Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 2021.11.01BURLiNGAME ��Fnr[o Juu[ 6 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Approved Minutes Regular City Council Meeting on November 1, 2021 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date via Zoom Webinar at 7:08 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG The pledge of allegiance was led by City Manager Goldman. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, O'Brien Keighran, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor O'Brien Keighran reviewed upcoming events in the city. 6. PRESENTATIONS a. PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING FAMILY COURT AWARENESS MONTH Mayor O'Brien Keighran recognized that November is family court awareness month. 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON -AGENDA Sandra Lang commented that the district election hearing was well done. 1 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Tom Paine and Susan Castner-Paine asked that the City Council go back to in -person meetings. (comment submitted via publiccomment(d),burlin ag me.org) 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 item was removed. Councilmember Beach made a motion to adopt the Consent Calendar; seconded by Vice Mayor Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR THE OCTOBER 18, 2021 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for the October 18, 2021 Council Meeting. b. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROCUREMENT OF THREE VEHICLES FOR THE CITY'S FLEET SYSTEM AS PART OF THE FY 2021-22 VEHICLE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $128,609 DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 130-2021. c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING LABOR AGREEMENTS WITH THE POLICE SERGEANTS ASSOCIATION, POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, ASSOCIATION OF POLICE ADMINISTRATORS, AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL 856 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY Human Resources Director Morrison requested Council to adopt Resolution Number 131-2021. d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP (PM 21-04) FOR CONDOMINIUMS, LOT MERGER AND RESUBDIVISION OF PORTIONS OF BLOCK 7, MAP OF MILLS ESTATE NO.3 SUBDIVISION AT 1814-1820 OGDEN DRIVE DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 132-2021. e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR FUNDING ASSIGNED TO THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND COMMITTING ANY NECESSARY MATCHING FUNDS AND 2 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes STATING ASSURANCE TO COMPLETE THE BURLINGAME SQUARE TRANSIT HUB PROJECT Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad requested Council adopt Resolution Number 133-2021. f. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DECLARING RIGHT-OF-WAY PARCELS ASSOCIATED WITH THE US HIGHWAY 101/11ROADWAY INTERCHANGE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT AS EXEMPT SURPLUS LAND PURSUANT TO THE SURPLUS LAND ACT; AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO EXECUTE A QUITCLAIM DEED BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND CALTRANS FOR SAID PARCELS DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 134-2021. g. OPEN NOMINATION PERIOD TO FILL ONE VACANCY ON THE MEASURE I CITIZENS' OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE City Manager Goldman requested Council open up the nomination period to fill one vacancy on the Measure I Oversight Committee. h. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE 2021 TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ANNUAL REPORT AND TO GIVE NOTICE OF INTENT TO LEVY ASSESSMENTS FOR 2022 AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING Finance Director Yu -Scott requested Council adopt Resolution Number 135-2021. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 8 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING A CHAPTER 8.15 (ORGANIC WASTE DISPOSAL REDUCTION); (CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15061(B)(3) AND 15308) Sustainability Coordinator Michael gave an overview of the proposed ordinance. She explained that SB 1383 was signed into law in 2016. The State legislation establishes statewide methane emissions reduction targets to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants in various sectors of California's economy including landfills. She stated that the legislation requires all residents and businesses to enroll in a composting program. Sustainability Coordinator Michael stated that SB 1383 requires jurisdictions to adopt an ordinance or other similarly enforceable mechanism regarding organic waste disposal reduction by January 1, 2022. 3 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Sustainability Coordinator Michael gave an overview of the requirements under SB 1383: • Requires all residents and businesses to compost • Requires the City to implement an Edible Food Recovery Program (food that is discarded by restaurants, hotels, stores, etc. that is still eligible must go to a Food Recovery Program such as a food bank) • Support recycling goods market o Purchase recycled paper o Purchase compost/mulch/biogas o Comply with CalGreen Construction and Demolition o Comply with State's Model Efficient Landscape Ordinance Sustainability Coordinator Michael noted that the three -bin system (recycling, landfill, and compost) is already in use in Burlingame. She noted that SB 1383 complements the City's Disposable Foodware Ordinance that prohibits the use of plastic take out foodware. She stated that SB 1383 aligns with the City's Climate Action Plan goals as it looks to remove 90% of waste from landfill by 2030. Sustainability Coordinator Michael stated that the City will receive assistance in complying with SB 1383 from the following organizations: • Rethink Waste (SBWMA) She explained that Rethink Waste will help with overall compliance and has drafted a model ordinance for all jurisdictions. She added that Rethink Waste will conduct outreach, education, and enforcement on the legislation. • Recology She explained that Recology will continue to provide three bins and will assist with outreach and education. • County of San Mateo Office of Sustainability She explained that the County of San Mateo Office of Sustainability will administer the Edible Food Recovery Program for Burlingame. Additionally, the County will assist in enforcement, outreach, and education. Sustainability Coordinator Michael explained that while an ordinance needs to be adopted by January 1, 2022, local enforcement of the ordinance doesn't need to start until January 1, 2024. She stated that this grace period will allow time for the organizations and the City to educate the public and assist businesses in complying with the law. Sustainability Coordinator Michael discussed the impact of SB 1383 on Burlingame businesses. She explained that 579 businesses are currently not complying with SB 1383. She stated that of the 579 businesses: • 167 business don't compost at the two -yard threshold 4 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes • 77 business don't compost at the one -yard threshold • 335 business don't compost at all Sustainability Coordinator Michael noted that a lot of the businesses might meet the waiver requirements as they may fall under the threshold and could qualify for a waiver. She explained that a business would need to go through this process on their own, but could get assistance from the City. Sustainability Coordinator Michael reviewed the impact of SB 1383 on multi -family buildings in Burlingame. She explained that 393 multi -family buildings are currently not complying with SB 1383. She stated that of the 393 multi -family buildings: • Four of the buildings with 50 to 100 units do not compost • 66 of the buildings with 15 to 50 units do not compost • 323 of the buildings with 15 or less units do not compost Sustainability Coordinator Michael noted that most of the multi -family buildings in Burlingame fall into the 15 units or less category. She discussed the outreach that the City would need to conduct to these buildings including working with Recology and the creation of a webpage outlining the requirements on the City's website. Sustainability Coordinator Michael reviewed the next steps: • Ordinance will be up for adoption at the November 15, 2021 Council meeting • Authorize MOU with SBWMA for SB 1383 Compliance • Authorize MOU with County of San Mateo Office of Sustainability for Edible Food Recovery Program Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked about outreach to small multi -family buildings. Sustainability Coordinator Michael explained that she is formulating a plan on how to reach the building owners. Mayor O'Brien Keighran suggested reaching out to the landlords via the phone number they provide on their business license. Councilmember Colson asked if the outreach materials would be multi-lingual. Sustainability Coordinator Michael responded in the affirmative. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked the City Clerk to read the title of the ordinance. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer read the title of the ordinance. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to waive further reading; seconded by Vice Mayor Ortiz. The motioned passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up to public comment. 5 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Former Mayor Terry Nagel asked about the location of compost bins along Burlingame Avenue and Broadway. Sustainability Coordinator Michael responded that staff is looking into this issue. She added that she is worried about how public compost bins might be contaminated with plastics. Shirley Lee voiced support for the ordinance. (comment submitted via publiccomment&burlin ag me.org). Mayor O'Brien Keighran closed public comment. Councilmember Beach stated that complying with SB 1383 will be a big task. She thanked staff and Councilmember Brownrigg for representing the City on SBWMA and for all they are doing to get the County ready for this change. She voiced support for bringing the ordinance back for a second reading. Councilmember Beach made a motion to bring the ordinance back for a second reading and adoption; seconded by Councilmember Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. DISCUSSION OF A ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE CDD Gardiner gave an overview of the Zoning Ordinance update. He noted it has been a long process as it started at the beginning of the General Plan update. He explained that the General Plan was adopted in 2019 and that the Zoning Ordinance is the implementation of the General Plan. He introduced Laura Stetson from MIG, who helped the City with both the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance update. Ms. Stetson stated that the General Plan is the foundation, and that the Zoning Ordinance is how it's implemented. Ms. Stetson explained that most of the new zones are focused on mixed use categories that were established for California Mixed Use, North Burlingame, and Broadway Mixed Use. Mixed Use General Plan Designations Corresponding Zoning District California Mixed Use CMU new North Burlingame Mixed Use NBMU new Broadway Mixed Use BRMU new Downtown Specific Plan BAC, HMU, BMU, DAC, CAC, CAR Live/Work RRMU new Ms. Stetson stated that the commercial zones have been consolidated down to one zone: C-1. She noted that there are specific regulations tied to the Bayfront Commercial (`BFC") and the Innovation Industrial ("I -I") zones. C. Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Commercial and Industrial General Plan Corresuondin2 Zoning District Desi nations General Commercial C-1 Ba front Commercial BFC new Innovation Industrial I -I new Ms. Stetson commented that the new Innovation Industrial zone is on both sides of Highway 101. She stated that there are various open space zoning districts that haven't changed and will be carried forward. Other General Plan Desi nation CorrespondiEg_Zoning District O en Space Various Parks and Recreation PR Ba lands TPB Public/Institutional P-I Rail Corridor All Ms. Stetson stated that changes were made to land use regulations in some of the zones, which led to changes in development standards. Ms. Stetson gave a brief background on the updated zoning ordinance: • 2017 — Zoning Code diagnosis • 2018 — Stakeholder interviews — developers, property owners, homeowners, City staff • 2018-2019 — Planning Commission Subcommittee • 2021 — Planning Commission Study Session and Hearings Ms. Stetson explained that the updated Zoning Code is restructured from its previous form. She stated that this was done in order to make it more reader friendly. Therefore, the first part of the code addresses the "What/Where" question; the second part address the "How" question; the third part addresses the "Who/When" question (the process). Ms. Stetson commented that the current structure to the code is one that is not intuitive to use. She reviewed the order of the new code: • Article 1: General Provisions • Article 2: Zoning Districts, Allowable Uses, and Development Standards • Article 3: Regulations and Standards Applicable to All Zoning Districts • Article 4: Regulations for Specific Land Uses and Activities • Article 5: Nonconformities • Article 6: Permit Processing Procedures • Article 7: Zoning Ordinance Administration • Article 8: Definitions 7 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Ms. Stetson noted that a section of the updated code reviews land use definitions. She continued that the Zoning Code should move ideas forward. She reviewed new ideas in the update including: • Community benefits • New neighborhoods • Flexible approach to accommodating emerging land uses • Standard conditions for recurring uses • Design principles for commercial development Ms. Stetson reviewed key corrections in the update: • Historic Preservation (Title 21) and Signs (Title 22) moved to Zoning Code —and updated • ALUC regulations included (Airport Land Use Code) • Removed inconsistencies • Removed loopholes • Codified best practices Ms. Stetson reviewed next steps: • Introduction of Zoning Ordinance at the November 15, 2021 Council meeting • Expect tweaks over the next 12 months CDD Gardiner noted that the update includes sea level rise development regulations for the commercial land use district. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked about the definition of the R1 district in regards to SB 9. CDD Gardiner responded that it becomes an overlay zone, which is reflected in Chapter 2, pages 61-63. He explained that the R1 standards are still in place for the overlay zone. Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that SB 9 diminishes the R1 zoning as it could potentially become R2. CDD Gardiner stated that SB 9 isn't necessarily the end of single-family zoning. Mayor O'Brien Keighran noted that page 23 discusses child care facilities and the "establishment and on- going maintenance of on -site or off -site." She asked how this would be incorporated into the update and how off -site care would be determined. CDD Gardiner explained that a development could sponsor an off - site childcare location in a place other than the development location. He noted that this is important because in some zoned areas, like the Airport Mixed Use area, it can be hard to develop a childcare site. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if a nexus study would be conducted for off -site care. CDD Gardiner explained that as projects are reviewed, it would be included in the conditions of approval or in the development agreement. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked about the Howard Mixed Use Zoning District discussed on page 44, in relation to "office uses that operate beyond a typical weekday schedule may be permitted subject to 8 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes discretionary review" and associated examples. CDD Gardiner explained that this concerned shared spaces that don't have the typical 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. schedule. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked about communal housing that is referenced on page 49. CDD Gardiner responded that that is in reference to co -housing, and that it has not been prevalent in Burlingame. He explained that co -housing refers to spaces with smaller units and a shared facility like a kitchen. He noted that it is a model that was brought to the City's attention recently, but has not been seen in Burlingame. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked about SB 9 and the minimum lot size, referenced on page 60, that is needed or allowed for a lot split. CDD Gardiner responded that the City's understanding is that there is no stated minimum lot size, and that the State has not given direction in that regard. He added that he is unsure if the City is allowed to stipulate a minimum lot size. He noted that the legislation does state that the each of the lots be 1,200 square feet or larger. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked that if there is a large lot (10,000 square feet), are you only allowed to split it once. CDD Gardiner responded in the affirmative and noted that this is stated in the legislation. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked about the exceptions to SB 9 regarding "housing that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years." She asked if a tenant moves out of a house after living in it for three years, can the lot be split. CDD Gardiner stated that his understanding is that the intent of SB 9 was not to have tenants evicted to create duplexes and lot splits. Mayor O'Brien Keighran commented that this legislation is difficult to parse through. She asked what the following language means: "a parcel on which an owner of residential real property has exercised the owner's rights under Government Code Chapter 12.75 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years before the date that the development proponent submits an application." CDD Gardiner responded that it is in reference to the Ellis Act and is not seen much in Burlingame. He continued that it usually involves dwellings with rent control. Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if an owner rents out their home, can they split the lot once the tenant leaves. CDD Gardiner explained that the legislation is not meant to evict a tenant in order to split a lot. However, whether or not an individual is able to split the lot is something that would need to be further researched. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up to public comment. Former Mayor Terry Nagel commended Burlingame for including sea level rise conditions in the Zoning Code. Ms. Pfaff complimented the Planning Commission, staff, consultants, and all involved for their hard work on the update. Mayor O'Brien Keighran closed public comment. Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Councilmember Colson thanked OneShoreline and Representative Speier for their efforts around sea level rise and was proud that Burlingame was one of the first cities to set a standard around sea level rise . She noted that this will be a very important task for the City to tackle. She discussed the work that staff and others were doing to create a new community on Rollins Road. Councilmember Beach thanked staff and everyone involved for all the hard work on the update. She concurred with Councilmember Colson regarding the importance of including sea level rise conditions in the update. Additionally, she voiced support for the way the update promoted development in the North Rollins Road area. Vice Mayor Ortiz thanked staff and members of the public for all the help and work put into the update. He is happy to see this long process finally coming to an end. Councilmember Brownrigg thanked staff and the consultants for all the work on the update. He noted that the update will allow for new opportunities throughout the city. He commented that the last time this was done was in 1969 and that CEQA did not exist. Mayor O'Brien Keighran thanked everyone who was involved in the update. She thanked CDD Gardiner and Planning Manager Hurin for all the work as well as the Planning Commission and the public. She commended Council for putting in the hours to make this vision happen. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that this vision will increase the population of Burlingame by 20%, and that if every city on the Peninsula adopted a plan like this, then there wouldn't be a housing crisis. b. UPDATE ON 778 BURLWAY (ENTERPRISE) PROJECT City Manager Goldman gave an overview of the Enterprise Project. She explained that the property at 778 Burlway Road has been occupied by a non -conforming car rental use since 1985. She continued that the conditional use permit (CUP), under which this use is allowed has been modified and extended several times at the request of the applicant. She noted that in October 2016, the Council granted a further extension of the CUP. She explained that anticipating a move to the then -planned SFO Car Rental facility, Enterprise and the Council agreed to timelines as well as escalating payments designed to offset the impacts of the non- conforming use and incentivize redevelopment of the site in a manner consistent with the Bayfront Specific Plan. City Manager Goldman stated that in the spring of 2019, Enterprise approached the City with an alternative development plan for the site that would involve consolidation of activities through the construction of a multi -story garage for car storage. She explained that this would free up a portion of the area for possible acquisition and redevelopment by the City. She noted that since that time, the City Council granted Enterprise a number of extensions to the CUP timelines in order to allow Enterprise to continue developing its plan. She explained that the most recent extension was granted on September 20, 2020. 10 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes City Manager Goldman introduced Eric Street from Enterprise and Brennan Cox from Groundworks Office. Mr. Street commented that Enterprise has been working with the City's subcommittee of Councilmember Brownrigg and Councilmember Colson since spring 2019. He explained that originally, Enterprise was working with the City to see if it was feasible to create a parking structure at 778 Burlway. He noted that considerable effort was put into that plan with help from the working group and with Council providing Enterprise with CUP extensions. However, he stated that the pandemic changed the landscape for Enterprise, and a parking structure is no longer feasible. Mr. Street noted that the travel sector was gravely impacted by the pandemic. He commented that the economics for building a multi -level parking structure are no longer feasible. Mr. Street explained that Enterprise wants to stay in Burlingame and is trying to find a solution to do that. He stated that he appreciated the open dialogue that Enterprise has had with the City. He explained that as a result of the pandemic, Enterprise didn't communicate with the City as much as it should have. He apologized for the lack of communication. Mr. Street added that Enterprise might need an extension of the CUP in order to find another location. He explained that Enterprise is looking for immediate investment in order to allow for both Enterprise and Benihana (located next door) to continue to operate in Burlingame. He stated that this would allow for jobs to stay in Burlingame. Mr. Street outlined Enterprise's proposed solution: • Benihana, which has operated since the 1970s, stays in place • Continued employment of a diverse workforce of over 100 people • Long-term lease with Benihana o Term sheet already in place between Enterprise and Benihana to try and keep the restaurant • Enterprise will provide, through Benihana, 10 dedicated public parking spaces for access to the Bay Trail Mr. Street then outlined the solution from the point of view of the Enterprise property: • Continued employment of a diverse workforce of 100 plus people • Existing maintenance building demolished and improvements to existing office building • Solar upgrades working towards a net -zero energy goal • Installation of EV chargers to prepare for future transportation and move away from gas vehicles • Opening of a second operating business of truck rentals • A potential workforce development partnership opportunity • A commitment to helping with sea level rise 11 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Mr. Street gave an overview of the property line and changes as outlined in the proposed plan. He introduced Brennan Cox from Groundworks Office. Mr. Cox discussed the proposed Bay Trail improvements. He noted some trail improvements that they would like to implement: • Widen the trail • Improve trail markers • Provide seating • Undertake habitat enhancements He stated that the proposed improvements are outlined in the Bay Trail Design Guide. He noted that habitat management would be the number one improvement for this stretch of shoreline. He explained that there are three potential entry nodes to the Bay Trail that they have identified for upgrades. He discussed two shoreline overlook opportunities. Councilmember Brownrigg commended the Enterprise team for their work over the last few years on this update. He acknowledged that this conundrum is not a new one and that the City confronted Enterprise ownership years ago with the need to do something different with the site. He noted that Envision Burlingame has a definition for long-term parking along the bayfront and that the current Enterprise use does not adhere to it. He stated that he remains hopeful that they can keep Enterprise in the city but not with an at -grade parking facility. Councilmember Colson agreed with Councilmember Brownrigg on the efforts from Enterprise and staff. She stated that there is significant development along the bayfront and is hopeful of keeping a long-term business in place in the area. She worried that the property might just become a fenced off area that has nothing done to it because an agreement can't be made. Mayor O'Brien Keighran opened the item up to public comment. Benihana CEO Tom Baldwin thanked the City Council for allowing him to speak at the meeting. He explained how much Benihana has served the community and that they will commit to more upgrades if a long-term lease can be signed in conjunction with Enterprise. Benihana Regional Manager Jocelyn Wong stated that Benihana wants to continue to be involved in the Burlingame community. Athan Rebelos stated that the bayfront needs to be developed to its full potential and that includes developing the Enterprise lot. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin a�g). Benihana General Manager Grace Yao stated that Benihana has served its employees and the community well over the years and wishes to see that continue. 12 Burlingame City Council November 1, 2021 Approved Minutes Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked Mr. Baldwin what would happen to the Burlingame location's employees if Benihana closes. Mr. Baldwin responded that the employees would be terminated if the lease was terminated. Mayor O'Brien Keighran closed public comment. Vice Mayor Ortiz stated that this issue keeps coming up throughout the years and that he feels that Benihana is being used as a pawn in these negotiations. Mayor O'Brien Keighran commented that she is someone who has dealt with the Enterprise issue many times over the years and is frustrated with it. She noted that there is a lot of development on the bayfront, and the community has voiced concern. She explained that it might not be the worst thing to have the CUP extended in order to keep people employed over the next few years. She added that she was open to working with Enterprise to keep 300 people employed. Councilmember Beach commented that she read meeting minutes from the 2016 meeting regarding the CUP extension as a refresher. She noted that at the time, she was worried that the CUP use was not in Burlingame's vision for the bayfront, and certainly not in the vision for the General Plan. She explained that the Council is the policy maker and that these documents are created with lots of public outreach. She didn't think that the Council should go against that vision outlined in the General Plan. She explained that originally, the use of the Enterprise lot (surface parking), did not meet the conditions required for a CUP, and that Council approved the CUP on the stipulation that Enterprise work with the City on a vision for the property. She voiced her support for Benihana continuing to be in Burlingame, but thought that the Enterprise proposal does not meet the vision for the City. Councilmember Brownrigg acknowledged that Councilmember Beach raised objections the last time the City discussed the CUP. He noted that he couldn't imagine extending a CUP for a non -conforming use for another 20 years. Councilmember Colson asked about the length of time on the current CUP. CDD Gardiner responded that the tolling agreement runs through 2025. Councilmember Colson agreed that preserving the jobs at Benihana is important and that there won't be a lot of upset people in Burlingame about another 1 million square foot building not being built at this time. She noted that three years left on the agreement will hopefully allow Enterprise to come up with a proposal that is not at -grade parking. She added that this issue does not have to be solved tonight. She hoped that if Enterprise does decide to sell the property, that they give Benihana the chance to buy their property at market value. She wanted the opportunity for both herself and Councilmember Brownrigg to continue to work with Enterprise on evolving their plan. City Manager Goldman stated that this item was just for information and that no action was needed. She noted that the majority of the Council voiced their concern over the proposal that Enterprise brought forward. 13 Burlingame City Council November 1, 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 (CEOA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEOA 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 publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ag me.org). Tim S. asked the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin a�g). Sophia Chiang asked the Council to keep the limits at their current level. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ag me.org). Graham Mudd stated that the Council shouldn't enable a small number of donors to bankroll a campaign. (comment submitted via publiccomment&burlin ag me.org). Gerard Manning stated that he vehemently opposed the raising of campaign contribution limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment@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 publiccomment&burlin ag me.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 publiccommentgburlin _ a�g). 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 publiccomment(a�burlin ag me.org). Deborah Griffith urged the Council to not raise the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin ag me.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&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 publiccommentkburlin _ 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 publiccommentgburlin ag me.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 publiccommentgburlin a�g). 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 _ ag me.org). Ling-yee and Jeb Gibney urged the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin 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 a�g). The Benson family supported not increasing the limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ag me.org). Jane G. asked the Council to not increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin ag me.org). Rosanna Myres asked the Council not to raise the contribution limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin 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&burlin 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 publiccommentgburlin a�g). 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 publiccomment(c�r�,burlin 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 publiccomment&burlin a�g). Marilyn Elperin asked the Council not to raise limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ag me.org). Debra Donaldson asked the Council not to raise the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin-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(&,,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 publiccommentgburlin-a�g). 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(&burlin ag me.org). Ash McNeely urged the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment&burlin 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 publiccommentgburlin-a�g). 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 publiccommentgburlin 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 ag me.org). Kim Koivisto and John Giere asked the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ag me.org). Elisa Clowes stated that she was against raising the contribution limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin a�g). Sandra Lang stated that increasing the limits is counterintuitive. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ag me.org). Jim Taschetta urged the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccoment(kburlin ag me.org). Kerry Bitner stated that she felt strongly that the limits shouldn't be increased. (comment submitted via publiccomment(c�r�,burlin ag me.org). Kerbey Altman asked the Council not to increase the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin ag me.org). Andrea Gailunas vehemently opposed increasing the limits. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin _ a�g). 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 publiccomment&burlin 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&burlin ag me.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