City of Brentwood
Home PageContact Us!Back

Back to Parks and Recreation CommissionParks and Recreation Commission

Calendar of Events | Current Agenda | Past Agendas | Meeting Minutes | Members
Members Photos | Parks and Recreation Ordinance | Service Request

November 30, 2000 at 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chamber
734 Third Street
Brentwood, CA 94513


ROLL CALL: Present Commissioners included Chairperson Lanny Brown; Co-Chairperson Karen Rarey; Commissioner Jan Melloni; Commissioner Shepard. Commissioner Ronda Berry was absent.

Others Present: Director Bronzan; Jon Elam, City Manager; Mac Kaiser, Recreation Supervisor; Sue Barry, Recreation Supervisor; Janet Hansen, Park Planner; Ken DeSilva, Park Manger; Barry Margesson, Park Svcs. Mgr.; Patti Hartman, Administrative Assn’t. II; Thom Head, Public Works Director; Pam Ehler, Acting Finance Director

1. Introduction of new employees: Director Bronzan introduced Mac Kaiser, the departments newest Recreation Services Manager and Janet Hansen the departments Park Planner.

2. Presentation on Village Drive Resource Center: Director Bronzan introduced Olivia Ruiz who runs the Community Center in the Village Drive neighborhood which merged with the City on November 14th. He outlined the resources available through the center, which includes Kinder Club; tutoring; recreation; bicycle safety awareness; arts and crafts; adult support and boy scouts. He stated that the center unites the community.

Discussion/Action on an item not appearing on the posted agenda may occur if a body determines by a 2/3rds vote of the members of the body present at the meeting there is both the need to take action immediately and the need for action to come to the attention of the body after the agenda was posted (Government Code 54954.2b2)

EMERGENCY calendar addition of an item no.6b “Park Developer fees consideration/action”
M/S/C/U: Rarey/Melloni (4/0)

CITIZEN COMMENTS: Annette Rains (3751 Holmes Road, Oakley) informing the Commission that ECHO had 125 Equestrian riders in the Holiday parade last weekend. She continued that County Supervisor Camcenellia has appointed Kathy Johnson a Brentwood resident and equestrian for the Contra Costa County Agriculture Task Force. She told the Commission that the booklets she distributes are for the purpose of educating about the equestrian community. She informed the Commission that the Millennium flag for the De Anza trail was presented to the County Board of Supervisors this month as part of their participation, preservation and development of the De Anza trail, which is the Millennium trail, as appointed by the White House Council. She mentioned that the Equestrian Economic Impact report has been submitted to the county, anticipating an approval for $10,000. She also informed the Commission that ECHO is purposing a color guard team for east county which will have a traditional American flag, a California flag and a flag for each of our cities and townships, including Bryon, Knightsen and Bethel Island to bring more pride of our east county.

Chairperson Brown moves to separate item 1 so he can abstain from voting on items 2 through 5.
M/S/C/U: Brown/Shepard (4/0)

M/S/C/U: Brown/Rarey approved Consent Calendar item 1 (3/0) Chairperson Brown abstains.
1. Approve minutes of regular meeting of October 26, 2000.

M/S/C/U to approve items 2 through 5. Brown/Melloni (4/0)
2. Acceptance of staff reports from Park Services Manager/Recreation Services Supervisors.
3. Accept report on current area usage for sport complex (S. Barry/P. Scherff)
4. Accept information update from East County Horseman's Organization (ECHO)
5. Accept update memo from Director (C. Bronzan).


6. Presentation/discussion on possible funding options for Sunset Park expansion (P. Ehler)
Main issues include the legality that the City must own the facility if it is to finance it. If the City owns it then has to bid out the construction part of the project with the winning bidder guaranteeing the bid price, design built alternatives would have to be reviewed by the City attorney. Group cannot have any ownership at all or there will be tax implications. Tax exempt bonds the management contract has to agree on certain requirements: the initial term must be 5 years, renewable; the operator group cannot work on an net profit basis; other requirements are more technical. Other finance alternatives, absent of voter approved bond, would be through the community development agency or general fund or combination of the two.
If it’s a redevelopment project, not within the boundaries of the ____________ areas, which this project is not, then the findings will have to be made. Agency council would also provide an opinion if the facility meets the objectives of the redevelopment plan. She had already talked to the City attorney and both of them feel that the findings would be met. 

The facility will have to compete with other City parks and recreation programs. This would put the City, as it’s own competitor. As a government facility it also means there will be no sale of alcohol allowed, which is a big revenue maker in the existing Cathedral City facility. 

Pam feels strongly that there is money in the Redevelopment fund but questions if this is where the City wants to spend it. She informs the Commission that most commonly, Redevelopment funds are spent on water and/or sewer or infrastructure, which is very poor in Brentwood.

Chairperson Brown asks if most of the Redevelopment projects are commercial and Pam responds that the biggest projects are water and sewer, identifying infrastructure as an issue that needs addressing. She informs the Commission that the Bond attorney feels that it will be a stretch with the alcohol and competition issues. If the Commission asks she can investigate other avenues. 

Commissioner Melloni asks to see the financial statements for “Big League Dreams” to review the construction costs, etc. Chairperson Brown comments that he does not see the possibility of this project continuing but Director Bronzan suggests that the staff looks into it.

Co-Chairperson Rarey states that she does not feel the City can run and maintain this facility the same way that the Field of Dreams can and Pam Ehler responds that the private sector can build the facility for 1/3rd less that the City because of our employment costs. She recommends that the City look at putting the funding into the existing facility. She also states that a facility like this could be run as an Enterprise.

Taxable bonds were discussed with Pam Ehler stating that they would be hard for us to close. It would preclude us from doing other things the City needs.

Co-Chairperson Rarey suggests that we take this project to the different developers in town to find out what their interests are and possibly having them meet together on this, showing them the video and ask for funding and Pam Ehler agrees, offering names and phone numbers.

Pam Ehler reminds the Commission that there is a bond that the City is looking at for the Police department, which is very large.

Commission asks for “line by line” comparisons, including costs overruns and change orders and the costs for both facilities and the third facility in the works. 

6b. Pam informs the Commission that the park fees of Sunset project show a huge overdraft. In order to fund the unfunded fees the Council needs to approve payment for unfunded fees (the Sunset project) showing the overdraft then she can go back and amend the fees. The new fees will increase developer fees from 23% to 28% increasing fees by an additional $1,316. Concern is that the Developers won’t want to pay the increased park fee even though the increase is justifiable. 

Pam tells the Commission that Seeno is challenging all of the developer fees at this point. Seeno has a history of fighting fees and winning. Pam feels confident that the City has improved the way things are done and that we are one of the best Cities in the state in analyzing fees. Blackhawk was a battle the City won but they will challenge the park fee increase, which increases it to $7,022 for a single family resident. She states that if we put this through it would accumulate $2,000,000.00 in 5 years. She feels we could fund it and protect ourselves from another facility fee for the interim and go on a faster track with this project. Pam states that Bill Hill, a new Councilmember, is concerned about the negative numbers and will support an increase and that they really need to help her in getting this done.

Director Bronzan states that he is confident that no one on Council will oppose this, however, the developers may organize themselves to fight against the high fees. He suggests that the Commission recommend funding of $2,000,000 by the City Council.

M/S/C/U: Rarey/Melloni (4/0)

7. Presentation on street trees/Discussion of street trees list (T. Head)
Thom shows the Commission a PowerPoint presentation on the trees in the City that are causing damage to the walkways. His concerns include downtown trees, the older mature heritage trees and the new street trees in new residential developments that will be problematic if something isn’t done now. His goals are to increase the quality and to be friendly with customers. 

The property owner’s are responsible for street tree maintenance. For routine maintenance there is no permit required. The adjacent property owner is responsible for all landscape from the back of the walk to curb and gutter, including the parkway landscaping and sidewalk, except for damage caused by street trees. When street trees are causing damage the City has to pay for it and it eats up his budget quickly. Major work requires permission from him. 

Downtown street trees were funded by a redevelopment project and haven’t been maintained properly. Now maintenance will have to be up dated slowly to avoid losing the tree. 

Problem is that several trees were planted in cutouts that are not large enough to accommodate the growth of the tree. He showed the Commission several trees through out the City where the roots had cracked the sidewalk. Several trees are being replaced with more sidewalk friendly ones with larger cutouts and special backfill mix that encourages roots to grow downward, away from the concrete. The public works department is working with property owners to trim big trees in helping them to do this. The City is responsible to replace sidewalk and tree when the tree damages the concrete.

The cost of reforestation is estimated at $50,000 per year to replace; where there are big problems it may cost $65,000, which is all going to Pippo this year. Thom projects at least $100,000 per year over the next 15/20 years. 

Director Bronzan urges the Commission to set standards for the type of trees to be planted.

Motion to accept monolithic structure and consider adapting the list of trees he provided the Commission as City approved and to allow staff to maintain the list and add root evasiveness.
M/S/C/U: Melloni/Shepard (4/0)

8. Recreation Supervisor Sue Barry reviewed the use of the aquatic complex: Since opening on Labor Day weekend the facility has been very busy. The Terrapins have an open swim meet scheduled in February. The issue of Family Season Passes brings concerns with the costs outlined in her attachments. Chairperson Brown suggested that staff wait until a full season has been experienced to consider a “family” pass program. Co-Chairperson Rarey asked where the majority of the swimmers are coming from and voiced her concerns that families may not use the passes enough to justify purchasing them. Sue feels that season passes are not profitable with a concern in extended non-eligible family using the passes. She informed the Commission that there are special events scheduled such as teen and family related events along with reduced rates to open the season. She stated that the diving boards are very popular along with the early morning lap swim and feels the facility needs to be opened at least 2 days a week for the community per complaints this past season. Co-Chairperson Rarey asked what the costs of running the pool was and it was determined that the staff was not able to come up with that number due to the lack of receiving a utility bill. 

Director Bronzan asks the Commissioners for a disclosure statement to post should they decide NOT to offer Family Season Passes to avoid the staff getting asked by upset pool users. 

Commissioners voted to recommend to City Council to keep the current structure adding an additional option to purchase 50 swim entries for $75.00, increase the lap swim passes to 32 entries for $30.00 and to allow staff to investigate the possibility and costs for wristbands or hand stamps for re-entry purposes.
M/S/C/U: Shepard/Melloni (4/0)

Projected usage for the pools 2001 season includes swim camps, lifeguard instruction programs, special events and holiday events. The order of use priority is: City use, School use, Affiliated usage (swim team) and then any other use. The staff is currently looking for a diving coach so that diving classes can be offered. Evening lap swim will begin Monday, December 4th. 
M/S/C/U: to accept the 2000/2001 Projected Usage schedule as outlined. Rarey/Melloni (4/0)

Sue asks the Commissioners for the directives in writing.

Chairperson Brown voices his concerns with the Terrapins and Dolphins (swim teams) wanting more time than the other. His other concern is that the high school had become so unfair in allowing us use of their pool. He urges that a first come/first serve basis for fairness. Director Bronzan informed him that we are not charging the high school for use of the pool in anticipation of “bartering” facility use once the new high school gym gets built.

Sue informed the Commission that the pool facility, “Team R &R” marketing campaign, the Youth Commission logo, Department Logo and the Fall department brochure are all up for C.P.R.S awards. The pool was also featured in the publication “Athletic Business” as a unique facility. 

9. Adoption of 2001 meeting calendar (C. Bronzan)
M/S/C/U: Melloni/Shepard (4/0)

10. Consideration of canceling regular meeting of December 28, 2000 (C. Bronzan).
M/S/C/U: Melloni/Shepard (4/0)

11.Update on Bicycle sub-committee (J. Hansen). A bicycle sub committee meeting was held on November 29th. A community meeting will be held on January 20th in the council chambers with Chaz O’Brien from RRM Designs facilitating.

12.Update on Skate Park (K. DeSliva) Ken reports that Land Image says we should have the construction documents for a final review on December 4th, next Monday. They are waiting for information on civil soils but moving right along. Ellen and Bill Timmerman met with Ken and Janet and were concerned about sound and visibility. Ken has met with PD regarding some of the issues and will draft a letter to respond to their questions.

13.Update on Senior/Social Services (M. Kaiser) Mac introduces the Commission to the City’s Senior Program by passing out the current Senior Newsletter. This program started in the Blue Room of the Community Center as an active organized club in the 80’s and 90’s with several members. It was a stand-alone group and did all their own activities. In the mid 90’s the group started dwindling. In 1998, when he arrived, there were fewer than 12 members. In 1999 a Sr. Program Coordinator was hired to put a program together. It was discovered that about 300-400 seniors that belonged to the Antioch club. The coordinator put the program together and started offering services and resources. The mailing list is approx. 300. Hopes are that programs will become more regular. Programs include Soup and Salad the last Wednesday of each month for $3 for anyone, including staff/Commission. Shay homes donated a new $15,000 kitchen. There were 6 trips this last year including Pac Bell Park of which tickets were donated. 

14.Update on Parks, Trails and Recreation Master Plan (C. Bronzan). Director Bronzan lets the Commission that the General Plan will not be finished until July 2001. This means that the Park and Recreation Trail Master Plan does not get “officially” finalized until then. It will be approved and used with the anticipation of possible changes, depending on what the General Plan does.

The Administrative draft is into the environmental review process, which means they go through a long CEQA checklist, which asks if it has an impact on fish, wild life and transportation. There’s an administrative draft of this that has to come back to the City to be reviewed by City staff. This should come in on December 15th with one week to review and get back to RRM. If there is any legal issues that will be corrected. January 8th it is expected to be out to all the agencies in the area that by law have to review it. Review period is through February 12th. It is expected that the final will come back for your approval on February 22nd. At that time your recommendations will be given to the City Council and he expects that they will accept what those recommendations will be. 

March 13th it should be approved by City Council and it becomes a legal document and it will be used until the General Plan gets revised in July. RRM is contracted to stay with this until the General Plan is done to work through any possible changes.


DIRECTOR REPORT: Director Bronzan informs the Commission that the Council has approved a $100 per month for Commissioners effective January 1st.

Loma Vista will go out to bid next week, available on Tuesday the 12th with the bids due on January 16th. 

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Co-Chairperson Rarey asks about Commissioner Berry’s re-appointment and Director Bronzan replies no and he will consult Commissioner Berry about her interest in continuing.

Co-Chairperson Rarey asks about the budget for the CPRS Conference and Director Bronzan replies that the reservations have been made for all 5 Commissioners to attend.




ADJOURNMENT: 10:25 P.M. Adjourn to regular meeting of January 25, 2001

Respectfully Submitted,

Patti Hartman,
Recording Secretary

City of Brentwood Park and Recreation Commission
35 Oak Street
Brentwood, CA 94513
(925) 516-5444
Fax (925)516-5445