Brown Act alert: staff kept “public” meeting (and private studio tour) off the agenda

 

(We’re on CP Time anyway this week, so we’ll be pinning this one to the top for a while if only because it’s so perfectly Burbank sleazy. It’s not to be ignored — twenty years ago there would have been a frigging riot down at the Chambers the minute the news of this one hit. The Disney execs got an illegal private meeting and group discussion with the city council and planning board right before their huge DA extension request goes up for a vote; the rest of us didn’t get an agenda statement or a set of descriptive minutes to the visit; and there isn’t even a copy of the menu for their catered luncheon.)

 

mickey (1)

 

This from Vice Mayor Rogers’ unofficial web calendar:

 

fireshot-capture-112-8777-7-jpg-2112c3971728

 

That’s funny.

Why wasn’t this tour placed on the regular council agenda? Apparently that’s what it was — a studio tour of the Walt Disney Company in preparation for their Development Agreement extension request.

Digging down, we’ve found that this event was only placed into public notice right here. But that’s not sufficient under the law.

Disney obviously didn’t want too many pesky visitors down there now, did they? Because by law anyone from the public would have been allowed to attend this joint meeting. And if we’d seen it on the required published agenda as we all should have under the law, we’d have all known about it way ahead of time.

Looks like the City of Burbank seriously broke the Open Meetings law on this one. Staff should have announced this important studio meeting on their regular formal agenda, and they did not.

No? See it listed anywhere in the archived agendas below? In short, their little studio tour and get-together was not properly noticed under the Brown Act.

 

 

FireShot Capture 199 - Burbank, CA _ _ - http___www.burbankca.gov_what-s-new_meeting-agendas-minutes

 

FireShot Capture 200 - Burbank, CA _ Meeting Agends

 

Disney didn’t want anyone else there. So the event was buried on an obscure web page, and with a supposed link to the agenda page that doesn’t even link to anything. Our first news of it was on Rogers’ web site.

The big question of course is … what did they all talk about (or were told about) down there?
 
tumblr_mfvnodyoqj1r9aisho1_500
 

 
 

Advertisements

32 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

32 responses to “Brown Act alert: staff kept “public” meeting (and private studio tour) off the agenda

  1. Anonymous 3

    You should sue.

  2. DixieFlyer

    This whole “check our website” routine is WRONG.

    Public Notice’s should be available at designated locations.

    Other postings should be optional ONLY, not LEGAL NOTICE.

    The shitty attorney is NOT doing her job.

    • semichorus

      It wasn’t even on their web site where it should have been. There was no agenda notice of that meeting, no descriptive written agenda of what to expect, and no minutes.

      It now looks like it was run as a private meeting between the groups. Not legal.

    • Anonymous

      Classic A3. No one in Burbank should expect the city gov’t to abide by BMC, the laws of California, the US constitution or even the historic tenets of Western civilization. Well, screw it. At least we have Wal Mart….

      • Anonymous 3

        You only have Jimmy’s word that the notice was not given.

        Actually, it was properly noticed, and members of the public did attend.

        • semichorus

          Where is it, and where is the agenda? Where are the minutes? Their own LINK from the extension page didn’t link to anything.

          I made that up too, eh?

          What are they gonna do now– suddenly put it up there? Are they also gonna claim that the new state funding rules don’t require online posting of agendas any more?

          If so, I’ve been waiting for that one.

          I guess if you put 2+2 together and knew about the event ahead of time you could have gone. But that’s not the Brown Act. I saw no special posting of this special meeting, and nothing about it is sitting in the archive. For either group.

          Everything else is.

  3. Faux Fuddy Luddy

    funny this is from tthe Agenda forecast: love how they have already changed the airport name , yet on homepage of Council website,they still call it Bob Hope

    9. City Council Consideration of a Comment Letter on the Hollywood Burbank Airport Replacement Terminal Project EIR –CDD

  4. Anonymous

    it is not easy to even find things on that city web site

  5. Doug

    Be sure to read tomorrow’s phoney-bologny Community News.
    Where are the Public Comments from the Public Hearing on the across the board Utility Rate Hikes?
    Was the reporter asleep or only half-way?
    Great Reporting on an Annual Public Hearing on raising rates.
    No Public Comments made the paper???
    Please tell us if it’s the Editors or the reporters.

    • Terry

      I love how anonymous 3 says “so sue” Really ? Do we have or want a city where the elected city council expresses an attitude that residents should sue all the time just to get their elected council to listen to them ? I think it is better if we just throw both Talamontez and Fruitos out of office this election and replace them with people who listen to the residents of Burbank instead of listening to their staff all the time. I am so tired of corrupt self serving government.

      • Anonymous 3

        Gordon is as complicit in this fictitious failure to notice. Why don’t you want him out of office as well?

        And excuse my flippant response to Jimmy’s hysterical reaction to a non-event. The meeting was noticed and the public did attend.

        • semichorus

          To whom– invited guests? It wasn’t on the agenda, and it’s still not. That’s not notice.

          The law is simple and direct about this: if it hasn’t been agendized, it’s not legally noticed. So where is it? And those staff clowns couldn’t even follow through on their supposed link to the agenda page.

          Business as usual in Burbank.

          I’m surprised that Disney isn’t having another one of their “Open House– Welcome Neighbors!” Sunday festivities like they had the last time they wanted their fancy DA. Guess it’s much easier now to manipulate the Burbank public.

          Wonder if Will has some scripts for them to read this time. Anyone else remember that 90s debacle? Some of the FOBs and city boosters of the old DA were promised a special reading of their work.

    • Mike

      U found this on the Rogers personal web site ? Oops looks like boy wonder rogers let secret session out of the bag and that city attorney will need to spank him again. I hear he likes spankings.

    • Dennis

      Just “read” the Leader. Sure didn’t take long.
      They have more sports coverage, two full pages, than Community News.
      It was laughable how Fuddy Duddy Luddy echoed staff remarks,
      and the “company paper” printed her babble.
      What will happen during the City Election?

    • Connie

      You go Doug.
      Those rubber stampers are raising Water,Electric, Trash and Sewer.
      The staff drivel on the Budget spent every dime, plus more.
      Naturally, the slobs on the Public Payroll feed info to the reporters and their editors.
      Lowest rates? Compared to what?
      These kids aren’t old enough to remember that each utility set their own courses.
      Different subdivisions went in at different times.
      Burbank always had a much bigger industrial base than Glendale.
      Those of you that have criticized the Leader are right.
      We need Local Coverage that balances the information.

  6. chad

    Off Topic: Idiots with guns will not bring down our school, Semi. UCLA I am with you. Two more victims to a gun culture that doesn’t give a shit about human life. And before anyone says otherwise, it’s not in the Constitution and even if it was it would be time to change the damn thing. Blue and Gold.

    • semichorus

      When I heard about this the first thing I thought was “South Campus” (!)

      So how come you never hear about film majors or English majors shooting anyone? It’s always the careerists.

    • Longshanks

      ” it’s not in the Constitution and even if it was it would be time to change the damn thing.”

      Except it is, in fact it’s the 2nd Amendment.

      You want to change it? Get the votes required. Never going to happen, but knock yourself out trying.

      What happened at UCLA is a tragedy, but let’s not start blaming the guns. I’m still waiting to hear more about this clown’s motivations before flipping out.

      • John Wooden

        His concern was Pussy, plain and simple
        After attending UCLA, he got married and then got a gun and….
        shot her.
        Then he drove across the Country seeking not one but two staffers.
        Oh. before he left his dead wife, he was concerned about his OTHER
        pussy, his cat.
        When he discovered one of his prey was not on Campus, he went after
        the one that was.
        In an effort to save taxpayers some money, he shot himself.
        And that’s the way it was.
        After all the draft-dodgers attend UCLA they all hate weapons
        in other peoples hands, but they prefer to handle their own.

        • Longshanks

          Hey John,

          Not sure if you’re being sarcastic or not here (although I completely agree about him saving taxpayers money).

          As far as the UCLA shooting goes, I want more information before flying off the handle about gun control/2nd Amendment stuff.

          Is this another situation like the Virginia Tech shooter from a few years ago, where that person should have been disqualified from owning a firearm, but “Agency A” wasn’t allowed to communicate information to “Agency B” about this person that would have prevented them from purchasing a firearm? If so, then let’s unfuck that process. I’m all for that.

          I’m more disturbed about the reports about the students who were told to “lock-down” had no real means to do that.

  7. Anonymous 3

    The meeting was publicly noticed and the public did attend.

  8. chad

    Wrong. That’s for a militia. Another emotionally disturbed person gets a hold of guns and kills innocent people. Every time this happens the NRA should burn a little more in hell.

  9. donkeypunch

    Jumbo is relatively quiet about the UCLA shooting. Probably because he’s disappointed that the circumstances don’t fit any of his ignorant pre-dispositions.

    • semichorus

      Too many guns around. What situation would that not be? I have nothing to add to it– except that nothing surprises me about South Campus.

      You are such a fucking asshole. Were you raised in Burbank or something?

Leave a Reply- (comments take a while to appear)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s