Council Agenda - City of Burbank

1. Acquisition of 10 West Magnolia Boulevard � AmeriCold Corporation Property Jonathan C. Daiker:

The purpose of this report is to request Council and Redevelopment Agency consideration of the acquisition of 10 West Magnolia Boulevard; a short-term lease of that property to the Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA); and several related financial transactions.

The subject property is a 105,850 square foot rectangular site (2.43 acres) located at 10 West Magnolia Boulevard, and is owned by AmeriCold Logistics. The property is improved with a 68,256 square foot cold storage building. Approximately 61,616 square feet of the building has interior cooling capability. The building is a poured-in- place concrete building on a concrete slab with concrete columns supporting a poured-in-place concrete roof. The property was offered to the City for $3,800,000 in a letter dated January 13, 2003. Staff obtained an appraisal from Norris Realty Advisors dated February 13, 2003, which indicated the offer amount to be the fair market value of the property.

The property is northerly adjacent to the Downtown Burbank Station (DBS, formerly known as the Regional Intermodal Transportation Center (RITC)) parking lot on the west side of the railroad tracks at 5 West Olive Avenue. The property is also immediately east of the Burbank Water and Power (BWP) electrical generating facilities, separated only by the Burbank Western Channel.

The proposed property acquisition is being recommended for three primary reasons: 1) SCPPA has an immediate need for construction staging and the close proximity of the AmeriCold site is ideal for this use; 2) as Burbank�s transportation programs expand the site could meet the needs of providing a facility for the local transit vehicles as well as a bike station, which will enhance the linkage between the Downtown Station and the Chandler accessway; and 3) the Redevelopment Agency has identified this site as a prime redevelopment site (Opportunity Site No. 7, Burbank Center Plan) for a transit-oriented, mixed-use project.

The acquisition is being considered at this time because the property owner, AmeriCold Logistics, has indicated a desire to consolidate the Burbank facility with other facilities in Southern California and has offered the property to the City for $3.8 million. The City considered acquiring the AmeriCold property back in 1998 (the last time the AmeriCold property was offered to the City, at a price of $2.0 million) to be used in conjunction with the Downtown Burbank Station. However, funding issues prohibited the transaction from taking place at that time.

Staff is recommending that the acquisition be funded from three sources; 1) City Fund 127 Development Impact Fees; 2) Redevelopment Agency funds; and 3) a pre-paid lease payment from SCPPA. The total acquisition price is $3,800,000, plus $8,000 in anticipated closing costs, for a total of $3,808,000. SCPPA will contribute $1,089,070 as a pre-paid lease payment. The remaining balance of approximately $2,718,930 is divided equally between City contribution of $1,359,465 from Fund 127, Development Impact Fees, a contribution of $679,732.50 from a loan from the Golden State Redevelopment Project Area to the City to the South San Fernando Redevelopment Project Area and a contribution of $679,732.50 from the Golden State Redevelopment Project Area to the City.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed Redevelopment Agency resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE EXECUTION OF A LOAN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF BURBANK AND AN AMENDMENT OF FY 2002-3 AGENCY BUDGET REFLECTING A TRANSFER OF $679,732.50 TO THE CITY. (Golden State Project Area)

Adoption of proposed City Council resolutions entitled:

1. (4/5 vote required)

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LOAN AGREEMENT WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY GOLDEN STATE PROJECT AREA AND AN AMENDMENT OF FY 2002-2003 CITY BUDGET REFLECTING A TRANSFER OF $679,732.50 TO THE CITY. (Golden State Project Area)

2. (4/5 vote required)

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LOAN AGREEMENT WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND AN AMENDMENT OF FY 2002-2003 CITY BUDGET REFLECTING A TRANSFER OF $679,732.50. (South San Fernando Project Area)

3. (4/5 vote required)

A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE EXECUTION OF A LOAN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY AND AN AMENDMENT OF FY 2002-2003 AGENCY BUDGET REFLECTING A TRANSFER OF $679,732.50. (South San Fernando Project Area)

4. (4/5 vote required)

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APRROVING AN ACQUISITION AGREEMENT AMONG THE CITY, AGENCY AND AMERICOLD CORPORATION FOR THE ACQUISITION OF 10 WEST MAGNOLIA BOULEVARD; APPROVING THE PAYMENT OF THE COST OF LAND FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO BE OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE CITY; APPROVING A COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AGENCY AND CITY RELATING TO THE OWNERSHIP OF 10 WEST MAGNOLIA; APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT AMONG THE AGENCY, CITY AND SCPPA; AND APPROVING AN AMENDMENT OF FY 2002-2003 BUDGET TO RECEIVE $679,732.50 FROM GOLDEN STATE PROJECT AREA.

Adoption of proposed Redevelopment Agency resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING AN ACQUISITION AGREEMENT AMONG THE CITY, AGENCY AND AMERICOLD CORPORATION FOR THE ACQUISITION OF 10 WEST MAGNOLIA BOULEVARD; APPROVING THE PAYMENT OF THE COST OF LAND FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO BE OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE CITY; APPROVING A COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AGENCY AND CITY RELATING TO THE OWNERSHIP OF 10 WEST MAGNOLIA; APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT AMONG THE AGENCY, CITY AND SCPPA; AND APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO FY 2002-20O3 BUDGET TO TRANSFER $679,732.50 FROM GOLDEN STATE PROJECT AREA TO THE CITY.

REPORTING ON CLOSED SESSION:

AIRPORT AUTHORITY MEETING REPORT:

2. 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 June 16, 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, HOUSING AUTHORITY, PARKING AUTHORITY AND YOUTH ENDOWMENT SERVICES FUND BOARD:

3. ADOPTION OF FISCAL YEAR 2003-04 ANNUAL BUDGET, CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE AND APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT:

The purpose of this report is for the Council, Redevelopment Agency, Housing Authority, Parking Authority and Youth Endowment Services (YES) Fund Board to adopt the Fiscal Year (FY) 2003-04 Annual Budget, Citywide Fee Schedule, and Appropriations Limit. Pursuant to the City Charter, a public hearing was properly noticed and conducted on June 10, 2003 at which time the Council received public comment, and provided direction to staff as to what should be incorporated into the Adopted Annual Budget.

The development of the FY 2003-04 proposed Operating and Capital Budgets began in the fall of 2002. By February 2003, it had become abundantly clear that the next five years would be financially challenging for the City. At that time, staff disclosed to the Council that starting with FY 2003-04, a trend of recurring costs growing at a much greater pace than recurring revenues would begin with no signs of relief for at least five years. This is in large part due to the following:

Increased Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) rates - for FY 2003-04 the City is projected to have $2.48 million in additional costs and for FY 2004-05 an additional $2.15 million;
Increased Memorandum of Understanding projected costs � for FY 2003-04 this cost is projected at $3.2 million;
Increased Internal Service Fund costs - General Liability and Workers Compensation Self-Insurance Funds increased by $1,350,070 due to an increase in both the insurance costs and claims. This industry continues to see large increases which are being felt by every sector, public and private. The Communications Replacement Fund increased by $314,000 to provide sufficient funding to replace radios Citywide over a five or more year period, and the Computer Equipment Replacement Fund increased by $103,000.
Several revenue categories are declining � the City�s Interest/Use of Money revenue continues to decline due to the low interest rates. The Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) had declined by 6.2 percent before the events of September 11^th and although Burbank has several new hotels, the TOT revenues are still lagging behind budget estimates. Although there are two new parking lots subject to the Transient Parking Tax (TPT), it has been negatively impacted due to the Airport reducing their daily rates. At this point, the TPT is projected to decrease by $400,000.

Due to the identified budget deficit, each General Fund department was asked to identify durable reductions and reasonable and fair increases in fees that would provide for an overall 10 percent reduction. In addition to the reductions that each department was required to achieve, the budget was developed under the following parameters agreed upon by the Executive Team: no new positions/upgrades unless there was a �rock solid� revenue offset; the FY 2002-03 frozen positions would remain, equating to an annual savings of $122,592; no allowable increase in materials, supplies and services; and, no new requests for capital outlay projects.

The first Council Budget Study Session was held earlier than usual on April 9, 2003 to present staff recommended reductions and fee increases. The Council received the Proposed Budget at their May 3, 2003 annual Goal Setting Workshop, followed by Budget Study Sessions on May 6, May 20, and May 22, 2003. Subsequently, the public hearing was held on June 10, 2003.

With the budget parameters, costs, and revenues in mind, the following chart is the proposed source of funds and appropriations for each fund or fund type for the 2003-04 Budget:

*Resources represent the total sources available to each fund, such as taxes, fees, charges, sales, interest, use of fund balance (from bond proceeds, depreciation, and available retained earnings) and includes changes disclosed in the addendums to the Proposed Budget.

** The General Fund variance between proposed sources and appropriations is a result of the following: the inclusion of the 1) reserves (Utilities Users Taxes, BWP In-Lieu and related interest earnings) previously designated for BWP competitiveness and set-aside in the General Fund, and 2) yet to be settled contracts with several bargaining groups.

CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE

The primary purpose of the Citywide Fee Schedule is to provide a one-stop listing of all City fees, charges, and rates. The Fee Schedule is reviewed and updated annually as part of the budget process in an effort to document all of the fees that have been revised or changed during the fiscal year.

In light of the budgetary deficit, a conscious effort was made to review all City fees, charges and rates. It was agreed that making reductions in costs alone would not be the most prudent course of action, as many more services, programs and employees would be affected. Thus, each department that has fees, charges and rates, spent a great deal of time researching the current rates, identifying areas of concern, and conducting surveys of other cities to ascertain a fair and reasonable charge. In addition, some departments were able to identify new fees that were being charged by surrounding communities that made sense for Burbank to consider.

At the June 10, 2003 public hearing, the City Council approved all but one of the recommended changes to the Fee Schedule. Staff had recommended increasing the TPT from 10 to 12 percent to offset the fact that this revenue category is projected to decrease by $400,000 in FY 2003-04. Staff had projected that the 2.0 percent increase would only cause the revenue category to decrease by $100,000. However, following public testimony and Council discussion, staff was directed to remove the proposed increase in the TPT from the Fee Schedule. The Council directed staff to revisit the issue at the mid-year report in 2004.

After all reductions have been made, and the proposed revenue from the fee increases have been accounted for in addition to removing the staff recommended increase in the TPT, it is projected that the City will need to use $1,486,925 from the Burbank Water and Power Set-Aside Fund to balance the FY 2003-04 Budget. (These are the incremental revenues that have been collected on the Utility Users Tax and In-Lieu Tax as a result of the most recent electric rate increases. These revenues were set-aside in a holding account because the Council did not want to count on these revenues as recurring since it was understood that the electric rates would eventually decrease.) With this use of funds, there is still projected to be $7.0 million in the BWP Set-Aside holding account on June 30, 2004.

GANN INITIATIVE APPROPRIATION LIMIT

The City is required by State law to establish an appropriation limit each fiscal year. The City�s FY 2003-04 appropriation limit is estimated to be $116,607,407. The actual amount of the appropriations contained in the budget that is subject to the limit is $85,871,028. The difference between the City�s appropriation limit and the amount subject to it is $30,736,379. As a result, the City has a significant gap between its legal limit and the actual appropriations subject to the limit. The exact figures will be calculated and made available after the Council adopts the budget on June 17, 2003.

The City staff has worked diligently over the past few months to develop a balanced approach to address the long-term structural problem that the City is now faced with. The proposed recurring deficit for FY 2003-04 was originally projected to be approximately $9.5 million and does not include any potential hits from the State. A deficit this large is extremely intimidating, and will no doubt have a negative impact on the delivery of our services and programs, and most importantly on our employees. This approach is balanced and buys time for the Executives to re-group following the adoption of the FY 2003-04 Budget, and begin the process of developing and producing a strategic plan that will help the City effectuate reasonable and prudent changes to the way we currently conduct business. This process will be all encompassing in that the Executives will work with the unions to ensure that all avenues are explored and that together the City�s future is contemplated and determined. This strategy will include among many ideas, finding efficiencies in our own business practices while also looking to regional synergy and efficiencies to reduce on-going costs.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed City Council resolutions:

1. (4/5 vote required)

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004, PROVIDING FOR THE TRANSFER OF REVENUE FROM THE BURBANK WATER & POWER DEPARTMENT TO THE GENERAL FUND, AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR AMOUNTS BUDGETED.

2. (4/5 vote required)

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK DETERMINING AND ESTABLISHING THE CITY�S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004.

3. (4/5 vote required)

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 PROVIDING FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR AMOUNTS DELINEATED.

4. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ADOPTING THE BURBANK FEE RESOLUTION.

Adoption of proposed Redevelopment Agency resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004.

Adoption of proposed Housing Authority resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004.

Adoption of proposed Parking Authority resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF PARKING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004.

Adoption of proposed Youth Endowment Services Fund Board resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE YOUTH ENDOWMENT SERVICES FUND OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004.

RECESS for the Redevelopment Agency and Housing Authority meetings.

RECONVENE for the City Council meeting.

CONSENT CALENDAR: (Items 4 through 10)

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.

4. MINUTES:

Approval of minutes for the Budget Study Session of April 9, 2003, and the regular meetings of April 15, April 22 and April 29, 2003.

Recommendation:

Approve as submitted.

5. DONATION OF A SURPLUS ARMORED TRUCK TO THE McLENNAN COUNTY SHERIFF�S OFFICE:

Staff is requesting Council approval of the transfer of a 1985 GMC armored truck from the City of Burbank Police Department to the McLennan County Sheriff�s Office in Waco, Texas.

In September 1993, Armored Transport of Nevada donated a 1985 GMC armored truck to the City of Burbank Police Department for the express purpose of law enforcement. The Council accepted the donation of the truck at that time. Since then, the Police Department has used this vehicle as transportation for the Special Response Team. Currently, it has been determined that this vehicle is surplus and no longer needed due to the acquisition of a newer, larger vehicle.

The original agreement for this armored truck states that when this vehicle is no longer needed it should be destroyed, or returned to Armored Transport. Due to the vehicle�s condition, staff contacted Armored Transport to ask if they were interested in taking the vehicle back. Armored Transport indicated no need for the vehicle but suggested a donation to the McLennan County Sheriff�s Office which was looking for this type of vehicle for transportation for their crisis response team and would be willing to accept it in its current condition. Transport costs will be paid for by the McLennan County Sheriff�s Office.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE DONATION OF SURPLUS CITY PROPERTY FROM THE CITY OF BURBANK TO THE MCLENNAN COUNTY SHERIFF�S OFFICE, WACO, TX.

6. AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2003-04 ANNUAL BUDGET FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO INCLUDE GRANT FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA:

Staff is requesting an appropriation of funds already received from State Citizen�s Option for Public Safety (COPS) grant funding in the amount of $204,192, and an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2003-04 annual budget.

In 1996, Assembly Bill (AB) 3229 was enacted as part of the State budget package. This bill established the COPS program which provides funding to local law enforcement agencies, based on population, for the purpose of ensuring public safety. To date, the City of Burbank has received a total of $1,580,217 in State COPS funding. State COPS funds must be appropriated for the purpose of providing front- line police services such as personnel, equipment, crime prevention/anti-gang programs and cannot be used to supplant the City�s current law enforcement funding.

Historically this funding has been used toward the matching requirement for the Federal COPS grant, which originally awarded $675,000 for nine additional officers. All officers originally obtained via the Federal COPS grant have now been absorbed into the Police Department budget. On October 30, 2002, the City of Burbank received $204,192 in State COPS funds to continue funding officers working in community policing positions.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

(4/5 vote required)

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 BUDGET FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING AND APPROPRIATING STATE CITIZEN�S OPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY PROGRAM GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $204,192 FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

7. APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS FOR THE CITY OF BURBANK VOLUNTARY EMPLOYEES� BENEFICIARY ASSOCIATION (VEBA):

On November 25, 1997, the City Council approved the establishment of the Voluntary Employees Beneficiary Association (VEBA), an employer-sponsored welfare benefit plan authorized under �501(c)(9) of the Internal Revenue Service Code. This type of IRS-approved trust allows employees, on a collective basis, to accumulate funds in a pre-tax account for the purpose of paying for retiree medical benefits.

Over the last two years, the VEBA Committee has been dissatisfied with the service level of the VEBA�s third party administrator, Benefit Strategies Group, and has been actively seeking another third party administrator for the VEBA. The VEBA Committee recommends that effective July 1, 2003, the City terminate its professional services agreements with Benefit Strategies Group and enter into the following agreements:

� Consulting Agreement between the City of Burbank and VEBA Service Group, LLC;

� Administrative Services Contract between the City of Burbank and A.W. Rehn & Associates, Inc.; and

� Engagement for Legal Counsel between the City of Burbank and Katten Muchin Zavis Rosenman.

In addition to these three agreements, the City is negotiating a new Trust Agreement with Washington Trust Bank. Once the agreement has been completed it will be placed on a future Council agenda for the Council�s review and approval.

All fees associated with this Plan will be fully paid by the VEBA Trust, with the exception of $6,000 which was included as part of the Burbank Police Officers� Association (BPOA) salary and benefits package effective July 1, 2003.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolutions entitled:

1. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE LEGAL SERVICES CONTRACT FOR LEGAL SERVICES RELATED TO THE VOLUNTARY EMPLOYEES� BENEFICIARY ASSOCIATION TRUST BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND KMZ ROSENMAN.

2. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CONTRACT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES FOR THE VOLUNTARY EMPLOYEES� BENEFICIARY ASSOCIATION TRUST BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND A.W. REHN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

3. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE CONSULTING AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE VOLUNTARY EMPLOYEES� BENEFICIARY ASSOCIATION TRUST BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND THE VEBA SERVICE GROUP, LLC.

8. APPROVING THE FILING OF FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 53413 (BURBANK COTTAGES):

Staff is requesting Council approval of Final Tract Map No. 53413, owned by Burbank Cottages L.P., a California Limited Partnership. Final Tract Map No. 53413 covers addresses within the area bound by Empire Avenue, North Ontario Street, Thornton Avenue, and North Fairview Street. Located in an R-4 Medium Density Multiple Family Residential zone, this multi-family neighborhood has been targeted by the City and Redevelopment Agency for revitalization due to numerous factors that have led to the deterioration of the area.

The M. David Paul Project proposed to develop 20 small-lot single-family homes along North Ontario Street and North Fairview Street and an 8,600 square foot childcare center. A total of eight properties were acquired ranging from vacant lots, non-conforming businesses, and substandard apartment buildings. All of the residents and businesses have been relocated with the assistance of a variety of relocation benefits from the Agency, and the site has been cleared of all buildings and is ready for the development of the M. David Paul project. The project creates a total of 22 lots, with Lot 1 designed for the childcare center, Lot 2 designed to include all the common areas controlled by a homeowners association, and lots 3-22 designed for the 20 individually-owned residential dwelling units.

Pursuant to Burbank Municipal Code (BMC) Section 27-313 (Council Action on Tentative Map), the Council approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 53413 on July 10, 2001 by Resolution 26,051. Conditions of Approval for Final Tract Map No. 53413 have been cleared by the Planning Division for purposes of the final map approval.

Staff has determined that this map is in compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 53413, 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 BMC, the Council must approve the Final Tract Map No. 53413 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 its 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 FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 53413 (HOUSING AND CHILDCARE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT: M. DAVID PAUL & ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT).

On December 10, 2002, the Council approved agreements with the Burbank Firefighters (BFF) and the Burbank Firefighters- Chief Officers Unit (BFF-COU). At the time of the original resolution, the parties had not yet reached agreement on the educational incentive. This issue was resolved on February 13, 2003, resulting in an additional $29,580 (.28 percent) cost increase for Fiscal Year 2002-03.

The parties also completed the January 1, 2003 salary survey for the Firefighter (1.40 percent) and Battalion Chief (.87 percent) positions. An additional allocation of $33,443 will be needed to cover these survey adjustments (.31 percent -$32,749 for BFF and .085 percent - $694 for BFF-COU).

1. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING AND EXTENDING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND THE BURBANK FIREFIGHTERS AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 BUDGET.

2. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING AND EXTENDING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND THE BURBANK FIREFIGHTERS CHIEF OFFICERS UNIT AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 BUDGET.

The Ralph M. Brown Act acknowledges the right and necessity of occasionally removing persons from Council meetings for disturbing the meeting (�54957.9). Although rarely used, the Council has adopted such rules to assure the ability to conduct the business of the people of the City.

Staff has reviewed these rules from time to time and noted a gap in the regulations. As a result staff has prepared an amendment that would provide that when such individuals are removed from the meeting, they must leave not only the building, but the public property on which the meeting is held. This would include the adjacent parking lots. In addition, they may not return for three hours after the meeting is adjourned. This provides the needed protection for the volunteer members of such boards and commissions, and still allows the subject individual to return to conduct business with the City when he or she has had an opportunity to calm down.

Staff has also revised, and subdivided, the present language in BMC Sec. 2-216 and Sec. 2-217 to make it clearer and more readable, but without changing the intent.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING ARTICLE 2, CHAPTER 2, SECTIONS 2-216 AND 2-217 OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DECORUM AND ENFORCEMENT OF DECORUM AT MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES.

RECONVENE the Redevelopment Agency, Housing Authority, Parking Authority and Youth Endowment Services Fund Board meetings 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 AGENDA - CITY OF BURBANK

TUESDAY, June 17, 2003
5:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER � 275 EAST OLIVE AVENUE

Recommendation:

COUNCIL AGENDA - CITY OF BURBANK

TUESDAY, June 17, 2003 5:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER � 275 EAST OLIVE AVENUE

Recommendation:

TUESDAY, June 17, 2003
5:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER � 275 EAST OLIVE AVENUE