When the Council reconvenes in open session, the Council may make any required disclosures regarding actions taken in Closed Session or adopt any appropriate resolutions concerning these matters.

PRESENTATION:                YOUTH ART EXPO.

PRESENTATION:                ST. FRANCIS XAVIER OLD TYME COUNTRY FAIRE.

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:

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:

RECESS for the Redevelopment Agency meeting.

RECONVENE for the City Council meeting.

CONSENT CALENDAR: (Items 1 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.

1.      MINUTES:

Approval of minutes for the regular meeting of March 18, 2003.

Recommendation:

Approve as submitted.

2.      DRAFT AMENDED RELOCATION PLAN FOR THE PEYTON-GRISMER REVITALIZATION PROJECT:

The purpose of this memorandum is to transmit for the Council�s consideration the Draft Amended Relocation Plan or Draft Amended Plan for the Peyton�Grismer Revitalization Project (Project) to initiate the 30-day plan review period.

The Burbank Redevelopment Agency (Agency) and the Burbank Housing Authority (Authority) have been engaged in acquiring property for the Project located within the Peyton-Grismer focus neighborhood.  The Agency has acquired 1819 Grismer Avenue and the owner of 1801-1815 Grismer Avenue has agreed to a stipulated judgment.  In a concurrent action, the Agency is negotiating terms of a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with the Burbank Housing Corporation (BHC) under which BHC is to acquire these properties from the Agency, rehabilitate and operate a mixed-income, affordable housing development of approximately 60 units.

Acquiring and rehabilitating the Project will require the relocation of tenants and, accordingly, the necessity to prepare a plan.  Under California Relocation Guidelines, a relocation plan is required subsequent to the initiation of negotiations and precedent to any action prompting displacement, in this instance, acquisition and rehabilitation actions.  Consequently, the Agency�s relocation consultants, Pacific Relocation Consultants (PRC) prepared a Draft Relocation Plan, which was accepted by the Council on October 22, 2002.  And, on January 14, 2003, the Council adopted the Relocation Plan for the Project.  

The Agency and Authority have initiated condemnation action against the owner of 1729-1735 Elliott Drive (Elliott Site), a site contiguous to the aforementioned Grismer properties and within the Peyton-Grismer focus area.  The plan included a description of the area and the Project site, an assessment of the relocation needs of potential displacees and available replacement housing in Burbank and set forth the steps and procedures to ensure a fair and equitable relocation program.  The Draft Amended Plan describes the Elliott Site, potential units lost and households displaced from the Elliott Site.

In conformance with State relocation guidelines, the Draft Amended Relocation Plan is to be available for public review for 30 days before any relocation activities are initiated, including issuance by the Agency to any displacee household of a 90-day notice to vacate.

         Recommendation:

Note and file.

3.      APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENTS TO PROVIDE ANNUAL AUDIT SERVICES AND INTERNAL AUDITING SERVICES:

The purpose of this report is to request Council authorization for staff to enter into professional service agreements for the provision of annual audit services and internal audit services for Fiscal Years (FY) 2003-04, and 2004-05.

In June 2000, after an extensive Request for Proposal (RFP) process, and pursuant to the direction subsequently recommended by the Audit Committee, the Council approved an agreement with KPMG to provide annual audit services for a three-year period.  Additionally, an agreement was entered into with Vavrinek, Trine, Day and Co. (VTD), to provide internal audit services for the same duration.  Each firm proposed a three-year commitment at set fixed fees, subject to annual Council approval.

At the December 2002 Audit Committee meeting, staff sought direction to seek out a new two-year contract extension proposal from KPMG and VTD.  This was done for a variety of reasons.  First, it is the recommendation of the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) that local government agencies, among other things, engage an auditor for a minimum of five years.  Such agreements allow for greater continuity and help to minimize the potential for disruption in connection with the independent audit.  Multiyear agreements can also help to reduce audit costs by allowing auditors to recover certain �start up� costs over several years, rather than over a single year.

Additionally, there are inherent costs that the City incurs when a different auditor is engaged.  To that end, the Committee was in agreement to seek a two-year extension, and perform an RFP at the end of that time.

Annual Audit   In response to staff�s request for a two-year proposal, KPMG has submitted a price of $82,500 for FY 2003-04 and $84,900 for FY 2004-05 audits.  While the price has increased by 10 percent, the proposed hours to perform the audit have increased by 13 percent, which is actually a reduction in the hourly rate.  There are several reasons for the price increase, most notably the City�s compliance in reporting under the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) 34 format, and the  increased scrutiny and regulations on the auditing industry, requiring additional procedures to be performed. 

In order to gain a comfort level as to the reasonableness of the price proposal, staff performed a survey of audit costs with our five survey cities: Glendale, Inglewood, Pasadena, Santa Monica, and Torrance. The results are shown below.

         Annual Audit Fee Survey Results

Internal Audit   In seeking a two year extension for internal audit services with VTD, as with the annual audit engagement, a five year commitment was optimum for the same reasons stated above; the GFOA five year recommendation, and the inherent costs of switching firms.  Additionally, staff has been very pleased with the work product of VTD. In budgeting for internal audit services, staff proposed a contract of $31,500, which is a 10 percent reduction from FY 2002-03.  Audits planned for the FY 2003-04 include Transient Parking Tax (TPT), Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), a Purchasing Audit, and the Castaways Restaurant.  Composite Billing Rate for FY 2003-04 is $85/hour, an increase of $2/hour.

The cost of the proposed agreements between the City of Burbank and KPMG for annual audit services, and the proposed agreement between VTD, for internal audit services are included within the Financial Services Department budget each year.  Fees for the annual audit contract will not exceed $82,500 for FY 2003-04, and $84,900 for FY 2004-05.  Fees for internal audit services will not exceed $31,500 for FY 2003-04.  Fees for FY 2004-05 have not been negotiated, and will depend on future budgetary constraints as well as the input of the Audit Committee.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolutions entitled:

1. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ANNUAL AUDIT SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND KPMG, LLP.

2. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND VAVRINEK, TRINE, DAY & COMPANY, LLP.

4.      APPROVING THE FILING OF VESTING PARCEL MAP NO. 24941-01 (BURBANK EMPIRE CENTER PROJECT � MULTIPLE MAP FILING):

Staff is requesting Council approval of Parcel Map No. 24941-01.  The Burbank Empire Center is a mixed-use project on 103 acres of land proposed by the Zelman Retail Partners Inc.  The Council held public hearings on Planned Development No. 97-3 and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 24941 for the Burbank Empire Center on June 6, 2000, June 13, 2000, September 5, 2000, and September 12, 2000.  The Council also certified the Environmental Impact Report (Resolution No. 25,768), approved the Planned Development (Ordinance No. 3554), and approved the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (Resolution No. 25,828) for this development.

The retail portion of the project, including Costco, The Great Indoors, Target, Lowes, and the smaller stores and restaurants have been completed, and the two hotels are open.  The first phase of the office portion of the development, adjacent to Buena Vista Street, is complete. All of the public utilities have been installed, and the easement documents have been prepared and received.  The Vesting Parcel Map will be recorded in phases to finalize the process.

The property covered on the submitted Parcel Map No. 24941-01 is a three-parcel subdivision.  These parcels are located at the corner of Empire Avenue and Buena Vista Street.  The property is owned by Burbank Technology Center LLC, a California Limited Liability Company.

Staff has determined that this map is in compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act and Tentative Parcel Map No. 24941, and that it meets the Conditions of Approval for the overall project that pertained to the property.  According to the State Subdivision Map Act, Chapter 3, Article 4, Section 66458, and the provisions of Chapter 27 of the Burbank Municipal Code, the Council must approve Parcel Map No. 24941-01 if it conforms to all the requirements.  If such conformity does not exist, the Council must disapprove the map at the meeting it receives the map, or at the next regular meeting.  If the Council has not authorized an extension to allow more time to disapprove the map, and the map conforms to all requirements, the map shall be deemed approved by operation of law.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE FILING OF VESTING PARCEL MAP NO. 24941-01 (BURBANK EMPIRE CENTER PROJECT � MULTIPLE MAP FILING).

5.      REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC POWER AUTHORITY AND THE CITY OF BURBANK REGARDING 461 NORTH VARNEY STREET:

The purpose of this item is to request Council approval of a Reimbursement Agreement between the City of Burbank and the Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA) with respect to property located at 461 N. Varney Street.

The City is in the process of purchasing the property to fulfill a noise mitigation condition imposed by the California Energy Commission on the Magnolia Power Project.  On March 11, 2003, the Council adopted a Resolution of Necessity, authorizing acquisition of the property by eminent domain.  Staff subsequently reached agreement with the owners for a purchase price of $352,000.  The Council approved an Acquisition Agreement on April 29, 2003.  The full cost of the acquisition will be paid by SCPPA with Project funds.

The Reimbursement Agreement would allow the City to complete the purchase of the property and retain title in its name until the property is sold, at which time SCPPA will receive the net proceeds of the sale as reimbursement for the cost of the acquisition.  In the interim, the property can be used for any purpose not inconsistent with the Project, with Project-related uses having priority.  Provisions are included that make the agreement, in effect, subject to termination at any time at the option of either party.  A covenant would be recorded in favor of SCPPA so that its interest in the property appears as a matter of record.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC POWER AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 461 N. VARNEY STREET.

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

REPORTS TO COUNCIL:

6.      CABLE FRANCHISE RENEWAL:

The purpose of this report is to request Council authorization for staff to commence the renewal process of the Cable Television Franchise Agreement with Charter Communications.

On December 6, 2002, Charter Communications (Charter), a cable operator, requested the City commence the process of  renewing the current franchise agreement, which was originally granted on October 17, 1995, and expires on October 17, 2005.  Pursuant to federal law, the cable operator may formally request the commencement of renewal proceedings within 36 months prior to the expiration of the franchise agreement.  The City�s authority to grant cable television franchises is regulated by the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as amended by the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 and by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the Cable Act).

The City must �commence� the renewal process within six months of Charter�s request (by June 6, 2003).  The Council may �commence� the renewal process by authorizing the retention of any necessary experts, and providing notice to Charter.  There is no deadline as to when franchise renewal proceedings must be completed. 

Under the Cable Act, the City may use one or all of the following four criteria to determine whether to renew a franchise.  The City may deny a renewal proposal only if it makes one or more adverse findings with respect to one or more of these four criteria:

1.         Has Charter �substantially complied� with the material terms of the existing franchise and applicable law?

2.        Has Charter�s quality of service, including signal quality, response to consumers� complaints and billing practices been reasonable in light of community needs?

3.        Does Charter have the financial, legal and technical ability to provide the services, equipment and facilities offered in its proposal? 

4.        Is Charter�s proposal reasonable to meet future cable-related interests and needs of the community considering the cost of meeting those interests and needs?  The City is required to consider the community�s need for certain services, and the costs of providing such services, facilities and equipment.

Staff seeks Council�s approval to initiate the process of gathering relevant data under the four criteria.  Once such data has been compiled, staff will return to the Council for determination as to whether Charter�s cable franchise should be renewed.

In the past, the City has conducted cable television franchise renewal and other cable television negotiations jointly with the City of Glendale and anticipates working cooperatively with Glendale on this renewal negotiation.  This allows the cities to pool staff resources and split the costs of the necessary consultants.

At this time, staff recommends the City retain appropriate outside legal counsel.  William Marticorena of Rutan & Tucker, LLP has in the past assisted the City in providing legal counsel in this highly specialized area of telecommunications law and it is recommended that Mr. Marticorena be engaged to assist in Charter�s franchise renewal process.  For reference, the City of Glendale has retained Mr. Marticorena for the renewal negotiations.

The City is also evaluating retaining additional experts to perform the following services:

•  Evaluate Charter�s compliance with current franchise requirements.

•  Conduct a community needs and interests assessment.

•  Conduct a technical audit including possibly a review of Charter�s physical plant.

•  Conduct a financial qualifications audit.

At this time, staff is requesting that the Council authorize an appropriation of $25,000 from the Fiscal Year (FY) 2002-03 unappropriated fund balance to cover estimated legal fees for telecommunications legal counsel, William Marticorena of Rutan & Tucker, LLP.  Staff also requests an additional appropriation of $60,000 from the FY 2002-03 unappropriated fund balance to hire consultants to perform the other services necessary in the renewal negotiations.  Such costs have been reimbursed by the cable operator in past procedures and are expected to be reimbursed by Charter should the Council ultimately grant renewal at the end of the franchise renewal proceedings.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Council direct staff to commence cable franchise renewal proceedings with Charter Communications.  In furtherance of such renewal proceedings and to assist in the renewal process, staff requests approval of an agreement for telecommunications legal counsel with Mr. Marticorena of Rutan & Tucker, LLP in the amount of $25,000 and the appropriation of $60,000 for additional services related to the renewal negotiations.  Both of these appropriations would be funded through the Fiscal Year 2002-03 unappropriated fund balance.

7.      APPOINTMENTS FOR VACANCIES ON VARIOUS CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES:

The purpose of this report is to identify the Boards, Commissions, and Committees with members whose terms expire June 1, 2003 and request the Council to make appointments from the qualified applicants.

The City Clerk's office placed a notice in the March 2003 utility billing envelopes as well as issuing a press release on April 16, 2003 and began advertising and accepting applications for vacancies, created by the June 1, 2003 term expirations, on various City Boards, Commissions, and Committees. Notice was also placed on the City�s web site, the Channel 6 scroll, and announcements made at Council meetings.  The deadline to submit applications was Friday, May 16, 2003. 

It should be noted that all Board, Commission, and Committee members serve without compensation from the City and no person shall serve on more than one Board, Commission, or Committee (established by the Burbank Municipal Code) at the same time.  If any current Board, Commission, or Committee member whose term is not due to expire on June 1, 2003 is appointed to a different Board, Commission, or Committee, that member must resign their current position before being installed to the new Board, Commission, or Committee.  In addition, any person appointed to be a member of a Board, Commission, or Committee must be an elector of, and actually reside in, the City of Burbank.

PROCEDURE FOR VOTING

RANDOM DRAWING OF BOARDS/COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES AND THE APPLICANTS:

The City Clerk's office conducted a random drawing to select the order that the Boards, Commissions, and Committees would be placed on the agenda for Council voting.  In addition, a random drawing was conducted to select the order the applicants will appear on the voting sheets.

Please note:  The City's application allows each applicant to select three choices should they desire.  Therefore, those applicants who applied for more than one Board, Commission or Committee have the priority selection listed next to their name.

VOTING PROCESS:

The Council votes based on the number of vacancies on the Board, Commission, or Committee.  For example, if there are three vacancies on the Board, each Council Member is allowed three votes.  Then, the applicants receiving a majority of the votes in the first round move into the second round.  The process continues for as many rounds as are necessary to attain the correct number of applicants to fill the vacancies.

It is important to point out that even though each Council Member is allowed a certain number of votes, that does not obligate each Council Member to vote that specified number of times.

This process is based on past practice.  The Council could certainly make any desired changes to the process.  If changes should be requested, staff would recommend that the process be clarified prior to any voting.

VACANCIES BY BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE

The following is the random order of the Boards, Commissions and Committees as well as the applicants and the order in which the Council will be asked to vote:

Civic Pride Committee

The Civic Pride Committee was established by Burbank Municipal Code Section 2-423 and consists of ten members.  There are currently five vacancies on this Board.  The terms of office are two years.  Applications were received from the following interested individuals: 

Five Vacancies

         1.   Susan M. MacFarlane (Incumbent)                6.   Valene L. Rolon (Incumbent)

         2.   Ellen D. Myer (Incumbent)                               7.   Juliet A. Gipson (2^nd Choice)

         3.   John P. Goffin (7^th Choice)                             8.   Linda F. Silvas (Incumbent)

         4.   Yvette M. Ulloa (2^nd Choice)                           9.   Razmik Hovanessian (1^st Choice)

         5.   Louise M. Paziak (Incumbent)                         10. J.J. Connaughton (2^nd Choice)

Youth Endowment Services Fund Advisory Committee

The Youth Endowment Services Fund Advisory Committee consists of five members.  There are currently two vacancies on this Committee.  Terms of office are four years.  Applications were received from the following interested individuals: 

Two Vacancies

         1.   John P. Goffin (6^th Choice)                       6.   Michael Porco (1st Choice)      

         2.   Larry A. Applebaum (2^nd Choice)            7.   Gloria O�Donohoe (2^nd Choice)                 

         3.   J.J. Connaughton (1^st Choice)                  8.   Janice M. Jafari (2^nd Choice)               

         4.   Hoori Chalian (Incumbent)                         9.   Joan L. Chandler (Incumbent)    

         5.         Yvette M. Ulloa (1^st Choice)                            

Civil Service Board

The Civil Service Board consists of five members.  There are currently two vacancies on this Board.  Terms of office are four years.  Applications were received from the following interested individuals:  

Two Vacancies

         1.   Norman A. Furman (Incumbent)               4.   John P. Goffin (4^th Choice)

         2.   David W. Hackett (Incumbent)                  5.   Theodore F. Milner (1^st Choice)

         3.   Alex R. Moreno (2^nd Choice)                    6.   Mary Lou Howard

Board of Library Trustees

The Board of Library Trustees consists of five members.  There are currently two vacancies on this Board.  Terms of office are four years.  Applications were received from the following interested individuals: 

Two Vacancies

1.      Michael W. Kubasak (3^rd Choice)      4.   Susan T. Robles (2^nd Choice)

2.      Connie M. Wilson                                 5.   Gloria O�Donohoe (Incumbent � 1^st Choice)

3.      Susan D. Bowers                                 6.   Lee Paysinger (Incumbent � 1^st Choice)

Traffic and Transportation Committee

The Traffic and Transportation Committee was established by Burbank Municipal Code Section 2-421 and consists of ten members.  One representative each is designated by the City Manager, Public Works Director, Chief of Police, Community Development Director and Superintendent of the Burbank Unified School District.  The five remaining members are Burbank residents appointed by the City Council.  The term of office for the five members is two years.  Currently, there are two vacancies.  Applications were received from the following interested individuals: 

Two Vacancies

                    1.   Ralph J. Herman                                  7.   Paul W. McKenna Jr. (1^st Choice)

                    2.    Brian A. Malone (1^st Choice)            8.   Vahe Hovanessian (3^rd Choice)                      

           3.   William B. Smith (2^nd Choice)            9.   Fredrick K. Thompson 

           4.         William T. Stevens                        10. Michael W. Kubasak

               (Incumbent 1^st Choice)                               (Incumbent � 1^st  Choice)   

         5.   Gary R. Bric (2^nd Choice)                    11. Joe M. Spaulding                                            

         6.   John E. Nave                                 

Park, Recreation, and Community Services Board

The Park, Recreation, and Community Services Board consists of five members. There are currently two vacancies on this Board. Terms of office are four years. Applications were received from the following interested individuals:

Two Vacancies

         1.   Cynthia A. Cavanaugh (1^st Choice)    7.   Elisabeth H. Handler (Incumbent-1^st Choice)

         2.   Lee Paysinger (3^rd Choice)                 8.   Janice M. Jafari (1^st Choice)

         3.   Garen V. Yegparian                              9.   Gary R. Bric (1^st Choice)                 

         4.   Thomas P. Moriarty                              10. Carolyn E. Jackson (Incumbent)                 

         5.   Marla A. Martinez (3^rd Choice)            11. John P. Goffin (3^rd Choice)

         6.  David C. Laurell                                      

         Board of Building and Fire Code Appeals

The Board of Building and Fire Code Appeals consists of five members. There are currently two vacancies on this Board. Terms of office are four years. Applications were received from the following interested individuals:  

Two Vacancies

1.      Nicholas L. Trotta                                 3.   John P. Goffin (1^st Choice)

2.      Timothy G. Behunin (Incumbent)         4.   William F. Ballas (Incumbent)

Police Commission

The Police Commission consists of five members. There are currently two vacancies on this Commission. Terms of office are four years. Applications were received from the following interested individuals:  

Two Vacancies

         1.   Carlos F. Lopez                                   8.   Michael Porco (2^nd Choice)

         2.   Stuart A. Maislin (Incumbent)              9.   Alex R. Moreno (1^st Choice)

         3.   Brian A. Malone (3^rd Choice)              10. William T. Stevens (2^nd Choice)

         4.   Michael W. Kubasak (2^nd Choice)     11. Hagop J. Hergelian

         5.   Theodore F. Milner (2^nd Choice)        12. Robert Frutos (1^st Choice)

         6.   Lee Paysinger (2^nd Choice)                13. Paul W. McKenna Jr. (3^rd Choice)

         7.   William B. Smith (Incumbent � 1^st Choice)

Burbank Water and Power Board

The Burbank Water and Power Board consists of seven members. There are currently four vacancies on this Board. Terms of office are four years. Applications were received from the following interested individuals:  

Four Vacancies

         1.   Vahe Hovanessian (2^nd Choice)        6.   Lee J. Dunayer (2^nd Choice)

         2.   John P. Goffin (5^th Choice)                 7.   Marla A. Martinez (2^nd Choice)

         3.   Alan H. Wilson (Incumbent)                 8.   Janice A. Slaby (Incumbent)

         4.   Wendy M. James                                 9.   Leonard H. Kushner (Incumbent)

         5.   Elisabeth H. Handler (2^nd Choice)

Planning Board

The Planning Board consists of five members. There are currently two vacancies for terms ending June 1, 2007. Another vacancy was created by the resignation of Board Member Carolyn Berlin, effective May 31, 2003, with the unexpired term ending June 1, 2005. Burbank Municipal Code Section 2-403 requires the unexpired term be filled within 90 days from the effective date of resignation. Terms of office for this Board are four years.  Michael Porco withdrew his application on May 20, 2003 and therefore his name has been removed from the voting sheet.  Applications were received from the following interested individuals: 

Three Vacancies

         1.   Juliet A. Gipson (1^st Choice)                     6.   Kenneth H. San Miguel

         2.   Cynthia A. Cavanaugh (2^nd Choice)        7.   Mitchell T. Thomas

         3.   John P. Goffin (2^nd Choice)                       8.   Margaret A. Taylor (Incumbent)

         4.   David R. Gerred                                         9.   Nicole B. Remini

         5.   Vahe Hovanessian (1^st Choice)               10. Lee J. Dunayer (1^st Choice)

Landlord-Tenant Commission

The Landlord-Tenant Commission consists of five members. There are currently two vacancies on this Commission. Terms of office are four years. Applications were received from the following interested individuals: 

Two Vacancies

         1.   Marla A. Martinez (Incumbent � 1^st Choice)        3.  Larry A. Applebaum (1^st Choice)

         2.   Razmik Hovanessian (3^rd Choice)

Transportation Commission

The Transportation Commission consists of seven members. There are currently three vacancies on this Commission. Terms of office are four years. Applications were received from the following interested individuals:

Three Vacancies

         1.   Brian A. Malone (2^nd Choice)             5.   Larry W. Cutler

         2.   Kathryn K. Cerra (Incumbent)              6.   Christopher S. Carson

         3.   Robert Frutos (2^nd Choice)                 7.   Susan T. Robles (Incumbent � 1^st Choice)

         4.   Paul W. McKenna Jr. (2^nd Choice)     8.   Razmik Hovanessian (2^nd Choice)

One application was also received from Larry Wayne Cutler for the Senior Citizen Board but the application was not forwarded to the Council since that particular Board does not have any vacancies until June 2004.  Applications are still being accepted for the Charter Review Committee and the Downtown Parking Management Committee.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the Council consider making the appropriate appointments to the various Boards, Commissions and Committees or give staff direction as desired.

8.      PROPOSED AGENDA FOR TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION STUDY SESSION:

A number of questions and concerns have been raised during Council meetings and elsewhere concerning traffic growth and the ability of the City to maintain adequate circulation.  Recently, at the conclusion of the Platt project hearing, the Council directed staff to return in a one-step, two-step process with a proposal for a study session on traffic and transportation issues.

Staff proposes the presentation include a discussion of the following broad topics: the measurement and trend of regional and local traffic volumes, how the local roadway system is being improved to handle additional traffic, the forecasting of future traffic conditions, the methodology for determining the impacts of a particular development project, the funding and programming of transportation improvements, neighborhood protection, trip-reductions programs, and public transit and other transportation alternatives.  Staff believes that a PowerPoint presentation following this organization will provide the appropriate framework to present the more detailed information regarding the City�s current traffic and transportation program and projects, and form a backdrop for the Council discussion.    

Recommendation:

Staff recommends conducting a study session on traffic and transportation issues on June 24, 2003, and requests direction on the proposed content. 

9.      PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION PLAN FOR CORDOVA-FAIRVIEW AREA:

During the Council�s consideration of the proposed Platt project, several residents of the neighborhood north of the site voiced concerns of increasing cut-through and speeding traffic.  The Council directed staff to return with a proposal for studying traffic conditions and developing a neighborhood protection plan to address any existing and projected problems.

Staff proposes to study the residential neighborhood bounded by Alameda Avenue, Hollywood Way, Oak Street, and Fairview Street.  This area was selected because it constitutes the neighborhood having the greatest potential to experience additional impacts from traffic associated with adjacent commercial development.  It is bounded by two major arterials, one collector (Oak Street) and Fairview Street, which was chosen for the eastern limit due to the alignment of streets in that area. 

The initial steps in conducting the study would include taking existing traffic counts, and retaining a consultant to assist with the analysis and public outreach.  Conducting counts of existing traffic volumes on each of the residential streets within the study area must be done prior to the completion of the school year to accurately reflect typical conditions.  In anticipation of Council�s direction to proceed with this study, the Public Works Department is scheduled to conduct those counts within the necessary time period. 

Staff proposes to select a traffic consultant from a short list of available firms that are qualified to perform this type of work.  It is likely that the selected consultant could be under contract within six weeks from the current date.  Based upon the cost of consulting services for prior studies, and the size of the study area, staff believes that cost of services would be in the range of $25,000-$30,000.  Traffic Impact Fees are available for appropriation to fund the contract cost.  The additional costs of staff support and materials could be covered through the adopted budget. 

The public outreach component of this study will entail a series of public meetings, opinion/comment solicitations, and periodic progress reports.  Notices of a kick-off meeting in early summer would be mailed to residents of the study area, inviting them to provide their perspectives and suggestions, review recently-taken traffic volume counts, and help direct the scope of the study.  Attendees would be invited to form a representative group to meet periodically with staff throughout the study to review progress and provide community perspectives. 

Staff will subsequently return to the Council with a proposed consultant contract and scope of work, and request an appropriation of Development Impact Fees to fund the costs.  

Recommendation:

Direct staff to conduct the proposed study traffic conditions for the neighborhood area potentially impacted by the proposed Platt Project.

10.    BURBANK WATER AND POWER WATER AND ELECTRIC OPERATION REPORT:

Staff has prepared the Burbank Water and Power (BWP) Water and Electric Monthly Report regarding water quality and power issues for May 2003.

WATER UPDATE

Water quality during April met or exceeded State and Federal drinking water standards.

Fiscal Year (FY) 2002-03 Year-To-Date preliminary Water Fund Financial Results as of April 30, 2003:

ELECTRIC UPDATE

The following table shows the systemwide reliability statistics for FY 2001-02 compared to the first ten months of FY 2002-03:

Financial and Operations Update

FY 2002-03 year-to-date preliminary Power Financial Results as of April 30, 2003:

    ^(a) Includes in-lieu

    ^(b) Transmission and Telecom sales

April 2003 Unit Data

Recommendation:

Note and file.

11.    INFORMATION ON GITANA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVOCATION:

At the Council meeting of April 29, 2003, several Council Members requested that staff initiate a one-step, two-step process pursuant to Council policy to agendize issues related to Conditional Use Permit (CUP) revocation and Gitana, the nightclub/restaurant/sports bar located at 260 East Magnolia Boulevard.  Council Members commented specifically on an April 26, 2003 article in the Burbank Leader newspaper that referenced the volume of police calls for service at Gitana and the Police Department�s ability to charge for such calls.

Police Department staff have indicated the statistics provided in the newspaper article may be misleading and not a true reflection of the actual police activity at Gitana, and Police Department staff noted that statistics regarding the number of calls for service at or near a particular business are not necessarily an accurate portrayal of the police activity related to that business.  As such, staff is currently reviewing the police calls for service to establish an accurate picture of the call history at Gitana.

Should the Council wish to place this matter on a future agenda for further discussion, staff will provide a detailed report of the police service calls and related incidents at Gitana and an analysis of the resulting demands on police services.  Staff will analyze the incidents at Gitana and consider any other complaints or problems that have occurred in relation to the CUP conditions of approval.  Staff will determine whether Gitana appears to be in violation of any conditions of approval and/or is operating as a public nuisance, and will make the appropriate recommendation to the Council regarding potential revocation of the CUP.

The Burbank Municipal Code states that only the Council, after holding a public hearing, has the authority to revoke a CUP on any one or more of the following grounds:

1.      The CUP was obtained by fraud or misrepresentation.

2.      The CUP has been exercised contrary to the terms or conditions of approval, or in violation of any statutes, ordinance, law,

         or regulation not excused by the CUP.

3.      The CUP is being or has been so exercised as to be detrimental to the public health or safety or so as to constitute a

          nuisance.

The Council also has the authority to formally initiate the revocation process and request that a hearing be scheduled.  However, the CUP for Gitana has a specific condition of approval that requires additional steps in the revocation process.  The condition of approval states that the Police Chief may request a compliance hearing before the Planning Board to determine whether the police activity at Gitana is creating a substantial adverse impact on the City�s police services.  If such a determination is made, the Planning Board and/or Council may make a determination that Gitana has not complied with the CUP and set a revocation hearing. 

When the report outlining the police calls for service is prepared and presented to the Council (if requested by the Council), the Police Chief will determine whether the calls for service are creating a substantial adverse impact on police services.  If the Chief determines that an adverse impact has occurred, a compliance hearing would be scheduled before the Planning Board, followed by a revocation hearing before the Council, if so requested by the Board and/or Council.

Recommendation:

If the Council wishes to agendize this matter for further discussion, staff recommends the Council direct staff to prepare the report on police calls for service as described above and schedule this item for the earliest possible date given the time that will be necessary to compile the data and prepare a comprehensive report.

ADOPTION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE:

12.    AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES� RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY REGARDING RETIREMENT, SURVIVOR, AND DEATH BENEFITS:

During Fiscal Year (FY) 2002-03, the City completed negotiations with several unions and made provisions to the Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) of these unions.  Two provisions for the Burbank Firefighters Association (BFFA) and Burbank Firefighters Chief Officers Unit (BFF-COU) MOUs are the implementation of the three percent at 55 safety retirement formula and Option 2 Death Benefit.  The Burbank Police Officers Association (BPOA) also negotiated a provision for the Option 2 Death Benefit.  All miscellaneous employees likewise have the provision to increase the Survivor Benefit from level 1 to level 4 as well as the provision for the Option 2 Death Benefit.  It is the intent of the City to have the Resolution of Intention adopted by the Council, and the first reading of the ordinance amending the contract with the Public Employees� Retirement System (PERS) on April 29, 2003 and the final adoption of the ordinance on May 27, 2003. These provisions would be effective on July 1, 2003.

The increase to Level 4 Survival Benefit is funded from surplus assets which can only be used for this benefit.  The employer rate for this year will be at zero percent.  The three percent at 55 retirement benefit and Option 2 Death Benefit for Fire members increases the City�s PERS employer rate from 3.058 percent to 10.812 percent.  The Option 2 Death Benefit for Police members increases the City�s PERS employer rate from 8.872 percent to 8.910 percent.  For all other members, the Option 2 Death Benefit will be at no additional cost to the City.  

This ordinance was introduced at the April 29, 2003 City Council meeting.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed ordinance entitled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES� RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY OF BURBANK.

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.

For a copy of the agenda and related staff reports,

please visit the

City of Burbank�s Web Site:

www.ci.burbank.ca.us

go to the top