HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 2024.02.05 (Regular Meeting)CITY c-
BU ERLINGAME
Hnt Eo J
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL
Approved Minutes
Regular City Council Meeting on February 5, 2024
1. CALL TO ORDER
A duly noticed meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in person and via Zoom
at 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
The pledge of allegiance was led by Generation Voter interns Lilah Higgins and Shani Rothman.
3. ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, Ortiz, Stevenson
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
There was no request.
��:Z�I�I:i��1�jiY:Z�If•[�I��I,j�I��j���L�PI
a. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
Sa4SF, R
PROPERTY: 1200-1340 OLD BAYSHORE HIGHWAY, BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA
AGENCY NEGOTIATORS: CITY MANAGER LISA K. GOLDMAN, CITY ATTORNEY MICHAEL GUINA
NEGOTIATING PARTIES: CITY OF BURLINGAME: DW BURLINGAME VENTURE, LLC — DIVCOWEST
UNDER NOEGOTIATIONS: PRICE AND TERMS OF REAL ESTATE NEGOTIATIONS
City Attorney Guina reported that direction was given, but no reportable action was taken.
6. UPCOMING EVENTS
Mayor Colson reviewed upcoming events in the city.
1
r�J:Z*.j4.krivi00.RI
a. PRESENTATION TO THE WINNERS OF THE CITY AND GENERATION VOTER'S I VOTED STICKER
CONTEST
Lilah Higgins and Shani Rothman presented five local students with certificates for winning the Generation
Voter "I Voted" sticker contest. Congratulations to Samantha, Liesl, Aaron, Audrey, and Hana. The student
stickers will be available at both Voting Centers in the city.
The Council thanked Generation Voter and the City Clerk for the creation of the "I Voted" sticker contest.
8. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Eric Zankman voiced concern about the amount of dog barking at the off -leash area at Ray Park.
Pamela Kaufman talked about having to wear noise canceling headphones while working from home as a
result of the off -leash area at Ray Park.
Jennifer Pfaff thanked staff and the Council for their hard work to prepare for the winter storms.
(Comment submitted via publiccomment@burlingame.org).
9. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Colson asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the
Consent Calendar. No items were pulled from the Consent Calendar.
Vice Mayor Beach made a motion to adopt the Consent Calendar; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The
motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0.
a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR THE JANUARY 16. 2024 CLOSED SESSION
City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council approve the City Council meeting minutes for the January 16,
2024 Closed Session.
b. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR THE JANUARY 16. 2024 REGULAR CITY
COUNCIL MEETING
City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council approve the City Council meeting minutes for the January 16,
2024 Regular City Council Meeting.
c. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL AND REPLACE CHAPTER 9.04, "ANIMALS." OF TITLE 9
OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO CLARFIY EXISTING DEFINITIONS, ENACT ADDITIONAL
REQUIREMENTS FOR ANIMAL CONTROL, AND REVISE THE FEES FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES;
CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15378 AND
15061(b)(3)
City Manager Goldman requested Council adopt Ordinance Number 2022.
d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE GLENWOOD PARK SUBDIVISION WATER MAIN
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. CITY PROJECT NO. 84891. AND WATER SERVICE REPLACEMENT
PROGRAM. CITY PROJECT NO. 86300. BY CRATUS. INC.. IN THE AMOUNT OF S2.706.019.66
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 013-2024.
e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROCUREMENT OF ADDITIONAL SPECIALIZED
SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS FROM CORE & MAIN FOR THE WATER DIVISION IN AN AMOUNT NOT
TO EXCEED $175,000
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 014-2024.
f. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A THREE-YEAR
AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TECHNOLOGY FOR THE PURCHASE OF A
YEARLY STATEWIDE ENTERPRISE LEVEL AGREEMENT SUBSCRIPTION FOR MICROSOFT 365 G5
PRODUCT AND SERVICES, FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
78 708
Police Chief Matteucci requested Council adopt Resolution Number 015-2024
g. OPEN NOMINATION PERIOD TO FILL THREE VACANCIES ON THE MEASURE I CITIZENS' OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE
City Manager Goldman requested Council open the nomination period to fill three vacancies on the
Measure I Citizens' Oversight Committee.
h. REVIEW OF THE CITY COUNCIL PROJECTS IDENTIFIED DURING THE FY 2024-2025 GOAL -SETTING
SESSION
Assistant to the City Manager Kirshner requested Council review the City Council projects identified during
the FY 2024-2025 Goal -Setting Session.
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND RESTATING CHAPTER 6.55 OF TITLE 6 OF THE
BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE SAN FRANCISCO PENINSULA TOURISM
MARKETING DISTRICT; CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES
SECTIONS 15378 AND 15061(b)(3)
City Manager Goldman stated that in 2023, the Council adopted an ordinance establishing the San
Francisco Tourism Marketing District. She noted that at the time, Foster City wasn't quite ready to join the
district, but Foster City is now ready. Accordingly, she explained that the ordinance needed to be amended
to include Foster City.
Mayor Colson opened the public hearing. No one spoke.
Councilmember Stevenson made a motion to bring back the ordinance for a second reading and adoption;
seconded by Councilmember Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0.
b. PUBLIC HEARING AND INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AMENDING SECTION 10.40.038 OF TITLE 10 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING
LEAF BLOWERS: CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES
SECTIONS 15378 AND 15061(b)(3)
Sustainability Program Manager Michael stated that previously, the City Council reviewed the proposed
ordinance to prohibit the use of combustion engine -powered leaf blowers beginning July 1, 2024. She
noted that the City Council directed staff to make the following two changes to the proposed ordinance:
• Allow electric leaf blowers to be used until 6:00 p.m., rather than 5:00 p.m. as currently provided,
due to electric leaf blowers possibly taking a longer time to complete work in comparison to gas leaf
blowers
• Change the word "punished," to "subject to" in the penalty section, BMC 10.40.038(h)
She explained that the proposed ordinance before the Council included these two changes.
Mayor Colson opened the public hearing. No one spoke.
Vice Mayor Beach made a motion to bring back the ordinance for a second reading and adoption; seconded
by Councilmember Ortiz.
Councilmember Brownrigg thanked staff for working on this item. He stated that he believed that the
Council and City reached a good outcome after several opportunities for public input.
The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0.
c. INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 8.18 OF
THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW ON -SITE CONSUMPTION OF HOOKAH (SHISHA)
TOBACCO AND ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 8.19 TO TITLE 8 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE
4
ESTABLISHING A TOBACCO RETAILER PERMIT PROGRAM; CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT
PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15378 AND 15061(b)(3)
ACA Spansail reviewed the City Council's discussions regarding smoking regulations in the city:
• April 2023 — Council considers and adopts a pilot program that bans smoking on Broadway
• November 20, 2023 — Council expands the smoking ban to include the Downtown Burlingame
Business District
• November 20, 2023 — Council holds a public hearing regarding a potential on -site hookah exemption
to the flavored tobacco ban, and discusses establishing a Tobacco Retailer Permit Program
• February 5, 2024 — Council considers proposed ordinance that establishes a Tobacco Retailer Permit
Program and allows onsite consumption of hookah tobacco
ACA Spansail discussed the current law regarding flavored tobacco:
• City - in 2019, Council banned the sale of all flavored tobacco (including hookah tobacco) in
Burlingame
• State — effective December 21, 2022 — California's SB 793 banned flavored tobacco sales throughout
the state; the prohibition was similar to the City's ban, except that it provided an exemption for
hookah tobacco sales in limited circumstances
ACA Spansail reviewed SB 793s requirements for a retailer to sell hookah tobacco:
• Have a valid license to sell tobacco
• Not permit anyone under 21 years of age to be present or enter the premises at any time
• Operate in accordance with all State and local laws relating to the retail sale of tobacco products
• Operate in accordance with all State and local laws relating to the consumption of tobacco products
on the premises
ACA Spansail stated that the City's proposed ordinance would require a hookah retailer to do the following:
• Obtain a valid Tobacco Retailer Permit
• Obtain a Hookah Tobacco Retailer designation (only two permitted in the city)
• Permit only the immediate, on -site consumption of hookah tobacco in accordance with the
restrictions under SB 793
• Include at least one non -tobacco, non -nicotine hookah alternative option for customers
ACA Spansail discussed the proposed Tobacco Retailer Permit Program as outlined in the proposed
ordinance. He noted that it is generally consistent with San Mateo County's model ordinance including:
• A requirement that all tobacco retailers in the city apply for an annual tobacco retailer permit ($672
per year), which funds administration of the program and two enforcement checks per year
• Places distance -based requirements on new retailers, ensuring that they are not located near
"youth populated areas," including schools and playgrounds
• New retailers may not be within 500 feet of an existing retailer
• Prohibition against any pharmacy selling tobacco within city limits
• Strengthens penalties for those violating the permit
o $500 fine for first violation and $1,000 fine for subsequent violations
o Suspension/revocation process for retailers who violate permit
ACA Spansail reviewed the differences between the City's Tobacco Retailer Permit Program and the
County's program:
• The director of the City program is the Chief of Police.
• The City would permit up to two hookah tobacco retailers, who must otherwise comply with all
other requirements of the program.
• Since no program exists at the moment, the distance -based requirements of the program would not
be applied to any proposed retailer with a current and valid State permit to see tobacco.
• However, the retailer must apply for the tobacco retailer permit within the timeframe set by the
Police Chief and propose sales from the same address in which their current State license was
issued.
Councilmember Brownrigg asked if the City notified Walgreens and CVS about how under the proposed
ordinance, they wouldn't be permitted to sell tobacco. ACA Spansail replied in the negative.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he was concerned about adopting an ordinance with a significant
economic action against a retailer without first notifying the businesses that would be affected.
Councilmember Ortiz asked if he was correct that CVS no longer sells tobacco. ACA Spansail replied in the
affirmative.
Mayor Colson asked if Safeway would be able to sell tobacco since it has a pharmacy in its store. ACA
Spansail stated that he would need to get back to Council after further review of the law.
Councilmember Stevenson stated that other cities in the county have adopted the model ordinance and
therefore have prohibited pharmacies from selling tobacco. ACA Spansail replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Brownrigg asked about the language stating a hookah establishment couldn't allow
someone on the premises that is under 21 years of age. ACA Spansail replied in the affirmative. He
explained that this the area that sells hookah tobacco. He noted that an individual could enter the
restaurant but not the hookah area.
Councilmember Brownrigg voiced concern that the language would be read to prohibit individuals under 21
years old from being anywhere on the premises.
Vice Mayor Beach asked if food and beverage are permitted in the area where hookah tobacco is sold for
on -site consumption. ACA Spansail replied that if the hookah consumption is outdoors, food and beverage
are permitted. He added that if it is indoors, food and beverage are not permitted to be served.
Mayor Colson asked if the food and beverage service also applies to regular tobacco. ACA Spansail replied
in the affirmative.
6
Mayor Colson opened the public hearing.
Luci asked the Council to not allow for hookah tobacco sales. (Comment submitted via
publiccomment@ burl ingame.org).
Kwik and Convenient owner Rajinder Kumar voiced concern about the Tobacco Retailer Permit Program
and its cost. (Comment submitted via publiccomment@burlingame.org).
Baggy Liquor owner Bibi Sawaya stated that the cost of the Tobacco Retailer Permit Program was too high
for local small businesses and that these shops are already enforcing tobacco laws. (Comment submitted
via publiccomment@burlingame.org).
Mayor Colson closed the public hearing.
Mayor Colson asked about the fee that retailers would need to pay under the Tobacco Retailer Permit
Program. ACA Spansail replied that $672 is the amount the County is charging, and City staff proposed
matching the County fee. He noted that it would be tied to the Master Fee Schedule.
Mayor Colson stated that there was another fee for new applications of $249. ACA Spansail stated this
would not apply to any of the current tobacco retailers, only future retailers. He explained that a future
retailer would need to pay $249 for the application and $672 as the yearly fee.
Councilmember Brownrigg suggested delaying the adoption of this ordinance in order to allow pharmacies
to comment on the law.
The Council discussed different options on when to bring back the ordinance for a second reading or
whether to reintroduce the the ordinance at a future public hearing.
Council decided to reintroduce the proposed ordinance in March in order to allow for pharmacies to
comment on the law.
Vice Mayor Beach thanked the public for their thoughtful emails. She discussed how carefully and
thoughtfully this item was reviewed.
11. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a. DISCUSSION OF TESLA PROPOSAL FOR NEW ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS
Sustainability Program Manager Michael stated that Tesla reached out to the City with a proposal to install
fast EV charging stations in downtown Burlingame at no cost to the City.
7
Ms. Michael stated that in 2021, the City adopted an EV Action Plan to increase EV use and infrastructure in
Burlingame. She noted that the Plan called for the City to have 100 public EV charging ports by 2030. She
explained that at the time of the Plan's adoption, the City had 12 public EV charging ports. She reviewed
the following table that depicts the location of the City's current 42 charging stations in public lots:
Station
Number of Ports
Total Charging Sessions
(2022)
Total Charging Sessions
(2023)
City Hall
2 ports, level 2
1,887
1,999
Burlingame Caltrain
4 ports, level 2
5,850
5,588
Downtown Broadway
6 ports, fast charging
6,861
11,816
Highland Parking Garage
24 ports, level 2
3,378
6,726
Community Center
6 ports, level 2
Data not available
Data not available
Ms. Michael stated that Tesla is proposing to install 16 fast chargers. She noted that the Tesla chargers
would have a universal plug accessible to other EVs. She added that it would be at no cost to the City.
Ms. Michael discussed the criteria that both Tesla and the City have in regard to installing Tesla's fast
chargers:
Criteria
Tesla
• Near grocery store and shopping areas
• Perpendicular parking spaces
City
• Lose minimal number of spaces
• Avoid losing long-term parking for
employees
• Avoid busy lots
• Locate near multi -family buildings
Ms. Michael stated that with the help of Councilmember Stevenson, Tesla and staff reviewed several sites:
0
Parking Lot
Location
Yes/No
Notes
Lot A
Donnelly Parking Garage
No
Plans to install five fast
charging stations
Lot A-3
Adjacent to Donnelly
No
Diagonal parking
Parking
Lot C
Behind Pottery Barn
No
In high demand,
generally full
Lot D
Across from II Fornaio
No
Diagonal parking
Lot V
Burlingame Caltrain
No
Too small; has level 2 EV
stations
Lot M
By Limon
No
Diagonal parking
Lot J
Between Primrose and
No
Diagonal parking
Park
Lot W
On Howard
No
Diagonal parking
Lot G
Behind UPS Store
No
Diagonal parking
Lot L
Behind Fox Plaza
No
Small lot and high
demand
Lot B-1
Off Chapin
No
Small lot and high
demand
Lot B
Behind BevMo!
No
Diagonal parking
Lot H
West of El Camino
No
Slated for future
housing
Lot K
Between Walgreens and
Yes
Mix of 2- and 10-hour
Safeway
parking; both diagonal
and perpendicular
Lot K-1
Across from Walgreens
No
10-hour lot, high
demand
Highland Garage
Parking structure
No
Has 24 Level 2 EV
stations
Ms. Michael stated that after reviewing the different options, it was determined that Lot K was the best
choice. She noted that Lot K is easily accessible from El Camino Real and is close to two of Burlingame's
major grocery stores. She added that it is across the street from multiple multi -family buildings.
Ms. Michael reviewed the proposed project:
• 16 universal, fast charging stations
• 3 spaces lost to equipment/configuration
• Least intrusive design
• Monthly rent $6,000
Vice Mayor Beach asked how staff/Tesla would help advertise that these chargers are universal. Tesla
representative Caitlin Hanner stated that Tesla worked with other electric car dealers to send out
marketing content stating that owners can use Tesla's fast chargers.
Vice Mayor Beach discussed putting up signage for those not in the loop to make sure people know these
EV charging stations are available to all. She asked if the lease amount can be reviewed every few years.
Ms. Hanner stated that the lease term is for ten years. She added that they offer a 3% annual increase for
rent.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he concurred with the Vice Mayor that these chargers should be
well -marked as "universal".
Mayor Colson stated that San Mateo County along with other counties in the Bay Area sued Tesla for illegal
dumping and improper disposal of paint and other materials. She asked if this would put the City in a
difficult situation, if they enter into a legal agreement with Tesla. City Attorney Guina replied that he would
need to review the litigation before getting back to Council with guidance.
Tesla representative Tessa Sanchez stated that a member of Tesla's legal team would follow up with the
City regarding Mayor Colson's concern.
Mayor Colson opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Councilmember Ortiz discussed the importance of signage to point out that this would be a universal
station. He added that he looked forward to having a Tesla fast charging station in Burlingame.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that it looks as if the Tesla suit was settled. City Manager Goldman
replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he believed the chargers would be enormously popular. He added
that the idle fee of $1 per minute once a car is fully charged makes sure cars don't stay in the spots.
However, he asked that the charging stations include language regarding the idle fee.
Councilmember Stevenson stated that he thinks the team was very thoughtful with regard to the proposed
project. He added that he thought this station would be very popular.
Mayor Colson asked that the agreement include a one-year review. She wanted it to include information
about the work Tesla is doing to mitigate pollution, issues around ESG, and a progress report.
Mayor Colson thanked staff for their report.
12. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
10
Council reviewed their committee appointments.
13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
There were no future agenda items.
14. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The agendas, packets, and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Safety & Parking
Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks & Recreation Commission, and Library Board of Trustees are
available online at www.burlingame.org.
15. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Colson adjourned the meeting at 8:33.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/
Meaghan Hassel -Shearer
City Clerk
11