6:30 P.M.

 

 

INVOCATION:                       Reverend Carmen Blair, First Presbyterian Church.

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

                                                under the Constitution.

 

FLAG SALUTE:

 

ROLL CALL:

ANNOUNCEMENT:             WEDNESDAY NIGHT PRIME TIME PROGRAMS.

 

RECOGNITION:                    BOY SCOUT TROOP 209 HOLIDAY MEAL DELIVERY.

 

PRESENTATION:                BURBANK FIRE DEPARTMENT DISTINGUISHED ACT AWARD.

 

 

COUNCIL COMMENTS: (Including reporting on Council Committee Assignments)

 

INTRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS:

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

REPORTING ON CLOSED SESSION:

 

 

AIRPORT AUTHORITY MEETING REPORT:

 

1.      AIRPORT AUTHORITY COMMISSIONER REPORT:

 

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

 

The main focus of this report will be issues which were on the Airport Authority meeting agenda of July 7, 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 MEETINGS WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY:

 

2.      COTTAGES HOUSING AND CHILDCARE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT:

 

In July 2001, the Agency Board approved a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with M. David Paul to construct the Housing and Childcare Center Demonstration Project.  The project is located at 2245-2251 North Fairview Street and 2242-2308 North Ontario Street in the Golden State neighborhood near the airport.  The project includes 20 small-lot single family homes and an 8,500 square foot childcare center that can accommodate 92 children.    Among other things, the DDA called for the developer, M. David Paul, to construct the shell of the childcare center and sell the land and improvements of the center to an entity selected by the Agency for one dollar.  In addition, the Agency is to receive certain participation in the profits of the sale of the 20 homes.  The Agency then planned to provide funding to the proposed owner of the childcare center to complete the interior improvements and playground of the childcare center.

 

The Agency has anticipated that the entity that would own the childcare center would be the Burbank Housing Corporation (BHC).  The BHC is an independent, non-profit corporation that was formed six years ago to own, manage and rehabilitate affordable housing projects throughout the City in partnership with the Redevelopment Agency.  In their neighborhood revitalization efforts, BHC operates two after-school programs, including the Achievement Center on the 100 block of West Elmwood and the Activity Center on the 200 block of West Verdugo Avenue.  In the Golden State neighborhood where the childcare center is being constructed, BHC has purchased and rehabilitated two nearby apartment buildings. 

 

Before the Agency and BHC could enter into any specific terms for completing the transfer of the Center, an experienced childcare operator needed to be identified to make sure that the long-term operation of the Center would meet the goals of the Agency.  These goals were set out in a Request For Proposal (RFP) for childcare operators.  Specifically, the Agency wanted to make sure 12 of the 92 childcare spaces would be available for infants (0 to 12 months), since the City currently has a severe shortage of infant care providers.  Also, the Agency requested that 20 percent of the spaces offer affordable, below-market tuition rates. Both of these requirements reduce the feasibility or profitability for an operator to run the center without requiring an ongoing subsidy. 

 

After issuing an RFP, the Agency received five responses from potential childcare operators.  After an extensive review of the proposals, including several meetings with the City�s Childcare Committee, the Agency chose to enter into negotiations  with Knowledge Beginnings.

 

Subsequently, a Management Agreement between BHC and Knowledge Beginnings was prepared, which set forth various terms, including: a five-year operating term; the Scope of Services provided by Knowledge Beginnings, including pre-opening services, and management operating services; insurance; operating expenses and proposed tuition rates; the provision of furniture and equipment; and, the selection priority for the children.

 

As the proposed owner of the childcare center, BHC will be taking on several typical responsibilities, including the payment of property taxes and property insurance.  However, with the infant care and affordability requirements, BHC will be taking on additional responsibilities to make sure that a positive revenue flow is obtained from Knowledge Beginnings within three years after the opening of the facility.  They include paying for utilities and exterior maintenance, and installing the playground equipment.   In addition, BHC will pay for Knowledge Beginnings� start-up costs, including pre-opening staffing, initial marketing and administration, and operational shortfalls expected for the first two years of operation until the Center reaches a stabilized basis.

 

It is proposed that the Elmwood promissory note be amended to provide BHC $61,000 annually to pay for these ongoing expenses including replacement reserves.  This amount assumes that BHC will be paying $20,000 annually in property taxes.   Should the property taxes be reduced or exempted, the Agency�s note would be reduced accordingly to $41,000 per year.

 

For the one-time expenses related to start-up costs, it is proposed that BHC in its agreement with the Agency, borrow $100,000 from the Agency, and begin repaying these funds beginning in year three, when the Center has reached a stabilized basis.

 

The Agreement between the Agency and BHC outlines that BHC will be the owner of the childcare facility, and that the facility will continue to operate in perpetuity as a high quality center.   This includes the requirement that the operator obtain the highly-regarded National Association of the Education of Young Children (NYAEC) accreditation.  In addition, the Agreement outlines the scope of work for  BHC to complete the interior improvement of the Center, including the installation of playground equipment, and that the Agency provide the funds to complete these improvements. 

 

In coordination with M. David Paul and Knowledge Beginnings, plans and specifications were prepared, and BHC issued a proposal to obtain bids.  A total of five bids were received ranging from $935,447 to $1,335,000.  To completely fund this work, it is recommended that the Agency appropriate $522,447 from the Golden State Project Area.  At the same time, it is recommended that the $175,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds be returned to the CDBG account, and that the $200,000 in home sale proceeds be returned to the Agency�s 20 Percent Set-Aside Account.

 

The Housing and Childcare Demonstration Project was intended to accomplish many things, including the elimination of blighted properties in the Golden State neighborhood, and providing new home ownership opportunities with 50 percent of the homes designated for moderate-income homebuyers.   However, the centerpiece of the project is the childcare center, which is the City�s first major effort to address the chronic shortage of quality childcare within the City.

 

When the Center is completed in December of this year, the public will have available a high quality center both in terms of architecture and program elements, and it will have been accomplished without any cost to the City�s General Fund.  It is therefore recommended that the Agency and Council approve the proposed agreements.

  

Recommendation:

 

1.  Adoption of proposed City Council resolutions entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH BURBANK HOUSING CORPORATION PERTAINING TO THE IMPROVEMENT, USE AND OPERATION OF THE CHILD CARE CENTER OF THE HOUSING AND CHILDCARE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

 

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 RELATING TO THE HOUSING AND CHILDCARE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

 

2.  Adoption of proposed Redevelopment Agency resolutions entitled: 

A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH BURBANK HOUSING CORPORATION PERTAINING TO THE IMPROVEMENT, USE AND OPERATION OF THE CHILD CARE CENTER OF THE HOUSING AND CHILDCARE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

 

A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF A COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AGENCY AND THE CITY OF BURBANK RELATING TO THE HOUSING AND CHILDCARE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

 

A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 IN THE AMOUNT OF $622,447 FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING THE INTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS AND PRE-OPENING COSTS FOR THE CHILD CARE CENTER OF THE HOUSING AND CHILDCARE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

 

 

3.      Remarketing of $25 Million Redevelopment Agency of the City of Burbank Golden State Redevelopment Project, Subordinated Taxable Tax Allocation Bonds, issue of 1993:

 

The purpose of this report is to request authorization to remarket $25 million Redevelopment Agency of the City of Burbank (Agency) Golden State Redevelopment Project, Subordinated Taxable Tax Allocation Bonds, issue of 1993.

 

On June 17, 2003, the Agency authorized the appointment of a Financing Team as it relates to the remarketing of the $25 million Redevelopment Agency of the City of Burbank Golden State Project Area Subordinated Taxable Tax Allocation Bonds, issue of 1993.  The bonds were originally purchased by the City and were used to help finance the construction of the Police/Fire facility.  The Agency has consistently included the subordinated bonds on its annual Statement of Indebtedness filed with Los Angeles County.  The subordinated bonds bear interest at the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) interest rate plus one percent and are due December 1, 2043. The subordinated indenture provides provisions for remarketing the bonds.  As a result, the remarketed bonds will bear current market interest rates and will amortize principal payments beginning on December 1, 2022 and ending December 1, 2043.

 

The proposed remarketed tax allocation bonds are anticipated to generate approximately $24,645,000 in net proceeds assuming the use of a reserve fund surety and a bond rating in the �A� category.  A bond rating in the �A� category by Standard and Poor�s would allow for the remarketed bonds to be insured.  Should the Agency not receive the anticipated bond rating and not be able to obtain a reserve fund surety, net bond proceeds will be significantly less that the anticipated amount.  In the event that this happens, Staff recommends that the City and Agency enter into a loan agreement for the difference between the current $25 million subordinated debt owned by the City and the net bond proceeds.  The loan agreement would have the same interest rate terms as the current subordinated debt; however, the principal would be due by December 1, 2020.

 

Based on current market conditions, annual interest only payments would be due on the remarketed bonds of $1,187,500 through 2021 with full amortization beginning in 2022 for a total principal and interest payment of approximately $1,855,000 annually through 2043.  The anticipated arbitrage yield on the remarketed debt is 4.75 percent.

 

The proposed remarketing anticipates generating $24,645,000 which can only be used for capital projects of the City.  A cooperation agreement will be entered into between the City and Agency to ensure that the net proceeds will be expended for capital purposes.  The anticipated net proceeds will change pending final pricing of the remarketed bonds and factors such as the bond rating, if credit enhancement is obtained via bond insurance, as well as the ability to obtain a debt service surety bond.  Compensation for the Financing Team will be paid as part of the bond remarketing costs.  Based on the remarketing calendar, bond pricing has been scheduled for late September with funding by mid-October 2003.

 

Recommendation:

 

1.  Adoption of proposed City Council resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK REQUESTING THE REPURCHASE BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK OF ITS AGENCY�S $25,000,000 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK GOLDEN STATE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, SUBORDINATED TAXABLE TAX ALLOCATION BONDS, ISSUE OF 1993.

 

2.  Adoption of proposed Redevelopment Agency resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING EXECUTION OF CERTAIN DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE PURCHASE AND REMARKETING OF THE AGENCY�S $25,000,000 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK GOLDEN STATE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, SUBORDINATED TAXABLE TAX ALLOCATION BONDS, ISSUE OF 1993, AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO.

 

 

RECESS for the Redevelopment Agency meeting.

 

 

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 regular meetings of May 13 and May 20, 2003, the adjourned meeting of May 22, 2003, and the regular meeting of May 27, 2003.

 

Recommendation:

 

Approve as submitted.

 

5.        APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND MELZER DECKERT & RUDER ARCHITECTS INC. FOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, SPECIALTY CONSULTANTS, AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE DEBELL CLUBHOUSE REPLACEMENT AND DRIVING RANGE RENOVATION/EXPANSION PROJECT: 

 

Staff is requesting Council approval of a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) between the City of Burbank and Melzer Deckert & Ruder Architects Inc. (MDR) to provide professional architectural design, specialty consultants, and engineering services for the DeBell Clubhouse Replacement and Driving Range Renovation/ Expansion Project.  The DeBell golf course and driving range facilities represent an important and viable City asset that provides the local and regional community with a very desirable recreational amenity.  However, there is no question that these facilities are in dire need of replacement and/or renovation, or expansion to maintain a reasonable level of function, operation, and quality to meet public demand and community service expectations. 

 

The architect selection process commenced on November 19, 2002 to identify a qualified firm to provide comprehensive design, specialty consulting, and engineering services for the DeBell Clubhouse Replacement and Driving Range Renovation/Expansion Project.  The selection process included the following steps.

 

1.      Formation of an Architect Selection Committee (Committee) comprised of City staff and key stakeholders that included:

�        Michael Flad, Park, Recreation & Community Services Director

�        Jan Bartolo, Recreation & Parks Deputy Director

�        Bruce Feng, Public Works Director

�        Scott Scozzola, DeBell Golf Course - Golf Professional

�        Ray Lucero, DeBell Golf Course - Food Service Vendor

�        Helen Duree, Greens Committee Member

�        Phillip Clifford, Capital Projects Manager

2.      Issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) to seek architectural firms with specific clubhouse design experience.  

3.      Review of submitted proposals from nine firms on December 20, 2002.

4.      Development of a short list of four firms whose proposal and potential service capabilities best addressed City needs.

5.      Interviews with the following firms on February 6, 2003:

�        Lee & Sakahara Architects  (LSA)

�        den Zer International  (dZI)

�        Melzer Deckert & Ruder Architects Inc. (MDR)

�        Pekarek Crandell, Inc.  (PCI)

6.      Analyzing and summarizing the Lump Sum Fee for each firm to ensure the scope of services was comprehensive and

          appropriately priced.   The Lump Sum Fees ranged from $280,000 to $620,000.

7.      Conducting extensive due diligence efforts for the top two candidates that resulted in a unanimous Committee consensus to

          initiate contract negotiations with MDR.

 

MDR, located in Irvine, California, is an architecture, planning, and interior design firm of 10 persons, specializing in recreational, resort, and hospitality design.  Golf clubhouse projects currently in design or under construction include Anaheim Hills Golf Club, Arroyo Trabuco Golf Club; San Juan Capistrano Golf Club, Rio Hondo Golf Club for the City of Downey, a major renovation of Lake Arrowhead Country Club, Tianma Golf and Country Club in Shanghai, and General Old Golf Club in Riverside.  Many of these projects included clubhouse demolition, temporary clubhouse facilities, maintenance yards, pump house structures, golf course restrooms, and extensive and adjacent site improvements.  Other MDR projects of note include resort and golf developments on the Big Island of Hawaii, Dubai, and China.  MDR�s domestic and international design experience has resulted in a diverse project portfolio that addresses a wide range of environmental, operational, and community needs.

 

The PSA with MDR is specifically tailored to the scope of services required for this project and to MDR as a provider of professional architectural services.  The PSA increases the City�s authority and sole judgment over the quality level and/or acceptability of all architectural services.  The architect has specific responsibility for all costs to make the City whole as a direct consequence of potential architectural design errors and/or omissions.

 

A Lump Sum Fee of $561,050 was negotiated for the project services described above and more specifically detailed within the PSA and represents approximately 12.5 percent of the estimated $4,500,000 construction cost.  It is important to note that the $470,100 cost for the Total Base Fee represents 10.5 percent of the estimated construction cost and is within the industry-accepted range and norm of eight to eleven percent for professional architectural design and engineering services. 

A majority of the $70,950 balance between the Lump Sum Fee and the Total Base Fee is for Additional Services and represent atypical costs relegated for the driving range renovation and expansion and other specifically requested specialty design services.  Sufficient funds are available to fund the cost for this PSA request.

 

Recommendation:

 

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND MELZER DECKERT & RUDER ARCHITECTS INC.

 

 

6.      APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT FOR A CONTRACT PROBATION OFFICER:

 

Staff is requesting authorization to continue an agreement with the Los Angeles County Probation Department to provide a contract probation officer for the City of Burbank.

 

The agreement with the County is for a one-year period and has been renewed annually since 1992.  This probation officer works directly with the Police Department Outreach Center and fulfills a number of community based needs, including targeting at-risk youth, providing intensive community-based supervision to juveniles on probation, and allowing the department a more timely method of dealing with juvenile detainees.  The probation officer�s detachment from a full County caseload enables him to quickly take action on anti-social behavior occurring in our local schools, which although serious, fails to rise to the level of criminal behavior.  As a result, our gang intervention and prevention efforts are substantially more productive.

 

The annual cost of this program is approximately $110,000 and is split between the City and the County of Los Angeles.  The City�s portion has already been appropriated as part of the Police Department�s Fiscal Year 2003-04 budget. Staff continues to feel this is an appropriate use of funds, as the contract probation officer�s efforts have proven to be a strong tool to reduce gang activity, drug abuse, and juvenile related criminal activity.

 

Recommendation:

 

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE GANG ALTERNATIVE PREVENTION PROGRAM (GAPP) AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES.

 

 

7.      AMENDED RELOCATION PLAN FOR PEYTON-GRISMER PROJECT:

 

The purpose of this report is to transmit for the Council�s consideration the Amended Relocation Plan for the Peyton�Grismer Revitalization Project (Project) following the end of  a mandated 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 Relocation 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 subsequently initiated condemnation action against the owner of 1729-1735 Elliott Drive (Elliott Site), a site that abuts the aforementioned Grismer properties and within the Peyton-Grismer focus area.   This action triggered the preparation of a draft amendment to the earlier Plan that was accepted by the  Council on May 27, 2003.

 

The Amended Relocation Plan includes a description of the Elliott Site and the Project site, an assessment of the relocation needs of potential displacees, available replacement housing in Burbank and sets forth the steps and procedures to ensure a fair and equitable relocation program.  The Amended Relocation Plan also describes potential units lost and households displaced from the Elliott Site.  Accompanying the Amended Plan for the Elliott Site is the earlier Plan that studied the Project site and serves to provide a broader context of the Project.

 

Recommendation:

 

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING AN AMENDED RELOCATION PLAN FOR THE RELOCATION OF RESIDENTS AND OCCUPANTS DISPLACED AS A RESULT OF THE PEYTON GRISMER REVITALIZATION PROJECT.

 

 

8.      ESTABLISHING THE TITLE AND CLASSIFICATION OF SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER:

 

The purpose of the proposed resolution is to establish the title and classification of Sign Language Interpreter (CTC No. 0875).  The City is receiving frequent requests for sign language interpreters from children enrolled in Park, Recreation and Community Services classes and sports activities.  Currently the City has been supplying interpreters from LIFESIGNS.  Although this service has been excellent, their scheduling constraints have presented some problems for our clients.  The establishment of the classification of Sign Language Interpreter will provide qualified interpreters on an as needed, temporary basis with scheduling flexibilities that may be more useful to our clients.  There is no additional fiscal impact from the establishment of the classification. 

 

Recommendation:

 

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ESTABLISHING THE TITLE AND CLASSIFICATION OF SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER (CTC No. 0875) AND PRESCRIBING CLASSIFICATION CODE NUMBER, SALARY AND SPECIFICATION THEREOF.

 

 

9.      REVISING THE MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR EDUCATION/TRAINING ON SPECIFICATIONS FOR ALL UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT AND EXECUTIVE CLASSIFICATIONS:

 

The proposed resolution allows for a flexible combination of education and/or experience to substitute for specific education/experience requirements for all unrepresented management and executive classifications.  The departments have had difficulty finding sufficient candidate pools for management positions with specific education/experience requirements.  This new language would give the departments the flexibility to consider candidates with either more education and/or more experience to substitute for the fixed static requirements.  This language is similar to language utilized by other cities (i.e. Glendale and Pasadena).  There is no additional fiscal impact from these changes.

 

Recommendation:

 

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK REVISING THE MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR EDUCATION/TRAINING ON SPECIFICATIONS FOR ALL UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT AND EXECUTIVE CLASSIFICATIONS.

 

 

10.    RESOLUTION REGARDING ORAL COMMUNICATIONS PERIOD:

 

At the July 1, 2003, Council meeting, the Council discussed the issue of Oral Communications.  It was determined to increase the first period of Oral Communications at which any item within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council may be discussed from one (1) minute to two (2) minutes, and to decrease the final period of Oral Communications from three (3) minutes to two (2) minutes, keeping the same restrictions on what can be addressed during the various periods of Oral Communications.  The Council also directed that instead of numbering the various periods of Oral Communications that they be appropriately named to help the public understand the purposes for the various periods.  As a result, staff is suggesting the following names for the four (4) periods of Oral Communications:

 

a.      Closed Session Oral Communications

b.      Initial Open Public Comment Period of Oral Communications

c.      Agenda Item Oral Communications

d.      Final Open Public Comment Period of Oral Communications

 

Recommendation:

 

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 26,029, AS PREVIOUSLY AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NO. 26,046, AND RESOLUTION NO. 26,087, REGARDING ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AND THE CONDUCT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS.

 

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

 

 

REPORTS TO COUNCIL:

 

11.    FISCAL YEAR 2003-04 WORK PROGRAM AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PRESENTATION (FIRE DEPARTMENT, POLICE DEPARTMENT AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT):

 

The purpose of this report is to provide the Council with the proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2003-04 Annual Work Program and Departmental Performance Indicators. 

        

In 2000, the Council adopted a 10-Year Strategic Plan entitled, Embarking on a New Millennium (2001-2010).  This Strategic Plan identifies and defines strategic priorities and includes corresponding goals and sub-goals that are designed to direct future actions by the City government to achieve the vision of the plan.

 

The Annual Work Program is used as a management tool to identify, prioritize, and monitor the City's projects in accordance with the Strategic Plan.  The proposed FY 2003-04 Annual Work Program includes over 300 goals and objectives, including several capital improvement projects.  

 

Generally, the Annual Work Program document reflects the objectives defined by each department and suggested by the Council during the annual budget study sessions.  Listing all the specific objectives together in one document allows the  Council, City staff, and the public an opportunity to comprehensively review the City's Annual Work Program as a companion volume to the 10-Year Strategic Plan.

 

Included with the Annual Work Program review are the FY 2003-04 Departmental Performance Indicators.  Performance Indicators are used by the City to assess how efficiently and effectively programs and activities are provided, and determine whether organizational goals are being met.  Performance Indicators have become an integral part of the budget process for most cities and are a needed component to compete for State and national budget awards.

 

Burbank began including Performance Indicators in the Budget in FY 2000-01.  This year the departments spent a great deal of time reassessing their current Indicators and in most cases they have been completely revamped.  A major goal of the changes was to link the Indicators to both the City�s Annual Budget and Work Program.  Further, the modifications are intended to allow the City�s programs and services to be measured in such a way that we can ascertain the following: 1) How well are our services being delivered?;  2) Are planned accomplishments being met?; 3) Are community problems being solved?; and, 4) Are our residents/customers satisfied with the results?

 

Although this is an �initial presentation� and not a �status update,� each Department Manager will present their proposed FY 2003-04 Annual Work Program and Performance Indicators for the Council�s review and be prepared to answer any questions from the Council as per the attached presentation schedule.

 

Recommendation:

        

Staff continues to believe that the Annual Work Program and Departmental Performance Indicators are effective project-tracking and work quality measurement tools that assist the Council in achieving their Strategic Plan goals.  Staff requests that the Council review the proposed FY 2003-04 Work Program and Departmental Performance Indicators per the proposed schedule and provide input and direction as necessary.

 

 

12.    APPOINTMENTS FOR VACANCIES ON THE PLANNING BOARD AND YOUTH ENDOWMENT SERVICES FUND ADVISORY COMMITTEE:

 

The purpose of this report is to request the Council to make appointments from the qualified applicants for one vacancy of an unexpired term ending on June 1, 2005 on the Planning Board, and one vacancy of an unexpired term ending on June 1, 2005 on the Youth Endowment Services (YES) Fund Advisory Committee.

 

At the May 27, 2003 Council meeting, the Council appointed members to various Boards, Commissions and Committees to fill vacancies that would be created by terms expiring June 1, 2003. The Council directed staff to continue advertising for a vacancy on the Planning Board following the resignation of one of its members, as well as for members to a Charter Review Committee. The May 27, 2003 appointments also included the appointment of Mr. Mitchell Thomas to the Planning Board, who was currently serving on the YES Committee.  Following Mr. Thomas� resignation from the YES Committee, the City Clerk�s office began advertising for this vacancy as well with the issuance of a press release on May 29 and June 11, 2003. 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 for both vacancies was Friday, June 27, 2003. In addition, a new press release was issued for the Charter Review Committee but no new applications have been received to date.

 

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. 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 Board and Committee 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.

 

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 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

 

Following is the random order of the Board and Committee as well as the applicants, and the order in which the Council will be asked to vote:

 

Youth Endowment Services Fund Advisory Committee

 

The Youth Endowment Services Fund Advisory Committee consists of seven members. There is currently one vacancy on this Committee for an unexpired term ending June 1, 2005, created by the resignation of Board Member Mitchell Thomas who was appointed to the Planning Board. Applications were received from the following interested individuals: 

 

One Vacancy

 

         1.            Diana Marie Encarnacion

         2.            Lori Tubert

         3.            Julie A. De Boever

 

 

Planning Board

 

The Planning Board consists of five members. There is currently one vacancy for an unexpired term ending June 1, 2005 created by the resignation of Board Member Carolyn Berlin, effective May 31, 2003. Burbank Municipal Code Section 2-403 requires the unexpired term be filled within 90 days from the effective date of resignation. Applications were received from the following interested individuals: 

 

One Vacancy

 

         1.            Theodore Xavier Garcia

         2.            Norman Arthur Furman

         3.            Daniel Davis Humfreville                             

 

Recommendation:

 

Staff recommends the Council consider making the appropriate appointments to the Planning Board and the Youth Endowment Services (YES) Fund Advisory Committee or give staff direction as desired. In addition, staff requests direction regarding the Charter Review Committee.

 

 

13.    PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE BURBANK-GLENDALE-PASADENA AIRPORT:

 

The process to amend the airport Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) is to have each Party agree in writing to the amended terms, which requires approval of each respective City Council.  Should the member cities desire to consider language that would provide for the staggering of terms, it would be necessary to amend the language in Section 2.2 of the current JPA, and an initial shorter period will need to be designated for some of each parties� appointees in order to create a staggered term.

 

         The Council might want to consider the following proposed amendment to this section:

 

�Members of the Commission shall generally serve for four (4) year terms, except that for the terms commencing June 1, 2005, the cities of Glendale and Pasadena shall each appoint one (1) member to the Commission for a  two (2) year term and two (2) members to the Commission for a  four (4) year term, and the City of Burbank shall appoint two (2) members to the Commission for a two (2) year term and one (1) member to the Commission for a four (4) year term, all with subsequent terms to commence on June 1 of each fourth (4^th) year thereafter.  Although the terms continue, the service of an individual Commissioner may be terminated as provided below.  Each member shall serve as a member of the Commission in such member�s individual capacity.� 

 

By the City of Burbank taking the two initially shorter terms, a message will be conveyed to the other cities that Burbank is really trying to do what is right, and not trying to obtain some kind of hidden advantage.

 

The Council also asked to consider the rotation of officers.  Since the formation of the JPA, the Airport Authority has had eight (8) presidents:

 

Leland Ayers, Burbank         July 1977 � January, 1978

Bill Rudell, Burbank               January, 1978 � July, 1984

Bob Garcin, Glendale           July, 1984 � July, 1994

Brian Bowman, Burbank      July, 1994 � May, 1995

Carl Raggio, Glendale          May, 1995 � July, 1996

Joyce Streater, Pasadena   July, 1996 � July, 1999

Carl Messeck, Glendale       July, 1999 � July, 2001

Chris Holden, Pasadena      July, 2001 - Present

 

In relation to the rotation of officers, language could be added to Section 2.4.1 of the JPA to read as follows:

 

�At least once in every five (5) year period the offices of President, Vice President and Secretary shall each be held by Commissioners appointed by each of the three member cities, so that each city shall have an opportunity to have its appointees serve in each of the offices.�