This agenda contains a summary of each item of business which the Council may discuss or act on at this meeting. The complete staff report and all other written documentation relating to each item on this agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk and the reference desks at the three libraries and are available for public inspection and review. If you have any question about any matter on the agenda, please call the office of the City Clerk at (818) 238-5851. This facility is disabled accessible. Auxiliary aids and services are available for individuals with speech, vision or hearing impairments (48 hour notice is required). Please contact the ADA Coordinator at (818) 238-5021 voice or (818) 238-5035 TDD with questions or concerns.

CLOSED SESSION ORAL COMMUNICATIONS IN COUNCIL CHAMBER:

Comments by the public on Closed Session items only. These comments will be limited to three minutes.

For this segment, a PINK card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk.

CLOSED SESSION IN CITY HALL BASEMENT LUNCH ROOM/CONFERENCE ROOM:

Public Employee Appointment:

Pursuant to Govt. Code �54956.95

Title of Position: City Manager.

6:30 P.M.

INVOCATION: Reverend Tania Kleiman, Olive Branch Ministries.

The Courts have concluded that sectarian prayer as part of City Council meetings is not permitted under the Constitution.

FLAG SALUTE:

ROLL CALL:

ANNOUNCEMENT: WEDNESDAY NIGHT PRIME TIME PROGRAMS.

PRESENTATION: REGIONAL OCCUPATIONAL PROGRAM FIRE ACADEMY GRADUATES.

PRESENTATION: ACCEPTING DONATION TO POLICE DEPARTMENT.

COUNCIL COMMENTS: (Including reporting on Council Committee Assignments)

INTRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS:

At this time additional items to be considered at this meeting may be introduced. As a general rule, the Council may not take action on any item which does not appear on this agenda. However, the Council may act if an emergency situation exists or if the Council finds that a need to take action arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda. Govt. Code �54954.2(b).

REPORTING ON CLOSED SESSION:

AIRPORT AUTHORITY MEETING REPORT:

1. AIRPORT AUTHORITY COMMISSIONER REPORT:

At the request of the Burbank representatives to the Airport Authority, an oral report will be made to the City Council following each meeting of the Authority.

The main focus of this report will be issues which were on the Airport Authority meeting agenda of February 3, 2003. Other Airport related issues may also be discussed during this presentation.

Recommendation:

Receive report.

FIRST PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: (One minute on any matter concerning City Business.)

There are four segments of Oral Communications during the Council Meeting. The first precedes the Closed Session items, the second and third segments precede the main part of the City Council�s business (but follow announcements and public hearings), and the fourth is at the end of the meeting following all other City business.

Closed Session. During this period of oral communications, the public may comment only on items listed on the Closed Session Agenda(s). A PINK card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk. Comments will be limited to three minutes.

First Period of Oral Communications. During this period of Oral Communications, the public may comment on any matter concerning City Business. A BLUE card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk. NOTE: Any person speaking during this segment may not speak during the third period of Oral Communications. Comments will be limited to one minute.

Second Period of Oral Communications. This segment of Oral Communications immediately follows the first period, but is limited to comments on agenda items for this meeting. For this segment, a YELLOW card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk. Comments will be limited to four minutes.

Third Period of Oral Communications. This segment of oral communications follows the conclusion of agenda items at the end of the meeting. The public may comment at this time on any matter concerning City Business. NOTE: Any member of the public speaking at the First Period of Oral Communications may not speak during this segment. For this segment, a GREEN card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk. Comments will be limited to three minutes.

City Business. City business is defined as any matter that is under the jurisdiction of the City Council. Although other topics may be of interest to some people, if those topics are not under City Council jurisdiction, they are not City business and may not be discussed during Oral Communications.

Videotapes/Audiotapes. Videotapes or audiotapes may be presented by any member of the public at any period of Oral Communications or at any public hearing. Such tapes may not exceed the time limit of the applicable Oral Communications period or any public comment period during a public hearing. The playing time for the tape shall be counted as part of the allowed speaking time of that member of the public during that period.

Videotapes must be delivered to the Public Information Office by no later than 10:00 a.m. on the morning of the Council meeting in a format compatible with the City�s video equipment. Neither videotapes nor audiotapes will be reviewed for content or edited by the City prior to the meeting, but it is suggested that the tapes not include material that is slanderous, pornographic, demeaning to any person or group of people, an invasion of privacy of any person, or inclusive of material covered by copyright.

Printed on the videocassette cover should be the name of the speaker, the period of oral communication the tape is to be played, and the total running time of the segment. The Public Information Office is not responsible for "cueing up" tapes, rewinding tapes, or fast forwarding tapes. To prevent errors, there should be ten seconds of blank tape at the beginning and end of the segment to be played. Additionally, the speaker should provide the first sentence on the tape as the "in cue" and the last sentence as the "out cue".

As with all Oral Communications, videotapes and audiotapes are limited to the subject matter jurisdiction of the City and may be declared out of order by the Mayor.

Disruptive Conduct. The Council requests that you observe the order and decorum of our Council Chamber by turning off or setting to vibrate all cellular telephones and pagers, and that you refrain from making personal, impertinent, or slanderous remarks. Boisterous and disruptive behavior while the Council is in session, and the display of signs in a manner which violates the rights of others or prevents others from watching or fully participating in the Council meeting, is a violation of our Municipal Code and any person who engages in such conduct can be ordered to leave the Council Chamber by the Mayor.

Once an individual is requested to leave the Council Chamber by the Mayor, that individual may not return to the Council Chamber for the remainder of the meeting. BMC �2-216(b).

Individuals standing in the Council Chamber will be required to take a seat. Also, no materials shall be placed in the aisles in order to keep the aisles open and passable. BMC �2-217(b).

Your participation in City Council meetings is welcome and your courtesy will be appreciated.

COUNCIL AND STAFF RESPONSE TO FIRST PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

SECOND PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: (Four minutes on Agenda items only.)

COUNCIL AND STAFF RESPONSE TO SECOND PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

JOINT MEETING WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY:

2. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS ADOPTING FINANCIAL PRINCIPLES ADDRESSING PROPOSALS FROM THE STATE TO REDUCE LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUES, SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING THE GOVERNOR�S 2003-04 BUDGET PROPOSAL, AND URGING THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE TO REJECT THE GOVERNOR�S PROPOSED SHIFT OF LOCAL VEHICLE LICENSE FEE (VLF) REVENUES:

At the January 28, 2003 City Council meeting, Council Member Golonski requested staff to return at the February 4, 2003 meeting with a draft set of financial principles for both the Redevelopment Agency and Council to consider in addressing the City�s response to proposals from the State to reduce local government revenues and more specifically the Governor�s Proposed 2003-04 Budget.

On January 10, 2003, the Governor released his Proposed 2003-04 Budget, which revealed that the State General Fund revenues from the major tax sources are expected to fall to $64.8 billion, resulting in a $34.6 billion budget shortfall in the current and 2003-04 Budget. It is the belief of most California cities that the Budget proposal places an unfair burden on local governments and is bad for California and it�s struggling economy.

There are two main components of the Governor�s proposal that are harmful to cities. The first is the elimination of $2.9 billion of the Vehicle License Fee (VLF) backfill payments estimated for Fiscal Year (FY) 2003-04. This proposal would eliminate all of the VLF backfill going to cities, leaving funding only from the remaining VLF base. This would impact Burbank by an estimated $4,045,355 and represents approximately 3.6 percent of Burbank�s recurring revenues.

The VLF was first enacted in 1935 and replaced the property tax on vehicles with a 1.75 percent fee charged against the value of the motor vehicle. In 1948 the rate was increased to 2 percent. Subsequently, in 1986, the voters overwhelmingly voted to constitutionally dedicate the proceeds of the VLF to fund city and county services. Then in 1998, a period of strong economic growth, the VLF payment to the consumer was reduced. However, the legislature and Governor agreed to provisions that would "trigger" restoration of the VLF if the State General Fund could no longer afford the "offset" or backfill from the General Fund to pay for the "VLF holiday" to the consumers. It is the position of local cities that if the State is in such a dire budget crisis, they should keep that vow and restore the VLF.

The other harmful proposal is the ongoing shift of $250 million from redevelopment agencies to pay a portion of the State�s school obligation. The Budget includes a statement of intent to continue to increase this shift until 50 percent of the tax increment is diverted to supplant the State�s commitment to schools. Estimates on this total are as high as $1.2 billion. The State will use these funds to support schools; they become part of the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) shift of local property taxes that has so dramatically altered local government�s ability to provide services and plan for future growth. The ERAF shift for FY 2002-03 for Burbank was $912,097 and the estimated impact for 2003-04 is $3,099,920. The Governor has stated his desire to increase the proposed 2003-04 shift until 50 percent of the tax increment has been diverted from redevelopment agencies to the State to fund its school obligation.

While the Governor�s State speech emphasized jobs, jobs and more jobs, it would appear that taking redevelopment funds would be counterproductive to that stated goal. Redevelopment agencies are a principal source of economic development and construction jobs in the State. With historic low-interest rates, many redevelopment agencies are poised to finance public infrastructure improvement and housing projects that will help jump-start the State economy.

It is also worth noting that an additional proposal by the Governor, unveiled in December 2002, would have swept approximately $500 million in "unencumbered" balances in the low and moderate income housing funds into ERAF accounts. This could have a detrimental impact on our Redevelopment Agency�s existing and future projects. At this point it is staff�s understanding that this proposal has not garnered support from the legislature, however, it is too soon to think that the funds might not still be in jeopardy as they are still part of the Governor�s proposal.

Due to the necessity to place this item on the agenda on short notice, it is staff�s intention to have a report and draft set of principles addressing the City�s response to proposals from the State to reduce local government revenues and more specifically the Governor�s Proposed 2003-04 Budget for the Council and Agency to consider Tuesday, February 4, 2003. In addition, staff will present a resolution for the Council to consider urging the legislature to reject the Governor�s proposed shift of local VLF revenues.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council and Redevelopment Agency consider the draft set of principles addressing the City�s response to proposals from the State to reduce local government revenues and more specifically the Governor�s Proposed 2003-04 Budget. The principles are incorporated into draft resolutions, however, if the Council and Agency are comfortable with the resolutions as drafted, they can be adopted at the meeting. Otherwise, staff could be directed to return at the following meeting with the resolutions for approval.

It is further recommended that the Council consider adopting a resolution urging the California Legislature to reject the Governor�s proposed shift of local VLF revenues and to honor the 1998 commitment to restore the VLF.

CONSENT CALENDAR: (Items 3 through 5)

The following items may be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Council Member so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent calendar and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A roll call vote is required for the consent calendar.

3. MINUTES:

Approval of minutes for the regular meeting of December 3 and the adjourned meeting of December 4, 2002.

Recommendation:

Approve as submitted.

4. ACCEPTING A DONATION TO THE BURBANK POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-03 BUDGET FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATING THESE MONIES:

Staff is requesting Council approval and appropriation of monies donated to the Burbank Police Department by Vetter Investigations.

On November 5, 2002, the Police Department received a donation from Vetter Investigations in the amount of $3,000. The department would like to appropriate this money for use for improvements and maintenance to the Police and Fire museum and to purchase a child identification system.

The child identification system will be used by Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) officers and at special events to provide documentation of a child�s vital information in the event a child becomes lost or is missing. The information card will provide law enforcement officials with key facts and the child�s thumbprint to immediately start a search if necessary.

Staff is recommending that the Council express its appreciation to Vetter Investigations and adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2002-03 budget by accepting and appropriating the above donation in the amount of $3,000.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

(4/5 vote required)

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 BUDGET FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACCEPTING VETTER INVESTIGATION�S DONATION OF $3,000 TO THE BURBANK POLICE DEPARTMENT.

5. DENYING APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-17 WITH DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2002-32:

On January 14, 2003, the Council voted 5-0 to deny an appeal and uphold the Planning Board�s decision to deny a conditional use permit application by August Bacchetta to construct an automobile lubrication service and detailing facility with four service bays in conjunction with a restaurant. The proposed project would have been located at 524 South San Fernando Boulevard in the BCC-3 zone.

The City Attorney�s Office has prepared the appropriate resolution pursuant to the Council�s action.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AFFIRMING THE PLANNING BOARD�S DECISION AND DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-17 WITH DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2002-32 (524 SOUTH SAN FERNANDO BOULEVARD, SARKIS ALEBIAN AND ASMIK YETARIAN, PROPERTY OWNERS).

END OF CONSENT CALENDAR *** *** ***

REPORTS TO COUNCIL:

6. UPDATE ON REUSE OF FORMER BUENA VISTA LIBRARY:

The purpose of this report is to update the Council on staff's preparation and follow-up work completed before scheduling a community meeting, and the next steps in the reuse of the old Buena Vista Library.

After the approval of the new 28,198 square foot Buena Vista Library on April 10, 2001, a committee was formed to explore opportunities for the reuse of the old Buena Vista Library. The committee conducted several brainstorming sessions to consider a variety of possible public uses for the site. Staff created a matrix that identified the uses that were explored. The uses looked at various factors including minimum required building and lot size, cost, and neighborhood compatibility. Most of the proposed uses were deemed not appropriate for the site considering the size of the property and neighborhood compatibility. After additional analysis, the committee focused on four options centered on single family residential and childcare uses.

On July 17, 2001, staff presented the four options: 1) standard single-family residential development - up to five units; 2) small-lot single family housing - up to nine units; 3) a childcare center utilizing the existing building; and, 4) a newly constructed childcare center. The single-family housing options were determined to be compatible with the single-family nature of the neighborhood. It has also been determined that the existing building could be rehabilitated to accommodate a 100 space childcare facility. The site could also accommodate a new childcare facility. The two options involving development of a childcare center were presented due to the serious unmet demand for quality childcare within the City as evidenced by long waiting lists and high childcare tuition rates. Furthermore, a childcare center would not impact the neighborhood on evenings and weekends due to the hours of operation of childcare centers (i.e. typically Monday through Friday 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.).

After a discussion of the four reuse options, the Council authorized staff to hold a community meeting to receive public comment on the proposed four options. Before holding a community meeting, staff felt it was important to more fully develop the details associated with both operations. Renderings were prepared for both residential options, while different public financing options for a childcare facility were explored. These include: 1) redevelopment agency funds; 2) grant funds; and, 3) bond proceeds. Another possible way to provide the childcare needed by our community is through public/private partnerships. A Childcare Corporate Support Package was prepared and sent to over 200 businesses to determine whether there is interest in the business community to provide support for a new childcare center.

With the renderings completed, and feedback from the business community on the corporate support package for a childcare facility in hand, staff is now prepared to hold a community meeting. It is recommended that the Council direct staff to conduct a General Community Meeting to receive public comment on the proposed four reuse options.

Recommendation:

Direct staff with respect to conducting a General Community Meeting on the reuse of the Old Buena Vista Library site.

7. Proposed Ordinance Amending the Burbank Municipal Code to Formalize the Current PerformArts Grant Program Policies and to Rename the Park and Recreation Board the Park, Recreation, and Community Services Board:

The purpose of this report is to assure that the PerformArts Grant Program operates in accordance with the rules and regulations as set forth by the Charter and Code of the City of Burbank and to propose adoption of an amendment to the Burbank Municipal Code.

As this is the first change in the Burbank Municipal Code relating to the powers of the Park and Recreation Board (Board) since the adoption of the new Charter language, staff is also proposing to amend the Code to change the name of the Board to the Park, Recreation, and Community Services Board.

Since the 1970�s, various performing arts organizations in Burbank have received financial support from the City of Burbank. These performing arts organizations were loosely organized as the Performing Arts Foundation. On December 21, 1993, the Council adopted Resolution No. 24,109 approving new policies and procedures for the distribution of City funds to the Performing Arts Foundation, thereby providing eligibility to other worthy performing arts groups in Burbank. These funds were distributed on an annual basis via the Performing Arts Grant Awards Program, later shortened to the PerformArts Grant Program.

The grant program included establishment of a grant review panel, to be appointed annually by the Park, Recreation and Community Services Board. The review panel has been rating proposals and making funding recommendations to the Board since the program�s inception. The panel consists of two staff members and four community representatives knowledgeable about performing arts organizations and the local arts community.

Although the Council approved the policies and procedures of the PerformArts Grant Program, the Burbank Municipal Code does not specifically provide the Park, Recreation and Community Services Board with the authority to make funding decisions or award grants. In order to assure that the PerformArts Grant Program operates in accordance with the rules and regulations as set forth by the Charter and Code of the City of Burbank, it is staff�s recommendation that the Burbank City Council adopt an ordinance amending the Burbank Municipal Code. This amendment would expand the Park, Recreation and Community Services Board�s authority to make PerformArts Grant Program funding decisions and award these grant funds, as has been done for the past ten years.

Finally, in April 2001 the Charter of the City of Burbank was amended to change the name of the Park and Recreation Department to the Park, Recreation and Community Services Department. At the same time, the name of the Board was also changed. Staff is proposing that the City Council formally amend the Code to change the name of the Board to conform to the recent change in the Charter.

Recommendation:

Introduction of proposed ordinance entitled: (motion and voice vote only)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING ARTICLE 4, CHAPTER 2 OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE PARK, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD.

8. Lobbyist Registration Ordinance:

The City Attorney�s Office was asked to obtain and review the City of Los Angeles lobbyist registration ordinance in order to assist the Council in determining if it is desirable for the City of Burbank to adopt a similar ordinance. The Council asked that this matter be placed on the agenda for Council consideration. This report summarizes the Los Angeles lobbyist registration ordinance, the lobbyist registration ordinances of several other cities and the State of California lobbyist regulations, and presents the Council with a draft lobbyist registration ordinance. This report also summarizes comments received from interested persons in the community.

The draft ordinance provides for annual registration of persons employed to communicate with or appear before City officials and/or employees for the purpose of influencing any legislative or administrative action. In addition to annual registration, a lobbyist must file an amended registration statement prior to engaging in any lobbying activity for a new client. There are a couple of exceptions in the ordinance including an exception for an employee who engages in lobbying activity on behalf of an employer, if influencing governmental action is not such person�s primary job duty. The draft ordinance provides that the lobbyist registration records will be maintained by the City Clerk and will be open to the public.

If the Council wishes to adopt a lobbyist registration ordinance, the City Attorney�s Office recommends either adoption of the draft ordinance or requests that the Council provide further direction regarding the desired ordinance.

Recommendation:

1.  Introduction of proposed ordinance entitled: (motion and voice vote only)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING CHAPTER 2 OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO REGISTRATION OF LOBBYISTS.

2. Provide City Attorney�s Office with further direction.

9. APPROVING A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH BLT RECYCLING, INC. FOR OPERATION OF THE BURBANK RECYCLE CENTER:

Staff is requesting Council approval of a second amendment to the agreement with BLT Recycling, Inc. (BLT) for operation of the Burbank Recycle Center. The amendment would allow the City to be compensated for additional mixed commercial recyclables delivered to BLT at the Recycle Center under specified circumstances.

The City has an agreement with BLT for operation of the Burbank Recycle Center until June 2009. BLT currently pays the City a flat monthly operation fee of $14,200, which generates $170,400 in revenue for the Refuse Enterprise Fund. City staff initiated discussions with BLT to identify ways to increase recycling revenue to the City beyond the flat monthly operation fee. Of the 4,600 tons processed at the Recycle Center per month, only 150 tons are mixed commercial recyclables generated by the 328 businesses that use the City�s recycling services. Staff plans to increase the mixed commercial recyclable tonnage by contacting businesses with the greatest potential for material diversion and incrementally adding recycling accounts along existing routes, maximizing the deployment of equipment and staff resources. Staff estimates that the City can increase the amount of mixed commercial recyclables collected to 300 tons over the next three years without increasing operational costs.

To generate additional recycling revenue for the City, BLT has agreed to pay the City for every additional ton of mixed commercial recyclables collected over and above the first 150 tons. The per ton payment will be the per ton market rate for mixed commercial recyclables minus BLT�s cost to sort, bale and ship the recyclables to market. BLT�s cost is $40 per ton and represents BLT�s actual cost to process and separate the mixed commercial recyclables (BLT�s profit comes from reselling the material once it is separated, as separated material is more valuable than mixed material).

The City is also protected from any loss if the per ton market rate for mixed commercial recyclables falls below $40. While the City would not receive any additional revenue if the per ton market rate falls below $40 (the per ton payment from BLT to the City would be $0), the City would also not be responsible for the negative difference between the $40 cost to prepare the recyclables for market and the lower per ton market rate. BLT would bear the loss if the per market rate falls below its $40 cost to prepare the recyclables for market.

BLT will also increase the number of tons it pays for as the City meets certain tonnage levels. If the City collects between 150 and 299 tons per month, BLT will pay for every additional ton over 150 tons. If the City collects over 300 tons, BLT will pay for every additional ton over the first 100 tons. If the City collects over 400 tons, BLT will pay for every additional ton over the first 50. Finally, if the City collects over 500 tons of mixed commercial recyclables per month, BLT will pay the City for every ton collected.

The City benefits from this amendment because it receives additional revenue for the additional mixed commercial recyclables it brings to BLT at the Recycle Center. BLT benefits from this amendment as well, as it can resell the additional tonnage at a higher rate than it paid the City once the material is processed and separated.

The amount of additional recycling revenue generated will fluctuate depending on the supply and demand in the market for mixed commercial recyclables and the amount of additional mixed commercial recyclable tons brought into the Recycle Center through City staff efforts. The per ton market rate for mixed commercial recyclables is very unpredictable, making any revenue projections unreliable.

To illustrate the potential that this amendment has for generating revenue for the City, the table below shows the amount of revenue the City would have brought in under this amendment from September 2002 through January 2003 at different tonnage levels. The per ton market rate for mixed commercial recyclables was $55 from September through November 2002, and was $50 for December 2002 and January 2003.

1. Under the agreement, the amount of tonnage for which the City receives payment increases as the total mixed commercial recyclable tonnage increases.

2. The City would have received this per ton market rate minus BLT�s $40 cost to process the material. With a $55 per ton market rate, the per ton payment to the City would have been $15; at $50, the payment would have been $10.

3. Estimated annual total based on five month market rate average from September 2002 through January 2003.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT FOR RECYLCING SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND BLT RECYCLING, INC.

10. COUNCIL MEMBER RAMOS� REQUEST TO DISCUSS FUNDING FOR THE OTA SISTER CITY PROGRAM:

At the January 14, 2003 City Council meeting, Council Member Ramos requested that staff agendize a one-step, two-step process regarding Council support for funding participants of the annual Sister City trip to Ota, Japan. Staff has done no further work on this issue and recommends that the City Council discuss the item and direct staff as necessary.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the Council discuss the item and direct staff as necessary.

11. VOTER EDUCATION PROGRAM PERTAINING TO THE LIBRARY BOND MEASURE (MEASURE L):

At the Council meeting of January 28, 2003, staff was directed to provide an impartial analysis of Measure L, the Library Bond Measure, and statements in opposition to or in support of Measure L, to be broadcast on Channel 6 on an on-going basis until the February 25, 2003 Primary Nominating Election, using the same criteria as that established for the production of the videotaped candidate statements. The Council established a deadline of Tuesday, February 4, 2003, for filing such applications with the City Clerk�s Office. A notice to that effect was posted on the Channel 6 scroll and in the City Clerk�s Office on Wednesday, January 29, 2003. The names of the applicants will be reported to the Council upon expiration of the application deadline at the Council meeting of February 4, 2003.

Recommendation:

Council consideration of applications to present statements in support of or in opposition to Measure L.

RECONVENE the Redevelopment Agency meeting for public comment.

THIRD PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: (Three minutes on any matter concerning the business of the City.)

This is the time for the Third Period of Oral Communications. Each speaker will be allowed a maximum of THREE minutes and may speak on any matter concerning the business of the City. However, any speaker that spoke during the First Period of Oral Communications may not speak during the Third Period of Oral Communications.

For this segment, a GREEN card must be completed, indicating the matter to be discussed, and presented to the City Clerk.

COUNCIL AND STAFF RESPONSE TO THE THIRD PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

ADJOURNMENT.