Present-

Council Members Campbell, Golonski, Ramos, and Murphy.

Absent - - - -

Council Member Vander Borght.

Also Present -

Ms. Alvord, City Manager; Mr. Barlow, City Attorney; and, Mrs. Campos, City Clerk.

Oral

Communications

There was no response to the Mayor�s invitation for oral communications on Closed Session matters at this time.

5:31 P.M.

Recess

The Council recessed at this time to the City Hall Basement Lunch Room/Conference Room to hold a Closed Session on the following:

a.     Conference with Legal Counsel � Anticipated Litigation (City as possible plaintiff):

Pursuant to Govt. Code �54956.9(c)

Number of potential case(s):  1

b.    Conference with Legal Counsel � Anticipated Litigation (City as potential defendant):

Pursuant to Govt. Code �54956.9(b)(1)

Number of potential case(s):  1

c.     Conference with Labor Negotiator:

Pursuant to Govt. Code �54957.6

Name of the Agency Negotiator:  Management Services         Director/John Nicoll.

Name of Organization Representing Employee:          Represented:  Burbank City Employees Association,         Burbank Management Association, Unrepresented, and         Appointed Officials.

Regular Meeting

Reconvened in

Council Chambers

The regular meeting of the Council of the City of Burbank was reconvened at 6:31 p.m. by Ms. Murphy, Mayor.

Invocation

The invocation was given by Reverend Roby Correa, Magnolia Park United Methodist Church.

Flag Salute

ROLL CALL

The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Susan Bowers, Executive Director, Burbank Chamber of Commerce.

Present-

Council Members Campbell, Golonski, Ramos, Vander Borght and Murphy.

Absent - - - -

Council Members None.

Also Present -

Ms. Alvord, City Manager; Mr. Barlow, City Attorney; and, Mrs. Campos, City Clerk.

301-1

Burbank Leadership

Graduates

Mrs. Bowers, Executive Director, Burbank Chamber of Commerce, briefly summarized the Leadership Burbank Program and introduced Members of the Board of Directors of the Leadership Burbank Foundation:  Mary Alvord, Larry Applebaum, Dr. Gregory Bowman, Tim Buchanan, Ernest Burger, Victor Georgino, George Mauney, Kenneth Nielsen, Florence Nos, Joan Ortiz, George Saikali, and Michael Walbrecht;  the two program facilitators, Jim DeLizia and J.P O�Connor; and, the graduates of the 2003 Burbank Leadership Class:  Delene Bon, Celeste Francis, Ben S. Komenkul, Jeremy Ochsenbein, Mitchell T. Thomas, Alexis M. Sheehy, Ph.D., Jacqueline Lewis, April Houle, Lucy M. Burgdorf, Lieutenant John D. Dilibert, Christopher Seberian Carson, Maribel Frausto, Linda Matsumoto, Michael Porco and Garen Yegparian.

Reporting on

Closed Session

Mr. Barlow reported on the items considered by the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency during the Closed Session meetings.

406

Airport Authority

Meeting Report

Commissioner Lombardo reported on the Airport Authority meeting of June 2, 2003, stating one action item was unanimously approved for award of a contract for the sound insulation program in the amount of $845,700 for 17 Burbank residences, 11 Sun Valley residences and two North Hollywood residences.  He also reported pursuant to Council Member Golonski�s request, Commissioner Brown presented the crosswalk issue for further consideration, but since the issue was in litigation, the matter was discussed in Closed Session and he was unable to provide further details. Regarding the number of citations issued related to the crosswalk, he reported a total of 207 citations had been issued, 85 of which were issued to drivers for rolling through the stop sign, and 122 citations were issued to pedestrians for failure to obey the no-pedestrian-crossing sign.  He also added the passenger count for April 2003 was up 3.7 percent from April 2002.

Mr. Golonski, inquired about the Daily News article which reported the Airport Authority threatened to revoke security badges of Southwest Airlines employees who continued to use the crosswalk.  He requested the Authority refrain from such action, stating it was wrong for a public agency to exercise authority in the manner the Airport Authority was pursuing, prompted by an economic dispute with the parking lot business.  He also stated he was not supportive of the use of Burbank Police Officers at the Airport if the Authority continued such conduct, and that he would consider writing a letter on behalf of the Council regarding the matter.  Commissioner Lombardo responded he would present Mr. Golonski�s request to the Authority.  Mr. Golonski also requested the matter be agendized in a one-step process for Council discussion.  Mrs. Alvord informed the Council staff was currently working with Authority staff on the matter and that a report would be presented to the Council at the next meeting.

Mr. Campbell concurred with Mr. Golonski�s request for Council discussion and requested staff provide a report regarding the level of support offered by Burbank Police Officers at the Airport.

Mrs. Ramos indicated she would contact two Glendale Council Members to provide them with an update on the matter in an effort to build a working relationship.  Mr. Vander Borght indicated he would do the same.

The Council noted and filed the report.

First Period of

Oral

Communications

Ms. Murphy called for speakers for the first period of oral communications at this time.

Citizen

Comment

Appearing to comment were Michael Garcia, representing the American Hiking Society, announcing an upcoming hiking event; Eileen Rogers, representing the Coalition to Reduce Tobacco Availability in Los Angeles County, requesting support for an ordinance to this effect; Gary Garrison, inquiring whether the AMC Theaters would be offering senior discounts; Josephine Hidalgo, teacher at Luther Burbank Middle School (Luther Burbank), explaining the Project Citizen program; Ryan Felix, student at Luther Burbank, stating police officers were spending too much time enforcing the curfew law; Giovanni Abujalil, student at Luther Burbank, citing examples of what could happen when police officers spend too much time enforcing the curfew law; Brandon Vargas, student at Luther Burbank, giving reasons why the curfew law should be eliminated; Sara Lush, student at Luther Burbank, citing reasons why the curfew law should be eliminated; Celeste Francis, commending  the Library Services Department on their customer service levels; Lee Paysinger, expressing appreciation to the Council for her reappointment to the Board of Library Trustees and inviting the community to attend their meetings; Esther Espinoza, making derogatory racial remarks; and Dr. Theresa Karam, on the case of  Karam v. City of Burbank, which was heard in the 9^th Circuit Court this date.

Staff

Response

Members of the Council and staff responded to questions raised.

Second Period

of Oral

Communications

Ms. Murphy called for speakers for the second period of oral communications at this time.

Citizen

Comment

Appearing to comment were Tate Holland, owner of Make Up Designery and the property located at 129 South San Fernando Boulevard, in support of the Property-Based Business Improvement District (PBID); Atef Tahe, business owner, in support of the PBID; Doug Jaquay, representing AMC Theaters, in support of the PBID; Allen Young, part-owner of the property at Palm Avenue and San Fernando Boulevard, in support of the PBID; Jeff O�Shaughnessy, representing IKEA, in support of the PBID; Morey Goodstein, property owner, in support of the PBID; Chuck Zidell, property owner on San Fernando Boulevard, stating more time should be invested in developing the PBID, requesting the Council postpone the decision to ensure the interests of the small business owners were considered; Stephanie Pillard, Executive Director of the current Tenant-Based Business Improvement District (BID), expressing concerns regarding the impact of the PBID to small businesses in the transition period, presenting a petition requesting a dedicated staff person be hired to oversee their special needs and concerns; Mary Ann Sutliff, property and business owner in Downtown Burbank, in support of the PBID, requesting all directors be paying-members of the PBID, and supporting the hiring of a dedicated staff person to represent the business owners on San Fernando Boulevard; Anthony Delcom, representing Tucker Investments, in support of the PBID; Christine Deschaine, commercial/retail leasing agent, in support of the PBID; Paul Ehre, owner of SkyBluPink, expressing appreciation to the City for past support, and in support of the PBID; Patricia Huezo, owner of Gemini Fashions for the past 19 years on San Fernando Boulevard, in support of the PBID, and requesting support for the small business owners during the transition period; Esther Espinoza, making derogatory racial remarks while commenting on oral communications, on disclosure of information on Closed Session real estate matters and in opposition to  reimbursement of land sale proceeds to the Redevelopment Agency; Celeste Francis, requesting the oral communications format be returned to the former system; C.L. Stack, commenting on the Airport Authority�s Open House, and suggesting amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement to ensure more equitable representation for Burbank.

Michael Cusumano, Cusumano Real Estate Group, in support of the PBID; Dr. Theresa Karam, expressing concerns of the PBID in relation to assessment of small business owners, suggesting representation of the City of Los Angeles be considered in the proposed amendment of the Joint Powers Agreement, and requesting the Council return to the previous oral communications format; Mark Barton, requesting an extension of time for the first period of oral communications, and in support of the PBID; David Piroli, inquiring whether the Burbank Police Department assigns officers to the Airport, commenting that the number of Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) employees at Burbank Airport has been decreased, requesting the B-6 property be sold, encouraging the Council to effect changes to the oral communications periods, and in favor of amending the Joint Powers Agreement; Susan Bowers, Executive Director, Burbank Chamber of Commerce, in support of the PBID, noting the need for assistance to the small businesses; and Mike Nolan, in opposition to the formation of the PBID, and in support of disclosing more information with regard to real estate matters on the Closed Session agenda.

Staff

Response

Members of the Council and staff responded to questions raised.

1702

1102

801-2

Land Sale

Proceeds � Five

Points

Realignment

Project

Mr. Hanway, Financial Services Director, requested Council and Redevelopment Agency Board (Agency) authorization to: 1) execute a Cooperation Agreement between the Agency and the City of Burbank for the reimbursement of $1,366,775 to the Agency by the City from land sale proceeds; 2) transfer the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) grant of $632,000 to the City Centre Redevelopment Project Area (City Centre Project); and, 3) approve an appropriation from the Fiscal Year (FY) 2002-03 Golden State Redevelopment Project Area (Golden State) unappropriated fund balance, in the amount of $237,099 to complete Phase II of the Five Points Realignment Project (Five Points Project).

He narrated at the inception of the Five Points Project, Golden State was the major funding source which provided over $8.2 million.  He noted in February 2001, the Agency transferred State Farm Insurance and Animal Hospital properties to the City in exchange for rights to the MTA grant, and added staff was requesting transferring the MTA grant from Golden State to the City Centre Project.  In addition, he noted land swaps occurred related to the Freeway Route 134 off-ramp project and the replacement of the distribution substations which was funded by the West Olive Project Area and involved swapping of land owned by the Agency for remnant parcels of the Five Points Project Area resulting in a net contribution from Golden State to the Five Points Project of over $4.8 million.  He further reported the City sold some remnant parcels and received $1,366,775 and that, since Golden State provided the gap funding for the Five Points Program, the proceeds should be returned to the Agency for reimbursement to Golden State; however, staff proposed reallocating the reimbursement funds, in addition to the MTA grants to the City Centre Project which was struggling financially.  He also explained Golden State could not transfer any other funds to the City Centre Project except for land sale proceeds.

Regarding the completion of Phase II of the Five Points Project, Mr. Hanway reported the last invoice was received which required an additional appropriation of $237,099.  He suggested a Cooperation Agreement with Golden State to fund the amount for transfer to the City thereby completing and phasing out Phase II of the Five Points Project.

Mr. Vander Borght expressed his preference for the City to retain the remnant parcels for public use or civic space, rather than development.

Mrs. Ramos requested clarification on the funding source for Phase III of the Burbank Boulevard bridge-widening project and Mr. Hanway responded a separate $4.6 million reimbursable MTA grant was available for the project which was scheduled to commence by the end of 2003.

Motion

It was moved by Mr. Golonski and seconded by Mr. Campbell that the following resolutions be passed and adopted:�

1702

1102

801-2

Approve Coop.

Agmt. w/Redev.

Agency for Five

Points

RESOLUTION NO. 26,493:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF A COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK RELATING TO THE FIVE POINTS REALIGNMENT PROJECT AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 ANNUAL BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,366,775.

Redev. Agency

Reso. Adopted

Redevelopment Agency Resolution No. R-2063 Approving a Cooperation Agreement between the Agency and the City of Burbank relating to the Five Points Realignment Project and Amending the Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Annual Budget in the amount of $1,366,775 was adopted.

1702

1102

801-2

Approving Agency Payment

Of Certain

Public Imps.

(Phase II Five

Points Project)

RESOLUTION NO. 26,494:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE AGENCY PAYMENT OF CERTAIN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO BE OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE CITY AND AMENDING FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 ANNUAL BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $237,099.  (PHASE II OF FIVE POINTS PROJECT).

Redev. Agency

Reso. Adopted

Redevelopment Agency Resolution No. R-2064 Approving the Agency Payment of Certain Public Improvements to be Owned and Operated by the City and Amending Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Annual Budget in the Amount of $237,099.  (Phase II of Five Points Project) was adopted.

Adopted

The resolutions were adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:      Council Members Campbell, Golonski, Ramos, Vander

              Borght and Murphy.

Noes:      Council Members None.

Absent:   Council Members None.

 1202

1102

PBID-Downtown

Burbank

Mrs. Stewart, Downtown Manager, Community Development Department, requested the Council accept the submission of a petition from downtown property owners, and authorize the initiation of proceedings to form a Property-Based Business Improvement District (PBID).

She narrated in August 2002, the Redevelopment Agency (Agency) conducted a Study Session to review a comprehensive strategy for the revitalization of Downtown Burbank which included marketing efforts, a leasing strategy and a Downtown Tenant Assistance Program to attract quality tenants to fill existing vacancies.  She stated infrastructure improvements were also recommended such as the installation of �Smart Parking� technology and a Wayfinding/Signage Program to direct motorists and pedestrian to and around the downtown.  She added the strategy outlined a reformatted Business Improvement District (BID) that included a substantially expanded program and broader participation from downtown businesses and property owners.

She noted the successful implementation of this strategy required a broad level of support including a dedicated funding source and staffing, and reported the existing Tenant-Based BID�s annual revenues of approximately $70,000 could not support the activities and improvements necessary to maximize the potential of Burbank�s downtown.  She added while the current BID was comprised of core downtown businesses, it excluded major regional draws such as IKEA and the Media City Center.

Mrs. Stewart reported staff received suggestions from members of the existing BID to consider the formation of a new PBID, followed by further meetings with local business leaders regarding the feasibility of transitioning from a tenant-based to a property-based BID in order to expand participation and increase funding.  As a result, in September 2002, the Agency approved the funding for a contract with Downtown Resources, a firm that has successfully developed PBIDs throughout California.

Mr. Lambeth, representing Downtown Resources, gave a PowerPoint presentation outlining the principles behind the PBID, steps involved in forming a PBID, and the outreach efforts including meeting with the Steering Committee, multiple focus group and individual owner meetings.  He reported all comments and suggestions were incorporated into the Draft Plan, followed by a subsequent Plan Review Workshop for feedback and suggestions for the Final Plan.

He informed the Council if the Resolution of Intention was approved, ballots and notices would be mailed to all owners followed by a public hearing scheduled for July 22, 2003, consideration of the Proposition 218 ballots, and final Council consideration for a vote of approval or disapproval. If approved, the corporation would be established in the third quarter, operations would begin in the fourth quarter, and funding would flow at the end of 2003/beginning of 2004.  He referred to earlier public comment requesting a delay in the PBID formation and advised the Council of the once-a-year opportunity to get the PBID on the County�s property tax bills, which in this case would create an August 1, 2003 deadline.

Mr. Lambeth also informed the Council of the stakeholders� feedback which included:  strong support for a wayfinding program and smart parking; interest in stepping up promotions for the downtown area; interest in a higher level of maintenance; concerns about representations, in particular balancing small and large owners� interests; mild interest in security enhancements; preference for a strong advocate or manager; and, the need for the assessment to create a level playing field.  He explained the Draft PBID parameters, described the proposed boundaries and stated the proposed PBID budget was approximated at $730,000 per year, comprising of $95,000 (13 percent) for Advocacy and Administration; $35,000 (5 percent) for contingency reserve; $240,000 (33 percent) for capital improvements; $110,000 (15 percent) for maintenance and $250,000 (34 percent) for advertising and promotions.

With regard to PBID assessments and term, he suggested a flat parcel square footage rate in addition to a modest frontage charge along San Fernando Boulevard with larger parcels shouldering the largest burden, considering properties on San Fernando Boulevard would receive most benefit; stated public properties would have to be assessed pursuant to Proposition 218; tax-exempt and residential properties would be exempted from the assessment; the annual rate was proposed at $16 cents per square foot per year and two dollars per front-footage on San Fernando Boulevard with a maximum increase of three percent per year; and, the proposed set term was five years.

Regarding the organizational structure he stated the corporation would be a 501(c) (6) with a Board of Directors contracted by the Council with subcommittees to work on individual issues.  He added the proposed PBID governance board comprised of two business/property owners from the Burbank Village area; 2 City and Redevelopment Agency representatives; 2 members from the Burbank Mall area; including a representative of the Mall and IKEA; one at-large member who is a large property owner; one at-large member who is a small property owner; and, one at-large member representing the broader business community.

In conclusion, he referenced staff�s recommendation for the City to reimburse the School District�s portion of the assessment and cited Proposition 218 which requires public entities to pay an assessment into the district.

Mrs. Stewart commended all the property owners and businesses in this effort and reiterated staff�s recommendation.

Mrs. Ramos requested clarification on the potential increase for the small business owners with the formation of the PBID and Mrs. Stewart explained the assessment for the current BID was based on sales tax while the proposed PBID�s assessment would be based on property tax and that depending on the particular business, some assessments would decrease while others increased.  Mrs. Ramos also requested more information regarding the components of the administrative costs and stated her preference for any board member to be a business and property owner as opposed to an at-large member from the community.

Mr. Lambeth clarified the PBID assessment would be paid by the property owner and that there was no requirement for the tenant to pay the assessment, unless specified by the lease between the tenant and property owner.

Mr. Vander Borght requested clarification on how mixed-use projects would be assessed and Mrs. Stewart responded assessments would all be based on ground floor footage and not on multi-level footage.

Council discussion ensued on the membership composition and staff was directed to come back with different options of the Board makeup that would provide a balance of property owners/business owners, and include specifications that the at-large member of the business community be either a property or business owner within the PBID boundaries.

Motion

It was moved by Mr. Vander Borght and seconded by Mr. Golonski that �the following resolutions be passed and adopted and that the City Manager and Executive Director be authorized to sign the proposed petition on behalf of the City and Redevelopment Agency and to direct the preparation of agreements for the Agency to pay the annual assessments on behalf of the City and School District:�

1202

1102

Formation of a

PBID

RESOLUTION NO. 26,495:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK TO FORM A BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE PROPERTY AND BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT LAW OF 1994.

Redev. Agency

Reso. Adopted

Redevelopment Agency Resolution No. R-2065 Authorizing the Executive Director to Vote in Favor of a Business Improvement District Pursuant to the Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994.

Adopted

The resolutions were adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:       Council Members Campbell, Golonski, Ramos, Vander

              Borght and Murphy.

Noes:      Council Members None.

Absent:   Council Members None.

9:28 P.M.

Recess

The Council recessed to permit the Redevelopment Agency to hold its meeting.  The Council reconvened at 9:28 p.m. with all members present.

9:28 P.M.

Recess

The Council recessed at this time.  The meeting reconvened at 9:38 p.m. with all members present.

Motion

It was moved by Mrs. Ramos and seconded by Mr. Vander Borght that "the following item on the consent calendar be approved as recommended.�

1411-1

Conditional Vacation of a

Portion of Palm

Ave. bet. First &

N. San Fernando

RESOLUTION NO. 26,496:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 25,595 ORDERING THE CONDITIONAL VACATION OF A PORTION OF PALM AVENUE BETWEEN FIRST STREET AND NORTH SAN FERNANDO BOULEVARD (V-326).

1411-2

Conditional

Vacation of a

Portion of the

Alley Bounded

By First, N. San

Fernando &

Magnolia

RESOLUTION NO. 26,497:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 25,582 ORDERING THE CONDITIONAL VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE ALLEY BOUNDED BY FIRST STREET AND NORTH SAN FERNANDO BOULEVARD, AND MAGNOLIA BOULEVARD AND PALM AVENUE (V-324).

Adopted

The consent calendar was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:       Council Members Campbell, Golonski, Ramos, Vander

              Borght and Murphy.

Noes:      Council Members None.

Absent:   Council Members None.

1502

410

Chandler Blvd.

Bikeway Project

Mr. Salehi, Senior Civil Engineer, provided the Council with an update on the Chandler Boulevard Bikeway Project.  He reported since December 2002, there have been three developments on the project with the most noticeable being the removal of the railway tracks and ties.  He also reported staff submitted the required Federal documents along with the Bikeway plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) to Caltrans for their review and authorization which was necessary before the City could proceed with advertising for construction bids. He stated the review process would be completed within 60 days.

He stated the second development was the request in March 2003, by the Caltrans Environmental Division, that a Historic Property Survey Report and an Archaeological Survey Report be performed on the right-of-way, noting after conducting a site visit with City staff, Caltrans Environmental Division personnel determined that no historic cultural resources were present in the project area that might have been eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places or to the California Register of Historic Places.  In addition, a cultural resources records search by the South Central Coastal Information Center indicated that no archaeological work was needed at this time.  

Mr. Salehi reported the third development was the request by the MTA that the City include the design and construction of the fiber optic line in the project as an alternate bid.  He stated staff contacted a consulting engineering firm for estimates for the design process and preparation of a reimbursement agreement with the MTA, and forwarded the cost estimate, along with the final version of the agreement, to MTA for signature in March 2003.  He added in April 2003, the City was notified that MTA had decided to design and construct the fiber optic conduit with their own resources prior to the City starting the bikeway construction.  He stated staff anticipated this would prevent several weeks, if not months, of additional delay in attempting to reach an agreement with MTA on the fiber optic design and construction issue and stated MTA was expected to begin construction of the fiber optic conduit in July 2003 and complete it by October 2003.

He concluded staff anticipated receiving approval for advertising construction bids in June 2003, followed by Council award of the construction contract in August 2003, and start of construction in September 2003.

The Council noted and filed the report.

209

201-1

Disclosure of

Real Estate

Negotiations

Mr. Barlow, City Attorney, reported this item was agendized in response to public request to consider providing more disclosure on the agenda relative to real estate negotiations, in particular the address of the company, and the names of the contact persons.  He stated the specific requirements for disclosure relative to real estate negotiations were contained in the Ralph M. Brown Act, known as �Safe Harbor� provisions, and that if the City met those disclosure requirements then it was in compliance.  He noted the absence of an argument that the City does not meet the Act�s requirements, but a desire to provide more information.  He added it was generally the practice that as negotiations proceeded, the persons with whom the City was negotiating changed, as did the office with which the City was dealing, which could result in misleading the public.  He also noted the Brown Act specifically stated that agents should not be listed and advised that listing individuals on the agenda would not assist in disclosing possible conflicts unless that specific individual provided a financial benefit to a Council Member.  In addition, he reported most businesses requested that their employees not be listed on the agenda to protect their privacy.

He concluded with staff�s recommendation that the disclosure of information on the agenda relating to real property negotiations remain as specified by the �Safe Harbor� provisions of the Brown Act.

Motion

Following Council deliberation it was moved by Mr. Golonski and seconded by Mr. Vander Borght that �staff be directed to adopt a practice of identifying, in addition to the party, the representatives and an address for the party.�

Carried

The motion carried by the following vote:

Ayes:      Council Members Golonski, Ramos, and Vander

              Borght.

Noes:      Council Members Campbell and Murphy.

Absent:   Council Members None.

201-1

Oral

Communications

Mr. Barlow reported this item was agendized at Council Member Golonski�s request to discuss the Oral Communications format. He stated the Ralph M. Brown Act established the right of individuals to address the Council on any matter on the agenda before action was taken, as well as the right to address the Council on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council.  He noted public agencies statewide provided for these public comment periods in various ways and that the City has tried various approaches over the years.  He added currently there are four periods of oral communications as follows: the first period of Oral Communications precedes Closed Sessions, is limited to items on the Closed Session agenda and is limited to three minutes per speaker; the second period of Oral Communications is on the open session and allows speakers to address issues which fall within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council, and is limited to one minute per speaker; the third period of Oral Communications immediately follows the second, and allows speakers to address the Council only on action items on the agenda for that meeting, and is limited to four minutes per speaker; the fourth, and last period of Oral Communications, is at the end of the meeting, and also allows the public to address any item within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council.  During this period of Oral Communications, the speakers may speak for three minutes, but those who have chosen to speak during the second period of Oral Communications may not speak during this period.

Mr. Barlow noted pursuant to Council policy staff had done no additional research on the matter and if the Council desired to further discuss the issue, such direction be given to staff and the matter will be presented with a more complete report including options.

Motion

Following Council discussion, it was moved by Mr. Campbell and seconded by Mrs. Ramos that �staff be directed to bring back a more complete report encompassing the options outlined by the Council with regard to oral communications periods.�

Carried

The motion carried by the following vote:

Ayes:      Council Members Campbell, Golonski, Ramos, Vander

              Borght and Murphy.

Noes:      Council Members None.

Absent:   Council Members None.

406

Amendment of

BGPA Authority

JPA

Mr. Barlow also reported on Mayor Murphy�s request for Council consideration of amending the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with the cities of Glendale and Pasadena to provide for staggered terms for airport commissioners.  He stated as currently established, all nine terms expire at the same time and that approval of such an amendment required agreement in writing by each of the three member cities.  He noted pursuant to Council policy staff had done no additional research on the possibility of the amendment and if the Council desired to consider the possibility by approaching other member cities, such direction be given to staff and the matter will be brought back with the options and appropriate language.

Motion

It was moved by Ms. Murphy and seconded by Mr. Vander Borght that �staff present options for appropriate language and process to amend the JPA to stagger the terms of the Airport Authority Members, and address the rotation of the Airport Authority presidents, including a list of past Airport Authority presidents.�

Carried

The motion carried by the following vote:

Ayes:      Council Members Campbell, Golonski, Ramos, Vander

              Borght and Murphy.

Noes:      Council Members None.

Absent:   Council Members None.

10:24 P.M.

Reconvene Redev.

Agency Meeting

The Redevelopment Agency meeting was reconvened at this time.

Third Period of

Oral

Communication

Ms. Murphy called for speakers for the third period of oral communications at this time.

Citizen

Comment

Appearing to comment were Mike Nolan, inquiring whether the City or Redevelopment Agency provided funding for the production of the Burbank Chamber of Commerce�s Business Guide and a brochure advertising specific downtown businesses, commenting on the enforceability of the issuance of jaywalking tickets by Airport Police Officers and the request by students to rescind the curfew law; and Mark Barton, commenting on flaws in the current sign code.

Staff

Response

Members of the Council and staff responded to questions raised.

Adjournment

There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m.

                                                   ____________________________    s/Margarita Campos                

                                          Margarita Campos, City Clerk