208.42 $ 208,208.42 Less: State Withheld Retention $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Amount Exceeding Authorized Fund $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Other $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Amount of This Claim: $ 208,208.42 $ 208,208.42 TOTAL INVOICE AMOUNT: $ 208,208.42 Refer to your Finance Letter Authorized Federal Fund Amount 1 $ 500,314.001$ 500,314.00 Less: Cumulative Amount Paid on All Previous Invo 1 $ 0.001s 0.00 Funds Remaining Prior to this Claim $ 500,314.001$ 500,314,00 ADA Notice For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For alternate format information, contact the Forms Management Unit at (916) 445-1233, TTY 711, or write to Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS -89, Sacramento, CA 95814. STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Reset Form LOCAL AGENCY INVOICE LAPM 5-A (REV 08/2020) Billing No: 1 SECTION 2: INDIRECT COST CALCULATION Indirect Cost: Phase FY Office/Department Direct Cost Base Expense Approved Indirect Cost Rate Subtotal CE 20/21 PW Engineering Is 14,826.971% 100 $ 14,826.97 Phase PE PA&ED E&P PS&E R/W CE NI FA Total Indirect Cost to Date $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $14,826.97 $0.00 $0.00 By signing this invoice, all local agency signatories certify to the best of my/our knowledge and belief that the invoice is true, complete, and accurate. The expenditures, disbursement, and cash receipts are for the purposes and objectives set forth in the terms and conditions of the Federal/State award. I/we are aware of any false, fictitious, fraudulent information, or the omission of any material fact may subject me/us to criminal, civil or administrative penalties for fraud, false statements, false claims or otherwise. (U.S. Code Title 18, Section 1001 and Title 31, Section 3729-3730 and 3801-3812). I/we certify that the cost claimed follow pertinent and applicable guidelines and all Federal/State regulations. All consultant and contractor agreements have been reviewed and approved in accordance with LAPM Chapter 10 Consultant Selection and Chapter 16 Administer Construction Contracts. I/we understand that Caltrans may review this invoice and support documentation for reasonableness at this time and that all invoices related documentation is subject to future detailed review by the Federal Highway Administration and/or Caltrans. Signature o 4Pal AgRepresentative Date 7 12.01.21 Print Na a Title Kevin Okada Isenior Engineer For questions regarding this invoice, please contact: Contact Name Title Phone Number E-mail Kevin Okada Senior Engineer 650-558-7230 kokada@burlingame.org Comments 0 STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LOCAL AGENCY INVOICE Reset Form LAPM 5-A (REV 08/2020) Billing No: 1 SECTION 3: BILLING SUMMARY Federal/State Project No. CML -5171(022) contractor Description Work Performed (Dates) Vendor Receipt/ Total Direct Cost parHc sating Cost Total PCartiFi ost pating (e.g., Contractor, Force Account, etc.) Invoice Number current invoice current invoice From To if applicable) ( ( (current invoice ( PP ) oedod onivl nednd onlv) I nwdnd nnlvl Contractor Total Participating Cost allphases): $220,357.06 Note: The Billing Summary must accompany all Local Agency invoices. Expenditures prior to authorization are not eligible for reimbursement. Each line needs to be detailed enough to verify the accuracy of the charge. Consultant charges need to be itemized similar to the agency charges. STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ResAt FprrO LOCAL AGENCY INVOICE LAPM 5-A (REV 08/2020) Billing No: 1 SECTION 4: CHECKLIST Local Agency Name: City of Burlingame Billing No: 1 Federal /State Project No: CML -5171(022) 1 Executed Program Supplement Agreement (PSA) on file with Local Agency. 2 Submittal of one signed original and one copy of completed Local Agency Invoice (LAPM 5-A) which includes Section 1: Invoice, Section 2: Indirect Cost Calculation, Section 3: Billing Summary (submit contractor pay estimate for construction invoices), and Section 4: Checklist. 3 Reimbursable work claimed is after E-76 (Federal Authorization to Proceed) date and/or California Transportation Commission (CTC) State Allocation date. 4 Work performed is prior to any lapsing / expiring funds. • Check Finance Letter Reversion Date (Federal) • Verify Cooperative Work Agreement Approval (Federal / State) • CTC State Allocation Letter Fund Expiration Deadline (State) 5 Invoice is consistent with current approved Finance Letter. • Phases of Work • Fund Types (e.g., CMAQ, RSTP, etc.) • Reimbursement Ratios • Available Balance of Federal /State Funds • Cost incurred prior to authorized Agreement End Date (AED) 6 Invoiced amount shall be greater than 2% of the total Federal and/or State funds or $1,000, whichever is greater, unless authorized by District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE) to prevent inactivity. 7 Percentage of work complete is consistent with total Federal / State funds invoiced (i.e., project should not be 80% expended if only 20% complete). 8 Remaining balance should not be less than Caltrans required retention ($40,000 or 2% of the Federal / State funds, whichever is greater). 9A All consultant agreements / amendments must follow the Caltrans procurement and oversight processes outlined in Loral Assistance Procedures Manual Chapter 10. The following Exhibits must be sent to and received by the appropriate entities prior to nvoiclnc: • Submit Exhibit 10-C to Division of Local Assistance HQ— Office of Guidance and Oversight • Submit Exhibits 10-01 and 10-02 to DLAE • Submit Exhibit 10-K to Independent Office of Audits and Investigations 9B Submit copy of executed contract to the DLAE within 30 days of contract award or concurrently with first invoice, whichever is earlier. • For on-call contracts, submit copy of issued task order and Exhibit 10-02 for the task order. Local Agency Caltrans Frequency Confirm NIA Concur Al Invoices 19 Al Invoices ❑ All Invoices ED Al Invoices ❑ All Invoices ❑ Al Invoices ED All invoices ❑ All Invoices prior to ED Final Invoice ❑ Al Invoices ❑ IR All First Consultant ❑ Invoices First Federal ❑ Consultant Contracts All Consultant ❑ Contracts> $150K All First Consultant ❑ Invoices El 10 Verification of Project Award: Attach LAPM Exhibit 15-L (Federal projects), LAPG Exhibit 22- First Construction A (State ATP projects), and/or LAPM Exhibit 23-A (STIP projects). Invoice F1 El 11 Submit contractor pay yyJeesstimate with Billing Summary. Construction Invoices ® ❑ ❑ 12/01/2021 Kevin Okada, Senior Engineer Signature of Local Agency Representative Date Print Name and Title Signature of Caltrans District Reviewer Date Print Name/Titie/Phone Number Comments N N V O m 4 N va r4 6 N O N m N m0 p N VF N Vl N N N N N V N N r e e � M � W N �p .q tp N tq 00 W N 00 00 00 w w a ri v v v ,y v ri o cq n W T tp w w R 1� N V ry � M I� N V L/1 tp V l0 Vl N N N Ol N � � 01 O ni t11 O lC 1� b n l0 M rci ttf O ni ry� N m w V1 N Y1 l0 O tD O l0 w w M Ol M N VT V} Vf Vf N VT N Vf N VF V' t/T VT VT Vf H v a a a v a o6 nc a ci a v a v v v a N w w w N w w M w M w w w w N w 1,� 1p I� n n W n n t0 n b n n n n w 1� n VF Ufa? N W N �A �A LIN N N H N N N N n M W m N pi N I* w O m N M n V w V d' l0 N m W t0 V 1p i� Ot �; V LA N m oi V V N IaA p 0 � O M N N T N O M VI N l0 N N m M V M VI G N LLI O O O O 00 OO0b 0 O O 0 OO uO 0 O O O Q N ON ZO p J Z Lu O z. s z s z >Wa' Z 2Vr1 ZO>d' V>x1 rSN Z r Z Nwr2 wr2H wrxN _O O 0 O 0 O O O 0 0 0 N0wr2 O0 >xNwxO KO O Oo > > > LL O m w pp Z GSG wOG a a aa a a aa a a a�Jw aO w w w O w w O w O w w w w n w W m V m w w w w w m W m m w v M m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m N m X H a O O N N a' O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N Z�- - V w N V1 01 M 1p O M N N J 0 0 n w w 01 O e -I m O O O O O O 0 Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 15-M Detail Estimate Exhibit 15-M: Detail Estimate File: 04 -SM -0 -BURL Federal Project No.: CML -5171(022) Project Location: Summit Drive from Hillside Circle to Easton Drive and immediately adjacent to the new Hoover Elementary School in Burlingame, CA Date: December 1, 2021 To be used as a basis of agreement for Federal -aid Project No. (1): CML -5171(022) In the City/County of (2): Burlingame / County of San Mateo Construction Authorization Date (3): March 12, 2021 Type (4): Install Sidewalk and Bike Improvements Preliminary Engineering (Authorization Date) (5): N/A Right of Way (Acquisition Authorization Date) (6): January 13, 2021 Acquisition No. of Parcels N/A $0 RAP No. of Homes N/A $0 RAP No. of Businesses N/A $0 LRH Parcel No. & Name N/A $0 TOTAL COST 7 $0 Utilities Authorization Date (8): February 5, 2021 Total Construction Cost: $221,919.06 Improvement Type Code (9): 44 Length (miles) (10): 0_1 Page 1 of 5 January 2020 Local Assistance Procedures Manual ITEM ESTIMATE (11) Exhibit 15-M Detail Estimate Item No. Item Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 Mobilization (15%) LS 1 $15,343.70 $15,343.70 2 Erosion and Sediment Control LS 1 $800.00 $800.00 3 Traffic Control LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 4 Construction Staking & Surveying LS 1 $6,600.00 $6,600.00 5 Clearing, Grubbing and Vegetation Removal LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 6 Removal and Disposal of Concrete Curb and Gutter LF 447.5 $13.75 $6153.13 7 Removal and Disposal of Asphalt Pavement SF 6772 $4.90 $33,182.8 8 Removal and Disposal of Concrete Sidewalk SF 1729.50 $4.90 $8,474.55 9 Remove and Salvage of Brick Driveway SF 100.75 $25.00 $2,518.75 10 Remove and Dispose of Existing Wall LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 11 Remove Ex. Fire Hydrant Assembly EA 0 $5,000.00 $0.00 12 Sawcut LF 0 $7.00 $0.00 13 Install Concrete Sidewalk SF 1,551.50 $13.75 $21,333.13 14 Install Brick Driveway SF 100.75 $35.00 $3,528.25 15 Install Concrete Curb and Gutter LF 445 $61.50 $27,367.50 16 Install Hot Mix Asphalt TON 182.95 $285.00 $52,140.75 17 Install Class 2 Aggregate Base CY 92.22 $75.00 $6,916.50 18 Install Fire Hydrant Assembly EA 0 $5,000.00 $0.00 19 Adjust Water Valve to Grade EA 2 $500.00 $1,000.00 20 Adjust Manhole to Grade EA 1 $500.00 $500.00 21 Adjust Gas Valve to Grade EA 1 $500.00 $500.00 22 Adjust Sanitary Sewer Clean Out to Grade EA 1 $500.00 $500.00 23 Adjust Water Meter to Grade EA 1 $500.00 $500.00 Subtotal Contract Items $220,357.06 Subtotal Contract Items (11) $220,357.06 Agency/State Furnished Materials (12) N/A Force Account (Day Labor) - striping, etc. N/A Subtotal $220,357.06 Change orders $1,562.00 Subtotal + Change orders = Contract Total $221,919,06 Construction Engineering 14 $N/A Total Construction Cost = $221,919.06 Page 2 of 5 January 2020 Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 15-M Detail Estimate DETAIL ESTIMATE SUMMARY (15) Contract Items Participating (16) Improvement Total Cost Participating Cost Federal Funds Other Funds TOTAL Type Code 100% Preliminary Engineering $ $ $ $ Right of Way $ $ $ $ Construction 44 $236,746.03 $235,184.03 $208,208.42 $28,337.61 Force Account $ $ $ $ Construction Engineering 17 $ $ $ $ TOTAL COST $236,746.03 $235,184.03 $208,208.42 $28,537.61 Contract Items Participating (16) $236,746.03 99.3% Contract Items Nonparticipating $1,562.00 0.7% TOTAL $236,746.03 100% *Reimbursement Ratio (17): 88.53% Program Code(s) (18): N/A Name/Date Prepared: Kevin Okada December 1, 2021 *Reimbursement ratios may vary within each phase of work such as Emergency Relief PE for Emergency Repair (100%) and Preliminary Engineering for restoration (88.53%). In these cases, the detailed estimate shall include two separate lines of Preliminary Engineering. Distribution: All Projects (1) Original & 1 copy to Caltrans DLAE (2) Copy to Local Agency Project File Page 3 of 5 January 2020 Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 15-M Detail Estimate DETAIL ESTIMATE INSTRUCTIONS 1. File • Fill in project identification example: Dist -County -Rte -City: 07 -LA -0 -LA • Federal -aid Project #: STPL-5006(023) • Federal -aid Program: Surface Transportation Program, population > 200,000 2. Project Location • Fairly detailed (list intersections or project limits, etc.) should agree with Authorization to Proceed 3. Construction Authorization Date • FHWA/Caltrans authorization date on the Authorization to Proceed 4. Type • General type of work (signalization, widening, construct four -lane divided street, etc.) Chapter 3, "Project Authorization" Exhibit 3-F (Item 38) 5. P.E. Authorization • FHWA/Caltrans authorization date on the Authorization to Proceed 6. Right of Way Authorization • FHWA/Caltrans authorization date on the Authorization to Proceed 7. Right of Way Costs • Total for project 8. Utility Authorization • FHWA/Caltrans authorization date on the Authorization to Proceed 9. Improvement Type Codes: 01 New Construction Roadway 21 Safety 42 Training 03 Reconstruction, Added Capacity 22 Rail/Highway Crossing 43 Utilities 04 Reconstruction, No Added Capacity 23 Transit 44 Other 05 4R Maintenance Resurfacing 24 Traffic Management/Eng. HOV 45 Debt Service 06 4R Maintenance -Restoration & Rehab 26 Ferry Boats 47 Bridge Preventative Maintenance 07 4R Maintenance -Relocation 28 Facilities for Pedestrian & Bicycle* 48 Bridge Protection 08 Bridge, New Construction 29 Acquisition of Scenic Easements* 49 Bridge Inspection and Related Training 10 Bridge Replacement, Added Capacity** 30 Scenic or Historic Highway Program* 50 New Tunnel 11 Bridge Replacement, No Added Capacity** 31 Landscaping & Scenic Beautification* 51 Tunnel Replacement 13 Bridge Rehab, Added Capacity** 32 Historic Preservation* 52 Tunnel Rehabilitation 14 Bridge Rehab, No Added Capacity** 33 Rehab & Operation of Historic Facility* 53 Tunnel Preservation 15 Preliminary Engineering* 36 Archeological Plan & Research* 54 Tunnel Protection 16 Right of Way 37 Mitigation of Water Pollution* 55 Tunnel Inspection 17 Construction Engineering 38 Safety & Education of Ped. Bike* 56 Other Asset Inspection 18 Planning 39 Establishment of Transp. Museum* 57 Safety — Non Infrastructure 20 Environmental Only 40 Special Bridge* 59 Bridge Resurfacing * Transportation Enhancement Projects must use these Types of Improvements. ** Projects using these Improvement Types must report a National Bridge Inventory Structure Number. Page 4 of 5 January 2020 Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 15-M Detail Estimate 10. Length • Length in miles (to nearest 0.1) is required for roadway codes and for bridge codes • Measured along center line • Not required for "Miscellaneous" codes 11. Item Estimate • List each bid item per sample format • Separate by "improvement type code" as noted above in item # 9 (should be same as preliminary estimate) • Place nonparticipation work directly following participating work of similar codes • Separate as "not part of Federal -aid Project" that work which is beyond project limits of federal participation but is being done under the same contract 12. State/Agency Furnished Materials • List each item and cost of all items or expenses that are to be furnished by other than contractor • Should agree with items listed in Special Provisions and Plans 13. Contingencies • Generally 5% to 10% • FHWA does not want supplemental work segregated from contingencies • If large amount of supplemental work, 10% may be exceeded, but contingencies should always be at least 5% • Separate for each code, etc. 14. Construction Engineering • Separate for each code, etc. • Indicate staking, construction trailer, etc., if claimed for reimbursement 15. Detail Estimate Summary • Summary generally broken down only between P.E., Construction, and Right of Way • Improvement Type Codes and nonparticipating involved, must be outlined in summary • Calculate P.E., Construction (by code) and Right of way separately at appropriate reimbursement ratio • Federal funds share of phase cannot be more than the fund reimbursement ratio times the participating costs. (Always round down to the nearest dollar). 16. Federal Participation Calculation • Use contract items only 17. Reimbursement Ratio (Federal) (See list in Chapter 3, "Project Authorization") • Use current ratio • Project ratio if under funded 18. Program Code(s) (Federal) NOTE: Formerly known as Appropriation Code(s) • Program code(s) applicable to the program(s) involved 19. Revised Detail Estimate or Modification • Required when federal funds are to be changed from what was previously under agreement • Changes can be accomplished by updating item costs, supplemental work, contingencies, etc. • Change Title to "Revised Detail Estimate". • Must remain consistent with FTIP/FSTIP rules • Wording to be changed in Item 2 by adding "To be used as basis for modification of agreement for federal -aid project". • Remaining instructions are unchanged Page 5 of 5 January 2020 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TEL: (650) 558-7230 FAX: (650) 685-9310 Local Assistance Procedures Manual The City of Burlingame CITY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 CORPORATION YARD 650 696-7260 EXHIBIT 17-E CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY Project CML 5171 (022) The amount shown as extra work is to be reported as a supplemental expenditure on the final Detail Estimate. CCO No. CCO Description Spent to Date 1 Additional Staking $1,562.00 1 Item Over Unders Balancing $27,877.05 Total $29,439.05 Liquidated Damages/contractors claim: $0 Date of completion: 08-11-21 Date of acceptance: 12-20-21 * Amounts shown are included at Bid Prices on Detail Estimate. * * Extra Work (Payment under force account or agreed price). Distribution: (1) Original -included in Report of Expenditures (2) Copy retained by Local Agency Project File ` R!!|! J §!!;| \R! _! !| | ! 4§||I| � (/( , .a n] The City of Burlingame PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL -501 PRIMROSE ROAD CORPORATION YARD TEL: 16501558-7230 BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 650 696-7260 FAX (650) 685-9310 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 17-G Materials CertiSeate Materials Certificate Date: 08-11-21 City of Burlingame Project No.: 84490 Federal -Aid Project No.: CML 5171 (022) Caltrans File Category (Project): 63.06 Subject: Materials Certification This is to certify that: The results of the tests on acceptance samples indicate that the materials incorporated in the construction work and the construction operations controlled by sampling and testing were in conformity with the approved plans and specifications. Exceptions to the plans and specifications are explained on the back of this memorandum (or on attached sheet). XNo exceptions to the plans and specifications were found. ick Panayotou, P.E., Resident Engineer lllstrlDation: (Horallprojec[s) 1)Locl! agency rro)ect Piles(onglnal) 2) DLAE (I copy in Report of Expenditures) (For projects on the NHS) 3) FHWA (1 copy) [Mill Project Location Map Hoover School Area Sidewalk Improvements on Summit Drive City Project No. 84490, Federal Aid Project No. CML -5171(022) BURifNGAME AGENDA NO: 8f STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: December 20, 2021 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: December 20, 2021 From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works — (650) 558-7230 Michael Heathcote, Deputy Director of Public Works Operations — (650) 558-7670 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Procurement of Four Vehicles for the City's Fleet System as Part of the FY 2021-22 Vehicle Replacement Program in the Amount of $122,787.24 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the procurement of four vehicles for the City's fleet inventory for a total price of $122,787.24. BACKGROUND The Fleet Division of the Public Works Department is responsible for vehicle maintenance services of the City's fleet and for managing the Vehicle Replacement Program in a sustainable and effective manner to ensure the City's fleet is in good operating condition. The Fleet Division has identified four City vehicles due for replacement. The vehicles, which have served their expected service life, are listed below: • Two 2022 Ford Escape Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) to replace two 2012 Chevrolet Caprice sedans utilized by the Police Department; • One 2022 Ford Escape Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) to replace a 2008 Ford F150 truck utilized by the Water Division; and • One 2022 Ford F150 truck to replace a 2009 Ford F150 truck utilized by the Parks Department. As part of the City's Climate Action Plan (CAP) to lower greenhouse gasses, staff did a comprehensive analysis of available electric vehicles (EV) for replacing the fleet's traditional gas - powered vehicles. At this time, three out of the four vehicles will be PHEVs. There are no EVs or PHEVs currently on the market to effectively replace the Ford F150 truck. 1 Resolution Approving the Procurement of Vehicles for the City's Fleet System December 20, 2021 DISCUSSION Staff solicited competitive bids for purchasing the four vehicles and received two bid proposals ranging from $122,787.24 to $155,777.40. Serramonte Ford submitted the lowest responsible bid in the amount of $122,787.24. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the procurement of the four vehicles as requested. FISCAL IMPACT The City Council has previously approved funding for the replacement of the identified vehicles as part of the FY 2021-2022 Budget from the Equipment Maintenance Replacement Fund. Exhibits: • Resolution • Bid Proposals 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING THE PROCUREMENT OF FOUR VEHICLES FOR THE CITY'S FLEET SYSTEM IN THE AMOUNT OF $122,787.24, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE PROCUREMENT WHEREAS, the Fleet Division of the Public Works Department is responsible for vehicle maintenance services of the City's fleet, and for managing the Vehicle Replacement Program in a sustainable and effective manner to ensure the City's fleet is in good operating condition; and WHEREAS, the Fleet Division has identified four vehicles for replacement; and WHEREAS, staff solicited competitive bids and obtained the lowest responsible bid in the amount of $122,787.24 from Serramonte Ford for the procurement of four vehicles as follows: - Two 2022 Ford Escape Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) to replace two 2012 Chevrolet Caprice sedans utilized by the Police Department; - One 2022 Ford Escape Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) to replace a 2008 Ford F150 truck utilized by the Water Division; and - One 2022 Ford F150 truck to replace a 2009 Ford F150 truck utilized by the Parks Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, and ORDERED, the above -submitted lowest responsible bid is approved and adopted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the lowest responsible bid for said purchase in the amount of $122,787.24 is accepted, and the City Manager or her designee is authorized to execute the procurement. Ann O'Brien Keighran, Mayor I, MEAGHAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 201 day of December, 2021, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk SERRAMONTE FORD BID PROPOSAL VEHICLE PURCHASE BID SHEET The wimiuig bidder shall honor bid price for up to 60 calendar days Quantity Make/Model Price Each Total Price 2022 Ford F150 (X1C) XL 1 2WD SuperCab 6.5' Box 145" $t� `X 7/ ��°�'" �� l " $ 7/ t? WB (Parks 7450) 2022 Ford Escape (UOE) SE 1 Plug In Hybrid FWD -Oxford $w(/713.71 $ 0 I 7A3 > 21 White Water 60 2022 Ford Escape (UOE) SE $ $ 1 Plug In Hybrid FWD - 3 7�� P 71 Carbonized Gray Metallic PD 20 2022 Ford Escape (UOE) SE $ $ 70 ' l ) 1 Plug In Hybrid FWD - Agate Black Metallic PD25 Total Bid Price $ /tc�C9, 78 7< c4 Representative Signat re: Date: /aA//,9Aq/ Representative Name: Phone: 51t) V-8rl 7ql� Email: Please return this page of the "Notice Inviting Bids for Vehicle Purchase" along with yom• order summary that details all the options included for each vehicle to the City by 1:OOym on Thursday, October 21, 2021. By email: iwoo@ burlin ang ie.orgor By FAX: (650) 696-1598 or By mail: The bid must be signed in ink and Sealed. Vehicle Purchase Bid Attn: Fleet Manager 1361 N. Carolan Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 R7A Y Tj rf Customer: Gity Of Burlingame 1361, N Carolan Avenue Burlingame CA 94010. Kind Attn : Mr. Johnson Woo BILL OF SALE Make and Model: 2022 Ford F•150 SC 4x2 1012112021 This Order Acknowledgement is accepted by: Customer. Signature Dealer Signature — Vaseem Mohammed Serramonte Ford Commercial Fleet Sales Department 999 Serramonte Blvd. Colma, CA 94014 T 650.301.7100 M 510.861.7975 Customer: City Of Burlingame 1361, N Carolan Avenue Burlingame CA 94010. BILL OF SALE 1012112021 Kind Attn : Mr. Johnson Woo Make and Model: 2022 Ford Escape Hybrid UOE This Order Acknowledgement is accepted by: Customer Signature Dealer Signature p Vaseem Mohammed Serramonte Ford Commercial Fleet Sales Deartment 999 Serramonte Blvd. Colma, CA 94014 T 650.301.7100 M 510.861.7975 10/21/21.9:57 AM GPC Lookup Government Bid Management System (GBMSj VASEEMMOHAMMED(V-MOHAM2) Purpose:New Bid; State:CA-California; FIN:QA725-CITY OF BURLINGAME; Bid Open Date :10/21 /2021; Vehicle Line:24 - F-150 ;Model Year:2022; Body Code Fs Name:XiC-F150 4X2 S/C ;GPC Type:All Model State Year Vehicle Line Body Code & Option Name Discounts GPC Req # GPC ($) �. price Level Bid Open / Reference p Reference !J Start Date Issue Date Reference FIN GPC Type k Ex D X1C � 24 - CA 2022 F- F150 I ( 9025 215 09/15/2021 110/15/2021 I PIGGYBACK 137424N 04/ 150 4X2 i I X1C _ _... 24 - - -'',. CA 2022 F- F150 6500 000 06/15/2021 � 06/15/2021 � LOCAL 17396N 150 4X2 ' S/C i I _j- haps://www.gbms.dealerconnection.com/GBMSNGUIWeb/gpcLookup/gpclookup.faces7faces-redirect=true&dswid=-425 1/1 10/21/21, 9:58 AM GPC Lookup Government Bid Management System (GBMS) VASEEMMOHAMMED (V-MOHAM2) Purpose:New Bid; State:CA-California; FIN:QA725-CITY OF BURLINGAME; Bid Open Date :10/21 /2021; Vehicle Line:45 -ESCAPE ;Model Year:2022; Body Code @ Name:UOE-SE PHEV FWD ;GPC Type:All Model Vehicle Body Code @ Option GPC Req GPC ($) price Bid Open / Reference # Reference State Year Line Name Discounts b Level Reference 11 Issue Date FIN GPC Type # Start Date UOE - CA 2022 45- SE 2481 215 08/1612021 08/26/2027 PIGGYBACK 26580N ESCAPE PHEV FWD UOE -_ i i CA 2p22 45- SE j 1800 000 � 07/26/2021 07/26/2021 LOCAL 22097N ESCAPE P�H/EDV haps://www.gbms.dealerconnection.com/GBMSNGUiWeb/gpcLookup/gpcLookup.faces?faces-redirect=true&dswid=-425 1/1 10/21/21, 9:45 AM IMS2 screen capture CNGP530 VEHICLE ORDER CONFIRMATION __> 2022 F-150 Order No: 9999 Priority: B4 Ord FIN: QA725 Order Type: Ord Code: 100A Cust/Flt Name: CITY OF BURLI PO Number: RETAIL DLR INV 10/21/21 12:45:05 Dealer: F7202� Page: 1 of 5B Price Level: 215 RETAIL X1C F150 4X2 S/C $33725 $32208.00 425 50 STATE EMISS NC 145" WHEELBASE 53A TRAILER TOW PKG 975 YZ OXFORD WHITE .TRL BRAKE CONTR A VINYL 40/20/40 NC NC 85A POWER EQUIP GRP 1170 S MED DARK SLATE 96W SPRAY -IN LINER 595 L00A EQUIP GRP FLEX FUEL SERIES SP FLT ACCT CR .XL STEEL FUEL CHARGE 996 .17"SILVER 3.3L V6 PFDI DEST AND DELIV 1695 44G ELEC 10-SPDAUTO TOTAL BASE AND OPTIONS 38160 .245/70R-17 A/S XL STD DISCT PEG & TT (500) X26 3.73 REG AXLE NC NC TOTAL 37660 6250# GVWR *THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE* CA BOARD FEES NC .65 FRT LICENSE BKT NC NC F1=Help F2=Return to Order F4=Submit FS=Add to Library 1099 - PRESS F4 TO SUBMIT DLR INV NC 888.00 1064.00 542.00 (988.00) 12.80 1695.00 35422.45 (455.00) 34967.45 F3/F12=Veh Ord Menu QC05727 1 /1 10/21/21, 9:57 AM GPC Lookup 1�GFY�ydlld�la_tdt;lir7l�abt;�77/e1� V71 Purpose:New Bid; State:CA-Caiifornia; FIN:QA725-CITY Vehicle Line OF BURLINGAME; Bid Open Date :10/21/2021; Vehicle Line:24 - F-150 ;Model Year:2022; Body Code 8 Name:X7C-F1504X2 S/C ;GPC Type:Atl Reference FIN GPC Type # Model State Year Vehicle Line Body Code 8 Option Name Discounts GPC Req GPC ($) # price Level Bid Open / Reference # Start Date Reference # Issue Date Reference FIN GPC Type # Ex D X1C I � 24 - � �i CA 2022 F- F750 I 9025 215 09/15/2021 10/15/2027 PIGGYBACK 37424N 041 �,, 150 4X2 j 5/C I _ .... X1C �... _ i .... _ _... _ _..... ._ _ ... 24 CA :2022 F- F150 '. � i 6500 000 06/15(2021 :06/15/2021 LOCAL 17396N 150 4X2 j S/C ' ____ ___ — haps://www.gbms.dealerconneclion.com/GBMSNGUiWeb/gpcLookup/gpcLookup.faces?faces-redirect=true&dswid=-425 1/1 10/21/21, 9:48 AM IMS2 screen capture CNGP530 VEHICLE ORDER CONFIRMATION __> 10/21/21 12:48:4: Dealer: F7202� Page: 1 of Type: 5B Price Level: 22E Number: RETAIL DLR INV 2022 ESCAPE Order No: 9999 Priority: B1 Ord FIN: QA725 Order Ord Code: 600A Cust/Flt Name: CITY OF BURLI PO RETAIL DLR INV U0E SE PHEV FWD $33075 $31752.00 TOTAL BASE AND OPTIONS$34320 $32093.40 .106.7" WB YZ OXFORD WHITE TOTAL *THIS IS NOT AN 34320 32093.40 INVOICE* 4 UNIQUE CLTH STS H EBONY i00A EQUIP GRP .18" ALUM WHEEL 99Z .2.5L I -VCT ENG NC NC 445 .ECVT TRANS NC NC .225/60R18 TIRES TIRE INFT KIT 153 FRT LICENSE BKT NC NC SP FLT ACCT CR (910.00) FUEL CHARGE 6.40 DEST AND DELIV 1245 1245.00 F1=Help F2=Return to Order F4=Submit FS=Add to Library >099 - PRESS F4 TO SUBMIT F3/F12=Veh Ord Menu QC05727 v1 10/21/21, 9:51 AM UNIQUE CLTH STS IMS2 screen capture H CNGP530 VEHICLE ORDER CONFIRMATION __> 2022 ESCAPE Order No: 9999 Priority: B1 Ord FIN: QA725 Order Ord Code: 600A Cust/Flt Name: CITY OF BURLI PO RETAIL DLR INV 10/21/21 12:51:2 Dealer: F7202� Page: 1 of Type: 5B Price Level: 22{ Number: RETAIL DLR INV U0E SE PHEV FWD $33075 $31752.00 TOTAL BASE AND OPTIONS$34320 $32093.40 .106.7" WB M7 CARBONIZED GRAY NC NC TOTAL 34320 32093.40 *THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE* 4 UNIQUE CLTH STS H EBONY i00A EQUIP GRP 99Z 445 .18" ALUM WHEEL .2.5L I -VCT ENG .ECVT TRANS .225/60R18 TIRES NC NC NC NC TIRE INFT KIT 153 FRT LICENSE BKT NC NC SP FLT ACCT CR (910.00) FUEL CHARGE 6.40 DEST AND DELIV F1=Help 1245 1245.00 F2=Return to Order F4=Submit FS=Add to Library >099 - PRESS F4 TO SUBMIT F3/F12=Veh Ord Menu QC05727 v1 10/21/21, 9:52 AM IMS2 screen capture CNGP530 __> Order No: Ord Code: VEHICLE ORDER CONFIRMATION 10/21/21 12:52:2; Dealer: F7202� Page: 1 of Type: 5B Price Level: 22{ Number: RETAIL DLR INV 2022 ESCAPE 9999 Priority: 61 Ord FIN: QA725 Order 600A Cust/Flt Name: CITY OF BURLI PO RETAIL DLR INV U0E SE PHEV FWD $33075 $31752.00 TOTAL BASE AND OPTIONS$34320 $32093.40 .106.7" UM AGATE WB BLACK TOTAL *THIS IS NOT AN 34320 32093.40 INVOICE* 4 UNIQUE CLTH STS H EBONY i00A EQUIP GRP .18" ALUM WHEEL 99Z .2.5L I -VCT ENG NC NC 445 .ECVT TRANS NC NC .225/60R18 TIRES TIRE INFT KIT 153 FRT LICENSE BKT NC NC SP FLT ACCT CR (910.00) FUEL CHARGE 6.40 DEST AND DELIV 1245 1245.00 F1=Help F2=Return to Order F4=Submit FS=Add to Library 1099 - PRESS F4 TO SUBMIT F3/F12=Veh Ord Menu QC05727 1/1 PUTNAM FORD BID PROPOSAL VEHICLE PURCHASE BID SHEET The winning bidder shall honor bid price for up to 60 calendar days Quantity Make/Model Price Each Total Price 2022 Ford F150 (X1C) XL 1 2WD SuperCab 6.5' Box 145" WB (Parks 7450) / / /l $3 !66o $ 113 / 07 l 2022 Ford Escape (UOE) SE 1 Plug In Hybrid FWD- Oxford $ 391 Sao $ White Water 60 ! 2022 Ford Escape (UOE) SE $ $ 1 Plug In Hybrid FWD - Carbonized 2l� 1�U J `ZI p Gray Metallic D 20 1 2022 Ford Escape (UOE) SE Plug In Hybrid FWD - Agate $ �� 3 $ 38 Black Metallic PD25 f Total Bid Price $ W 17 7 7,,4 c) Company Name: PuTrlolyv� F64 l'/C)/, 1. j 0-"( Representative Signature: Date: Representative Name: / I c Phone: --JaSlk,>X�o A . G.C,,rc�l IWITMn I Ows I=, Please return this page of the "Notice Inviting Bids for Vehicle Purchase" along with your order summary that details all the options included for each vehicle to the City by 1:OOpm on Thursday, October 21, 2021. By email: jwoo(2cburlingame.org or By FAX: (650) 696-1598 or By mail: The bid must be signed in ink and Sealed. Vehicle Purchase Bid Attn: Fleet Manager 1361 N. Carolan Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 Putnam Ford Order Summary Order Number: 1250 Dealer Rep: MAX GARCIA Customer Name: Johnson Woo/ City of Burlingame Order Type: Fleet Vehicle Line: F-150 Model year: 2022 Ord Code: 100A Priority Code: 19 Configuration: A DESCRIPTION RETAIL X1C F1504X2S/C 33725 145" WHEELBASE YZ OXFORD WHITE A VINYL 40/20/40 NC S MED DARK SLATE 100A EQUIP GRP .XL SERIES .17" SILVER STEEL 99B 3.31- V6 PFDI 44G ELEC 10-SPDAUTO .245/70R-17 A/S X26 3.73 REG AXLE NC 6250# GVWR CA BOARD FEES 153 FRT LICENSE BKT NC 425 50 STATE EMISS NC 53A TRAILER TOW PKG 975 .TRL BRAKE CONTR 85A POWER EQUIP GRP 1170 96W SPRAY -IN LINER 595 FLEX FUEL DEST AND DELIV 1695 TOTAL BASE AND OPTIONS 38160 XL STD DISCT PEG & TT (500) MSRP 37660 -------------------------------------------------------------- Total Including taxes and fees 42,113.71 Putnam Ford Order Summary Order Number: 1251 Dealer Rep: MAX GARCIA Customer Name: Johnson Woo/ City of Burlingame Order Type: Fleet Vehicle Line: Escape Model year: 2022 Ord Code: 600A Priority Code: 19 Configuration: DESCRIPTION RETAIL UOE SE PHEV FWD 33075 .106.7" WB YZ OXFORD WHITE 4 UNIQUE CLTH STS H EBONY 600A EQUIP GRP .18"ALUM WHEEL 99Z .2.51- I -VCT ENG NC 445 ECVT TRANS NC .225/60R18 TIRES 794 PRICE CONSESSN REMARKS TRALIER 153 FRT LICENSE BKT NC 134A NET INV FLT OPT NC DEST AND DELIV 1245 TOTAL BASE AND OPTIONS 34320 MSRP 34320 Total Including taxes and fees 38,221.23 Putnam Ford Order Summary Order Number: 1252 Dealer Rep: MAX GARCIA Customer Name: Johnson Woo/ City of Burlingame Order Type: Fleet Vehicle Line: Escape Model year: 2022 Ord Code: 600A Priority Code: 19 Configuration: DESCRIPTION RETAIL UOE SE PHEV FWD 33075 .106.7" WB UM AGATE BLACK METALLIC 4 UNIQUE CLTH STS H EBONY 600A EQUIP GRP .18"ALUM WHEEL 99Z .2.51- I -VCT ENG NC 445 ECVT TRANS NC .225/60R18 TIRES 794 PRICE CONSESSN REMARKS TRALIER 153 FRT LICENSE BKT NC 134A NET INV FLT OPT NC DEST AND DELIV 1245 TOTAL BASE AND OPTIONS 34320 MSRP 34320 Total Including taxes and fees 38,221.23 Putnam Ford Order Summary Order Number: 1253 Dealer Rep: MAX GARCIA Customer Name: Johnson Woo/ City of Burlingame Order Type: Fleet Vehicle Line: Escape Model year: 2022 Ord Code: 600A Priority Code: 19 Configuration: DESCRIPTION RETAIL UOE SE PHEV FWD 33075 .106.7" WB M7 CARBONIZED GRAY MET 4 UNIQUE CLTH STS H EBONY 600A EQUIP GRP .18"ALUM WHEEL 99Z .2.51- I -VCT ENG NC 445 ECVT TRANS NC .225/60R18 TIRES 794 PRICE CONSESSN REMARKS TRALIER 153 FRT LICENSE BKT NC 134A NET INV FLT OPT NC DEST AND DELIV 1245 TOTAL BASE AND OPTIONS 34320 MSRP 34320 Total Including taxes and fees 38,221.23 BURL— INGAME AGENDA NO: 8g STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: December 20, 2021 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: December 20, 2021 From: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk — (650) 558-7203 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution to Continue Conducting City Council and Commission Meetings Remotely Due to Health and Safety Concerns for the Public RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to continue conducting the City's Council and Commission meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns for the public. BACKGROUND On March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the State prepare for a broader spread of COVID 19. Thereafter, on March 16, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution Number 033-2020 declaring a local emergency due to COVID-19. The resolution states that the COVID-19 pandemic is "likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel and facilities of the City of Burlingame" and that a "proclamation of a Local Emergency is necessary to enable the City of Burlingame and other local government entities to adequately plan, prepare and preposition resources to be able to effectively respond to the threat". On March 17, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20, which suspended certain provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act in order to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means. Additionally, the State implemented a shelter -in-place order, requiring all non-essential personnel to work from home. Staff quickly worked to set up Zoom meetings for all City Council and Commission meetings. The Zoom meetings have allowed the Council and Commissions to continue to conduct City business from the safety of members' homes. The City Council and Commissions have been utilizing Zoom for the past 18 months to conduct all meetings. The usage of Zoom for public meetings has allowed the City to ensure the public's continued access to government meetings while also ensuring the public's safety. 1 Application of AB 361 December 20, 2021 On June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which among other things, rescinded his prior Executive Order N-29-20 and set a date of October 1, 2021 for agencies to transition back to public meetings held in full compliance with the Brown Act. In preparation for the return to in-person meetings, staff has been working on acquiring audio and visual upgrades for the Council Chambers in order to conduct hybrid meetings. Although hybrid meetings will help to keep the public safe by allowing them to continue accessing the meetings from their own home, Councilmembers, Commissioners, and staff will need to meet in person. Since the Governor issued Executive Order N-08-21, the Delta variant has emerged, causing a spike in cases throughout the state. As a result, the San Mateo County Health Department issued a Health Order requiring masks indoors in public places, regardless of vaccination status, starting August 3, 2021. On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed into law AB 361. AB 361 allows local legislative bodies to meet remotely when: • The local agency holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency; • State or local health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; • Legislative bodies declare that as a result of the proclaimed state of emergency that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees A "proclaimed state of emergency" refers to a gubernatorial state of emergency issued pursuant to the California Emergency Services Act, Government Code section 8625. On March 4, 2020, the Governor proclaimed a state of emergency pursuant to the California Emergency Services Act, and the proclamation remains in effect. At the September 20, 2021 Council meeting, staff requested that Council declare the need for the City Council and Commissions to continue to meet remotely in accordance with AB 361. Council adopted Resolution Number 116-2021, which allowed for the City's legislative bodies to continue to meet remotely for 30 days. Additionally, staff notified Council that in order to stay in compliance with AB 361, they would need to re-evaluate the need to meet remotely every 30 days and make findings that: A) the Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency; and B) any of the following circumstances exist: a. The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person; or b. State or local officials continue to impose recommend measures to promote social distancing On October 18, 2021, Council re-evaluated the need to meet remotely and found that the City continued to meet the requirements of AB 361 in order to hold remote meetings. Therefore, the Council adopted Resolution Number 128-2021, which allowed for the continuation of remote meetings for 30 days. 2 Application of AB 361 December 20, 2021 On November 15, 2021, the Council found that the City continued to meet the requirements of AB 361 and adopted Resolution Number 142-2021 to allow for another 30 days of remote meetings. nicrri iccinKI The City continues to meet the requirements of AB 361 in order to hold remote meetings. This is because: • The Governor's proclamation for a state of emergency issued on March 4, 2020, remains in effect. • County Health orders require that all individuals in public spaces maintain social distancing and wear masks • The City cannot maintain social distancing requirements for the public, staff, Councilmembers, and Commissioners in their meeting spaces The City cannot ensure social distancing requirements are met inside Council Chambers where the City Council, Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission, and Planning Commission meet. Councilmembers and Commissioners sit well within six feet of each other and are directly above staff members. Moreover, the County's indoor mask order is still in effect, making it difficult to hear what Councilmembers, Commissioners, staff, and public speakers are saying. Similarly, the Beautification Commission, Parks & Recreation Commission, and Library Board of Trustees all hold their meetings in a small conference room, making it impossible for Commissioners, staff, and members of the public to socially distance from each other. Staff recommends that the City Council declare these findings are true so that the Council and Commissions can continue to meet remotely for another 30 days. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact. Exhibits: • Resolution • Resolution Number 116-2021 • Resolution Number 128-2021 • Resolution Number 142-2021 • Governor's Executive Order N-29-20 • Governor's Executive Order N-08-21 • AB 361 3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DECLARING THE NEED FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSIONS TO CONTINUE TO MEET REMOTELY IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the State prepare for a broader spread of COVID-19, and the proclamation remains in effect; WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution Number 033-2020 declaring a local emergency due to COVID-19; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act in order to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means; and WHEREAS, as a result of Executive Order N-29-20, staff set up Zoom meetings for all City Council and Commission meetings; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which placed an end date of September 30, 2021, for agencies to meet remotely; and WHEREAS, since issuing Executive Order N-08-21, the Delta variant has emerged, causing a spike in COVID-19 cases throughout the state; and WHEREAS, on August 3, 2021, in response to the Delta variant, the San Mateo County Health Department ordered all individuals to wear masks when inside public spaces and maintain social distancing; and WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021 Governor Newsom signed into law AB 361, which allows for local legislative bodies to meet remotely due to health and safety concerns for the public; and WHEREAS, on September 20, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution Number 116- 2021 acknowledging the need to continue to meet remotely, and WHEREAS, on October 18, 2021, the City Council after re-evaluating the situation Council adopted Resolution Number 128-2021 acknowledging the need to continue to meet remotely, and WHEREAS, on November 15, 2021, the City Council reviewed the situation, and adopted Resolution Number 142-2021 acknowledging the continued need to meet remotely, and WHEREAS, in adherence with AB 361, the City Council must re-evaluate the need to meet remotely every 30 days; and WHEREAS, the City cannot maintain social distancing requirements for the public, staff, Councilmembers, and Commissioners in their respective meeting locations; and WHEREAS, because of the rise in cases due to the Delta variant, the City is concerned about the health and safety of all individuals who intend to attend Council and Commission meetings NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 1. In compliance with AB 361, and in order to continue to teleconference without the usual teleconference requirements of the Brown Act, the City Council makes the following findings: a. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the Governor's proclaimed state of emergency; and b. The state of emergency remains in effect and continues to directly impact the ability of the City Council and its Commissions, as well as staff and members of the public, to meet safely in person; and c. San Mateo County Health orders require all individuals in public spaces to maintain social distancing; however, the City cannot maintain social distancing requirements for the Councilmembers, Commissioners, staff and public in the meeting spaces. 2. City Council and Commission meetings will continue to be conducted remotely for the next 30 days in compliance with AB 361, in order to better ensure the health and safety of the public. 3. The City Council will revisit the need to conduct meetings remotely within 30 days of the adoption of this resolution. Ann O'Brien Keighran, 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 20th day of December, 2021, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk DocuSign Envelope ID: 43467118-D91D443CE-13C61-AFC9AECA327C RESOLUTION NO. 116-2021 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DECLARING THE NEED FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSIONS TO CONTINUE TO MEET REMOTELY IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the State prepare for a broader spread of COVID-19; WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution Number 033-2020 declaring a local emergency due to COVID-19; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act in order to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means; and WHEREAS, as a result of Executive Order N-29-20, staff set up Zoom meetings for all City Council and Commission meetings; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which placed an end date of September 30, 2021, for agencies to meet remotely; and WHEREAS, since issuing Executive Order N-08-21, the Delta variant has emerged, causing a spike in COVID-19 cases throughout the state; and WHEREAS, on August 3, 2021, in response to the Delta variant, the San Mateo County Health Department ordered all individuals to wear masks when inside public spaces and maintain social distancing; and WHEREAS, the City cannot maintain social distancing requirements for the public, staff, Councilmembers, and Commissioners in their respective meeting locations; and WHEREAS, because of the rise in cases due to the Delta variant, the City is concerned about the health and safety of all individuals who intend to attend Council and Commission meetings. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: DocuSign Envelope ID: 43413711B-D9D4-43CE-BC61-AFC9AECA327C 1. In compliance with AB 361, and in order to continue to teleconference without the usual teleconference requirements of the Brown Act, the City Council makes the following findings: a. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency; and b. The state of local emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the City Council and its Commissions, as well as staff and members of the public, from meeting safely in person; and c. San Mateo County Health orders require all individuals in public spaces to maintain social distancing; however the City cannot maintain social distancing requirement for the Councilmembers, Commissioners, staff and public in the meeting spaces. 2. City Council and Commission meetings will continue to be conducted remotely for the next 30 days in compliance with AB 361, in order to better ensure the health and safety of the public. 3. The City Council will revisit the need to conduct meetings remotely within 30 days of the adoption of this resolution. /r Ann Brien Keighran, Mayo ; 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 20th day of September, 2021, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BEACH, BROWNRIGG, COLSON, 07BRIEN KEIGHRAN, ORTIZ NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE u Signed by: E�-0,cSAG3.n8IIE7sl sL1 Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 128-2021 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DECLARING THE NEED FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSIONS TO CONTINUE TO MEET REMOTELY IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the State prepare for a broader spread of COVID-19, and the proclamation remains in effect; WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution Number 033-2020 declaring a local emergency due to COVID-19; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act in order to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means; and WHEREAS, as a result of Executive Order N-29-20, staff set up Zoom meetings for all City Council and Commission meetings; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which placed an end date of September 30, 2021, for agencies to meet remotely; and WHEREAS, since issuing Executive Order N-08-21, the Delta variant has emerged, causing a spike in COVID-19 cases throughout the state; and WHEREAS, on August 3, 2021, in response to the Delta variant, the San Mateo County Health Department ordered all individuals to wear masks when inside public spaces and maintain social distancing; and WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021 Governor Newsom signed into law AB 361 which allows for local legislative bodies to meet remotely due to health and safety concerns for the public; and WHEREAS, on September 20, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution Number 116- 2021 acknowledging the need to continue to meet remotely, and WHEREAS, in adherence with AB 361, the City Council must re-evaluate the need to meet remotely every 30 days; and WHEREAS, the City cannot maintain social distancing requirements for the public, staff, Councilmembers, and Commissioners in their respective meeting locations; and WHEREAS, because of the rise in cases due to the Delta variant, the City is concerned about the health and safety of all individuals who intend to attend Council and Commission meetings NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 1. In compliance with AB 361, and in order to continue to teleconference without the usual teleconference requirements of the Brown Act, the City Council makes the following findings: a. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the Governor's proclaimed state of emergency; and b. The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the City Council and its Commissions, as well as staff and members of the public, to meet safely in person; and c. San Mateo County Health orders require all individuals in public spaces to maintain social distancing; however, the City cannot maintain social distancing requirements for the Councilmembers, Commissioners, staff and public in the meeting spaces. 2. City Council and Commission meetings will continue to be conducted remotely for the next 30 days in compliance with AB 361, in order to better ensure the health and safety of the public. 3. The City Council will revisit the need to conduct meetings remotely within 30 days of the adoption of this resolution. i J k=:e4 L r. c Ann O Brien Keighran, 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 18th day of October, 2021, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BEACH, BROWNRIGG, COLSON, O'BRIEN KEIGHRAN, ORTIZ NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Meaghan -Shearer, City Clerk DocuSign Envelope ID: 5FF9FE9D-8E6C-4AEE-89BA-F8A24CBD82DE RESOLUTION NO. 142-2021 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DECLARING THE NEED FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSIONS TO CONTINUE TO MEET REMOTELY IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the State prepare for a broader spread of COVID-19, and the proclamation remains in effect; WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution Number 033-2020 declaring a local emergency due to COVID-19; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act in order to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means; and WHEREAS, as a result of Executive Order N-29-20, staff set up Zoom meetings for all City Council and Commission meetings; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which placed an end date of September 30, 2021, for agencies to meet remotely; and WHEREAS, since issuing Executive Order N-08-21, the Delta variant has emerged, causing a spike in COVID-19 cases throughout the state; and WHEREAS, on August 3, 2021, in response to the Delta variant, the San Mateo County Health Department ordered all individuals to wear masks when inside public spaces and maintain social distancing; and WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021 Governor Newsom signed into law AB 361 which allows for local legislative bodies to meet remotely due to health and safety concerns for the public; and WHEREAS, on September 20, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution Number 116- 2021 acknowledging the need to continue to meet remotely, and WHEREAS, on October 18, 2021, the City Council after re-evaluating the situation, Council adopted Resolution Number 128-2021 acknowledging the need to continue to meet remotely, and DocuSign Envelope ID: 5FF9FE9D-8E6C-4AEE-89BA-F8A24CBD82DE WHEREAS, in adherence with AB 361, the City Council must re-evaluate the need to meet remotely every 30 days; and WHEREAS, the City cannot maintain social distancing requirements for the public, staff, Councilmembers, and Commissioners in their respective meeting locations; and WHEREAS, because of the rise in cases due to the Delta variant, the City is concerned about the health and safety of all individuals who intend to attend Council and Commission meetings NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 1. In compliance with AB 361, and in order to continue to teleconference without the usual teleconference requirements of the Brown Act, the City Council makes the following findings: a. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the Governor's proclaimed state of emergency; and b. The state of emergency remains in effect and continues to directly impact the ability of the City Council and its Commissions, as well as staff and members of the public, to meet safely in person; and c. San Mateo County Health orders require all individuals in public spaces to maintain social distancing; however, the City cannot maintain social distancing requirements for the Councilmembers, Commissioners, staff and public in the meeting spaces. 2. City Council and Commission meetings will continue to be conducted remotely for the next 30 days in compliance with AB 361, in order to better ensure the health and safety of the public. 3. The City Council will revisit the need to conduct meetings remotely within 30 days of the adoption of this resolution. Ricardo Ortiz, Vice -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 15th day of November, 2021, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BEACH, BROWNRIGG, COLSON, ORTIZ NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: O'BRIEN KEIGHRAN Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk DocuSign Envelope ID: 5FF9FE9D-8E6C-4AEE-89BA-F8A24CBD82DE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT STATE OF CALIFORNIA EXECUTIVE ORDER N-29-20 WHEREAS on March 4, 2020, 1 proclaimed a State of Emergency to exist in California as a result of the threat of COVID-19; and WHEREAS despite sustained efforts, the virus continues to spread and is impacting nearly all sectors of California; and WHEREAS the threat of COVID-19 has resulted in serious and ongoing economic harms, in particular to some of the most vulnerable Californians; and WHEREAS time bound eligibility redeterminations are required for Medi - Cal, CalFresh, CalWORKs, Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants, California Food Assistance Program, and In Home Supportive Services beneficiaries to continue their benefits, in accordance with processes established by the Department of Social Services, the Department of Health Care Services, and the Federal Government; and WHEREAS social distancing recommendations or Orders as well as a statewide imperative for critical employees to focus on health needs may prevent Medi -Cal, CalFresh, CaIWORKs, Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants, California Food Assistance Program, and In Home Supportive Services beneficiaries from obtaining in-person eligibility redeterminations; and WHEREAS under the provisions of Government Code section 8571, 1 find that strict compliance with various statutes and regulations specified in this order would prevent, hinder, or delay appropriate actions to prevent and mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor of the State of California, in accordance with the authority vested in me by the State Constitution and statutes of the State of California, and in particular, Government Code sections 8567 and 8571, do hereby issue the following order to become effective immediately: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: As to individuals currently eligible for benefits under Medi -Cal, CalFresh, CalWORKS, the Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants, the California Food Assistance Program, or In Home Supportive Services benefits, and to the extent necessary to allow such individuals to maintain eligibility for such benefits, any state law, including but not limited to California Code of Regulations, Title 22, section 50189(a) and Welfare and Institutions Code sections 18940 and 11265, that would require redetermination of such benefits is suspended for a period of 90 days from the date of this Order. This Order shall be construed to be consistent with applicable federal laws, including but not limited to Code of Federal Regulations, Title 42, section 435.912, subdivision (e), as interpreted by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (in guidance issued on January 30, 2018) to permit the extension of otherwise -applicable Medicaid time limits in emergency situations. 2. Through June 17, 2020, any month or partial month in which California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (Co[WORKs) aid or services are received pursuant to Welfare and institutions Code Section 11200 et seq. shall not be counted for purposes of the 48 -month time limit set forth in Welfare an Institutions Code Section 11454. Any waiver of this time limit shall not be applied if it will exceed the federal time limits set forth in Code of Federal Regulations, Title 45, section 264.1. Paragraph 11 of Executive Order N-25-20 (March 12, 2020) is withdrawn and superseded by the following text: Notwithstanding any other provision of state or local law (including, but not limited to, the Bagley -Keene Act or the Brown Act), and subject to the notice and accessibility requirements set forth below, a local legislative body or state body is authorized to hold public meetings via teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the local legislative body or state body. All requirements in both the Bagley -Keene Act and the Brown Act expressly or impliedly requiring the physical presence of members, the clerk or other personnel of the body, or of the public as a condition of participation in or quorum for a public meeting are hereby waived. In particular, any otherwise -applicable requirements that (i) state and local bodies notice each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting; (ii) each teleconference location be accessible to the public; (iii) members of the public may address the body at each teleconference conference location; (iv) state and local bodies post agendas at all teleconference locations; (v) at least one member of the state body be physically present at the location specified in the notice of the meeting; and (vi) during teleconference meetings, a least a quorum of the members of the local body participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local body exercises jurisdiction are hereby suspended. A local legislative body or state body that holds a meeting via teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, consistent with the notice and accessibility requirements set forth below, shall have satisfied any requirement that the body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. Such a body need not make available any physical location from which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. Accessibility Requirements: If a local legislative body or state body holds a meeting via teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, the body shall also: (i) implement a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable modification or accommodation from individuals with disabilities, consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act and resolving any doubt whatsoever in favor of accessibility; and (ii) Advertise that procedure each time notice is given of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment, pursuant to subparagraph (ii) of the Notice Requirements below. Notice Requirements: Except to the extent this Order expressly provides otherwise, each local legislative body and state body shall: (i) Give advance notice of the time of, and post the agenda for, each public meeting according to the timeframes otherwise prescribed by the Bagley -Keene Act or the Brown Act, and using the means otherwise prescribed by the Bagley -Keene Act or the Brown Act, as applicable; and (ii) In each instance in which notice of the time of the meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, also give notice of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. As to any instance in which there is a change in such means of public observation and comment, or any instance prior to the issuance of this Order in which the time of the meeting has been noticed or the agenda for the meeting has been posted without also including notice of such means, a body may satisfy this requirement by advertising such means using "the most rapid means of communication available at the time" within the meaning of Government Code, section 54954, subdivision (e); this shall include, but need not be limited to, posting such means on the body's Internet website. All of the foregoing provisions concerning the conduct of public meetings shall apply only during the period in which state or local public health officials have imposed or recommended social distancing measures. All state and local bodies are urged to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to the provisions of the Bagley -Keene Act and the Brown Act, and other applicable local laws regulating the conduct of public meetings, in order to maximize transparency and provide the public access to their meetings. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that as soon as hereafter possible, this Order be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State and that widespread publicity and notice be given of this Order. This Order is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity, against the State of California, its agencies, departments, entities, officers, employees, or any other person. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Great Seal of the State of California to be affixed this 17th day ATTEST: ALEX PADILLA Secretary of State EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT STATE OF CALIFORNIA EXECUTIVE ORDER N-08-21 WHEREAS on March 4, 2020, 1 proclaimed a State of Emergency to exist in California as a result of the threat of COVID-19; and WHEREAS since March 2020, the State has taken decisive and meaningful actions to reduce the spread, and mitigate the impacts, of COVID-19, saving an untold number of lives; and WHEREAS as a result of the effective actions Californians have taken, as well as the successful and ongoing distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, California is turning a corner in its fight against COVID-19; and WHEREAS on June 11, 2021, 1 issued Executive Order N-07-21, which formally rescinded the Stay -at -Home Order (Executive Order N-33-20, issued on March 19, 2020), as well as the framework for a gradual, risk-based reopening of the economy (Executive Order N-60-20, issued on May 4, 2020); and WHEREAS in light of the current state of the COVID-19 pandemic in California, it is appropriate to roll back certain provisions of my COVID- 1 9 -related Executive Orders; and WHEREAS certain provisions of my COVID-19 related Executive Orders currently remain necessary to continue to help California respond to, recover from, and mitigate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, including California's ongoing vaccination programs, and the termination of certain provisions of my COVID-19 related Executive Orders during this stage of the emergency would compound the effects of the emergency and impede the State's recovery by disrupting important governmental and social functions; and WHEREAS under the provisions of Government Code section 8571, 1 find that strict compliance with various statutes and regulations specified in this Order would continue to prevent, hinder, or delay appropriate actions to prevent and mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor of the State of California, in accordance with the authority vested in me by the State Constitution and statutes of the State of California, and in particular, Government Code sections 8567, 8571, and 8627, do hereby issue the following Order to become effective immediately: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: The following provisions shall remain in place and shall have full force and effect through June 30, 2021, upon which time they will expire subject to individual conditions described in the enumerated paragraphs below. 1) State of Emergency Proclamation dated March 4, 2020: a. Paragraph 10. Any facility operating under a waiver pursuant to this provision, memorialized in an All Facilities Letter, may operate pursuant to such a waiver through the stated expiration in the All Facilities Letter or September 30, 2021, whichever occurs first; b. Paragraph 11; c. Paragraph 12; and d. Paragraph 13. 2) Executive Order N-25-20: a. Paragraph 1; and b. Paragraph 7, and as applicable to local governments per Executive Order N-35-20, Paragraph 3. Effective July 1, 2021, the waivers in Executive Order N-25-20, Paragraph 7, and Executive Order N-35-20, Paragraph 3, of reinstatement requirements set forth in Government Code sections 7522.56(f) and (g) are terminated. 3) Executive Order N-26-20: a. Paragraph 1; b. Paragraph 2; c. Paragraph 3; d. Paragraph 5; e. Paragraph 6; and f. Paragraph 7. 4) Executive Order N-27-20: a. Paragraph 1; b. Paragraph 2; and c. Paragraph 3. 5) Executive Order N-28-20: a. Paragraph 3; and b. Paragraph 6. 6) Executive Order N-31-20: a. Paragraph 1; and b. Paragraph 2. 7) Executive Order N-35-20: a. Paragraph 1. Any facility operating under a waiver pursuant to this provision, memorialized in an All Facilities Letter, may operate pursuant to such a waiver through the stated expiration in the All Facilities Letter or September 30, 2021, whichever occurs first; b. Paragraph 4; c. Paragraph 6. To the extent the Director exercised their authority pursuant to this provision on or before June 30, 2021, the extension shall remain valid until the effective expiration; -IC-5— d. Paragraph 10. The State Bar shall receive the time extension in the aforementioned order for any nomination submitted to the State Bar by the Governor on or before June 30, 2021; and e. Paragraph 11 (as extended and clarified by N-71-20, Paragraph 6). Claims accruing before June 30, 2021 will remain subject to the 120 - day extension granted in the aforementioned orders. 8) Executive Order N-36-20, Paragraph 1. To the extent the Secretary exercised their authority pursuant to this provision, the Secretary shall allow each facility to resume intake in a manner that clears intake backlog as soon as feasible. 9) Executive Order N-39-20: a. Paragraph 1. Any facility operating under a waiver pursuant to this provision, memorialized in an All Facilities Letter, may operate pursuant to such a waiver through the stated expiration in the All Facilities Letter or September 30, 2021, whichever occurs first; b. Paragraph 4; and c. Paragraph 7. The leases or agreements executed pursuant to this provision shall remain valid in accordance with the term of the agreement. 10) Executive Order N-40-20: a. Paragraph 1. For rulemakings published in the California Regulatory Notice Register pursuant to Government Code section 11346.4(a)(5) prior to June 30, 2021, the deadlines in the aforementioned order shall remain extended in accordance with the order; b. Paragraph 2 (as extended and clarified by N-66-20, Paragraph 12, and N-71-20, Paragraph 10). Notwithstanding the expiration of this provision, state employees subject to these training requirements shall receive the benefit of the 120 -day extension granted by the aforementioned orders. All required training due on or before June 30, 2021 must be completed within 120 days of the statutorily prescribed due date; c. Paragraph 7 (as extended and clarified by N-66-20, Paragraph 13 and N-71-20, Paragraph 11). With regard to appeals received on or before June 30, 2021, the State Personnel Board shall be entitled to the extension in the aforementioned order to render its decision; d. Paragraph 8. To the extent the deadlines specified in Government Code section 22844 and California Code of Regulations, title 2, sections 599.517 and 599.518 fell on a date on or before June 30, 2021 absent the extension, they shall expire pursuant to the timeframes specified in the aforementioned orders; e. Paragraph 16; f. Paragraph 17; and g. Paragraph 20. 1 1) Executive Order N-45-20: a. Paragraph 4; b. Paragraph 8; c. Paragraph 9; and d. Paragraph 12. For vacancies occurring prior to June 30, 2021, the deadline to fill the vacancy shall remain extended for the time period in the aforementioned order. 12) Executive Order N-46-20: a. Paragraph 1; and b. Paragraph 2. 13) Executive Order N-47-20: a. Paragraph 2; and b. Paragraph 3. 14) Executive Order N-48-20, Paragraph 2 (which clarified the scope of N-34- 20) . 15) Executive Order N-49-20: a. Paragraph 1; b. Paragraph 3. For determinations made on or before June 30, 2021, the discharge date shall be within 14 days of the Board's determination; and c. Paragraph 4. 16) Executive Order N-50-20, Paragraph 2. 17) Executive Order N-52-20: a. Paragraph 6; b. Paragraph 7. To the extent an individual has commenced a training program prior to June 30, 2021, that was interrupted by COVID-19, that individual shall be entitled to the extended timeframe in the aforementioned order; and c. Paragraph 14; and d. Paragraph 16. 18) Executive Order N-53-20: a. Paragraph 3; b. Paragraph 12 (as extended or modified by N-69-20, Paragraph 10, and N-71-20, Paragraph 27); and c. Paragraph 13 (as extended or modified by N-69-20, Paragraph 11, and N-71-20, Paragraph 28). 19) Executive Order N-54-20, Paragraph 7. To the extent the date governing the expiration of registration of vehicles previously registered in a foreign jurisdiction falls on or before June 30, 2021, the deadline is extended pursuant to the aforementioned orders. 20) Executive Order N-55-20: a. Paragraph 1. Statutory deadlines related to cost reports, change in scope of service requests, and reconciliation requests occurring on or before June 30, 2021 shall remain subject to the extended deadline in the aforementioned order; b. Paragraph 4; c. Paragraph 5; d. Paragraph 6; e. Paragraph 8; f. Paragraph 9; g. Paragraph 10; h. Paragraph 13; i. Paragraph 14. Statutory deadlines related to beneficiary risk assessments occurring on or before June 30, 2021 shall remain subject to the extended deadline in the aforementioned order; and Paragraph 16. Deadlines for fee-for-service providers to submit information required for a Medical Exemption Request extended on or before June 30, 2021 shall remain subject to the extended deadline granted under the aforementioned order. 21) Executive Order N-56-20: a. Paragraph 1; b. Paragraph 6; c. Paragraph 7; d. Paragraph 8; e. Paragraph 9; and f. Paragraph 11. 22) Executive Order N-59-20, Paragraph 6. 23) Executive Order N-61-20: a. Paragraph 1; b. Paragraph 2; c. Paragraph 3; and d. Paragraph 4. 24) Executive Order N-63-20: a. Paragraph 8(a) (as extended by N-71-20, Paragraph 40). The deadlines related to reports by the Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) and the Occupational Safety & Health Standards Board on proposed standards or variances due on or before June 30, 2021 shall remain subject to the extended timeframe; b. Paragraph 8(c). To the extent the date upon which the Administrative Director must act upon Medical Provider Network applications or requests for modifications or reapprovals falls on or before June 30, 2021 absent the extension in the aforementioned order, it shall remain subject to the extended timeframe; c. Paragraph 8(e). To the extent filing deadlines for a Return -to -Work Supplement appeal and any reply or responsive papers fall on or before June 30, 2021, absent the extension in the aforementioned order, they shall remain subject to the extended timeframe; d. Paragraph 9(a) (as extended and modified by N-71-20, Paragraph 39). Any deadline setting the time for the Labor Commissioner to issue any citation under the Labor Code, including a civil wage and penalty assessment pursuant to Labor Code section 1741, that, absent the aforementioned order, would have occurred or would occur between May 7, 2020 and September 29, 2021 shall be extended to September 30, 2021. Any such deadline that, absent the aforementioned order, would occur after September 29, 2021 shall be effective based on the timeframe in existence before the aforementioned order; e. Paragraph 9(b) (as extended and modified by N-71-20, Paragraph 41); f. Paragraph 9(c) (as extended and modified by N-71-20, Paragraph 39). Any deadline setting the time for a worker to file complaints and initiate proceedings with the Labor Commissioner pursuant to Labor Code sections 98, 98.7, 1700.44, and 2673. 1, that, absent the aforementioned order, would have occurred or would occur between May 7, 2020 and September 29, 2021 shall be extended to September 30, 2021. Any such deadline that, absent the aforementioned order, would occur after September 29, 2021 shall be effective based on the timeframe in existence before the aforementioned order; g. Paragraph 9(d) (as extended and modified by N-71-20, Paragraph 39). Any deadline setting the time for Cal/OSHA to issue citations pursuant to Labor Code section 6317, that, absent the aforementioned order, would have occurred or would occur between May 7, 2020 and September 29, 2021 shall be extended to September 30, 2021. Any such deadline that, absent the aforementioned order, would occur after September 29, 2021 shall be effective based on the timeframe in existence before the aforementioned order; h. Paragraph 9(e) (as extended and modified by N-71-20, Paragraph 41); i. Paragraph 10; j. Paragraph 12. Any peace officer reemployed on or before June 30, 2021 pursuant to the aforementioned order shall be entitled to the extended reemployment period set forth in the order; k. Paragraph 13; I. Paragraph 14; and m. Paragraph 15 (as extended by N-71-20, Paragraph 36). 25) Executive Order N-65-20: a. Paragraph 5 (as extended by N-71-20, Paragraph 35; N-80-20, Paragraph 4; and N-01-21). Identification cards issued under Health and Safety Code section 11362.71 that would otherwise have expired absent the aforementioned extension between March 4, 2020 and June 30, 2021 shall expire on December 31, 2021; and b. Paragraph 7. 26) Executive Order N-66-20: a. Paragraph 3; b. Paragraph 4; and c. Paragraph 5. 27) Executive Order N-68-20: a. Paragraph 1. Notwithstanding the expiration of the aforementioned order, temporary licenses granted on or before June 30, 2021 shall be valid through September 30, 2021; and b. Paragraph 2. Renewal fee payments otherwise due to the to the California Department of Public Health absent the extension in the aforementioned order on or before June 30, 2021, shall be entitled to the extensions of time set forth in the aforementioned order. 28) Executive Order N-71-20: a. Paragraph 1; b. Paragraph 4; c. Paragraph 16. Where the statutory deadline for opening or completing investigations is set to occur on or before June 30, 2021, the deadline shall remain subject to the extension in the aforementioned order; and d. Paragraph 17. Where the statutory deadline for serving a notice of adverse action is due on or before June 30, 2021, the deadline shall remain subject to the extension in the aforementioned order. 29) Executive Order N-75-20: a. Paragraph 7. Children placed in foster care on or before June 30, 2021 shall receive such examinations on or before July 31, 2021; b. Paragraph 8; c. Paragraph 9; d. Paragraph 10. Any facility operating under a waiver pursuant to this provision may operate pursuant to such a waiver through the expiration as set forth by the California Department of Public Health, or September 30, 2021, whichever occurs first; and e. Paragraph 13. 30) Executive Order N-76-20, Paragraph 3. 31) Executive Order N-77-20: a. Paragraph 1; b. Paragraph 2; and c. Paragraph 3. 32) Executive Order N-78-20 (as extended and modified by N-03-21): a. Paragraph 1; and b. Paragraph 2. 33) Executive Order N-83-20: a. Paragraph 3. To the extent the Director of the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control suspends deadlines for renewing licenses upon payment of annual fees on or before June 30, 2021, the extension shall remain valid until the effective expiration; b. Paragraph 5 (which repealed and replaced N-71-20, Paragraph 19, which extended N-52-20, Paragraph 1, and N-69-20, Paragraph 3); c. Paragraph 6 (which repealed and replaced N-71-20, Paragraph 20, which extended N-52-20, Paragraph 2, and N-69-20, Paragraph 4); and d. Paragraph 7 (which repealed and replaced N-71-20, Paragraph 21, which extended N-52-20, Paragraph 3, and N-69-20, Paragraph 5). 34) Executive Order N-84-20: a. Paragraph 1; b. Paragraph 2; c. Paragraph 3; and d. Paragraph 5. The following provisions shall remain in place and shall have full force and effect through July 31, 2021, upon which time they will expire subject to individual conditions described in the enumerated paragraphs below. 35) Executive Order N-39-20, Paragraph 8 (as extended by N-69-20, Paragraph 2 and N-71-20, Paragraph 8). 36) Executive Order N-53-20, Paragraph 1 1 (as extended or modified by N-68- 20, Paragraph 15, and N-71-20, Paragraph 26). 37) Executive Order N-71-20, Paragraph 25. 38) Executive Order N-75-20: a. Paragraph 5; and b. Paragraph 6 The following provisions shall remain in place and shall have full force and effect through September 30, 2021, upon which time they will expire subject to individual conditions described in the enumerated paragraphs below. 39) State of Emergency Proclamation dated March 4, 2020: a. Paragraph 3; and b. Paragraph 14. Any facility operating under a waiver pursuant to this provision may operate pursuant to such a waiver through the expiration as set forth by the Department of Social Services, or September 30, 2021, whichever occurs first. 40) Executive Order N-25-20: a. Paragraph 2; b. Paragraph 3; and c. Paragraph 4. 41) Executive Order N-28-20: a. Paragraph 4; and b. Paragraph 5. 42) Executive Order N-29-20, Paragraph 3, is withdrawn and replaced by the following text: Notwithstanding any other provision of state or local law (including, but not limited to, the Bagley -Keene Act or the Brown Act), and subject to the notice and accessibility requirements set forth below, a local legislative body or state body is authorized to hold public meetings via teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the local legislative body or state body. All requirements in both the Bagley -Keene Act and the Brown Act expressly or impliedly requiring the physical presence of members, the clerk or other personnel of the body, or of the public as a condition of participation in or quorum for a public meeting are hereby waived. In particular, any otherwise -applicable requirements that (i) state and local bodies notice each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting; (ii) each teleconference location be accessible to the public; (iii) members of the public may address the body at each teleconference conference location; (iv) state and local bodies post agendas at all teleconference locations; (v) at least one member of the state body be physically present at the location specified in the notice of the meeting; and (vi) during teleconference meetings, a least a quorum of the members of the local body participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local body exercises jurisdiction are hereby suspended. A local legislative body or state body that holds a meeting via teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, consistent with the notice and accessibility requirements set forth below, shall have satisfied any requirement that the body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. Such a body need not make available any physical location from which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. Accessibility Requirements: If a local legislative body or state body holds a meeting via teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, the body shall also: (i) Implement a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable modification or accommodation from individuals with disabilities, consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act and resolving any doubt whatsoever in favor of accessibility; and (ii) Advertise that procedure each time notice is given of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment, pursuant to subparagraph (ii) of the Notice Requirements below. Notice Requirements: Except to the extent this Order expressly provides otherwise, each local legislative body and state body shall: (i) Give advance notice of the time of, and post the agenda for, each public meeting according to the timeframes otherwise prescribed by the Bagley -Keene Act or the Brown Act, and using the means otherwise prescribed by the Bagley -Keene Act or the Brown Act, as applicable; and (ii) In each instance in which notice of the time of the meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, also give notice of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. As to any instance in which there is a change in such means of public observation and comment, or any instance prior to the issuance of this Order in which the time of the meeting has been noticed or the agenda for the meeting has been posted without also including notice of such means, a body may satisfy this requirement by advertising such means using "the most rapid means of communication available at the time" within the meaning of Government Code, section 54954, subdivision (e); this shall include, but need not be limited to, posting such means on the body's Internet website. All of the foregoing provisions concerning the conduct of public meetings shall apply through September 30, 2021. 43) Executive Order N-32-20: a. Paragraph 1; b. Paragraph 2; and c. Paragraph 3. 44) Executive Order N-35-20: a. Paragraph 2; and b. Paragraph 12. 45) Executive Order N-39-20: a. Paragraph 2; b. Paragraph 3; and c. Paragraph 6. �c - 46) Executive Order N-40-20: a. Paragraph 12 (as extended or modified by N-66-20, paragraph 16, N-71-20, paragraph 14, and N-75-20, Paragraph 12). To the extent the Director exercised their authority pursuant to this provision on or before September 30, 2021, the extension shall remain valid until the effective expiration of the applicable waiver; and b. Paragraph 18. 47) Executive Order N-42-20. 48) Executive Order N-43-20. 49) Executive Order N-49-20, Paragraph 2. 50) Executive Order N-54-20: a. Paragraph 8 (as extended by N-80-20, Paragraph 6); and b. Paragraph 9. To the extent any timeframe within which a California Native American tribe must request consultation and the lead agency must begin the consultation process relating to an Environmental Impact Report, Negative Declaration, or Mitigated Negative Declaration under the California Environmental Quality Act extends beyond September 30, 2021, the tribe and lead agency will receive the benefit of the extension so long as the triggering event occurred on or before September 30, 2021. 51) Executive Order N-55-20: a. Paragraph 2; b. Paragraph 3; c. Paragraph 7. All on-site licensing visits which would have been due on or before September 30, 2021 shall occur before December 31, 2021; d. Paragraph 11; and e. Paragraph 12. 52) Executive Order N-56-20, Paragraph 10 is withdrawn and superseded by the following text: Paragraph 42 of this Order, including the conditions specified therein, shall apply to meetings held pursuant to Article 3 of Chapter 2 of Part 21 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Education Code and Education Code section 47604.1(b) . 53) Executive Order N-58-20 (as extended by N-71-20, Paragraph 29). 54) Executive Order N-59-20: a. Paragraph 1. The sworn statement or verbal attestation of pregnancy must be submitted on or before September 30, 2021 and medical verification of pregnancy must be submitted within 30 working days following submittal of the sworn statement or verbal attestation for benefits to continue; b. Paragraph 2 (as extended and modified by N-69-20, Paragraph 14, and N-71-20, Paragraph 31); c. Paragraph 3 (as extended and modified by N-69-20, Paragraph 15, and N-71-20, Paragraph 32); and d. Paragraph 4 (as extended and modified by N-69-20, Paragraph 16, and N-71-20, Paragraph 33). 55) Executive Order N-63-20: a. Paragraph 8(b). To the extent filing deadlines for claims and liens fall on or before September 30, 2021, absent the extension in the aforementioned order, they shall remain subject to the extended timeframe; and b. Paragraph 11. 56) Executive Order N-66-20, Paragraph 6. 57) Executive Order N-71-20: a. Paragraph 15; b. Paragraph 22; and c. Paragraph 23. 58) Executive Order N-75-20: a. Paragraph 1; b. Paragraph 2; and c. Paragraph 4. 59) Executive Order N-80-20: a. Paragraph 3; and b. Paragraph 7. 60) Executive Order N-83-20 a. Paragraph 2 is withdrawn and replaced by the following text: The deadline to pay annual fees, including any installment payments, currently due or that will become due during the proclaimed emergency, as specified in Business and Professions Code sections 19942, 19951, 19954, 19955, 19984, and any accompanying regulations is September 30, 2021; the deadlines for submission of any application or deposit fee, as specified in Business and Professions Code sections 19951 (a), 19867, 19868, 19876, 19877, 19942, 19984, and any accompanying regulations is no later than September 30, 2021, or per existing requirements, whichever date is later. b. Paragraph 4. 61) Executive Order N-03-21, Paragraph 3, is withdrawn and replaced by the following text: As applied to commercial evictions only, the timeframe for the protections set forth in Paragraph 2 of Executive Order N-28-20 (and extended by Paragraph 21 of Executive Order N-66-20, Paragraph 3 of Executive Order N-71-20, and Paragraph 2 of Executive Order N-80-20) is extended through September 30, 2021. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, as soon as hereafter possible, this Order be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State and that widespread publicity and notice be given of this Order. This Order is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity, against the State of California, its agencies, departments, entities, officers, employees, or any other person. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Great Seal of the State of California to be affixed this 11 th day of June 2021. 4AX" GAVIN NEWSOM Governor of California ATTEST: SHIRLEY N. WEBER, PH.D. Secretary of State 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. (2021-2022) SHARE THIS: In � Date Published: 09/17/2021 09:00 PM Assembly Bill No. 361 CHAPTER 165 An act to add and repeal Section 89305.6 of the Education Code, and to amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of, and to add and repeal Section 11133 of, the Government Code, relating to open meetings, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately. Approved by Governor September 16, 2021. Filed with Secretary of State September 16, 2021. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 361, Robert Rivas. Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. (1) Existing law, the Ralph M. Brown Act requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a legislative body of a local agency, as those terms are defined, be open and public and that all persons be permitted to attend and participate. The act contains specified provisions regarding the timelines for posting an agenda and providing for the ability of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public. The act generally requires all regular and special meetings of the legislative body be held within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, subject to certain exceptions. The act allows for meetings to occur via teleconferencing subject to certain requirements, particularly that the legislative body notice each teleconference location of each member that will be participating in the public meeting, that each teleconference location be accessible to the public, that members of the public be allowed to address the legislative body at each teleconference location, that the legislative body post an agenda at each teleconference location, and that at least a quorum of the legislative body participate from locations within the boundaries of the local agency's jurisdiction. The act provides an exemption to the jurisdictional requirement for health authorities, as defined. The act authorizes the district attorney or any interested person, subject to certain provisions, to commence an action by mandamus or injunction for the purpose of obtaining a judicial determination that specified actions taken by a legislative body are null and void. Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, authorizes the Governor, or the Director of Emergency Services when the governor is inaccessible, to proclaim a state of emergency under specified circumstances. Executive Order No. N-29-20 suspends the Ralph M. Brown Act's requirements for teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic provided that notice and accessibility requirements are met, the public members are allowed to observe and address the legislative body at the meeting, and that a legislative body of a local agency has a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities, as specified. This bill, until January 1, 2024, would authorize a local agency to use teleconferencing without complying with the teleconferencing requirements imposed by the Ralph M. Brown Act when a legislative body of a local agency holds a meeting during a declared state of emergency, as that term is defined, when state or local health officials https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 1/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, during a proclaimed state of emergency held for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, and during a proclaimed state of emergency when the legislative body has determined that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, as provided. This bill would require legislative bodies that hold teleconferenced meetings under these abbreviated teleconferencing procedures to give notice of the meeting and post agendas, as described, to allow members of the public to access the meeting and address the legislative body, to give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment, including an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option, and to conduct the meeting in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body. The bill would require the legislative body to take no further action on agenda items when there is a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency's control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments, until public access is restored. The bill would specify that actions taken during the disruption are subject to challenge proceedings, as specified. This bill would prohibit the legislative body from requiring public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and would specify that the legislative body must provide an opportunity for the public to address the legislative body and offer comment in real time. The bill would prohibit the legislative body from closing the public comment period and the opportunity to register to provide public comment, until the public comment period has elapsed or until a reasonable amount of time has elapsed, as specified. When there is a continuing state of emergency, or when state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, the bill would require a legislative body to make specified findings not later than 30 days after the first teleconferenced meeting pursuant to these provisions, and to make those findings every 30 days thereafter, in order to continue to meet under these abbreviated teleconferencing procedures. Existing law prohibits a legislative body from requiring, as a condition to attend a meeting, a person to register the person's name, or to provide other information, or to fulfill any condition precedent to the person's attendance. This bill would exclude from that prohibition, a registration requirement imposed by a third -party internet website or other online platform not under the control of the legislative body. (2) Existing law, the Bagley -Keene Open Meeting Act, requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a state body be open and public and all persons be permitted to attend any meeting of a state body. The act requires at least one member of the state body to be physically present at the location specified in the notice of the meeting. The Governor's Executive Order No. N-29-20 suspends the requirements of the Bagley -Keene Open Meeting Act for teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic, provided that notice and accessibility requirements are met, the public members are allowed to observe and address the state body at the meeting, and that a state body has a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities, as specified. This bill, until January 31, 2022, would authorize, subject to specified notice and accessibility requirements, a state body to hold public meetings through teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the state body. With respect to a state body holding a public meeting pursuant to these provisions, the bill would suspend certain requirements of existing law, including the requirements that each teleconference location be accessible to the public and that members of the public be able to address the state body at each teleconference location. Under the bill, a state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically would satisfy any requirement that the state body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. The bill would require that each state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing provide notice of the meeting, and post the agenda, as provided. The bill would urge state bodies utilizing these teleconferencing procedures in the bill to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to existing law, as provided. (3) Existing law establishes the various campuses of the California State University under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and authorizes the establishment of student body organizations in https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 2/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. connection with the operations of California State University campuses. The Gloria Romero Open Meetings Act of 2000 generally requires a legislative body, as defined, of a student body organization to conduct its business in a meeting that is open and public. The act authorizes the legislative body to use teleconferencing, as defined, for the benefit of the public and the legislative body in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. This bill, until January 31, 2022, would authorize, subject to specified notice and accessibility requirements, a legislative body, as defined for purposes of the act, to hold public meetings through teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the legislative body. With respect to a legislative body holding a public meeting pursuant to these provisions, the bill would suspend certain requirements of existing law, including the requirements that each teleconference location be accessible to the public and that members of the public be able to address the legislative body at each teleconference location. Under the bill, a legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically would satisfy any requirement that the legislative body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. The bill would require that each legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing provide notice of the meeting, and post the agenda, as provided. The bill would urge legislative bodies utilizing these teleconferencing procedures in the bill to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to existing law, as provided. (4) This bill would declare the Legislature's intent, consistent with the Governor's Executive Order No. N-29-20, to improve and enhance public access to state and local agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future emergencies by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 54953 of the Government Code proposed by AB 339 to be operative only if this bill and AB 339 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (7) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (8) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. Vote: 2/3 Appropriation: no Fiscal Committee: yes Local Program: no THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 89305.6 is added to the Education Code, to read: 89305.6. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, and subject to the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), a legislative body may hold public meetings through teleconferencing and make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the legislative body. (b) (1) For a legislative body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all requirements in this article requiring the physical presence of members, the clerk or other personnel of the legislative body, or the public, as a condition of participation in or quorum for a public meeting, are hereby suspended. (2) For a legislative body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all of the following requirements in this article are suspended: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 3/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. (A) Each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting or proceeding be identified in the notice and agenda of the public meeting or proceeding. (B) Each teleconference location be accessible to the public. (C) Members of the public may address the legislative body at each teleconference conference location. (D) Post agendas at all teleconference locations. (E) At least one member of the legislative body be physically present at the location specified in the notice of the meeting. (c) A legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, consistent with the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), shall have satisfied any requirement that the legislative body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. A legislative body need not make available any physical location from which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. (d) If a legislative body holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, the legislative body shall also do both of the following: (1) Implement a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable modification or accommodation from individuals with disabilities, consistent with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.), and resolving any doubt whatsoever in favor of accessibility. (2) Advertise that procedure each time notice is given of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (e). (e) Except to the extent this section provides otherwise, each legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section shall do both of the following: (1) Give advance notice of the time of, and post the agenda for, each public meeting according to the timeframes otherwise prescribed by this article, and using the means otherwise prescribed by this article, as applicable. (2) In each instance in which notice of the time of the meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, also give notice of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. As to any instance in which there is a change in the means of public observation and comment, or any instance prior to the effective date of this section in which the time of the meeting has been noticed or the agenda for the meeting has been posted without also including notice of the means of public observation and comment, a legislative body may satisfy this requirement by advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time. Advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time shall include, but need not be limited to, posting such means on the legislative body's internet website. (f) All legislative bodies utilizing the teleconferencing procedures in this section are urged to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to the otherwise applicable provisions of this article, in order to maximize transparency and provide the public access to legislative body meetings. (g) This section shall remain in effect only until January 31, 2022, and as of that date is repealed. SEC. 2. Section 11133 is added to the Government Code, to read: 11133. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, and subject to the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), a state body may hold public meetings through teleconferencing and make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the state body. (b) (1) For a state body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all requirements in this article requiring the physical presence of members, the clerk or other personnel of the state body, or the public, as a condition of participation in or quorum for a public meeting, are hereby suspended. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 4/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. (2) For a state body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all of the following requirements in this article are suspended: (A) Each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting or proceeding be identified in the notice and agenda of the public meeting or proceeding. (B) Each teleconference location be accessible to the public. (C) Members of the public may address the state body at each teleconference conference location. (D) Post agendas at all teleconference locations. (E) At least one member of the state body be physically present at the location specified in the notice of the meeting. (c) A state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, consistent with the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), shall have satisfied any requirement that the state body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. A state body need not make available any physical location from which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. (d) If a state body holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, the state body shall also do both of the following: (1) Implement a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable modification or accommodation from individuals with disabilities, consistent with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.), and resolving any doubt whatsoever in favor of accessibility. (2) Advertise that procedure each time notice is given of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (e). (e) Except to the extent this section provides otherwise, each state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section shall do both of the following: (1) Give advance notice of the time of, and post the agenda for, each public meeting according to the timeframes otherwise prescribed by this article, and using the means otherwise prescribed by this article, as applicable. (2) In each instance in which notice of the time of the meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, also give notice of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. As to any instance in which there is a change in the means of public observation and comment, or any instance prior to the effective date of this section in which the time of the meeting has been noticed or the agenda for the meeting has been posted without also including notice of the means of public observation and comment, a state body may satisfy this requirement by advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time. Advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time shall include, but need not be limited to, posting such means on the state body's internet website. (f) All state bodies utilizing the teleconferencing procedures in this section are urged to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to the otherwise applicable provisions of this article, in order to maximize transparency and provide the public access to state body meetings. (g) This section shall remain in effect only until January 31, 2022, and as of that date is repealed. SEC. 3. Section 54953 of the Government Code is amended to read: 54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter. (b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 5/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. otherwise applicable requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding. (2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall. (3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivisions (d) and (e). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location. (4) For the purposes of this section, "teleconference" means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both. Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agency from providing the public with additional teleconference locations. (c) (1) No legislative body shall take action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final. (2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action. (3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be taken. This paragraph shall not affect the public's right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation. (d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that would establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory over which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if any, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdivision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section. (3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county -sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter 2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members. (e) (1) A local agency may use teleconferencing without complying with the requirements of paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) if the legislative body complies with the requirements of paragraph (2) of this subdivision in any of the following circumstances: (A) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency, and state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing. (B) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 6/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. (C) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and has determined, by majority vote, pursuant to subparagraph (B), that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees. (2) A legislative body that holds a meeting pursuant to this subdivision shall do all of the following: (A) The legislative body shall give notice of the meeting and post agendas as otherwise required by this chapter. (B) The legislative body shall allow members of the public to access the meeting and the agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3. In each instance in which notice of the time of the teleconferenced meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, the legislative body shall also give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment. The agenda shall identify and include an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option. This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment. (C) The legislative body shall conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. (D) In the event of a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting to members of the public using the call-in option or internet-based service option, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency's control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments using the call-in option or internet-based service option, the body shall take no further action on items appearing on the meeting agenda until public access to the meeting via the call-in option or internet-based service option is restored. Actions taken on agenda items during a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting may be challenged pursuant to Section 54960.1. (E) The legislative body shall not require public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and must provide an opportunity for the public to address the legislative body and offer comment in real time. This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment. (F) Notwithstanding Section 54953.3, an individual desiring to provide public comment through the use of an internet website, or other online platform, not under the control of the local legislative body, that requires registration to log in to a teleconference may be required to register as required by the third -party internet website or online platform to participate. (G) (i) A legislative body that provides a timed public comment period for each agenda item shall not close the public comment period for the agenda item, or the opportunity to register, pursuant to subparagraph (F), to provide public comment until that timed public comment period has elapsed. (ii) A legislative body that does not provide a timed public comment period, but takes public comment separately on each agenda item, shall allow a reasonable amount of time per agenda item to allow public members the opportunity to provide public comment, including time for members of the public to register pursuant to subparagraph (F), or otherwise be recognized for the purpose of providing public comment. (iii) A legislative body that provides a timed general public comment period that does not correspond to a specific agenda item shall not close the public comment period or the opportunity to register, pursuant to subparagraph (F), until the timed general public comment period has elapsed. (3) If a state of emergency remains active, or state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, in order to continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the legislative body shall, not later than 30 days after teleconferencing for the first time pursuant to subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1), and every 30 days thereafter, make the following findings by majority vote: (A) The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency. (B) Any of the following circumstances exist: (i) The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person. (ii) State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 7/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. (4) For the purposes of this subdivision, "state of emergency" means a state of emergency proclaimed pursuant to Section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act (Article 1 (commencing with Section 8550) of Chapter 7 of Division 1 of Title 2). (f) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed. SEC. 3.1. Section 54953 of the Government Code is amended to read: 54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency in person, except as otherwise provided in this chapter. Local agencies shall conduct meetings subject to this chapter consistent with applicable state and federal civil rights laws, including, but not limited to, any applicable language access and other nondiscrimination obligations. (b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all otherwise applicable requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding. (2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall. (3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivisions (d) and (e). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location. (4) For the purposes of this section, "teleconference" means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both. Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agency from providing the public with additional teleconference locations. (c) (1) No legislative body shall take action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final. (2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action. (3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be taken. This paragraph shall not affect the public's right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation. (d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that would establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory over which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if any, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdivision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 8/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. https:// (3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county -sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter 2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members. (e) (1) A local agency may use teleconferencing without complying with the requirements of paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) if the legislative body complies with the requirements of paragraph (2) of this subdivision in any of the following circumstances: (A) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency, and state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing. (B) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees. (C) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and has determined, by majority vote, pursuant to subparagraph (B), that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees. (2) A legislative body that holds a meeting pursuant to this subdivision shall do all of the following: (A) The legislative body shall give notice of the meeting and post agendas as otherwise required by this chapter. (B) The legislative body shall allow members of the public to access the meeting and the agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3. In each instance in which notice of the time of the teleconferenced meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, the legislative body shall also give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment. The agenda shall identify and include an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option. This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment. (C) The legislative body shall conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. (D) In the event of a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting to members of the public using the call-in option or internet-based service option, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency's control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments using the call-in option or internet-based service option, the body shall take no further action on items appearing on the meeting agenda until public access to the meeting via the call-in option or internet-based service option is restored. Actions taken on agenda items during a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting may be challenged pursuant to Section 54960.1. (E) The legislative body shall not require public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and must provide an opportunity for the public to address the legislative body and offer comment in real time. This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment. (F) Notwithstanding Section 54953.3, an individual desiring to provide public comment through the use of an internet website, or other online platform, not under the control of the local legislative body, that requires registration to log in to a teleconference may be required to register as required by the third -party internet website or online platform to participate. (G) (i) A legislative body that provides a timed public comment period for each agenda item shall not close the public comment period for the agenda item, or the opportunity to register, pursuant to subparagraph (F), to provide public comment until that timed public comment period has elapsed. (ii) A legislative body that does not provide a timed public comment period, but takes public comment separately on each agenda item, shall allow a reasonable amount of time per agenda item to allow public members the opportunity to provide public comment, including time for members of the public to register pursuant to subparagraph (F), or otherwise be recognized for the purpose of providing public comment. eginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 9/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. (iii) A legislative body that provides a timed general public comment period that does not correspond to a specific agenda item shall not close the public comment period or the opportunity to register, pursuant to subparagraph (F), until the timed general public comment period has elapsed. (3) If a state of emergency remains active, or state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, in order to continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the legislative body shall, not later than 30 days after teleconferencing for the first time pursuant to subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1), and every 30 days thereafter, make the following findings by majority vote: (A) The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency. (B) Any of the following circumstances exist: (i) The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person. (ii) State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing. (4) For the purposes of this subdivision, "state of emergency" means a state of emergency proclaimed pursuant to Section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act (Article 1 (commencing with Section 8550) of Chapter 7 of Division 1 of Title 2). (f) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed. SEC. 4. Section 54953 is added to the Government Code, to read: 54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter. (b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding. (2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall. (3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivision (d). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location. (4) For the purposes of this section, "teleconference" means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both. Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agency from providing the public with additional teleconference locations (c) (1) No legislative body shall take action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final. (2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action. (3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be taken. This paragraph shall not affect the public's right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 10/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation. (d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that would establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory over which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if any, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdivision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section. (3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county -sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter 2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members. (e) This section shall become operative January 1, 2024. SEC. 4.1. Section 54953 is added to the Government Code, to read: 54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency, in person except as otherwise provided in this chapter. Local agencies shall conduct meetings subject to this chapter consistent with applicable state and federal civil rights laws, including, but not limited to, any applicable language access and other nondiscrimination obligations. (b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding. (2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall. (3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivision (d). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location. (4) For the purposes of this section, "teleconference" means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both. Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agency from providing the public with additional teleconference locations. (c) (1) No legislative body shall take action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final. (2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 11/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. (3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be taken. This paragraph shall not affect the public's right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation. (d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that would establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory over which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if any, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdivision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section. (3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county -sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter 2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members. (e) This section shall become operative January 1, 2024. SEC. 5. Sections 3.1 and 4.1 of this bill incorporate amendments to Section 54953 of the Government Code proposed by both this bill and Assembly Bill 339. Those sections of this bill shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2022, but this bill becomes operative first, (2) each bill amends Section 54953 of the Government Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Assembly Bill 339, in which case Section 54953 of the Government Code, as amended by Sections 3 and 4 of this bill, shall remain operative only until the operative date of Assembly Bill 339, at which time Sections 3.1 and 4.1 of this bill shall become operative. SEC. 6. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to improve and enhance public access to state and local agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future applicable emergencies, by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options consistent with the Governor's Executive Order No. N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020, permitting expanded use of teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic. SEC. 7. The Legislature finds and declares that Sections 3 and 4 of this act, which amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of the Government Code, further, within the meaning of paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, the purposes of that constitutional section as it relates to the right of public access to the meetings of local public bodies or the writings of local public officials and local agencies. Pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, the Legislature makes the following findings: This act is necessary to ensure minimum standards for public participation and notice requirements allowing for greater public participation in teleconference meetings during applicable emergencies. SEC. 8. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that during the COVID-19 public health emergency, certain requirements of the Bagley -Keene Open Meeting Act (Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code) were suspended by Executive Order N-29-20. Audio and video teleconference were widely used to conduct public meetings in lieu of physical location meetings, and public meetings conducted by teleconference during the COVID-19 public health emergency have been productive, have increased public participation by all members of the public regardless of their location in the state and ability to travel to physical meeting locations, have protected the health and safety of civil servants and the public, and have reduced travel costs incurred by members of state bodies and reduced work hours spent traveling to and from meetings. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 12/13 11/23/21, 2:53 PM Bill Text -AB -361 Open meetings: state and local agencies: teleconferences. (b) The Legislature finds and declares that Section 1 of this act, which adds and repeals Section 89305.6 of the Education Code, Section 2 of this act, which adds and repeals Section 11133 of the Government Code, and Sections 3 and 4 of this act, which amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of the Government Code, all increase and potentially limit the public's right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest: (1) By removing the requirement that public meetings be conducted at a primary physical location with a quorum of members present, this act protects the health and safety of civil servants and the public and does not preference the experience of members of the public who might be able to attend a meeting in a physical location over members of the public who cannot travel or attend that meeting in a physical location. (2) By removing the requirement for agendas to be placed at the location of each public official participating in a public meeting remotely, including from the member's private home or hotel room, this act protects the personal, private information of public officials and their families while preserving the public's right to access information concerning the conduct of the people's business. SEC. 9. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall go into immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are: In order to ensure that state and local agencies can continue holding public meetings while providing essential services like water, power, and fire protection to their constituents during public health, wildfire, or other states of emergencies, it is necessary that this act take effect immediately. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB361 13/13 BUR— IN�AAGENDA NO: 8h STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: December 20, 2021 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: December 20, 2021 From: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk — (650) 558-7203 Subject: Adoption of the 2022 City Council Calendar RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council review, make changes if necessary, and approve the Burlingame City Council Calendar for 2022. The calendar reflects the cancellation of the July 18 and August 1 City Council meetings. BACKGROUND In 2015, the Council agreed to cancel the second meeting in July and the first meeting in August to give Councilmembers a longer break between meetings. Exhibit: • 2022 Council Calendar 1 9URLINGAME 2022 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL CALENDAR City Council meetings are held on the first and third Monday of each month. When Monday is a holiday, the meeting is usually held on Tuesday or Wednesday. Study meetings are held as scheduled. Meetings begin at 7:00 p.m. Meetings are live online on the City's website at www.burlinggme.ore. For more information, please view the City's website or call the City Clerk at 650-558-7203. REGULAR MEETINGS Monday, January 3 Tuesday, July 5 Tuesday, January 18 Monday, July 18 (canceled) Monday, February 7 Monday, August 1 (canceled) Tuesday, February 22 Monday, August 15 Monday, March 7 Tuesday, September 6 Monday, March 21 Monday, September 19 Monday, April 4 Monday, October 3 Monday, April 18 Monday, October 17 Monday, May 2 Monday, November 7 Monday, May 16 Monday, November 21 Monday, June 6 Monday, December 5 Monday, June 20 Monday, December 19 Saturday, January 29 Friday March 11 Wednesday, March 16 Saturday, April 23 Wednesday, May 11 Wednesday, May 25 Wednesday, December 7 12/16/2021 10:45 AM STUDY MEETINGS AND OTHER DATES 2022/23 Goals Session, 9:00 a.m. Commissioners Dinner (tentative) 2021-22 Mid -Year Budget Session, 6:30 p.m. Joint Council and Planning Commission, Meeting 9:00 a.m. 2022-23 Budget Study Session, 6:30 p.m. City Attorney's Annual Performance Evaluation, 6:00 p.m. City Manager's Annual Performance Evaluation, 6:00 p.m. To: Date: From: Subject STAFF REPORT Honorable Mayor and City Council December 20, 2021 AGENDA NO: 8i MEETING DATE: December 20, 2021 Helen Yu -Scott, Finance Director — (650) 558-7222 Acceptance of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2021 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council accept the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year 2020-21. BACKGROUND Following the close of each fiscal year, the City's external auditors conduct an audit of the City's financial records and assist in the compilation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The paramount objective of general purpose external financial reporting is accountability. The goal of a financial statement audit is to provide users with a reasonable assurance from an independent source that the information presented in the statements is reliable. DISCUSSION The 2020-21 fiscal year audit is the sixth annual audit performed by Maze & Associates as the City's external auditors. The firm conducts its audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. The standards require that the auditors plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. On a sample basis, they examine evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall basic financial statement presentation. The auditor's unmodified ("clean") opinion is presented as the first item in the financial section of the CAFR (page 1). In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, the auditors also issue a report of recommendations to City management identifying any areas for improvement in the City's internal control over financial reporting. The City's Audit Committee, currently comprised of Vice Mayor Ricardo Ortiz and Councilmember Donna Colson, met with staff and the auditors on December 10th to discuss the audit reports, results, and recommendations. 1 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2020-21 December 20, 2021 The City participates in the CAFR award program administered by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA), and has been successful in obtaining the award each fiscal year beginning in 1989-90. Staff intends to submit the City's FY 2020-21 CAFR to the GFOA program and is confident that the report will again merit the GFOA Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. Upon the full Council's acceptance, the FY 2020-21 CAFR will be posted to the City's website (Finance Department web page). ANALYSIS City-wide Financial Results: The actual results of the City's financial activities are presented in the attached Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. The report includes Government -wide financial statements with governmental activities and business -type activities presented separately. The business -type activities consist of self-supporting functions (primarily comprised of the City's Water and Wastewater utility operations). The overall financial standing of the City remains relatively healthy despite the difficult economic circumstances resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. The government -wide financial statements, which provide a broad overview of the City's finances, indicate that the City's net position increased over $9.5 million (nearly 3.1 percent) during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. Of this increase, $3.0 million were governmental, and $6.5 million were business -type, resulting from a net increase in assets over liabilities. The City's total revenues decreased $14.0 million over the prior year, and total expenses increased $2.2 million. Governmental revenues were down significantly, with a $13.1 million decrease in general revenues, mainly from General Fund transient occupancy taxes (TOT), offset by a $3.1 million increase in program revenues. Although most departmental charges for services remained strong, the additional $2.4 million in public benefits payments reported in the prior fiscal year related to large development projects did not reoccur. The fees for recreational activities were curtailed by shelter -in-place orders aimed at controlling the spread of the COVID-19 virus at the beginning of the fiscal year. Combined with an increase in operating and capital grants (about $5.2 million), program revenues improved compared to the prior fiscal year. General Fund: The General Fund experienced a surplus for the year, as revenues exceeded expenditures and net transfers by $0.3 million. Because the revenue budgets had been adjusted downward to reflect the anticipated impact of the pandemic, most revenue categories reported slightly positive variances for the year. The largest positive revenue budget variance was reported for Investment Income — an approximately $1.3 million variance. General Fund investment income for the year (nearly $2.8 million) reflects a year-end "mark -to -market" of the City's investment portfolio of $2.1 million. Because this adjustment reflects unrealized gains and losses within the portfolio that will not materialize (the City typically holds investments to maturity), it is not included in the investment income budget. Excluding investment earnings, revenues were 1.8 percent higher than budgeted. The City's TOT had been the highest General Fund revenue source for many years. But the City's 12 hotels suffered greatly from the COVID-19 outbreak and the restrictions on international and domestic travel and tourism. A $1.8 million negative variance was experienced for the fiscal year, and TOT revenues fell from the prior year's results of $20.4 million to a sobering $5.7 million. Sales 2 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2020-21 December 20, 2021 tax revenues came in $1.1 million higher than the adjusted budget of $14.6 million. Property tax revenues continued to reflect solid property values: at $24.2 million, these revenues were up $0.9 million from the prior year, an approximate 3.9 percent increase. In all, actual General Fund revenues came in approximately 3.9 percent higher than the adjusted budget, but $10.0 million (13.9 percent) lower than experienced in the prior fiscal year. Proprietary Funds Proprietary Funds are used to account for activities that are fueled by charges for the services provided by each fund. Enterprise Funds account for external activities (largely utilities), while Internal Service Funds (ISFs) account for internal (interdepartmental) activities. The Water and Sewer Funds account for the City's main enterprise activities. The funds are self- supporting: the sale of water and provision of wastewater services to customers generates the revenue needed to support these utilities' operations and capital needs. Both utilities experienced an increase in net position in fiscal year 2020-21: a $4.6 million increase for the Water Fund and $0.7 million for the Sewer Fund. However, these increases largely represented growth in each fund's net investment in capital assets. Additional explanatory information is provided in the Management's Discussion and Analysis (referred to as MD&A) section beginning on page five of the attached CAFR. The MD&A provides readers an objective and easily readable analysis of the City's financial performance for the year. The impact of the 2020-21 fiscal year results for the City's General Fund on the current year budget continues to be analyzed in conjunction with a monthly budget -to -actual review. A comprehensive review of all of the City's funds, an update on the status of major projects and priorities, and an update of economic conditions will be presented to the Council with the mid -year report and budget adjustments in March. At that time, the revised long-term financial forecast will also be provided. FISCAL IMPACT Acceptance of the City's CAFR has no direct impact on City resources. However, obtaining an unmodified opinion from the auditor is an important independent verification and validation of the City's financial management practices and a prerequisite to receive the GFOA award. An award- winning CAFR contributes to the City's excellent bond rating. Exhibit: • City of Burlingame Fiscal Year 2020-21 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 3 I 'PPORATED Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 City of Burlingame, California COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2021 Prepared by City of Burlingame Finance Department CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 INTRODUCTORY SECTION Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT JUNE 30, 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTORY SECTION Letterof Transmittal.......................................................................................................................... i Certificate of Achievement— Government Finance Officers Association .......................................... viii Elected and Appointed Officials......................................................................................................... ix City of Burlingame Organizational Chart........................................................................................... x City of Organization by Critical Service Area............................................................................................. xi City of Burlingame Finance Department Organization Chart............................................................ xii Organizational Compass.................................................................................................................... xiii FINANCIAL SECTION IndependentAuditor's Report.................................................................................................................. 1 Management's Discussion and Analysis................................................................................................... 5 Basic Financial Statements: Government -Wide Financial Statements: Statementof Net Position........................................................................................................... 27 Statementof Activities................................................................................................................ 28 Fund Financial Statements: Balance Sheet —Governmental Funds........................................................................................ 32 Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to the Statement of Net Position.............................................................................................. 33 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances —Governmental Funds.................................................................................. 34 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities ................................ 35 Statement of Net Position — Proprietary Funds......................................................................... 38 Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Position — Proprietary Funds..................................................................................... 40 Statement of Cash Flows — Proprietary Funds............................................................................ 42 Statement of Net Position — Fiduciary Funds.............................................................................. 46 Statement of Changes in Net Position Fiduciary Funds............................................................. 48 Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (The Notes to the Basic Financial Statements are an integral part of the basic financial statements)............................................................. 51 Required Supplementary Information: Cost -Sharing Multiple -Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plan Schedule of the City's Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability ......................................... 119 Cost -Sharing Multiple -Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plan Schedule of Contributions ............. 120 STATISTICAL SECTION NetPosition by Component....................................................................................................... 150 Changein Net Position............................................................................................................... 152 Fund Balance of Governmental Funds....................................................................................... 154 Changes in Fund Balance of Governmental Funds..................................................................... 156 Assessed Values of Taxable Property......................................................................................... 158 Net Taxable Assessed Value History........................................................................................... 160 Property Tax Rates — Direct and Overlapping Governments...................................................... 161 TopTen Property Taxpayers...................................................................................................... 162 Property Tax Levies and Collections........................................................................................... 163 Governmental Activities Tax Revenues by Source..................................................................... 164 Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type........................................................................................... 165 Ratios of General Bonded Debt Outstanding............................................................................. 166 Computation of Direct and Overlapping Debt............................................................................ 167 Legal Debt Margin Information.................................................................................................. 168 Pledged Revenue Coverage........................................................................................................ 169 Page FINANCIAL SECTION (continued) Required Supplementary Information (Continued): Agent Multiple Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plan Schedule of Changes in the Net Pension Liability and Related Ratios................................................................. 121 Agent Multiple Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plan Schedule of Contributions ......................... 122 Schedule of Changes in the Net OPEB Liability and Related Ratios ........................................... 123 Schedule of Changes in the Net OPEB Liability and Related Ratios Schedule of Contributions . 124 Modified Approach for the City's Infrastructure........................................................................ 125 Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance — Budget and Actual — GeneralFund............................................................................................................................ 129 Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance — Budget and Actual — Storm Drainage Special Revenue Fund..................................................................................... 130 Combining Financial Statements and Supplemental Information: Combining Balance Sheet — Nonmajor Governmental Funds .................................................... 134 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances — Nonmajor Governmental Funds................................................................ 136 Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual — Nonmajor Governmental Funds ............................................ 138 Combining Statement of Net Position — Internal Service Funds ................................................ 144 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position — Internal Service Funds................................................................................... 145 Combining Statement of Cash Flows — Internal Service Funds .................................................. 146 STATISTICAL SECTION NetPosition by Component....................................................................................................... 150 Changein Net Position............................................................................................................... 152 Fund Balance of Governmental Funds....................................................................................... 154 Changes in Fund Balance of Governmental Funds..................................................................... 156 Assessed Values of Taxable Property......................................................................................... 158 Net Taxable Assessed Value History........................................................................................... 160 Property Tax Rates — Direct and Overlapping Governments...................................................... 161 TopTen Property Taxpayers...................................................................................................... 162 Property Tax Levies and Collections........................................................................................... 163 Governmental Activities Tax Revenues by Source..................................................................... 164 Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type........................................................................................... 165 Ratios of General Bonded Debt Outstanding............................................................................. 166 Computation of Direct and Overlapping Debt............................................................................ 167 Legal Debt Margin Information.................................................................................................. 168 Pledged Revenue Coverage........................................................................................................ 169 Page STATISTICAL SECTION, Continued Demographic and Economic Statistics....................................................................................... 170 PrincipalEmployers.................................................................................................................... 171 Full -Time Equivalent City Government Employees by Function ................................................. 172 Operating Indicators by Function.. Capital Asset Statistics by Function 173 174 Independent Auditor's Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards ................................................ 175 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 CITrY O� IR 1�ll1 I11II ,� I 0 RpORATED � Burlingame Finance Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010-3997 650-558-7200 Fax: 650-342-8386 www.burlingame.org November 10, 2021 To the Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council, and residents of Burlingame: I am pleased to submit the City of Burlingame's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021. This financial report contains a complete set of audited financial statements prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) as promulgated by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). Responsibility for the accuracy of the data, and the completeness and fairness of the presentation, including all disclosures, rests with the City, and in particular, the Finance Department. Information contained in this report is based upon a comprehensive framework of internal controls that has been established for this purpose. The objective of internal controls is to provide reasonable assurance that the CAFR information is accurate in all material aspects. The Management's Discussion and Analysis section of the financial report provides information on the City's financial position and should be read in conjunction with the financial statements. As required by GAAP, the financial statements present the government and its component units that are considered to be fiscally interdependent. For financial reporting purposes, the City's basic financial statements include all funds, boards, commissions, and authorities that are controlled by or are dependent upon the Burlingame City Council. The California Government Code requires an annual audit of the basic financial statements of the City. The accounting firm Maze & Associates performed the audit for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021. The independent auditor's report on the general purpose financial statements is included in the financial section of this report and states that the City's basic financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the City as of June 30, 2021, and the results of its operations and the cash flows of its proprietary fund types for the year then ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. The independent audit of the financial statements of the City is part of a broader, federally mandated "Single Audit" designed to meet the special needs of Federal grantor agencies. The standards governing Single Audit engagements requires the independent auditor to report not only on the fair presentation of the financial statements, but also on the audited government's internal controls and compliance with legal requirements, with special emphasis related to and involving the administration of Federal Awards. These reports are available in the City's separately issued Single Audit Report. This transmittal letter is intended to provide an introductory profile of the City of Burlingame, its economy, and other information useful in assessing its overall financial condition, especially in consideration of the economic impact of the pandemic throughout the fiscal year. The transmittal letter is designed to complement the Management's Discussion & Analysis (MD&A) and should be read in conjunction with it. The MD&A, which can be found immediately following the independent auditor's report in the financial statement of the CAFR, provides a more comprehensive look at the City's financial results. Government Profile The City of Burlingame is a California general law City incorporated in 1908 that operates under the Council - Manager form of government. A five -member City Council is elected at large to four-year terms and serves as the board of directors. The City Council selects a Mayor and Vice Mayor from its members annually. A City Manager is appointed by the City Council and serves as the chief executive officer. The City Manager is responsible for all municipal functions. A City Attorney is appointed by the City Council to serve as chief legal advisor for the governing body and the administration. The City's municipal services include: police and fire protection, public works, community development, parks and recreation, library services, water, sewer, parking, solid waste, and storm drainage. General government activities include finance and information technology, human resources, legal services, and city administration. The City employs approximately 222 full-time employees. An executive team helps the City Manager lead the City organization. It includes eight department directors, the City Attorney, and the City Clerk. Burlingame is approximately six square miles in size and is located in San Mateo County, on the western shore of the San Francisco Bay approximately 10 miles south of San Francisco. According to the State Department of Finance, the estimated population for Burlingame was 29,746 on January 1, 2021. The population has remained fairly level, decreasing by 1.3% over the past five years for the first time. Budget Process The City adopts an annual budget for all funds. Major funds include the General, Capital Projects, Debt Service, Water, Sewer, Parking, Waste Management, Landfill, and Building Funds. Budgets are prepared on the same basis of accounting as the associated financial statements. The City's formal budget is employed as a management control device during the year, and it is adopted annually for all City funds, except for the fiduciary funds and certain special revenue funds where appropriate. Consistent with most governmental entities, the City's budget is based on a modified accrual basis of accounting under which revenues are recognized in the period they become available and measurable, and expenditures are recognized in the period the related liability is incurred. The City budget includes information regarding estimated costs (or outlays) and revenue (or cash inflows) for identified programs, projects, and levels of service to meet the needs of the City. All annual appropriations lapse at the end of the fiscal year except in the Capital Projects Fund, because capital improvement projects typically span more than one fiscal year. Appropriations for capital projects lapse when projects are completed, placed into service, accounted for as capital assets, or abandoned at the discretion of the City staff and/or City Council. Budget amendments that increase a fund's appropriations require majority approval by the City Council. Certain budgetary re -allocations within departments require approval by the Finance Director and department heads. Budget amendments between departments are approved by the Finance Director and City Manager. A mid -year budget status report and a long-term financial forecast for the next five years are presented to the City Council as part of an ongoing assessment and evaluation of budgetary performance, with special attention to the General Fund and certain other major funds. The City Council encourages all Burlingame residents and business community members to participate in the development of the City budget. The Council holds three public meetings to provide guidance on the budget: a goal -setting session in January, and budget study sessions in March and May. The City Council solicits input at each of the meetings. Community members may also submit their ideas directly to the City Council and/or City staff. Under these policy directives and guidance, departments prepare their budget requests in support of their programs for submission in early April. Expenditure assumptions are based on known factors such as collective bargaining agreements, current pay and benefit policies, consumer price indices, and other information available from expert third parties or governing authorities. The Finance Department reviews budget requests for technical compliance with City budget instructions. The Proposed Budget is prepared and delivered to the City Council in May. The City Council reviews the Proposed Budget before the final budget is formally adopted in June at a public hearing, which gives residents an additional opportunity to comment on the spending plan. Assessment of Economic Conditions The City's top three revenue streams (from property tax, sales taxes, and transient occupancy tax) constituted nearly 81.1% of the City's General Fund revenues in the City's prior fiscal year. However, many of these revenues are highly sensitive to economic conditions and reliant on the travel and leisure industry. Due to the coronavirus pandemic, governmental restrictions decimated passenger demand for air travel. The City's transient occupancy tax (TOT) revenues were hardest hit. In recognition of the vulnerability of the City's main revenue sources, and in preparation for the next inevitable economic downturn, Burlingame's General Fund Reserve Policy dictates that the City hold a high level of reserves. In addition, a sizeable Capital Investment Reserve has been accumulated from recent year operating surpluses. Coupled with the systematic pre -funding of its pension and retiree medical obligations, the City is in a strong financial position to weather this economic storm. Key indicators of the City's economic health are job growth, real estate values, travel activity, and retail sales volume. Travel -related activity has been greatly impacted by the pandemic, but assessed values of properties in Burlingame have remained solid. The following information is being provided to offer a flavor of the City's fiscal health as it stands at the time of this report. Employment Despite the pandemic, the unemployment rate in the San Francisco Bay Area remains one of the lowest in California, based upon recent Employment Development Department (EDD) data. The unemployment rate in the San Francisco/Redwood City/South San Francisco Metropolitan Division was 4.0% in September 2021, down from 5.3% in June 2021, but well above the pre -pandemic estimate of 2.0%. In comparison, California's unemployment rate stood at 7.5% in September, while it was 4.8 % nation-wide. Despite the ongoing pandemic, average salaries in the Bay Area are well above the California average and are expected to remain so in the near future. Real Estate & Property Taxes Property taxes, which are based on assessed value, are now the City's largest revenue source. Fiscal year 2020-21 property tax receipts were $24.2 million, up approximately 3.9% from the prior year, and accounted for 39.0% of the City's General Fund revenue. According to data obtained from the San Mateo County Assessor, the City has 8,727 parcels with a net total assessed value of nearly $13.1 billion—an increase of $1.3 billion, or 11.2%, since last year. Residential assessed values grew by 7.5%; commercial assessed values grew by 20.6%. The median price of homes sold in Burlingame during the third quarter of 2021 was approximately $2.8 million. The volume of homes on the market remained low (although 68 homes sold in the third quarter of 2021 as compared to 58 in 2020). County -wide, the median value of homes sold in the third quarter also increased – from over $1.7 million in 2020 to over $1.9 million in 2021. Although the rents have dropped throughout the region since the beginning of the pandemic, home sale values are projected to continue trending higher. The continued lack of inventory of for -sale homes on the market appears to be the primary driver of high housing costs. With lower-income residents getting priced out of the area, housing affordability is a priority issue for Burlingame and for the entire San Francisco Metropolitan area. Sales and Use Taxes Burlingame is a highly desirable residential community and upscale commercial location with attractive shopping districts. Burlingame borders Hillsborough, an affluent community that is 100% residential. Therefore, in many cases, Burlingame businesses have the opportunity to serve the commercial needs of Hillsborough residents and benefit from the additional disposable income from neighboring communities. Numerous national retailers are located in the Burlingame Avenue Business District, making the area competitive with regional shopping malls. In addition, the city is known for its upscale restaurants and businesses that attract patrons from throughout the entire San Francisco Bay Area. The City owns and manages most of the parking spaces located within the shopping districts and works with local merchants to maximize the shopping experience. Sales and use taxes accounted for 25.2% of General Fund revenue in fiscal year 2020-21. Sales and use tax revenues were $15.7 million, which is approximately 5.8% more than the prior year's receipts of $14.8 million. Note that these revenues include both the 1% local sales tax on taxable transactions and the City's Measure I receipts. Measure I, approved by the voters in November 2017 and effective in April 2018, enacted an additional % cent transaction tax to help fund street and sidewalk maintenance, enhance neighborhood police patrols and programs, and support the cost of maintaining recreation programs and facilities. iv Tourism and Business Travel Burlingame's 12 major hotels provide convenient overnight accommodations for business travelers, flight crew, and tourists using San Francisco International Airport (SFO), with a total of approximately 3,711 rooms available for rental. Hotel occupancy rates are indicative of growth (or lack thereof) in the economy. Transient occupancy tax (TOT) revenues have historically constituted Burlingame's largest General Fund revenue. At nearly $29.4 million, TOT accounted for approximately 34.8% of all General Fund revenues in fiscal year 2018-19, dropping to $20.4 million in fiscal year 2019-20. For fiscal year 2020-21, the total TOT revenue is about $5.7 million, which is 76.5% of the $7.5 million projected in the amended budget and 80.5% lower than the pre -pandemic level. Hotels in the Burlingame/Millbrae/SFO area are lagging behind in their recovery in comparison to San Mateo County overall due to the concentration of larger, full-service hotels focused on business meetings and conferences. The overall hotel occupancy for the area increased from 26.7% in June 2020 to 53.9% in June 2021, while the ADR (average daily rate) of area hotels is up approximately 8.6 percent from a year ago. Financial Information Accounting System, Budgetary Control & Fund Accounting: All governmental and fiduciary fund types use the modified accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recorded when measurable and available, rather than when received, and expenses are recorded when the liability is incurred, rather than when paid. Conversely, the accrual basis of accounting is used for proprietary funds. All governmental fund types are accounted for on a spending (or funds flow) measurement focus. Only current assets and current liabilities are generally included on the governmental fund balance sheets. Internal Controls: City management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal controls to ensure that City assets are protected from loss, theft, or misuse and to assure that adequate accounting data is compiled to allow for the preparation of financial statements that conform to generally accepted accounting principles. Internal controls are designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits to be derived, and that cost -benefit analysis requires prudent estimates and judgments by management. The Finance Department establishes internal accounting controls to provide management with reasonable assurance regarding the safeguarding of assets and the reliability of financial records for preparing financial statements and maintaining asset accountability. The City's finance staff and the independent auditor consider the internal controls over financial reporting in planning and performing the annual audit. The independent auditors test the City's internal controls and make inquiries into the staff's knowledge of fraud or the occurrence of fraud. Cash Management: The City pools cash from all operating sources to manage cash flow and invest idle funds. The Finance Director serves as the City's Treasurer and, utilizing the services of a third -party asset management advisor, oversees the investment of funds in accordance with the City Council -adopted Investment Policy and Government Code Sections 53601 and 56535. The Finance Director submits a quarterly investment report to the Council. The Council also reviews and approves the City's Investment Policy early in each fiscal year. v Risk Management: The City is a member of the Pooled Liability Assurance Network Joint Powers Authority (PLAN JPA), a joint powers insurance authority that consists of 28 member cities in the San Francisco Bay Area. The PLAN JPA was established to provide liability insurance, claims, risk management, and legal defense services to participating members. The program provides the City with liability coverage up to a maximum of $30 million, with the City maintaining a self-insured retention of $250,000. The City also maintains workers' compensation coverage to a maximum of $5 million, with a self-insured retention of $500,000 per claim. The City maintains reserves for all claims below its self-insured retention in separate Internal Service Funds and charges the costs of the program to operating departments. Accruals for current and expected claims have been included in the year-end results for the General Liability and Workers' Compensation Funds based on an actuarial study of current obligations. The City has implemented and is in compliance with Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 10, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Risk Financing and Related Insurance Issues. Debt Administration: The City has an AAA credit rating for its outstanding pension obligation bonds, and an AA+ on the City's outstanding lease revenue bonds and water and wastewater revenue refunding bonds. The rating on the City's storm drainage revenue bonds is AA. As of June 30, 2021, the City had 12 outstanding bonds or loans, including a taxable bond issue for pension obligations, two loans from the State of California Water Resources Control Board for improvements to the Burlingame Wastewater Treatment Plant, and a storm drain revenue bond issued under the Internal Revenue Service's Build America Bond program. The City annually evaluates each outstanding debt obligation that is subject to arbitrage rebate requirements and determined that there was no arbitrage rebate liability as of June 30, 2021. As of June 30, 2021, the City's general obligation debt limit was $491 million, which represents 3.75% of total assessed valuation based on assessments at 100% of full market value, in accordance with California Government Code Section 43605. With only the 2006 Pension Obligation Bonds ($7.0 million outstanding) considered to be general obligation debt, the City's legal debt margin was $484 million. Additional information pertaining to the City's outstanding long-term debt can be found under Long -Term Debt (Note 6) in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements and in the Statistical Section under Legal Debt Margin information. Certificate of Achievement The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City for its comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2020. The City has received the award for 19 consecutive years. To receive the award, a government must publish a readable and well organized annual financial report. The report must satisfy both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable legal requirements. The certificate is valid for one year. Staff believes that the City's current comprehensive annual financial report continues to meet the Certificate of Achievement Program's requirements. vi Acknowledgments The preparation of this report on a timely basis could not be accomplished in these unprecedented times without the dedicated service of the entire staff of the Finance Department. Each member of the team has our sincere appreciation for their contributions in furthering the fiscal year-end audit while maintaining excellent levels of financial service and accountability. Special thanks go to the City's Deputy Finance Director Karen Huang, who oversaw the compilation and review of the financial statements, and to Amy Bernardo, Senior Accountant, and Sabrina Lee, Accountant, who are also major contributors to this effort. The audit firm of Maze and Associates has also been very helpful in meeting the City's audit report requirements and financial reporting. The City Council's continued support in fiscal matters, especially in the maintenance of a long-term, sustainable financial vision, is essential and sincerely appreciated. The financial health of the City is a direct result of their vigilant fiduciary stewardship. Respectfully submitted, Lisa K. Goldman City Manager vii Helen Yu -Scott Finance Director & Treasurer Government Finance Officers Association Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Presented to City of Burlingame California For its Annual Comprehensive Financial Report For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2020 Executive Director/CEO M CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 Ann O'Brien Keighran, Mayor ....................................................November 2022 Ricardo Ortiz, Vice Mayor...........................................................November 2022 Michael Brownrigg.......................................................................November 2022 DonnaColson................................................................................November 2024 Emily Beach....................................................................................November 2024 CITY MANAGER Lisa K. Goldman DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS Community Development............................................................ Kevin Gardiner Finance Director and Treasurer .................................................... Helen Yu -Scott Central County Fire (JPA) Chief ........................................................ Bruce Barron Human Resources......................................................................... Sonya Morrison Library.......................................................................................... Bradley McCulley Parks and Recreation............................................................. Margaret Glomstad Police....................................................................................... Michael Matteucci Public Works.................................................................................... Syed Murtuza CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY Meaghan Hassel -Shearer ix Michael Guina ■ � 0 .§ ■ .§ E 0 U � U � 6. (D u u CD E � o u � u >1 @ E 0 � � _ A =z.Gm 2 u 12 x o , � 0 � § ■2r»/ ■]\p E Q gu dao%2=e S 2937 OLE°R �LUk\ ri-�/ LU @ / � } k ----------------- § x � 0 L -,&mgt\{ u9=«mwe±{r: ■gJ.p�e jcn /t)§irL CL � % � o , � 0 � § ■]\p 3/— �;&a\ ej 2937 OLE°R �LUk\ LU @ / � 0 L -,&mgt\{ u9=«mwe±{r: ■gJ.p�e jcn /t)§irL CL � % � � � § ■]\p �;&a\ 2937 OLE°R 3^¥ / ----------------- § � i:/�f/%2/\R k��f�7732§ E ZR¥JJ'e.u�~ o \ m � 0 L -,&mgt\{ u9=«mwe±{r: ■gJ.p�e jcn /t)§irL CL � % � CITY OF BURLINGAME I FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 General Government City Attorney In-house counsel, risk management, and code enforcement City Clerk Elections, City records, public noticing, and maintenance of municipal code City Manager Supervision of departments, implementation of City policy and strategy, management of City communications and sustainability programs Finance Revenue management, disbursements, budget and forecasting, payroll, financial reporting, treasury, purchasing, information technology, telecom and utility billing, business licenses, cashiering and front -desk customer service, and solid waste Human Resources Salary and benefits administration, employment, health and safety, employee training and wellness, and collective bargaining Public Works Engineering Administration of capital improvement program including major and minor repair and replacement of city infrastructure Water & Sewer Delivery of potable water, treatment and discharge of sanitary flows in accordance with environmental, health and safety guidelines Streets & Storm Drainage Street sweeping, transportation and regional shuttles, streetlights, and stormwater management and compliance Public Safety Police Community patrol, 911 communications and dispatch, crime prevention, special weapons and tactics (SWAT), K-9 Program, traffic safety, parking enforcement, and community outreach Central County Fire Department ([PA) Fire suppression and prevention, emergency medical services, and disaster preparedness for the City of Burlingame and the Town of Hillsborough; provision of service to the City of Millbrae via contract Leisure and Neighborhood Services Library City literacy advocacy, circulation of written and digital media, special programs, and community education for citizens, children, and teens Parks Operation and maintenance of urban forest, landscaping, City parks, and infrastructure Recreation Recreational, educational and after-school programs for pre-school children, youth, and seniors Community Development Building Plan checking, inspection, complaint response, development review and consultation, and building research and development Planning Public outreach, Climate Action Plan, land use, economic development, plan checks, and code and zoning enforcement xi § 2 0 � LU« u � « g z -j � C13 LL 0 � Q G \ 0 \ \ ) ! \ \ c \ \ ! _ 2 @ a 2 \ \ » CO ) § / } » { / 0 — _ < e ® _ _ 7 { ] ra co�{ 3 u k k � 8 � : � '- �j\ �)( 2\( <§ E § f a c g@ k- m � 7 E §S < 2g// 3r w m \ m /2 o @ ©) � � � \ \ cc \\ 0 u<< 3 \ { 0 < \ 0 \ \ ■ } \ \ a 0 { ■ © k / \ 0 — _ < e ® _ _ 7 { ] ra m / 3 u k � § -r— ° � 8 � : � '- § / \ o f �% o § f m- m 5 = k- m � 7 E E 9 < < � w m \ m En � # ©) / > 0ƒ \\ 2 < < / \ \ 0 }CL ■ k 0 \ \ ■ © k / \ e a J e a)2@\ cr ��_ k « \ 2 \ @ / x1l CITY OF BURLINGAME ORGANIZATIONAL COMPASS The City of Burlingame is an organization that exists to se e -and benefit the community. We deliver unsurpassed municipal services that enhance the quality of life for o citizens. As employees of the City of Burlingame, we recognize the leadership role we play in the community and we hold ourselves accountable to those we serve. We value the partnership that exists between the organization and community and strive to foster and maintain that relationship. As such, we are committed to the tenets of the Organizational Compass: COMMUNI XERVICE THAT IS RESPONSIVE TO AND MEETS THE NEEDS OF THE PU.,L ■ Being dedicated to the community we serve ■ Involving and understanding our community ■ Anticipating and adapting to the changing needs of our citizens AN ETHICAL ORGANIZATION THAT INTERACTS WITH THE PUBLIC AND EACH OTHER IN AN HONEST AND PROFESSIONAL MANNER BY: //� ■ Treating people with respect and dignity r ■ Taking responsibility for our decisions, statements and actions to the organization and community ■ Dealing with differences and conflicts in a professional, respectful and authentic fashion ONE ORGANIZATION THAT FOSTERS POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS AND TEAMWORK BY: ■ Being part of the solution ■ Creating and maintaining constructive relationships while respecting individual contributions ■ Focusing on the issues and needs of the organization and community m= , behavior that builds confidence and self-esteem ('J� ■ s img self -initiative, constant improvement and employee involvemei%tJ (� POSITIVE LEADERSHIP THAT IS NURTURING AND FORWARD -THINKING BY: ■ Recognizing the leadership role all employees play in the community ■ Encouraging innovation and creativity ■ Leading by example ■ Being supportive, humanistic and compassionate As City employees we embrace the Organizational Compass and will be guided by its points. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 FINANCIAL SECTION Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 IV M A�ZTE INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT To the Honorable Members of the City Council City of Burlingame, California Report on the Financial Statements We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business - type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Burlingame, California as of and for the year ended June 30, 2021, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements as listed in the Table of Contents. Management's Responsibility for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. Auditor's Responsibility Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor's judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the City's preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinions. Accountancy Corporation 3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 215 Pleasant Hili, GA 94523 1 T 925.930.0902 F 925.930.0135 E maze(Omazeassociates.com w mazeassociates.com Opinions In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business -type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Burlingame as of June 30, 2021, and the respective changes in financial position and, where applicable, cash flows thereof for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Changes of Accounting Principal Management adopted the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 84 — Fiduciary Activities (GASB 84), which became effective during the year ended June 30, 2021 and established the new fund type, Custodial Funds, and eliminated the fund type of Agency Funds, as discussed in Note 12E. Other Matters Required Supplementary Information Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that Management's Discussion and Analysis and other required supplementary information as listed in the Table of Contents be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management's responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Other Information Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements. The Introductory Section, Supplemental Information and Statistical Section listed in the Table of Contents are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not required parts of the basic financial statements. The Supplemental Information is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the Supplemental Information is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole. 2 The Introductory and Statistical Sections have not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on them. Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated November 10, 2021 on our consideration of the City's internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the City's internal control over financial reporting and compliance. Pleasant Hill, California November 10, 2021 3 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 This is Management's Discussion and Analysis of financial activities for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021. This information should be read together with the transmittal letter, financial statements, and notes to the basic financial statements to better understand the City of Burlingame's (the City) financial position. The City has prepared its annual financial report in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) and all Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) pronouncements that affect the City. Financial Highlights for Fiscal Year 2020-21 (ending June 30) Key financial highlights for the year are as follows: • In total, City assets and deferred outflows of resources exceeded liabilities and deferred inflows of resources by $315.2 million, which is a $9.5 million increase compared to the beginning net position. • Governmental fund balances decreased $23.0 million, to $149.0 million. Of this amount, approximately $12.0 million, or 8.1%, was unassigned fund balance and available for spending at the City's discretion. • The Enterprise Funds net position increased by $6.5 million to over $140.7 million. Of this amount, $41.9 million was unrestricted net position and available for use at the City's discretion. • General Fund revenues decreased by $10.0 million in fiscal year 2020-21, a decrease of 13.9% over the prior year's total of $72.2 million. The decrease in revenue was largely the result of the COVID- 19 pandemic, which drove transient occupancy (hotel) taxes down nearly $23.6 million (80.5%) from their pre -pandemic level. Property tax revenues remained strong, rising over $0.9 million (3.9%). • Under the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 84 (GASB 84), the activities of the formal agecy funds are now reported as custodial funds. Deferred Compensation —Retirees Fund was merged into the General Fund since it does not meet the Custodial Funds' criteria. As a result, the General Fund beginning fund balance was restated and increased by $65,709. The General Fund ending fund balance increased from the restated beginning fund balance of $44.9 million to $45.2 million. Of this amount, $17.4 million has been assigned — intended to be used for specific purposes. Overview of the Financial Statements This section introduces the reader to the City's three basic financial statements: 1) government -wide financial statements, 2) fund financial statements, and 3) notes to the basic financial statements. The report also contains supplemental information to help the reader develop a full understanding of the City's financial activities. k, CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 Government -Wide Statements The government -wide financial statements include the Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities. These statements provide a broad overview of the City's finances. They are presented in a manner that is similar to private -sector business. The Statement of Net Position presents complete information on the City's assets and deferred outflows of resources, as well as liabilities and deferred inflows of resources, with the difference reported as net position. Changes in net position that occur over time may serve as an indicator of the City's financial position. The Statement of Activities presents information showing how the City's net position changed during the most recent fiscal year. All changes in net position are reported using the "accrual basis of accounting." Changes are reported when the underlying event causing the changes occurs, regardless of the timing of the related cash flows. Therefore, revenues and expenses are reported in this statement for some items that will result in cash flows in future years, such as revenues related to uncollected taxes, or earned but unused employee leave. Both government -wide financial statements distinguish between governmental activities, such as City functions that are supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenue, and other activities that are self- supporting. The self-supporting functions are called "business -type activities," or enterprise funds. They are intended to recover all or a significant portion of their costs through user fees and charges for services. Governmental activities include general government administration, public safety (such as police, fire, and 911 -dispatch), public works, community development, parks, recreation and library, shuttle bus operations, and financing and other activities. The self-supporting, business -type activities include water, sewer service, parking, waste management, landfill, and building inspection. Fund Financial Statements A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. The City uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance -related legal and accounting requirements. The City's funds can be divided into three categories: governmental, proprietary, and fiduciary. Governmental Funds Governmental funds account for tax -supported functions reported as governmental activities in the governmental -wide financial statements. Governmental funds use the "current financial resources" measurement focus, with an emphasis on having sufficient resources to meet expenditures in the short- term — a 12 month fiscal year. These statements focus on how cash and other financial assets can be readily converted to available resources for spending on City services. They also show fund balances that are left at the end of the fiscal year and distinguish between amounts that are restricted versus funds that are available for spending. Because the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government -wide financial statements, it is useful to compare the information presented for governmental funds with similar information presented for governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements. By doing so, readers may better understand the long-term impacts of the City's near-term financing decisions. Both 11 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet and the Governmental Funds Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental activities and governmental funds. The City has four major governmental funds: General, Capital Projects, Storm Drainage, and Debt Service. Information is presented separately in the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet and in the Governmental Funds Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances for these funds. Financial information for the remaining governmental funds is combined into a single, aggregated presentation called Non -Major Governmental Funds. Individual fund data for each of these non -major governmental funds is provided in the form of combining statements located elsewhere in the report. Proprietary Funds Proprietary funds are used to account for services and activities for which a fee is charged to customers in exchange for City provided goods or services. Proprietary funds use the "economic resources" measurement focus, which concentrates on how transactions and events have affected the fund's total economic resources. The City maintains two different types of proprietary funds. Business -Type Activities or Enterprise Funds: These are funds that are used to report business -type activities in the governmental -wide financial statements. The City has six enterprise funds: Water, Sewer, Parking, Waste Management, Landfill, and Building Fund. Internal Service Funds: These funds are used to allocate costs internally among the City's functions. The City uses internal service funds to account for the maintenance and replacement of its fleet and rolling stock; maintenance of City buildings and facilities; general liability; workers' compensation; and information technology and administrative support. These funds are included in the governmental activities of the government -wide financial statements because their activities support governmental programs. The internal service funds are then combined into a single, aggregated presentation in the proprietary fund financial statements. Individual data for the internal service funds is provided in the form of combining statements. Fiduciary Funds Fiduciary funds are used to account for financial resources held for the benefit of parties outside the City government. The City holds these funds in a custodial capacity or as an agent for individuals, private organizations, or other governmental units such as the State of California or the United States. Fiduciary funds are not reflected in the government -wide financial statements because the resources of these funds are not available to support the City's governmental activities. Government -Wide Financial Analvsis All financial statements are presented in conformance with GASB Statement No. 34, Basic Financial Statements and Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) —for State and Local Governments. Prior year information is made available for a comparative analysis of government -wide data. Analysis of Net Position The City had a total net position of $315.2 million as of June 30, 2021. Net position increased by 3.1% from the beginning total net position of $305.7 million. Assets and deferred outflows of resources as of the end 7 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 of June 30, 2021 were $589.2 million, reflecting a 5.6% positive change from the prior year, which included a $36.5 million increase in capital assets and deferred outflows of resources coupled with a $5.5 million decrease in current assets. Liabilities and deferred inflows of resources increased by 8.5% ($21.5 million). In addition to the $11.2 million increase in long-term debt due largely to the issuance of Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2021 in June 2021, the City experienced an increase in net pension liability and related deferred inflows ($5.2 million). Offsetting these increases somewhat was a $4.0 million decrease in the City's OPEB (retiree medical obligations) liability and related deferred inflows. The largest portion (approximately 63.6%) of the City's net position is its net investment in capital assets totaling $200.5 million. Capital assets are the aggregate value of land, buildings, and improvements that are used to provide services. Their value is reported net of related debt because the funds to repay the debt come from other sources - the capital assets themselves cannot be used to liquidate these liabilities. The City uses these capital assets to provide services to citizens; consequently, these assets are not available for future spending. An additional portion of the City's net position, $90.9 million (28.8%), represents resources that are subject to restrictions that may only be used for debt service, to construct specified capital projects, or within the confines of special revenue programs. Unrestricted net position can be used to finance day-to-day operations without constraints established by debt covenants or other legal requirements or restrictions. The City's unrestricted net position on June 30, 2021 was approximately $23.8 million, or 7.6% of total net position. W City of Burlingame Comparative Statement of Net Position June 30, 2021 and 2020 (Amounts In Millions) Governmental Business -Type Activities Activities Totals 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 Assets: Current a nd other assets $193.70 $203.78 $88.66 $84.11 $282.36 $287.89 Capital assets 176.95 141.17 108.56 111.06 285.51 252.23 Total assets: 370.65 344.95 197.22 195.17 567.87 540.12 Deferred Outflows: 17.52 14.62 3.83 3.47 21.35 18.09 Liabilities: Current liabilities 23.26 10.81 5.86 6.68 29.12 17.49 Other liabilities 2.85 2.70 1.60 1.54 4.45 4.24 Long term liabilities 182.14 166.35 49.96 54.58 232.10 220.93 Total liabilities: 208.25 179.86 57.42 62.80 265.67 242.66 Deferred Inflows: 5.37 8.19 2.93 1.64 8.30 9.83 Net Position: Net investment in capital assets 124.84 107.08 75.64 74.43 200.48 181.51 Restricted 67.77 77.14 23.16 20.02 90.93 97.16 Unrestricted (18.07) (12.70) 41.90 39.75 23.83 27.05 Total net position: $174.55 $171.52 $140.70 $134.20 $315.25 $305.72 W CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 Governmental Activities Governmental activities increased the City's net position by $3.0 million, with a total net position of $174.6 million at the end of the fiscal year. The increase was attributable to a number of factors. pi City of Burlingame Statement of Activities For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2021 and 2020 (Amounts in millions) Governmental Business -Type Activities Activities Total 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 Revenues: Program revenues: Charges for services $9.67 $11.81 $39.24 $42.63 $48.91 $54.44 Operating grants and contributions 4.32 0.42 - - 4.32 0.42 Capital grants and contributions 1.50 0.20 1.50 0.20 General revenues: Property taxes 24.22 23.30 24.22 23.30 Sales taxes 15.67 14.80 15.67 14.80 Transient occupancy taxes 5.74 20.42 5.74 20.42 Other taxes 5.30 5.50 - - 5.30 5.50 Other general revenue 0.37 0.39 0.28 0.83 0.65 1.22 Total revenues: 66.79 76.84 39.52 43.46 106.31 120.30 Expenses: Governmental Activities General government 11.03 6.71 11.03 6.71 Public safety 29.93 31.55 29.93 31.55 Public works 8.36 7.64 8.36 7.64 Community development 2.67 2.38 2.67 2.38 Parks, recreation and library 13.97 16.06 13.97 16.06 Shuttle operations 0.09 0.16 0.09 0.16 Interest 3.02 2.14 - - 3.02 2.14 Business -Type Activities Water - - 14.73 15.11 14.73 15.11 Sewer service 11.77 12.22 11.77 12.22 Waste management 0.75 0.64 0.75 0.64 Landfill 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 Parking 1.28 1.00 1.28 1.00 Building inspection - - 2.55 2.35 2.55 2.35 Total expenses: 69.07 66.64 31.29 31.53 100.36 98.17 Increase/(decrease)in net position before tra nsfers (2.28) 10.20 8.23 11.93 5.95 22.13 Investment income (expenses) 3.00 6.00 0.51 2.94 3.51 8.94 Transfers 2.24 2.21 (2.24) (2.21) Change in net position: 2.96 18.41 6.50 12.66 9.46 31.07 Net position - beginning, restated 171.59 153.11 134.20 121.54 305.79 274.65 Net position - ending $174.55 $171.52 $140.70 $134.20 $315.25 $305.72 pi CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 General revenues decreased by nearly $13.1 million (20.4%). The decrease was largely the result of a 71.9% ($14.7 million) decrease in transient occupancy tax receipts: The lower occupancy rates continued for most of fiscal year 2020-21, though some improvements were seen in May and June. The duration of the impact of COVID-19 on the travel industry is still unknown. Sales tax revenues increased by approximately $0.9 million (5.8%) from the prior fiscal year. Property tax revenues remained strong, coming in $0.9 million (3.9%) higher than in the prior year. Expenses from governmental activities increased by over $2.4 million, for a total of $69.1 million for the fiscal year. Expenses increased 64.4% ($4.3 million) in general government primarily due to the payment of a one-time liability insurance settlement. A 13.0% ($2.1 million) decrease was experienced in the recreation, library, and shuttle programs, as the public health emergency dampened these activities. The majority of these governmental activities are financed from City taxes. However, the $9.7 million collected in charges for services (reported as program revenues) for these various activities served to offset the departmental spending associated with some services. Overall, program revenues covered approximately 22.4% of governmental expenses over the fiscal year. The program revenues from governmental activities were slightly higher when compared to the fiscal year 2019-20. The funding from the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (CSLFRF) ($3.7 million) and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES) fund ($0.4 million) helped the City to maintain its current service level without tapping further into its reserves. Governmental Activities Two -Year Comparative Program Revenues Fiscal Years 2020 and 2021 ■ 2020 ■ 2021 (Amounts in millions) 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 - General Public Safety Public Works Community Parks, Recreation, Shuttle Operations Government Development and Library The charts of expenses and net cost of the City's various governmental activities shown below have been derived from the Statement of Activities. The first pie chart reflects expenses incurred in each area as a percentage of the total expense of governmental activities ($69.1 million in fiscal year 2020-21). This compares with the relative net cost after applying program revenues derived from each area's activity 10 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 shown in the second chart. The total net cost of governmental activities ($53.6 million in fiscal year 2020- 21) must be funded out of the City's general revenues — primarily taxes and investment earnings. Areas with the highest program revenues (i.e., planning permits and recreation offerings) are able to offset relatively more costs than activities that have fewer opportunities to derive program revenues (such as public safety). Governmental Expenses - by Program Fiscal Year 2020-21 3.9%- 12.1% Business -Type Activities ■ General Government ■ Public Safety ,- Public Works ■ Community Development • Parks, Recreation, and Library - Shuttle Operations ■ Interest Governmental Activities - Net Expense by Program Fiscal Year 2020-21 0.1% 5.6% ■ General Government i i ■ Public Safety 21.1% ■ Public Works • Community Development r Parks, Recreation, and Library ■ Shuttle Operations ■ Interest The net position for business -type activities increased by nearly $6.5 million, or 4.8%, from a net beginning position of $134.2 million. The increase largely results from the collection of revenues needed to fuel future utility infrastructure and improvements. In fiscal year 2020-21, enterprise operations produced total operating revenues (consisting mainly of revenues from charges for services) of $39.2 million, marking an 8.0% decrease from fiscal year 2019-20 operating revenues, which is a direct result of the COVID-19 pandemic impacts. Business -type expenses totaled $31.3 million. Operating expenses for these activities decreased slightly (0.7%) from prior -year expenses of $31.5 million. This decrease was attributable primarily to expenses incurred with Water and Sewer utilities, although the cost of Parking operations also increased somewhat. These activities maintained relatively constant staffing levels throughout the year, despite decreasing service demand due to the pandemic. The changes in net position reflected a relatively healthy increase for these enterprise activities. Unlike governmental activities, program revenues cover total expenses in the business -type activities, with no contribution from City taxes. The City is able to adjust water, sewer, solid waste, parking rates, and building permit fees to cover expenditures and future liabilities. Financial Analysis of City Funds Governmental Funds The Governmental Funds financial statements provide information on the short-term inflows, outflows, and balances of resources available for spending over the 12 -month fiscal period. The goals of the funds 11 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 are to have sufficient resources available to finance City services within each fiscal year. In particular, the unassigned fund balance may serve as a measure of City funds available for spending in the short term. The General Fund, Capital Projects Fund, Storm Drainage Fund, and the Debt Service Fund, or collectively, the 'major funds,' are reported separately in the Basic Financial Statements. A separate accounting of the City's nine non -major governmental funds can be found in the Combining Statements located in the Other Supplementary Information section of the CAFR. Total Governmental Funds (Amounts In Millions) 6/30/2021 7/1%2020 Change - Net Net Position/Fund 6/30/2021 Net Position/Fund 7/1/2020 Position/Fund Fund Description Balance Nonspendable Balance Nonspendable Balance General Fund $45.21 $0.02 $44.83 $0.01 $0.38 Capital Projects 52.18 - 61.09 - (8.91) Storm Drainage 8.14 - 7.09 - 1.05 Debt Service Fund 29.03 - 45.97 - (16.94) Non -Major Funds 14.44 - 12.98 - 1.46 $149.01 $0.02 $171.96 $0.01 ($22.95) Total The General Fund is the City's main operating fund. Revenues and expenditures are monitored year-round to maintain a balanced budget. General Fund revenues totaled $62.1 million in fiscal year 2020-21, reflecting a $10.1 million (14.0%) decrease from the prior -year's performance of $72.2 million. Expenditures totaled $58.4 million, which is $0.2 million higher than in the prior year. Revenues less operating expenditures before transfers were nearly $3.7 million. The General Fund transferred $2.7 million out to the Debt Service Fund to pay for the government debt and nearly $3.2 million to the Capital Projects Fund. The large contribution for capital spending was approved to pay for street -related project expenditures ($2.6 million). The City took a break from its contribution towards the Capital Investment Reserve due to the fiscal challenges created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Detailed Notes on the transfers can be found in the Interfund Transfer section (Note 4) in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements. As of June 30, 2021, the General Fund balance was $45.2 million, representing an increase of $0.3 million from the restated prior -year's fund balance of $44.9 million. The City Council assigned $17.4 million as reserves for specific purposes described in Note 12 of the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements. Approximately $573,829 represents contractual obligations (encumbrances) and reappropriations of specific program funding that will carry forward to the next fiscal year. $15.7 million of the ending General Fund balance reflects the amount of cash and investments restricted to use for specific purposes - this is the amount held in the City's § 115 Trust Fund to pay required future pension contributions attributable to governmental funds. The remaining $12.0 million represents unassigned amounts. Capital Projects Fund The Capital Projects Fund accounts for the resources used to acquire, develop, and construct capital improvements or to purchase major capital equipment for governmental activities. The City capitalizes equipment with a cost basis of at least $5,000 and an estimated useful life over one year. Structures, improvements, and infrastructure with a value of at least $250,000 are also capitalized. All capital assets are valued at historical cost, and major outlays for capital assets and improvements are capitalized as projects are constructed. For more information on capital assets, please refer to the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements under Capital Assets (Note 5). 12 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 The Capital Projects Fund had nearly $1.5 million in revenues, which is almost $1.1 million higher than the prior year. The higher amount was primarily due to an increase in grant reimbursements when compared to the prior year. In fiscal year 2020-21, projects were financed mainly by nearly $30.6 million in transfers from other funds to support ongoing construction costs and previously appropriated projects. In addition to the General Fund contribution of $3.2 million, $24.3 million of 2019 Lease Revenue Bonds proceeds, $2.2 million of Storm Drain bond proceeds, and $0.8 million from Gas Tax and SBI special revenue funds were transferred into the Capital Projects Fund. Capital project expenditures totaled $41.0 million, an increase of $25.9 million from prior -year expenditures. At the end of the fiscal year, the Capital Projects fund balance was $52.2 million, a decrease of $8.9 million from the prior -year ending balance. Other than the $21.2 million reserves for Capital Investment, the entire fund balance is assigned to construct specific capital projects. During fiscal year 2020-21, major governmental capital projects exceeding $1.0 million in current year spending included the following: • New Community Center — $23.4 million The new Community Center construction replaces the 70 -year-old Recreation Center. In April 2020, the City Council approved the construction contract for the new Community Center, a pavilions style 35,700 square foot two-story building with adjacent and underground parking. The new Community Center includes dedicated teen and senior rooms, a Tech Lab, Kids Town, a large community hall with a catering kitchen, and meeting rooms. The completed project is expected to cost nearly $52.2 million and is anticipated to open for the summer of 2022. • Ray Park Field Renovations and Parking Lot Improvements - $1.7 million The Ray Park Field Renovation and Parking Lot Improvement project included the removal of the existing sod and irrigation, laser leveling, and new fencing, paving, drainage, irrigation, sod, and associated landscaping. It also included updating the existing softball field dugouts and warmup areas to be compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The City Council approved the project contract w in May 2020, and the project was completed in July 2021. • Burlingame Ave Storm Drain Improvement - $1.1 million This project is part of a series of projects identified in the Storm Drainage Master Plan to improve drainage and minimize localized flooding. Project work includes the construction of new storm drain inlets, storm drain mains, curbs and gutters, sidewalks, valley gutters, concrete channels, medians, drainage structures, curb ramps, driveway approaches, and replacement of existing storm drain facilities in public rights-of-way and storm drain easements. The construction encountered delays and additional expenses because of soil conditions and the availability of materials due to supply chain issues. • Broadway, California, Cadillac, and Trousdale Federal Grant Resurfacing project—$2.1 million The Federal Grant Resurfacing project 2018 consisted of resurfacing roadway sections along Broadway, California Drive, Cadillac Way, and Trousdale Drive. The project scope of work included the installation of an asphalt concrete overlay, pavement grinding, full depth asphalt repairs, utility frame, grate adjustments, traffic signal detection device replacements, ADA -compliant curb ramps, pavement marking, and pavement striping. 13 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 • 2020 Annual Street Resurfacing Program Projects — $1.7 million This project consisted of resurfacing 20 collector and residential streets. This project is part of a continuous effort to resurface older street segments. The work consisted of street base failure repair and resurfacing on various City streets within the city limits. The project included asphalt concrete "dig -out" repairs, surface milling, asphalt concrete overlay, minor concrete improvements, traffic markings and striping, traffic control, and other related work. Additionally, an asphalt pathway alongside the 2800 block of Easton Drive leading to Hoover School was removed and replaced. In all, capital projects spending included $2.9 million in Parks and Tree projects, $24.5 million in Facilities projects, $9.1 million in Pavement projects, and nearly $4.5 million in Storm Drain capital improvements. Debt Service Fund The Debt Service Fund is used to account for resources used to repay general long-term debt and to record the payment of principal and interest as well as other expenditures related to debt administration. In June 2021, the City issued Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2021 to provide funding for improvements to the storm drain system, fund a reserve account for the bonds, and refund the Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds Series 2012. The $16.4 million issuances netted $20.0 million in bond proceeds; the $3.6 million premium will be amortized over the life of the bonds. The bonds were structured to maintain an average annual debt service payment of $1.3 million per year and mature on July 1, 2038. Total principal payments on outstanding debt reduced general government debt by over $11.4 million. The General Fund contributed nearly $2.7 million to the Debt Service Fund for governmental debt service payments. The Storm Drainage Fund paid nearly $2.1 million as required to meet obligations relating to the Storm Drain Revenue Bonds. Taxable Build America Bonds comprised a significant portion of the 2010 Storm Drain Bonds; the Internal Revenue Service provided an annual interest subsidy of approximately $157,000 for this issuance. Debt service expenditures represent principal payments, interest charges, and administrative costs of debt such as fiscal agent fees on existing governmental debt. A more detailed description of the City's outstanding debt and the long-term obligations associated with each issue can be found in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements under Long -Term Debt (Note 6). Storm Drainage Fund The Storm Drainage Fund was added as a special revenue fund in fiscal year 2009-10 to fund needed improvements to the City's infrastructure and to pay debt service on certain revenue bonds issued to fund storm drain capital projects. The voter -approved initiative requires that the funds be accounted for separately, given their intended purpose. The voters approved the new fee in May 2009, and revenues are collected through an assessment on property tax bills. The storm drain fee will sunset after 30 years. Neighborhood storm drainage improvements continued in fiscal year 2019-20. The storm drain fee generated about $3.0 million in revenue. The funds are dedicated to debt service on the use of storm drain revenue bonds and to fund improvements on a pay-as-you-go basis. Revenue bonds issued with a pledge of storm drain fee revenues are used as a funding source for these projects in the Capital Projects Fund. 14 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 The fund balance increased by over $1.1 million during the fiscal year, as revenues from storm drain fees and interest earnings were adequate to fund the $2.0 million debt service expense for the fiscal year. Non -Major Governmental Funds Fiscal year 2020-21 marked the third full year of S131 funding - the 2017 Road Repair and Accountability Act (S131) allocations from the State. However, Gas Tax revenues also were impacted by the pandemic, a slight decline in this funding source ($16,800) was experienced from the prior year. Similarly, Measure A revenues reflected a decrease in this funding source of $47,800 from the prior year. Non -major governmental fund balances in total increased approximately $1.5 million, or 11.2%, during the fiscal year. As most of these funds are intended to fund capital projects, it is fitting that they accumulate to significant amounts before being appropriated to specific capital projects. For example, although annual expenditures of Measure A and Gas Tax Funds account for the majority of the City's non -major governmental funds' financing uses, the Development Fees Fund holds the preponderance ($9.0 million) of the total $14.4 million non -major governmental funds' balance. Proprietary Funds The City's proprietary fund statements provide the same type of information found in the government - wide financial statements. Proprietary funds consist of the City's six enterprise funds (Water, Sewer, Waste Management, Landfill, Parking, and the Building Enterprise funds) and six Internal Service Funds (General Liability, Workers' Compensation, Facilities Services, Equipment Services, OPEB, and Information Technology Services funds). Operations of the City's Enterprise funds are accounted for as business activities. Total Enterprise Funds (Amounts In Millions) 6/30/2021 7/1/2020 Yr -over -Yr 6/30/2021 Net Investment 7/1/2020 Net Investment Change- Net Fund Description Net Position in Capital Assets Net Position in Capital Assets Position Water $41.20 $19.02 $36.60 $18.46 $4.60 Sewer 66.77 48.45 66.06 48.40 0.71 Waste Management 4.31 - 4.35 - (0.04) Landfill (0.86) - (1.11) - 0.25 Parking 17.79 8.17 17.76 7.57 0.04 Building 11.49 - 1 10.55 0.94 $140.70 $75.64 1 $134.20 $74.43 1 $6.50 Total Water Fund The Water Fund continues to maintain a stable financial position despite considerable variability in water consumption in recent years. Assisted by 7.5% rate increases for each of three consecutive years (the last approved rate increase was effective starting January 1, 2019), the revenues of the water utility increased steadily over the years. However, the operating revenues for the Water Fund experienced a decline of $552,000 (2.7%) in the 2020-21 fiscal year, while operating expenditures decreased by $315,000 (2.2%). The City continues to invest in updates to the aging water system. Total spending on capital projects (nearly 15 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 $1.4 million in fiscal year 2020-21) included $270,000 for Airport Boulevard Emergency Water Main Replacement, $210,000 for Glenwood/Burlingame Heights water main improvements, and $289,000 for Hillside & Skyview Reservoir Site Improvements. The net position of the Water Enterprise Fund increased by $4.6 million, to $41.2 million. The largest portion of net position ($19.0 million) relates to the net investment in capital assets, representing 46.2% of the utility's total net position. Approximately 24.1% of the fund's net annual revenue is irrevocably pledged to the prompt payment of debt service relating to future payments of principal and interest on revenue bonds previously issued. Sewer Fund The Sewer Fund continues to be financially stable, with an increase in the fund's overall net position (including capital assets) of $0.7 million, to $66.8 million, due largely to personnel cost savings. Note that the largest portion of the net position ($48.5 million) relates to this net investment in capital assets, representing 72.6% of the utility's total net position. Approximately 47.7% of the fund's net revenue is irrevocably pledged to the prompt payment of debt service relating to future payments of principal and interest on revenue bonds previously issued. As a large portion of sewer charges are based on water consumption, sewer service revenues decreased significantly, as large commercial water use declined. The revenues from sewer service charges declined 13.4% for the year as a whole. The City Council -approved average rate increases of 9% for the three calendar years beginning January 1, 2022 to increase the fund's net investment in capital assets through improvements to the City's waste water collection system and treatment plant will advance the fund's position further in the near future. 16 Water Fund Historical Financial Performance Last 5 Fiscal Years Millions —*--Total Revenue: —11—Total Expenses: --Ar-Net Position, excluding net investment in capital assets and capital projects: $24 $22 $20 $18 $16 $14 $12 $10 $8 $6 $4 $2 $0 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 The net position of the Water Enterprise Fund increased by $4.6 million, to $41.2 million. The largest portion of net position ($19.0 million) relates to the net investment in capital assets, representing 46.2% of the utility's total net position. Approximately 24.1% of the fund's net annual revenue is irrevocably pledged to the prompt payment of debt service relating to future payments of principal and interest on revenue bonds previously issued. Sewer Fund The Sewer Fund continues to be financially stable, with an increase in the fund's overall net position (including capital assets) of $0.7 million, to $66.8 million, due largely to personnel cost savings. Note that the largest portion of the net position ($48.5 million) relates to this net investment in capital assets, representing 72.6% of the utility's total net position. Approximately 47.7% of the fund's net revenue is irrevocably pledged to the prompt payment of debt service relating to future payments of principal and interest on revenue bonds previously issued. As a large portion of sewer charges are based on water consumption, sewer service revenues decreased significantly, as large commercial water use declined. The revenues from sewer service charges declined 13.4% for the year as a whole. The City Council -approved average rate increases of 9% for the three calendar years beginning January 1, 2022 to increase the fund's net investment in capital assets through improvements to the City's waste water collection system and treatment plant will advance the fund's position further in the near future. 16 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 Sewer Fund Historical Financial Performance Last 5 Fiscal Years Millions —$--Total Revenue: (Total Expenses: -gh—Net Position, excluding net investment in capital assets and capital projects: $18 $16 $14 $12 $10 $8 $6 $4 $2 $0 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 As with the Water Fund, the Sewer Fund will also finance future capital improvements on a pay-as-you-go basis. The adopted budget for fiscal year 2020-21 included a set-aside of nearly $1.8 million to pay for capital improvements to the Burlingame Wastewater Treatment Plant and repair and maintenance of the sewer collection system. Total actual spending on capital projects was closer to $0.8 million, including nearly $345,000 on Rollins Sewer Pump Station Upgrade and Force Main projects; $124,000 was spent on improvements at the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant process piping. Parking Fund The objectives of the Parking Fund are to cover the costs of operating and improving the City's parking districts and to produce sufficient revenue to re -invest in the capital assets of the Burlingame Avenue and Broadway shopping districts, which are served by the City's parking lots. The fund's overall ending net position, including capital assets, remains the same as the prior -year ending net position of $17.8 million. The City spent $0.8 million toward parking lot resurfacing and downtown smart parking meters from the Parking Enterprise Fund. The fund's restricted net position for capital projects is decreased by $443,000 from the prior year. Revenue in the Parking Fund was decreased by $302,000 from the prior year due to the continued impact from the coronavirus pandemic. In an effort to assist the City's downtown businesses, parking enforcement was curtailed for several months at the beginning of the pandemic. Although parking enforcement resumed on July 1, 2020, many parking spaces in the Burlingame Avenue and Broadway shopping districts were converted to parklets , resulting in a loss of fee revenue. Operating revenues for the fund, at $1.6 million, were down approximately 15.7% from the prior year. Operating expenses increased by $273,000 (27.2%), largely due to increased personnel costs from full staffing in the current fiscal year. 17 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 Waste Management and Landfill Funds The City is a member of the South Bayside Waste Management Authority (SBWMA), a joint powers authority that contracts with external vendors for solid waste collection and disposal as well as collection of inert recyclable materials, yard waste, and other organic materials. The Waste Management Fund accounts for certain other services that the City provides or pays for directly. The costs of these services, which include the cleaning of sidewalks, parking lots, and garbage cans/liners, hazardous waste disposal, and street sweeping, are built into garbage collection rates for both residential and commercial customers. Operating revenues of the Waste Management Fund totaled $0.7 million in fiscal year 2020-21, which is 16.7% lower than reported in the prior fiscal year. Despite a 6% increase in solid waste rates as of January 1, 2021, fee revenues were flat due to a decrease in demand from commercial customers as business operations declined in response to the pandemic. However, revenues from the forfeiture of C&D deposits, largely from prior -year development projects, increased significantly. These fees, shared equally with the Building Enterprise Fund, generated an additional $136,500 for the fund (included as miscellaneous revenue). The Waste Management Fund's unrestricted net position largely reflects a rate stabilization reserve, built largely from prior -year surpluses as a buffer to large rate swings. The City Council approved rate increases of 6% for the three calendar years beginning January 1, 2019 in order to mitigate continued draws on the rate stabilization reserve and to bolster the fund in anticipation of cost increases in waste management contracts in calendar year 2021. A surcharge on garbage collection rates funds the costs associated with the long-term monitoring requirements of the former city landfill. The surcharge yielded $450,000 in fiscal year 2020-21, level with the prior -year revenues for the fund. The Landfill Fund continues to report a deficit position of nearly $0.9 million due to the status of the City's obligation to mediate closure and post -closure activities relating to the City's old landfill. On an annual basis, the City reports to CalRecycle (Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery) the estimated costs of post -closure and corrective action as adjusted for inflation and current -year expenditures pertaining to mitigation. The landfill closure and post -closure liability increased slightly ($45,000) during the fiscal year due largely to the inflationary factors prescribed by CalRecycle, but the fund's ending net position increased by $249,000 (22.4%) when compared to the prior year as expenses were kept to a minimum. Internal Service Funds The Internal Service Funds (ISFs) are allocated among the City's various functions and are therefore considered to account for governmental activities for financial statement purposes. The Internal Service Funds as a whole experienced a reduction in net position of nearly $2.9 million, but this amount reflects a wide variation in the change of net position of the various funds. The General Liability Fund net position decreased $4.9 million, which contributed to the majority of this reduction. The City reached a large claim settlement, with the City's share of the pay -out $5.2 million. This included a one-time payment of $2.5 million for the first year; the reminder of $2.7 million will be paid with equal payments over the next five years. Claims and litigation liabilities were adjusted based on an actuarial study completed in July 2021. The OPEB Fund, which accounts for the cost of the City's retiree medical program, shows an approximate balance of $172,600 due to amounts accrued for contribution to the OPEB trust fund (for retiree medical benefit obligations), but not yet paid out at the end of the fiscal year. Although the Facilities Services ISF showed a slightly improved net position from operations, the fund's negative net position reflects the inclusion of large net OPEB liabilities and pension liabilities in the fund's balance sheet that were not CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 sufficiently covered in the charges to departments of prior years. The costs of the services provided by these funds are carefully monitored, and the charges to the departments are adjusted each fiscal year as appropriate. General Fund Budgetary Highlights Detailed information on budget variances can be found in the General Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance, Budget and Actual. The adopted fiscal year 2020-21 General Fund budget assumed further operating revenue reductions from from fiscal year 2019-20, based on the uncertain outlook of the pandemic and economic recovery. Key revenue budgets were adjusted downward (by $4.9 million total) at mid -year to reflect the continued impacts from the pandemic -induced recession on General Fund receipts. The highest adjustment was needed for the City's transient occupancy (hotel) tax - the budget for this revenue source was amended to be $6.5 million lower than projected in the FY 2020-21 budget adopted in June 2020. Although a positive 3.9% revenue variance was realized for General Fund revenues, much of the greater -than -anticipated amount was due to an increase in the market value of the City's portfolio, reported as investment income $1.3 million), stronger sales tax receipts ($1.1 million), and improved fee based services' charges ($1.1 million). The performance of the three major revenue sources compared to the adjusted budget is as follows: Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues declined rapidly and sharply as international air traffic began to slow since March 2020, and progressed downward as the pandemic brought most travel - related activities to a halt. Burlingame hotels, which had experienced very high occupancy rates in the past, were forced to cut staff, shutting off floors and even suspending operations for whole hotels. The lower occupancy rates continued for most of fiscal year 2020-21, though some improvements were seen in May and June. As a result, TOT receipts were greatly diminished in fiscal year 2020-21. Overall, these revenues were down nearly $14.7 million (71.9%) from the prior year, and lower than the year's adjusted budget by 23.5% (approximately $1.8 million). • Sales and use tax revenues became the second largest revenue sources in fiscal year 2020-21 due to the significant decline in the TOT revenues collection. The City included $12 million for this line item in its adopted fiscal year 2020-21 budget. And as of mid -year, it appeared that an upward adjustment in the budget for sales tax revenues would be needed ($2.6 million). Sales and use tax revenues ended the year at $15.7 million, approximately $0.9 million higher than in the prior year, and approximately $1.1 million higher than forecast in the adjusted budget. 19 City of Burlingame Historical General Fund Revenues (Amounts In Millions) FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 Total Revenue $68.04 $71.72 $84.54 $72.16 $62.12 Dollar Change 1.89 3.68 12.82 (12.38) (10.04) Percentage Change 2.85% 5.40% 17.87% -14.64% -13.91% The performance of the three major revenue sources compared to the adjusted budget is as follows: Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues declined rapidly and sharply as international air traffic began to slow since March 2020, and progressed downward as the pandemic brought most travel - related activities to a halt. Burlingame hotels, which had experienced very high occupancy rates in the past, were forced to cut staff, shutting off floors and even suspending operations for whole hotels. The lower occupancy rates continued for most of fiscal year 2020-21, though some improvements were seen in May and June. As a result, TOT receipts were greatly diminished in fiscal year 2020-21. Overall, these revenues were down nearly $14.7 million (71.9%) from the prior year, and lower than the year's adjusted budget by 23.5% (approximately $1.8 million). • Sales and use tax revenues became the second largest revenue sources in fiscal year 2020-21 due to the significant decline in the TOT revenues collection. The City included $12 million for this line item in its adopted fiscal year 2020-21 budget. And as of mid -year, it appeared that an upward adjustment in the budget for sales tax revenues would be needed ($2.6 million). Sales and use tax revenues ended the year at $15.7 million, approximately $0.9 million higher than in the prior year, and approximately $1.1 million higher than forecast in the adjusted budget. 19 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 • Nearly $2.5 million of the total receipts for fiscal year 2020-21 were the result of the third full year of the City's Measure I transaction tax - a retail transactions and use tax of % percent effective April 1, 2018. This tax fared slightly better than point -of -sales results because it is assessed at the place of delivery for online sales, as opposed to being allocated to all cities from the County Pool. • Property tax revenues, at $24.2 million, came in very slightly under budget (less than 1.8%), reflecting an increase of nearly 3.9% over prior -year results. The secured property tax roll is well- established prior to the fiscal year budget being developed; this revenue is now only adjusted at mid -year for mild variances. Burlingame's fiscal health relies largely on growth in assessed property values, health in the travel and tourism industry, and increased consumer confidence. Although property taxes are expected to remain relatively strong over the next fiscal year, the recovery of TOT revenues is inextricably linked to the nation's recovery from the current pandemic. A return to pre -pandemic levels is not anticipated until 2024. In recent years, General Fund expenditures have increased fairly consistently as shown below. City of Burlingame Historical General Fund Expenditures (Amounts In Millions) FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 Total Operating Expenditures $49.71 $53.64 $55.76 $58.21 $58.44 Dollar Change 2.25 3.93 2.12 2.44 0.24 Percentage Change 4.74% 7.91% 3.96% 4.38% 0.41% The fiscal year 2020-21 adopted General Fund budget assumed operating expenditures of nearly $63.3 million, a reduction of 1.2% from the prior -year amended budget. Budgets were closely monitored City wide, as reflected in positive budget variances in all functional areas. The extent of the budgetary savings that would result from the reduction in operating activities, particularly in leisure and cultural services, was difficult to ascertain in real time. For example, City facilities were closed in response to the public health emergency, and, though most essential services were maintained, a large portion of the City's casual employees were furloughed for much of the fiscal year. Actual expenditures totaled $58.4 million; total budgetary (expenditure) savings for the fund were over $3.9 million, or 6.3%. 20 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 General Fund Historical Revenues& Expenditures Last 5 Fiscal Years Millions Total Revenue -4F-Total Operating Expenditures $90 $85 $80 $75 $70 (Amounts In Millions) $65 $60 $55 FY19 $50 FY21 $45 $40 $16.20 $16.91 $35 $18.91 $30 Catastrophic Reserve $25 2.00 $20 2.00 $15 - - $10 - $5 General Plan Reserve $0 - FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 General Fund Reserve Policy The chart below illustrates the amounts of General Fund balance assigned as various reserves for the past five years. In January 2015, the Council adopted a General Fund Reserve Policy that established reserve levels based on an analysis of risks specific to the City, including vulnerability to extreme events and public safety concerns, revenue source stability, expenditure volatility, liquidity, leverage, and adequacy of infrastructure funding. The policy established targeted levels for an Economic Stability Reserve and a Catastrophic Reserve (24% and 2%-9% of budgeted revenues, respectively), as well as a Contingency Reserve amount of $0.5 million. Based on an updated risk analysis, the policy was revised in October 2015 to change the initial range for the Catastrophic Reserve to a fixed $2 million. The actual reserve levels are adopted by resolution with each annual budget but may be modified by resolution throughout the year based on recommendations by the Finance Director as economic forecasts or other changes dictate. Each reserve is reported as an assignment of the City's General Fund balance. As a measure of the General Fund liquidity, it is useful to compare its unrestricted fund balance (including commitments and assignments of fund balance) to annual operating expenditures. As of June 30, 2021, 21 City of Burlingame City Council Assigned General Fund Reserves (Amounts In Millions) FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 Economic Stability Reserve $16.20 $16.91 $18.84 $18.91 $14.36 Catastrophic Reserve 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 OPEB Reserve - - - - - General Plan Reserve - - - - - Contingency Reserve 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Total Reserves 18.70 19.41 21.34 21.41 16.86 Encumbrances and Reappropriations 0.69 0.52 0.24 0.32 0.57 Total Assigned Fund Balance $19.39 $19.93 $21.58 $21.73 $17.43 As a measure of the General Fund liquidity, it is useful to compare its unrestricted fund balance (including commitments and assignments of fund balance) to annual operating expenditures. As of June 30, 2021, 21 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 the unrestricted fund balance of $29.5 million ($45.2 million less non -spendable and restricted fund balance of $15.7 million) represents 50.5% of General Fund operating expenditures of $58.4 million. Fund balance in the General Fund had consistently increased in recent years until the pandemic hit in fiscal year 2019-20. A small increase in fiscal year 2020-21 signals a positive recovery. I Assets and Debt Administration Capital Assets Improvements that lengthen an asset's useful life are not capitalized unless the improvements increase the asset's service potential. Furthermore, maintenance costs are expensed in the period incurred. The City maintains an inventory of roads and parking lots and performs periodic assessments to establish the condition levels. The City uses the modified approach for roads and parking lots as an alternative to depreciation. Additional information can be found in the CAFR's Required Supplementary Information, Note 4 - Modified Approach for the City's Infrastructure. As reported in the Statement of Net Position, capital assets for the governmental and business -type activities totaled $285.5 million on June 30, 2021, net of depreciation, increasing 13.2% from the priorfiscal year. The investments in capital assets include: land, construction in progress, buildings, improvements, machinery, equipment, major software systems, facilities, roads, streets, utilities infrastructure, and storm drains. Capital Assets, Net of Accumulated Depreciation June 30, 2021 (Amounts In Millions) Governmental Activities Business -Type Activities Total 2021 2020 % Change 2021 2020 % Change 2021 2020 % Change Land and other assets not being depreciated $85.32 $55.47 53.80% $9.11 $13.22 -31.12% $94.43 $68.70 37.45% Facilities, infrastructure and equipment $91.63 $85.69 6.93% $99.45 $97.84 1.65% $191.09 $183.53 4.12% Total $176.95 $141.17 25.3% $108.56 $111.06 -2.25% $285.51 $252.23 13.20% All depreciable capital assets were depreciated from their acquisition/completion date to the end of the current fiscal year for the government -wide financial statement presentation. Governmental fund financial statements record capital asset purchases as expenditures during the year. Ongoing projects are accounted for as "construction in progress." Additional information about Capital Assets can be found in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements under Note 5 - Capital Assets. 22 City of Burlingame Historical General Fund Ending Fund Balance (Spendable) (Amounts In Millions) FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 Ending Spendable Fund Balance $33.06 $36.37 $53.96 $44.82 $45.19 Dollar Change 3.42 3.31 17.60 (9.14) 0.37 % of Expenses: 66.50% 67.80% 96.78% 77.00% 77.32% I Assets and Debt Administration Capital Assets Improvements that lengthen an asset's useful life are not capitalized unless the improvements increase the asset's service potential. Furthermore, maintenance costs are expensed in the period incurred. The City maintains an inventory of roads and parking lots and performs periodic assessments to establish the condition levels. The City uses the modified approach for roads and parking lots as an alternative to depreciation. Additional information can be found in the CAFR's Required Supplementary Information, Note 4 - Modified Approach for the City's Infrastructure. As reported in the Statement of Net Position, capital assets for the governmental and business -type activities totaled $285.5 million on June 30, 2021, net of depreciation, increasing 13.2% from the priorfiscal year. The investments in capital assets include: land, construction in progress, buildings, improvements, machinery, equipment, major software systems, facilities, roads, streets, utilities infrastructure, and storm drains. Capital Assets, Net of Accumulated Depreciation June 30, 2021 (Amounts In Millions) Governmental Activities Business -Type Activities Total 2021 2020 % Change 2021 2020 % Change 2021 2020 % Change Land and other assets not being depreciated $85.32 $55.47 53.80% $9.11 $13.22 -31.12% $94.43 $68.70 37.45% Facilities, infrastructure and equipment $91.63 $85.69 6.93% $99.45 $97.84 1.65% $191.09 $183.53 4.12% Total $176.95 $141.17 25.3% $108.56 $111.06 -2.25% $285.51 $252.23 13.20% All depreciable capital assets were depreciated from their acquisition/completion date to the end of the current fiscal year for the government -wide financial statement presentation. Governmental fund financial statements record capital asset purchases as expenditures during the year. Ongoing projects are accounted for as "construction in progress." Additional information about Capital Assets can be found in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements under Note 5 - Capital Assets. 22 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 Long -Term Obligations As of June 30, 2021, the City had total long-term obligations of $239.1 million, an increase of $10.1 million from the prior year. The increase is largely due to the new Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds $16.4 million bonded debt, issued in June 2021, to provide nearly $12.2 million funding for improvements to the storm drain system. This increase in outstanding debt was offset somewhat by a $3.9 million decrease in Net OPEB Liabilities. Including the new debt, $36.0 million of the City's total long-term outstanding debt relates to storm drain revenue bond financing, $37.2 million is 2019 Lease Revenue Bonds for the City's New Community Center project, and $16.0 million is for other governmental activities; the remainder ($34.2 million) is comprised of loans and revenue bonds previously issued to support various capital projects overseen by the Water and Sewer enterprises. Short of additional debt financings, bonded debt obligations will decrease over time as principal amounts are paid off. In addition, the City has several other long-term obligations. Landfill closure and post -closure liabilities are determined in order to capture the estimated cost of municipal solid waste landfill closure and post -closure care as required by federal and state regulations. Funds are set aside to ensure adequate funding for the post -closure costs of the former Burlingame landfill, including the annual costs of monitoring and maintenance as the costs are incurred. Funding for this liability is currently provided through a portion of solid waste rates charged to City ratepayers. Additional information about the City's long term debt and other obligations can be found in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements under Note 6 - Long Term Debt and Note 7 - Other Long -Term Liabilities. The City's OPEB liabilities, which are comprised of retiree healthcare benefits, continue to be funded from a surcharge on each payroll. The cost of the City's former retiree medical benefits program is charged to all operations as a percentage of payroll, calculated to yield the actuarially determined contribution (both normal and accrued liability costs) of the plan. The proceeds of this surcharge are used first to pay actual retiree medical costs on a pay-as-you-go basis; remaining funds are deposited to a trust account established in 2013 for the purpose of funding the OPEB liabilities. As of the end of the fiscal year, there was a balance of nearly $30.3 million in the California Employers' Retiree Benefit Trust, serving to offset the total liability. As there will be no new members added to this benefit plan - the City now offers a defined contribution plan for retiree health costs to its employees - this liability will be fully funded in 15 years. As of June 30, 2021, the net OPEB liability for the City was computed to be $23.1 million. 23 Outstanding Long -Term Obligations June 30, 2021 (Amounts In Millions) Governmental Activities Business -Type Activities Total 2021 2020 % Change 2021 2020 % Change 2021 2020 % Change Bonds Due i n More tha n One Yea r $87.11 $78.25 11.32% $31.40 $34.88 -9.98% $118.51 $113.13 4.75% Bonds Due Wi thi n One Yea r 2.12 3.01 -29.56% 2.83 2.71 4.33% 4.95 5.72 -13.48% Claims and Litigation 8.97 6.78 32.32% - - 0.00% 8.97 6.78 32.32% Landfill Closure - - 0.00% 3.40 3.35 1.34% 3.40 3.35 1.34% Net OPEB Liability 11l 18.70 21.87 -14.49% 4.42 5.18 -14.54% 23.12 27.04 -14.50% Net Pension Liability 65.73 58.63 12.11% 10.55 10.99 -3.96% 76.29 69.62 9.57% Compensated Absences 3.39 2.90 16.62% 0.47 0.44 5.87% 3.85 3.34 15.20% Total: $186.02 $171.44 8.50% $53.07 $57.55 -7.78% $239.09 $228.99 4.41% During fiscal year 2017-18, the City implemented GASB Statement No. 75, which requires the recording of net OPEB liabiIityand related deferred inflows and outflows of resources on the financial statements. In addition, the City has several other long-term obligations. Landfill closure and post -closure liabilities are determined in order to capture the estimated cost of municipal solid waste landfill closure and post -closure care as required by federal and state regulations. Funds are set aside to ensure adequate funding for the post -closure costs of the former Burlingame landfill, including the annual costs of monitoring and maintenance as the costs are incurred. Funding for this liability is currently provided through a portion of solid waste rates charged to City ratepayers. Additional information about the City's long term debt and other obligations can be found in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements under Note 6 - Long Term Debt and Note 7 - Other Long -Term Liabilities. The City's OPEB liabilities, which are comprised of retiree healthcare benefits, continue to be funded from a surcharge on each payroll. The cost of the City's former retiree medical benefits program is charged to all operations as a percentage of payroll, calculated to yield the actuarially determined contribution (both normal and accrued liability costs) of the plan. The proceeds of this surcharge are used first to pay actual retiree medical costs on a pay-as-you-go basis; remaining funds are deposited to a trust account established in 2013 for the purpose of funding the OPEB liabilities. As of the end of the fiscal year, there was a balance of nearly $30.3 million in the California Employers' Retiree Benefit Trust, serving to offset the total liability. As there will be no new members added to this benefit plan - the City now offers a defined contribution plan for retiree health costs to its employees - this liability will be fully funded in 15 years. As of June 30, 2021, the net OPEB liability for the City was computed to be $23.1 million. 23 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 The City's Statement of Net Position also reflects unfunded pension liabilities. Governmental accounting standards require the City to compute its unfunded liabilities by ascertaining "net pension liability," or the difference between a plan's total pension liability and the assets available to pay for such liability at a specific time. As of June 30, 2021, the net pension liability for the City was computed to be $76.3 million, an increase over the prior year of $6.7 million. Concerned over growing pension liabilities and in response to the sharply increasing employer rates to support the pensions provided by CAPERS, the City implemented a plan, beginning in fiscal year 2017-18, to annually set aside additional funding in a § 115 Trust. The plan is designed to protect the City's fiscal health in future years by setting aside funds for use when the City's required CalPERS contribution rates rise above pre -established threshold rates. The balance in the pension trust fund as of June 30, 2021, was $18.4 million. Unlike contributions to the OPEB trust fund, these contributions are not shown as expenditures and cannot be used to offset the liability as shown in the financial statements. Rather, amounts in the pension trust fund are reflected in each operating fund as restricted cash and investments. A detailed explanation of the changes in the pension liabilities associated with the City's Safety and Miscellaneous Employee pension plans can be found in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements under Notes 9 and 10, respectively. Economic Factors and Next Year's Budget and Rates The following factors were taken into consideration in preparing the fiscal year 2021-22 budget: Revenue Projections: Each year, City staff prepares a five-year forecast of revenues and expenditures for the General Fund early in the budget process. In light of the continued presence of the virus and related economic impacts, the adopted budget for fiscal year 2021-22 anticipated an improvement from fiscal year 2020-21 (approximately $5.6 million, or 9.2%) in total General Fund revenues. Although property tax receipts are expected to continue grow in the 2021-22 fiscal year, sales tax revenue remains flat, and an increase of TOT revenue to $13.5 million (about one-half of 2018-19 fiscal year receipts) is anticipated in fiscal year 2021-22. The budget's revenue projections were based on fiscal year 2020-21 estimates that came in slightly higher than forecast with the help of $3.7 million from the federal American Rescue Plan Act funds; while showing recovery on multiple fronts, the timing and strength of the City's revenue recovery is uncertain at best. Expenditures: General Fund operating expenditures are expected to grow approximately 2.3% when compared to the fiscal year 2020-21 adjusted budget. Fiscal year 2021-22 departmental budgets of $63.8 million provide for a full year of increased full-time staffing assumed in the prior mid -year analysis. Increases in pension costs are also included in the adopted budget (reflected not only in the City's personnel budgets but also in the cost of Central County Fire Department services as well). Since personnel costs represent a large investment in the City's current and future resources, requests for increases in Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions are carefully monitored to ensure they provide the best on-going value for the City. In light of the reduced revenues anticipated for the fiscal year, the FY 2021-22 budget for capital projects remains flat from FY 2020-21. Work on the large number of previously funded capital projects will continue, including construction of the $52.3 million New Community Center project, expected to be complete at the end of May 2022. Also, to minimize the General Fund operating deficit for the year, no contribution to the Capital Investment Reserve was included in the FY 2021-22 budget. (The last General 24 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 Fund contribution to the Capital Investment Reserve was $6.5 million in fiscal year 2019-20.) In addition, the General Fund transfer for debt service of $2.0 million was resumed after a one-year break in FY2020- 21 for the 2019 Lease Revenue Bond issuance. However, the 2021-22 fiscal year budget does provide for all the day-to-day operations and capital needs required to sustain high-quality services, and continues to set aside monies in the City's §115 trust fund for pension liabilities - $1.9 million from the General Fund alone. Funding of retiree medical obligations is also included in the departmental budgets in fiscal year 2021-22. In all, the budgeted deficit was limited to $1.7 million, well within the $12.0 million unassigned General Fund balance as of June 30, 2021. General Fund Capital Improvements: The City Council earmarked nearly $3.2 million in the 2021-22 fiscal year General Fund budget for capital improvements in the Five Year CIP Plan. Although this is well below the approximately $10.0 million peryear provided pre -pandemic, this funding covers the immediate capital needs of the City, including $2.3 million for streets and sidewalk infrastructure improvements. Water and Sewer Rate Adjustments: The drought that had begun in 2011 had worsened, and state-wide water restrictions had reduced water consumption to record lows. The City had a water utilty rate study done in the fall of 2016. Based on the increased cost of water purchased from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), and to upgrade and maintain the aging water system, the City Council approved water rates increases for each of the years beginning January 1, 2017, 2018, and 2019. Beyond these water utility rate increases, no further rate adjustments have been approved. Rates for the sewer utility have not been adjusted since 2012. At its November 15, 2021 meeting, the City Council conducted a public hearing and approved an overall composite rate increase of approximately 9.0% annually in 2022, 2023, and 2024. Solid Waste Rate Adjustments: The City provides solid waste services through a joint exercise of powers agreement (JPA) and a franchise with a private contractor. Rates are adjusted each calendar year based on updated costs of solid waste collection and material processing service, including landfill post -closure costs, street sweeping, recycling, and other diversion programs. Due to significant upheaval in global market conditions for recyclables, changes in both commercial and residential waste streams, a scarcity of landfill options, and increased diversion requirements and environmental regulation from the State, the cost of solid waste services has risen in recent years. Further cost increases were anticipated with a restated, 15 - year franchise agreement for solid waste collection services effective January 1, 2021. Although a rate stabilization reserve within the City's Solid Waste Fund had allowed services to continue without a rate increase since 2012, solid waste rate increases of 6% were approved for each of the three calendar years 2019, 2020, and 2021. uests for Information This financial report is designed to provide Burlingame's citizens, taxpayers, investors, and creditors with a general overview of the City's finances and to demonstrate the City's accountability for the money it receives. Individuals are encouraged to make inquiries or requests for additional financial information at: Burlingame Department of Finance City Hall 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010 (650) 558-7200 25 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA STATEMENT OF NET POSITION JUNE 30, 2021 ASSETS Cash and investments Receivables (net of uncollectible amounts) Due from consumers Due from other governments Other receivables Inventory Prepaid items and deposits Cash and investments, restricted Capital assets: Land and other assets not being depreciated Facilities, infrastructure, and equipment, net of depreciation Total assets DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES Deferred amount of bond refunding Deferred outflows related to OPEB Deferred outflows related to pension Total deferred outflows of resources LIABILITIES Accounts payable Retentions payable Accrued payroll Accrued interest Deposits Unearned revenue Claims and litigation Due in one year Due in more than one year Compensated absences Due in one year Due in more than one year Landfill closure and post closure costs Due in one year Due in more than one year Long-term debt Due in one year Due in more than one year Net OPEB liability, due in more than one year Net pension liability, due in more than one year Total liabilities Governmental Business -Type 491,304 Activities Activities Total $ 126,470,161 $ 79,992,110 $ 206,462,271 (332,963) 5,648,208 5,648,208 569,883 51,184 621,067 10,610,125 230,102 10,840,227 262,273 4,423,612 262,273 16,323 10,553,727 16,323 55,769,676 2,739,136 58,508,812 85,317,462 9,108,405 94,425,867 91,633,882 99,452,553 191,086,435 370,649,785 197,221,698 567,871,483 Capital projects 862,100 862,100 4,949,006 1,170,698 6,119,704 12,575,415 1,792,623 14,368,038 17,524,421 3,825,421 21, 349, 842 16,882,654 2,079,933 18,962,587 1,530,292 19,285 1,549,577 907,050 209,751 1,116,801 58,364 438,911 497,275 2,855,807 1,548,995 4,404,802 23,830,433 49,569 49,569 1,325,000 1,325,000 7,645,000 7,645,000 440,724 50,580 491,304 2,944,379 416,184 3,360,563 1,349,787 226,487 226,487 (332,963) 3,170,821 3,170,821 2,117,143 2,831,173 4,948,316 87,111,855 31,396,677 118,508,532 18,700,340 4,423,612 23,123,952 65,734,753 10,553,727 76,288,480 208,253,361 57,415,705 265,669,066 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Deferred inflows related to OPEB 5,706,082 1,349,787 7,055,869 Deferred inflows related to pension (332,963) 1,582,269 1,249,306 Total deferred inflows of resources 5,373,119 2,932,056 8,305,175 NET POSITION Net investment in capital assets 124,844,708 75,643,192 200,487,900 Restricted for: Pension and employee benefit program 16,150,318 2,291,152 18,441,470 Debt service 1,930,848 447,984 2,378,832 Capital projects 35,247,279 20,418,588 55,665,867 Development fees 8,995,482 8,995,482 Burlingame Avenue Special Assessment District 419,146 419,146 Shuttle, Access TV and community programs 1,664,749 1,664,749 Street and sidewalk repair and maintenance 3,363,205 3,363,205 Total restricted net position 67,771,027 23,157,724 90,928,751 Unrestricted (18,068,009) 41,898,442 23,830,433 Total net position $ 174,547,726 $ 140,699,358 $ 315,247,084 See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements 27 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 Program Revenues Operating Capital Charges for Grants and Grants and Functions/Programs Expenses Services Contributions Contributions Total Governmental activities: General government $ 11,025,740 $ 97,282 $ 4,074,336 $ - $ 4,171,618 Public safety 29,926,658 1,530,222 211,645 1,741,867 Public works 8,363,039 4,437,055 1,502,377 5,939,432 Community development 2,673,522 957,293 957,293 Parks, recreation, and library 13,971,773 2,649,986 5,000 2,654,986 Shuttle operations 98,373 25,000 25,000 Interest 3,016,459 Total governmental activities 69,075,564 9,671,838 4,315,981 1,502,377 15,490,196 Business -type activities: Water 14,730,585 20,081,318 20,081,318 Sewer 11,772,086 13,098,508 13,098,508 Waste management 751,355 611,242 611,242 Landfill 214,973 452,212 452,212 Parking 1,277,512 1,627,764 1,627,764 Building 2,547,279 3,373,416 3,373,416 Total business -type activities 31,293,790 39,244,460 39,244,460 Total government -wide $ 100,369,354 $ 48,916,298 $ 4,315,981 $ 1,502,377 $ 54,734,656 General revenues: Taxes: Property taxes Sales taxes Transient occupancy tax Othertaxes Other general revenue Total general revenues Investment income (expense) Transfers Total general revenues and transfers Change in net position Net position - beginning, as restated (Note 12E) Net position - ending See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements Net (Expense) Revenue and Changes in Net Position Governmental Business -type Activities Activities Total $ (6,854,122) (28,184,791) (2,423,607) (1,716,229) (11,316,787) (73,373) (3,016,459) (53,585,368) (53,585,368) 24,223,779 15,665,703 5,738,588 5,303,433 371,087 51,302,590 3,002,878 2,242,550 56,548,018 2,962,650 5,350,733 1,326,422 (140,113) 237,239 350,252 826,137 7,950,670 7,950,670 279,103 279,103 511,911 (2,242,550) (1,451,536) 6,499,134 $ (6,854,122) (28,184, 791) (2,423,607) (1,716,229) (11,316,787) (73,373) (3,016,459) (53,585,368) 5,350,733 1,326,422 (140,113) 237,239 350,252 826,137 7,950,670 (45,634,698) 24,223,779 15,665,703 5,738,588 5,303,433 650,190 51,581,693 3,514,789 55,096,482 9,461,784 171,585,076 134,200,224 305,785,300 $ 174,547,726 $ 140,699,358 $ 315,247,084 29 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 GOVERNMENTAL FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The General Fund accounts for all financial resources necessary to carry out basic governmental activities of the City that are not accounted for in another fund. The General Fund supports essential City services such as police and fire protection, street maintenance, libraries, parks, and recreation. The Storm Drainage Fund — This fund is to account for the storm drainage fees collected due to an assessment approved by the majority of the parcel owners in the City voting at a special election on May 5, 2009. The Debt Service Fund is used to account for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of, general long-term debt principal, interest, and related costs (other than those paid for by the Proprietary Funds). The Capital Projects Fund accounts for City capital projects funded by the General Fund or other governmental funds, or any projects funded by multiple sources. 31 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA BALANCE SHEET GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS June 30, 2021 32 Storm Capital Nonmajor Total General Drainage Debt Service Projects Governmental Governmental Fund Fund Fund Fund Funds Funds Assets: Cash and investments $ 24,874,625 $ 8,035,152 $ 570,246 $ 54,389,765 $ 14,310,914 $ 102,180,702 Accounts receivable 8,714,063 144,397 78,427 1,207,524 298,448 10,442,859 Due from other governments 569,883 569,883 Due from other funds 172,571 2,569,787 2,742,358 Prepaids and deposits 16,323 16,323 Cash and investments, restricted 15,723,356 39,619,358 55,342,714 Total assets $ 50,070,821 $ 8,179,549 $ 40,268,031 $ 58,167,076 $ 14,609,362 $ 171,294,839 Liabilities: Accounts payable $ 960,722 $ - $ 8,664,820 $ 4,403,609 $ 29,331 $ 14,058,482 Due to other funds 2,569,787 2,569,787 Retentions payable 1,530,292 1,530,292 Accrued payroll 856,168 14,051 870,219 Deposits 2,855,807 2,855,807 Unearned revenue Total liabilities 4,672,697 11,234,607 5,947,952 29,331 21,884,587 Deferred Inflows: Unavailable revenue 191,060 34,846 39,519 137,449 402,874 Total deferred inflows 191,060 34,846 39,519 137,449 402,874 Fund Balances: Nonspendable 16,323 16,323 Restricted 15,723,356 8,144,703 29,033,424 14,442,582 67,344,065 Committed 30,981,935 30,981,935 Assigned 17,429,829 21,197,670 38,627,499 Unassigned 12,037,556 12,037,556 Total fund balances 45,207,064 8,144,703 29,033,424 52,179,605 14,442,582 149,007,378 Total liabilities, deferred inflows and fund balances $ 50,070,821 $ 8,179,549 $ 40,268,031 $ 58,167,076 $ 14,609,362 $ 171,294,839 See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements 32 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to the Statement of Net Position JUNE 30, 2021 Fund balance —total governmental funds Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net assets are different because: CAPITAL ASSETS Capital assets used in governmental activities are not financial resources and, therefore, are not reported in the funds. LONG TERM LIABILITIES Long-term liabilities are not due and payable in the current period and, therefore, are not reported in the funds. Compensated absences Long-term debt Net OPEB Liability Net Pension Liability Interest on long-term debt is not accrued in the funds, but rather is recognized as an expenditure when due. DEFERRED INFLOWS AND OUTFLOWS Deferred outflows are not current assets or financial resources; and deferred inflows are not due and payable in the current period and are therefore not reported in the governmental funds Deferred Outflows Deferred Inflows Unavailable revenues $ 149,007,378 175,435,935 (3,316,496) (89,228,998) ($17,921,063) (63,652,713) (58,364) 16, 964, 540 (5,133,732) 402,874 ALLOCATION OF INTERNAL SERVICES FUND NET ASSETS Internal service funds are used by management to charge the costs of fleet management, building maintenance, information technology and risk management to individual funds. The assets and liabilities of the internal service funds are included in the governmental activities in the statements of net assets. $12,048,365 Net assets of governmental activities See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements. 33 $ 174,547,726 REVENUES: Property taxes Sales and use taxes Transient occupancy taxes Othertaxes Charges for services - fees Charges for services - licenses and permits Fines, forfeitures, and penalties Investment income Intergovernmental taxes Grants and subventions Other revenue Total revenues EXPENDITURES: Current: General government Public safety Public works Community development Parks, recreation, and library Shuttle operations Capital Outlay Debt service: Principal Interest Cost of Issuances Total expenditures REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Bond issuance proceeds Transfers in Transfer out Total other financing (uses) sources Net change in fund balances FUND BALANCES: Beginning of year, as restated (Note 12E) End of year CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements 34 Storm Capital Nonmajor Total General Drainage Debt Service Projects Governmental Governmental Fund Fund Fund Fund Funds Funds $ 24,223,779 $ $ $ $ $ 24,223,779 15,665,703 15,665,703 5,738,588 5,738,588 2,957,503 2,957,503 5,489,921 2,977,639 442,890 8,910,450 85,614 85,614 700,774 700,774 2,765,323 6,776 58,118 55,868 2,886,085 22,090 2,323,840 2,345,930 4,240,733 1,502,377 50,248 5,793,358 232,039 16,029 103,686 351,754 62,122,067 2,984,415 58,118 1,518,406 2,976,532 69,659,538 6,289,747 30,335 6,320,082 29,770,832 40,341 29,811,173 6,446,636 461,130 6,907,766 2,305,767 428,997 148,000 2,882,764 13,439,407 777,801 113,524 14,330,732 98,373 98,373 191,235 39,322,915 39,514,150 11,494,064 11,494,064 3,255,451 3,255,451 342,682 342,682 58,443,624 15,122,532 40,990,843 400,238 114,957,237 3,678,443 2,984,415 (15,064,414) (39,472,437) 2,576,294 (45,297,699) 20,038,114 20,038,114 2,573,550 4,639,677 30,557,118 37,770,345 (5,937,338) (1,926,339) (26,548,118) (1,116,000) (35,527,795) (3,363,788) (1,926,339) (1,870,327) 30,557,118 (1,116,000) 22,280,664 314,655 1,058,076 (16,934,741) (8,915,319) 1,460,294 (23,017,035) 44,892,409 7,086,627 45,968,165 61,094,924 12,982,288 172,024,413 $ 45,207,064 $ 8,144,703 $ 29,033,424 $ 52,179,605 $ 14,442,582 $ 149,007,378 See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements 34 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA RECONCILIATION OF THE STATEMENT OF REVENUES EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS TO THE STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2020 Net change in fund balances — total governmental funds $ (23,017,035) Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities are different because: CAPITAL ASSETS TRANSACTIONS Governmental tunds report capital outlays as expenditures. However, in the statement of activities, the cost of those assets is allocated over their estimated useful lives and reported as depreciation expense. The capital outlay expenditures are added back to fund balance 39,514,150 Expenses being added due to difference in capital outlay and capital asset additions 3,622 Depreciation expense on capital assets is reported in the Government -wide Statement of Activities and Changes in Net Assets, but they do not require the use of current financial resources. Therefore, depreciation expense is deducted from the fund balance. (3,215,364) LONG TERM DEBT PROCEEDS AND PAYMENTS Long-term liabilities are not due and payable in the current period and, therefore, are not reported in the governmental funds. Accrued interest calculated on bonds payable 6,645 Amortization of bond premium 575,029 Proceeds from bond issuance are deducted from fund balances (20,038,114) The repayment of the principal of long-term debt consumes the current financial resources of governmental funds. This transaction, however, has no effect on net assets: Principal payments 11,494,064 ACCRUAL OF NON-CURRENT ITEMS Some expenses reported in the statement of activities do not require the use of current financial resources and, therefore, are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds. This change reflects a increase in compensated absences that occurred during the year (476,095) Pension Expense (1,995,680) Net other post -employment benefits obligation expense 3,587,886 Unavailable revenues recognized as revenue in prior year (572,611) ALLOCATION OF INTERNAL SERVICE FUND ACTIVITY Internal Service funds are used by management to charge the costs of certain activities, such as fleet management, building maintenance, information technology and risk management to individual funds. The portion of the net revenue (expense) of these Internal Service Funds arising out of their transactions with governmental funds is reported with governmental activities, because they service those activities. Change in net position - All Internal Service Funds (2,903,847) Change in net position of governmental activities $ 2,962,650 See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements 35 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 PROPRIETARY FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The Water Fund is used to account for the provision of water services to residents of Burlingame and some residents of areas adjacent to the City. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance, financing, and billing/collections. The Sewer Fund is used to account for the provision of sewer services to the residents of Burlingame and some residents of areas adjacent to the City. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance, financing, and billing/collections. The Waste Management Fund is used to account for the provision of solid waste services to the residents of Burlingame, excluding the revenues and expenditures associated with the collection, processing, and disposal of solid waste and recyclable materials which are provided by solid waste contractors servicing member cities of the South Bay Waste Management Authority. The Landfill Fund is used to account for the landfill closure costs and post -closure monitoring services. The Parking Fund is used to account for the activities of the City's parking districts. The Building Fund was established to account for the activities of the City's building permits and inspection division. 37 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA STATEMENT OF NET POSITION PROPRIETARY FUNDS JUNE 30, 2021 ASSETS AND DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES Current assets: Cash and investments Receivables (net of uncollectible amounts): Due from other governments Due from consumers Other receivables Prepaids and deposits Inventory Total current assets Noncurrent assets: Cash and investments, restricted Capital assets: Land and other assets not being depreciated Facilities, infrastructure, and equipment, net of depreciation Total noncurrent assets Total assets Deferred outflows of resources: Deferred amount on bond refunding Deferred outflows related to pensions Deferred outflows related to OPEB Total deferred outflows of resources LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES, AND FUND BALANCES Current liabilities: Accounts payable Accrued payroll Due to other funds Accrued interest Retentions payable Deposits Unearned revenue Claims and litigation due in one year Bonds payable due in one year Compensated absences due in one year Landfill closure and post -closure liability due in one year Total current liabilities Noncurrent liabilities: Bonds payable Landfill closure and post closure liability Claims and litigation Compensated absences Net pension liability Net OPEB liability Total noncurrent liabilities Total liabilities DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Deferred inflows related to pensions Deferred inflows related to OPEB Total deferred inflows of resources Enterprise Funds Waste Water Sewer Management $ 25,068,471 $ 20,511,783 $ 4,872,465 51,184 2,970,314 2,677,894 58,199 50,083 11,930 28,096,984 23,239,760 4,935,579 912,694 1,201,076 131,579 1,411,352 1,642,726 238,177 32,700,972 64,633,239 837,008 35,025,018 67,477,041 131,579 63,122,002 90,716,801 5,067,158 537,657 449,459 491,985 370,115 452,234 727,536 611,827 99,603 466,321 389,825 63,033 1,685,842 1,371,767 162,636 903,910 675,874 725 88,913 60,389 10,822 148,349 290,562 12,679 6,606 24,133 49,569 1,168,682 1,662,491 31,510 4,760 1,912 2,427,745 2,700,682 13,459 14,418, 250 16, 978,427 173,208 114,528 12,438 4,283,229 3,602,014 586,393 1,762,045 1,472,996 238,177 20,636,732 22,167,965 837,008 23,064,477 24,868,647 850,467 3,300 2,775 452 537,657 449,459 72,675 540,957 452,234 73,127 NET POSITION Net investment in capital assets 19,017,377 48,453,146 Restricted for capital projects 7,038,918 10,601,691 Restricted for pension and benefits program 912,694 753,092 Restricted for debt service 447,984 Unrestricted 14,233,421 6,511,774 Total net position $ 41,202,410 $ 66,767,687 See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements W 131,579 4,174, 621 $ 4,306,200 Enterprise Funds Governmental Activities - Landfill Parking Building Internal Fund Fund Fund Total Service Funds $ 2,537,158 $ 11,671,721 $ 15,330,512 $ 79,992,110 $ 24,289,459 2,109 7,830 39,688 51,184 36,831 5,648,208 172,571 44,813 28,924 36,153 230,102 167,266 19,285 262,273 2,581,971 11,700,645 15,366,665 85,921,604 24,718,998 21,668 84,743 387,376 2,739,136 426,962 6,054,327 9,108,405 1,325,000 2,118,342 99,452,553 1,515,409 21,668 8,257,412 387,376 111,300,094 1,942,371 2,603,639 19,958,057 15,754,041 197,221,698 26,661,369 246,496 90,189 1,976,113 862,100 4,366,452 1,190 66,147 286,320 1,792,623 353,648 11,015 41,002 199,502 1,170,698 206,233 12,205 107,149 485,822 3,825,421 559,881 17,900 77,648 403,876 2,079,933 2,824,172 2,109 7,830 39,688 209,751 36,831 172,571 438,911 19,285 1,524,862 1,548,995 49,569 1,325,000 2,831,173 4,711 7,687 50,580 7,878 226,487 226,487 246,496 90,189 1,976,113 7,454,684 4,366,452 31,396,677 3,170,821 3,170,821 7,645,000 13,991 102,019 416,184 60,729 7,007 389,430 1,685,654 10,553,727 2,082,040 41,623 154,930 753,841 4,423,612 779,277 3,219,451 558,351 2,541,514 49,961,021 10,567,046 3,465,947 648,540 4,517,627 57,415,705 14,933,498 5 1,574,438 1,299 1,582,269 1,604 12,701 47,274 230,021 1,349,787 237,783 12,706 1,621,712 231,320 2,932,056 239,387 8,172,669 75,643,192 1,515,409 2,777,979 20,418,588 21,668 84,743 387,376 2,291,152 426,962 447,984 (884,477) 6,759,563 11,103,540 41,898,442 10,105,994 $ (862,809) $ 17,794,954 $ 11,490,916 $ 140,699,358 $ 12,048,365 39 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN FUND NET POSITION PROPRIETARY FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 OPERATING REVENUES: Water sales Sewer service charges: City of Burlingame users Other agencies Special surcharges Parking fees Charges for services Otherrevenue Total operating revenues OPERATING EXPENSES: Salaries and benefits Retiree medical benefit Supplies and services Water purchases Depreciation Insurance claims and expenses Total operating expenses Operating income NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES): Investment income Interest expense Net nonoperating revenues (expenses) Income before transfers Transfers out Enterprise Funds Waste Water Sewer Management Fund Fund Fund $ 19,942,486 $ - $ 11,600,550 1,497,958 611,242 138,832 9,044 136,529 20,090,362 13,098,508 747,771 3,000,030 2,276,506 368,234 1,434,229 5,635,104 381,985 7,428,650 2,084,054 3,114,717 150,805 92,431 1,136 14,097,768 11,118,758 751,355 5,992,594 1,979,750 (3,584) 228,681 137,440 20,914 (632,817) (653,328) (404,136) (515,888) 20,914 5,588,458 1,463,862 17,330 (989,181) (751,981) (58,000) Net change in net position 4,599,277 711,881 (40,670) NET POSITION: Net position - beginning (deficit) 36,603,133 66,055,806 4,346,870 Net position - end of year (deficit) $ 41,202,410 $ 66,767,687 $ 4,306,200 See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements 40 41 Enterprise Funds Governmental Activities - Landfill Parking Building Internal Fund Fund Fund Total Service Funds $ - $ - $ - $ 19,942,486 $ 11,600,550 1,497,958 452,212 1,063,454 1,627,764 1,627,764 3,373,416 3,512,248 11,859,159 133,530 279,103 19,333 452,212 1,627,764 3,506,946 39,523,563 11,878,492 66,409 574,307 1,324,140 7,609,626 1,183,731 4,390,850 148,564 508,723 1,218,989 9,327,594 2,151,896 7,428,650 193,734 5,392,505 708,275 748 4,150 249,270 6,464,380 214,973 1,277,512 2,547,279 30,007,645 14,899,132 237,239 350,252 959,667 9,515,918 (3,020,640) 11,443 17,825 95,608 511,911 116,793 (1,286,145) 11,443 17,825 95,608 (774,234) 116,793 248,682 368,077 1,055,275 8,741,684 (2,903,847) (332,388) (111,000) (2,242,550) 248,682 35,689 944,275 6,499,134 (2,903,847) (1,111,491) 17,759,265 10,546,641 134,200,224 14,952,212 $ (862,809) $ 17,794,954 $ 11,490,916 $ 140,699,358 $ 12,048,365 41 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS PROPRIETARY FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Receipts from customers Receipts from other funds Payments to other funds Payments to suppliers Payments to retirees and trust Payments to claims Payments to employees for services Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Transfers from other funds Transfers to other funds Net cash provided by (used in) noncapital financing activities CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Acquisition and construction of capital assets Principal paid on long-term debt Interest paid on long-term debt Net cash provided by (used in) capital and related financing activities CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: Interest received on investments Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities Net increase (decrease) in cash and equivalents CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS: Beginning of year End of year RECONCILIATION OF CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS TO THE NET CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Operating income Adjustments for noncash activities: Depreciation and amortization Changes in assets and liabilities: Receivables Prepaid / Inventories Deferred outflows Due to other funds Accounts payable Accrued payroll Retentions and Deposits payable Unearned revenue Compensated absences Claims and litigations liabilities Net pension liabilities Net OPEB Liabilities Deferred inflows Total adjustments Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities RECONCILIATION OF CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS TO THE STATEMENT OF NET POSITION Cash and investments -current Cash and investments, restricted Cash and cash equivalents on statement of cash flows Non-cash transactions Amortization of Bond Premiums Enterprise Funds Waste Water Sewer Management Fund Fund Fund $ 20,117,969 $ 13,176,263 $ 888,522 (1,083) (1,083) (9,869,402) (6,314,172) (388,420) (3,144,419) (2,400,195) (415,527) 7,103,065 4,460,813 84,575 (989,181) (751,981) (58,000) (989,181) (751,981) (58,000) (1,217,187) (882,368) (1,481,327) (1,881,301) (646,318) (683,160) (3,344,832) (3,446,829) 228,681 137,440 20,914 228,681 137,440 20,914 2,997,733 399,443 47,489 22,983,432 21,313,416 4,956,555 $ 25,981,165 $ 21,712,859 $ 5,004,044 $ 5,992,594 $ 1,979,750 $ (3,584) 2,084,054 3,114,717 20,678 77,755 140,751 (194,175) (179,708) (31,215) (1,083) (1,083) (758,515) (479,020) (5,299) 88,913 60,389 10,822 (97,203) (107,617) 6,929 9,600 (25,118) (434) 402,164 338,203 55,058 (339,313) (236,217) (62,017) (111,578) (81,238) (19,507) 1,110,471 2,481,063 88,159 $ 7,103,065 $ 4,460,813 $ 84,575 $ 25,068,471 $ 20,511,783 $ 4,872,465 912,694 1,201,076 131,579 $ 25,981,165 $ 21,712,859 $ 5,004,044 $ 186,328 $ 138,213 See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements 42 25,803 (332,388) (111,000) (2,242,550) (332,388) (111,000) (2,242,550) 25,803 (793,286) 44,922 44,922 (793,286) (2,892,841) (188,614) (3,317,706) (1,329,478) (7,540,025) (188,614) 11,443 Enterprise Funds 9,254 95,608 503,340 Governmental 11,443 9,254 Activities - Landfill Parking Building 125,381 Internal Fund Fund Fund Total Service Funds $ 450,916 $ 1,653,957 $ 3,525,087 $ 39,812,714 $ - 11,997,890 14,381,981 11,899,634 22,439,953 $ 2,558,826 ( 2,166) 11,756,464 (157,429) (492,805) (868,097) (18,090,325) (3,265,923) 24,716,421 (4,395,567) (587,878) (72,670) (286,158) (1,305,691) (7,624,660) (1,336,368) 220,817 874,994 1,351,299 14,095,563 2,313,898 25,803 (332,388) (111,000) (2,242,550) (332,388) (111,000) (2,242,550) 25,803 (793,286) 44,922 44,922 (793,286) (2,892,841) (188,614) (3,317,706) (1,329,478) (7,540,025) (188,614) 11,443 9,254 95,608 503,340 125,381 11,443 9,254 95,608 503,340 125,381 277,182 (241,426) 1,335,907 4,816,328 2,276,468 2,281,644 11,997,890 14,381,981 77,914,918 22,439,953 $ 2,558,826 $ 11,756,464 $ 15,717,888 $ 82,731,246 $ 24,716,421 $ 237,239 $ 350,252 $ 959,667 $ 9,515,918 $ (3,020,640) 193,734 5,392,505 708,275 (1,296) 17,622 18,141 273,651 21,142 8,571 8,571 (16,310) (1,677) 170,840 (115,067) (351,002) (107,828) (2,166) (8,865) 16,666 312,217 (922,816) 2,583,068 2,109 7,830 39,688 209,751 36,831 42,825 (161,995) 6,929 6,923 34,914 25,885 6,306 2,191,000 658 (1,389,773) 158,271 (435,419) 195,488 (7,057) (34,382) (73,721) (752,707) (213,256) (294) 1,526,711 (25,636) 1,288,458 (70,178) (16,422) 524,742 391,632 4,579,645 5,334,538 $ 220,817 $ 874,994 $ 1,351,299 $ 14,095,563 $ 2,313,898 $ 2,537,158 $ 11,671,721 $ 15,330,512 $ 79,992,110 $ 24,289,459 21,668 84,743 387,376 2,739,136 426,962 $ 2,558,826 $ 11,756,464 $ 15,717,888 $ 82,731,246 $ 24,716,421 $ 324,541 43 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 FIDUCIARY FUNDS rnc+nriinl Cnnrl Hotel Business Improvement District (BID) Fees Fund— This fund accounts for fee collections received as an Agent for the San Mateo County Visitors and Convention Bureau. Elementary School Development Fees Fund— This fund accounts for fee collections received as an Agent for the Burlingame Elementary School District. High School Development Fees Fund — This fund accounts for fee collections received as an Agent for the San Mateo Union High School District. Downtown Business Improvement District Fund — This fund accounts for collections received for the Downtown Business Improvement District. Broadway Business Improvement District Fund — This fund accounts for collections received for the Broadway Business Improvement District. 45 ASSETS Cash and investments Accounts receivable Total assets LIABILITIES Accounts payable Due to other governmental units Total liabilities NET POSITION Restricted for: Other governments Total Net Position CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA STATEMENT OF NET POSITION FIDUCIARY FUNDS June 30, 2021 Custodial Funds $ - $ - $ See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements Er. Elementary School High School Hotel Bid Development Development Broadway BID Fees Fees Fees Fund $ 59,938 $ 298,754 $ 198,698 $ - 745,088 805,026 298,754 198,698 67,023 298,754 198,698 738,003 805,026 298,754 198,698 $ - $ - $ See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements Er. Custodial Fund Downtown Business Improvement District Total $ - $ 557,390 16,429 761,517 16,429 1,318,907 564,475 16,429 754,432 16,429 1,318,907 47 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET POSITION FIDUCIARY FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 Custodial Funds ADDITIONS Fees collections Total Additions DEDUCTIONS Distribution to districts Total Deductions Net increase(decrease) in fiduciary net position Net Position -Beginning of the Year (Note 12E) Net Position -End of the Year $ - $ - $ See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements Elementary School High School Hotel Bid Development Development Broadway BID Fees Fees Fees Fund $ 879,481 $ 605,378 $ 404,523 $ 879,481 879,481 605,378 404,523 879,481 879,481 605,378 404,523 879,481 879,481 605,378 404,523 879,481 Net Position -End of the Year $ - $ - $ See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements Custodial Fund Downtown Business Improvement District Total $ 2,768,863 2,768,863 2,768,863 2,768,863 i• Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 1— SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES A. Definition of the Reporting Entity The City of Burlingame (the City) was incorporated in 1908 as a California general law city. Burlingame is a full-service city providing all municipal services, including police, fire, library, parks, recreation, street and storm drain maintenance, and water and sewage treatment. It is governed by a five member City Council, whose members are normally each elected to a four year term. The Mayor of the City is a one-year rotating chair of the City Council. As a government agency, the City is exempt from both federal income taxes and state franchise taxes. The accompanying financial statements present the City and its component units, entities for which the City is considered to be financially accountable. Blended component units, although legally separate entities are, in substance, part of the City's operations and so data from these units are combined with data of the City as the primary government. For financial reporting purposes, the City's financial statements include all funds, boards and commissions, and authorities that are controlled by or are dependent on the City's legislative branch, the City Council. Control by or dependence on the City was determined on the basis of budget adoption, taxing authority, outstanding debt, or the City's obligation to fund any deficits that may occur. Blended Component Units The following unit is a legally separate component unit for which the City is financially accountable, and therefore, the related financial activities have been blended with the City's financial reporting: Burlingame Financing Authority In November 1995, the City formed an authority known as the Burlingame Financing Authority (Authority). The Authority provides services entirely to the City. The purpose of this Authority is to issue bonds to finance the construction of public capital improvements through the lease of certain land and existing improvements or a pledge of revenue. Facilities are leased by the Authority to the City pursuant to lease agreements. The Authority is comprised of members of the City Council. The City and the Authority have a financial and operational relationship and the financial activities of the Authority have been included in the financial statements of the City as a blended component unit. The Authority's financial activities are presented in the Debt Service Fund as part of the governmental fund statements. The books and records of the Authority are maintained by the City. Additional financial data for the Authority may be obtained from the Finance Department, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010. 51 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 1— SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) A. Definition of the Reporting Entity (Continued) Non -Disclosed Organizations There are other agencies that provide services within the City, which are independently governed, and also maintain financial books and records that are separate from the City. Central County Fire Department Effective July 1, 2010, City fire employees became employees of Central County Fire Department (CCFD). CCFD is a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) which provides fire, emergency medical, and disaster preparedness services to the City and the Town of Hillsborough. CCFDS also provide fire and emergency medical services to the City of Millbrae through a contract. CCFD is governed by a four member board of directors and a Chief Administrative Officer. As members of the CCFD JPA, Burlingame and Hillsborough fund 70% of the direct costs in support of the ongoing operations and maintenance of CCFD based on a 60/40 cost allocation as outlined in the JPA. The remaining 30% is funded by the City of Millbrae. The Town of Hillsborough maintains the books and records of the CCFD which is subject to a separate annual audit. This cost allocation is reflected as a receivable (if total actual direct costs are less than budgeted or expected direct costs) or payable (if total actual direct costs exceed budgeted or expected direct costs) on the City's Statement of Net Position. CCFD is a stand-alone employer recognized by the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS). B. Basis of Accounting, Measurement Focus, and Presentation The City's basic financial statements are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) is the acknowledged standard setting body for establishing accounting and financial reporting standards followed by governmental entities. GASB requires that the accounts of the City be organized on the basis of funds, each of which is considered a separate accounting entity. Fund accounting segregates funds according to their intended purpose and is used to aid management in demonstrating compliance with finance -related legal and contractual provisions. The operations of each fund are accounted for in a separate set of self -balancing accounts that comprise its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenues, and expenditures or expenses, as appropriate. City resources are allocated to and accounted for in individual funds based upon the purpose for which they are to be spent and the means by which spending activities are controlled. 52 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 1— SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) B. Basis of Accounting, Measurement Focus, and Presentation (Continued) Financial reporting standards established by GASB require that the financial statements described below be presented. Government -Wide Financial Statements The Government -Wide Financial Statements include a Statement of Net Position and a Statement of Activities. These statements include the financial activities of the overall City government, except for fiduciary activities. Eliminations have been made to minimize the double counting of internal activities, except for interfund services provided and used, which are not eliminated in the process of consolidation. These statements present summaries of Governmental and Business -Type Activities, and represent a consolidation of all financial activities for the entire City. Fiduciary activities of the City are not included in these statements. The Government -Wide Financial Statements are presented on an economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting, as are the proprietary funds. Accordingly, all of the City's current and long-term assets and liabilities, including capital assets, infrastructure assets, and long- term liabilities, are included in the accompanying Statement of Net Position as of June 30. The Statement of Activities presents changes in net position since July 1, the beginning of the fiscal year. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the period in which they are earned while expenses are recognized in the period in which the liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of the related cash flows. For example, property tax revenue is recognized in the year of levy, and all other revenue is recognized when services have been rendered. The types of transactions reported as program revenues for the City are reported in three categories: 1) charges for services, 2) operating grants and contributions, and 3) capital grants and contributions. Governmental Fund Financial Statements Governmental Fund Financial Statements include a Balance Sheet and a Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances for all major governmental funds and nonmajor funds aggregated. An accompanying schedule is presented to reconcile and explain the differences in net position as presented in these statements to the net position presented in the Government -Wide Financial Statements. The City has presented all major funds that met the qualifications for major fund reporting. 53 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 1— SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) B. Basis of Accounting, Measurement Focus, and Presentation (Continued) Governmental Fund Financial Statements (Continued) Major funds are funds whose revenues, expenditures/expenses, assets, or liabilities (excluding extraordinary items) are at least 10% of corresponding totals for all governmental or enterprise funds and at least 5% of the aggregate amount for all governmental and enterprise funds. The identification and separate reporting of major funds serves to highlight financial activities which may be particularly important to financial statement users. Nonmajor funds are reported in aggregate in a separate column in the Balance Sheet and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances. The City reports the following major governmental funds: The General Fund is the general operating fund of the City. It is used to account for all financial resources and transactions except those required to be accounted for in another fund. The Storm Drainage Special Revenue Fund is used to account for the storm drainage fees collected as a result of an assessment approved by the majority of the parcel owners in the City voting at a special election on May 5, 2009. The Debt Service Fund is used to account for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of, general long-term debt principal, interest, and related costs (other than those paid by the proprietary funds). The Capital Proiects Fund is used to account for resources used to acquire or develop facilities or major capital improvements. All governmental funds are accounted for on a spending or current financial resources measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, only current assets and current liabilities are included on the Balance Sheet. The Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances presents increases (revenues and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in current net position. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the accounting period in which they become both measurable and available to finance expenditures of the current period. Accordingly, revenues are recorded when received in cash, except that revenues subject to accrual (generally 60 days after year-end) are recognized when due. The primary revenue sources, which have been treated as susceptible to accrual by the City, are taxpayer -assessed tax revenues (such as property taxes, sales taxes, transient occupancy taxes, and franchise taxes), certain grant revenues, and earnings on investments. 54 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 1— SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) B. Basis of Accounting, Measurement Focus, and Presentation (Continued) Governmental Fund Financial Statements (Continued) Expenditures are recorded in the accounting period in which the related fund liability is incurred, except for principal and interest on general long-term debt, claims and judgments, and compensated absences, which are recognized as expenditures to the extent they have matured. General capital asset acquisitions are reported as expenditures in governmental funds. Proceeds of general long-term debt and acquisitions under capital leases are reported as other financing sources. Non-exchange transactions, in which the City gives or receives value without directly receiving or giving equal value in exchange, include property taxes, grants, entitlements, and donations. On an accrual basis of accounting, revenue from property taxes is recognized in the fiscal year for which the taxes are levied. Revenue from grants, entitlements, and donations is recognized in the fiscal year in which all eligibility requirements have been satisfied. Other revenues which may be accrued include other taxes, intergovernmental revenues, interest, and charges for services. Again, grant revenues are recognized in the fiscal year in which all eligibility requirements are met. Under the terms of grant agreements, the City may fund certain programs with a combination of cost -reimbursement grants and general revenues. Thus, both restricted and unrestricted net position may be available to finance program expenses. It is the City's policy to first apply restricted resources to such programs, followed by unrestricted resources if necessary. Proprietary Fund Financial Statements Proprietary Fund Financial Statements include a Statement of Net Position; a Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Position; and a Statement of Cash Flows for each major proprietary fund. A column representing internal service funds is also presented in these statements. However, internal service fund balances and activities are combined with the Governmental Activities in the Government -Wide Financial Statements. The City reports the following major proprietary (enterprise) funds: The Water Fund is used to account for the activities of the City's water supply system. The Sewer Fund is used to account for the activities of the City's sewage collection system and the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Waste Management Fund is used to account for the activities of the City's franchised garbage collections and recycling program. 55 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 1— SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) B. Basis of Accounting, Measurement Focus, and Presentation (Continued) Proprietary Fund Financial Statements (Continued) The Landfill Fund is used to account for the landfill closure costs and post -closure monitoring services. The Landfill Fund was created in 2014 by separating landfill activities from the Waste Management Fund. The Parking Fund is used to account for the activities of the City's Parking Districts. The Building Fund is used to account for activities of the City's building division. Proprietary funds are accounted for using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, all assets and liabilities (whether current or noncurrent) are included on the Statement of Net Position. The Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Position present increases (revenues) and decreases (expenses) in total net position. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the period in which they are earned while expenses are recognized in the period in which the liability is incurred. In these funds, receivables have been recorded as revenue and provisions have been made for uncollectible amounts. Operating revenues in the proprietary funds are those revenues that are generated from the primary operations of the fund. The primary operating revenues of the City's enterprise and internal service funds include water and sewer service, connection fees, sewer discharge permits, garbage and recycling collection surcharges, building inspections, parking fees and permits, information technology support, vehicle and facilities maintenance, and risk management activities provided to the various departments in the City. All other revenues are reported as non-operating revenues. Operating expenses are those expenses that are essential to the primary operations of the fund. All other expenses are reported as nonoperating expenses. The Internal Service Funds are used to account for the servicing of self-insurance, allocation of funding for the retiree medical benefit trust fund, vehicle maintenance and acquisition, facilities maintenance, and information technology maintenance and acquisitions made for City departments or agencies on a cost -reimbursement basis. Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements The Fiduciary Funds are used to account for the resources held by the City in a custodial capacity or as an agent for individuals, private organizations, other government units such as the State of California, and/or other funds The City maintains custodial funds for Hotel, Downtown and Broadway Business Improvement Districts (BIDS) fees; and the elementary and high school district developer fees. Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements are reported on full accrual basis, which include the Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities, which represent the related activity for the City's custodial funds. 56 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 1— SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) C. Fair Value Hierarchy Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The City categorizes its fair value measurements within the fair value hierarchy established by generally accepted accounting principles. The fair value hierarchy categorizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three levels based on the extent to which inputs used in measuring fair value are observable in the market. Level 1 inputs are quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 2 inputs are inputs — other than quoted prices included within level 1— that are observable for an asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for an asset or liability. If the fair value of an asset or liability is measured using inputs from more than one level of the fair value hierarchy, the measurement is considered to be based on the lowest priority level input that is significant to the entire measurement. D. Deferred Outflows and Inflows of Resources In addition to assets, the statement of financial position or balance sheet reports a separate section for deferred outflows of resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred outflows of resources, represents a consumption of net position or fund balance that applies to a future period(s) and so will not be recognized as an outflow of resources (expense/expenditure) until then. In addition to liabilities, the statement of financial position or balance sheet reports a separate section for deferred inflows of resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred inflows of resources, represents an acquisition of net position or fund balance that applies to a future period(s) and so will not be recognized as an inflow of resources (revenue) until that time. E. Capital Assets Capital assets, which include land, roads and parking lots, buildings and structures, improvements other than buildings, machinery and equipment, infrastructure assets, and construction in progress, are reported in the applicable governmental or business -type activities columns in the government - wide financial statements. The City capitalizes equipment and improvements having an estimated useful life in excess of one year and acquisition cost of at least $5,000. 57 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 1— SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) F. Inventories and Prepaid Items Inventories are reported at a cost basis. The cost is recorded, using a weighted average, as an expenditure at the time an individual item is consumed rather than when purchased. Inventories are reflected as nonspendable in the General Fund balance and are, therefore, unavailable for appropriation. As of June 30, 2021, inventories on hand were immaterial. Certain payments to vendors reflect costs applicable to future accounting periods and are recorded as prepaid items in both the government -wide and fund financial statements. The cost of prepaid items is recorded as expenditures/expenses when consumed, rather than when purchased. The inventories and prepaid items recorded in the governmental funds do not reflect current appropriable resources and, thus, are reported as part of nonspendable fund balance. G. Property Taxes Property taxes are collected for a twelve-month period effective July 1 by the County Tax Collector. Property tax is levied each September 1 on the assessed values as of the prior January 1 for all real and personal property located in the City. Once the levy rates are approved, the actual claim to property taxes arises and is enforceable. Taxes are billed once a year in late October and are payable in two equal installments due by December 10 and April 10 (of the following year). Taxes are considered delinquent if paid after the due dates. As a result of the implementation of Article XIII (a) of the California State Constitution in fiscal year 1978-1979, the City does not have the power to levy property taxes or to set property tax rates based on the financial requirements of the various funds. Instead, the City receives remittances from the County. These remittances are based either on a flat 1% rate applied to the fiscal year 1975-1976 full value of the property, or on 1% of the sales price of the property on sales transactions and construction which occur after the fiscal year 1975-1976 valuation. Values on properties (exclusive of increases related to sales transactions and construction) can rise at a maximum of 2% per year or the amount of increases to the California Consumer Price Index, whichever is less. City property tax revenues are recognized when levied to the extent that they result in current receivables. Article XIII (a), Section 113, of the California State Constitution allows property taxes in excess of the 1% limit to fund general obligation bond debt service when such bonds are approved by two-thirds of the local voters. On October 12, 1993, the County Board of Supervisors adopted and implemented the Alternative Method of Tax Apportionment (Teeter Plan). The Teeter Plan applies to secured taxes only and provides a consistent predictable cash flow for taxes since they are apportioned to the City as if the tax levy had been collected in full. CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 1— SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) H. Use of Estimates and Reclassifications The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts and disclosures. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates. I. New Accounting Pronouncements The City has implemented the requirements of the following GASB Pronouncement: GASB Statement No. 84 — In January 2017, the GASB issued Statement No. 84, Fiduciary Activities. The objective of this Statement is to improve guidance regarding the identification of fiduciary activities for accounting and financial reporting purposes and how those activities should be reported. This Statement describes four fiduciary funds that should be reported, if applicable: (1) pension (and other employee benefit) trust funds, (2) investment trust funds, (3) private -purpose trust funds, and (4) custodial funds. Custodial funds generally should report fiduciary activities that are not held in a trust or equivalent arrangement that meets specific criteria. The provisions of this Statement were implemented during fiscal year 2021. See the impact of the implementation disclosed in Note 12E. 59 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 2 — BUDGETS AND BUDGETARY ACCOUNTING A. Basis of Budgeting A formal budget is employed as a management control device during the year for the City, and is adopted annually for all City funds, except for the fiduciary funds, Debt Service Fund and certain special revenue funds where appropriate. Consistent with most governmental entities, the City's budget is based on a modified accrual basis of accounting under which revenues are recognized in the period they become available and measurable, and expenditures are recognized in the period the related liability is incurred. Budgets for the General Fund and Special Revenue Funds are adopted on a basis consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP). The City budget includes information regarding estimated costs (or outlays) and revenue (or cash inflows) for identified programs, projects, and levels of service to meet the needs of the City. All annual appropriations lapse at the end of the fiscal year except in the Capital Projects Fund because capital improvement projects typically span more than one fiscal year. Appropriations for capital projects lapse when projects are completed, placed into service, accounted for as capital assets, or abandoned at the discretion of the City and/or City Council. Budget amendments that increase a fund's appropriations require majority approval by the City Council. Certain budgetary re -allocations within departments require approval by the Finance Director and department heads. Budget amendments between departments are approved by the Finance Director and City Manager. A mid -year budget status report and long-term financial forecast for the next five years is presented to the City Council as part of an ongoing assessment and evaluation of budgetary performance, with special attention to the General Fund and certain other major funds. Budgetary financial data is included in the required supplementary information for the General Fund and Storm Drainage Fund. Final budgetary data excludes the amount reserved for encumbrances in order to properly compare these amounts to actual expenditures. Budget Development and Adoption The City Council encourages all Burlingame residents and business community members to participate in the development of the City budget. The Council holds public meetings to provide guidance on the budget. Under Council's policy directives and guidance, departments prepare their budget requests in support of their programs in January for submission in early April. Expenditure assumptions are based on known factors such as collective bargaining agreements, current pay and benefit policies, consumer price indices, and other information available from expert third -parties or governing authorities. .e CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 2 — BUDGETS AND BUDGETARY ACCOUNTING (Continued) A. Basis of Budgeting (Continued) Budget requests are reviewed by the Finance Department for technical compliance to City budget instructions. The Proposed Budget is prepared and delivered to the City Council in May. The City Council reviews the Proposed Budget before the final budget is formally adopted in June at a public hearing, which gives residents an additional opportunity to comment on the spending plan. A separate publication presenting this information is available from the City of Burlingame, Finance Department, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010. General Fund and Storm Drainage Fund Budgetary Comparison Schedules are also included in the Required Supplementary Information, which has information regarding budget to actual performance for the General Fund and Storm Drainage Fund. NOTE 3 — CASH AND INVESTMENTS The City maintains a cash and investment pool, which includes cash balances and authorized investments of all funds. This pooled cash is invested to enhance interest earnings in accordance with City investment policy guidelines established by the City Treasurer. The pooled interest earned is allocated to the funds based on cash and investment balances in these funds at the end of each accounting period. The City has the following cash and investments at June 30, 2021: Cash and investments Cash and investments, restricted Cash and investments, restricted, held with fiscal agents Total cash and investments Government -Wide Statement of Net Position Governmental Business -Type Activities Activities Fiduciary Funds Total $ 126, 470,161 $ 79, 992,110 $ 557,390 $ 207, 019, 661 447,984 447,984 55, 769, 676 2,291,152 58, 060, 828 $ 182,239,837 $ 82,731,246 $ 557,390 $ 265,528,473 61 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 3 — CASH AND INVESTMENTS (Continued) The City's cash and investments at June 30, 2021 in more detail: Cash and Investments Held with Treasu Unrestricted, held with Treasury $ 206,840,880 Restricted, held with Treasury 447,984 Total Cash and Investments Held With Treasury 207,288,864 Restricted Cash and Investment Held with Fiscal Agent Investment held with Pension Trust - PARS 18,441,471 Cash held by fiscal agent- US Bank 17,478,372 Cash held by fiscal agent - Bank of New York 22,140,986 Cash held by fiscal agent - J. P. Morgan Chase 121,407 Cash held by fiscal agent - Bank of America 57,373 Total restricted cash and investments held with fiscal agent 58,239,609 Total Cash and Investments $ 265,528,473 IMM Fair Value Deposits Deposits - unrestricted $ 9,332,896 Deposits - restricted 58,239,609 Total deposits 67,572,505 Investments -unrestricted U.S. Treasury Bond/Note 39,637,563 Supranational Agency Bond/Note 867,501 Municipal Bond/Note 3,276,170 Federal Agency Obligations 47,324,284 Certificates of Deposit 5,513,377 Asset -Backed Security/Collateralized Mortgage 6,163,957 Corporate notes 21,579,261 California Asset Management Program (CAMP) 589,425 California Local Agency Investment Funds (LAIF) 73,004,430 Total investments 197,955,968 Total Cash and Investments $ 265,528,473 Cash and Investments Held with Treasu Unrestricted, held with Treasury $ 206,840,880 Restricted, held with Treasury 447,984 Total Cash and Investments Held With Treasury 207,288,864 Restricted Cash and Investment Held with Fiscal Agent Investment held with Pension Trust - PARS 18,441,471 Cash held by fiscal agent- US Bank 17,478,372 Cash held by fiscal agent - Bank of New York 22,140,986 Cash held by fiscal agent - J. P. Morgan Chase 121,407 Cash held by fiscal agent - Bank of America 57,373 Total restricted cash and investments held with fiscal agent 58,239,609 Total Cash and Investments $ 265,528,473 IMM CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 3 — CASH AND INVESTMENTS (Continued) A. Deposits Custodial Credit Risk The carrying amounts of the City's cash deposits were $9,332,896 at June 30, 2021. Bank balances before reconciling items were $9,539,212. At that date, the total collateralized or insured with securities held by the pledging financial institutions in the City's name as discussed below. Custodial credit risk for deposits is the risk that the City will not be able to recover its deposits or will not be able to recover collateral securities in the possession of an outside party if a depository institution fails. The California Government Code and the City's investment policy do not contain legal or policy requirements that would limit exposure to custodial credit risk for deposits or investments, other than the following provision applicable to deposits. The California Government Code requires California banks and savings and loan associations to secure the City's cash deposits by pledging securities as collateral. This code states that collateral pledged in this manner shall have the effect of perfecting a security interest in such collateral superior to those of a general creditor. Thus, collateral for cash deposits is considered to be held in the City's name. The fair value of pledged securities must equal at least 110% of the City's cash deposits. State law also allows institutions to secure City deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of the City's total cash deposits. The City may waive collateral requirements for cash deposits, which are fully insured up to $250,000 by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The City, however, has not waived the collateralization requirements. The City follows the practice of pooling cash and investments of all funds, except for funds required to be held by fiscal agents under the provisions of bond indentures. Interest income earned on pooled cash and investments is allocated on an accounting period basis to the various funds based on the period -end cash and investment balances. Interest income from cash and investments with fiscal agents is credited directly to the related fund. B. Investments Pooled Investments and Investment by City Treasury Cash of the respective funds is pooled and invested principally in U.S. Treasury and agency securities and short-term investments such as the State of California (State) Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) and the California Asset Management Program (CAMP). 63 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 3 — CASH AND INVESTMENTS (Continued) B. Investments (Continued) The LAIF is a pool of State cash and investments and those of California cities and local agencies. The State's investment policy is consistent with the City's policy, and, although State and City investments are pooled, the State does not have access to City funds. The State Treasurer administers LAIF, which charges for the service by retaining a percentage of investment earnings. State regulations permit the City to place up to $75,000,000 (effective January 1, 2020) in LAIF, plus any bond proceeds related to construction of a City facility. Valuation For the purposes of the Statement of Cash Flows, the City considers cash and cash equivalents to be cash on hand, demand deposits, and highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less at the time of acquisition. In accordance with GASB Statement No. 31, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Certain Investments and for External Investment Pools, highly liquid market investments with maturities of one year or less at time of purchase are stated at amortized cost. All other investments are stated at fair value. Market value is used as fair value for those securities for which market quotations are readily available. Interest income from investment of pooled cash is allocated to the funds based on monthly cash balances. Investments are presented at fair value except as noted below. The fair value of participants' position in the investment pools is the same as the value of the investment pools' shares and investment income includes changes in fair value (i.e., realized and unrealized gains or losses). Money market funds (such as short-term, highly liquid debt instruments including bankers' acceptances and securities notes, bills, and bonds of the U.S. government and its agencies), and participating interest-earning investment contracts (such as negotiable certificates of deposit, certificates of deposit, and repurchase agreements) that have a remaining maturity at the time of purchase of one year or less, are carried at amortized cost which approximates fair value. Certain disclosures, if applicable, for deposits and investment risks such as interest rate risk and custodial credit risk are required to be disclosed in the financial statements: ■ Fair Value Hierarchy ■ Interest Rate Risk ■ Credit Risk o Overall o Custodial Credit Risk o Concentrations of Credit Risk In addition, other disclosures are specified, including use of certain methods to present deposits and investments, highly sensitive investments, credit quality at year-end, and other information. For purposes of the Statement of Cash Flows of the proprietary fund types, cash and cash equivalents include all investments, as the City operates an internal cash management pool which maintains the general characteristics of a demand deposit account. 64 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 3 — CASH AND INVESTMENTS (Continued) B. Investments (Continued) Fair Value Hierarchy The City categorizes its fair value measurements within the fair value hierarchy established by generally accepted accounting principles. The hierarchy is based on the valuation inputs used to measure fair value of the assets. Level 1 inputs are quoted prices in an active market for identical assets; Level 2 inputs are significant other observable inputs; and Level 3 inputs are significant unobservable inputs. The following is a summary of the fair value hierarchy of the fair value of cash and investments of the City as of June 30, 2021: Investments by Fair Value Level: U.S. Treasury Bond/Note Supranational Agency Bond/Note Municipal Bond/Note Federal Agency Obligations Asset -Backed Security/ Collateralized Mortgage Corporate notes Total Investments Investments measured at Amortized Cost: California Local Agency Investment Fund California Asset Management Program Certificates of Deposit Total Investments M Level Level Total $ 39,637,563 $ - $ 39,637,563 867,501 867,501 3,276,170 3,276,170 47, 324, 284 47, 324, 284 6,163,957 6,163,957 21, 579, 261 21, 579, 261 $ 39,637,563 $ 79,211,173 $ 118,848,736 $ 73,004,430 589,425 5,513,377 $ 197,955,968 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 3 — CASH AND INVESTMENTS (Continued) B. Investments (Continued) Investments classified in Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy are valued using quoted prices in active markets. Federal agency securities, Certificates of Deposit, Commercial paper totaling and Corporate notes classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, are valued using matrix pricing techniques maintained by various pricing vendors. Matrix pricing is used to value securities based on the securities' relationship to benchmark quoted prices. The California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) is classified as exempt in the fair value hierarchy, as it is valued at amortized cost, which is exempt from being classified under GASB 72. Fair value is defined as the quoted market value on the last trading day of the period. These prices are obtained from various pricing sources by the custodian bank. Concentration of Credit Risk The investment policy of the City contains limitations on the amount that can be invested in any one issuer. The City has the following investments in one issuer (other than money market funds and an external investment pool) that represent 5% or more of total City investments: Issuer Fannie Mae Freddie Mac Interest Rate Risk Investment Type Federal Agency Securities Federal Agency Securities Amount $ 23,667,930 $ 18,361,112 To minimize exposure to fair value losses caused by rising interest rates and to meet the liquidity needs of the City, the City's investment policy limits its investment portfolio to a maturity of less than 5 years. 12 Months 13 to 24 25 to 60 Percentage InvestmentType or less Months Months Total of Portfolio U.S. Treasury Bond/Note $ - $ 4,686,172 $ 34,951,391 $ 39,637,563 20.02% Supranational Agency Bond/Note 867,501 867,501 0.44% Municipal Bond/Note 3,276,170 3,276,170 1.65% Federal Agency Obligations 13,420,460 33,903,824 47,324,284 23.91% Corporate notes 3,767,166 7,203,960 10,608,135 21,579,261 10.90% Asset -Backed Security/ Collateralized Mortgage 12,714 1,306,078 4,845,165 6,163,957 3.11% Certificates of Deposit 1,190,644 4,322,733 5,513,377 2.79% California Asset Management Program 589,425 589,425 0.30% California Local Agency Investment Fund 73,004,430 73,004,430 36.88% Total Investments $ 78,564,379 $ 30,939,403 $ 88,452,186 $ 197,955,968 100.00% CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 3 — CASH AND INVESTMENTS (Continued) B. Investments (Continued) Credit Risk State law limits investments in commercial paper and corporate bonds to be rated in a category "A" or its equivalent or better by nationally recognized statistical rating organizations (NRSROs). It is the City's policy to limit its investments in these investment types to the top rating issued by NRSROs, including raters Standard & Poor's, Fitch Ratings, and Moody's Investors Service (Moody's). Investment Type: Fair Value: Moody's Rating U.S. Treasury Bond/Note $ 39,637,563 Aaa Federal Agency Obligations 47,324,284 Aaa Supranational Agency Bond/Note 867,501 Aaa Municipal Bond/Note 3,276,170 Aa2 Asset -Backed Security/ Collateralized Mortgage 6,163,957 Aaa Corporate Notes: Amazon.com Inc. Bonds 1,807,708 A2 Apple Inc Corporate Notes 720,990 Aal Apple Inc Corporate Notes 1,472,232 Aal Bank of America Corp Note 932,803 A2 Bank of New York Mellon Corp 1,478,935 Al Cisco System Inc. Corp Notes 1,427,987 Al Citigroup Inc. Corp Note 312,819 A3 Citigroup Inc. Corp Note 299,593 A3 Citigroup Inc. Corp Note 324,559 A3 Goldman Sachs GRP Inc. Corp NT 910,925 A3 Home Depot Inc. Corp Note 1,113,214 A2 IBM Corp Bonds 2,026,360 A2 Intel Corp Corporate Notes 910,988 Al JPMorgan Chase & Co Bonds 985,364 A2 JPMorgan Chase & Co Bonds 334,880 A2 JPMorgan Chase & Co Bonds 349,440 A2 Morgan Stanley Corp Notes 155,186 Al Morgan Stanley Corp Notes 460,551 Al Pfizer Inc Corp Notes 1,595,434 A2 Toyota Motor Credit Corp Corp Notes 392,345 Al Toyota Motor Credit Corp Corp Notes 547,218 Al US Bank NA Cincinnati Corp Notes 1,915,278 Al Walt Disney Company Notes 1,104,452 A2 Certificates of Deposit 5,513,377 FDIC Insured California Asset Management Program 589,425 Not Rated California Local Agency Investment Fund 73,004,430 Not Rated $ 197,955,968 67 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 3 — CASH AND INVESTMENTS (Continued) Custodial Credit Risk For an investment, custodial credit risk is the risk that, in the event of the failure of the counterparty, the City will not be able to recover the value of its investments or collateral securities that are held by the counterparty. All of the City's investments in securities are held in the name of the City. The City's custody agreement policy prohibits counterparties holding securities not in the City's name. C. Investments in LAIF The City is a participant in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) that is regulated by California Government Code Section 16429 under the oversight of the Treasurer of the State of California. The City reports its investment in LAIF at the fair value amount provided by LAIF, which is the same as the value of the pool share. The balance available for withdrawal is based on the accounting records maintained by the State, which are recorded on an amortized cost basis. Included in LAIF's investment portfolio are collateralized mortgage obligations, mortgage-backed securities, other asset-backed securities, loans to certain state funds, floating rate Securities issued by federal agencies, government-sponsored enterprises, United States Treasury Notes and Bills and corporations. As of June 30, 2021, these investments have an average maturity of 291 days. D. California Asset Management Program The City is a voluntary participant in the California Asset Management Program (CAMP). CAMP is an investment pool offered by the California Asset Management Trust (the Trust). The Trust is a joint powers authority and public agency created by a Declaration of Trust and established under the provisions of the California Joint Exercise of Powers Act (California Government Code Sections 6500 et seq., or the "Act") for the purpose of exercising the common power of its participants to invest certain proceeds of debt issues and surplus funds. The Pool's investments are limited to investments permitted by subdivisions (a) to (n), inclusive, of Section 53601 of the California Government Code. The City reports its investments in CAMP at the fair value amounts provided by CAMP, which is the same as the value of the pool share. At June 30, 2021, these investments have an average maturity of 52 days, and the fair value approximated was the City's cost. M.: CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 4 — INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND TRANSACTIONS A. Transfers Between Funds With Council approval, resources may be transferred from one City fund to another. The purpose of the majority of transfers is to allocate resources from the fund that receives them to the fund where they will be spent without a requirement for repayment. Less often, a transfer may be made to open or close a fund. Transfers between funds for the year ending June 30, 2021, are as follows: Transfers Out General Fund Storm Drain Fund Debt Service Fund Non Major Funds Water Fund Sewer Fund Waste Management Fund Parking Fund Building Enterprise Fund Total In Transfers In Debt Service Capital General Fund Fund Projects Fund Total Out $ - $ 2,728,338 $ 3,209,000 15,000 1,911,339 26, 548,118 316,000 800,000 989,181 751,981 58,000 332,388 111,000 $ 2,573,550 $ 4,639,677 $ 30, 557,118 (a) To fund debt service and administrative support (b) To fund capital projects and debt service (c) To fund capital projects and various city services (d) To fund debt service B. Interfund Receivables and Payables $ 5,937,338 (b)(c) 1,926,339 (d) 26,548,118 (c) 1,116,000 (b) 989,181 (a) 751,981 (a) 58,000 (a) 332,388 (a) 111,000 (a) $37,770,345 During the course of operations, transactions may occur between funds to account for goods received or services rendered. Transactions between funds that are representative of lending or borrowing arrangements outstanding at the end of the fiscal year are referred to as advances to/from other funds, which represent the noncurrent portion of any interfund loans. All other outstanding balances between funds are reported as due to/from other funds. Any other residual balances outstanding between the governmental activities and business -type activities are reported in the government -wide financial statements as internal balances. CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 4 — INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND TRANSACTIONS (Continued) C. Internal Balances Internal balances are presented only in the government -wide financial statements. They represent the net interfund receivables and payables remaining after the elimination of all such balances within governmental and business -type activities. Due From General Fund Capital Projects Fund Total Due To 70 Internal Governmental Fund Services Fund Debt Service OPEB Fund Fund Total $172,571 $ 172,571 $ 2,569,787 2,569,787 $ 2,569,787 $172,571 $ 2,742,358 70 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 5 — CAPITAL ASSETS All capital assets are valued at historical cost or estimated historical cost if actual historical cost is not available. Contributed capital assets are valued at their estimated acquisition value on the date contributed. Furthermore, the book value of grant -funded assets is shown net of any grant reimbursement revenue. Capital outlay is recorded as expenditures in the General, Capital Projects, and other governmental funds and as an asset in the government -wide financial statements to the extent that the City's capitalization threshold is met. Major outlays for capital assets and improvements are capitalized as projects are constructed. The costs of normal maintenance and repairs that do not add to the value of the asset or materially extend assets lives are not capitalized. Interest incurred during the construction phase of the capital assets of business -type activities is reflected in the capitalized value of the asset constructed, net of interest earned on the invested proceeds over the same period. Except for roads and parking lots covered by the modified approach, depreciation has been provided on capital assets excluding land and construction in progress. Depreciation of all capital assets is charged as an expense against operations each year and the total amount of depreciation taken over the years, called accumulated depreciation, is reported on the Statement of Net Position as a reduction in the book value of capital assets. Depreciation is provided using the straight-line method which means the cost of the asset is divided by its expected useful life in years and the result is charged to expense each year until the asset is fully depreciated. The City has assigned the useful lives listed below to capital assets. Type of Asset Yea rs Buildings and structures 10-100 I mprovements 10-100 Ma chi nery a nd eq ui pment 5-15 1 nfrastructure 10-100 The modified approach is an alternative to depreciation that may be applied for eligible infrastructure capital assets. The City has elected to follow the modified approach for paved roads and parking lots. No depreciation is reported for these assets nor are amounts capitalized in connection with improvements that lengthen the lives of the roads and parking lots, unless the improvements also increase their service potential. Rather, costs for both maintenance and preservation of these assets are expensed in the period incurred. The City maintains an inventory of the roads and parking lots and performs periodic condition assessments to establish the condition levels of the systems. Additional information regarding the condition of paved roads can found in the required supplementary information. 71 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 5 — CAPITAL ASSETS (Continued) Intangible Assets In 2010, the City adopted GASB Statement No. 51, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Intangible Assets. GASB Statement No. 51 established accounting and financial reporting requirements for intangible assets to reduce inconsistencies, enhancing the comparability of the accounting and financial reporting of such assets among state and local governments. The statement also provides authoritative guidance that specifically addresses the nature of the intangible assets that are internally created by the governmental entity. Examples of intangible assets include easements, land use rights, and computer software. The City capitalizes intangible assets with an acquisition cost of at least $5,000 and an estimated useful life in excess of one year. Artwork and historical artifacts of the City held for public exhibition or promotion of education and public service rather than financial gain are not capitalized and are expensed when incurred. As of June 30, 2021, the City does not have intangible assets. A. Capital Asset Activity from Governmental Activities Capital asset activity for the year ended June 30, 2021, relating to governmental activities was as follows: 72 Balance Balance July 01, 2020 Increases Decreases Transfers June 30, 2021 Capital assets not being depreciated: Land $ 6,407,198 $ - $ - $ - $ 6,407,198 Pavement accounted for using the modified approach 32,947,987 32,947,987 Construction in progress 16,118,750 39,322,915 (9,479,388) 45,962,277 Total capital assets, not being depreciated 55,473,935 39,322,915 (9,479,388) 85,317,462 Capital assets being depreciated: Buildings and structures 42,650,911 2,324,939 44,975,850 Machinery and equipment 22,425,407 383,471 ($302,176) 26,007 22,532,709 Improvements and Infrastructure 112,632,004 7,128,442 119,760,446 Total capital assets, being depreciated 177,708,322 383,471 (302,176) 9,479,388 187,269,005 Less accumulated depreciation for: Buildings and structures 19,930,009 893,424 20,823,433 Machinery and equipment 19,257,582 1,223,986 (302,176) 20,179,392 Infrastructure & Improvements 52,826,069 1,806,229 54,632,298 Total accumulated depreciation 92,013,660 3,923,639 (302,176) 95,635,123 Total capital assets, being depreciated, net 85,694,662 (3,540,168) 9,479,388 91,633,882 Governmental activities capital assets, net $ 141,168,597 $ 35,782,747 $ $ - $ 176,951,344 72 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 5 — CAPITAL ASSETS (Continued) B. Capital Asset Activity from Business -Type Activities Capital asset activity for the year ended June 30, 2021, relating to business -type activities was as shown below. Balance July 01, 2020 Increases Transfers Balance June 30, 2021 Capital assets not being depreciated: Land $ 6,357,188 $ - $ - $ 6,357,188 Construction in progress 6,866,303 2,599,464 (6,714,550) 2,751,217 Total capital assets, not being depreciated 13,223,491 2,599,464 (6,714,550) 9,108,405 Capital assets being depreciated: Buildings and structures 3,924,051 3,924,051 Improvements and Infrastructure 181,483,244 198,297 6,113,616 187,795,157 Machinery and equipment 7,531,557 95,080 600,934 8,227,571 Total capital assets, being depreciated 192,938,852 293,377 6,714,550 199,946,779 Less accumulated depreciation for: Buildings and structures Improvements other than buildings Machinery and equipment Total accumulated depreciation Total capital assets, being depreciated, net Business -type activities capital assets, net C. Depreciation Expense 1,660,840 80,096 1,740,936 87,445,041 4,916,689 92,361,730 5,995,840 395,720 6,391,560 95,101,721 5,392,505 100,494,226 97,837,131 (5,099,128) 6,714,550 99,452,553 $ 111,060,622 $ (2,499,664) $ - $ 108,560,958 Depreciation expense was charged to functions and programs based on their usage of the related assets. The amounts allocated to each function or program for the current year were as follows: Governmental Depreciation Less:ISF Funds Governmental activities: General government $ 135,209 $ $ 135,209 Public safety 560,451 560,451 Publicworks 2,304,348 (708,275) 1,596,073 Parks, recreation, and library 923,631 923,631 Total depreciation expense - governmental activities $ 3,923,639 $ (708,275) $ 3,215,364 Business -type activities Water $ 2,084,054 Sewer 3,114,717 Parking 193,734 Total depreciation expense - business -type activities $ 5,392,505 73 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT Government -Wide Financial Statements In the government -wide financial statements, long-term debt and other financial obligations are reported as liabilities in the appropriate activities or proprietary funds. Bond premiums, discounts, and deferred gains and losses at refunding are deferred and amortized over the life of the bonds using the straight-line method. Issuance costs are expensed in the year incurred. Governmental Fund Financial Statements The governmental fund financial statements do not present long-term debt, which is shown in the Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to the Government -Wide Statement of Net Position. Governmental funds recognize bond premiums and discounts, as well as bond issuance costs, during the current period. The face amount of debt issued is reported as other financing sources. Premiums received on debt issuance are reported as other financing sources while discounts on debt issuance reported as other financing uses. Issuance costs, whether or not withheld from the actual debt proceeds received, are reported as debt service expenditures. 74 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 - LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) The following is a summary of changes in long-term debt related to governmental and business -type activities during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021: Ending Amounts Balance Due Within Reductions June 30, 2021 One Year $ (555,000) $ 7,450,000 $ 605,000 (285,000) 7,170,000 295,000 (7,790) 126,290 (7,790) (8,440,000) (197,162) (1,125,000) (54,364) Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2012 Beginning (250,000) Balance Description June 30, 2020 Additions Governmental Activities - Bonds: (8,066) Pension Obligation Bonds, Series 2006 $ 8,005,000 $ Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2010 7,455,000 - Unamortized Premium 134,080 Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2012 8,440,000 - Unamortized Premium 197,162 Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2010 1,125,000 - Unamortized Premium 54,364 Ending Amounts Balance Due Within Reductions June 30, 2021 One Year $ (555,000) $ 7,450,000 $ 605,000 (285,000) 7,170,000 295,000 (7,790) 126,290 (7,790) (8,440,000) (197,162) (1,125,000) (54,364) Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2012 8,365,000 (250,000) 8,115,000 265,000 - Unamortized Premium 181,475 (8,066) 173,409 (8,066) Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2016 8,225,000 (305,000) 7,920,000 310,000 - Unamortized Premium 838,663 (46,593) 792,070 (46,593) Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2019 30,240,000 (485,000) 29,755,000 510,000 - Unamortized Premium 7,701,088 (261,054) 7,440,034 (261,054) Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2021 16,410,000 16,410,000 620,000 - Unamortized Premium 3,628,114 $ - 3,628,114 (213,418) Total Governmental Activities -Bonds 80,961,832 20,038,114 (12,020,029) 88,979,917 2,068,079 Governmental Activities - Direct Borrowings: PG&E Loan - 2020 298,145 (49,064) 249,081 49,064 Total Governmental Type Activities - Direct Borrowings 298,145 (49,064) 249,081 49,064 Total Governmental Type Activities $ 81,259,977 $ 20,038,114 $ (12,069,093) $ 89,228,998 $ 2,117,143 Business -Type Activities - Bonds: Water and Wastewater Refunding Bonds, Series 2011 $ 3,270,000 $ - $ (345,000) $ 2,925,000 $ 360,000 - Unamortized Premium 277,771 (34,722) 243,049 (34,722) Water and Wastewater Refunding Bonds, Series 2013 8,990,000 (845,000) 8,145,000 875,000 - Unamortized Premium 811,947 (90,216) 721,731 (90,216) Water and Wastewater Refunding Bonds, Series 2016 13,695,000 (985,000) 12,710,000 1,035,000 - Unamortized Premium 2,195,625 (199,603) 1,996,022 (199,603) Total Business -Type Activities - Bonds 29,240,343 (2,499,541) 26,740,802 1,945,459 Business -Type Activities - Direct Borrowings: State Water Resource Loan - 2003 4,533,947 (600,727) 3,933,220 615,746 State Water Resource Loan - 2010 3,816,188 (262,360) 3,553,828 269,968 Total Business -Type Activities - Direct Borrowings 8,350,135 (863,087) 7,487,048 885,714 Total Business -Type Activities $ 37,590,478 $ - $ (3,362,628) $ 34,227,850 $ 2,831,173 75 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) A. Long -Term Debt from Governmental Activities Pension Obligation Bonds, 2006 Series A Bonds — Original Issue $32,975,000 In September 2006, the City issued $32,975,000 in taxable pension obligation bonds. The City is obligated to make payments to the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CaIPERS) as a result of retirement benefits accruing to members of CalPERS. The City's statutory obligation includes, among others, the requirement to amortize the unfunded accrued actuarial liability (UAAL) and to make contributions with respect to such retirement benefits. The proceeds of the bonds were used to provide funds to allow the City to refund its current UAAL with respect to retirement benefits accruing to members of CaIPERS and to prepay a portion of its contribution to CaIPERS for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007. Principal on the bonds is payable annually on June 1. Interest on the bonds is payable semi-annually June 1 and December 1. During fiscal year 2021, the City made principal and interest payments totaling $555,000 and $443,891, respectively. The bonds mature on June 1, 2036, and the underlying serial and term bonds carry an interest rate that varies from 5.2% to 5.5%. The bonds are payable from any source of available funds of the City. The bond covenants contain events of default that require the revenue of the City to be applied by the Trustee as specified in the terms of the agreement if any of the following conditions occur: default on debt service payments; the failure of the City to observe or perform the conditions, covenants, or agreement terms of the debt; bankruptcy filing by the City; or if any court or competent jurisdiction shall assume custody or control of the City. Remedies following an event of default include any remedy available at law or in equity. No such events of default occurred during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. For The Year Ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 605,000 $ 413,550 $ 1,018,550 2023 660,000 379,966 1,039,966 2024 725,000 343,329 1,068,329 2025 790,000 303,085 1,093,085 2026 305,000 259,232 564,232 2027-2031 1,795,000 1,027,490 2,822,490 2032-2036 2,570,000 448,244 3,018,244 $ 7,450,000 $ 3,174,896 $ 10,624,896 76 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) A. Long -Term Debt from Governmental Activities (Continued) Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2010 — Original Issue $8,205,000 In 2010, the Authority issued $8,205,000 of Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2010 to refund and defease all of the Authority's outstanding Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2001, which financed certain improvements to the City's Corporation Yard and paid the costs of issuance of the bonds. A premium of $579,892 was paid and will be amortized over the life of the bonds. The transaction resulted in an economic gain of $1,150,926 and a reduction of $2,575,952 in future debt service payments. Principal is due annually on June 1, commencing on June 1, 2007. Interest on the bonds is payable semiannually on June 1 and December 1, commencing on December 1, 2010. During fiscal year 2021, the City made principal and interest payments totaling $1,125,000 and $39,375, respectively. The bonds mature on June 1, 2021, and the underlying serial and term bonds carry an interest rate that varies from 2.5% to 4.0%. The bonds are limited obligations of the Burlingame Financing Authority and are payable by the Authority solely from the revenues, consisting primarily of base rental payments paid by the City to the Authority and from amounts on deposit in certain funds and accounts held under the trust agreement. The City has covenanted in the facilities sublease to include all base rental payments and additional payments needed in its annual budgets. Should the City default under the facilities sublease, the trustee may terminate the sublease and recover certain damages from the City, or may retain the facilities sublease and hold the City liable for base rental payments as they become due. Base Rental payments may not be accelerated upon a default under the facilities sublease. The debt was officially paid off as of June 30, 2021. Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2010— Original Issue $9,805,000 Series 2010A-1 Tax -Exempt $2,635,000 Series 2010A-2 Taxable — Build America Bonds $7,170,000 The Authority issued Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2010 to provide funds to the City to finance certain improvements to the City's Storm Drainage System and fund a reserve account for the bonds. The bonds include $2,635,000 in tax-exempt bonds and $7,170,000 in taxable Build America Bonds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). Pursuant to the Recovery Act, the City expects to receive a cash subsidy payment from the United States Treasury up to 35% of the interest payable on the Series 2010A-2 bonds on or about each interest payment date. The Refundable Credits received by the City constitute system revenues and are pledged to the payment of installment payments under the Installment Sale Agreement. The tax-exempt series was issued at a premium of $210,326, which will be amortized over the life of the bonds. Principal is due annually on July 1, commencing July 1, 2011. Interest on the bonds is payable semiannually on January 1 and July 1, commencing on January 1, 2011. During fiscal year 2021, the City made principal and interest payments on the tax-exempt series totaling $285,000 and $9,975, respectively. Principal and interest payments on the taxable series totaled $0 and $318,390, respectively, net of the Build America Bonds Interest subsidy. The bonds mature on July 1, 2038, and the underlying serial and term bonds carry interest rates which vary from 3.0% to 6.8%. 77 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) A. Long -Term Debt from Governmental Activities (Continued) Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2010 (continued) The bonds are limited obligations of the Burlingame Financing Authority and are payable by the Authority solely from the revenues generally consisting of installment payments paid by the City to the Authority and from amounts on deposit in certain funds and accounts held under the trust agreement. The installment payments are special obligations of the City under the 2010 Installment Sale Agreement and are separately secured by a pledge of the system revenues of the Storm Drainage System. System revenues are required to be at least equal to 110% of the maximum annual debt service for all outstanding installment payments and all outstanding parity obligations during each fiscal year. The system revenues consist primarily of the Storm Drainage Fees approved by a majority of the parcel owners in the City voting at a special election May 5, 2009. Failure by the City to pay installment payments constitutes an event of default under the installment sale agreement, and the trustee is permitted to pursue remedies at law or in equity to enforce the City's obligation to make such payments. The trustee has no right to accelerate the total unpaid principal amount of the installment payments. No such events of default occurred during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. Ending June 30 Principal Interest Subsidy* Total 2022 $ 295,000 $ 475,245 $ (156,855) $ 613,390 2023 310,000 457,377 (153,906) 613,471 2024 320,000 438,600 (147,859) 610,741 2025 335,000 419,218 (141,561) 612,657 2026 345,000 398,927 (135,014) 608,913 2027-2031 1,975,000 1,628,661 (558,275) 3,045,386 2032-2036 2,455,000 900,735 (323,651) 3,032,084 2037-2038 1,135,000 116,585 (57,214) 1,194,371 7,170,000 4,835,348 (1,674,335) 10,331,013 Plus: Una morti zed premium 126,290 126,290 $ 7,296,290 $ 4,835,348 $ (1,674,335) $10,331,013 * Assumes sequestration rate of Federal subsidy of Build America Bonds remains at 2021 rate I&3 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) A. Long -Term Debt from Governmental Activities (Continued) Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2012 — Original Issue $10,030,000 In December 2012, the Authority issued the Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2012 to finance certain improvements to Downtown Burlingame Avenue in accordance with the City's Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Project and to pay the costs of issuance of the bonds. The bonds were issued at a premium of $237,936, which will be amortized over the life of the bonds. Principal and interest are due annually on June 1, commencing on June 1, 2013. During fiscal year 2021, the City made principal and interest payments totaling $250,000 and $296,688, respectively. The bonds mature on June 1, 2042, and the underlying serial and term bonds carry an interest rate that varies from 2.0% to 5.0%. The bonds are limited obligations of the Burlingame Financing Authority and are payable by the Authority solely from revenues consisting primarily of base rental payments paid by the City to the Authority and from amounts on deposit in certain funds and accounts held under the trust agreement. The City has covenanted in the facilities sublease to include all base rental payments and additional payments needed in its annual budgets. Should the City default under the facilities sublease, the trustee may terminate the sublease and recover certain damages from the City, or may retain the facilities sublease and hold the City liable for base rental payments as they become due. Base rental payments may not be accelerated upon a default under the facilities sublease. No such events of default occurred during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. For The Year Ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 265,000 $ 286,688 $ 551,688 2023 275,000 276,088 551,088 2024 285,000 262,338 547,338 2025 300,000 248,088 548,088 2026 315,000 233,088 548,088 2027-2031 1,725,000 1,019,655 2,744,655 2032-2036 2,020,000 727,800 2,747,800 2037-2041 2,400,000 350,700 2,750,700 2042 530,000 18,550 548,550 8,115,000 3,422,995 11,537,995 Plus: Una morti zed premium 173,409 173,409 $ 8,288,409 $ 3,422,995 $ 11,711,404 79 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) A. Long -Term Debt from Governmental Activities (Continued) Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2012 — Original Issue $10,615,000 In December 2012, the Authority issued Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2012 to provide funds to the City to finance certain improvements to the City's Storm Drainage System and fund a reserve account for the bonds. Principal is due annually on July 1, commencing July 1, 2013. Interest on bonds is payable semiannually on January 1 and July 1, commencing on July 1, 2013. During fiscal year 2021, the City made principal and interest payments totaling $8,440,000 and $286,891, respectively. The bonds mature on July 1, 2038, and the underlying serial and term bonds carry interest rates which vary from 2.0% to 5.0%. The bonds are limited obligations of the Burlingame Financing Authority and are payable by the Authority solely from the revenues generally consisting of installment payments paid by the City to the Authority and from amounts on deposit in certain funds and accounts held under the trust agreement. The installment payments are special obligations of the City under the 2012 Installment Sale Agreement and are separately secured by a pledge of the system revenues of the Storm Drainage System. System revenues are required to be at least equal to 110% of the maximum annual debt service for all outstanding installment payments and all outstanding parity obligations during each fiscal year. The system revenues consist primarily of the Storm Drainage Fees approved by a majority of the parcel owners in the City voting at a special election May 5, 2009. Failure by the City to pay installment payments constitutes an event of default under the installment sale agreement, and the trustee is permitted to pursue remedies at law or in equity to enforce the City's obligation to make such payments. The trustee has no right to accelerate the total unpaid principal amount of the installment payments. As of June 30, 2021, the Bond was refund and paid off by the Storm Drainage Revenue Bond, Series 2021. Ee CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) A. Long -Term Debt from Governmental Activities (Continued) Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2016— Original Issue $9,855,000 In February 2016, the Authority issued Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2016 to provide funds to the City to finance certain improvements to the City's Storm Drainage System and fund a reserve account for the bonds. Principal is due annually on July 1, commencing July 1, 2016. Interest on bonds is payable semiannually on January 1 and July 1, commencing on July 1, 2017. During fiscal year 2021, the City made principal and interest payments totaling $305,000 and $346,075, respectively. The bonds mature on July 1, 2038, and the underlying serial and term bonds carry interest rates which vary from 2.0% to 5.0%. The bonds are limited obligations of the Burlingame Financing Authority and are payable by the Authority solely from the revenues generally consisting of installment payments paid by the City to the Authority and from amounts on deposit in certain funds and accounts held under the trust agreement. The installment payments are special obligations of the City under the 2016 Installment Sale Agreement and are separately secured by a pledge of the system revenues of the Storm Drainage System. System revenues are required to be at least equal to 110% of the maximum annual debt service for all outstanding installment payments and all outstanding parity obligations during each fiscal year. The system revenues consist primarily of the Storm Drainage Fees approved by a majority of the parcel owners in the City voting at a special election May 5, 2009. Failure by the City to pay installment payments constitutes an event of default under the installment sale agreement, and the trustee is permitted to pursue remedies at law or in equity to enforce the City's obligation to make such payments. The trustee has no right to accelerate the total unpaid principal amount of the installment payments. No such events of default occurred during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. For The Year Ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 310,000 $ 333,875 $ 643,875 2023 335,000 318,375 653,375 2024 345,000 301,625 646,625 2025 365,000 284,375 649,375 2026 385,000 266,125 651,125 2027-2031 2,230,000 1,035,025 3,265,025 2032-2036 2,720,000 563,975 3,283,975 2037-2038 1,230,000 93,000 1,323,000 7,920,000 3,196,375 11,116,375 Plus: Unamortized premium 792,070 792,070 $ 8,712,070 $ 3,196,375 $ 11,908,445 01 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) A. Long -Term Debt from Governmental Activities (Continued) Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2019 — Original Issue $31,400,000 In December 2019, the Authority issued the Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2019 to finance the construction and equipping of a portion of the Burlingame Community Center to be located at 850 Burlingame Avenue and to pay the costs of issuance of the bonds. The bonds were issued at a premium of $7,831,615, which will be amortized over the life of the bonds. Principal and interest are due annually on July 1, commencing on June 1, 2020. During fiscal year 2021, the City made principal and interest payments totaling $485,000 and $1,512,000, respectively. The bonds mature on July 1, 2049, and the underlying serial and term bonds carry an interest rate of 5.0%. The bonds are limited obligations of the Burlingame Financing Authority and are payable by the Authority solely from revenues consisting primarily of base rental payments paid by the City to the Authority and from amounts on deposit in certain funds and accounts held under the trust agreement. The City has covenanted in the facilities sublease to include all base rental payments and additional payments needed in its annual budgets. Should the City default under the facilities sublease, the trustee may terminate the sublease and recover certain damages from the City, or may retain the facilities sublease and hold the City liable for base rental payments as they become due. Base rental payments may not be accelerated upon a default under the facilities sublease. No such events of default occurred during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. For The Year Ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 510,000 $ 1,487,750 $ 1,997,750 2023 535,000 1,462,250 1,997,250 2024 560,000 1,435,500 1,995,500 2025 590,000 1,407,500 1,997,500 2026 620,000 1,378,000 1,998,000 2027-2031 3,595,000 6,393,000 9,988,000 2032-2036 4,585,000 5,400,250 9,985,250 2037-2041 5,855,000 4,133,250 9,988,250 2042-2046 7,470,000 2,516,000 9,986,000 2047-2049 5,435,000 552,250 5,987,250 29,755,000 26,165,750 55,920,750 Plus: Una mortized premium 7,440,034 7,440,034 $ 37,195,034 $26,165,750 $ 63,360,784 Ei CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) A. Long -Term Debt from Governmental Activities (Continued) PG&E On -Bill Financing 2019 Loans (Direct Borrowing) The City entered into several loan agreements with Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) through the On -Bill Financing (OBF) Program to retrofit City lighting with qualified energy-saving lights throughout the City. The notes are to be repaid with future energy savings over various periods at interest rates of 0%. Under this program, the City's bill after the retrofits are completed will be kept constant, rather than reduced based on energy savings. PG&E will use the City's financial savings from lower energy bills to service the debt associated with the upgrades. The annual requirements to repay the PG&E note outstanding as of June 30, 2021 are as follows: For The Year Ending June 30 Principal 2022 $ 49,064 2023 47,866 2024 33,321 2025 30,338 2026 29,737 2027-2029 58,755 $ 249,081 Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2021— Original Issue $16,410,000 In June 2021, the Authority issued Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2021 to provide funds to the City to finance certain improvements to the City's Storm Drainage System and fund a reserve account for the bonds, and to refund the Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2012. As a result, the refunded bonds are considered to be defeased, and the liability has been removed from the Statement of Net Position. The refunding resulted in an overall debt service savings of $367,658. The net present value of the debt service savings is called an economic gain and amounted to $980,368. The principal is due annually on July 1, commencing July 1, 2021. Interest on bonds is payable semiannually on January 1 and July 1, commencing on July 1, 2021. During fiscal year 2021, the City made no principal and interest payments. The bonds mature on July 1, 2038, and the underlying serial and term bonds carry interest rates which vary from 2.0% to 5.0%. E CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) A. Long -Term Debt from Governmental Activities (Continued) Storm Drainage Revenue Bonds, Series 2021 — Original Issue $16,410,000 (Continued) The bonds are limited obligations of the Burlingame Financing Authority and are payable by the Authority solely from the revenues generally consisting of installment payments paid by the City to the Authority and from amounts on deposit in certain funds and accounts held under the trust agreement. The installment payments are special obligations of the City under the 2021 Installment Sale Agreement and are separately secured by a pledge of the system revenues of the Storm Drainage System. System revenues are required to be at least equal to 110% of the maximum annual debt service for all outstanding installment payments and all outstanding parity obligations during each fiscal year. The system revenues consist primarily of the Storm Drainage Fees approved by a majority of the parcel owners in the City voting at a special election May 5, 2009. Failure by the City to pay installment payments constitutes an event of default under the installment sale agreement, and the trustee is permitted to pursue remedies at law or in equity to enforce the City's obligation to make such payments. The trustee has no right to accelerate the total unpaid principal amount of the installment payments. No such events of default occurred during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. For The Year Ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 620,000 $ 683,750 $ 1,303,750 2023 665,000 631,600 1,296,600 2024 710,000 605,000 1,315,000 2025 740,000 576,600 1,316,600 2026 775,000 547,000 1,322,000 2027-2031 4,490,000 2,238,200 6,728,200 2032-2036 5,710,000 1,247,400 6,957,400 2037-2038 2,700,000 163,400 2,863,400 16,410,000 6,692,950 23,102,950 Plus: Una morti zed premium 3,628,114 3,628,114 $ 20,038,114 $ 6,692,950 $ 26,731,064 E� CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) B. Long -Term Debt from Business -Type Activities Water and Wastewater Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 2011 — Original Issue $5,935,000 In 2011, the Authority issued $5,935,000 of Water and Wastewater Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 2011 to refund and defease all of the Authority's outstanding Water and Wastewater Revenue Bonds, Series 2003, which financed certain improvements to the City's water and wastewater system, and to pay the costs of issuance of the bonds. Principal is payable annually on April 1, commencing April 1, 2012. Interest on the bonds is payable semiannually on April 1 and October 1, commencing April 1, 2012. For the current year, principal and interest paid on the Water and Wastewater Bonds, Series 2011 were $345,000 and $155,751, respectively. Of this amount, principal and interest payments made by the Water Enterprise Fund were $220,000 and $99,313, respectively. Principal and interest payments made by the Sewer Enterprise Fund were $125,000 and $56,438, respectively. The bonds mature on April 1, 2028, with an interest rate that varies from 4.00 to 4.75%. A premium of $575,800 was paid and will be amortized over the life of the bond. The refunding transaction resulted in an economic gain of $450,734 and a reduction of $1,429,732 in future debt service payments. The bonds are limited obligations of the Burlingame Financing Authority and are payable by the Authority solely from the revenues generally consisting of separate installment payments paid by the City to the Authority. The bonds are secured by a pledge of the net revenue generated from the water system, wastewater system, and from amounts on deposit in certain funds held under the trust agreement. Net system revenues are required to be at least equal to 120% of the installment payments and debt service for any parity obligations during each fiscal year, and net system revenues (excluding connection fees and money transferred from any rate stabilization fund) will be equal to at least 100% of the installment payments and debt service on other parity obligation during each fiscal year. The City is not obligated to use system net revenues from one system to make up for a deficiency in the installment payments in connection with the other system. Failure by the City to pay installment payments constitutes an event of default under the installment sale agreement, and the trustee is permitted to pursue remedies at law or in equity to enforce the City's obligation to make such payments. Although the trustee has the right to accelerate the total unpaid principal amount of the installment payments, there is no assurance that the City would have sufficient funds to pay the accelerated amounts. No such events of default occurred during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. EJ•" CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) B. Long -Term Debt from Business -Type Activities (Continued) For The Year Ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 360,000 $ 138,500 $ 498,500 2023 380,000 120,500 500,500 2024 400,000 101,500 501,500 2025 415,000 81,500 496,500 2026 435,000 64,900 499,900 2027-2028 935,000 63,550 998,550 2,925,000 570,450 3,495,450 Plus: Una morti zed premium 243,049 243,049 $ 3,168,049 $ 570,450 $ 3,738,499 Water and Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2013 — Original Issue $14,260,000 In 2013, the Authority issued $14,260,000 of Water and Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2013 to advance refund the Authority's outstanding Water and Wastewater Revenue Bonds, Series 2004, which financed certain improvements to the City's water and wastewater system, and to pay the costs of issuance of the bonds. Principal is payable annually on April 1, commencing April 1, 2013. Interest on the bonds is payable semi-annually on April 1 and October 1, commencing October 1, 2013. During fiscal year 2021, the City made principal and interest payments of $845,000 and $359,776, respectively. Of this amount, principal and interest payments made by the Water Enterprise Fund were $560,000 and $238,938, respectively. Principal and interest payments made by the Sewer Enterprise Fund were $285,000 and $120,838, respectively. The bonds mature on April 1, 2029, with underlying serial and term bonds carrying an interest rate that varies from 2.00% to 5.00%. The bond was issued a premium of $1,533,676 which will be amortized over the life of the bond. The refunding transaction resulted in an economic gain of $584,903. M. CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) B. Long -Term Debt from Business -Type Activities (Continued) The bonds are limited obligations of the Burlingame Financing Authority and are payable by the Authority solely from the revenues generally consisting of separate installment payments paid by the City to the Authority. The bonds are secured by a pledge of the net revenue generated from the water system, wastewater system, and from amounts on deposit in certain funds held under the trust agreement. Net system revenues are required to be at least equal to 120% of the installment payments and debt service for any parity obligations during each fiscal year, and net system revenues (excluding connection fees and money transferred from any rate stabilization fund) will be equal to at least 100% of the installment payments and debt service on other parity obligation during each fiscal year. The City is not obligated to use system net revenues from one system to make up for a deficiency in the installment payments in connection with the other system. Failure by the City to pay installment payments constitutes an event of default under the installment sale agreement, and the trustee is permitted to pursue remedies at law or in equity to enforce the City's obligation to make such payments. Although the trustee has the right to accelerate the total unpaid principal amount of the installment payments, there is no assurance that the City would have sufficient funds to pay the accelerated amounts. No such events of default occurred during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. For The Year Ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 875,000 $ 325,976 $ 1,200,976 2023 910,000 290,976 1,200,976 2024 950,000 254,576 1,204,576 2025 995,000 207,076 1,202,076 2026 1,050,000 157,326 1,207,326 2027-2029 3,365,000 246,678 3,611,678 8,145,000 1,482,608 9,627,608 Plus u na morti zed premium 721,731 721,731 $ 8,866,731 $ 1,482,608 $ 10,349,339 Water and Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2016 — Original Issue $17,585,000 In July 2016, the Authority issued $17,585,000 of Water and Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2016 to advance refund the Authority's outstanding Water and Wastewater Revenue Bonds, Series 2007, which financed certain improvements to the City's water and wastewater system, and to pay the costs of issuance of the bonds. Principal is payable annually on April 1, commencing April 1, 2017. Interest on the bonds is payable semi-annually on April 1 and October 1, commencing October 1, 2016. During fiscal year 2021, the City made principal and interest payments of $985,000 and $592,100, respectively. Of this amount, principal and interest payments made by the Water Enterprise Fund were $515,000 and $309,150, respectively. Principal and interest payments made by the Sewer Enterprise Fund were $470,000 and $282,950, respectively. M. CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) B. Long -Term Debt from Business -Type Activities (Continued) The bonds mature on April 1, 2031, with underlying serial and term bonds carrying an interest rate that varies from 2.00% to 5.00%. The bond was issued a premium of $2,994,038 which will be amortized over the life of the bond. The bonds are limited obligations of the Burlingame Financing Authority and are payable by the Authority solely from the revenues generally consisting of separate installment payments paid by the City to the Authority. The bonds are secured by a pledge of the net revenue generated from the water system, wastewater system, and from amounts on deposit in certain funds held under the trust agreement. Net system revenues are required to be at least equal to 120% of the installment payments and debt service for any parity obligations during each fiscal year, and net system revenues (excluding connection fees and money transferred from any rate stabilization fund) will be equal to at least 100% of the installment payments and debt service on other parity obligation during each fiscal year. The City is not obligated to use system net revenues from one system to make up for a deficiency in the installment payments in connection with the other system. Failure by the City to pay installment payments constitutes an event of default under the installment sale agreement, and the trustee is permitted to pursue remedies at law or in equity to enforce the City's obligation to make such payments. Although the trustee has the right to accelerate the total unpaid principal amount of the installment payments, there is no assurance that the City would have sufficient funds to pay the accelerated amounts. No such events of default occurred during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. For The Year Ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 1,035,000 $ 552,700 $ 1,587,700 2023 1,080,000 500,950 1,580,950 2024 1,130,000 446,950 1,576,950 2025 1,185,000 390,450 1,575,450 2026 1,250,000 331,200 1,581,200 2027-2031 7,030,000 866,000 7,896,000 12,710,000 3,088,250 15,798,250 Plus: Una morti zed premium 1,996,022 1,996,022 $ 14,706,022 $ 3,088,250 $ 17,794,272 E.3 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 - LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) B. Long -Term Debt from Business -Type Activities (Continued) State Water Resources Control Board Loan, 2010 (Direct Borrowing) - Principal $5,605,800 In 2010, the City entered into an agreement with CWRCB to receive financial assistance for the Influent Storm Water Retention Basin project at the City's wastewater treatment facility, which involves the construction of an influent storm water retention basin and associated pumping system, commencing in July 2011. The loan is due in annual installments payments at an interest of 2.9%, and the net revenues of the Sewer Fund are pledged for the prompt payment of debt service on the loan. Installment payments commenced July 2012 and shall be fully amortized in July 2031. The City is required to maintain compliance with all provisions of the loan. During fiscal year 2021, the City made principal and interest payments of $262,360 and $110,670, respectively. For The Year Ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 269,968 $ 103,062 $ 373,030 2023 277,797 95,232 373,029 2024 285,854 87,176 373,030 2025 294,143 78,886 373,029 2026 302,674 70,356 373,030 2027-2031 1,650,234 214,914 1,865,148 2032 473,158 13,718 486,876 $ 3,553,828 $ 663,344 $ 4,217,172 State Water Resources Control Board Loan, 2003 (Direct Borrowing) - Principal $10,743,788 In 2003, the City entered into an agreement with the State of California Water Resources Control Board (CWRCB) to receive financial assistance for the improvement of the wastewater treatment plant which consists of upgrading the performance of several unit processes and increasing their reliability to help the plant meet discharge requirements. The loan is due in annual installment payments at an interest of 1.5%. Installment payments will start August 2007 and shall be fully amortized August 2026. The City is required to maintain compliance with all provisions of the loan. During fiscal year 2021, the City made principal and interest payments of $600,727 and $113,349, respectively. For The Year EndingJune 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 615,746 $ 98,331 $ 714,077 2023 631,139 82,937 714,076 2024 646,918 67,158 714,076 2025 663,091 50,985 714,076 2026 679,668 34,408 714,076 2027 696,658 17,417 714,075 $ 3,933,220 $ 351,236 $ 4,284,456 IM CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 - LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) C. Future Debt Requirements The future outstanding debt of the City, net of amortized costs as of June 30, 2021, for governmental activities is as follows: TOTAL FUTURE DEBT REPAYMENTS - BONDS TOTAL FUTURE DEBT REPAYMENTS -DIRECT BORROWINGS For The Year For The Year EndingJune 30 Principal Interest Total End ingJune 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 2,605,000 $ 3,524,003 $ 6,129,003 2023 2,780,000 3,371,750 6,151,750 2024 2,945,000 3,238,533 6,183,533 2025 3,120,000 3,097,305 6,217,305 2026 2,745,000 2,947,358 5,692,358 2027-2031 15,810,000 12,783,756 28,593,756 2032-2036 20,060,000 8,964,753 29,024,753 2037-2041 13,320,000 4,799,721 18,119,721 2041-2046 8,000,000 2,534,550 10,534,550 2046-2049 5,435,000 552,250 5,987,250 154,334 76,820,000 45,813,979 122,633,979 Plus: 3,274,026 2025 957,234 Una mortized 1,087,105 2026 2,735,000 premium 12,159,917 2026 12,159,917 104,764 $ 88,979,917 $45,813,979 $ 134,793,896 2022 $ 49,064 $ $ 49,064 2023 47,866 47,866 2024 33,321 33,321 2025 30,338 30,338 2026 29,737 29,737 2027-2029 58,755 58,755 2022 $ 249,081 $ $ 249,081 The future outstanding debt of the City, net of amortized costs as of June 30, 2021, for business - type activities is as follows: TOTAL FUTURE DEBT REPAYMENTS - BONDS TOTAL FUTURE DEBT REPAYMENTS - DIRECT BORROWINGS For The Yea r For The Yea r EndingJune 30 Principal Interest Total Ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2022 $ 2,270,000 $ 1,017,176 $ 3,287,176 2022 $ 885,714 $ 201,393 $ 1,087,107 2023 2,370,000 912,426 3,282,426 2023 908,936 178,169 1,087,105 2024 2,480,000 803,026 3,283,026 2024 932,772 154,334 1,087,106 2025 2,595,000 679,026 3,274,026 2025 957,234 129,871 1,087,105 2026 2,735,000 553,426 3,288,426 2026 982,342 104,764 1,087,106 2027-2031 11,330,000 1,176,228 12,506,228 2027-2031 2,346,892 232,331 2,579,223 23,780,000 5,141,308 28,921,308 2032 473,158 13,718 486,876 Plus u n a mo rti zed premium 2,960,802 2,960,802 $ 7,487,048 $ 1,014,580 $ 8,501,628 $ 26,740,802 $ 5,141,308 $ 31,882,110 D. Arbitrage Rebate Liability Under U.S. Treasury Department regulations, all government tax - exempt debt issued after August 31, 1986, is subject to arbitrage rebate requirements. The requirements stipulate, in general, that the excess of earnings from the investment of tax-exempt bond proceeds over related interest expenditure on the bonds must be remitted to the federal government on every fifth anniversary of each bond issue. The city has valuated each outstanding debt obligation that is subjected to arbitrage rebate requirement and has determined that there is no arbitrage rebate liability as of June 30, 2021. all CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) E. Credit Rating The City carried underlying ratings of AA+ for the Water and Sewer Funds, AA+ for the Storm Drainage Fund, and AAA as the City's institutional credit rating for general obligation debt. These ratings were most recently affirmed by Standard & Poor's in August 2019. F. Revenue Pledge The City has pledged future revenues to debt service on previously issued revenue bonds to finance the capital programs related to the Water and Sewer Funds or defease previously issued revenue bonds: (1) Water and Wastewater Revenue Bonds, Series 2011; (2) Water and Wastewater Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 2013; (3) Water and Wastewater Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 2016. Debt services on certain bonds are payable solely through the net revenue of the activities of the Water and Sewer Funds. Under the provisions of GASB Statement No. 48, the City's net revenue for the year ended June 30, 2021, and net amounts available to pay debt service on the revenue bonds are as follows: Water Fund Sewer Fund Pledged revenue required for future principal and interest $ 16,870,345 $ 20,552,598 Principal and interest paid during the year 1,942,401 2,427,332 Net revenue, excluding depreciation and amortization 8,076,648 5,094,467 Percentage of revenue pledged 24.05% 47.65% Term of commitment 2031 2032 G. Debt Service Coverage Under the terms of the City's Indenture, the Water and Sewer Funds are required to collect sufficient net revenues each fiscal year, which may include any other unappropriated enterprise funds available for expenditure on debt service. The Indenture requires that net revenues are, at minimum, equal to 1.20 times annual debt service for the applicable fiscal year. For the year ended June 30, 2021, the Water and Sewer Funds had sufficient net revenues to satisfy the requirements of the Indenture. Under the terms of the City's Indenture, the Storm Drainage Fund is required to collect sufficient net revenues each fiscal year, which may include any other unappropriated funds available for expenditure on debt service. The Indenture requires that net revenues are, at minimum, equal to 1.10 times annual debt service for the applicable fiscal year. For the year ended June 30, 2021, the Storm Drainage Fund had sufficient net revenues to satisfy the requirements of the Indenture. 91 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) G. Debt Service Coverage (Continued) Other obligations relating to governmental activities are paid solely from available revenue of the City, such as the Lease Revenue Bonds Series 2010 and the Pension Obligation Bonds Series 2006, which are subordinate to previously issued parity debt relating to the Water and Sewer Funds. The following table summarizes debt service coverage levels for the Water Fund for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021: Water Fund Gross operating revenue $ 20,090,362 Less: Operating expenses, 714,076 except depreciation and amortization (12,013,714) Net revenue 8,076,648 Debt Service 181,438 Water Refunding Bonds, Series 2016 824,150 Water Refunding Bonds, Series 2011 319,313 Water Refunding Bonds, Series 2013 798,938 Parity Debt Service 1,942,401 Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2010 388,086 Pension Obligation Bond, Series 2006 124,861 Total Debt Service $ 2,455,348 Parity Debt Service Coverage 4.16 Total Debt Service Coverage 3.29 The following table summarizes debt service coverage levels for the Sewer Fund for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021: Sewer Fund Gross operating revenue $ 13,098,508 Less: Operating expenses, except depreciation and amortization (8,004,041) Net revenue 5,094,467 Debt Service State Water Resource Board Loan, 2003 $ 714,076 Wastewater Refunding Bonds, Series 2016 752,950 State Water Resource Board Loan, 2010 373,030 Wastewater Refunding Bonds, Series 2011 181,438 Wastewater Refunding Bonds, Series 2013 405,838 Parity Debt Service 2,427,332 Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2010 388,086 Pension Obligation Bond, Series 2006 124,861 Total Debt Service $ 2,940,279 Parity Debt Service Coverage 2.10 Tota I Debt Servi ce Covera ge 1.73 ON CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT (Continued) The following table summarizes debt service coverage levels for the Storm Drainage Fund for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021: Storm Drainage Fund Net Revenue, Excluding Depreciation and Amortization Debt Service Storm Drain Revenue Bond, Series 2010* Storm Drain Revenue Bond, Series 2012 Storm Drain Revenue Bond, Series 2016 Storm Drain Revenue Bond, Series 2021 Parity Debt Service Parity Debt Service Coverage * net of IRS refundable credits NOTE 7 — OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES A. Compensated Absences $ 2,984,415 613,365 626,891 651,075 $ 1,891,331 1.58 The City's compensated absences consist of accumulated vacation, compensatory time, and administrative leave for management employees. The estimated unpaid compensated absences at June 30, 2021 are recorded in the government -wide and proprietary fund financial statements. The City permits its employees to accumulate vacation hours up to a maximum of two years of annual accrual. Depending on the bargaining unit, Sick leave is accumulated up to 2000 or 2080 hours. Upon retirement unused sick leave is reported to CalPERS and converted to service credit in accordance with CalPERS rules and procedures. Depending on the bargaining unit, an employee may elect to be compensated for up to 600 hours of unused sick leave and the remainder can be reported to CalPERS for conversion to service credit. At retirement or termination, employees receive compensation for any unused vacation leave balance, any accrued compensatory time, and administrative leave for management employees. Such cash payments are recognized as expenditures of the government -wide and proprietary funds. The General Fund has been primarily used to liquidate the liability for compensated absences. Balance on June 30, 2020 Additions Payments Balance on June 30, 2021 Due Within One Year Noncurrent Portion Governmental Business Total $ 2,902,702 $ 440,879 1,483,402 382,211 (1,001,001) (356,326) $ 3,385,103 $ 466,764 $ 3,343,581 1,865,613 (1,357,327) $ 3,851,867 $ 440,724 $ 50,580 $ 491,304 $ 2,944,379 $ 416,184 $ 3,360,563 93 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 7 — OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES (Continued) B. Pollution Remediation Obligation Landfill Closure and Post -Closure Costs The City closed the Burlingame Landfill located on Airport Boulevard in accordance with the California Code of Regulations under the jurisdiction of the California Integrated Waste Management Board in 1987. The landfill had been filled to capacity and has been reconstructed as a multi -use recreational facility. State and federal laws and regulations require that the City perform certain maintenance and monitoring functions at the landfill site. These same regulations require the City to make annual contributions and/or provide an alternative funding mechanism to finance closure and post -closure costs. The City has collected a surcharge on solid waste collection fees in order to cover these costs. The City was also required by the Bay Area Air Quality Management Board to install a gas collection system. In 1997, the City developed a post -closure plan that met all regulatory requirements. The post - closure estimate was $3,660,000. In 2008, the City recognized an additional liability, as required by the State, for corrective action. The corrective action cost estimate was $733,100. Consequently, the City recorded 100% of its closure and post -closure costs based upon these estimates. This estimate is based upon the original estimates for post -closure and corrective action costs as reported to the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) as adjusted, based on changes in the implicit price deflator for the gross national product in accordance with Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations, reduced by any permitted 15 year amortization of post -closure costs, and adjusted for incurred costs and expected costs of remediation. At June 30, 2021, the City's outstanding future post -closure and corrective action costs were estimated at $3,397,308. The City will fund ongoing post -closure costs with a combination of revenues from the surcharge and interest earnings. However, if these revenues are inadequate or additional post -closure care requirements are determined, these costs may need to be covered by additional garbage surcharges or from future tax revenue. 94 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 8 — RISK MANAGEMENT A. Self -Insurance and Contingent Liabilities Effective July 1, 1976, and December 2, 1976, respectively, the City implemented a self-insurance program for workers' compensation and general liability. The City is a member of the Pooled Liability Assurance Network Joint Powers Authority (PLAN JPA), a joint powers insurance authority which consists of 28 member cities in the San Francisco Bay Area. PLAN JPA provides liability insurance with coverage, claims management, risk management services, and legal defense to its participating members. PLAN JPA is governed by a board of directors, which comprises officials appointed by each participating member. Premiums paid to PLAN JPA are subject to possible refund based on the results of actuarial studies and approval by PLAN JPA's board of directors. Premiums are assessed to the participants based on their individual loss experience. The PLAN JPA claim administrators set the reserve levels for known liability claims. General liability insurance coverage has been purchased by PLAN JPA for losses exceeding $250,000 up to a maximum of $30,000,000. The workers' compensation program is administered by a third -party administrator (TPA). The TPA sets reserve levels for reported claims. Excess workers' compensation insurance has been purchased by the City for losses exceeding $500,000 up to the maximum statutory limit. The City's liabilities are reported when it is both probable that a loss has occurred, and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. The claims and litigation liabilities are reported in the governmental activities of the government -wide financial statements and in the internal service fund and include an amount for claims that have been incurred but not reported. The liabilities are re-evaluated annually using the results of actuarial studies. The estimated liability for claims and litigation is calculated considering recent claim settlement trends, amounts for claims incurred but not reported, current settlements, frequency of claims, past experience, and economic factors. Changes in the balances of the City's claims liabilities were as follows: There have been no significant reductions in any insurance coverage, nor have there been any insurance related settlements that exceeded insurance coverage during the past ten fiscal years. Current Year Payments for Claims and Currentand Balance Changes in Prior Fiscal Balance July 1 Estimates Years June 30 2011-2012 $ 6,640,000 $ 1,516,265 $ (1,085,265) $ 7,071,000 2012-2013 7,071,000 1,595,000 (1,892,000) 6,774,000 2013-2014 6,774,000 2,813,959 (1,692,959) 7,895,000 2014-2015 7,895,000 911,838 (1,791,838) 7,015,000 2015-2016 7,015,000 910,959 (1,507,959) 6,418,000 2016-2017 6,418,000 1,675,414 (1,558,414) 6,535,000 2017-2018 6,535,000 1,591,781 (1,461,781) 6,665,000 2018-2019 6,665,000 1,311,960 (1,468,960) 6,508,000 2019-2020 6,508,000 2,068,422 (1,797,422) 6,779,000 2020-2021 6,779,000 3,672,000 (1,481,000) 8,970,000 There have been no significant reductions in any insurance coverage, nor have there been any insurance related settlements that exceeded insurance coverage during the past ten fiscal years. CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 8 — RISK MANAGEMENT (Continued) A. Self -Insurance and Contingent Liabilities, (Continued) In September 2021, an actuarial review was conducted and completed to identify the estimated liability for the City's Self -Insured General Liability Program as well as determine the various funding confidence levels to cover that liability. The study estimated the expected liability for outstanding claims to be $811,000 as of June 30, 2021. The study recommends that the City set aside an amount in addition to the discounted expected loss costs to be set aside as a margin for contingencies. As of June 30, 2021, the City has funded the general liability program at the 90% confidence level. In September 2021, an actuarial review was conducted and completed to identify the estimated liability for the City's Self -Insured Workers' Compensation Program as well as determine the various funding confidence levels to cover that liability as of June 30, 2021. The study estimated that the outstanding claims at June 30, 2021, were $5,459,000. The study also recommends that an amount be set aside as a margin for contingencies. As of June 30, 2021, the City has funded the workers' compensation program at the 90% confidence level. NOTE 9 — PENSION PLANS — COST-SHARING The combined total for City's both Miscellaneous and Safety pension plans are: A. General information about the Safety Pension Plan The City's Safety Plan is part of the public agency cost-sharing multiple -employer defined benefit pension plan, which is administered by CaIPERS. The Plan consists of a miscellaneous pool and a safety pool (also referred to as "risk pools"), which are comprised of individual employer miscellaneous and safety rate plans, respectively. Individual employers may sponsor more than one miscellaneous and safety rate plan. The employer participates in one cost-sharing multiple -employer defined benefit pension plan regardless of the number of rate plans the employer sponsors. The City sponsors two rate plans (Police Classic tier and Police PEPRA tier) within the safety risk pool. Plan Descriptions — All qualified permanent and probationary employees are eligible to participate in the City's separate Safety Employee Pension plan, cost-sharing multiple -employer defined benefit pension plans administered by the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CaIPERS), which acts as a common investment and administrative agent for its participating member employers. Benefit provisions under the Plans are established by State statute and the City's resolution. CalPERS issues publicly available reports that include a full description of the pension plans regarding benefit provisions, assumptions and membership information that can be found on the CAPERS website. W. Miscellaneous Plan Safety Plan Agent -Multiple Cost -Sharing Total Net pension liabilities $ 44,253,429 $ 32,035,051 $ 76,288,480 Deferred outflows of resources 7,516,747 6,851,291 14,368,038 Deferred inflows of resources 34,095 1,215,211 1,249,306 Pension expenses 3,523,332 4,592,655 8,115,987 A. General information about the Safety Pension Plan The City's Safety Plan is part of the public agency cost-sharing multiple -employer defined benefit pension plan, which is administered by CaIPERS. The Plan consists of a miscellaneous pool and a safety pool (also referred to as "risk pools"), which are comprised of individual employer miscellaneous and safety rate plans, respectively. Individual employers may sponsor more than one miscellaneous and safety rate plan. The employer participates in one cost-sharing multiple -employer defined benefit pension plan regardless of the number of rate plans the employer sponsors. The City sponsors two rate plans (Police Classic tier and Police PEPRA tier) within the safety risk pool. Plan Descriptions — All qualified permanent and probationary employees are eligible to participate in the City's separate Safety Employee Pension plan, cost-sharing multiple -employer defined benefit pension plans administered by the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CaIPERS), which acts as a common investment and administrative agent for its participating member employers. Benefit provisions under the Plans are established by State statute and the City's resolution. CalPERS issues publicly available reports that include a full description of the pension plans regarding benefit provisions, assumptions and membership information that can be found on the CAPERS website. W. CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 9 — PENSION PLANS — COST-SHARING (Continued) A. General information about the Safety Pension Plan (Continued) Benefits Provided — CalPERS provides service retirement and disability benefits, annual cost of living adjustments and death benefits to plan members, who must be public employees and beneficiaries. Benefits are based on years of credited service, equal to one year of full time employment. Members with five years of total service are eligible to retire at age 50 with statutorily reduced benefits. All members are eligible for non -duty disability benefits after 10 years of service. The death benefit is one of the following: the Basic Death Benefit, the 1957 Survivor Benefit, or the Optional Settlement 2W Death Benefit. The cost of living adjustments for each plan are applied as specified by the Public Employees' Retirement Law. The Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA), Assembly Bill 340, is applicable to employees new to CalPERS and hired after December 31, 2012. The Plan's provisions and benefits in effect at June 30, 2021, are summarized as follows: Hire date Benefit formula Benefit vesting schedule Benefit payments Retirement age Monthly benefits, as a % of annual salary Required employee contribution rates Required employer contribution rates Safety Classic PEPRA Prior to On or after January 1, 2013 January 1, 2013 3.0% @ 50 2.7% @ 57 5 years service monthly for life 50-55 3% 9% 25.540% 5 years service monthly for life 50-57 2.0%-2.7% 13.75% 13.884% Beginning in fiscal year 2017, CalPERS collects employer contributions for the cost-sharing plan as a percentage of payroll for the normal cost portion as noted in the rates above and as a dollar amount for contributions toward the unfunded liability and side fund. The dollar amounts are billed on a monthly basis. The City's required contribution for the unfunded liability was $1,995,166 in fiscal year 2021. Contributions — Section 20814(c) of the California Public Employees' Retirement Law requires that the employer contribution rates for all public employers be determined on an annual basis by the actuary and shall be effective on the July 1 following notice of a change in the rate. Funding contributions for the Plan are determined annually on an actuarial basis as of June 30 by CalPERS. The actuarially determined rate is the estimated amount necessary to finance the costs of benefits earned by employees during the year, with an additional amount to finance any unfunded accrued liability. The City is required to contribute the difference between the actuarially determined rate and the contribution rate of employees. 97 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 9 — PENSION PLANS — COST-SHARING (Continued) A. General information about the Safety Pension Plan (Continued) For the year ended June 30, 2021, the contributions recognized as part of pension expense for each Plan were as follows: Safety - Classic Safety - PEPRA Contributions - employer $ 2,733,540 $ 326,520 Total $ 3,060,060 B. Pension Liabilities, Pension Expenses, and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions As of June 30, 2021, the City reported net pension liabilities for its proportionate shares of the net pension liability of the Plan as follows: Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liabilitv Safety $ 32,035,051 The net pension liability of the Plan is measured as of June 30, 2020, and the total pension liability for the Plan used to calculate the net pension liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of June 30, 2019, rolled forward to June 30, 2020, using standard update procedures. The City's proportion of the net pension liability was based on a projection of City's long-term share of contributions to the pension plan relative to the projected contributions of all participating employers, actuarially determined. For governmental funds, the General Fund has been primarily used to liquidate pension liabilities. The City's proportionate share of the net pension liability for the Plan as of June 30, 2020 and 2021, was as follows: Safety Proportion - June 30, 2020 0.47296% Proportion - June 30, 2021 Change - Increase (Decrease) a.*] 0.48084% 0.00788% CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 9 — PENSION PLANS — COST-SHARING (Continued) B. Pension Liabilities, Pension Expenses, and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions, (Continued) For the year ended June 30, 2021, the City recognized a pension expense of $4,592,655 for the Safety Plan. At June 30, 2021, the City reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions for the Safety Plan from the following sources: Deferred Outflows Deferred Inflows of Resources of Resources Pension contributions subsequentto measurement date $ Differences between actual and expected experience Changes in assumptions Net differences between projected and actual earnings on plan investments Change in proportion Differences between actual contributions and proportionate share of contributions 3,060,060 $ 2,484,156 (106,709) 696,257 610,818 (1,108,502) Total $ 6,851,291 $ (1,215,211) $3,060,060 reported as deferred outflows of resources related to contributions subsequent to the measurement date will be recognized as a reduction of the net pension liability in year ended June 30, 2022. Other amounts reported as deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized as pension expense as follows: Year Ended Annual June 30 Amortization 2022 $ 494,242 2023 998,627 2024 734,286 2025 348,865 Tota I $ 2,576,020 C. Sensitivity of the Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate The following presents the City's proportionate share of the net pension liability for the Plan as of the measurement date, calculated using the discount rate for the Plan, as well as what the City's proportionate share of the net pension liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is one percentage point lower (6.15%) or one percentage point higher (8.15%) than the current rate: Actuarial assumptions and information regarding the discount rate are discussed in Note 9D. Safety 1% Decrease 6.1S% Net Pension Liability $ 45,913,925 Current Discount Rate 7.15% Net Pension Liability $ 32,035,051 1% Increase 8.15% Net Pension Liability $ 20,646,122 Actuarial assumptions and information regarding the discount rate are discussed in Note 9D. CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 9 — PENSION PLANS — COST-SHARING (Continued) D. Information Common to the Miscellaneous (Footnote 10) and Safety Plans Actuarial Assumptions — For the measurement period ended June 30, 2020, the total pension liabilities were determined by rolling forward the June 30, 2019 total pension liability. The June 30, 2020 total pension liabilities were based on the following actuarial assumptions: (1) Net of pension investment and administrative expenses, including inflation (2) The mortality table used was developed based on CalPERS' specific data. The table includes 15 years of mortality improvements using the Society of Actuaries Scale 90% of scale MP 2016. For more details on this table, please refer to the December 2017 experience study report (based on CalPERS demographic data from 1997 to 2015) that can be found on CalPERS website. 100 Miscellaneous and Safety Plans Valuation Date June 30, 2019 Measurement Date June 30, 2020 Actuarial Cost Method Entry Age Normal in accordance with the requirements of GASB 68 Actuarial Assumptions: Discount Rate 7.15% Inflation 2.50% Payroll Growth 2.75% Projected Salary Increase Varies by Entry Age and Service Investment Rate of Return 7.15%(1) Mortality Derived using CaIPERS Membership Data for all Funds (2) The lesser of contract COLA or 2.50% until Purchasing Power Protection Post Retirement Benefit Increase Allowance Floor on Purchasing Power applies, 2.50% therea fter (1) Net of pension investment and administrative expenses, including inflation (2) The mortality table used was developed based on CalPERS' specific data. The table includes 15 years of mortality improvements using the Society of Actuaries Scale 90% of scale MP 2016. For more details on this table, please refer to the December 2017 experience study report (based on CalPERS demographic data from 1997 to 2015) that can be found on CalPERS website. 100 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 9 — PENSION PLANS — COST-SHARING (Continued) D. Information Common to the Miscellaneous (Footnote 10) and Safety Plans (Continued) Discount Rate — The discount rate used to measure the total pension liability was 7.15% for each Plan. To determine whether the municipal bond rate should be used in the calculation of a discount rate for each plan, CaIPERS stress tested plans that would most likely result in a discount rate that would be different from the actuarially assumed discount rate. Based on the testing, none of the tested plans run out of assets. Therefore, the current 7.15% discount rate is adequate, and the use of the municipal bond rate calculation is not necessary. The long term expected discount rate of 7.15% will be applied to all plans in the Public Employees Retirement Fund (PERF). The stress test results are presented in a detailed report that can be obtained from the CaIPERS website. The long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was determined using a building-block method in which best -estimate ranges of expected future real rates of return (expected returns, net of pension plan investment expense and inflation) are developed for each major asset class. In determining the long-term expected rate of return, CalPERS took into account both short-term and long-term market return expectations as well as the expected pension fund cash flows. Using historical returns of all the funds' asset classes, expected compound returns were calculated over the short-term (first 10 years) and the long-term (11+ years) using a building-block approach. Using the expected nominal returns for both short-term and long-term, the present value of benefits was calculated for each fund. The expected rate of return was set by calculating the single equivalent expected return that arrived at the same present value of benefits for cash flows as the one calculated using both short-term and long-term returns. The expected rate of return was then set equal to the single equivalent rate calculated above and adjusted to account for assumed administrative expenses. The table below reflects the expected real rate of return by asset class. (a) In the Cal PERS CAFR, Fixed Income is included in Global Debt Securities; Liquidity is included in Short-term Investments; Inflation Assets are included in both Global Equity Securities and Global Debt Securities. (b) An expected inflation of 2.0% used for this period. (c) An expected inflation of 2.92% used for this period. Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position — Detailed information about each pension plan's fiduciary net position is available in the separately issued CAPERS financial reports. 101 New Strategic Real Return Real Return Asset Class (a) Allocation Years 1 - 10 (b) Years 11+(c) Global Equity 50.0% 4.80% 5.98% Fixed Income 28.0% 1.00% 2.62% Inflation Sensitive 0.0% 0.77% 1.81% Private Equity 8.0% 6.30% 7.23% Real Assets 13.0% 3.75% 4.93% Liquidity 1.0% 0.00% -0.92% Total 100% (a) In the Cal PERS CAFR, Fixed Income is included in Global Debt Securities; Liquidity is included in Short-term Investments; Inflation Assets are included in both Global Equity Securities and Global Debt Securities. (b) An expected inflation of 2.0% used for this period. (c) An expected inflation of 2.92% used for this period. Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position — Detailed information about each pension plan's fiduciary net position is available in the separately issued CAPERS financial reports. 101 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 10—PENSION PLANS—MULTIPLE EMPLOYER A. General information about the Miscellaneous Pension Plan Plan Descriptions — All qualified permanent and probationary employees are eligible to participate in the City's separate Miscellaneous Plan, agent multiple employer defined benefit pension plan administered by CalPERS, which acts as a common investment and administrative agent for its participating member employers. Benefit provisions under the Plan are established by State statute and the City resolution. CalPERS issues publicly available reports that include a full description of the pension plan regarding benefit provisions, assumptions, and membership information that can be found on the CalPERS website. Benefits Provided — CAPERS provides service retirement and disability benefits, annual cost of living adjustments, and death benefits to plan members, who must be public employees and beneficiaries. Benefits are based on years of credited service, equal to one year of full time employment. Members with five years of total service are eligible to retire at age 50 with statutorily reduced benefits. All members are eligible for non -duty disability benefits after 10 years of service. The death benefit is one of the following: the Basic Death Benefit, the 1957 Survivor Benefit, or the Optional Settlement 2W Death Benefit. The cost of living adjustments for each plan are applied as specified by the California Public Employees' Retirement Law. The Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA), Assembly Bill 340, is applicable to employees new to CalPERS and hired after December 31, 2012. The Plan's provisions and benefits in effect at June 30, 2021, are summarized as follows: Miscellaneous On or after January 1, 2013 2.0% @ 62 5 years service monthly for life 52-67 1.0% to 2.5% 7.25% 14.731% Employees Covered — As of the June 30, 2019 actuarial valuation date, the following employees were covered by the benefit terms for the Plan: Inactive employees or beneficiaries currently receiving benefits Inactive employees entitled to but not yet receiving benefits Active employees Total 102 Miscellaneous 293 155 188 636 Prior to Hire date January 1, 2013 Benefit formula 2.5%@ 55 Benefit vesti ng schedule 5 years service Benefit payments monthly for life Reti rement age 50-55 Monthly benefits, as a %of eligible compensation 2.0% to 2.5% Required empl oyee contri buti on rates 8.0% Required employer contribution rates 11.270% On or after January 1, 2013 2.0% @ 62 5 years service monthly for life 52-67 1.0% to 2.5% 7.25% 14.731% Employees Covered — As of the June 30, 2019 actuarial valuation date, the following employees were covered by the benefit terms for the Plan: Inactive employees or beneficiaries currently receiving benefits Inactive employees entitled to but not yet receiving benefits Active employees Total 102 Miscellaneous 293 155 188 636 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 10 — PENSION PLANS — MULTIPLE EMPLOYER (Continued) A. General information about the Miscellaneous Pension Plan (Continued) Contributions — Section 20814(c) of the California Public Employees' Retirement Law requires that the employer contribution rates for all public employers be determined on an annual basis by the actuary and shall be effective on the July 1 following notice of a change in the rate. Funding contributions for both Plans are determined annually on an actuarial basis as of June 30 by CalPERS. The actuarially determined rate is the estimated amount necessary to finance the costs of benefits earned by employees during the year, with an additional amount to finance any unfunded accrued liability. The City is required to contribute the difference between the actuarially determined rate and the contribution rate of employees. B. Net Pension Liability The City's net pension liability for the Miscellaneous Plan is measured as the total pension liability, less the pension plan's fiduciary net position. The net pension liability of the Plans is measured as of June 30, 2020, using an annual actuarial valuation as of June 30, 2019, rolled forward to June 30, 2020, using standard update procedures. A summary of principal assumptions and methods used to determine the net pension liability is shown in Note 9D above. 103 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 10 — PENSION PLANS — MULTIPLE EMPLOYER (Continued) C. Changes in the Net Pension Liability The changes in the Net Pension Liability for the Miscellaneous Plan follow: Balance at June 30, 2019 Changes in the year: Service cost Interest on Total Pension Liability Changes of Benefit Terms Changes in Assumptions Differences between Expected and Actual experience Net Plan to Plan Resource Movement Contribution - Employer Contribution - Employee Net Investment Income Benefit payments, including Refunds of Employee Contributions Administrative Expenses Other Miscellaneous Income/(Expense)' Net changes 1,525,345 1,525,345 4,673,324 (4,673,324) 1,287,721 (1,287,721) 5,639,668 (5,639,668) (8,473,915) (8,473,915) (161,688) 161,688 7,120,188 2,965,110 4,155,078 Balance at June 30, 2020 $ 161,911,027 $ 117,657,598 $ 44,253,429 1 During Fiscal Year 2017-18, as a result of Governmental Accounting Standard Board Statement (GASB) No.75, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefit Plans Other than Pension (GASB 75), CalPERS reported its proportionate share of activity related to postemployment benefits for participation in the State of California's agent OPEB plan. Accordingly, CAPERS recorded a one-time expense as a result of the adoption of GASB 75. Additionally, CalPERS employees participate in various State of California agent pension plans and during Fiscal Year 2017-18, CAPERS recorded a correction to previously reported financial statements to properly reflect its proportionate share of activity related to pensions in accordance with GASB statement No.68, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions (GASB 68). 104 Increase (Decrease) Total Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Pension Liability Net Position Liability/(Asset) $ 154,790,839 $ 114,692,488 $ 40,098,351 3,084,811 3,084,811 10,983,947 10,983,947 1,525,345 1,525,345 4,673,324 (4,673,324) 1,287,721 (1,287,721) 5,639,668 (5,639,668) (8,473,915) (8,473,915) (161,688) 161,688 7,120,188 2,965,110 4,155,078 Balance at June 30, 2020 $ 161,911,027 $ 117,657,598 $ 44,253,429 1 During Fiscal Year 2017-18, as a result of Governmental Accounting Standard Board Statement (GASB) No.75, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefit Plans Other than Pension (GASB 75), CalPERS reported its proportionate share of activity related to postemployment benefits for participation in the State of California's agent OPEB plan. Accordingly, CAPERS recorded a one-time expense as a result of the adoption of GASB 75. Additionally, CalPERS employees participate in various State of California agent pension plans and during Fiscal Year 2017-18, CAPERS recorded a correction to previously reported financial statements to properly reflect its proportionate share of activity related to pensions in accordance with GASB statement No.68, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions (GASB 68). 104 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 10 — PENSION PLANS — MULTIPLE EMPLOYER (Continued) C. Changes in the Net Pension Liability (Continued) Sensitivity of the Net Pension Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate — The following presents the net pension liability of the City for Miscellaneous Plan, calculated using the discount rate, as well as what the City's net pension liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is one percentage point lower or higher than the current rate: Miscellaneous 1% Decrease 6.15% Net Pension Liability $ 65,006,512 Current Discount Rate 7.15% Net Pension Liability $ 44,253,429 1% Increase 8.15% Net Pension Liability $ 27,071,704 D. Pension Expenses and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions For the year ended June 30, 2021, the City recognized a pension expense of $3,523,332 for the Miscellaneous Plan. At June 30, 2021, the City reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions from the following sources: Pension contributions subsequent to mea surementdate Change of Assumptions Differences between actual and expected experience Net differences between projected and actual earnings on plan investments Total 105 Deferred Outflows of Resources $ 5,217,323 1,385,709 913,715 Deferred Inflows of Resources (34,095) $ 7,516,747 $ (34,095) CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 10 — PENSION PLANS — MULTIPLE EMPLOYER (Continued) D. Pension Expenses and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions (Continued) $3,060,247 reported as deferred outflows of resources related to contributions subsequent to the measurement date will be recognized as a reduction of the net pension liability in the year ended June 30, 2022. Other amounts reported as deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized as pension expense as follows: Year Ended Annual June 30 Amortization 2021 $ 282,565 2022 841,133 2023 651,351 2024 490,280 Total $ 2,265,329 E. Payable to the Miscellaneous Pension Plan At June 30, 2021, the City reported no payable for the outstanding amount of employer and member contributions to the Miscellaneous pension plan required for the year ended June 30, 2021. F. Subsequent Event: Reduction of CalPERS Discount Rate In July 2021, CaIPERS reported a preliminary 21.3% net return on investments for the 12 -month period that ended June 30, 2021. Under the Funding Risk Mitigation Policy approved by the CalPERS Board of Administration in 2015, the 21.3% net return was under the original expected return of 21.7%, which will trigger a reduction in the discount rate used to calculate employer and Public Employees' Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) member contributions. The Funding Risk Mitigation Policy seeks to reduce CaIPERS funding risk over time, in which CaIPERS investment performance that significantly outperforms the discount rate will trigger adjustments to the discount rate, expected investment return, and strategic asset allocation targets. This is the first time it has been triggered. The discount rate, or assumed rate of return, will drop to 6.8%, from its current level of 7%. Based on these preliminary fiscal year returns, the CaIPERS has announced the funded status of the overall PERF is an estimated 82%. This estimate is based on a 7% discount rate. Under the new 6.8% discount rate, however, CAPERS indicated the funded status of the overall PERF drops to 80%. This is because existing assets are assumed to grow at a slightly slower rate annually into the future. As intended under the Funding Risk Mitigation Policy, the lower discount rate increases the likelihood that CaIPERS can reach its target over the longer term. The CaIPERS Board of Administration will continue to review the discount rate through its Asset Liability Management process during the rest of the calendar year. CaIPERS' final fiscal year 2021 investment performance will be calculated based on audited figures and will be reflected in contribution levels for contracting cities, counties, and special districts in fiscal year 2024. 106 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 11— OTHER -POST-EMPLOYMENT HEALTHCARE PLAN (OPEB) A. Plan Description The City of Burlingame has established a Retiree Healthcare Plan (Plan), and participates in an agent multiple -employer defined benefit retiree healthcare plan. The Plan provides post -employment healthcare benefits to eligible employees who retire directly from the City under CAPERS at the minimum age of 50 with at least 5 years of CaIPERS service or disability. Retirees must make a retirement election with CaIPERS within 120 days following the date of separation from the City. Benefit provisions are established and may be amended through agreements and memorandums of understanding (MOUS) between the City, its management employees, and unions representing City employees. The City participates in the CAPERS healthcare program (PEMHCA) and allow retirees to continue participation in the medical insurance program after retirement. Under the Plan, the City pays retiree healthcare benefits up to a cap for eligible retirees and dependents based on bargaining unit and hire date. Employees hired on or after January 1, 2012 (or an earlier date as defined in the MOUS) are only eligible to receive a City contribution equal to the PEMHCA minimum upon retirement from the City. As stated above, an individual must also qualify as a CAPERS annuitant in order to receive this benefit. No dental, vision or life insurance benefits are provided. In addition, the City provides a defined contribution retiree healthcare plan for eligible employees. Employees hired after January 1, 2012 (or an earlier date as defined in the MOUs) are enrolled in a retiree health savings plan (RHS Plan) after meeting the service requirement defines in the MOUS. Upon enrollment, the City contributes 2.0% of the employee's annual base pay into the RHS Plan based on the benefit provisions in the MOUS. Contributions cease upon termination from employment. B. Employees Covered by Benefit Terms At June 30, 2019 (the Valuation date), the benefit terms covered the following employees: Active employees 216 Inactive employees, spouses, or beneficiaries currently receiving benefit payments 425 Inactive employees entitled to but not yet receiving benefit payments 0 Total 641 C. Net OPEB Liability The City's net OPEB liability was measured as of June 30, 2020, and the total OPEB liability for the Plan used to calculate the net OPEB liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of June 30, 2019, using standard update procedures. For governmental funds, the General Fund has been primarily used to liquidate OPEB liabilities. 107 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 11— OTHER - POST -EMPLOYMENT HEALTHCARE PLAN (Continued) C. Net OPEB Liability, Continued Actuarial Assumptions: The total OPEB liability in the June 30, 2020 actuarial valuation was determined using the following actuarial assumptions, applied to all periods included in the measurement, unless otherwise specified: Actuarial Assumption Actuarial valuation date Inflation Salary increases Investment rate of return Healthcare cost trend rates -Pre-Medicare -Medicare Mortality rate June 30, 2020 Measurement Date June 30, 2019 2.5% 2.75%. Additional merit -based increases based on CaIPERS merit salary increase tables. 7.52% 6.00% 4.00% Based on CaIPERS tables Change of Assumptions: The assumptions of inflation, salary increase, and mortality and retirement rates are based on CalPERS tables. In 2018, CalPERS demographic assumptions and inflation rate were changed in accordance to the CalPERS Experience Study and Review of Actuarial Assumptions December 2017. As a result, the inflation assumption is reduced from 2.75 percent to 2.50 percent. The assumption for individual salary increases and overall payroll growth are reduced from 3.00 percent to 2.75 percent. Discount rate changed to 7.52% from 7.00%. Discount Rate: The discount rate used to measure the total OPEB liability is 7.52%. This is the expected long-term rate of return on City assets using investment strategy 2 within the California Employers' Retiree Benefit Trust (CERBT). The projection of cash flows used to determine the discount rate assumed that the City contribution will be made at rates equal to the actuarially determined contribution rates. Based on those assumptions, the OPEB plan's fiduciary net position is projected to cover all future OPEB payments. Therefore, the discount rate was set equal to the long-term expected rate of return. W. CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 11— OTHER - POST -EMPLOYMENT HEALTHCARE PLAN (Continued) D. Changes in the Net OPEB Liability Balance at 6/30/2020: Changes Recognized for the Measurement Period: Service Cost Interest on the total OPEB liability Expected investment income Contributions Employer - City's Contribution Employer - Implicit Subsidy Employee Net investment income Administrative expenses Difference between expected and actual experience Changes of assumptions Implicit rate subsidy fulfilled Benefit payments Net Changes Balance at 6/30/2021: (Measurement Date 6/30/20) Increase (Decrease) Total OPEB Plan Fiduciary Net Net OPEB Liability Position Liability/(Asset) (a) (b) (c) = (a) - (b) $ 47,319,774 $ 20,275,271 $ 27,044,503 843,673 843,673 3,252,206 3,252,206 4,652,150 (4,652,150) 582,560 (582,560) Sensitivity of the net OPEB liability to changes in the discount rate: The net OPEB liability of the City, as well as what the City's net OPEB liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is one percentage point lower (6.52%) or one percentage point higher (8.52%) follows: Net OPEB Liability/(Asset) Discount Rate -1% Discount Rate Discount Rate +1% (6.52%) (7.52%) (8.52%) $ 27, 671,134 $ 23,123, 952 $ 19, 232, 555 Sensitivity of the net OPEB liability to changes in the healthcare cost trend rates: The net OPEB liability of the City, as well as what the City's net OPEB liability would be if it were calculated using healthcare cost trend rates that are one percentage point lower (6.00) or one percentage point higher (8.00%) than current healthcare cost trend rates follows: 1% Decrease (5.00% decreasing to 1.84%) $ 18, 483, 263 Net OPEB Liability/(Asset; Healthcare Cost Trend Rates (6.00% decreasing to 2.84%) $ 23,123, 952 109 1% Increase (7.00% decreasing to 3.84%) $ 28, 605, 314 728,615 (728,615) (10,065) 10,065 210,694 210,694 (2,273,864) (2,273,864) (582,560) (582,560) (2,824,141) (2,824,141) (1,373,992) 2,546,559 (3,920,551) $ 45,945,782 $ 22,821,830 $ 23,123,952 Sensitivity of the net OPEB liability to changes in the discount rate: The net OPEB liability of the City, as well as what the City's net OPEB liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is one percentage point lower (6.52%) or one percentage point higher (8.52%) follows: Net OPEB Liability/(Asset) Discount Rate -1% Discount Rate Discount Rate +1% (6.52%) (7.52%) (8.52%) $ 27, 671,134 $ 23,123, 952 $ 19, 232, 555 Sensitivity of the net OPEB liability to changes in the healthcare cost trend rates: The net OPEB liability of the City, as well as what the City's net OPEB liability would be if it were calculated using healthcare cost trend rates that are one percentage point lower (6.00) or one percentage point higher (8.00%) than current healthcare cost trend rates follows: 1% Decrease (5.00% decreasing to 1.84%) $ 18, 483, 263 Net OPEB Liability/(Asset; Healthcare Cost Trend Rates (6.00% decreasing to 2.84%) $ 23,123, 952 109 1% Increase (7.00% decreasing to 3.84%) $ 28, 605, 314 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 11— OTHER - POST -EMPLOYMENT HEALTHCARE PLAN (Continued) E. OPEB Expense and Deferred Inflows and Outflows of Resources Related to OPEB For the year ended June 30, 2021, the City recognized an OPEB expense of $307,487. At June 30, 2021, the City reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to OPEB from the following sources: Differences between Actual and Expected Experience Employer contributions made subsequent to the measurement date Net differences between Projected and Actual Earnings Changes of assumptions Deferred Outflows Deferred Inflows of Resources of Resources $ 166,799 $ (3,822,562) 5,052,235 872,086 28,584 (3,233,307) Total $ 6,119,704 $ (7,055,869) Amounts reported as deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to OPEB will be recognized in OPEB expense as follows: Year Annual Ending June 30 Amortization 2022 $ (2,099,213) 2023 (2,054,719) 2024 (1,684,729) 2025 (149,739) Total $ (5,988,400) F. Funding Policy The contribution requirements of the Plan participants and the City are established and may be amended by the City. In September 2013, the City established an irrevocable trust to prefund its unfunded actuarially accrued liability for retiree health care benefits. The California Benefit Trust Fund (CERBT), a multi- employer trust, is administered by CalPERS which also invests trust fund deposits made by the City on behalf of retirees. The City pre -funds the Plan by contributing the City's ADC every year to the CERBT. During fiscal year 2021, the City made deposits of $1,278,962 to the trust. As of June 30, 2021, the cash balance in the City's account within the trust was $30,305,290. 110 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 12 — NET POSITION AND FUND BALANCES A. Net Position Net position is the excess of all the City's assets and deferred outflows over all its liabilities and deferred inflow, regardless of fund. Net position is divided into three captions on the Statement of Net Position. These captions apply only to net position, which is determined at the Government - wide level and proprietary funds and are described as follows: Net investment in capital assets, describes the portion of net position which is represented by the current net book value of the City's capital assets, less the outstanding balance of any debt issued to finance these assets. Restricted describes the portion of net position which is restricted as to use by the terms and conditions of agreements with outside parties, governmental regulations, laws or other restrictions which the City cannot unilaterally alter. These principally include developer fees received for use on capital projects, debt service requirements and funds restricted to low and moderate income purposes. Unrestricted describes the portion of net position which is not restricted as to use. B. Fund Balances Governmental fund balances represent the net current assets of each fund. Net current assets generally represent a fund's cash and receivables, less its liabilities. The City's fund balances are classified in accordance with GASB Statement Number 54 (GASB 54), Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions, which requires the City to classify its fund balances based on the long-term amounts of loans and on spending constraints imposed on the use of resources. For programs with multiple funding sources, the City prioritizes and expends funds in the following order: Restricted, Committed, Assigned and Unassigned. Each category in the following hierarchy is ranked according to the degree of spending constraint as follows: Nonspendable represents balances set aside to indicate items do not represent available, spendable resources even though they are a component of assets. Fund balances required to be maintained intact, such as Permanent Funds, and assets not expected to be converted to cash, such as inventories and prepaids, the long-term amounts of loans and notes receivable and land held for resale are included. However, if proceeds realized from the sale or collection of nonspendable assets are restricted, committed or assigned, then nonspendable amounts are required to be presented as a component of the applicable category. Restricted fund balances have external restrictions imposed by creditors, grantors, contributors, laws, regulations, or enabling legislation which requires the resources to be used only for a specific purpose. Nonspendable amounts subject to restrictions are included along with spendable resources. 111 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 12 — NET POSITION AND FUND BALANCES (Continued) B. Fund Balances (Continued) Committed fund balances have constraints imposed by resolution of the City Council, which may only be altered by resolution of the City Council. Nonspendable amounts subject to council commitments are included along with spendable resources. Assigned fund balances are amounts constrained by the City's intent to be used for a specific purpose, but are neither restricted nor committed. Intent is expressed by the City Council or its designees and may be changed at the discretion of the City Council or its designees. The City Council has not delegated the authority to make assignments of fund balance. This category includes nonspendables, when it is the City's intent to use proceeds or collections for a specific purpose and residual fund balances, if any, of Special Revenue, Capital Projects and Debt Service Funds which have not been restricted or committed. Unassigned fund balance represents residual amounts that have not been restricted, committed or assigned. This includes the residual general fund balance and residual fund deficits, if any, of other governmental funds. Committed and Assigned Fund Balance In 2015, the City Council adopted a General Fund Reserve Policy by resolution. The policy, based on an analysis of risks specific to the City, establishes targeted levels for an Economic Stability Reserve and a Catastrophic Reserve (24% of budgeted revenues), Catastrophic Reserve amount of $2,000,000, as well as a Contingency Reserve amount of $500,000. The actual reserve levels are adopted by resolution with each annual budget, or as recommended by the Finance Director based upon an update of the City's fiscal needs or forecasts during the year. As the City Council and management can only use reserves for purposes consistent with the purposes described in the policy, these reserve amounts are reported as assignments of the General Fund's balance. The aggregate balance of the General Fund's assigned fund balance was $17,429,829 as of June 30, 2021. The breakdown is shown below: ■ The Economic Stability Reserve is available to protect and preserve City services from dramatic drops in General Fund revenues that are highly sensitive to economic conditions, mainly sales taxes and transient occupancy taxes. The balance at June 30, 2021, was $14,356,000. ■ The Catastrophic Reserve is available to make repairs and reconstruct City buildings and facilities that may be damaged by natural disasters or acts of war and terrorism. The balance at June 30, 2021, was $2,000,000. 112 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 12 — NET POSITION AND FUND BALANCES (Continued) B. Fund Balances (Continued) ■ The Contingency Reserve is available to cover unexpected expenses that may arise during the course of the fiscal year that were not considered during budget planning. The balance at June 30, 2021, was $500,000. ■ Encumbrances and Reappropriations represent commitments related to contracts not yet performed and purchase orders not yet filled or appropriations for specific activities approved late in the fiscal year that were not encumbered by contractual arrangements by the end of the fiscal year. The total of encumbrances and reappropriations at June 30, 2021 were $573,829. Detailed classifications of the City's fund balances, as of June 30, 2021, are below: 113 Storm Capital Other General Drainage Debt Service Projects Governmental Fund Balance Classifications Fund Fund Fund Fund Funds Total Nonspendable: Items not in spenda hl form: Prepaids $ 16,323 $ 16,323 Total Nonspendable Fund Balances 16,323 16,323 Restricted for: Employee benefits 15,723,356 15,723,356 Special revenue programs: Development fees $ 8,995,482 8,995,482 Local grants 544,362 544,362 MeasureAand gas tax 2,715,590 2,715,590 Measure W 647,615 647,615 Special assessment district 419,146 419,146 Other 1,120,387 1,120,387 Capital projects $ 8,144,703 $ 27,102,576 35,247,279 Debt s ervi c e 1,930,848 1,930,848 Total Restricted Fund Balances 15,723,356 8,144,703 29,033,424 14,442,582 67,344,065 Committed to: Capital projects $ 30,981,935 30,981,935 Total Committed Fund Balances 30,981,935 30,981,935 Assigned to: Encumbrances and reappropriations 573,829 573,829 Contingency reserve 500,000 500,000 Economic stability reserve 14,356,000 14,356,000 Catastrophic event reserve 2,000,000 2,000,000 Capital projects 21,197,670 21,197,670 Total Assigned Fund Balances 17,429,829 21,197,670 38,627,499 Unassigned: 12,037,556 12,037,556 Total Fund Balances $ 45,207,064 $ 8,144,703 $ 29,033,424 $ 52,179,605 $ 14,442,582 $ 149,007,378 113 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 12 — NET POSITION AND FUND BALANCES (Continued) C. PARS Trust During fiscal year 2018, the City established an irrevocable trust with Public Agency Retirements Services (PARS) to set aside funds for pension liability. At June 30, 2021, the balance in the trust was $18,441,471. The City Council reserves the authority to review and amend this funding policy from time to time, in order to ensure the funding policy continues to best suit the circumstances of the City. D. Deficit Fund Balance/Net Position The following funds had a deficit fund balance/net position at June 30, 2021: Deficit Funds Net Position Enterprise Fund: Landfill $ 862,811 Internal Service Fund: Facilities Services 431,190 The City expects future revenues to mitigate the deficit fund balance/net position in future years. E. GASB 84 Implementation The City implemented the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 84 — Fiduciary Activities during the year ended June 30, 2021, as a result, the activities of the former agency funds are now reported as custodial funds. Due to GASB 84 implementation, certain former agency fund does not meet Custodial Fund's criteria and was merged into General Fund. As a result, the General Fund beginning fund balance was restated and increased by $65,709, and the Statement of Activities for the Governmental Activities was also restated and increased by the same amount. NOTE 13 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES A. Grant Programs The City may, from time to time, participate in Federal and State grant programs. No cost allowances were proposed as a result of the City's financial audit. As of June 30, 2021, the City has not made an allowance for expenditures which may be disallowed by the granting agencies. Any disallowance for expenditures is expected to be immaterial. 114 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 13 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES (Continued) B. Litigation The City is subject to litigation arising in the normal course of business. In the opinion of the City Attorney, there is one case pending in which there is at least a possibility that the plaintiff could be entitled to monetary damages. However, the City believes that its financial position would not be adversely affected due to the availability of reserves in the remote event that the plaintiff prevails. C. Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency Revenue Bonds Surcharge The City contracts with the City and County of San Francisco for the purchase of water from the Hetch Hetchy System operated by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC). The City is also a member of the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) which represents the interests of all the 24 cities and water districts, as well as two private utilities, that purchase wholesale water from the SFPUC. In 2009 the City entered into a new 25 year agreement with the SFPUC. Under the new agreement, the SFPUC issues revenue bonds and the debt service (which also includes an interest component) is paid for through rates over the life of the bonds. During the transition from the old to the new contracts, one of the issues addressed was how to deal with the $370 million in assets that were still being paid for by the wholesale customers under the old agreement. The assets were transferred to the new agreement, assigned a life with an agreed upon rate of return of 5.13%. Also negotiated was a provision to allow the wholesale customers to prepay any remaining existing assets' unpaid principal balance without penalty or premium. This prepayment was executed through the issuance of bonds by BAWSCA which provide a better interest rate given the favorable rate environment. BAWSCA issued Revenue Bonds in the principal amount of $335,780,000 in January 2013 to prepay the capital cost recovery payment obligation and fund a stabilization fund. The Bonds mature in October 2034 and are secured by surcharges to the monthly water purchase charges imposed upon the participating members. The Bonds are not a debt obligation of any member, and BAWSCA's failure to pay its Bonds would not constitute a default by any participating member. Should any participating member fail to pay its share, BAWSCA will rely on the stabilization fund and will pursue all legal remedies to collect the shortfall from the delinquent member. In the interim, other participating members may have their portion adjusted to insure the continued payment of the debt service surcharge. The risk of bearing the debt service expense of a defaulting member is not significantly different than the risk each member assumes currently for fluctuations in water purchase charges. Under the Bond indenture, BAWSCA maintains a stabilization fund. If surcharge revenues collected are less than needed (due to a member's failure to pay timely), BAWSCA uses the stabilization fund to fund the debt service deficiency, and increases the surcharge in the subsequent year to make up for the prior year shortfall and reimburse the stabilization fund account. Also, given that each participating agency's governing body adopted a Resolution to participate in the Bond issue, Management believes that default is generally very unlikely. 115 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 13 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES (Continued) C. Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency Revenue Bonds Surcharge (Continued) The annual debt service surcharges are a fixed amount for each participant and are calculated by taking the subsequent fiscal year's debt service, multiplied by each participant's actual water purchase as a percent of total wholesale customer water purchases from the prior fiscal year. One -twelfth of the annual surcharge is included in the monthly bill from SFPUC. Because each participant's share of the debt service surcharge is proportional to the amount of water purchased during the prior fiscal year, the City's share of the debt service will fluctuate from year to year. The City paid its surcharge of $680,740 during fiscal year 2021, which is included as a component of purchased water expenses in the Water Enterprise Fund. The surcharge for fiscal year 2022 is estimated to be $645,276. D. Contingent Liabilities On September 29, 2018, the Governor of California approved Assembly Bill No. 1912, which requires member agencies of an agency established pursuant to a joint powers agreement that participates in, or contracts with, a public retirement system, prior to filing a notice of termination or upon notice of potential termination by the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS), to mutually agree as to the apportionment of the agency's retirement obligations among themselves, provided that the agreement equals 100% of the retirement liability of the agency. If the member agencies are unable to mutually agree to the apportionment, the bill requires the PERS board to apportion the retirement liability of the agency to each member agency, as specified, and would establish procedures allowing a member agency to challenge the board's determination through the arbitration process. This bill also requires the PERS board to enter into the above described agreement upon request of a member agency of a terminating agency formed under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act and providing that the member agencies of the terminating agency are liable to the system for inadequate funding of the benefits pursuant to the agreement. This bill extends that liability and lien to all of the parties of a terminating agency that was formed under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act. In addition, the bill requires the PERS board, prior to exercising its authority to reduce benefits and to the extent consistent with its fiduciary duties, to consider and exhaust all options and necessary actions, including evaluating whether to bring a civil action against any member agencies to compel payment of the terminated public agency's pension obligations. As of June 30, 2021, the City participated in the following joint powers agreements that participate in, or contracts with, a public retirement system: • Central County Fire District — CCFD (fire, emergency medical, disaster preparedness) • San Mateo County Pre -Hospital Emergency Services Group —SMCPHESG (pre -hospital emergency services, ambulance transport, first response) The City is not aware that any of these agencies are in the process of termination or facing potential termination by the PERS board. 116 REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 1- COST-SHARING MULTIPLE -EMPLOYER DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN ` Fiscal year 2015 was the 1st year of GASB 68 implementation, therefore only six years are shown 119 Safety Plan, Cost -Sharing Multiple -Employer Defined Pension Plan Last 10 Years• SCHEDULE OF THE CITY'S PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF THE NET PENSION LIABILITY Safety Plan Measurement Date 6/30/2014 6/30/2015 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 6/30/2018 6/30/2019 6/30/2020 Plan's Proportion of the Net Pension Liability/Asset 0.24850% 0.44660% 0.45659% 0.45193% 0.46735% 0.47296% 0.48084% Plan's Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability/(Asset) $ 15,465,681 $ 18,401,988 $ 23,647,731 $ 27,003,552 $ 27,421,719 $ 29,524,728 $ 32,035,051 Plan's Covered Payroll $ 4,498,186 $ 4,478,926 $ 4,671,613 $ 4,834,326 $ 4,880,736 $ 4,684,900 $ 5,083,094 Plan's Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability/(Asset) as a Percentage of it's Covered Payroll 343.82% 410.86% 506.20% 558.58% 561.84% 630.21% 630.23% Plan's Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability/(Asset) as a Percentage of the Plan's Total Pension Liability 18.58% 22.03% 27.54% 29.02% 28.73% 29.97% 31.35% ` Fiscal year 2015 was the 1st year of GASB 68 implementation, therefore only six years are shown 119 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (Continued) FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 1— COST-SHARING MULTIPLE -EMPLOYER DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN (Continued Safety Plan, Cost -Sharing Multiple -Employer Defined Pension Plan Last 10 Years* SCHEDULE OF CONTRIBUTIONS Plan Fiscal Year Ended lune 30 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Actuarially determined contribution $ 1,686,060 $ 1,923,807 $ 2,106,261 $ 2,369,301 $ 2,767,532 $ 3,060,060 Contributions in relation to the actuarially determined contributions (1,686,060) (1,923,807) (2,106,261) (2,369,301) (2,767,532) (3,060,060) Contribution deficiency (excess) $ $ $ - $ - $ - $ - Covered payroll $ 4,671,613 $ 4,834,326 $ 4,880,736 $ 4,684,900 $ 5,083,094 $ 5,279,607 Contributions as a percentage of covered payroll 36.09% 39.79% 43.15% 50.57% 54.45% 57.96% Notes to Schedule Valuation date: 6/30/2014 6/30/2015 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 6/30/2018 6/30/2019 Methods and assumptions used to determine contribution rates: Actuarial cost method Entry age Amortization method Level percentage of payroll, closed Remaining amortization period 30 years Asset valuation method 5 -year smoothed market Inflation 2.50% Salary increases 2.75 % Varies by Age, Service and Type of Employment Retirement age The probabilities of retirement are based on the 2010 CalPERS Experience Study for the period from 1997 to 2007 Mortality The probabilities of mortality are derived from CaIPERS' Membership Data for all Funds based on CaIPERS' specific data from a 2017 CalPERS Experience Study. The table includes 15 years of mortality improvements using the Society of Actuaries Scale BB. * Fiscal year 2015 was the 1st year of GASB 68 implementation, therefore only six years are shown 120 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (Continued) FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 2 —AGENT MULTIPLE -EMPLOYER DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN Miscellaneous Plan, an Agent Multiple -Employer Defined Pension Plan Last 10 Years* SCHEDULE OF CHANGES IN THE NET PENSION LIABILITY AND RELATED RATIOS Measurement Date 6/30/2014 6/30/2015 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 6/30/2018 6/30/2019 6/30/2020 Total Pension Liability Service Cost $ 2,451,356 $ 2,374,018 $ 2,440,538 $ 2,891,884 $ 2,954,416 $ 3,112,725 $ 3,084,811 Interest 8,964,159 9,244,742 9,456,322 9,717,799 10,042,619 10,492,653 10,983,947 Changes of Benefit Terms Differences Between Expected and Actual Experience (1,273,339) (1,959,467) (570,100) 332,948 962,894 1,525,345 Changes of Assumptions (2,208,472) 7,865,663 (1,056,903) Benefit Payments, including Refunds of Employee Contributions (6,246,453) (6,895,260) (6,958,358) (7,275,386) (7,472,690) (8,017,140) (8,473,915) Net Change in Total Pension Liability 5,169,062 1,241,689 2,979,035 12,629,860 4,800,390 6,551,132 7,120,188 Total Pension Liability- Beginning 121,419,671 126,588,733 127,830,422 130,809,457 143,439,317 148,239,707 154,790,839 Total Pension Liability- Ending (a) $ 126,588,733 $ 127,830,422 $ 130,809,457 $ 143,439,317 $ 148,239,707 $ 154,790,839 $ 161,911,027 Plan Fiduciary Net Position Contributions -Employer $ 2,214,366 $ 2,605,414 $ 2,936,966 $ 3,362,448 $ 3,612,106 $ 4,093,017 $ 4,673,324 Contributions - Employee 1,203,540 1,064,874 1,112,768 1,357,763 1,234,017 1,290,194 1,287,721 Net Investment Income 15,116,451 2,248,984 487,558 10,862,212 8,765,961 7,207,344 5,639,668 Benefit Payments, including Refunds of Employee Contributions (6,246,453) (6,895,260) (6,958,358) (7,275,386) (7,472,690) (8,017,140) (8,473,915) Net Plan to Plan Resource Movement 40,946 (98) (397,322) (256) Administration Expense (111,650) (60,485) (142,865) (162,887) (78,639) (161,688) Other Miscellaneous Income/(Expense) (309,326) 256 Net Change in Plan Fiduciary Net Position 12,287,904 (1,046,692) (2,481,649) 7,766,850 5,666,925 4,495,032 2,965,110 Plan Fiduciary Net Position - Beginning 88,004,118 100,292,022 99,245,330 96,763,681 104,530,531 110,197,456 114,692,488 Plan Fiduciary Net Position - Ending (b) $ 100,292,022 $ 99,245,330 $ 96,763,681 $ 104,530,531 $ 110,197,456 $ 114,692,488 $ 117,657,598 Net Pension Liability - Ending (a) -(b) $ 26,296,711 $ 28,585,092 $ 34,045,776 $ 38,908,786 $ 38,042,251 $ 40,098,351 $ 44,253,429 Plan Fiduciary Net Position as a Percentage of the Total Pension Liability 79.23% 77.64% 73.97% 72.87% 74.34% 74.10% 72.67% Covered Payroll $ 13,078,081 $ 13,191,923 $ 13,560,054 $ 14,918,921 $ 15,717,707 $ 16,412,886 $ 16,638,248 Net Pension Liability as Percentage of Covered - Employee Payroll 201.07% 216.69% 251.07% 260.80% 242.03% 244.31% 265.97% Notes to Schedule: Benefit changes. Figures above do not include any liability impact that may have resulted from plan changes which occurred after the June 30. This applies for voluntary benefit changes as well as any offers of Two Years Additional Service Credit (a.k.a. Golden Handshakes). Changes in assumptions. In 2018, demographic assumptions and inflation rate were changed in accordance to the CaIPERS Experience Study and Review of Actuarial Assumptions December 2017. The inflation assumption is reduced from 2.75 percent to 2.50 percent. The assumptions for individual salary increases and overall payroll growth are reduced from 3.00 percent to 2.75 percent. There were no changes in the discount rate. In 2017, the accounting discount rate reduced from 7.65 percent to 7.15 percent. In 2016, there were no changes. In 2015, the discount rate was changed from 7.5% (net of administrative expenses) to 7.65%. In 2014, amounts reported were based on the 7.5 discount rate. * - Fiscal year 2015 was the 1st year of GASB 68 implementation. 121 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (Continued) FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 2 —AGENT MULTIPLE -EMPLOYER DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN (Continued Miscellaneous Plan, an Agent Multiple -Employer Defined Pension Plan Last 10 Years SCHEDULE OF CONTRIBUTIONS Fiscal Year Ended lune 30 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Actuarially determined contribution $ 2,929,226 $ 3,370,189 $ 3,611,599 $ 4,093,018 $ 4,647,118 $ 5,217,323 Contributions in relation to the actuarially determined contributions (2,929,226) (3,370,189) (3,611,599) (4,093,018) (4,647,118) (5,217,323) Contribution deficiency (excess) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ Covered payroll $ 13,560,054 $ 14,918,921 $ 15,717,707 $ 16,412,886 $ 16,638,248 $ 18,069,293 Contributions as a percentage of covered payroll 21.60% 22.59% 22.98% 24.94% Notes to Schedule Valuation date: 6/30/2014 6/30/2015 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Methods and assumptions used to determine contribution rates: Actuarial cost method Entry age Amortization method Level percentage of payroll Remaining amortization period 29 years Asset valuation method Market Value of Assets Inflation 2.50% Salary increases Varies by category, entry age, and duration of service. Retirement age The probabilities of Retirement are based on the CalPERS Experience Study. Mortality The probabilities of mortality are derived from CaIPERS' Membership Data for all Funds based on the CalPERS Experience Study. The table includes 20 years of mortality improvements using the Society of Actuaries Scale BB. * Fiscal year 2015 was the 1st year of GASB 68 implementation. 122 27.93% 28.87% 6/30/2018 6/30/2019 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA - REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (Continued) FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 3 — OTHER POST -EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS (OPEB) Schedule of Changes in the Net OPEB Liability and Related Ratios An Agent Multi -Employer Defined Benefits Retiree Healthcare Plan Last 10 fiscal years* Measurement Date Total OPEB Liability (1) Service Cost Interest Changes of benefit terms Differences between expected and actual experience Changes of assumptions Implicit rate subsidy fulfilled Benefit payments Net change in total OPEB liability Total OPEB liability - beginning Total OPEB liability - ending (a) OPEB fiduciary net position Net investment income Contributions - employer Contributions - Implicit Subsidy Contributions - employee Administrative expense Implicit rate subsidy fulfilled Benefit payments, including refunds of employee contributions Net change in plan fiduciary net position Plan fiduciary net position - beginning Plan fiduciary net position - ending (b) Net OPEB liability - ending (a) -(b) 6/30/2017 6/30/2018 6/30/2019 6/30/2020 $ 1,076,983 $ 1,109,292 $ 1,165,244 $ 843,673 3,715,640 3,831,234 3,939,278 3,252,206 (6,552,966) 210,694 82,179 (2,456,857) (2,273,864) (627,012) (672,658) (675,769) (582,560) (2,779,180) (2,735,249) (2,765,515) (2,824,141) 1,386,431 1,614,798 (7,346,585) (1,373,992) 51,665,130 53,051,561 54,666,359 47,319,774 $ 53,051,561 $ 54,666,359 $ 47,319,774 $ 45,945,782 $ 1,236,932 $ 1,113,358 $ 1,146,645 $ 728,615 4,402,957 4,323,894 5,064,694 4,652,150 627,012 672,658 675,769 582,560 (5,990) (7,856) (3,777) (10,065) (627,012) (672,658) (675,769) (582,560) (2,779,180) (2,735,249) (2,765,515) (2,824,141) 2,854,719 2,694,147 3,442,047 2,546,559 11,284,358 14,139,077 16,833,224 20,275,271 $ 14,139,077 $ 16,833,224 $ 20,275,271 $ 22,821,830 $ 38,912,484 $ 37,833,135 $ 27,044,503 $ 23,123,952 Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage of the total OPEB liability 26.65% 30.79% 42.85% 49.67% Covered -employee payroll $ 21,235,525 $ 20,450,015 $ 19,742,257 $ 20,857,677 Net OPEB liability as a percentage of covered -employee payroll Notes to schedule: * - the City adopted GASB 75 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2018. 123 183.24% 185.00% 136.99% 110.87% CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (Continued) FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 3 — OTHER POST -EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS (OPEB) (Continued) Schedule of Changes in the Net OPEB Liability and Related Ratios An Agent Multi -Employer Defined Benefits Retiree Healthcare Plan Last 10 fiscal years* SCHEDULE OF CONTRIBUTIONS Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2021 Actuarially Determined Contribution (ADC) Less: Contributions in Relation to the ADC Contribution Deficiency (Excess) Covered -employee payroll Contributions as a percentage of Covered -employee payroll Notes to Schedule: Assumptions and Methods Actuarial Cost Method Amortization Method Amortization Period Inflation Assumed Payroll Growth Healthcare Trend Rates Rate of Return on Assets Mortality & Retirement Rates 2018 2019 2020 2021 $ 4,615,519 $ 4,669,234 $ 4,471,859 $ 3,557,131 5,029,969 4,996,552 5,740,463 5,234,710 $ (414,450) $ (327,318) $ (1,268,604) $ (1,677,579) $ 21,235,525 $ 20,450,015 $ 19,742,257 $ 20,857,677 23.69% 24.43% 29.08% 25.10% Entry age normal, level percent of pay Closed period, level percent of pay 20 years 2.50% 2.75% 6.50%, trending down to 3.84% 7.52% CalPERS Rates. See appendix * City adopted GASB 75 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2018. 124 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (Continued) FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 4 —.MODIFIED APPROACH FOR THE CITY'S INFRASTRUCTURE In accordance with GASB Statement No. 34, the City accounts for and reports infrastructure capital assets. The City defines infrastructure as the basic physical assets including the street system; park and recreation lands and improvement system; storm water collection system; and site amenities associated with buildings, such as parking and landscaped areas, used by the City in the conduct of its business. Each major infrastructure system is divided into subsystems. For example, the street system is divided into concrete and asphalt pavements, concrete curb and gutters, sidewalks, medians, streetlights, traffic control devices (signs, signals, and pavement markings), landscaping, and land. Subsystem detail is not presented in these basic financial statements; however, the City maintains detailed information on these subsystems. The City has elected to use the modified approach, as defined by GASB Statement No. 34, for the Roads and Streets networks. Under GASB Statement No. 34, eligible infrastructure capital assets are not required to be depreciated. In March 2019, the City's consultant completed a study to update the physical condition assessment of the streets. The streets, primarily asphalt pavements, were defined as all physical features associated with the operation of motorized vehicles that exist within the limits of right of way. City -owned streets are classified based on land use, access and traffic utilization into the following four classifications: (1) arterial/major, (2) collector, (3) residential, and (4) other (such as alleys and parking lots). This condition assessment will be performed approximately every two years. For this inspection update, all the paved streets in the City's system were re -inspected. A visual survey of approximately 82.28 centerline miles was evaluated in accordance with Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) standards. Upon completion of this survey, a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) was calculated for each segment to reflect the overall pavement condition. Ranging between 0 — 100, a PCI of 0 would correspond to a badly deteriorated pavement with virtually no remaining life. A PCI of 100 would correspond to a new pavement with proper engineering design and construction at the beginning of its life cycle. 125 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (Continued) FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 4 —.MODIFIED APPROACH FOR THE CITY'S INFRASTRUCTURE (Continued) The following conditions were defined: Condition Rating Description Excellent 90-100 Little or no distress. Little or no distress, with the exception of utility patches in good Very Good 70-89 condition, or minor to moderate hairline cracks; typically lightly weathered. Good 50-69 Light to moderate weathering, light load -related base failure, moderate linear cracking. Poor 25-49 Moderate to severe weathering, moderate levels of base failure, moderate to heavy linear cracking. Very Poor 0-24 Extensive weathering, moderate to heavy base failure, failed patches, extensive network of moderate to heavy linear cracking. The City's policy is to achieve an average rating of 65 for all streets. This rating allows minor cracking and raveling of the pavement along with minor roughness that could be noticeable to drivers traveling at the posted speeds. As of June 30, 2021, the City's street system was rated at a PCI index of 78 on a 100 - point scale. The overall condition of the street pavement is in the lower range of MTC's designation 'Very Good'. The following table details the network statistics and pavement condition by functional class. Table 1— Street Network Statistics and Average PCI by Functional Class Table 1 Street Network Statistics and Average PCI by Functional Class Functional Class Centerline Miles Lane Miles # of Sections % of Network (by Pavement Area) Average PCI Arterial 23.66 53.86 85 29.7% 80 Residential 37.5 67.28 249 41.3% 81 Collector 20.35 39.69 116 25.7% 82 Other 0.8 1.61 24 3.3% 74 Totals 82.31 162.44 474 100% 81 126 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (Continued) FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 4 —.MODIFIED APPROACH FOR THE CITY'S INFRASTRUCTURE (Continued) Table 2 details the percentage of the street network area by each PCI range or condition category. Table 2 — Percent Network Area by Functional Class and Condition Class Table 2 Percent Network Area by Functional Class and Condition Class Condition Class PCI Range Arterial Collector Residential Other Total Excellent/Very Good (1) 100-90 23.7% 21.6% 31.5% 2.2% 79.0% Good/Fair (II/III) 89-50 6.0% 3.6% 7.7% 0.6% 17.9% Poor (IV) 49-25 0.0% 0.3% 2.1% 0.5% 2.9% Very Poor (V) 0-24 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.2% Total 1 29.7% 1 25.6% 1 41.4% 1 3.3% 1 100.0% The City's street network replacement value is estimated at $155 million. Replacement value is calculated as the current cost to reconstruct each street in the network. The optimal network PCI is somewhere between low and mid 80's, which is in the middle of the 'excellent/very good' condition category. This is recommended because streets with a PCI in the 80's as opposed to 70's will likely remain in the 'excellent/very good' condition category for a longer period of time if relatively inexpensive preventive maintenance treatments are used. Once PCI falls below 70, more expensive rehabilitation treatments will be needed. The cost to repair and maintain a pavement depends on its current PCI. In the 'excellent/very good' category, it costs very little to apply preventative maintenance treatments. More than half (76.9%) of the City's street network would benefit from these lower cost preventative maintenance treatments. Approximately 97% of the City's street network is considered in 'good' condition. Pavements in this range require more than a life -extending treatment. At this point, a well-designed pavement will have served at least 75 percent of its life with the quality of the pavement dropping approximately 40%. The remaining 3% of the City's street network falls into the 'poor' or 'very poor' PCI ranges. These pavements are near the end of their service lives and often exhibit major forms of distress. At this stage a street usually requires either a thick overlay or reconstruction. One of the key elements of a pavement repair strategy is to keep streets that are in the 'good' or 'fair' category from deteriorating. This is particularly true for streets in the 'fair' range, because they are at the point where pavement deterioration accelerates if left untreated. The projected pavement budget for fiscal year 2021 through fiscal year 2024 is approximately $2,000,000 per year or $10,000,000 million. This investment level is estimated to maintain the current PCI level with a decrease of one point to 80 in 2023. Furthermore, under this investment level, the deferred maintenance backlog is projected to decrease from $1.2 million in 2019 to $0.9 million in 2023. 127 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (Continued) FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 NOTE 4 —.MODIFIED APPROACH FOR THE CITY'S INFRASTRUCTURE (Continued) A schedule of estimated annual amounts calculated to maintain and preserve the City's streets at the current level compared to actual expenditures for street maintenance for the last three years is presented below. Fiscal Year 2020 2021 2022 2023 Budget $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 Rehabilitation 1,749,705 1,713,333 1,623,564 1,761,962 Preventative Maintenance 249,213 285,607 128,246 16,936 Deferred Maintenance 294,547 72,376 - 896,357 PCI 78 81 81 80 A schedule of estimated annual amounts calculated to maintain and preserve the City's streets at the current level compared to actual expenditures for street maintenance for the last three years is presented below. Fiscal Year Maintenance Estimate Actual Expenditures PCI Rating 2018-2019 $ 2,000,000 $ 856,722 81 2019-2020 $ 2,000,000 $ 2,031,991 78 2020-2021 1 $ 2,000,000 1$ 3,848,350 1 81 The City's ongoing street rehabilitation program is funded in the Capital Improvement Program. 128 Revenues Property taxes Sales and use taxes Transient occupancy taxes Othertaxes Licenses and permits Fines, forfeitures and penalties Charges for services Otherrevenue Intergovernmental taxes Grants and subventions Investment income Total revenues Expenditures Current: General Government City Attorney City Clerk City Council City Manager Human Resources Finance Total General Government Public safety: Fire Fire - Disaster Preparedness Police Communications Dispatch Police - Parking Enforcement Police Total Public Safety Public Works Community Development Parks, recreation, and library Library Parks Recreation and Aquatics Total Leisure & Cultural Services Capital outlay Total Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over expenditures Other financing sources (uses) Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Net change in fund balance FUND BALANCE Beginning of year End of year CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA GENERAL FUND SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE BUDGET AND ACTUAL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 Budgeted Amounts Original Final Actual $ 25,136,000 12,000,000 14,000,000 2,831,200 78,200 560,000 5,007,000 110,000 143,000 1,563,000 61,428,400 1,126,967 644,591 455,960 952,823 1,179,619 2,758,687 7,118,647 12,459,737 110,000 1,695,497 672,248 15,220,487 30,157,969 7.023.458 2,549,168 5,972,001 5.556.687 4,753,949 16,282,637 163.000 rz')QA Q7Q $ 24,659,000 14,570,000 7,500,000 2,802,800 71,200 650,000 4,406,900 212,500 3,434,371 1,508,000 59,814,771 1,126,967 647,591 454,860 859,023 1,162, 619 2,758,687 7,009,747 12,459,737 110,000 1,726,971 664,148 15,620,214 30,581,070 7.208.558 2,547,668 5,426,166 5.607.487 3,753,099 14,786,752 249.746 F) zQ:Z qA1 $ 24,223,779 15,665,703 5,738,588 2,957,503 85,614 700,774 5,489,921 232,039 22,090 4,240,733 2,765,323 62,122,067 892,842 513,391 355,950 802,012 1,067,332 2,658,220 6,289,747 12, 256,105 77,033 1,683,174 624,521 15,129,999 29,770,832 6,446,636 2,305,767 5,129, 220 5.078.273 3,231,914 13,439,407 191,235 58,443,624 Variance Positive (Negative) $ (435,221) 1,095,703 (1,761,412) 154,703 14,414 50,774 1,083,021 19,539 22,090 806,362 1,257,323 2,307,296 234,125 134,200 98,910 57,011 95,287 inn AF.7 203,632 32,967 43,797 39,627 490,215 810,238 761,922 241,901 296,946 529,214 521,185 1,347,345 58,511 2 QZQ Q'17 (1,866,479) (2,568,770) 3,678,443 6,247,213 2,573,550 2,573,550 2,573,550 (5,883,338) (5,937,338) (5,937,338) (3,309,788) (3,363,788) (3,363,788) $ (5,176,267) $ (5,932,558) 314,655 $ 6,247,213 129 44,892,409 $ 45,207,064 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA STORM DRAINAGE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE BUDGET AND ACTUAL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements 130 Budgeted Amounts Variance Positive Original Final Actual (Negative) Revenues Charges for services $ 3,017,000 $ 3,017,000 $ 2,977,639 $ (39,361) Investment income 77,000 74,300 6,776 (67,524) Total revenues 3,094,000 3,091,300 2,984,415 (106,885) Other financing sources (uses) Transfers out (1,926,339) (1,926,339) (1,926,339) Total other financing sources (uses) (1,926,339) (1,926,339) (1,926,339) Net change in fund balance $ 1,167,661 $ 1,164,961 1,058,076 $ (106,885) FUND BALANCE Beginning of year 7,086,627 End of year $ 8,144,703 See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements 130 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION COMBINING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS Special Revenue Funds Measure A Fund — This fund accounts for the City's share of the special half -cent sales tax for transportation approved on the November 1988 ballot, effective January 1, 1989. Expenditures from this fund can only be incurred on transportation -related programs. Gas Tax Fund — This fund is to account for revenue received from the State of California derived from gasoline taxes. These funds may only be used for street purposes as specified in the State Streets and Highway Code. Special Assessment District Fund — This fund accounts for revenue from special assessments received from a special benefit district formed during fiscal year 2011-12 on Burlingame Avenue. The special benefit district revenues fund the lighting, landscape, and utility -related upgrades completed in 2014, and a portion of the related maintenance costs. Train Shuttle Fund — This fund is to account for revenues received from the Peninsula Joint Powers Board, San Mateo County Transportation Authority, Bay Area Air Quality Management District, City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County, Downtown Burlingame Business Association, and the Broadway Improvement District for a free shuttle bus program. State/Federal Grants Funds — These funds are to account for grants from the State of California and the federal government, used or expended for a specific purpose, activity, or facility. Local Grants and Donations Fund — This fund is to account for grants or donations from local sources other than the State or Federal government used or expended for a specific purpose, activity, or facility. Development Fees Fund — This fund is to account for developers' fees that may be used for public improvements or facilities needed to support approved development projects in the City. This fund includes receipts from impact fees for specific improvement in the Bayfront and North Burlingame areas, as well as parking in lieu fees. Public TV Access Fund — This fund is to account for the PEG Access funding through Cable TV Franchise agreement beginning January 1, 1999. The City uses these funds to finance capital improvements associated with the broadcast of municipal events. Measure W Fund — This fund accounts for the City's share of the special half -cent sales tax for transportation approved on the November 2018 ballot, effective July 1, 2019. Expenditures from this fund can only be incurred for local safety, pothole & congestion relief improvements. 133 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA Combining Balance Sheet Nonmajor Governmental Funds JUNE 30, 2021 ASSETS Cash and investments Receivables (net of uncollectible amount of $0): Accounts and other receivables Total assets LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS AND FUND BALANCES Liabilities: Accounts payable Total liabilities Deferred Inflows: Unavailable revenue Total deferred inflows Fund Balances: Special Revenue Funds Special Train Measure A Gas Tax Assessment Shuttle Fund Fund District Fund $ 1,256,432 $ 1,335,970 $ 402,189 $ 226,377 65,981 57,207 48,872 69,534 $ 1,322,413 $ 1,393,177 $ 451,061 $ 295,911 23,993 23,993 31,915 105,534 31,915 105,534 Restricted 1,322,413 1,393,177 419,146 166,384 Total fund balances 1,322,413 1,393,177 419,146 166,384 Total liabilities, deferred inflows and fund balances $ 1,322,413 $ 1,393,177 $ 451,061 $ 295,911 134 $ $ 5,338 $ - $ - $ - $ 29,331 5,338 29,331 137,449 137,449 49,983 544,362 Special Revenue Funds 904,020 647,615 14,442,582 49,983 Local 8,995,482 904,020 647,615 Total State /Federal Grants and Development Public TV 647,615 $ Nonmajor Grants Donations Fees Access Measure W Governmental Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Funds $ 40,942 $ 548,795 $ 8,973,189 $ 880,570 $ 646,450 $ 14,310,914 9,041 905 22,293 23,450 1,165 298,448 $ 49,983 $ 549,700 $ 8,995,482 $ 904,020 $ 647,615 $ 14,609,362 $ $ 5,338 $ - $ - $ - $ 29,331 5,338 29,331 137,449 137,449 49,983 544,362 8,995,482 904,020 647,615 14,442,582 49,983 544,362 8,995,482 904,020 647,615 14,442,582 $ 49,983 $ 549,700 $ 8,995,482 $ 904,020 $ 647,615 $ 14,609,362 135 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Nonmajor Governmental Funds FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 REVENUES: Investment income (loss) Intergovernmental taxes Charges for services Donations Grants and subventions Total revenues EXPENDITURES: Current: Public safety Community development Parks, recreation, and library Shuttle operations Total expenditures REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Transfer out Total other financing sources (uses) Net change in fund balance FUND BALANCE: Beginning of year End of year Special Revenue Funds Special Train Measure A Gas Tax Assessment Shuttle Fund Fund District Fund $ 11,309 $ 7,125 $ (378) $ - 775,874 1,222,442 310,094 25,000 181,163 1,229,5b/ 3U9,/1b 25,000 98,373 98,373 787,183 1,229,567 309,716 (73,373) (806,000) (310,000) (806,000) (310,000) 787,183 423,567 (284) (73,373) 535,230 969,610 419,430 239,757 $ 1,322,413 $ 1,393,177 $ 419,146 $ 166,384 136 Local State /Federal Grants and Grants Donations Special Revenue Funds Development Public TV Fees Access Fund Fund Measure W Fund Total Nonmajor Governmental Funds $ - $ (1,387) $ 27,961 $ 2,571 $ 8,667 $ 55,868 325,524 2,323,840 22,148 85,648 442,890 103,686 103,686 50,248 50,248 50,248 102,299 50,109 88,219 334,191 2,976,532 39,756 585 40,341 148,000 148,000 113,524 113,524 98,373 39,756 114,109 148,000 400,238 10,492 (11,810) (97,891) 88,219 334,191 2,576,294 (1,116,000) (1,116,000) 10,492 (11,810) (97,891) 88,219 334,191 1,460,294 39,491 556,172 9,093,373 815,801 313,424 12,982,288 $ 49,983 $ 544,362 $ 8,995,482 $ 904,020 $ 647,615 $ 14,442,582 137 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual - Nonmajor Governmental Funds FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 REVENUES: Investment income (loss) Intergovernmental Charges for services Donations Grants revenue Total revenues EXPENDITURES: Current: Public safety Community development Parks, recreation, and library Shuttle operations Total expenditures REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Net change in fund balance FUND BALANCE: Beginning of year End of year Special Revenue Funds Measure A Fund Gas Tax Fund Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) $ 1,000 $ 11,309 $ 10,309 $ 4,800 $ 7,125 $ 2,325 764,000 775,874 11,874 1,254,000 1,222,442 (31,558) 765,000 787,183 22,183 1,258,800 1,229,567 (29,233) 765,000 787,183 22,183 1,258,800 1,229,567 (29,233) (806,000) (806,000) (806,000) (806,000) $ 765,000 787,183 $ 22,183 $ 452,800 423,567 $ (29,233) 535,230 $ 1,322,413 138 969,610 $ 1,393,177 Special Revenue Funds Special Assessment District Train Shuttle Fund State/Federal Grants Fund Variance Variance Variance Positive Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) $ 3,900 $ (378) $ (4,278) $ - $ - $ - $ $ $ 310,000 310,094 94 25,000 25,000 313,900 309,716 (4,184) 25,000 25,000 227,500 98,373 129,127 227,500 98,373 129,127 313,900 309,716 (4,184) (227,500) (73,373) 154,127 50,248 50,248 50,248 50,248 39,756 (39,756) 39,756 (39,756) 10,492 10,492 (310,000) (310,000) (310,000) (310,000) $ 3,900 (284) $ (4,184) $ (227,500) (73,373) $ 154,127 $ 10,492 $ 10,492 419,430 239,757 39,491 $ 419,146 $ 166,384 $ 49,983 (Continued) 139 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual - Nonmajor Governmental Funds FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 REVENUES: Investment income (loss) Intergovernmental Charges for services Donations Grants revenue Total revenues EXPENDITURES: Current: Public safety Community development Parks, recreation, and library Shuttle operations Total expenditures REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Net change in fund balance FUND BALANCE: Beginning of year End of year Special Revenue Funds Local Grants and Donations Funds Development Fees Fund Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) $ 9,600 $ (1,387) $ (10,987) $ 118,000 $ 27,961 $ (90,039) 22,148 22,148 103,686 103,686 9,600 102,299 92,699 118,000 50,109 (67,891) 585 (585) 148,000 148,000 113,524 (113,524) 114,109 (114,109) 148,000 148,000 9,600 (11,810) (21,410) 118,000 (97,891) (215,891) $ 9,600 (11,810) $ (21,410) $ 118,000 (97,891) $ (215,891) 556,172 $ 544,362 140 9,093,373 $ 8,995,482 Special Revenue Funds Public TV Access Fund Measure W Fund Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) $ 10,600 $ 2,571 $ (8,029) $ 1,900 $ 8,667 $ 6,767 350,000 325,524 (24,476) 100,000 85,648 (14,352) 110,600 88,219 (22,381) 351,900 334,191 (17,709) 110,600 88,219 22,381 351,900 334,191 17,709 $ 110,600 88,219 $ 22,381 $ 351,900 334,191 $ 17,709 815,801 313,424 $ 904,020 $ 647,615 141 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS General Liability Fund — This fund accounts for the servicing of the general liability self-insurance program of the City. Included are costs associated with self-insurance and the purchase of excess insurance to adequately protect the City. User departments are charged for this program at rates based on loss experience (frequency and severity of claims). Workers' Compensation Fund - This fund accounts for the funding of the City's Workers' Compensation costs. User departments are charged for workers' compensation at rates based on loss experience and on departmental personnel budgets. OPEB (Other Post -Employment Benefits) Fund — This fund accounts for the costs of the City's retiree medical program and related liabilities. A percentage "surcharge" on actual payroll provides the fund's revenues; benefits are paid out of the fund and the remaining funds are swept to the irrevocable trust fund established to reduce the OPEB liability incurred in prior years. Facilities Services Fund — This fund accounts for the costs of operation of the City's maintenance and repair of City building and custodial services on a cost reimbursement basis. Equipment Services Fund — This fund accounts for the costs of operation, maintenance, and replacement of automotive equipment used by the various departments. Such costs are billed to the consuming departments at a rate that includes operation and maintenance, and an amount necessary to provide replacement of the equipment at a future date. Information Technology Services Fund — This fund accounts for the costs of operating and maintaining the City's computer system, computer hardware acquisitions, telecommunication system, and connectivity to the Internet and Intranet. Such costs are billed to the consuming departments at a rate that includes operation and maintenance, and an amount necessary to provide for replacement of computers. Activities of the fund also cover cybersecurity, technology disaster recovery and administrative support, such as reception, printing and mailing. 143 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA Combining Statement of Net Position Internal Service Funds JUNE 30, 2021 144 Information General Workers' Facilities Equipment Technology Liability Compensation OPEB Services Services Services Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total ASSETS Current assets: Cash and investments $ 7,596,330 $ 7,688,671 $ - $ 868,684 $ 6,512,993 $ 1,622,781 $ 24,289,459 Receivable (net of uncollectible amounts of $0): Other receivables 18,010 18,400 105,259 6,537 15,397 3,663 167,266 Prepaid and Inventory 2101200 52,073 262,273 Total current assets 7,614,340 7,707,071 315,459 875,221 6,580,463 1,626,444 24,718,998 Non -Current assets: Cash and investments, restricted 247,883 152,369 26,710 426,962 Capital assets: Facilities, infrastructure, and equipment, net of depreciation 71,629 1,380,711 63,069 1,515,409 Total noncurrent assets 319,512 1,533,080 89,779 1,942,371 Total assets 7,614,340 7,707,071 315,459 1,194,733 8,113,543 1,716,223 26,661,369 DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES Deferred outflows related to pensions 208,698 135,377 9,573 353,648 Deferred outflows related to OPEB 121,170 72,824 12,239 206,233 Total deferred outflows of resources 329,868 208,201 21,812 559,881 LIABILITIES Current liabilities: Accounts payable 2,620,751 380 66,924 21,692 114,425 2,824,172 Accrued payroll 20,537 14,834 1,460 36,831 Due to other fund 172,571 172,571 Compensated absences due in one year 4,551 3,327 7,878 Claims and litigation due in one year 336,000 989,000 1,325,000 Total current liabilities 2,956,751 989,380 172,571 92,012 39,853 115,885 4,366,452 Noncurrent liabilities: Compensated absences 36,604 24,125 60,729 Claims and litigation 3,175,000 4,470,000 7,645,000 Net pension liability 1,228,671 797,008 56,361 2,082,040 Net OPEB liability 457,854 275,175 46,248 779,277 Total noncurrent liabilities 3,175,000 4,470,000 1,723,129 1,096,308 102,609 10,567,046 Total liabilities 6,131,751 5,459,380 172,571 1,815,141 1,136,161 218,494 14,933,498 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Deferred inflows related to pensions 947 614 43 1,604 Deferred inflows related to OPEB 139,706 83,965 14,112 237,783 Total deferred outflows of resources 140,653 84,579 14,155 239,387 NET POSITION Net investment in capital assets 71,629 1,380,711 63,069 1,515,409 Restricted 247,883 152,369 26,710 426,962 Unrestricted (deficit) 1,482,589 2,247,691 142,888 (750,705) 5,567,924 1,415,607 10,105,994 Total net position $ 1,482,589 $ 2,247,691 $ 142,888 $ (431,193) $ 7,101,004 $ 1,505,386 $ 12,048,365 144 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position Internal Service Funds FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 145 Information General Workers' Facilities Equipment Technology Liability Compensation OPEB Services Services Services Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total OPERATING REVENUES: Charges for services $ 1,514,000 $ 1,034,500 $ 4,381,109 $ 2,041,760 $ 1,466,122 $ 1,421,668 $ 11,859,159 Other revenue 13 19,320 19,333 Total operating revenue 1,514,000 17034,500 4,381,109 2,041,773 1,485,442 1,421,668 11,878,492 OPERATING EXPENSES: Salaries and benefits 691,943 415,955 75,833 1,183,731 Retiree medical benefit 4,390,850 4,390,850 Supplies and services 103,470 11,952 757,839 206,842 1,071,793 2,151,896 Depreciation 18,591 662,781 26,903 708,275 Insurance claims and expenses 6,407,090 15,877 2,182 39,231 6,464,380 Total operating expenses 6,407,090 119,347 4,402,802 1,470,555 1,324,809 1,174,529 14,899,132 Operating income (loss) (4,893,090) 915,153 (21,693) 571,218 160,633 247,139 (3,020,640) NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES): Investment income (expense) 18,007 4,912 48,360 36,061 9,453 116,793 Net nonoperating revenues (expenses) 18,007 4,912 48,360 36,061 9,453 116,793 Net change in net position (4,875,083) 920,065 (21,693) 619,578 196,694 256,592 (2,903,847) NET POSITION: Total net position, beginning, 6,357,672 1,327,626 164,581 (1,050,771) 6,904,310 1,248,794 14,952,212 Total net position, ending $ 1,482,589 $ 2,247,691 $142,888 $ (431,193) $ 7,101,004 $ 1,505,386 $ 12,048,365 145 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA Combining Statement of Cash Flows Internal Service Funds FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021 RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) Information TO NET CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES: General Workers' Facilities Equipment Technology Operating (loss) income Liability Compensation OPEB Services Services Services $ (3,020,640) Adjustments for noncash activities: Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: 18,591 662,781 26,903 708,275 Receipts from customers for service charges $ 1,514,000 $ 1,045,307 $ 4,381,716 $ 2,041,785 $ 1,493,602 $ 1,423,224 $ 11,899,634 Payments to claims (157,217) (430,661) 607 12 8,160 1,556 (587,878) Payments to suppliers (882,079) (263,427) (11,952) (748,675) (279,040) (1,080,750) (3,265,923) Payments to retirees and trust (4,395,567) (66,632) (37,566) (3,630) (4,395,567) Payments to employees 2,609,794 (7,741) (785,493) (465,501) (85,374) (1,336,368) Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities 474,704 351,219 (25,803) 507,617 749,061 257,100 2,313,898 CASH FLOWS FROM (15,399) 21,705 6,306 NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES: 2,758,000 (567,000) 2,191,000 Interfund loans received (paid) 25,803 (37,338) (30,722) (2,118) 25,803 Net pension liabilities 25,803 115,363 74,833 5,292 25,803 CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND (110,081) (92,630) (10,545) (213,256) RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES: 5,367,794 (563,934) (4,110) (63,601) 588,428 9,961 5,334,538 Acquisition and construction of capital assets $ 474,704 $ 351,219 $ (25,803) (14,999) (173,616) 1 (188,614) CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: Interest received on investments 26,595 4,912 48,360 36,061 9,453 125,381 Cash and investments - current 26,595 4,912 $ - 48,360 36,061 9,453 125,381 Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 501,299 356,131 540,978 611,506 266,554 2,276,468 CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS: $ 7,596,330 $ 7,688,671 $ - $ 1,116,567 $ 6,665,362 $ 1,649,491 $ 24,716,421 Beginning ofyear 7,095,031 7,332,540 575,589 6,053,856 1,382,937 22,439,953 End of year $ 7,596,330 _S7688671 $ - $ 1,116,567 _$6665362 _$1649491 $ 24,716,421 RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) TO NET CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Operating (loss) income $ (4,893,090) $ 915,153 $ (21,693) $ 571,218 $ 160,633 $ 247,139 $ (3,020,640) Adjustments for noncash activities: Depreciation and amortization 18,591 662,781 26,903 708,275 Changes in assets and liabilities: Receivables 10,807 607 12 8,160 1,556 21,142 Inventories and prepaid (4,717) (11,593) (16,310) Deferred outflows (66,632) (37,566) (3,630) (107,828) Accounts payable 2,609,794 (7,741) 11,346 (21,374) (8,957) 2,583,068 Accrued payroll 20,537 14,834 1,460 36,831 Compensated absences (15,399) 21,705 6,306 Claims and litigations liabilities 2,758,000 (567,000) 2,191,000 Deferred inflows (37,338) (30,722) (2,118) (70,178) Net pension liabilities 115,363 74,833 5,292 195,488 Net OPEB liabilities (110,081) (92,630) (10,545) (213,256) Total adjustments 5,367,794 (563,934) (4,110) (63,601) 588,428 9,961 5,334,538 Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities $ 474,704 $ 351,219 $ (25,803) $ 507,617 $ 749,061 $ 257,100 $ 2,313,898 RECONCILIATION OF CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS TO THE STATEMENT OF NET POSITION Cash and investments - current $ 7,596,330 $ 7,688,671 $ - $ 868,684 $ 6,512,993 $ 1,622,781 $ 24,289,459 Cash and investments, restricted 247,883 152,369 26,710 426,962 Total cash and investments per5tatement of Net Position $ 7,596,330 $ 7,688,671 $ - $ 1,116,567 $ 6,665,362 $ 1,649,491 $ 24,716,421 146 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 STATISTICAL SECTION Contents Financial Trends Pages These schedules contain trend information to help the reader understand how the City's financial performance and well-being have changed overtime. 150-157 Revenue Capacity These schedules contain information to help the reader assess the factors affecting the City's ability to generate its property and other taxes. 159-164 Debt Capacity These schedules present information to help the reader assess the affordability of the City's current levels of outstanding debt and the City's ability to issue additional debt in the future. 165-169 Demographic and Economic Information These schedules offer demographic and economic indicators to help the reader understand the environment within which the City's financial activities take place and to help make comparisons over time and with other governments. 170-171 Operating Information These schedules contain information about the City's operations and resources to help the reader understand how the City's financial information relates to the services the City provides and the activities it performs. 172-174 149 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NET POSITION BY COMPONENT Last Ten Fiscal Years (accrual basis of accounting) (amounts expressed in thousands) Governmental activities: Net investment in capital assets Restricted Unrestricted - restated per GASB 75 Total governmental activities net position Business -type activities: Fiscal Year (1) (1) (2) 2012 2013 2014 2015 $ 78,903 $ 64,020 $ 72,956 $ 74,346 12,102 26,400 45,863 36,446 27,234 34,841 14,732 (26,763) $ 118,239 $ 125,261 $ 133,551 $ 84,029 Net investment in capital assets $ 40,381 $ 43,469 $ 46,341 $ 50,485 Restricted 5,014 5,050 451 451 Unrestricted - restated per GASB 75 14,788 16,093 27,092 22,038 Total business -type activities net position $ 60,183 $ 64,612 $ 73,884 $ 72,974 Primary government: Net investment in capital assets $ 119,284 $ 107,489 $ 119,297 $ 124,831 Restricted 17,116 31,450 46,314 36,897 Unrestricted 42,022 50,934 41,824 (4,725) Total primary government net position $ 178,422 $ 189,873 $ 207,436 $ 157,003 (1) Reclassifications in the categories were made to stay consistent and comparable with the presentation in the current year. (2) 2012 reflects net position as originally stated and does not include the effect of implementation of GASB Statement No. 65 in 2013 which restated beginning net position. 150 Fiscal Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 12,367 11,963 12,155 15,485 20,020 23,158 $ 79,019 $ 82,624 $ 87,689 $ 98,575 $ 107,083 $ 124,845 38,414 43,383 26,901 28,852 77,137 67,771 (25,511) (9,583) 6,415 25,681 (12,700) (18,068) $ 91,922 $ 116,424 $ 121,005 $ 153,108 $ 171,520 $ 174,548 $ 54,587 $ 61,071 $ 66,077 $ 69,494 $ 74,432 $ 75,643 12,367 11,963 12,155 15,485 20,020 23,158 26,002 30,125 31,760 36,559 39,748 41,898 $ 92,956 $ 103,159 $ 109,992 $ 121,538 $ 134,200 $ 140,699 $ 133,606 $ 143,695 $ 153,766 $ 153,766 $ 181,515 $ 200,488 50,781 55,346 39,056 39,056 97,157 90,929 491 20,542 38,176 38,176 27,048 23,830 $ 184,878 $ 219,583 $ 230,998 $ 230,998 $ 305,720 $ 315,247 151 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA CHANGE IN NET POSITION Last Ten Fiscal Years (accrual basis accounting) (amounts expressed in thousands) 152 2012 2013 2014 2015 Expenses Governmental activities: General government $ 6,358 $ 6,188 $ 7,295 $ 4,231 Public safety 20,265 21,163 19,141 23,005 Public works 8,248 9,268 12,961 8,267 Community development 1,245 941 1,007 1,145 Parks, recreation and library 9,828 11,065 11,162 15,832 Shuttle operations 249 179 188 135 Financing and other activities 2,215 3,552 2,812 2,422 Total governmental activities expenses 48,408 52,356 54,567 55,037 Business -type activities: Water 11,082 12,127 10,745 11,471 Sewer 9,686 9,553 9,332 10,144 Waste management 681 634 467 481 Landfill - - 177 67 Parking 1,435 1,350 1,183 1,296 Building 1,222 1,317 1,254 1,368 Total business -type activities expenses 24,107 24,980 23,158 24,827 Total primary government expenses __$_72 516 $ 77,336 $ 77,725 $ 79,864 Program Revenue Governmental activities: Charges for services: General government $ 2 $ 117 $ 302 $ 116 Public safety 1,053 212 1,097 1,066 Public works 560 3,230 4,075 3,870 Community development 319 384 738 657 Parks, recreation and library 2,760 2,880 2,919 3,372 Shuttle operations - - - - Operating grants and contributions 1,165 987 738 1,127 Capital grants and contributions 3,520 357 1,249 740 Total government activities program revenues 9,379 8,167 11,118 10,948 Business -types activities: Charges for services: Water 13,708 14,875 16,023 15,425 Sewer 16,157 16,791 16,931 15,679 Waste management 465 564 1,694 943 Landfill - - 350 445 Parking 1,950 2,428 2,477 2,573 Building 1,580 1,707 2,057 1,980 Capital grants and contributions - - - - Total business -type activities program revenues 33,860 36,365 39,532 37,045 Total primary governmental program revenues _$_43 239 $ 44,532 $ 50,651 $ 47,993 Net Government activities $ (39,029) $ (44,189) $ (43,449) $ (44,089) Business -type activities 9,753 11,385 16,374 12,218 Total primary government net expenses $ (29,277) $ (32,804) $ (27,075) $ (31,871) General Revenues and Other Changes in Net Position Governmental activities: Taxes Property taxes $ 13,672 $ 14,394 $ 15,497 $ 16,677 Sales tax 8,495 9,199 10,196 11,101 Transient occupancy tax 16,183 18,244 21,357 23,698 Other taxes 4,478 5,311 4,595 4,697 Other general revenue - - 344 1,254 Special Item - OPEB pre -funding - - (6,600) - Investmentearnings(expense) 472 148 576 481 Transfers 4,513 3,916 5,774 3,127 Total governmental activities 47,813 51,212 51,739 61,037 Business -type activities: Othertaxes 228 314 - - Other general revenue - - Investmentearnings(expense) (1,427) (3,353) (1,329) (1,451) Transfers (4,513) (3,916) (5,774) (3,127) Total primary government (5,712) (6,955) (7,103) (4,578) Change in Net Position Government activities 8,784 7,023 8,290 16,947 Business -type activities 4,041 4,430 9,271 7,640 Total primary government $ 12,825 $ 11,453 $ 17,562 $ 24,587 152 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 $ 4,275 $ 4,757 $ 5,785 $ 6,181 $ 6,710 $ 11,026 26,296 25,710 27,244 28,634 31,551 29,927 8,312 7,353 7,929 7,574 7,639 8,363 1,162 1,386 1,817 1,755 2,376 2,674 13,786 14,581 16,925 16,875 16,062 13,972 137 150 191 168 156 98 2,639 3,075 2,210 1,814 2,144 3,016 56,607 57,012 62,101 63,001 66,638 69,076 12,822 13,806 14,671 14,855 15,096 14,731 10,960 10,345 11,205 11,874 12,224 11,772 487 676 789 728 637 751 56 77 406 224 213 215 445 635 1,053 926 1,005 1,278 1,420 2,054 1,580 2,495 2,354 2,547 26,190 27,593 29,704 31,102 31,529 31,294 $ 82,797 $ 84,605 $ 91,805 $ 94,103 $ 98,167 $ 100,370 $ 123 $ 122 $ 119 $ 109 $ 115 $ 97 1,009 1,075 1,140 1,386 1,496 1,531 3,477 4,316 4,186 4,122 4,219 4,437 890 5,900 702 1,332 3,053 957 3,405 3,860 4,208 4,261 2,924 2,649 150 - - - - - 591 978 830 629 424 4,316 439 150 1,218 508 193 1,502 10,084 16,401 12,403 12,347 12,424 15,489 15,158 16,375 18,623 19,664 20,615 20,081 15,634 15,798 15,837 15,715 15,127 13,099 778 780 700 617 617 611 437 447 465 483 480 452 2,649 2,766 2,820 2,773 1,930 1,628 2,257 4,087 4,413 3,221 3,861 3,373 42,858 39,244 - - - - 79,771 79,497 42,858 42,473 42,630 39,244 $ 89,855 $ 95,898 $ 55,261 $ 54,820 $ 55,054 $ 54,733 $ (46,523) $ (40,611) $ (49,698) $ (50,654) $ (54,214) $ (53,587) 53,581 51,904 13,154 11,371 11,101 7,950 $ 7,058 $ 11,293 $ (36,544) $ (39,283) $ (43,113) $ (45,637) $ 17,645 $ 18,933 $ 20,335 $ 21,956 $ 23,304 $ 24,224 12,828 12,089 12,820 17,820 14,803 15,666 26,092 26,263 27,936 29,384 20,417 5,739 4,589 4,407 4,869 5,214 5,503 5,303 233 427 381 466 383 371 1,292 266 624 5,758 6,000 3,003 (8,114) 2,730 2,863 2,157 2,213 2,243 54,565 65,115 69,828 82,755 72,623 56,549 382 144 185 203 831 279 762 128 235 2,127 2,942 512 8,114 (2,730) (2,864) (2,157) (2,213) (2,243) 9,258 (2,458) (2,444) 173 1,560 (1,452) 7,893 24,503 20,132 32,103 18,411 2,963 19,982 10,202 10,709 11,545 12,663 6,499 $ 27,875 $ 34,705 $ 30,841 $ 43,648 $ 31,074 $ 9,462 153 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA FUND BALANCE OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS Last Ten Fiscal Years (modified accrual basis of accounting) (amounts express in thousands) General Fund: Nonspendable Restricted Committed Assigned Unassigned Total general fund All other governmental funds: Nonspendable Restricted Committed Assigned Unassigned Subtotal all other governmental funds Total governmental fund balance General Fund: Nonspendable Restricted Committed Assigned Unassigned Subtotal General Fund All other governmental funds: 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 $ 1 $ 217 $ 221 $ 224 $ 337 11,927 12,300 9,413 18,773 18,638 3,591 7,430 13,251 10,465 11,003 $ 15,519 $ 19,947 $ 22,885 $ 29,462 $ 29,978 13,659 12,046 20,102 12,268 12,038 $ 204 $ 396 $ 383 $ 375 $ 575 11,898 26,004 17,417 10,851 21,034 - 19,412 28,063 25,220 20,874 13,246 1,166 651 8,762 13,500 40,256/ bb,925 b9,399 /4,b/U 8b,U525 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 $ 215 $ 6 $ 4 $ 7 $ 16 12 4,391 7,480 10,824 15,723 19,386 19,930 21,582 21,728 17,430 13,659 12,046 20,102 12,268 12,038 $ 33,272 $ 36,373 $ 49,168 $ 44,827 $ 45,207 Nonspendable $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Restricted 25,196 22,325 21,117 66,037 51,621 Committed 22,359 27,005 27,765 36,439 30,982 Assigned 20,500 25,800 30,800 24,656 21,198 Unassigned (5) - - - - Subtotal all other governmental funds $ 68,050 $ 75,130 $ 79,682 $ 127,132 $ 103,801 Total governmental fund balance $ 101,322 $ 111,503 $ 128,850 $ 171,959 $ 149,008 (1) Beginning in fiscal year 2011, the City implemented GASB Statement No. 54 which provided updated guidance on fund balance designation and reporting. 154 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report June 30, 2021 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS Last Ten Fiscal Years (modified accrual basis of accounting) (amounts expressed in thousands) REVENUES: Property taxes Sales and use taxes Transient occupancy taxes Othertaxes Licenses and permits Fines, forfeitures, and penalties Investment income Motor vehicle in lieu tax Intergovernmental Charges for services Grant and governmental revenues Otherrevenue Total revenues EXPENDITURES: Current General government Public safety Public works Community development Parks, recreation and library Shuttle operations Other Capital Outlay Debt service: Principal Interest Cost of issuance Total expenditures EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Transferin Transfer out Pension obligation bonds issued Payment to PERS retirement Refund bond issued Premium on bonds issued Proceeds from issuance of debt Payments to refunded bond escrow agent Total other financing sources (uses) Net change in fund balances Debt service as a percentage of noncapital expenditures Fiscal Year 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 $ 13,672 $ 15,539 $ 15,497 $ 16,677 $ 17,645 8,495 9,199 10,196 11,101 12,828 16,183 18,244 21,357 23,698 26,092 2,582 2,970 2,970 3,048 3,154 100 102 112 84 86 889 933 874 921 864 472 148 391 374 1,036 1,896 2,115 1,625 1,648 1,435 6,270 6,721 7,704 8,076 7,919 1,216 267 1,987 1,867 1,075 904 370 345 1,255 391 52,680 56,608 63,058 68,749 72,525 6,669 5,699 5,989 4,434 4,917 18,392 18,895 20,082 23,231 25,057 9,790 7,834 11,280 8,311 7,330 1,172 854 1,041 1,244 1,406 9,463 9,328 10,485 15,145 12,725 145 179 188 135 137 - 6,447 3,205 6,594 3,885 3,034 3,527 4,631 4,964 5,832 2,304 2,337 2,752 2,548 2,633 1,711 1,507 3,404 2,142 8,603 29,276 33,209 33,520 33,694 30,150 (24,763) (29,293) (34,448) (30,567) (38,264) - - 1,045 405 20,637 9,855 4,918 24,553 (929) 3,127 2,786 $ 6,630 $ 26,058 $ 2,473 $ 5,270 $ 11,389 10% 12% 13% 13% 13% 156 Fiscal Year 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 $ 18,933 $ 20,335 $ 21,956 $ 23,304 $ 24,224 12,089 12,819 17,820 14,803 15,666 26,263 27,936 29,384 20,416 5,738 3,024 3,216 3,233 3,134 2,958 88 83 85 99 86 898 976 1,209 793 701 309 547 5,059 5,174 2,886 1,383 1,653 1,980 2,369 2,346 14,284 9,298 9,918 11,257 8,911 779 2,048 1,010 443 5,793 427 378 416 553 352 78,477 79,289 92,070 82,345 69,661 5,148 5,604 5,922 6,515 6,320 25,646 26,448 27,647 28,631 29,812 6,238 6,617 6,313 6,593 6,908 1,531 1,812 1,710 2,374 2,883 13,590 15,642 16,128 15,188 14,331 150 160 168 156 98 4,863 8,080 14,429 14,295 39,514 5,596 5,246 2,600 3,929 11,494 3,182 2,364 1,963 2,697 3,255 303 343 65,944 71,973 76,880 80,681 114,958 12,533 7,316 15,190 1,664 (45,297) 26,378 29,605 28,964 28,731 37,770 (23,648) (26,741) (26,806) (26,518) (35,528) 20,038 2,730 2,864 2,158 2,213 22,280 $ 15,263 $ 10,180 $ 17,348 $ 3,877 $ (23,017) 14% 14% 7% 10% 20% 157 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA ASSESSED VALUES OF TAXABLE PROPERTY Last Ten Fiscal Years Category 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Residential $ 5,067,435,558 $ 5,292,630,080 $ 5,657,587,039 $ 6,106,922,682 $ 6,543,165,637 Commercial 1,203,204,597 1,264,338,491 1,304,028,690 1,406,432,281 1,487,657,043 Industrial 449,409,192 469,569,724 487,612,064 491,904,917 500,290,183 Government 481,217 490,841 1,131,741 1,136,878 16,859,592 Institutional 5,179,683 5,313,527 5,686,994 6,739,774 5,545,746 Miscellaneous 46,149,474 47,731,445 52,216,889 52,541,265 63,818,615 Recreational 21,565,053 21,330,221 21,756,820 27,696,881 30,269,253 Vacant Land 44,684,470 53,260,644 61,242,201 42,238,634 43,082,544 SBE Nonunitary 2,560,452 2,560,452 2,560,452 2,560,452 2,763,435 Unsecured 270,906,684 275,840,943 302,712,785 307,284,506 324,903,282 Unknown - - 45,233,193 - - TOTALS $ 7,111,576,380 $ 7,433,066,368 $ 7,941,768,868 $ 8,445,458,270 $ 9,018,355,330 Total Direct Rate 0.14519 0.14209 0.14205 0.14235 0.14250 Note: Exempt values are not included in the total. In 1978 the voters of the State of California passed Proposition 13 which limited taxes to a total maximum rate of 1%, based upon the assessed value of the property being taxed. Each year, the assessed value of property may be increased by an "inflation factor" (limited to a maximum of 2%). With few exceptions, property is only reassessed as a result of new construction activity or at the time it is sold to a new owner. Source: San Mateo County Assessor 2011/12 - 2020/21 Combined Tax Rolls 158 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 $ 6,996,722,454 1,665,932,944 523,550,270 17,116, 700 5,634,571 76,577,551 30,095,025 62,448,455 2,763,435 329,134,973 $ 7,392,749,191 1,857,291,724 545,609,274 17,459,033 5,743,999 102,398,944 30,696,916 63,823,350 2,763,435 338,411,794 $ 7,873,773,642 1,978,102,748 650,767,854 40,103,131 5,819,973 2,461,921 52,691,864 18,242,238 2,763,435 344,682,252 $ 8,453,667,110 2, 064, 268,140 770,865,330 39,254,268 5,958,515 2,511,155 53,744,894 31,975,517 3,841,026 360,169,404 $ 9,086,726,751 2,850,479,408 673,478,092 20,329,877 6,077, 249 2,561,375 54,810,016 55,962,779 3,841,026 351,494,932 $ 9,709,976,378 $ 10,356,947,660 $ 10,969,409,058 $ 11,786,255,359 $ 13,105,761,505 0.14246 0.14245 0.14245 0.14242 0.14240 159 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA NET TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUE HISTORY Last Ten Fiscal Years TAXABLE PROPERTY VALUES LIEN YEAR SECURED UNSECURED SBE NONUNITARY NET TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE % CHANGE 2011/12 $ 6,838,109,244 $ 270,906,684 $ 2,560,452 $ 7,111,576,380 1.43% 2012/13 7,154,664,973 275,840,943 2,560,452 7,433,066,368 4.52% 2013/14 7,636,495,631 302,712,785 2,560,452 7,941,768,868 6.84% 2014/15 8,135,613,312 307,284,506 2,560,452 8,445,458,270 6.34% 2015/16 8,690,688,613 324,903,282 2,763,435 9,018,355,330 6.78% 2016/17 9,378,077,970 329,134,973 2,763,435 9,709,976,378 7.67% 2017/18 10,015,772,431 338,411,794 2,763,435 10,356,947,660 6.66% 2018/19 10,621,963,371 344,682,252 2,763,435 10,969,409,058 5.91% 2019/20 11,422,244,929 360,169,404 3,841,026 11,786,255,359 7.45% 2020/21 12,750,425,547 351,494,932 3,841,026 13,105,761,505 11.20% Source: San Mateo County Assessor 160 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA PROPERTY TAX RATES --DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING GOVERNMENTS Last Ten Fiscal Years (per $100 of assessed value) City's Share of 1% Levy Per Prop 13 "' Redevelopment Rate "' Total Direct Rate 0.14472 Note: (1) In 1978, California voters passed Proposition 13 which set the property tax rate at a 1.00% fixed amount. This 1.00% is shared by all taxing agencies in which the subject property resides within. In addition to the 1.00% fixed amount, property owners are charged taxes as a percentage of assessed property values for the payment of any voter approved bonds. (2) Overlapping rates are those of local and county governments that apply to property owners within the City. Not all overlapping rates apply to all city property owners. (3) City's share of 1% levy is based on the City's share of the General Fund tax rate area with the largest net taxable value within the city. Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) General Fund tax shifts may not be included in tax ratio figures. (4) Redevelopment Agency (RD) rate is based on the largest RDA tax rate area (TRA) and includes only rate(s) from indebtedness adopted prior to 1989 per California State Statute. RDA direct and overlapping rates are applied only to the incremental property values. The approval of ABX1 26 eliminated RDA from the State of California for the fiscal year 2012/13 and years thereafter. (5) Total Direct Rate is the weighted average of all individual direct rates applied to by the government preparing the statistical section information and excludes revenues derived from aircraft. Beginning in 2013-14 the Total Direct Rate no longer includes revenue generated from the former redevelopment tax rate areas. Challenges to recognized enforceable obligations are assumed to have been resolved during 2012-13. For the purposes of this report, residual revenue is assumed to be distributed to the City in the same proportions as general fund revenue. 161 General DEBT AND/OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS County, Community Elementary High Fiscal City and Peninsula College School School Total Year Schools City County Hospital District District District Tax Rate 2012 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.019900 0.138800 0.038300 1.197000 2013 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.019400 0.144800 0.038100 1.202300 2014 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.019400 0.177200 0.035500 1.232100 2015 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.019000 0.101500 0.047500 1.168000 2016 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.025000 0.090000 0.046600 1.161600 2017 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.024700 0.082400 0.041500 1.148600 2018 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.023500 0.103800 0.043300 1.170600 2019 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.017500 0.097700 0.040700 1.155900 2020 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.026600 0.092500 0.038500 1.157600 2021 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.021300 0.094700 0.044900 1.160900 City's Share of 1% Levy Per Prop 13 "' Redevelopment Rate "' Total Direct Rate 0.14472 Note: (1) In 1978, California voters passed Proposition 13 which set the property tax rate at a 1.00% fixed amount. This 1.00% is shared by all taxing agencies in which the subject property resides within. In addition to the 1.00% fixed amount, property owners are charged taxes as a percentage of assessed property values for the payment of any voter approved bonds. (2) Overlapping rates are those of local and county governments that apply to property owners within the City. Not all overlapping rates apply to all city property owners. (3) City's share of 1% levy is based on the City's share of the General Fund tax rate area with the largest net taxable value within the city. Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) General Fund tax shifts may not be included in tax ratio figures. (4) Redevelopment Agency (RD) rate is based on the largest RDA tax rate area (TRA) and includes only rate(s) from indebtedness adopted prior to 1989 per California State Statute. RDA direct and overlapping rates are applied only to the incremental property values. The approval of ABX1 26 eliminated RDA from the State of California for the fiscal year 2012/13 and years thereafter. (5) Total Direct Rate is the weighted average of all individual direct rates applied to by the government preparing the statistical section information and excludes revenues derived from aircraft. Beginning in 2013-14 the Total Direct Rate no longer includes revenue generated from the former redevelopment tax rate areas. Challenges to recognized enforceable obligations are assumed to have been resolved during 2012-13. For the purposes of this report, residual revenue is assumed to be distributed to the City in the same proportions as general fund revenue. 161 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA TOP TEN PROPERTY TAXPAYERS June 30, 2021 (amounts expressed in thousands) 2020/21 $ 1,725,626 13.16% (1) 2020-21 Local Combined Assessed Valuation $ Source: San Mateo County Assessor Combined Tax Rolls and the SBE Non Unitary Tax Roll 162 13,105, 761 2011/12 Percentage Percentage of of Taxable Taxable Assessed Total Assessed Value Taxable Value (1) Taxable 1 1.55% Assessed 2 Assessed 72,000 Taxpayer Value Rank Value (1) 0.73% Burlingame Point LLC $ 705,474 1 5.38% EQR-North Park LP HMC Burlingame Hotels LLC 229,664 2 1.75% HMC Burlingame Hotel LLC Shac Carolan Apartments LLC 174,661 3 1.33% Inland American Lodging Burlingame LLC EQR-NorthPark LP 130,477 4 1.00% Bay Park Plaza Associates Inland American Lodging Burlingame LLC 119,559 5 0.91% Mills -Peninsula Health Services EW PG Airport Owner LLC 104,283 6 0.80% Felcor CSS Holdings LP DCT Rollins Road LLC 78,420 7 0.60% EQR-Skyline Terrace LP IP Woodstock One Bay LLC 75,300 8 0.57% DCT Rollins Road LLC Felcor CSS Holdings LP 57,800 9 0.44% One Bay Plaza Associates LLC Pur Skyline MMC II LLC 49,988 10 0.38% Harbor View Hotels Inc. $ 1,725,626 13.16% (1) 2020-21 Local Combined Assessed Valuation $ Source: San Mateo County Assessor Combined Tax Rolls and the SBE Non Unitary Tax Roll 162 13,105, 761 2011/12 $ 546,133 7.67% Percentage of Total Taxable Taxable Assessed Assessed Value Rank Value (1) $ 110,000 1 1.55% 81,841 2 1.15% 72,000 3 1.01% 51,900 4 0.73% 47,138 5 0.66% 44,771 6 0.63% 42,600 7 0.60% 34,256 8 0.48% 33700 9 0.47% 27,927 10 0.39% $ 546,133 7.67% CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA PROPERTY TAX LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS Last Ten Fiscal Years Collected Within Year of Levy Total Collections Notes (1) Current tax collections are less than the levy due to roll corrections, county administrative charges, and other adjustments which may occur after the date of levy. (2) The City participates in the Teeter Plan under California State law. Under the Teeter Plan, the County remints the entire tax levy and manages delinquent tax collections with the associated interest and penalties. Source: San Mateo County Controller's Office; Audited City financial records 163 Current Delinquent Total Fiscal Total Tax Tax Tax Year Tax Levy Collections % of Levy Collections Collections % of Levy 2012 $ 11,900,220 $ 10,976,456 92.24% $ - $ 10,976,456 92.24% 2013 12,446,101 11,762,421 94.51% - 11,762,421 94.51% 2014 13,312,310 12,745,227 95.74% - 12,745,227 95.74% 2015 14,167,158 13,744,014 97.01% - 13,744,014 97.01% 2016 15,144,338 14,512,541 95.83% - 14,512,541 95.83% 2017 16,321,692 15,570,855 95.40% - 15,570,855 95.40% 2018 17,425,188 16,758,071 96.17% - 16,758,071 96.17% 2019 18,469,901 18,490,239 100.11% - 18,490,239 100.11% 2020 19,862,525 19,780,067 99.58% - 19,780,067 99.58% 2021 22,113,831 21,944,375 99.23% 21,944,375 99.23% Notes (1) Current tax collections are less than the levy due to roll corrections, county administrative charges, and other adjustments which may occur after the date of levy. (2) The City participates in the Teeter Plan under California State law. Under the Teeter Plan, the County remints the entire tax levy and manages delinquent tax collections with the associated interest and penalties. Source: San Mateo County Controller's Office; Audited City financial records 163 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES TAX REVENUES BY SOURCE (accrual basis of accounting) (amounts expressed in thousands) Source: Audited City Financial records - Governmental Funds 164 Transient Inter - Fiscal Property Sales & Use Occupancy governmental year Tax Tax Tax Other Taxes Revenues Total 2012 $ 13,672 $ 8,495 $ 16,183 $ 2,582 $ 1,896 $ 42,828 2013 14,394 9,199 18,244 4,217 2,115 48,169 2014 15,497 10,196 21,357 2,970 1,625 51,645 2015 16,677 11,101 23,698 3,048 1,648 56,172 2016 17,645 12,828 26,092 3,154 1,435 61,154 2017 18,933 12,089 26,263 3,024 1,383 61,692 2018 20,335 12,820 27,936 3,216 1,653 65,960 2019 21,956 17,820 29,384 3,233 1,980 74,373 2020 23,304 14,803 20,417 3,134 2,369 64,027 2021 24,224 15,666 5,739 2,958 2,324 50,911 Source: Audited City Financial records - Governmental Funds 164 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA RATIOS OF OUTSTANDING DEBT BY TYPE Last Ten Fiscal Years 165 Governmental Activities Business -Type Activities Lease Pension Total Percentage Fiscal Revenue Storm Obligation Direct Lease Sewer Water Primary of Personal Per Year Bond Drainage Bonds Borrowing (2) State Loans Purchase Bonds Bonds Government Income(') Capita (l) 2012 $ 10,935,000 $ 9,560,000 $ 24,235,000 $ - $ 13,466,890 $ 1,305,907 $ 18,225,000 $ 25,925,000 $ 103,652,797 6.91% 3,522 2013 19,985,000 19,630,000 22,275,000 - 364,204 1,104,952 17,525,000 24,895,000 105,779,156 7.14% 3,563 2014 18,889,859 19,596,924 20,095,000 - 320,209 897,598 30,260,807 24,550,763 114,611,160 7.74% 3,861 2015 16,999,489 19,083,477 17,695,000 - 274,884 683,639 28,729,137 23,372,756 106,838,382 6.41% 3,597 2016 15,040,564 28,920,064 15,050,000 - 228,210 462,866 27,143,163 22,154,450 108,999,317 6.03% 3,667 2017 13,773,133 28,060,024 12,145,000 - - - 25,861,091 21,262,243 101,101,491 5.44% 3,353 2018 12,465,703 27,169,985 8,970,000 - - - 24,129,246 19,895,915 92,630,849 4.77% 3,058 2019 11,118,270 26,249,945 8,510,000 - - - 22,351,473 18,499,587 86,729,275 4.11% 2,861 2020 47,666,927 25,289,905 8,005,000 298,145 - - 20,522,219 17,068,259 118,850,455 5.53% 3,946 2021 45,483,443 36,046,474 7,450,000 249,081 - - 18,640,918 15,586,931 123,456,847 5.46% 4,150 Note: (1) Details regarding the City's outstanding debt can be found in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements. Furthermore, please reference the schedule of Demographic and Economic Statistics for personal income and per capita data. Data for calendar year 2018 is not available. Therefore, in order to present a useful estimate, personal income data for calendaryear 2016 has been used. (2) PG&E on -bill financing loans- issued in fiscal year 2020. 165 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA RATIOS OF GENERAL BONDED DEBT OUTSTANDING Last Ten Fiscal Years Note Net Total Assesssed Value General Fiscal Obligation Year Bonds 2011 $ 26,010,000 2012 24,235,000 2013 22,275,000 2014 20,095,000 2015 17, 695, 000 2016 15,050,000 2017 12,145, 000 2018 8,970,000 2019 8,510,000 2020 8,005,000 2021 7,450,000 Note Net Total Assesssed Value Percentage of Estimated Actual Taxable Value of Property Burlingame Population Per Capita $ 7,011,122,988 0.37% 29,342 $ 886 7,111,576,380 0.34% 29,106 833 7,433,066,368 0.30% 29,426 757 7,941,768,868 0.25% 29,685 677 8,445,458,270 0.21% 29,700 596 9,018,355,330 0.17% 29,724 506 9,709,976,378 0.13% 30,148 403 10,356,947,660 0.09% 30,294 296 10,969,409,058 0.08% 30,317 281 11,786,255,359 0.07% 30,118 266 13,105,761,505 0.06% 29,746 250 The City has had no general obligations bonds outstanding over the last ten years. However, because the 2006 Pension Obligation Bonds are to be repaid with general government resources, they are shown as general obligation bonds included in this table. 166 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA COMPUTATION OF DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING DEBT* June 30, 2021 2020-21 Assessed Valuation" : $ 13,105,761,505 City's share of Total Debt Percent Debt June 30, 2021 Applicable (1) June 30, 2021 OVERLAPPING TAX AND ASSESSMENT DEBT: San Mateo Community College District $ 761,305,961 5.119% $ 38,971,252 San Mateo Union High School District 680,210,648 14.773% 100,487,519 Burlingame School District 170,632,486 95.005% 162,109,393 Hillsborough School District 73,579,471 0.142% 104,483 TOTAL OVERLAPPING TAX AND ASSESSMENT DEBT $ 1,685,728,566 $ 301,672,647 DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING LEASE OBLIGATION DEBT: San Mateo County General Fund Obligations $ 487,114,345 5.119% $ 24,935,383 San Mateo County Board of Education Certificates of Participation 6,840,000 5.119% 350,140 City of Burlingame, General Fund Obligations 38,355,000 100.000% 38,355,000 City of Burlingame, Pension Obligation Bonds 7,450,000 100.000% 7,450,000 TOTAL GROSS DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING LEASE OBLIGATION DEBT $ 539,759,345 $ 71,090,523 Less: City of Burlingame General Fund Obligations supported from enterprise revenues 3,586,830 (3) Less: City of Burlingame Pension Obligations supported by enterprise revenues 1,862,500 TOTAL NET DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING GENERAL FUND OBLIGATION DEBT $ 65,641,193 TOTAL GROSS DIRECT DEBT $ 45,805,000 TOTAL NET DIRECT DEBT $ 40,355,670 TOTAL OVERLAPPING DEBT $ 326,958,170 GROSS COMBINED TOTAL DEBT $ 372,763,170 (2) NET COMBINED TOTAL DEBT $ 367,313,840 Ratios to 2020-21 Assessed Valuation: Total Overlapping Tax and Assessment Debt 2.30% Total Gross Direct Debt 0.35% Total Net Direct Debt 0.31% Gross Combined Total Debt 2.84% Net Combined Total Debt 2.80% Note: Overlapping governments are those that coincide, at least in part, with the geographic boundaries of the city. This schedule estimates the portion of the outstanding debt of those overlapping governments that is borne by the residents and businesses of the City of Burlingame. This process recognizes that, when considering the City's ability to issue and repay long-term debt, the entire debt burden borne by the residents and businesses should be taken into account. However, this does not imply that every taxpayer is a resident, and, therefore responsible for repaying the debt of each overlapping government. (1) The percentage of overlapping debt applicable to the city is estimated using taxbalbe assessed property value. Applicable percentages were estimated by determining the portion of the overlapping district's assessed value that is within the boundaries of the city divided by the ditrict's total assessed value. (2) Excludes tax and revenue anticipation notes, enterprise revenue, mortgage revenue and non -bonded capital lease obligations. (3) Changed from source to reflect the amount supported from enterprise revenues Source: California Municipal Statistics 167 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA LEGAL DEBT MARGIN INFORMATION Last Ten Fiscal Years (amount expressed in thousands) (1) California Government, Code Section 43605 sets the debt limit at 15%. The Code section was enacted when assessed valuations were based on 25% of full market value. This has sincechanged to 100% of full market value. Thus, the limit shown is 3.75% (one- fourth the limit of 15%). 168 Fiscal Year 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Debt limit $ 295,550 $ 295,550 $ 297,816 $ 299,010 $ 323,138 $ 351,979 $ 379,416 $ 402,843 $ 433,980 $ 484,016 Pension Obligation Bond $ 24,235 $ 22,275 $ 20,095 $ 17,695 $ 15,050 $ 12,145 $ 8,970 $ 8,510 $ 8,005 $ 7,450 Total net debt applicable to the limit as a percentage of debt limit 8.2% 7.5% 6.7% 5.9% 4.7% 3.5% 2.4% 2.1% 1.8% 1.5% Legal Debt Margin Calculation for Fiscal Year 2021 Gross Assessed Valuation $ 13,105,761,505 Multiplied by: (1) 0.0375 491,466,056 Less: Amount of Debt Applicabl 7,450,000 Legal Debt Margin $ 484,016,056 (1) California Government, Code Section 43605 sets the debt limit at 15%. The Code section was enacted when assessed valuations were based on 25% of full market value. This has sincechanged to 100% of full market value. Thus, the limit shown is 3.75% (one- fourth the limit of 15%). 168 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA PLEDGED REVENUE COVERAGE Last Ten Fiscal Years Notes Details regarding the City's outstanding debt can be found in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements. Operating expenses, for purposes of calculating debt service coverage, do not include depreciation and amortization. The above reference debt service only includes parity debt. 169 Water Revenue Bonds Less: Net Fiscal Water Operating Available Debt Service Year Charges Expenses Revenue Principal Interest Coverage 2012 13,708,448 9,112,553 4,595,895 1,225,000 1,232,332 1.87 2013 14,874,705 9,577,242 5,297,463 1,220,000 1,295,085 2.11 2014 16,023,092 8,955,437 7,067,655 1,125,000 942,966 3.42 2015 15,425,234 9,507,833 5,917,401 1,095,000 964,149 2.87 2016 15,178,439 9,945,476 5,232,963 1,135,000 928,601 2.54 2017 16,385,236 10,933,600 5,451,636 1,240,000 705,220 2.80 2018 18,635,292 11,843,823 6,791,469 1,180,000 772,751 3.48 2019 19,683,908 12,043,332 7,640,576 1,210,000 737,151 3.92 2020 20,641,914 12,343,328 8,298,586 1,245,000 696,600 4.27 2021 20,090,362 12,013,714 8,076,648 1,295,000 647,401 4.16 Notes Details regarding the City's outstanding debt can be found in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements. Operating expenses, for purposes of calculating debt service coverage, do not include depreciation and amortization. The above reference debt service only includes parity debt. 169 Wastewater Revenue Bonds Less: Net Fiscal Wastewater Operating Available Debt Service Year Charges Expenses Revenue Principal Interest Coverage 2012 16,157,287 6,932,146 9,225,141 405,000 786,381 7.74 2013 16,791,449 6,297,799 10,493,650 700,000 780,966 7.09 2014 16,931,432 6,448,667 10,482,765 750,000 693,981 7.26 2015 15,679,343 7,071,969 8,607,374 750,000 695,633 5.95 2016 15,634,340 6,973,545 8,660,795 785,000 668,183 5.96 2017 15,821,906 7,081,664 8,740,242 870,000 470,705 6.52 2018 15,866,790 7,421,431 8,445,359 795,000 541,101 6.32 2019 15,732,905 8,122,946 7,609,959 820,000 519,101 5.68 2020 15,440,418 8,476,479 6,963,939 850,000 494,050 5.18 2021 13,098,508 8,003,949 5,094,559 880,000 460,226 3.80 Notes Details regarding the City's outstanding debt can be found in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements. Operating expenses, for purposes of calculating debt service coverage, do not include depreciation and amortization. The above reference debt service only includes parity debt. 169 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC STATISTICS Last Ten Fiscal Years Personal Income % of Population (amounts Per Capita % of Population 25+ with Calendar expressed Personal 25+ with High Bachelor's Year Population (1) in thousands)(2) Income (2) School 2011 29,106 $ 1,396,972 $ 47,996 2012 29,426 1,500,785 51,002 2013 29,685 1,480,747 49,882 2014 29,700 1,667,596 56,148 2015 29,724 1,808,528 60,844 2016 30,148 1,856,902 61,592 2017 30,294 1,943,371 64,150 2018 30,317 2,109,904 69,594 2019 30,118 2,147,950 71,317 2020 29,746 2,261,639 76,031 Sources: (1) California State Department of Finance (2) Income Data: ESRI provided by HDL, Coren & Cone (3) State of California Employment Development Department for San Mateo County 170 94.1% 95.2% 95.2% 95.5% 95.8% 96.6% 96.3% 96.4% 95.2% 96.0% 53.4% 54.1% 54.6% 58.3% 58.0% 58.5% 60.5% 63.6% 65.3% 67.8% Unemployment Rate (3) 5.8% 3.7% 3.0% 3.3% 2.6% 2.3% 2.2% 2.2% 1.9% 5.8% CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA PRINCIPAL EMPLOYERS Last Fiscal Year and Nine Years Ago Source: Avenu Insights & Analytics Results based on direct correspondence with city's local businesses. * Includes full and part time ** number of full-time equivalent (FTE) (1) 2011-12 Prior year data provided by previous published CAFR. (2) Total City Labor Force provided by EDD Labor Force Data. 171 2020-21 2011-12 Number of Percent of Total Number of Percent of Total Business Name Employees Employment (%) Employees (1) Employment (%) Mills-Penninsula Medical Center - Sutter Health 1,820 10.34% Hyatt Regency SF Airport* 381 2.16% 467 1.70% Burlingame School District 365 2.07% Guittard Chocolate CC* 271 1.54% American Medical Response (AMR)* 265 1.51% Burlingame Long Term Care 249 1.41% City of Burlingame 236 1.34% Lahlouh Inc. 178 1.01% Putnam Auto 164 0.93% California Teachers Association 132 0.75% 500 1.82% Virgin America, Inc 2,056 7.50% Wright Medical technology Inc 1,200 4.38% United Natural Foods 555 2.02% Critchfield Mechanical, Inc 517 1.89% Getinge USA 500 1.82% Wine Warehouse 483 1.76% Berkeley Farms 463 1.69% ECC Remediation Services Corp 460 1.68% Total Top 10 Employers 4,061 23.07% 7,201 26.26% Total City Labor Force (2) 17,600 Source: Avenu Insights & Analytics Results based on direct correspondence with city's local businesses. * Includes full and part time ** number of full-time equivalent (FTE) (1) 2011-12 Prior year data provided by previous published CAFR. (2) Total City Labor Force provided by EDD Labor Force Data. 171 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT CITY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES BY FUNCTION Last Ten Fiscal Years Note: The Central County Fire Department (CCFD) is a Joint Powers Authority shared by the Town of Hillsborough and City of Burlingame. Please refer to the Notes to the Financial Statements which define the reporting entity. CCFD is a non -disclosed organization, independently governed, and therefore, no longer a reporting unit of the City. Source: City of Burlingame 172 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Function General government 18.00 18.00 18.00 19.00 19.63 19.88 19.88 19.88 23.53 23.53 Public safety Police: Officers 37.00 37.00 37.00 37.00 37.00 39.00 39.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 Civilians 18.25 17.25 19.25 19.25 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Fire: Firefighters and officers - - - - - - - - - - Civilians - - - - - - - - - - Public works 61.15 61.14 61.75 62.74 62.99 62.99 64.99 64.99 64.99 65.99 Community development 10.00 10.00 11.00 11.00 11.75 12.75 12.75 12.75 17.00 17.00 Leisure and culture 49.77 49.52 51.67 52.18 53.93 54.38 54.38 54.63 55.50 55.50 Note: The Central County Fire Department (CCFD) is a Joint Powers Authority shared by the Town of Hillsborough and City of Burlingame. Please refer to the Notes to the Financial Statements which define the reporting entity. CCFD is a non -disclosed organization, independently governed, and therefore, no longer a reporting unit of the City. Source: City of Burlingame 172 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA OPERATING INDICATORS BY FUNCTION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 (COMPARED TO 5 YEARS AGO) Function Police Calls for Service Physical arrests Crimes Reported Traffic Stops Fire Number of calls answered Inspections Public works Street repair (sq. ft.) Sidewalk & curb repair (sq. ft.) City planning Plans checked Planning applications reviewed Building Permit issued Inspections conducted Leisure and culture Recreation Class Participants Library circulation Tree plantings Tree trimmings Water New connections Main and valve repairs Millions of gallons purchased (millions of gallons) Wastewater Average daily sewage treatment (millions of gallons) Preventive Maintenance, main cleaning (Feet) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 41,673 46,540 48,917 43,313 48,284 768 800 621 563 606 1,885 1,915 1,985 2,255 2,283 5,003 5,178 5,227 5,300 3,889 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 13,704 9,891 3,258 13,101 9,826 52,557 4,262 3,580 5,022 43,788 418 436 516 381 485 112 129 162 106 180 1,226 1,278 1,201 1,106 1,287 5,722 7,433 7,099 8,037 9,319 13,787 14,537 14,507 11,999* 9,306* 688,058 658,754 730,751 676,723 403,975* 240 257 248 232 289 1,830 2,081 2,076 1,424 1,351 4 2 3 5 4 22 21 22 17 22 1,058 1,232 1,235 1,269 1,200 3.55 2.82 3.11 2.40 2.10 202,812 342,422 380,405 457,941 379,239 Source: Various city department records. year 2013, due to the transition of programming responsibility from the City of Burlingame to the Burlingame Aquatics Club. year basis. Central County Fire Department data is now reported with the Central County Fire Department CAFR. *Recreation Class Participants in fiscal year 2020 and 2021- COVID restrictions affected enrollments. *Library Circulatin in Fiscal Year 2020-21 - Affected by Covid Lockdown 173 CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA CAPITAL ASSET STATISTICS BY FUNCTION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 (COMPARED TO 5 YEARS AGO) Function Public works Streets (miles) Streetlights Traffic signals Water Water mains (miles) Fire hydrants Maximum Storage Reservoir capacity (thousands of gallons) Sewer Sanitary sewers (miles) Storm sewers (miles) Average daily treatment capacity (thousands of gallons) Storm drain pump station Note: Historical data is not available. Includes Hillside Fire Station which is currently closed. Source: City of Burlingame 174 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 152 152 152 152 158 1,700 1,800 1,800 1,745 1,714 18 18 18 18 19 105 107 107 100 100 826 887 835 831 837 2,850 2,850 2,850 2,850 2,940 130 130 130 119 89 50 50 50.0 46.6 59 4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100 5,500 5 5 5 5 5 IV, M A&ASCZTE INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS To the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council of the City of Burlingame, California We have audited, in accordance with the auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the basic financial statements of the City of Burlingame, California, as of and for the year ended June 30, 2021, and have issued our report thereon dated November 10, 2021. Internal Control Over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting (internal control) to determine the audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the City's financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses. However, material weaknesses may exist that have not been identified. Accountancy Corporation 3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 215 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 175 T 925.930.0902 F 925.930.0135 E mazeUmazeassociates.com w mazeassociates.com Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. We have also issued a separate Memorandum on Internal Control dated November 10, 2021 which is an integral part of our audit and should be read in conjunction with this report. Purpose of this Report The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the City's internal control and compliance. Accordingly, this communication is not suitable for any other purpose. -LUT-- A 55 C) do"¢� Pleasant Hill, California November 10, 2021 176 To: Date: From: STAFF REPORT Honorable Mayor and City Council December 20, 2021 AGENDA NO: 10a MEETING DATE: December 20, 2021 Sigalle Michael, Sustainability Coordinator — (650) 558-7274 Subject: Annual Report of Sustainability Progress RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council receive a report summarizing the City's sustainability activities over the past year. BACKGROUND The Sustainability Coordinator is tasked with supporting the City Council's priority to "exceed carbon reduction targets and develop strategies to address changing environmental realities." The Sustainability Coordinator works closely with City staff, Burlingame residents and businesses, and other local jurisdictions to implement the above -stated priority through the various efforts and initiatives summarized below. Over the last year, staff implemented the following programs and policies to improve sustainability in the community and in City operations. SB 1383 SB 1383, signed into law in 2016, mandates that California reduce the amount of organic waste sent to landfill by 75% by 2025 as a strategy to reduce climate pollutants. This equates to eliminating about 20 million tons of waste annually. This is important because when organic waste goes to landfills, it decomposes and generates methane — a potent greenhouse gas (GHG) emission. However, when organic waste is diverted from landfills and composted, it decomposes and creates compost, a valuable natural resource used in agriculture. The SB 1383 regulations require ALL businesses and residents to compost. In Burlingame, this means enrolling all businesses and multi -family buildings into Recology's (Burlingame's waste hauler) composting program. Single family homes in Burlingame already receive composting service from Recology. Businesses that do not generate any organic waste and meet the SB 1383 criteria may apply for a waiver. 1 Annual Sustainability Report December 20, 2021 The South Bayside Waste Management Authority (SBWMA) and San Mateo County are leading the implementation of SB 1383 and have each prepared a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for their member cities. Burlingame's City Council adopted an SB 1383 Ordinance and approved the MOUs in November 2021. Staff is working closely with SBWMA, San Mateo County, Recology, and the downtown Broadway and Burlingame business improvement districts on composting education and outreach to residents and businesses. EV Action Plan The City is on its way to meeting the EV infrastructure goals and strategies the Council adopted in the 2020 EV Action Plan through the following key projects implemented this year: - This last year, the City completed the Highland Parking Garage project, which includes 24 Level 2 EV charging stations. - Staff succeeded in securing a $300,000 grant from CALeVIP (California Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Project) for the installation of five fast (DCFC) charging stations and ten Level 2 charging stations in the Donnelly Parking Garage, adjacent to the Main Library. Staff selected a project contractor through an RFP process, and the groundbreaking is set to occur in early 2022. The grant covers most of the project cost, with the City's match just $12,500. - Staff is coordinating with Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE) to plan three additional sites for EV stations: the Corp Yard, Bayside Park, and the new Community Center. PCE is providing technical assistance in assessing the three sites so that staff is prepared to apply for future grants as they arise. - Staff distributed postcards to the multifamily buildings located near the new Highland Parking Garage to encourage use of the new EV chargers; and to the multifamily buildings near the EVgo stations in downtown Broadway to announce the installation of Tesla adaptors and encourage use of the stations. - Facilities staff is in the process of purchasing three more plug-in hybrids for the municipal fleet. Usage at the City's existing EV charging stations has bounced back since the start of the pandemic. The table below highlights several EV indicators. Year Public EV ZEV EVgo Sessions ChargePoint Stations Registrations (6 DCFC charging Sessions (4 ports (ports) (cumulative) stations in downtown @Burlingame Caltrain Broadway) and 2 @City Hall) 2020 12 2,174 1,670 4,322 2021 36 3,729 2,669 5,764 2030 Goal 100 5,000 2 Annual Sustainability Report December 20, 2021 BAWSCA Programs The Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) offers rebates and programs for cities to help conserve water. Led by Jennifer Lee, Environmental Regulatory Compliance Manager, Burlingame participated in the following programs: - Hosted four landscaping classes on Zoom with 174 total participants. The classes were: Herb Garden 101 (5/11/2021), How to Grow Your Own Salad (5/29/2021), Lawn Alternatives for Beginners (10/15/2021), and Building a Laundry -to -Landscape Graywater System (10/19/2021). All BAWSCA workshops are recorded and uploaded to their website here: https://bawsca.org/conserve/landscaping/videos. - Coordinated school programs with EarthCapades, a water education assembly, and Waterwise, an education program taught in 5th grade that includes take-home water saving kits. - Offered three rebate programs: $129 for smart irrigation controls (45 participants in FY 20-21) and up to $200 per qualifying rain barrel (1 participant in FY 20-21). Ongoing Efforts Staff continued progress on the following ongoing efforts as part of the City's sustainability program: - Peninsula Clean Energy: Burlingame's enrollment in Peninsula Clean Energy's electricity program remains the City's most impactful climate action. In 2020, PCE estimates that Burlingame avoided 23,705 tons of greenhouse gas emissions and saved Burlingame customers close to a million dollars. At the start of 2021, PCE began providing 100% greenhouse gas free electricity. This means that Burlingame's electricity is not being generated by the burning of fossil fuels. PCE recently released a plan to further accelerate its energy goals by providing 100% renewable energy 24/7 by 2025. - Reach Codes: In 2020 the City adopted new reach codes that require new buildings and large renovations to use all -electric appliances for heating and install solar energy and electric vehicle charging stations. To date, 20 permits for single family all -electric homes (gas allowed for cooking) have been issued, and at least 10 more are in the pipeline. No permits have yet been issued for commercial or multifamily buildings. - Sunshares: Burlingame participates annually in this regional program that offers discounted solar power rates from vetted contractors to residents and employees in the Bay Area. The program results in about two to five new solar installations yearly. - Induction Cooktop: Staff initiated an Induction Cooktop Loaner Program in the beginning of the year and to date, 25 residents have borrowed the cooktop. Participants have expressed their appreciation for the program, and about 75% of the survey respondents (participants receive a survey after they return the cooktop) indicated that they would consider purchasing an induction cooktop in the future. - Plastic Bag Recycling: Staff signed up to Trex's recycling program a few months ago and started with a single collection bin to recycle plastic bags in City Hall. The plastic bags were 3 Annual Sustainability Report December 20, 2021 then taken to Burlingame Safeway and from there transported to Trex. Trex recycles the plastic bags into outdoor deck and furniture material. Soon after the start of the program, the Burlingame chapter of the Bay Area Leo Club reached out to take over and expand the program. The Leo Club now manages two collection bins in Burlingame's City Hall and Main Library and one in the Hillsborough Town Hall. The collection bins fill up quickly every week. - Outreach: Staff manages a range of outreach efforts, including: serves as a liaison with the Citizens Environmental Council and meets with them quarterly; manages an active sustainability Instagram account that highlights energy efficiency, water conservation, sustainability tips, and community events; maintains Burlingame's sustainability website, which contains resources and a Climate Action Plan dashboard to track the City's progress; created pop-up art environmental displays in vacant window stores in downtown Broadway and Burlingame; and developed a local landscape series for the eNews that featured local residents' experiences in converting their lawn to a sustainable landscape; and. Climate Action Plan Burlingame's 2020 Climate Action Plan contains 20 measures to reduce 50,000 tons of GHG emissions by 2030. The City made significant progress this year in implementing CAP measures, including: - Measure 13, Peninsula Clean Energy, is estimated to reduce 16,000 tons of GHG emissions by 2020. PCE recently reported that Burlingame has exceeded that goal and avoided 23,000 tons of GHGs in 2020. - Measures 11, 12, 14, 15 associated with green building and energy efficiency are estimated to reduce about 4,000 tons of GHG emissions by 2030 due to the building electrification reach codes Burlingame adopted in 2020. - Measure 6, Electric Vehicle Infrastructure and Initiatives, is estimated to reduce 5 tons of GHG emissions in 2020 and 29 tons in 2030 due to the City's ongoing EV infrastructure projects. - Measure 18, Zero Waste, is estimated to reduce 4,000 tons of GHG emissions by 2030 due to the implementation of SB 1383. Next Steps for 2022 Staff anticipates that 2022 will bring the following exciting opportunities to advance the City's sustainability program: - Waste diversion: Composting and recycling will be a focus of 2022 as City staff helps multifamily buildings and businesses comply with the composting requirements of SB 1383; and implements and enforces the Disposable Foodware Ordinance, which goes into effect in March 2022 and requires all disposable one -use foodware items, such as containers and utensils, be non -plastic and compostable. Staff is coordinating with San Mateo County on these efforts to provide resources and education to businesses to help them meet these new rules. Staff also intends to reduce contamination and improve composting and recycling practices in Burlingame parks and downtown areas in partnership with RethinkWaste and Recology. C Annual Sustainability Report December 20, 2021 - Micromobility: Mircomobility refers to lightweight vehicles for transportation such as scooters, and bicycles, especially electric ones. Staff is exploring electric bike and scooter sharing options for Burlingame. Several years ago, staff initiated a pilot for bike sharing with LimeBike. Though popular in Burlingame, the program ended abruptly after Lime Bike pivoted their business away from bicycles to only scooters and left Burlingame. Over the last year, new bike and scooter businesses have been popping up in the Bay Area's mid to small size cities, such as: HOPR in Fremont (e -bikes and e -scooters); Gotcha in Richmond (e -bikes); Brite Bikes in Bishop Ranch San Ramon (e -bikes); and Link, Spin, and Lime in Emeryville (all e -scooters). This new wave of programs has improved since Burlingame's previous LimeBike experience. They tend to use docked systems, either with stations or geolocations (areas tracked on a device's map); stronger age and safety restrictions; and improved management models. Staff has talked with both HOPR and Bird about the potential of an e -scooter program in Burlingame. Staff will be bringing the issue to the Council for discussion and guidance in the start of 2022. Through 2022, staff will also continue to enhance its existing sustainability programs and implement the Burlingame's Climate Action Plan. FISCAL IMPACT No fiscal impact. Exhibit: • Slide presentation 5 Sustainability Progress 2021 City of Burlingame December 20, 2021 Sigalle Michael PCE # of Estimated 2020 GHG IMPACT: Accounts Savings Emissions Avoided 2020 159047 $948,501 2021 Target: - 100% carbon free electricity 2025 Target: - 100% renewable energy 24/7 23,705 MTCO2e o@* Effective January i, zozz; Enforcement starts January i, 2oz4 All residents & businesses to compost: 579 businesses and 393 • multifamily buildings Implement Edible Food Recovery Program Organics Z� Purchase Recycled Or Y g 1 •�11 in think waste=. South Bayside Waste Management Authority A Public Agency Recolo WASTE ZERO OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Major • Highland Garage Installation CALeVIP Grant • Future Programming: Bayside Park, CorpYard, Community Center hello YY"� HItRLINGAME there Year EV Stations (ports) 2020 12 2021 36 2030 Goal 100 ZEV Registrations (cumulative) 2,174 3,729 5,000 Th & 4 14 Ave 71an otel at SFO INB'OLD MIL D -ALE 101 � ilIago P -ark � �Ba ti�1m Park I ❑ w Existing EV IIJ Stations Priority Locations B U R L I N G A k – yAn Park,,,[gF RAY PARDGATE � ----- Ell B U R L I-N-G'A IV-E-8�}^sh r Fir .— — Y Mercy Centor Borlinganno MILLS ESTATES 0: Cu-emavaca Par r URLINrGAME H I U S -i EASTO N ADDITION HICLSB0R0UGH OAK BRIDGE Hillsbo�oogh 8l1RLING ME TERR C E RYAN TRACT �rr,r Washington Park LYON HOAO IItiJ Bufliname ar Mateo High B URJLI NGA�FE��� � f PARI{ NOR Ongoing Programs Reach Code �► Sunshares BAWSCA Aa Induction Cooktop l Plastic Bag Recycling Outreach OwTaRcCion. OUR HANDS. 2021 Action CAP Measure Clean Energy: Measure 13 Peninsula Clean Energy, Z00% GHG-free electricity Zero Waste: 513 1.383 EV Infrastructure: Highland Garage EV stations Green Building: Reach Code Measure 18 Measure 6 Measures 11, 1211-4,15 GHG Reduction by 2030 (MTCO2e) 23,000 4,000 w 4,000 ❑ Implementation of Disposable Foodware Ordinance ❑ Outreach and compliance for SB 1.383 ❑ EV Installation at Donnelly Garage ❑ E -mobility: bike/scooter sharing, car sharing