|
Present-
|
Council Members
Bric, Golonski, Gordon and Reinke. |
|
Absent - - - - |
Council Member
Ramos. |
|
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.
|
|
4:06 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:
|
|
|
Conference with Legal Counsel � Existing Litigation:
Pursuant to
Govt. Code �54956.9(a)
Name of Case:
Burbank-Glendale Airport Authority Noise Variance Hearing
Case No.:
OAH No. L2001-110412
Brief description and nature of case:
California Department of Transportation Hearing on whether noise variance
should be extended.
|
|
|
Name of Case:
Southern California Regional Rail Authority, et al. vs. Wysocki, et al.
Case No.:
EC036018
Brief description and nature of case:
Court Appeals arising from lawsuits filed related to the Metrolink
accident on January 6, 2004.
|
|
5:02 P.M.
Budget Study
Session
|
Planning
Application Processes Study Session.
|
|
Present-
|
Council Members
Bric, Golonski, Gordon, Reinke and Ramos. |
|
Absent - - - - |
Council Members
None. |
|
Also Present - |
Ms. Alvord, City
Manager; Mr. Barlow, City Attorney; and, Mrs. Campos, City Clerk.
|
|
|
Mr. Forbes,
Principal Planner, Community Development Department, reported that the
purpose of the study session was to provide information on the proposed
Zone Text Amendment (ZTA) that would reorganize sections of the Burbank
Municipal Code dealing with planning application processes and
procedures. In addition, he stated that Council
Member Gordon requested that staff bring back for Council discussion
information regarding the Development Review (DR) process and projects
that are appealed to the Council.
Mr. Forbes
reported that there are three general types of planning applications;
those acted upon administratively by the Community Development Director,
Planning Board and the Council. He added that with few exceptions, any
decision of the Director may be appealed to the Planning Board and
Council, and any decision of the Planning Board may be appealed to the
Council. With a visual aid, he explained the steps followed in the
planning application process until the application is processed and
ultimately approved or denied. He noted that for applications approved by
the Director, an approval letter is mailed to the public including any
required Conditions of Approval. He added that the Director�s decision
may be appealed by any interested party within 15 days of the date the
decision is made and if no appeal is filed, the Director�s decision
becomes final. He noted that if one or more appeals are filed, the
Planning Board conducts a noticed public hearing to consider the
application. He stated that appeals may be withdrawn until the 20th day
prior to the scheduled hearing, after which time they may not be
withdrawn. If all appeals are withdrawn prior to that deadline, a
secondary appeal period is provided to allow a second chance.
Mr. Forbes
further stated that a decision by the Planning Board may be further
appealed to the Council within 15 days of the Board�s decision and the
Council also has the authority to call for review a decision by the
Planning Board. He reported that the Council then holds a noticed public
hearing in the same manner as when an appeal is filed. He noted that if
no appeal is filed and the Council does not call up the Planning Board�s
decision, the Planning Board�s decision becomes final. He mentioned that
following the public hearing, the Council either adopts a resolution or
ordinance to memorialize the decision on the project, depending upon the
type of application. He added that in the event changes need to be made
to the project, the project would have to go through a substantial
conformance determination and if the changes are not in substantial
conformance, the applicant is required to re-apply in order to amend the
application.
With regard to
reorganizing sections of the Burbank Municipal Code dealing with planning
application processes and procedures, Mr. Forbes stated that the proposed
ZTA seeks to make the Zoning Ordinance more user-friendly and to eliminate
redundancy. He explained that the ZTA would simplify and standardize the
procedures for all applications by establishing five application
processes, and all planning applications would be processed pursuant to
one of the five processes. He noted that the existing general procedures
for individual application types would not change but be grouped into the
five categories. In addition, the ZTA would increase the internal
consistency of the Zoning Ordinance, simplify the process of adding new
application types in the future and facilitate the use of the
recently-implemented software system that is now being used to track
planning applications and manage project workload.
Mr. Forbes
requested Council direction regarding the previously-proposed ZTA, as well
as any additional direction regarding further consideration of changes to
the DR process.
|
|
6:17 P.M.
Recess
|
The Council
recessed at this time.
|
|
Regular Meeting
Reconvened in
Council Chambers |
The regular
meeting of the Council of the City of Burbank was reconvened at 6:35 p.m.
by Mrs. Ramos, Mayor.
|
|
Invocation
|
The invocation
was given by Bob Kramer, Community Assistance Coordinator.
|
|
Flag Salute
ROLL CALL |
The pledge of
allegiance to the flag was led by Dennis Barlow, City Attorney.
|
|
Present-
|
Council Members
Bric, Golonski, Gordon, Reinke and Ramos. |
|
Absent - - - - |
Council Members
None. |
|
Also Present - |
Ms. Alvord, City
Manager; Mr. Barlow, City Attorney; and, Mrs. Campos, City Clerk.
|
|
Council
Comments
|
Dr. Gordon
reported on participating in an operational tour of Bob Hope Airport and
an event of the arrival of the traveling Memorial Wall at the Valhalla
Memorial Park.
|
|
406
Airport
Authority
Report
|
Commissioner
Brown reported on the Airport Authority meeting of June 18, 2007 at which
Airport staff made a presentation on the enhancements to the Airport
website. Mr. Hardyment, Director of Noise and Environmental Programs,
elaborated on the enhancements.
|
|
Reporting on
Closed Session |
Mr. Barlow
reported on the items considered by the City Council during the Closed
Session meeting.
|
|
Initial Open
Public Comment
Period of Oral
Communications
|
Mrs. Ramos
called for speakers for the initial open public comment period of oral
communications at this time.
|
|
Citizen
Comment |
Appearing to
comment were: Olga Ford, on the Soka Gakkai International open house
event; Gary Garrison on the Joslyn Adult Center karaoke program; Tracy
Steinkruger, on the Relay for Life Team; Robert Caplan, requesting permit
parking for the 300 Lomita Street block; Michelle Feather, on a memorial
fund for former Bob Hope Airport Fire Chief; Eden Rosen, on Charter
Communication rates, in support of the Probation Officer funding and a
bronze art piece for the Chandler Bikeway; Esther Espinoza, reading an
article; Douglas Hill, in support of permit parking for Lomita Street;
LaVerne Thomas, on planning application procedures; James Schad,
congratulating Mrs. Reinke and Mr. Bric and commenting on traffic signal
issues; and, Tally Roth, inviting the community to an emergency
preparedness meeting.
|
|
Staff
Response |
Members of the
Council and staff responded to questions raised.
|
|
Agenda Item
Oral
Communications
|
Mrs. Ramos
called for speakers for the agenda item oral communications at this time.
|
|
Citizen
Comment |
Appearing to
comment were: Donald Pell and Robert Trainar, in support of the DeBell
Clubhouse Replacement Project; Esther Espinoza, on the Probation Officer
agreement; Paul Dyson, on the ordinance amending Chapter 23 of the Burbank
Municipal Code and the Chandler Bikeway art piece; and, LaVerne Thomas, on
the Chandler Bikeway art pieces.
|
|
Staff
Response |
Members of the
Council and staff responded to questions raised.
|
|
7:41 P.M.
Jt Mtg w Agency,
Housing Auth,
Parking Auth, Pub Fin Auth, and YES Fund -
Adoption of
FY 2007-08
Budget and Citywide Fee Schedule
|
Mr. Hess,
Assistant Financial Services Director, requested the Council,
Redevelopment Agency, Housing Authority, Parking Authority, Public
Financing Authority and Youth Endowment Services (YES) Fund Board adopt
the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007-08 Citywide Budget, Citywide Fee Schedule and
Appropriations Limit. He reported the citywide budget for FY 2007-08 is
approximately $719.8 million with the total General Fund appropriations of
$139,693,338 balanced against estimated revenue. He stated that if
adopted as proposed, including the items added by the Council, the General
Fund budget will be balanced with a projected amount of $127,722 remaining
at year�s end. He added that the FY 2007-08 General Fund budget is
approximately six percent larger than the adopted FY 2006-07 Budget. He
highlighted the discussion papers including restoration of three
firefighter positions, restoration of two Police Officer positions;
top-to-bottom review of the Police Department; parking enforcement tools;
and, education/ ambassador program. He also requested clarification with
regard to the $300,000 set aside for sustainability programs.
Mr. Hess
reported that during the public hearing on the proposed budget, the
Council directed staff to explore the feasibility of smoothing the
proposed nine percent refuse rate increase for FY 2007-08. He noted that
the proposed budget includes the nine percent refuse rate increase for FY
2007-08 which would amount to an increase of $1.81, from $20.14 to $21.95
per month. He noted that Lifeline customer rates will remain unchanged.
He stated that the rate increase is recommended to help the Refuse Fund
cover its growing operating costs and comply with legal bond coverage
requirements, other legal requirements and the City�s fiscal policies. He
informed the Council that if the bond covenants are not met: the City�s
ability to issue future debt will be restricted; there will be a potential
for a higher credit risk which will affect the future cost of capital and
result in payment of higher interest rates; the City will be required to
provide the associated disclosures; and, the City will be liable to
potential litigation. He noted that reducing the rate increase to six
percent reduces the monthly cost to rate payers by only 60 cents while
subjecting the fund to a potential deficit. He reiterated staff�s
recommendation for the proposed nine percent rate increase plan which will
decrease to eight percent over the next four years.
Ms. Teaford,
Public Works Director, gave an overview on the drivers behind the proposed
refuse rate increase from an operations perspective, which included:
increase in salaries and benefits per the Memoranda of Understanding;
increase in gas prices; and, costs associated with the new billing
system. She noted that refuse rates were not increased between 2001 and
2004, and reiterated that no increase is proposed for Lifeline customers.
She also provided a comparison of the City�s refuse rates to other
surrounding cities.
|
|
Motion |
It was moved by
Mr. Golonski and seconded by Mrs. Reinke that "the following resolutions
be passed and adopted.�
|
|
FY 2007-08
Budget |
RESOLUTION NO. 27,484:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURBANK ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007-2008, AND MAKING
APPROPRIATIONS FOR AMOUNTS BUDGETED.
|
|
FY 2007-08
Appropriations Limit |
RESOLUTION NO. 27,485:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURBANK DETERMINING AND ESTABLISHING THE CITY�S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2007-2008.
|
|
FY 2007-08
Fee Resolution
|
RESOLUTION NO. 27,486:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURBANK ADOPTING THE BURBANK FEE RESOLUTION, with modification of an eight
percent refuse rate increase for FY 2007-2008.
|
|
FY 2007-08
Red Agency
Budget
|
Redevelopment
Agency Resolution No. R-2184 entitled �A Resolution of the Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Burbank Adopting the Budget For Fiscal Year
2007-2008.�
|
|
FY 2007-08
Housing Auth
Budget
|
Housing
Authority Resolution No. H-195 entitled: �A Resolution of The Housing
Authority of the City of Burbank Adopting the Budget For Fiscal Year
2007-2008.
|
|
FY 2007-08
Parking Auth
Budget
|
Parking
Authority Resolution No. P-79 entitled �A Resolution of the Parking
Authority of the City of Burbank Adopting the Budget For Fiscal Year
2007-2008.�
|
|
FY 2007-08
Pub. Fin Auth
Budget
|
Public Financing
Authority Resolution No. F-11 entitled: �A Resolution of the Public
Financing Authority of the City of Burbank Adopting the Budget For Fiscal
Year 2007-2008.
|
|
FY 2007-08
YES Fund
Budget
|
Youth Endowment
Services Fund Board Resolution No. Y-50 entitled: �A Resolution of the
Youth Endowment Services Fund of the City of Burbank Adopting the Budget
For Fiscal Year 2007-2008, with direction that the $300,000 for
sustainability programs go into a holding account.�
|
|
Adopted |
The resolutions
were adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members Bric, Golonski,
Reinke and Ramos.
Noes:
Council Member Gordon.
Absent:
Council Members None.
|
|
Motion |
It was moved by
Mr. Golonski and seconded by Dr. Gordon that "the following items on the
consent calendar be approved as submitted.�
|
|
Minutes Approved
|
The minutes for
the regular meetings of January 9, January 16, January 23 and January 30,
2007 were approved as submitted.
|
|
404
907
Agt w LA County
for the Prevention and Intervention Program
|
RESOLUTION NO. 27,487:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURBANK APPROVING THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND THE COUNTY
OF LOS ANGELES TO PROVIDE A PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION PROGRAM (PIP).
|
|
Adopted |
The consent
calendar was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members Bric (except the
minutes), Golonski,
Gordon, Reinke and Ramos.
Noes:
Council Members None.
Absent:
Council Members None.
Abstain:
Council Member Bric (on the minutes only).
|
|
8:47 P.M.
Recess
|
The Council
recessed at this time. The meeting reconvened at 8:53 p.m. with all
members present. |
|
1301-3
Auth to
Proceed with Const of the DeBell Clubhouse Replacement Project �
BS No. 1153
|
Ms. Teaford,
Public Works Director, requested approval of various actions necessary to
begin construction of the DeBell Clubhouse. She stated that the existing
Clubhouse: is functionally obsolete by today�s clubhouse operational and
functional standards; does not meet current Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) standards for accessibility or structural integrity for
earthquake standards; does not have a fire suppression system other than
fire extinguishers and an American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
system for its kitchen equipment; is not energy efficient; and, the
existing surface parking lot is in poor condition and does not meet
current Burbank Municipal Code (BMC) standards. She reported that the
decision to replace the existing clubhouse and surface parking lot with
new facilities was made prior to June 2002 and has been re-affirmed
several times since then, given the facility�s continued declining
condition.
Ms. Teaford
elaborated on the project design elements which include a new two-story
13,760 square-foot clubhouse, new parking lot for 79 vehicles, ADA
accessibility from the new parking lot, a four-way stop installed at
Walnut Avenue and DeBell Drive, street and drainage improvements. She
also elaborated on the interior program which includes a bar and grill,
community room, restrooms with lounge areas, commercial kitchen and
administrative support offices, stairs and elevators, pro-shop, starter
area office and storage workroom, cart storage and maintenance support
areas, exterior terraces and a partially-covered patio.
Ms. Teaford
informed the Council that two bids were received on the project and Summit
Builders of Lakewood, California submitted the lowest bid of $6,776,000.
She added that an investigation of Summit Builders� current and local
project experience was performed and the results were favorable. Further
investigation indicated that three or more bids were received by Summit
Builders from their subcontractors for all primary trades, representing
approximately 82 percent of the construction bid. She noted that efforts
to attain a comparison to recent construction costs for comparable public
golf club houses did not identify any really similar publicly-constructed
facilities.
Ms. Teaford
reported that the current total projected cost was $9.4 million, which
reflects a 17.5 percent increase over the $8 million amount presented to
the Council on July 25, 2006. She stated that the primary causes for the
increase include: increased costs for architectural and engineering;
construction management; temporary power, water and sewer connections and
consumption; and, construction and project contingency.
With regard to
funding, Ms. Teaford reported that the Golf Fund had originally programmed
$6.5 million for the project and in March 2006, the Council authorized a
$1.5 million advance from the General Fund to the Golf Enterprise Fund to
be repaid over a ten-year period with principal and interest payments
commencing in January 2008. She stated that the two funding sources
represent the $8 million previously projected cost. She added that with
the construction bids indicating a cost of $9.4 million, the Oversight
Committee recommended the Council authorize a $1.4 million advance from
the General Fund for a total loan amount of $2.9 million. She noted that
if approved, the project would begin construction in July 2007 and be
ready for occupancy in September 2008.
|
|
Motion
|
It was moved by
Mr. Golonski and seconded by Mr. Bric that �the following resolution be
passed and adopted.�
|
|
1301-3
Auth to
Proceed with Const of the DeBell Clubhouse Replacement Project �
BS No. 1153
|
RESOLUTION NO. 27,488:
A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING AND ADOPTING
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND DETERMINING THE LOWEST
RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, ACCEPTING THE BID, AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A
CONTRACT FOR THE DEBELL CLUBHOUSE REPLACEMENT PROJECT (BID SCHEDULE 1153)
TO SUMMIT BUILDERS; AUTHORIZING AN ADVANCE OF $1.4 MILLION FROM THE
GENERAL FUND TO THE GOLF FUND; AND, AMENDING THE 2006-2007 FISCAL YEAR
BUDGET TO PROVIDE $6,222,283.60 FOR THE PROJECT.
|
|
Adopted |
The resolution
was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members Bric, Golonski,
Gordon, Reinke and
Ramos.
Noes:
Council Members None.
Absent:
Council Members None.
|
|
1705-1
Continuation of
the Downtown parking Management Update
|
Mr. Johnson,
Assistant Public Works Director/Traffic Engineer, reported that on May 29,
2007, staff presented an update on Downtown Parking Management. He noted
that due to the length of the Council meeting on that date, the Council
directed that the discussion regarding the item be postponed to a future
date. He requested Council direction regarding the presentation.
Mr. Golonski
requested an update on the Council�s request to look into utilizing a
private service on a contractual basis for downtown enforcement, similar
to the City of Pasadena which had a positive experience. He also stated
that the Council was not interested in imposing a charge for all
structures in downtown, but noted that in the event a fee was to be
imposed it would only be in the most popular structure or those with the
highest demand. He also requested the status on the ability to acquire a
parking structure that the City is currently leasing.
Mr. Johnson
responded that the lease payment was for a private parcel on which a
portion of the courthouse structure was built. He added that the lease
will be up this year and there was a plan in place to purchase the parcel
with funds that have been accumulating since the project was built;
however, the funds are not associated with the Parking Authority. He also
stated that charging for the most popular structures was problematic
because there is a need to install gates which is a fairly expensive
proposition. He added that it would be much easier to charge for
on-street parking with meters for a low cost.
Mrs. Reinke
inquired as to whether staff has contacted the cities of Pasadena or Santa
Monica to find out the process they used in order to be successful. She
noted the missed opportunity for charging for parking in places such as
the courthouse parking structure. She was not supportive of placing
meters on San Fernando Boulevard but suggested that staff look into some
programs in the larger parking structures that are heavily used, and
determine what the cost is and how soon the cost can be recouped.
Mr. Bric
inquired as to how may parking kiosks would be needed on San Fernando
Boulevard. He stated that when the item was considered by the Traffic and
Transportation Committee, he voted against parking meters but was having
second thoughts about the issue because too many people were taking
advantage of the parking.
Mrs. Reinke
stated that if paid parking was instituted in all structures and the City
was able to implement additional parking enforcement on San Fernando
Boulevard, revenue can be made fast without capital outlay. She was still
against parking meters on San Fernando Boulevard and stated that revenue
can be made from citations and gated parking structures.
Mr. Johnson
responded that enforcing the limits more rigorously will initially yield
some income but as individuals learn that they cannot park longer than
allowed, the revenue will drop by approximately half.
Dr. Gordon
inquired as to the source of funding for the parking structures. He
requested that staff explore using Redevelopment Agency resources.
Mr. Golonski
suggested pursuing increased enforcement to generate additional revenues
via a contract on an annual basis. He was also willing to consider a pilot
program for charging in one prime structure, preferably Structure A.
Mrs. Reinke
agreed with Mr. Golonski�s summary. She noted the need for the Parking
Authority to be self-funded and urged that the courthouse parking be
considered for the pilot program as it is always full in addition to
Structures G and M.
Mr. Bric inquired as to the input from the merchants. Mr. Johnson stated
that the Downtown Parking Management Committee reluctantly agreed to paid
parking but recommended that the deficit be made up from the General
Fund.
Mrs. Ramos
requested that staff return with an update on the ability to enhance
parking enforcement on a contractual basis. She noted consensus that
enforcement is an important issue. She agreed with Mr. Golonski�s
suggestion that the prime spaces need to be managed. She requested the
status of the smart signage program and requested statistical information
on employee parking permits being issued. She also inquired if outreach
has been made to the business owners.
Dr. Gordon
inquired if there may be a mechanism to assess a parking fee to the
downtown business owners based on the number of commuting employees and to
designate specific parking areas for the employees.
|
|
Motion
|
It was moved by
Mr. Golonski, seconded by Mrs. Reinke and carried �to direct staff to:
provide an analysis on utilizing the service used by the City of Pasadena
for enhanced enforcement of the existing parking regulations in the
downtown on a contractual basis; provide an analysis of other parking
enforcement tools; consider implementing a pilot program of charging in
structures A, G and M; look at additional revenue generated from the
enhanced enforcement and consider a contribution to the Parking Authority;
and, look at the funds that have been accumulated to purchase the parcel
that is part of the courthouse parking structure and evaluate if there is
an alternate funding mechanism that could free up those funds to be
utilized for the immediate capital needs.�
Mrs. Ramos also
requested information on businesses that have purchased employee parking
permits and any public outreach efforts that have been made.
|
|
1705-2
1601-1
Additional Art Piece on Chandler Bikeway
Step 1
|
Mr. Hansen,
Park, Recreation and Community Services Director, reported that on May 8,
2007, Mayor Ramos requested a discussion on the potential of developing
another public art installation on the Chandler Bikeway. He noted that
currently, there are two bronze sculptures installed along the bikeway;
The Wagon Pull which was dedicated in December 2005 and Family Outing
which was dedicated in May 2007. He stated that there are other potential
installation sites available. He noted that there is approximately
$454,000 in the fund and requested Council direction with regard to the
matter.
The Council
noted and filed the report.
|
|
1502
206
Ord Amend
Chapter 23 � Public Transportation
|
Mr. Johnson,
Assistant Public Works Director/Traffic Engineer, requested Council
approval of an ordinance amending Chapter 23, Public Transportation, of
the Burbank Municipal Code (BMC) to authorize the Traffic and
Transportation Committee (T&TC) to establish a surcharge for extraordinary
or unusual costs incurred in providing specialized transportation
services. He noted that currently, the BMC requires that a taxicab fare
cannot be greater than that charged in the City of Los Angeles (LA) for a
similar trip. The section also requires that taxicab rates of fare must
be consistent throughout the City. He noted that requests have been
received from taxi cab companies to charge a differential rate for trips
from Bob Hope Airport in order to fund additional services for Airport
passengers. He stated that the proposed changes in the BMC retain the
consistency of base fares within the region based on LA rates. However,
the changes will allow the Traffic and Transportation Committee, which
currently regulates the number and operating rules of Burbank licensed
taxis, to establish surcharges as necessary for specialized operations.
|
|
Ordinance
|
It was moved by
Mr. Golonski and seconded by Mr. Bric that �the following ordinance be
introduced and read for the first time by title only and be passed to the
second reading.� |
|
|
AN
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING SECTION 23-129 OF
THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO RATES OF FARE FOR TAXICAB
SERVICE .
|
|
Introduced |
The ordinance
was introduced by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members Bric, Golonski,
Gordon, Reinke and
Ramos.
Noes:
Council Members None.
Absent:
Council Member None.
|
|
1100
Ordinance
Outlining the Red Agency�s Eminent Domain Program, in Compliance with SB
53
|
Mr. Lynch,
Senior Redevelopment Project Manager, Community Development Department,
requested the Council introduce an ordinance to satisfy the requirements
of State Senate Bill (SB) 53 regarding the Burbank Redevelopment Agency�s
(Agency) Eminent Domain Program. He stated that the new measure requires
the legislative body of agencies with existing redevelopment plans to
adopt an ordinance by July 1, 2007 that describes their program to acquire
real property by eminent domain. Also, redevelopment plans adopted after
January 1, 2007 are required to describe the agency�s program to acquire
real property by eminent domain. He stated that Burbank has no new
redevelopment project area that is being contemplated; however, there are
four existing redevelopment plans. He noted that for the West Olive and
Golden State Project Areas, the right to use eminent domain has expired
and the two project areas with eminent domain authority are the City
Center (until 2011) and South San Fernando Project Areas (until 2009). He
stated that the proposed ordinance reflects these limits. He also updated
the Council on potential State legislation that could affect the Agency�s
ability to use eminent domain.
|
|
Ordinance
|
It was moved by
Mr. Golonski and seconded by Mr. Bric that �the following ordinance be
introduced and read for the first time by title only and be passed to the
second reading.�
|
|
|
AN
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK DESCRIBING THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK PROGRAM TO ACQUIRE REAL
PROPERTY BY EMINENT DOMAIN AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 33342.7 OF THE
CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE. |
|
Introduced |
The ordinance
was introduced by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members Bric, Golonski,
Gordon, Reinke and
Ramos.
Noes:
Council Members None.
Absent:
Council Member None.
|
|
10:59 P.M.
Reconvene
Agency, Housing Auth. Parking Auth, Pub Fin Auth and YES Fund meetings
|
The
Redevelopment Agency, Housing Authority, Parking Authority, Public
Financing Authority and Youth Endowment Service Fund Board meetings were
reconvened at this time for public comment.
|
|
11:00 P.M.
Memorial
Adjournment |
There being no
further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at
11:00 p.m. in memory of Betty Jane Rodriguez.
Margarita Campos, CMC
City Clerk
|
