BURBANK CITY COUNCIL
JOINT MEETING WITH THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY,
HOUSING AUTHORITY, PARKING AUTHORITY, AND
YOUTH ENDOWMENT SERVICES FUND BOARD
TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 2026
4:00 p.m. – Closed Session
5:00 p.m. – Study Session
6:00 p.m. – Open Session
Council Chamber
275 E. Olive Avenue, Second Floor
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Joint City Council Meeting will be held in the Council Chamber – 275 East Olive Avenue, Second Floor, on Tuesday, January 13, 2026, at 4:00 p.m., to discuss matters on the attached agenda.
Members of the public have the option to participate in the meeting via in-person and/or telephonically for Closed Session, General Public Comment, Public Hearings, and Study Sessions. They may also submit their written comments regarding City business using the eComment feature on the City website, or by emailing the City Council directly at
[email protected]
.
Auxiliary aids and services are available for individuals with speech, vision, or hearing impairments (48- hour notice is required). For more information, please contact the ADA Coordinator at (818) 238-5051.
Interpretation Requests
:
If you would like to participate in Public Comments and require an interpreter, please telephone the City Clerk's Office at (818) 238-5851 at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting.
Si desea participar en los comentarios públicos y necesita un intérprete, por favor llame a la Oficina de la Secretaria Municipal al (818) 238-5851 al menos 48 horas antes de la reunión.
How to View the Meeting
:
Local Cable: Spectrum Channel 6 or AT&T Uverse Channel 99.
YouTube Live Streaming Channel:
Click here
.
City Website Live Streaming:
Click here
.
Public Comment Options
:
1 .
To speak during Closed Session Public Comment, General Public Comment, Public Hearing Public Comment, and Study Session Public Comment periods during the meeting, members of the public may speak in-person in the Council Chamber or call (818) 238-3335
. Speaker time limits will
be determined by the Presiding Officer, depending on how many public comment cards are received and how many callers are in the queue at the commencement of each public comment period (as shown below).
Additional public comment cards and calls will not be accepted once the public comment period commences.
1 – 20 Total Speakers – 3 minutes each
21 – 39 Total Speakers – 2 minutes each
40+ Total Speakers – 1 minute each
Burbank City Council Meeting Agenda
January 13, 2026
1 A.
Public Comment
: (On Closed Session and Study Session items only) To Comment, please telephone into the meeting at (818) 238-3335, or to speak in person a YELLOW
Public Comment
Card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk prior to the comment period.
B.
Closed Session
in City Hall First Floor Conference Room
:
2 .
The Reports to Council Public Comment periods are only accepted in person – public comment cards must be submitted before the public comment period begins for each report to Council.
Speaker time limits will be determined by the Presiding Officer depending on how many public comment cards have been received at the commencement of each public comment period (as shown below).
Additional public comment cards will not be accepted once the public comment period commences.
1 – 20 Total Speakers – 3 minutes each
21 – 39 Total Speakers – 2 minutes each
40+ Total Speakers – 1 minute each
3 .
eComment will remain open until 3:00 p.m. the day of the meeting. 4 .
Email the City Council directly
[email protected]
Emails received on or before 3:00 p.m. on City Council Meeting Day will be distributed to the City Council in advance of the meeting. Any correspondence received after this time will be distributed the following business day.
5 .
The Presiding Officer has the discretion to reduce speaking time for each speaker in order to ensure that City business can be completed at a reasonable hour.
Public Disclosure
:
Please be advised that any communication submitted to the City of Burbank, its officials, staff or City consultants, may be considered a public record under the Brown Act and California Public Records Act.
This means that any information contained in the communication, including personal information, may be subject to public disclosure. The City reserves the right to disclose such information in accordance with the law.
This agenda contains a summary of each item of business which the City Council, Successor Agency, Housing Authority, Parking Authority, and Youth Endowment Services Fund Board may discuss or act on at this meeting. The agenda packet consisting of the staff reports and all other documentation relating to each item on this agenda will be posted on the City's website at www.burbankca.gov
. Any writings or
documents provided to the City Council regarding any item on this agenda subsequent to distribution of the agenda packet will be posted on the City's website at www.burbankca.gov
. If you have a question
about any matter on the agenda, please call the Office of the City Clerk at (818) 238-5851. The Council Chamber is disabled accessible. Auxiliary aids and services are available for individuals with speech, vision, or hearing impairments (48-hour notice is required). Please contact the ADA Coordinator at (818) 238-5051 with questions or concerns.
1. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation a
.
Initiation of litigation pursuant to Govt. Code §54956.9(d)(4) City as Potential Plaintiff b
.
Number of potential case(s): 1
2. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
a
.
Pursuant to Govt. Code §54956.9(d)(1)
b
.
Name of Case: Michelle Morris v. City of Burbank
c
.
Case No.: 25NNCV06802
d
.
Brief description and nature of case: Trip and fall
Burbank City Council Meeting Agenda
January 13, 2026
2 C.
Study Session: 5:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. – Council Chamber
:
1. Update on the Status of the Burbank Rancho Neighborhood Specific Plan Development Process – Community Development Department
D.
Call to Order
: 6:00 p.m.
E.
Moment of Reflection
:
F.
Flag Salute
:
G.
Roll Call
:
H.
Announcements
: (The Mayor will make announcements on various topics in addition to any listed) I.
Council Presentations/Recognitions
: (The Mayor will make presentations to various
groups/persons)
1. Presentation of Certificates of Recognition to the Winners of the OurBurbank 2025 Holiday Decorating Contest – City Council
2. Presentation of a Certificate of Recognition to the Burbank Tournament of Roses Association – City Council
J.
City Manager Report
: (Updates on Notable Events, if any)
K.
Presentations
:
L.
Reporting on Closed Session
: (The City Attorney will report the Closed Session items and report out actions taken)
3. Conference with Real Property Negotiator
a
.
Pursuant to Govt. Code §54956.8
b
.
Property: Burbank Historical Society, 115 N. Lomita Street, Burbank, CA 91506, located on portions of George Izay Park
c
.
Parties Whom Agency or City is Negotiating with: Burbank Historical Society d
.
City Negotiator: Simone McFarland, Assistant Community Development Director - Business & Economic Development
e
.
Terms Under Negotiation: Ground lease renewal. Terms under negotiation include, but are not limited to, term of lease, rent, use, and maintenance.
Recommendation
: Receive an update on the development process of the Burbank Rancho Neighborhood Specific Plan.
Attachments
:
SR - Rancho Neighborhood Specific Plan
Att1 - Existing Regulations
Att2 - Project Timeline
Att3 - Summary of Draft Historic Context Statement
Att4 - Map of Existing Equestrian Network
Att5 - Summary of Existing Conditions
Att6 - Summary of Interviews with Stakeholders
Att7 - Summary of Community Events.pdf
Att8 - Summary of Major Themes and Objectives
PowerPoint Presentation
Burbank City Council Meeting Agenda
January 13, 2026
3 M.
Joint General Public Comment
: (On any matter concerning City business and/or any agenda items.) To Comment, please telephone into the meeting at (818) 238-3335 or to speak in person, a YELLOW
Public Comment Card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk prior to the comment period.
N.
Council, City Manager, and/or City Attorney Comment
: (Responses to General Public
Comment, if any, shall be brief and in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act) O.
Consent Calendar
: (Items on the Consent Calendar are generally routine matters and should be adopted by one motion without an oral report)
1. City Council Minutes – City Clerk's Office
2. Successor Agency Minutes – City Clerk's Office
3. Housing Authority Minutes – City Clerk's Office
4. Parking Authority Minutes – City Clerk's Office
Recommendation
:
Approve the City Council Minutes of the City Council Reorganization Meeting of December 15, 2025; the Regular Meeting of December 16, 2025; and the Dark Meetings of December 23 and December 30, 2025, and January 6, 2026.
MOTION: Approved 5-0
Attachments
:
Council Minutes - 12.15
Council Minutes - 12.16
Dark Meeting Minutes - 12.23
Dark Meeting Minutes - 12.30
Dark Meeting Minutes - 01.06
Recommendation
:
Approve the Successor Agency Minutes of the Joint Meeting of September 9, 2025.
MOTION: Approved 5-0
Attachments
:
Successor Agency Minutes
Recommendation
:
Approve the Housing Authority Minutes of the Joint Meeting of December 9, 2025.
MOTION: Approved 5-0
Attachments
:
Housing Authority Minutes
Recommendation
:
Approve the Parking Authority Minutes of the Joint Meeting of October 14, 2025.
MOTION: Approved 5-0
Attachments
:
Parking Authority Minutes
Burbank City Council Meeting Agenda
January 13, 2026
4 5.
Youth Endowment Services Fund Board Minutes – City Clerk's Office
6. Adoption of a Resolution Correcting Resolution No. 25-29,664 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Design-Build Contract with Landscape Structures, Inc. and Delegating Authority to Approve Plans and Specifications for Shade Structures at Robert E. Gross Park Ballfields – Parks and Recreation Department
7. Adoption of a Resolution Awarding Contract Documents Including Plans, Specifications and Environmental Analysis, and Authorizing the Execution of a Construction Contract for Bid Schedule No. 1542, Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) Access Center, to Cal-City Construction, Inc., as the Highest Ranked Bidder and Best Value to the City – Community Development Department
Recommendation
:
Approve the Youth Endowment Services Fund Board Minutes of the Joint Meeting of September 9, 2025.
MOTION: Approved 5-0
Attachments
:
YES Fund Board Minutes
Recommendation
:
Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK CORRECTING RESOLUTION NO. 25-29,664 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACT WITH LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES, INC. AND DELEGATING
AUTHORITY TO APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR SHADE STRUCTURES AT ROBERT E. GROSS PARK BALLFIELDS.
MOTION: Removed for Discussion at a Future Meeting
Attachments
:
SR - Resolution No. 25-29,664 Correction
Att1 - 11.18.25 Staff Report
Att2 - Resolution
Recommendation
:
Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AWARDING
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS INCLUDING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL
ANALYSIS, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR BID SCHEDULE NO. 1542, BURBANK’S HOME AGAIN LOS ANGELES (HALA) ACCESS CENTER, TO CAL-CITY CONSTRUCTION, INC., AS THE HIGHEST RANKED BIDDER AND BEST VALUE TO THE CITY.
MOTION: Adopted 5-0 (Resolution No. 26-29,676)
Attachments
:
SR - Construction Contract for BS 1542
Att1 - Resolution
Resolution No. 26-29,676
Burbank City Council Meeting Agenda
January 13, 2026
5 8.
Adoption of a Resolution Ratifying And Approving Community Energy Reliability And Resilience Investment Program Grant Applications for an Award of $5,186,701 for the Burbank Grid Forward 12kv Conversion Project, Commitment to Fund $36,800,000 over Fiscal Years 2027-28, 2028-29, 2029-30, and 2030-31, and Authorizing the Burbank Water and Power General Manager, as the City Manager’s Designee, to Negotiate, Execute, and Implement All Required and Related Agreements and Forms with the California Energy Commission and the Department of Energy – Burbank Water and Power
9. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Execution of a Grant Agreement with California Fire Foundation for Disaster Relief and Recovery, Acceptance of Grant Funds in the Amount of $25,000, and Amending the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget by Appropriating Funds Towards the Burbank Fire Department’s Wildland Program – Fire Department
Recommendation
:
1 .
Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK RATIFYING AND APPROVING GRANT APPLICATIONS FOR AN AWARD OF $5,186,701 FROM
THE COMMUNITY ENERGY RELIABILITY AND RESILIENCE INVESTMENT (CERRI) PROGRAM FOR THE BURBANK GRID FORWARD 12KV CONVERSION PROJECT (PROPOSED PROJECT) BY BURBANK WATER AND POWER (BWP), COMMITMENT TO FUND $36,800,000 OVER FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2027-28, FY 2028-29, FY 2029-30, AND FY 2030-31, AND AUTHORIZING THE BWP GENERAL MANAGER, AS THE CITY MANAGER’S DESIGNEE, TO NEGOTIATE, EXECUTE, AND IMPLEMENT ALL
REQUIRED AND RELATED AGREEMENTS AND FORMS WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION (CEC) AND THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (DOE); 2 .
Authorize BWP General Manager to accept all grant funds under these agreements.
MOTION: Adopted 5-0 (Resolution No. 26-29,677)
Attachments
:
SR - CEC Grant Applications
Att1 - Resolution
Att2 - Grant Terms and Conditions
Att3 - Federal Award Terms and Conditions
Resolution No. 26-29,677
Recommendation
:
Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH CALIFORNIA FIRE FOUNDATION FOR
DISASTER RELIEF AND RECOVERY, ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000 AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING FUNDS TOWARDS THE BURBANK FIRE DEPARTMENT’S WILDLAND PROGRAM.
MOTION: Adopted 5-0 (Resolution No. 26-29,678)
Attachments
:
SR - Grant Agreement with CA Fire Foundation
Att1 - Resolution
Att2 - Grant Agreement
Resolution No. 26-29,678
Burbank City Council Meeting Agenda
January 13, 2026
6 10.
Acceptance of an Additional $382,630 from the Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department - Funding for the Contracted Elderly Nutrition Program and Related Amendment of the Fiscal Year 2025–2026 Adopted Budget – Parks and Recreation Department
11. Acceptance of a Grant from California Library Literacy Services in the Amount of $39,570 for Adult Literacy Services and Amendment of the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget – Library Services Department
Recommendation
:
1 .
Accept $382,630 from the County of Los Angeles Aging and Disabilities Department, Net County Cost (NCC) and Modernizing Older Californias Act (MOCA) Funding, and Intensive Program (NSIP) Funding to extend the Contracted Elderly Nutrition Program (ENP) Older Americans Act Title III C-1 and Title III C-2 Services and Approve the Executed Elderly Nutrition Program Amendment One.
2 .
Amend the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026 Adopted Budget as follows upon receipt of the grant funds in FY 2025-2026 by appropriating $362,930 (NCC funding $87,000, MOCA funding $250,000 and NSIP funding $25,930) from revenue account 001.PR000.48010.1007.000000 (General Fund, Other Intergovernmental Revenue, Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department Nutrition State C1) to expenditure account 001.PR42A.62300.0000.000000 (General Fund, Supplemental Nutrition Program, Special Department Supplies) and appropriating $19,700 (NSIP C2 Funding $19,700) from revenue account 001.PR000.48010.1008.000000 (General Fund, Other Intergovernmental Revenue, Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department Nutrition State C2) to account number 001.PR42A.62300.0000.000000 (General Fund, Supplemental Nutrition Program, Special Department Supplies).
MOTION: Accepted and Amended 5-0
Attachments
:
SR - Elderly Nutrition Program Fund
Att1 - Funding
Att2 - ENP Amendment One
Recommendation
:
Accept a grant from California Library Literacy Services in the amount of $39,570 for Adult Literacy Services and authorize the Library Services Director or his designee to take all actions necessary to receive such funds and amend the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Adopted Budget as specified to receive and appropriate these grant funds.
MOTION: Accepted 5-0
Attachments
:
SR - CLLS Literacy Grant
Att1 - Award Letter
Burbank City Council Meeting Agenda
January 13, 2026
7 12.
Acceptance of a Donation to the Library Services Department in the Amount of $50,000 from the Friends of the Burbank Public Library to Support Early Childhood Learning and Library of Things Collection and Authorization to Amend the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Adopted Budget – Library Services Department
13. Approval of Bikeway License Agreement with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Construction and Maintenance Agreement with Southern California Regional Rail Authority, and Use Agreement with Los Angeles County Flood Control District for the San Fernando Bikeway Project – Community Development Department
14. Review of Fiscal Year 2024-25 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report – Financial Services Department
(with Successor Agency, Housing Authority, Parking Authority, and Youth Endowment Services Fund Board)
Recommendation
:
Accept a donation from Friends of the Burbank Public Library in the amount of $50,000, authorize the Library Services Director or his or her designee to take all actions necessary to receive such funds, and amend the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget as specified to receive and appropriate these funds.
MOTION: Accepted 5-0
Attachments
:
SR - Friend of Burbank Public Library Donation
Recommendation
:
Approve the following agreements related to permitting and construction of the San Fernando Bikeway Project, with reasonable changes in form and substance approved by the City Attorney’s Office, and authorize the Community Development Director, as the City Manager’s designee, to execute such Agreements and any necessary amendments thereto:
a
.
Bikeway License Agreement with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority b
.
Construction and Maintenance Agreement with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority
c
.
Use Agreement with Los Angeles County Flood Control District
MOTION: Approved 5-0
Attachments
:
SR - San Fernando Bikeway License Agreements
Att1 - Draft Bikeway License Agreement
Att2 - Draft Construction and Maintenance Agreement
Att3 - Draft Use Agreement
Att4 - Rendering and Proposed Cross Section
Recommendation
:
Note and file.
MOTION: Noted and Filed 5-0
Attachments
:
SR - Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
Att1 - FY 2024-25 Report
Burbank City Council Meeting Agenda
January 13, 2026
8 15.
Approval of the Proposed City Council Meeting Schedule for March 2026 through February 2027 – City Manager's Office
P.
Reports to Council
: (Items listed under this section will have an oral report provided)
1. Appointment of City Council Members to Committee and Liaison Roles for the 2026 Calendar Year – City Manager's Office
Q.
Council Comments
: (Including reporting on Council committee assignments, attendance at conferences, regional meetings, and community events)
R.
Consideration of Previously Introduced Additional Agenda Items : (Council Members may
briefly discuss future agenda item requests)
1. Mayor Takahashi’s request for a first step report on the Downtown Paseo improvements and plans for the cultural market (December 16, 2025).
MOTION: Requested a First Step Report 5-0
S.
Introduction of Additional Agenda Items
: (Council Members may request future agenda items)
T.
Adjournment
: To Tuesday, January 27, 2026, for a Regular Meeting in the Council Chamber –
275
East Olive Avenue, Second Floor.
Recommendation
:
Approve the proposed City Council Meeting Schedule for March 2026 through February 2027.
MOTION: Approved as Amended 5-0
Attachments
:
SR - Proposed Meeting Schedule 2026-27
Att1 - 2026-27 Meeting Schedule
Recommendation
:
Appoint members of the City Council to Committee and Liaison roles for the 2026 calendar year.
Public Comment
: To speak in person, a
YELLOW
Public Comment Card must be completed
and presented to the City Clerk prior to the comment period.
Council Action
: Appointed Members 5-0
Attachments
:
SR - Council Liaisons Appointments
Att1 - 2026 Council Liaison Appointments
Att2 - Description of Committees and Coalitions
Att3 - Liaison Definition of Role and Purpose Policy
Burbank City Council Meeting Agenda
January 13, 2026
9 1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: January 13, 2026
TO: Justin Hess, City Manager
FROM: Patrick Prescott, Community Development Department VIA: Fred Ramirez, Asst. Community Development Director - Planning Scott Plambaeck, Planning Manager
Amanda Landry, Principal Planner
BY: Greg Mirza-Avakyan, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Update on the Status of the Burbank Rancho Neighborhood Specific Plan (RNSP) Development Process
RECOMMENDATION
Receive an update on the development process of the Burbank Rancho Neighborhood Specific Plan.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report pr esents a comprehensive update on the status and next steps for the Burbank RNSP Project with a summary of historic context, existing land use regulations, equestrian ownership trends, equestrian safety concerns, economic profile, and mobility conditions. Emerging themes and objectives identified in initial public outreach will also be discussed . S taff requests City Council’s direction and input on these themes and objectives.
BACKGROUND
The Burbank Rancho i s a unique area that represents a rare example of an equestrian neighborhood nestled in the urban Southern California landscape. T he Rancho is specifically designated within the City of Burbank to allow horse keeping and equestrian- related uses, grounded in its proximity to the LA Equestrian Center (LAEC) and Griffith Park. T he Rancho has maintained an equestrian identity since the City’s early years, when Griffith Park trails were established in the 1920’s and surrounding neighborhoods
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
Study Session
Item #1
10 2
the arrival of major studios in the 1920s–30s, and the first horse keeping regulations were adopted in 1950, followed by the adoption of the H-overlay in 1964. As development pressures increased, the City initiated planning efforts in the early 1990’s to preserve the Rancho’s unique character. This planning effort resulted in the creation of a Draft Rancho Commercial Recreation Master Plan in 1992. While the plan was never formally adopted, its core elements were incorporated into a Neighborhood Protection Plan (traffic mitigation), Neighborhood Identity Plan (streetscape and signage), General Plan Land Use amendments for seven subareas, and tailored “Rancho Master Plan” zoning regulations. Development in the area also became subject to review by a Rancho Review Board, an advisory body determined by the Community Development Director .
Subsequent planning and public outreach conducted in 2007–2008 and in 2012 resulted in minor zoning adjustments. A full list of City ordinances related t o horse keeping in general and the Rancho neighborhood specifically can be found in Attachment 1.
Under Burbank2035 (the City’s General Plan) Land Use Program LU -3 (Specific Plans), the City is required to periodically reevaluate its specific plans through a public participation process, reinforcing the need for an updated vision for the Rancho. In March 2023, Council directed staff to pursue a new specific plan for the Rancho neighborhood, which initiated the RNSP Project. Additionally, Council approved $1.4 million in funding for the RNSP Project in the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget on May 16, 2023. Dudek was selected as project consultant following a competitive bid process.
The RNSP aims to establish objective standards that reflect community values, protect the equestrian lifestyle, integrate relevant equestrian design guidelines, examine the future of M-1 industrial parcels, ensure compliance with state housing laws, and evaluate historic district or equestrian overlay options. It will also evaluate the impacts of potential development on City services and infrastructure. The RNSP was initiated in November 2024 and is expected to take 36 months to complete from that date. With the i nitial Discovery, Analysis, and Visioning phase complete, the Project is now focused on developing Alternatives and community design options for public review during the second phase in Spring 2026. The selection of the Preferred Plan and Adoption of the RNSP will follow in late 2026 and carry over into 2027, with tentative adoption in the second half of 2027. A timeline of the Project is included as Attachment 2.
DISCUSSION
Historic Context
Dudek’s subconsultant, South Environmental, prepared a Draft Rancho Neighborhood Specific Plan Historic Context Statement that documents the equestrian history of the Burbank Rancho. The draft document focuses on local equestrian heritage, evaluate s historic resources, and evaluates whether the neighborhood qualifies as a historic district developed to support horse keeping. Residential and commercial growth accelerated with 11 3
of each street and individual property within the survey area constructed before 1980 using in-person public-right-of-way site visits in July 2025.
The Draft RNSP Historic Context Statement concludes that while there may be individual properties that are representative of historic architectural styles and may individually meet the historic designation criteria, the Rancho as a neighborhood lacks the architectural cohesion to qualify as a historic district. A summary of the Draft Historic Context Statement is in Attachment 3.
Equestrian Regulations in Burbank
The Burbank Municipal Code (BMC) currently outlines a process for horse keeping that allows one horse for each 3,000 square feet of property on R -1-H Zoned parcels for personal (non- commercial) stables, and one horse for each 500 square feet in commercial stables. Commercial stables are allow ed in the R -1-H, C -R (Commercial- Recreation) and M-1 (Light Industrial) zones with a conditional use permit (CUP). Prior to operating a stable, residents must register horses with the Burbank Animal Shelter pursuant to BMC Section 5-1-515. Section 10-1-605(E) requires permits be issued only if the property is consistent with the requirements for horse keeping in the Zoning Ordinance.
An analysis of the existing regulations indicates that their purpose and justification has historically been to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Moving forward, health, safety, and welfare will continue to be major considerations for the development of land use regulations. The Project will strive to ensure compatibility between existing land uses , horse keeping and riding, as well as other transportation modes, including walking, bicycling, and driving.
Equestrian Safety and Mobility
The Project team has developed a n understanding of Burbank’s equestrian history and existing conditions through multiple interviews, site visits and consultations with respected equestrian experts. It has identified potential best practices in urban horse keeping and equestrian safety. The team also conducted a survey of best practices for equestrian infrastructure including a survey of trail designs, trail amenities, and equestrian intersection safety. It has also created recommendations on how best to engage with the community in the crafting of relevant equestrian policy . The team’s analysis found that most equestrian communities encourage dedicated horse trails and acknowledge that while equestrian trails can be located near other modes of travel, they are generally safest when physically separated. Additional best practices included developing recommendations for intersection safety. These safety and mobility findings will be considered when drafting the Specific Plan alternatives . A map of the existing Rancho equestrian network is in Attachment 4.
under federal, state and local designation criteria. The survey includes a detailed review 12 4
Existing Conditions: Equestrian Activity in Burbank
Staff’s community engagement suggests that many horse owners do not register their horses, which makes it difficult to count the Rancho equine population. However, extrapolated information from past and present horse registration permits, manure pickup request locations , and a survey of building permits since 2006 , showed t he following trends:
• 132 properties in the RNSP area either have current or past horse permits or requests for manure pickup since approximately 2004.
• Of these, 24 properties have current horse permits for 30 horses, and 13 additional properties have just manure pickup with no horse registered. • The total number of horses is likely higher, given that some properties have manure removal without a licensed horse.
• Private manure removal companies also operate in the area, which suggests the number of horses may be even higher than above.
• 28% of all properties that have registered horses or manure pickups since 2006 are currently registered with horses or manure pickups. • No significant new horse facilities have been constructed since 2006 Approximately 90 horses at the LAEC are registered to about 50 Burbank residents. The Project team continues to collect data from various sources to have a more accurate census of equine presence in the Rancho. It is critical for City to have this data for emergency preparedness , since knowing the location of horses can help to send emergency response personnel to these locations to help with evacuation efforts.
Existing Conditions: Technical Reports
To understand the challenges and opportunities in the plan area, the Project team focused on developing a better understanding of the existing conditions, and prepared draft background reports on major factors that drive land use decisions . Focus areas included:
1) E
conomic and Demographic Conditions, by ProForma Advisors, LLC, including:
a. Draft Existing Economic Conditions Report (April 2025) b. Draft Economic Impact Report (June 2025)
2) D
raft Mobility Existing Conditions Report (October 2025), by Fehr and Peers, with supplemental memoranda including:
a. Equestrian Mobility Policy Review
b. Equestrian Community Best Practices in California
c. Los Angeles River Phase IV Bike Path Connections
13 5
A summary of findings from these draft reports are in Attachment 5. Final reports will be made available with final recommendations to Council leading up to the final phase of plan adoption.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH
Community participation is encouraged in the Burbank 2035 General Plan Land Use Element and emphasized by the City Council. The public outreach component of the RNSP Project is designed to solicit input from the community throughout the Project, ensuring the RNSP reflects the community’s vision while integrating the Rancho within the larger context s of the City, County, and State . To date, the Project team has conducted outreach through direct contact with stakeholders, including the creation of a project website, ten individual interviews , and hosting two community events . More outreach is planned with each future step of the Project.
T
he RNSP Project (www.BurbankRNSP.com) website was launched in April of 2025 and contains information about the Project, a history portal, a news page, a FAQ page, and a newsletter sign-up. It is updated regularly with events, project materials and resources.
A
summary of survey interview questions and responses is in Attachment 6. A detailed summary of the community events is in Attachment 7. Community engagement has been strong with approximately 250 individuals sign ed-up on the mailing list as of December , 2025, and the two community events attended by 100+ and 70+ participants, respectively.
Fi
ndings
Emerging Ma jor Themes and Objectives
Through a review of community feedback, existing conditions, and best planning practices, the Project team identified six major themes to assist in the future development of project alternatives, design guidelines, and implementation programs (Attachment 8).
These include:
• P
ublic Realm – Provide a variety of spaces and places to meet the community’s needs by creating a new central gathering place, as well as improve the existing physical environment while continuing to focus on safety and tranquility. • Mobility – Make it easier and safer to get around the Rancho for all modes, ages, and abilities, including by equestrian travel . Major corridors should consider the mix of users , and street infrastructure should reflect an understanding of users from within the Rancho community as well as visitors. Because horse safety is a priority, solutions for equestrian issues should focus on separated horse trails along key corridors as opposed to mixed-flow configurations. • Horse Keeping – Establish the Rancho as a model for safe urban equestrianism.
Horse keeping regulations should be modernized considering the health and safety 14 6
of humans, including, but not limited to in equestrian construction conflicts where standards should be established to mitigate impacts.
• Change and Growth – Identify and encourage change and growth in targeted areas to address gaps in community needs. This includes concerns with housing development, especially the City’s response to state law. Growth should be focused in existing commercial areas of the Rancho, including a strengthened focus on Main Street as the commercial heart of the neighborhood. • Citywide Role – Clarify Rancho’s role in achieving citywide goals, including, but not limited to providing access to regional amenities like Griffith Park. RNSP should strive to align the neighborhood vision with broader City goals. • Identity – Sharpen and build resilience into the Rancho’s identity. Ideas include elevating its equestrian history through signage, wayfinding, and streetscaping, while anticipating and adapting to shifts in demographics.
N
ext Steps
This report concludes the Analysis and Visioning ( Phase 1) of the Project . The Project team seeks feedback from Council on Phase 1 of the Project, including major Emerging Themes and Objectives, and the Project team’s focus on equestrian safety as the guiding principle for the Project. Based on Phase 1, as well as Council’s input, the Project t eam will develop Project Alternatives for the RNSP which will be presented to the public during Phase 2, Community Design Options. This phase will commence in the Winter/Spring of 2025-26. The Project Alternatives identified during this phase will be evaluated in partnership with the community on how each one meets the goals established in Phase
1. Phase 2 will include multiple outreach efforts by the RNSP team, as well as updates to Council, as needed. Project Alternatives identified by the Project team will address:
o Construction Management Plan / Standards
o Neighborhood Protection Program and roadway safety
o Improvements to public spaces / opportunities for land acquisition o Housing Density / rezoning discussion
o Revision to list of allowable land uses
o Bike/Ped Bridge
o Urban Design Standards
Phase 2 will also begin the environmental analysis for the RNSP Project as required by CEQA.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This report is solely informational and has no potential for resulting in a direct or indirect physical change to the environment. It falls outside the definition of a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is therefore not subject to CEQA pursuant to Section 15378 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. However, the 15 7
RNSP itself is subject to CEQA , and i n early 2026 the Project consultant will begin environmental review.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.
CONCLUSION
The RNSP Project is an opportunity for the City to leverage existing physical and community resources in the Rancho to plan for future development of this vital equestrian neighborhood to meet the City’s short - and long- term planning goals, which include compliance with state housing and land use regulations and City Council housing and neighborhood protection goals, while maximizing local control in the land use planning process. T he Project team seeks feedback from Council on Phase 1 of the Project, including major Emerging Themes and Objectives, and the Project t eam’s fo cus on equestrian safety as the guiding principle for the P roject to ensure the Phase 2 effort is consistent with Council and community goals.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 – Existing Regulations
Attachment 2 – Project Timeline
Attachment 3 – Summary of Draft Historic Context Statement Attachment 4 – Map of Existing Equestrian Networks
Attachment 5 – Summary of Existing Conditions
Attachment 6 – Summary of Interviews with Stakeholders
Attachment 7 – Summary of Community Events
Attachment 8 – Summary of Major Themes and Objectives
16 ATTACHMENT 1-1
ATTACHMENT 1
Existing Regulations on Horse Keeping
Below is a comprehensive list of Burbank City Council ordinances related to horsekeeping and the Rancho neighborhood. To Staff’s knowledge, the list is exhaustive. Copies of the Ordinances and any relevant information can be made available upon request:
• 1950 – Ordinance 1025 – Regulating the Keeping of Horses. Required application for permit to keep horses with the Director of Health Services. • 1964 – Ordinance 1931 – Establishment of H Overlay Zone. Establishment of limit of one horse per 3,000 square feet of lot area. Required a 20- foot distance to be maintained between new stables and doors and windows of building used for human habitation.
• 1964 – Ordinance 1935 – Require a permit to keep horses in residential zone from Animal Shelter Superintendent, and referred to Planning Director for approval. • 1964 – Ordinance 1950 – Clarified that maintaining nonconforming existing stables within 20 feet of new residences is legal nonconforming use. • 1965 – Ordinances 1985 through 1988 – Rezoning of R-1 properties to R-1-H. • 1967 – Ordinance 2052 – Fire walls and Fire Extinguishers required in Commercial Stables
• 1968 – Ordinance 2112 – Construction of Stables in Setback Area. Added an exemption for the 10- foot setback requirement for enclosed stables built of a certain material.
• 1971 – Ordinance 2317 – Proof of vaccination by licensed veterinarian of horses required with each horse registration.
• 1972 – Ordinance 2329 – Permits housing facilities for caretakers in connection with horses and kennels.
• 1975 – Ordinance 2506 – Deleting Requirement for Vaccination Certificate for Horses
• 1978 – Ordinance 2583 – Stables and corrals for owners permitted in R -4 with CUP.
• 1983 – Ordinance 2933 – Fee for dog and horse registration • 1984 – Ordinance 2962 – Keeping of Manure in Stables
• 1993 – Ordinance 3343 – Amended BMC to create Rancho zones and Standards • 1993 – Ordinance 3344 – Rancho Zone Map Amendment
• 1993 – Ordinance 3349 – Exempts projects submitted prior to effective date of Ord 3343 from Ord 3343.
• 1993 – Ordinance 3358 – Use of Plant Nursery and Petting Zoo as allowed uses within R-1-H zone if located on properties with a minimum of 12,000 square feet in area that abuts commercial land.
• 1994 – Ordinance 3368 – Added motion picture studio as a permitted use with a CUP in the Rancho Commercial and Rancho Business Park zones. 17 ATTACHMENT 1-2
• 1995 – Ordinance 3399 – Mansionization Ordinance – Reduced allowable height of structures, affecting single-family residential zones, including R-1-H. • 1995 – Ordinance 3418 – Ordinance relating to setbacks for noncommercial stables in the R -1-H zone. Provides that the ten foot rear and side yard setback requirement for non-commercial stables are inapplicable to stables which meet a certain standard of construction. Removes any exception to the 20-foot separation requirement between a non- commercial stable and a door, window, or other opening of a structure used for human habitation.
• 2012 - Ordinance 3829 - Removed the 20- foot separation requirement for non- commercial stables and also reduced the required setback for enclosed stables from 10 feet to 3 feet from the rear and side property lines, and further reducing this requirement to zero setback if the property abuts an alley.
18 ATTACHMENT 2-1
ATTACHMENT 2
Project Timeline
Projected timeline for RNSP adoption as of January 2026 19 ATTACHMENT 3-1
ATTACHMENT 3
Summary of RNSP Historic Context Statement
The Draft Burbank Rancho Neighborhood Specific Plan Historic Context Statement (HCS), prepared by South Environmental, provides an in- depth historical, architectural, and cultural overview of one of Burbank’s most distinctive areas: the Rancho neighborhood. The document was prepared by South Environmental in November 2025 to document the area’s equestrian heritage, evaluate historic resources, and determine whether the neighborhood qualifies as a historic district. The HCS includes extensive archival research, a reconnaissance- level survey of 911 properties, and a detailed analysis of themes related to equestrian development, residential growth, film industry connections, and architectural evolution.
The Historic Context Statement has not yet been finalized, but can be provided to the Council upon request.
19 th Century:
The Rancho neighborhood began as part of Rancho Providencia, a 19th-century Mexican land grant purchased by Dr. David Burbank in 1866. Early land uses centered on agriculture, cattle, and wheat production. Subdivision in the late 1880s created irregularly shaped tracts along the Los Angeles River, laying the foundation for later residential and equestrian development.
Equestrian History:
The area’s equestrian history is extensively documented in the HCS. The period with the most focused equestrian development started in the 1920 and lasted until the early 1980s, peaking during the popularity of rodeo and the western film genre. During this period multiple public stables, riding academies, training grounds, and even a small racetrack operated in the neighborhood. By the time the Los Angeles Equestrian Center opened in 1982, most neighborhood stables and public riding facilities had already closed and been demolished. Only limited equestrian elements—such as the Mariposa Bridge, the Studio Horse Rental property, private backyard stables, and alleyway gates remained.
Architectural History:
The big residential building boom in the RNSP area took place between 1938 and 1941.
Residential development followed common national and regional patterns. The tract homes built between the 1920s and 1950s generally reflected prevailing architectural styles—Tudor Revival, Spanish Colonial Revival, Craftsman, Minimal Traditional, and Ranch—rather than the work of recognized master architects. The neighborhood grew in phases, with the most rapid building period between 1938 and 1941. Despite this, the architectural landscape remained eclectic due to staggered construction, later alterations, and scattered infill development. The 1950s –1960s brought denser housing, small apartment buildings, and commercial development, particularly near Riverside Drive and along the neighborhood’s periphery.
20 ATTACHMENT 3-2
Findings:
The reconnaissance-level survey found that the RNSP area does not meet the criteria for historic district designation, despite its meaningful equestrian past, the evidence that once expressed this identify has been diminished. Loss of stables, alterations to residential properties, demolition of equestrian facilities, limited visibility of remaining infrastructure, and a lack of architectural cohesion prevent the neighborhood from achieving the integrity required for historic district eligibility under National Register Criterion A/1/1 (events) or Criterion C/3/3 (architecture). Despite this, individual properties may still be eligible for historic designation. Examples include the Studio Horse Rental at 914 S Mariposa, and several residences representing high- quality architectural examples representing Tudor Revival, Ranch style, Storybook Ranch, Craftsman, and Minimal traditional styles.
However, additional property-specific research is needed to understand if these individual properties are potentially eligible.
21 ATTACHMENT 4-1
ATTACHMENT 4
Map of Existing Equestrian Network
Map of Equestrian infrastructure and amenities in the RNSP Area as of January 2026 22 ATTACHMENT 5-1
ATTACHMENT 5
Summary of Existing Conditions
The reports below were submitted to the City in Draft form and will be available upon request when they are finalized.
Draft Reports by Pro Forma Advisors, LLC
Demographics
Draft Existing Economic Conditions, released in April 2025, provides a snapshot of demographic and economic neighborhood profile. The report shows that the population of the RNSP has held steady over the years, with a current population of approximately 3,800. The long- term population growth, as predicted by the Southern California Association of Governments for Burbank is projecting that Burbank will add approximately 7,300 new residents by 2045, which represents a 0.33 compound annual growth rate over the 20-year time period.
The RNSP area has a slightly higher percentage of seniors and empty nesters than Burbank as a whole, however, the largest cohort is the 34- 54-year-old population at 29 percent of the RNSP population. The racial profile of the RNSP shows that the RNSP is predominantly “White Alone,” with 61.1% of the population identifying as such. The RNSP has slightly smaller percentage of Asian and Hispanic origin than Burbank as a whole, though the population of Black and those with two or more races is higher than Burbank as a whole. The level of Educational attainment in the Rancho is relatively higher than that of Burbank as a whole, with at least 68% of the population over 25 having a secondary degree, compared to 60% for Burbank as a whole.
Economics and Employment.
Based on 2024 data, the RNSP area has a much higher median ($109,200) and average ($169,000) household income than Burbank as a whole, with over 36% of the households earning more than $150,000 per year. The unemployment rate in 2024 in Burbank stood a 7%, which is slightly higher than that of Los Angeles County (5.1%) and California (4.7%) as a whole. The RNSP area has slightly more renters than homeowners, with approximately 12% of units vacant as of 2022. Real estate trends suggest that the single family homes in the Rancho saw a dramatic increase over the past few years, with an average sales price nearing $1.5 million.
Analysis of employment by Pro Forma shows that the City employs approximately 93,000 employees. Only 6.7% of these jobs are represented by Burbank Residents. The RNSP area is estimated to generate approximately 2,584 jobs. Employment projections provided by SCAG suggest a 4% growth in jobs over the next six years.
The numbers in this report will need to be verified for the subsequent analysis given that the data sources may not perfectly align with the geography of the RNSP area and the city as a whole.
23 ATTACHMENT 5-2
Economics of Equestrian Uses.
The report shows that the national horse enthusiast trends with the ridership declining and finally plateauing in 2020 at approximately 7 million equestrians nationwide. While California currently ranks second in the U.S> for horse population, the number i s down from 750,000 to only 477,000 statewide. The median age of horse participants is 25, with the median age of horse owners at 38 and 27 for median age of spectators.
Draft Report Economic Impact by Pro Forma Advisors, LLC, prepared June 2025, estimates the Economic contribution of the equestrian sector with the Equestrian Area in Burbank and surrounding areas, including the LA equestrian center and the Glendale Rancho, for three metrics – Output, Earnings, and Employment. Direct Impacts, which include activities such as equine services and visitor -supported business, generate $47.76 million in output per year, $4.79 million in earnings, and support 120 jobs. Indirect and induced impacts, which capture the ripple effects of spending throughout the broader economy, contribute $981,000 in output, $21.01 million in earnings, and support 353 jobs.
It is important to note, that the vast majority of the equestrian jobs are outside the Burbank Rancho.
In addition, the report found that homes in the rancho command a price premium likely due to equestrian amenities and zoning that allows horse keeping, as well as direct access to Griffith Park and proximity to the Los Angeles Equestrian center. A high- level analysis suggests that homes with horse facilities may sell for 10 to 20 percent more than similar homes without such facilities. This mirrors trends seen in other equestrian-friendly neighborhoods such as Shadow Hills and Agoura Hills.
Draft Reports by Fehr & Peers
Traffic & Mobility
As noted earlier, the Rancho Neighborhood has an existing Neighborhood Protection Plan, adopted in 1993. The plan has been mostly implemented to date, and new interventions have not been adopted; However, the Complete Our Streets Plan, approved in 2020, does identify propriety streets for pedestrians, bicyclists, and equestrians in the area, and provides broad policies for future project implementation.
The consultant team has provided several draft reports which help to identify existing conditions and recommendations going forward. The final versions of these reports will be released in the future, prior to the final recommendation to Council . Below is a summary of the findings contained in these draft reports.
A vehicle count was conducted to quantify existing Level o f Service (LOS) at various intersections throughout the Rancho. When viewed together, the LOS grades for each intersection can provide an overall picture of the traffic flow in the area, including peak travel hours and volumes . The most congested intersection w as Victory and West Alameda Ave, with the other intersections displaying minor congestion at peak travel times. These intersections include S. Main and W Oak St, S Main St and Alameda, 24 ATTACHMENT 5-3
Mariposa and Riverside (mornings only), S Main St. and W Riverside (evenings only), S.
California and W Riverside Drive, and S Fairview St. and W Riverside Dr. It should be noted that the Burbank2035 General Plan sets a goal of maintaining LOS D or better at all intersections, and all of these are rated LOS C or better. Vehicle counts taken from the previous Rancho Master Plan were also included to show vehicle travel trends between the 1990s and today.
A Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis assessed the number of miles driven within the RNSP area over a given time. It revealed that the RNSP area generates around 15.8 VMT per resident, 13.4 VMP per employee, and a combined 39.6 VMT for the entire service population. This is slightly higher than the city as a whole.
Collision data show that there were 85 collisions resulting in an injury during the period of 2018-2023, the majority involv ing vehicles only. The overwhelming majority of the collisions took place on Alameda Ave. There were no reported collisions involving equestrian activities during this period.
Pedestrian counts were taken at 18 locations throughout the RNSP area. The busiest intersections were at various intersections along Alameda Ave, especially in the mornings, as well as several intersections along Riverside, albeit less busy in the mornings. A map of the intersection pedestrian activity is pictured below:
25 ATTACHMENT 5-4
Bicycle counts suggest that the highest volumes of bicyclists use routes that have existing bicycle infrastructure. The busiest intersections for bicyclists were along Riverside Drive, parts of which have a dedicated, Class II bike lane. Finally, the consultant reviewed the current progress of the LA River Path and explored the potential for a future bike path connection between the Burbank Rancho and Griffith Park. Pending Council direction and community input, t he RNSP will explore possible alternatives in the implementation chapter. A map of bicycle counts is pictured below:
Equestrian counts were also conducted at selected locations in the RNSP area. The counts captured equestrians riding or horseback as well as those walking their horse.
Data was captured on two separate days, one weekday and one weekend day. The busiest intersections, by far, were dedicated equestrian paths in an around the Mariposa Street Bridge as well as the LA Equestrian Center. The location and activity are noted in the illustration below:
26 ATTACHMENT 5-5
Best Practices in Equestrian Mobility
The consultant also conducted a survey of best practices for equestrian community regulations, including a survey of trail designs, trail amenities, intersection safety, and engagement strategies in the creation of policy documents. The survey generally found that most communities encourage dedicated horse trails and acknowledge that while equestrian trails can be located near other modes of travel, they are generally safer when physically separated. Additional best practices surveyed included recommendations for intersection safety. These recommendations will be taken into account during the drafting of the Specific Plan alternatives.
27 ATTACHMENT 6-1
ATTACHMENT 6
Summary of Interviews with Stakeholders
In July of 2025 the Project team conducted individual interviews with residents representing various stakeholder groups in the Rancho including equestrians and non- equestrians, homeowners and renters, commercial brokers, and known community leaders.
The stakeholder interviews reveal strong community interest in preserving the Rancho’s historic equestrian character while addressing growing concerns about traffic, safety, and outdated zoning that affects both residents and commercial tenants. Stakeholders broadly support thoughtful, small-scale development, improved multimodal safety, and enhanced public spaces to maintain the neighborhood’s unique identity amid ongoing change.
Ten stakeholders were identified by City staff and invited to participate by the Project Team via email and phone calls. Individual stakeholder interviews were scheduled on a case-by-case basis for 60 minutes and were offered in a virtual or in-person format.
Each interview was intended to meet the following objectives:
• Inform stakeholders about the goals of the updated plan • Understand and incorporate the Rancho Community vision into the RNSP • Identify Rancho Community needs and experiences that are important for the RNSP
• Build relationships with Rancho Community members
The Questions:
The discussion questions were developed in collaboration with Dudek and the City and were intended to help guide the interviews. The interviewer determined which questions to ask, as applicable by the participant.
1. How would you describe your relationship to or interest in the Burbank Rancho Neighborhood?
2. What are the things you value most about the Burbank Rancho neighborhood?
3. What role do you think the Burbank Rancho plays in the overall City of Burbank and in the Region?
4. From your perspective, what challenges do you see the Burbank Rancho confronting now and in the future?
5. What are the priorities, interests, or concerns you hear most often from your neighbors? Are these aligned with your own?
6. What additional uses, amenities, and services could help make the Burbank Rancho a better neighborhood for current and future residents? 28 ATTACHMENT 6-2
7. What is your perception of the role that equestrian uses and activities play in the neighborhood? How significant do you think equestrian uses/activities are to the current and future identity of the neighborhood?
a. From your perspective, what are neighbors' experiences who live near horses? Are there impacts that those neighbors experience? What can be done to improve the quality of life for neighbors with or without horses?
8. Do you foresee (or desire) the Burbank Rancho changing over time? If so, how and where would you like to see those changes take place?
9. Over the years, the Rancho has added amenities and developments, such as Basecamp Dinette, LILA, and Dincara Road. When these were underway, what were your perceptions of the projects?
a. Now that they are completed and part of the neighborhood, what is your perception of them now?
10. In your experience, are there any conflicts that arise between motor vehicles, pedestrians, equestrians, and cyclists on the streets of the Burbank Rancho? Where and what kind of improvements could be made?
11. Access to Griffith Park is available to equestrians and pedestrians via the Mariposa Street bridge.
a. Do you feel that access to the park via the bridge is an important amenity in the neighborhood?
b. Do you feel the bridge should be limited to Rancho residents or be made more widely available to the greater Burbank community? c. Do you have any ideas on how to expand access to other users?
12. Can you estimate how many horses are in the backyard stables in the Rancho? a. How many horses are stabled in the LA Equestrian Center by Rancho residents?
b. Can you identify reasons why horse owners may be reluctant to register their horses? If so, how can the City remove barriers to registration?
13. Are there other groups, individuals, or stakeholders you recommend we talk to for an additional understanding of the issues?
14. Other things you recommend the project team be mindful of?
29 ATTACHMENT 6-3
Findings:
The interviews reveal broad agreement on several core themes: preserving the Rancho’s equestrian identity, addressing traffic and safety concerns, and managing growth in a thoughtful way. Across interviews, residents consistently emphasized that the Rancho’s distinct equestrian lifestyle – backyard horse keeping, access to Griffith Park via the Mariposa Bridge, and a small -town, neighborly atmosphere – is central to community identity. Many longtime residents expressed concern that development pressures, diminished horse infrastructure, and rising costs threaten this identity. Stakeholders urged the City to protect equestrian- only facilities, improve safety for riders, and consider programs to ease stable permitting and encourage proper horse registration. S everal noted that equestrian uses benefit not just riders but also the neighborhood’s cohesion and sense of place.
Traffic, congestion, and multimodal conflicts emerged as the most urgent quality -of-life issues. Residents pointed to worsening conditions on Riverside Drive and Mariposa Avenue, citing increased commuter traffic, higher vehicle speeds, unsafe interactions with cyclists, and e-bikes posing risks to horses. Many recommended stronger traffic calming measures, such as raised crosswalks, roundabouts, curb extensions, better signage, and enhanced enforcement. The Mariposa Bridge is viewed as essential for equest rian access, and should remain a pedestrian/equestrian bridge to ensure safety.
Stakeholders also discussed development, zoning, and future land uses. Several commercial property owners and brokers described outdated and inconsistent zoning rules – particularly around parking – that hinder leasing and contribute to long- term vacancies on Alameda. They encouraged modernizing zoning to support appropriate commercial tenants while avoiding high-density residential projects seen as incompatible with the Rancho’s character. Residents generally support moderate, carefully scaled growth that maintains greenery, historic architecture, and small -scale commercial uses.
Opinions on recent developments such as the Pickwick Project at and 910 Mariposa varied, with concerns focused on density, design compatibility, and cumulative impacts.
Many stakeholders highlighted the importance of community gathering places —from Basecamp Dinette to Mountain View Park —and encouraged the City to enhance public space, add pedestrian pathways, and improve river -adjacent trails and lighting. While some residents are cautious about overdevelopment, most want to see amenities that serve both current and future populations, including seniors, families, and equestrian users.
Overall, the interviews reveal a community deeply invested in preserving the Rancho’s heritage while navigating demographic change and development pressures.
Stakeholders want balanced planning that supports equestrian culture, improves safety, revises outdated zoning, and strengthens community connections – all while respecting the neighborhood’s historic charm and rural character.
30 ATTACHMENT 7-1
ATTACHMENT 7
Summary of Community Events
To date, two community events have been held for the RNSP project.
The first, held on May 10, 2025 at two locations in the Rancho (one in East and one in West Rancho), attracted well over 100 participants. Public Noticing for the event included social media advertising, individual mailers sent to all Rancho Residents, a City Council Announcement, and e-mail blasts to project interest lists. The event included a self-guided walking tour which highlighted the major landmarks and places of interest in the Rancho.
Project Staff meticulously documented observations, ideas, and written comments.
The second community event on August 2, 2025, was a pop- up table at the Rancho Marketplace, with the goal of capturing a group of residents who may not be otherwise exposed to the Specific Plan effort. The second event attracted 70 participants.
The two community events drew strong participation and revealed consistent themes:
residents value the Rancho’s unique equestrian, small -town character and want safer mobility options, improved crossings, better trail conditions, and thoughtful management of future development. Feedback across both events emphasized preserving neighborhood identity while enhancing walkability, public spaces, and access to small, locally focused businesses.
FIRST COMMUNITY EVENT: 5/10/2025
The first Community Event was held on the morning of May 10, 2025 with 2 main locations – one in East Rancho, at Mountain View Park, at and one in West Rancho at Buena Vista Park. Additional checkpoints were provided along approximately 1- mile-long predetermined self-guided walking routes in each half o the neighborhoods. The attendees who chose to take part in the walking tour walked each route and documented their thoughts on forms provided by Staff. Some of the attendees did not take part in the walking tour and instead spent all of their time at the main locations.
The purpose of this event was to allow residents to share firsthand observations, highlight neighborhood strengths and challenges, and inform the planning process through immersive, self-guided participation.
The event was promoted through social media, email lists, direct mailers, a press release, and a City Council announcement. A total of 115 participants signed in across both routes, with 82 identifying as Rancho residents and 63 submitting questionnaires either during or after the event. Some pictures from the first community event can be seen below:
31 ATTACHMENT 7-2
Findings (East Rancho):
• Participants emphasized concerns about traffic, cut-through driving, speeding, and pedestrian/equestrian safety, particularly along Riverside Drive and Alameda Avenue.
• Participants requested measures such as reduced speed limits, enhanced crossings, and clearer signage.
• Many residents expressed strong attachment to the Rancho’s unique, quiet, semi- rural character and voiced concerns about new development, increased housing density, and the loss of historic or equestrian-oriented features. • Opinions on growth were mixed, but there was broad interest in preserving neighborhood identity.
• Participants supported small, neighborhood- serving businesses like Basecamp Dinette and requested additional community-oriented spaces. • The Mariposa Bridge was widely considered essential for equestrian access to Griffith Park, with varied opinions on whether bicycles should share the bridge or require a separate facility.
32 ATTACHMENT 7-3
• Residents also emphasized the need for improved trail maintenance, enhanced green spaces, and safer walking and biking infrastructure.
Findings (West Rancho):
• Feedback highlighted debate over a potential new bike bridge, with some residents concerned about conflicts between cyclists and equestrians, while others supported improved bike access and safety features.
• Some participants noted a cultural distinction between East and West Rancho and expressed feelings that West Rancho receives less attention. • As in East Rancho, residents advocated for maintaining equestrian identity, addressing development pressures, improving trail safety, and managing vegetation for fire prevention.
• Additional concerns included traffic impacts from new housing, unsafe intersections, increased parking spillover from nearby studios, and occasional disruptions from filming activity.
• Suggestions included resident -only parking permits and stronger enforcement of filming regulations.
SECOND COMMUNITY EVENT: 8/2/2025.
Still a part of the first round of outreach for the Rancho Neighborhood Specific Plan (RNSP), the second Community Event was a pop-up style event on August 2, 2025 at the Rancho Marketplace. The purpose was to engage residents and visitors in conversations about non- residential areas of the Rancho, understand how they use commercial corridors, and gather input on future commercial needs. The event aimed to cre ate an accessible, informal opportunity for participation, enabling community members to share experiences, challenges, and aspirations related to mobility, public space, amenities, and neighborhood identity.
The project team notified the community through social media, email lists, and onsite materials. 70 participants engaged with the pop-up, with 31 signing in and 26 identifying as Rancho residents.
Participants contributed through two activities: a push- pin community map identifying frequently visited commercial areas, and a discussion board with prompts about mobility, public spaces, amenities, and character. Feedback highlighted West Riverside Drive and West Alameda Avenue as the neighborhood’s primary commercial corridors – well-used but in need of improved walkability, safer crossings (especially for equestrians), and more pedestrian-friendly shopping destinations . Residents expressed clear interest in small, locally owned businesses, including cafés, casual dining, and boutique shops, and suggested potential redevelopment sites such as the AAA and Technicolor Credit Union buildings. Pictures from the event can be seen below:
33 ATTACHMENT 7-4
Findings:
• Mobility comments emphasized safer sidewalks, slower vehicle speeds, better enforcement of e- bike and motorcycle behavior, improved equestrian infrastructure, and more shade, lighting, and landscaping. • Public space feedback called for a central gathering area or plaza, more benches, park improvements, after-school spaces for youth, and enhanced animal -friendly amenities such as horse facilities and a dog park.
• Amenities feedback strongly prioritized more restaurants, bakeries, and independently owned stores, with additional interest in equestrian-friendly features like horse tie rails.
• Finally, residents stressed the importance of preserving Rancho’s identity through thoughtful street design, added landscaping and trees, thematic signage, public art, and careful zoning to maintain the area’s unique equestrian and small -town character.
34 ATTACHMENT 8-1
ATTACHMENT 8
Major Themes and Objectives
Through a combination of a review of community feedback, existing conditions, and best planning practices, the Project Team identified six major themes to assist in the development of project alternatives, design guidelines, and future implementation programs as the project moves forward. These themes include:
1. Public Realm – provide a variety of spaces and places to meet the community’s needs.
o Vision: Burbank Rancho’s public realm will offer safe and varied experiences to match the diverse needs of its residents, workers, and visitors. Enable the creation of a central neighborhood place – a plaza, town square, park, or similar space – that is shared by the community and defines the center of the Rancho Neighborhood.
Maintain the tranquil and slow-paced quality of river edge experiences. Formalize and improve equestrian pathways between East and West Rancho.
Study the rehabilitation of existing Park facilities to better meet community needs.
2. Mobility – Make it easier and safer to get around the Rancho for all modes, ages, and abilities.
o Vision: The Burbank Rancho will offer a safe, comfortable, and accessible network of streets, sidewalks, trails, pathways, and other connections for all modes of travel, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, transit users, and equestrians.
Enable multi-modal connections to regional open space networks and trails.
Prioritize safety on Riverside Drive and its cross streets. Consider traffic safety improvements on Alameda Avenue. Ensure primary equestrian corridors (on streets and trails) are designed to highest standards of safety and minimize conflicts . Dedicated, separate horse trails are safest for all, as opposed to mixed- flow or shared right-of-way configurations
Enhance signage to better alert motorists and other visitors to unconventional equestrian presence on city streets.
Ensure crosswalks and intersections are designed for safety needs of all street users (including signal timing).
Consider options for a new bridge to Griffith Park to address the needs of non-equestrians.
Enable inter -agency and inter -jurisdiction coordination for safety and mobility improvements along Los Angeles River edge.
Incorporate applicable projects and guidelines from the Complete Streets Plan and Safer Streets Burbank Action Plan.
35 ATTACHMENT 8-2
3. Horse Keeping – Establish Burbank Rancho as a model for urban horse keeping.
o Vision: The Burbank Rancho is a unique neighborhood characterized by a long – and ongoing – tradition of urban equestrianism.
Streamline and modernize horse keeping regulations in the context of Rancho’s urban setting while considering health and safety of horses and humans.
Consider the establishment of an amnesty program to allow for the legalization of certain unpermitted stables and other equestrian structures that meet current health and safety regulations in order to facilitate the registration of non-registered horses.
Update existing and develop new regulations for horse keeping that are grounded in data, industry trends, and best practices. Address construction -related conflicts with equestrian use and establish standards to mitigate impacts via established precedents and best practices.
4. Change and Growth – Steer development into targeted areas to address gaps in community needs. This includes addressing concerns with housing development, especially the City’s response and strategy in responding to state law. o Vision: Burbank Rancho will protect existing residential areas, while allowing for sustainable and strategic growth in other areas to allow cohesive balance between old and new.
Focus growth and new community amenities in the existing commercial areas of the Rancho.
Envision Main Street as the Rancho neighborhood’s archetypal “Main Street”.
Plan for a variety of housing types to serve the needs of seniors, renters, and other housing-vulnerable communities.
Update commercial land use policies and permitted uses to not preclude desired local-serving businesses and amenities. Support organic clustering of business (such as Audio Alley) by eliminating known barriers and streamlining regulations. Establish a vision for M1 -zoned light industrial parcels along Mariposa Street.
Change of use or building typology should not preclude current or future equestrian uses on adjacent parcels.
Explore new uses and redevelopment opportunities for long-standing vacant buildings along Alameda.
Craft development regulations that are easy to understand & implement and are consistent with state mandates.
36 ATTACHMENT 8-3
5. Citywide Role – Clarify Burbank Rancho’s role in achieving citywide goals, including, but not limited to providing access to regional amenities like Griffith Park.
o Vision: Burbank Rancho is a unique neighborhood which contributes to and supports the City of Burbank’s overall vision and policy goals. Align the neighborhood’s vision to City of Burbank’s broader goals. Prevent spillover impacts of Media District and activities of other adjacent neighborhoods on the streets of the Rancho (including analysis of preferential parking programs).
Refine Burbank Rancho’s land use policies by balancing community aspirations and citywide objectives.
Study Rancho neighborhood’s role in addressing citywide needs for public facilities (civic services, connections to adjacent destinations, and cultural institutions).
6. Identity – Sharpen and make resilient Burbank Rancho’s identity.
o Vision: The Burbank Rancho is an equestrian neighborhood that protects, celebrates, and strengthens its unique identity for equestrians and non - equestrians alike.
Elevate the neighborhood’s equestrian history and current identity through improved signage, wayfinding, streetscape, and
placemaking.
Introduce a historic markers or info panel program to educate and memorialize the neighborhood’s past.
Strengthen connections with historic riverbottom neighbors including adjacent LA River equestrian communities, LA Equestrian Center, and Griffith Park.
Study feasibility of and identify pathways for future historic designation of individual resources
Anticipate and adapt to shifts in demographics, recreational preferences, and the local economy.
37 11/14/2026
Update on the Burbank R ancho
Ne ig hb o rho o d Sp e cific Plan
( R NSP) Dev el opment P rocess
City Council Study Session
38 21/14/2026
Presentation Outline
1. Neighborhood Profile
2. History of Land Use Regulations
3. Trends in Horse Keeping
4. Draft Historic Context Statement
5. Existing Conditions –Mobility and Equestrian Infrastructure
6. Equine Safety
7. Community Outreach
8. Emerging Themes and Objectives
9. Project Timeline and Next Steps
10. Question and Discussion Period
39 31/14/2026
1. R NSP Nei ghborhood P rof i l e
Burbank Rancho
• Tw o p a r t s – East
and West R ancho
• 315 Acres
• Ap p ro xim ate ly
3,800 residents
in 1,450 units
• M ore renters
than owners
N
East
Rancho
West
Rancho
40 41/14/2026
1. R NSP Nei ghborhood P rof i l e
41 51/14/2026
1950 – R egul ati on of Horses
1964 – H O ve rlay Ad op te d
1992/93 – Co mme rcial Re cre atio n Maste r Plan
• Nei ghborhood P rotecti on Pl an ( NPP)
• Nei ghborhood I denti ty Pl an ( S tr eetscape and S i gnage) • General Plan L and Use Amendments
• R ancho Master Plan Z oning R egulations (Commercial Z ones Only) • Establishment of R ancho R eview Board
2023 – Council provides funding for the preparation of the R ancho Neighborhood Specific Plan and directs staff to begin the project.
2024 – Project kicks of f with Dudek as the selected consultant in November 2024.
2. History of L and Use R egulations
42 61/14/2026
3. T r ends i n Horse K eepi ng
Horse Keeping Statistics – 2006 to 2025
• Ho rse Re g istratio n
• Manure Pickup
Total Horse
Permits:
• 2005- 2025 high –
171 horses
• Current – 30
horses
Total Manure
Pickup
Current: 13
properti es
• All Tim e : 61
properti es
Legend
Horse Permits (Current)
Horse Permits (2006- 2025)
Manure R emoval (Current)
Manure R emoval (2004- 2025)
RNSP Plan Area
City Boundary
43 71/14/2026
3. T r ends i n Horse K eepi ng
Horse Keeping Statistics – 2025 Only
• Ho rse Re g istratio n
• Manure Pickup
Active Pe rm its:
30 Horses
(17.5% o f all time
high)
Active Manure
Pickup :
23 O ve rall:
28% o f all time
hig h
Legend
Horse Permits (Current)
Horse Permits (2006- 2025)
Manure R emoval (Current)
Manure R emoval (2004- 2025)
RNSP Plan Area
City Boundary
44 81/14/2026
4. Draft Historic Context Statement
Evaluates whether the neighborhood qualif ies as a
histo ric d istrict
Draf t R ancho
Nei ghborhood
Sp e cific Plan
Historic
Context
Statement
Focuses on local equestrian heritage
Evaluate s histo ric re so urce s
45 91/14/2026
5 . Existing Co nd itio ns - Mo b ility
Legend
Equestrian Counts (AM)
Collected in August 2025
During week end AM hours
10 intersections in study area
Equestrian Paths
I ntersection L ocation Count
Mari posa Street B ri dge
46 101/14/2026
5 . Existing Co nd itio ns - Mo b ility
Legend
P edestrian Counts (AM)
Collected in August 2025
During weekday AM hours
18 intersections in study area
Typ ical Rancho stre e t with no sid e walk
Missing Sid e walks
I ntersection L ocation Count
47 111/14/2026
5 . Existing Co nd itio ns - Mo b ility
Bicycle Counts (AM)
Collected in August 2025
During weekday AM hours
18 intersections in study area
Legend
Existing Class I (Separated Bike Path)
Existing Class II (Standard Bike L ane)
Existing Class III (Bike R oute)
I ntersection L ocation Count
Typ ical Class II Bike Lane
48 121/14/2026
5. Existing Cond itions – Equestrian I nfrastructure
9 Horse Crossings
LAEC
O ve r 500 boardi ng
stalls
90 Horses
regi stered to
Burbank residents
Horse Tails
Connect R ancho,
LAEC, & Griffith
Park
Equestrian
Facilities
Studio Horse Rental
Gle nd ale Facilitie s
L A E C
49 131/14/2026
6. Equine Safety
D. Best Practices in Trail Design
• Off-Road Trails are safest
• When located near other modes of travel, should be
separated to extent possible
• Safety measures for crossing paved roads
C. Regulations on Equine Safety in Burbank
B. Regulations on Equine Safety Outside of Burbank
A. Primary Concern – Equine Safety
50 141/14/2026
7. Community Outreach
Outreach Elements
A. Project Website: www.BurbankRNSP .com
• Signup Page: 250 sign- ups
• FAQ Pa g e
• Histo ry
• News – Announcements
• R esources
B. Community Events
T wo events thus far:
• 05.10.25 Walking T our
• 08.02.25 P op -Up at R ancho Marketplace
C. Individual Interviews with Stakeholders
• 10 interviews thus f ar
• Site visits to ho m e s
51 151/14/2026
7. Community Outreach – 05.10.25 E vent
52 161/14/2026
7. Community Outreach – 08.02.25 E vent
53 171/14/2026
Horse Keeping
8. R NSP Emer gi ng T hemes & Obj ecti ves
Change and Growth
Public Realm
Mobility
Citywide Role
Identity
54 181/14/2026
Objective: Provid e a varie ty of spaces and
p lace s to meet the community’ s needs
8. R NSP Emer gi ng T hemes & Obj ecti ves
Vision: Burb ank Rancho ’ s p ub lic re alm will o ffe r safe and v ari ed ex peri ences to match the di v erse needs of its residents, workers, and visitors
Public Realm
55 191/14/2026
Objective: Make it e asie r and safe r to get around
the R ancho for all m o d e s, ag e s, and ab ilitie s
8. R NSP Emer gi ng T hemes & Obj ecti ves
Vision: T he Burbank R ancho will of fer a safe,
comfortable, and accessible network of streets,
sidewalks, trails, pathways, and other connections
fo r all m o d e s o f trave l, includ ing p e d e strians, bicyclists, motorists, transit users, and equestrians
Mobility
56 201/14/2026
8. R NSP E mer gi ng T hemes & Obj ecti ves
Objective: Establish Burbank R ancho
as a model fo r urban horse keeping
Vision: T he Burbank R ancho is a unique
nei ghborhood characteri zed by a l ong – and
ongoing – tradition of urban equestrianism
Horse Keeping
57 211/14/2026
Objective: Steer dev el opment i nto targeted
areas to address gaps in community needs
8. R NSP Emer gi ng T hemes & Obj ecti ves
Vision: Burb ank Rancho will p ro te ct e xisting
re sid e ntial are as, while allo wing fo r sustainab le and strate g ic g ro wth in o the r are as to allo w co he sive bal ance between ol d and new .
Change and Growth
58 221/14/2026
8. R NSP E mer gi ng T hemes & Obj ecti ves
Objective: Clarify Burbank R ancho’ s role in
achie ving citywid e g o als, includ ing , b ut no t lim ite d to p ro vid ing acce ss to re g io nal am e nitie s like Griffith Park
Vision: Burbank R ancho is a unique neighborhood
which contributes to and supports the City of Burbank’ s o ve rall visio n and p o licy g o als
Citywide Role
59 231/14/2026
8. R NSP E mer gi ng T hemes & Obj ecti ves
Objective: Sharpen and make resilient Burbank
R ancho’ s id e ntity
Vision: T he Burbank R ancho is an equestrian
neighborhood that protects, celebrates, and strengthens its unique identity for equestrians and non- equestrians alike
Identity
60 241/14/2026
9 . Pro je ct Tim e line and Ne xt Ste p s
Compl eted Phase
One (Discove ry
and Analysis) and
Round 1 Outreach
61 251/14/2026
10. Question & Discussion Period
Project Website:
www.BurbankRNSP .com
Project Planners:
Gre g Mirza-Avakyan, Senior Planner
(gmirzaavakyan@ burbankca.gov )
Amanda L andry, Principal Planner
(alandry@ burbankca.gov )
T elephone: (818) 238- 5250
Thank You!
62 1
CITY OF BURBANK
CITY COUNCIL REORGANIZATION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
MONDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2025
Call to Order:
A Special Reorganization Meeting of the City Council of the City of Burbank was held in the Council Chamber, 275 East Olive Avenue, on the above date. The meeting was called to order at 10:15 a.m. by Mayor Perez.
Moment of Reflection:
Brandon Johnson, First Christian Church of Burbank, held a Moment of Reflection to begin the meeting with positive and collective support for our beloved community.
Flag Salute:
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Eddie Arnold, Burbank resident, veteran, and community advocate.
Roll Call:
Present: Council Member(s) Anthony, Mullins, Rizzotti, Vice Mayor Takahashi, and Mayor Perez
Absent: None
Also Present: City Manager Hess, City Attorney McDougall, and City Clerk Clark Council Presentations/Recognitions:
1. Mayor’s Presentation of a Key to the City of Burbank Mayor Perez presented a Key to the City to Ever Huerta.
Special Meeting Public Comment:
Appearing to comment were: Joel Schlossman, Barry Sarna, David Donahue, Diane Rana (Office of Assembly Member Schultz), Sarkis Simonian, Sonya Blake (The Valley Economic Alliance), Brian D., Jo Pimienta, Dan K., Karen Lau, and Terri Freedman.
Calling in to comment were: Sara Mendez and Steve Starleaf.
Council, City Manager, and/or City Attorney Comment:
Council Members, City Manager, and Staff responded to Public Comment.
Mayor’s Welcome Remarks:
Mayor Perez delivered welcome remarks.
Mayor’s Recognition of City Elected Officials, Executive Team, and Key Staff Members:
Mayor Perez introduced the Executive Team and gave the following presentation.
Mayor Perez expressed appreciation to the City's Elected Officials, Executives, and Key City Manager and City Council staff, and presented them with gifts in the following order: Elected Officials: Kimberley Clark, City Clerk; Krystle Palmer, City Treasurer; Consent Calendar
Item #1
63 2
Department Executives: Rafael Quintero, Chief of Police; Danny Alvarez, Fire Chief; Mandip Samra, Burbank Water and Power General Manager; Patrick Prescott, Community Development Director; Damian Skinner, Interim Public Works Director; Marisa Garcia, Parks and Recreation Director; Eric Lashley, Library Services Director; Jennifer Becker, Financial Services Director; Betsy McClinton, Management Services Director; Jose Calderon, Information Technology Director; Jonathan Jones, Communications Manager; Courtney Padgett, Assistant City Manager; City Council's Appointed Executives: Joseph H. McDougall, City Attorney, and Justin Hess, City Manager; and City Manager and Council Office staff: Cathryn LaBrado, Assistant to the City Manager; Kylene Pecor, Community Assistance Coordinator; and Sandy George, Executive Assistant.
Recognition of City Council Members:
Mayor Perez presented the City Council with a framed photo of the City Council and made remarks.
Council Members introduced their friends and families.
Vice Mayor Takahashi presented Mayor Perez with the Mayor's gavel plaque.
City Council Members thanked Mayor Perez for her hard work throughout the year.
City Manager Hess presented Mayor Perez with a scrapbook and a video highlighting notable achievements and events that occurred during her term as Mayor.
The following District Representatives presented certificates of recognition, made remarks, and thanked Mayor Perez for her leadership throughout her mayoral term:
Luke Klipp, District Director, Office of Congressmember Laura Friedman; Diane Rana, District Director, Office of State Assembly Member Nick Schultz (44th District); Teodora Reyes, District Representative, Office of State Senator Caroline Menjivar (20th District); and Diana Oganesyan, Assistant Field Deputy, Office of Los Angeles County Supervisor Kathryn Barger (5th District).
Reorganization of City Council
Mayor Perez announced that this is the time prescribed by the City Charter for the Reorganization of the City Council, during which motions for the selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor are to be made.
Council Action:
It was moved by Council Member Mullins, seconded by Mayor Perez, to appoint Vice Mayor Takahashi to serve as Mayor. The motion carried 5-0 with the following roll call vote: AYES: Anthony, Mullins, Rizzotti, Takahashi, and Perez. NOES: None.
Mayor Takahashi took the Mayor's seat, made remarks, and continued the meeting as agendized. Mayor Takahashi announced that she would like to entertain a motion to select a Vice Mayor.
Council Action:
64 3
It was moved by Council Member Rizzotti, seconded by Council Member Anthony, to appoint Council Member Mullins to serve as Vice Mayor. The motion carried 5-0 with the following roll call vote: AYES: Anthony, Mullins, Perez, Rizzotti, and Takahashi. NOES:
None.
Adjournment:
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:36 p.m., to Tuesday, December 16, 2025, for a Regular Meeting in the Council Chamber - 275 East Olive Avenue, Second Floor.
__________________________
Kimberley Clark
City Clerk
__________________________
Tamala Takahashi
Mayor
APPROVED DATE:
65 1
CITY OF BURBANK
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2025
Call to Order:
A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Burbank was held in the Council Chamber, 275 East Olive Avenue, on the above date. The meeting was called to order at 5:34 p.m. by Mayor Takahashi.
Present: Council Member(s) Anthony, Perez, Rizzotti, Vice Mayor Mullins, and Mayor Takahashi
Absent: None
Also Present: City Manager Hess, City Attorney McDougall, and City Clerk Clark Council Member Perez arrived at 5:35 p.m.
Closed Session Public Comment:
There being no response to the Mayor's invitation for Public Comment on Closed Session matters, the City Council recessed at this time to the City Hall First Floor Conference Room to hold a Closed Session on the following:
1. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation
a. Pursuant to Govt. Code §54956.9(d)(1)
b. Name of Case: Anush Kemdjian v. City of Burbank
c. Case No.: 25NNCV00700
d. Brief description and nature of case: Trip and fall
Call to Order:
A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Burbank was held in the Council Chamber, 275 East Olive Avenue, on the above date. The meeting was called to order at 6:06 p.m. by Mayor Takahashi.
Moment of Reflection:
Mayor Takahashi held a Moment of Reflection to begin the meeting with positive and collective support for our beloved community.
Flag Salute:
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Takahashi.
Roll Call:
Present: Council Member(s) Anthony, Perez, Rizzotti, Vice Mayor Mullins, and Mayor Takahashi
Absent: None
Also Present: City Manager Hess, City Attorney McDougall, and City Clerk Clark Mayor Takahashi indicated there would be two (2) periods of Public Comment at this evening’s meeting and those who wish to participate in the General Public Comment 66 2
period may call in at (818) 238-3335. The Reports to Council Public Comment period will only be taken in person.
Announcements:
Mayor Perez displayed a PowerPoint presentation announcing the following: (1) Spark of Love Toy Drive and (2) 2026 Homeless Count.
City Manager Report:
City Manager Hess indicated there were no items to report.
Reporting on Closed Session:
City Attorney McDougall reported that the City Council met in Closed Session regarding the agendized Closed Session item and City Council took no reportable action.
General Public Comment:
Appearing to comment were: Cynthia Pease, Ron Bax, Jamie Keyser, James Coker, Mark Scroggs, Mike Van Gorder, Diana Pulver, Jean Kang, Abdullah Kassem, Sadako Leong-Suzuki, Meghan B., Hernan Camacho, Jim Lane, Terri Freedman, Carmenita Helligar, Cheryl Bricker, and Corey Mensing.
Calling in to comment was: Stefan Doomanis.
Council, City Manager, and/or City Attorney Comment:
Council Members and Staff responded to Public Comment.
Consent Calendar:
It was moved by Vice Mayor Mullins, seconded by Council Member Rizzotti, to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion carried 5-0 with the following roll call vote: AYES:
Anthony, Perez, Rizzotti, Mullins, and Takahashi. NOES: None.
Council Member Anthony had a question on Item No. 2. Courtney Padgett, Assistant City Manager, responded to City Council inquiries.
1. City Council Minutes
Approve the City Council Minutes of the Joint Meeting of December 9, 2025.
2. Adoption of an Ordinance Establishing Title 7, Chapter 3, Article 11 and Amending Section 1002, Title 10, Chapter 1, Article 10 of the Burbank Municipal Code to Allow the Implementation of Wayfinding Kiosks in the Public Right of Way
ORDINANCE NO. 25-4,035
Adopt AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ESTABLISHING ARTICLE 11, WAYFINDING KIOSKS, IN CHAPTER 3, TITLE 7 OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE, AMENDING SECTION 1002 SIGNS AND ADVERTISING STRUCTURE REGULATIONS, OF ARTICLE 10,
CHAPTER 1, TITLE 10 OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE, AND FINDING 67 3
OF A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES
SECTIONS 15301(C) (CLASS 1), 15303 (CLASS 3), 15304 (CLASS 4), and 15305 (CLASS 5).
3. Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Burbank Municipal Code, Title 10, Chapter 1 (Zoning) to Establish a New School –Trade/Vocational Use With Related Regulations, Allow the Use in M-1 (Limited Industrial) and M-2 (General Industrial) Zones, and Clarify its Permissibility in Other Non-Residential Zones ORDINANCE NO. 25-4,036
Adopt AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTER 1 (ZONING) OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH SCHOOL–TRADE/VOCATIONAL AS A NEW USE
ALONG WITH RELATED REGULATIONS, ALLOW THE USE IN M-1 (LIMITED INDUSTRIAL) AND M-2 (GENERAL INDUSTRIAL) ZONES, AND TO CLARIFY
THE PERMISSIBILITY OF THE USE IN OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONES (PROJECT NO. 25-0004932, ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT).
4. Adoption of an Ordinance Establishing Article 10 Use of Gas-Powered Leaf Blowers Prohibited in Chapter 1 Health, Title 4 Health and Sanitation of the Burbank Municipal Code and Amending Section 214 Restrictions on Leaf Blower Operation in Chapter 3, Title 9 of the Burbank Municipal Code ORDINANCE NO. 25-4,037
Adopt AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ESTABLISHING ARTICLE 10 USE OF GAS-POWERED LEAF BLOWERS PROHIBITED IN CHAPTER 1 HEALTH, TITLE 4 HEALTH AND SANITATION OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE AND AMENDING SECTION 214
RESTRICTIONS ON LEAF BLOWER OPERATION IN CHAPTER 3, TITLE 9 OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE.
5. Adoption of a Resolution Making Findings Regarding the Continuing Need for Unexpended Balances of Development Impact Fees and Review of Development Impact Fee Funds as of June 30, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. 25-29,674
Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK
MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING THE CONTINUING NEED FOR
UNEXPENDED BALANCES OF IMPACT FEES AS OF JUNE 30, 2025; Note and file Review of Development Impact Fee Funds as of June 30, 2025.
6. Approval of a First Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Professional Services Agreement with Return-To-Work Partners to Provide Consulting and Case Management Support for Compliance with the Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act
Approve a First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Return- 68 4
To-Work Partners to provide consulting and case management support for compliance with the Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
7. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Execution of a Lease Agreement with Home Again Los Angeles to A Homeless Access Center Located at 2244 N.
Buena Vista and Approval to Amend Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget to Appropriate Funds, and Authorize the Acceptance of Future Funds Under the Lease Agreement
RESOLUTION NO. 25-29,675
Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING A LEASE WITH HOME AGAIN LOS ANGELES FOR BURBANK’S HOME AGAIN LOS ANGELES (HALA) ACCESS CENTER LOCATED AT 2244 N. BUENA VISTA AND APPROVAL TO AMEND FISCAL YEAR 2025-26
BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS, AND AUTHORIZE THE ACCEPTANCE OF FUTURE FUNDS UNDER THE LEASE AGREEMENT.
Reports to Council
1. Appointment to Fill One Vacancy on Heritage Commission for an Unexpired Term Kimberley Clark, City Clerk, presented the report and responded to City Council inquiries.
Public Comment:
Appearing to comment was: Corey Mensing.
Council Action:
It was approved by Council Majority and carried 3-0 by a show of hands, to appoint Corey Mensing to the Heritage Commission to fill an unexpired term ending July 31, 2026.
Council Comments:
Council Members reported out on Council committee assignments and attendance at conferences, regional meetings, and community events.
Consideration of Previously Introduced Additional Agenda Items:
1. Council Member Anthony’s request for a first step report on the feasibility of commencing litigation to stop any acquisition of Warner Bros. Studios, on the basis of, but not limited to, anti-trust violations.
It was moved by Council Member Anthony, seconded by Council Member Rizzotti, to request a letter from the Burbank City Council urging the California Attorney General, U.S. Congresswoman, and State and local representatives to exercise their full authority to review the proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. to ensure preservation of entertainment industry jobs. The motion carried 5-0 with the following roll call vote: AYES: Anthony, Perez, Rizzotti, Mullins, and Takahashi. NOES: None.
69 5
Introduction of Additional Agenda Items:
Council Member Rizzotti requested an informational memo on the status of the affordable housing project at 2814 Empire Ave.
Mayor Takahashi requested (1) a first step report on the Downtown Paseo improvements and plans for the Downtown Burbank Cultural Market and (2) an update on her request for an informational memo on the community/special events permitting process, including requirements for hosting events and applicable insurance requirements.
Adjournment:
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m. to Tuesday, January 13, 2026, for a Regular Meeting in the Council Chamber – 275 East Olive Avenue, Second Floor.
__________________________
Kimberley Clark
City Clerk
__________________________
Tamala Takahashi
Mayor
APPROVED DATE:
70 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
DARK MEETING
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 23, 2025
A Regular Meeting of the Council of the City of Burbank was not held on the above date.
__________________________________
Kimberley Clark
City Clerk
__________________________________
Tamala Takahashi
Mayor
APPROVED DATE:
71 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
DARK MEETING
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 30, 2025
A Regular Meeting of the Council of the City of Burbank was not held on the above date.
__________________________________
Kimberley Clark
City Clerk
__________________________________
Tamala Takahashi
Mayor
APPROVED DATE:
72 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
DARK MEETING
TUESDAY, JANUARY 6, 2026
A Regular Meeting of the Council of the City of Burbank was not held on the above date.
__________________________________
Kimberley Clark
City Clerk
__________________________________
Tamala Takahashi
Mayor
APPROVED DATE:
73 1
SUCCESSOR AGENCY MINUTES
A JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
CALL TO ORDER:
A Joint Meeting of the Successor Agency and the City Council of the City of Burbank was held in the Council Chamber, 275 East Olive Avenue, on the above date. The meeting was called to order at 6:05 p.m. by Chair Perez.
MOMENT OF REFLECTION:
Chair Perez held a Moment of Reflection to begin the meeting with positive and collective support for our beloved community.
FLAG SALUTE:
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chair Perez.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Members Anthony, Mullins, and Rizzotti, Vice Chair Takahashi, and Chair Perez.
Absent: None.
Also Present: Executive Director Hess, City Attorney McDougall, and Secretary Clark.
Closed Session, Announcements, Council Presentations/Recognitions, City Manager Report, Reporting on Closed Session, Public Hearing, Council Comments, and Introduction of Additional Agenda Items were City Council items only and can be found in the City Council Meeting Minutes.
JOINT GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT:
Appearing to comment were: David Donahue, Angela Towne, Ron Bax, Mark Scroggs, Mike Derian, Jamie Keyser, Stephanie Cyphers, Jim Lane, Diana Pulver, Mary O'Hare, Jackie Waltman, Steve Starleaf, Paul Darrigo, Elizabeth Bax, and Edward Parker (Bridging Community Resources).
Calling in to comment were: Allison Thomas, Gevik Sherverdian, Dimple Chirumamilla, Jo Pimienta, Liliana Martirosyan, Michelle Papazyan, and Hovik Keshishian.
COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER AND/OR CITY ATTORNEY COMMENT:
Members and Staff responded to Public Comment.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
It was moved by Member Mullins, seconded by Vice Chair Takahashi, to approve the Consent Calendar. For Item Nos. 1-6 and 8, the motion carried 5-0 with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Anthony, Mullins, Rizzotti, Takahashi, and Perez. NOES: None. For Item No. 7, the motion carried 4-0-1 with the following roll call vote: AYES: Mullins, Rizzotti, Takahashi, and Perez. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: Anthony.
Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 and 3-8 were City Council items only and can be found in the City Council minutes.
2. Successor Agency Minutes
Approve the Successor Agency Minutes of the Joint Meeting of June 3, 2025.
Consent Calendar
Item #2
74 2
REPORTS TO COUNCIL:
Reports to Council Item No. 3 was a City Council item only and can be found in the City Council minutes.
1. Approval of the 2025 City of Burbank Investment Policy (with All Agencies) Krystle Ang Palmer, City Treasurer, presented the PowerPoint presentation and responded to Successor Agency inquiries.
Chair Perez left the dais at 8:05 p.m.
Joint Public Comment:
Appearing to comment was: None.
Council Action:
It was moved by Member Rizzotti, seconded by Member Anthony, to approve the 2025 Investment Policy as proposed. The motion carried 4-0 with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Anthony, Mullins, Rizzotti, Takahashi. NOES: None. ABSENT: Perez.
2. Review of City Treasurer's Investment Portfolio Report for June 30, 2025 (with All Agencies)
Krystle Ang Palmer, City Treasurer, presented the PowerPoint presentation and responded to Successor Agencies inquiries.
Member Anthony left the dais at 8:25 p.m.
Joint Public Comment:
Appearing to comment was: None.
Council Action:
It was approved by Authority Consensus to note and file.
Chair Perez returned to the dais at 8:30 p.m.
Member Anthony returned to the dais at 8:37 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business to come before the Successor Agency, the meeting was adjourned at 9:07 p.m. to Tuesday, September 30, 2025, for a Joint Meeting in the Council Chamber – 275 East Olive Avenue, Second Floor.
___________________________________
Kimberley Clark
Secretary
___________________________________
Tamala Takahashi
Chair
APPROVED DATE:
75 1
HOUSING AUTHORITY MINUTES
A JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2025
Call to Order
A Joint Meeting of the Housing Authority and the City Council of the City of Burbank was held in the Council Chamber, 275 East Olive Avenue, on the above date. The meeting was called to order at 6:06 p.m. by Chair Perez.
Moment of Reflection:
Chair Perez held a Moment of Reflection to begin the meeting with positive and collective support for our beloved community.
Flag Salute:
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chair Perez.
Roll Call:
Present: Commissioner(s) Anthony, Mullins, Rizzotti, Vice Chair Takahashi, Chair Perez, and Clerk Clark
Absent: None
Also Present: Executive Director Hess, and City Attorney McDougall Closed Session, Study Session, Announcements, Council Presentations/Recognitions, City Manager Report, Reporting on Closed Session, Public Hearing, Reports to Council, Council Comments, and Introduction of Additional Agenda Items were City Council items only and can be found in the City Council Meeting minutes.
Joint General Public Comment:
Appearing to comment were: Sunshine McWane, Ron Bax, Armand Matevosian, Mike Stage, John Van Nest, Caroline Solberg, Kit, Ashley Ramsey, David Donahue, Jean Kang, Terri Freedman, Meghan B., Dan K., Jo Pimienta, and Jomo.
Calling in to comment were: Katie Hood, Sadako Leong Suzuki, and Kyle Anderson.
Council, City Manager, and/or City Attorney Comment:
Commissioners and Staff responded to Public Comment.
Consent Calendar:
It was moved by Commissioner Mullins, seconded by Chair Perez, to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion carried 5-0 with the following roll call vote: AYES:
Anthony, Mullins, Rizzotti, Takahashi, and Perez. NOES: None.
Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 and 6 were City Council items only and can be found in the City Council Meeting minutes.
Consent Calendar
Item #3
76 2
2. Housing Authority Minutes
Approve the Housing Authority Minutes of the Joint Meeting of September 30, 2025.
3. Adoption of a Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Adopted Budget to Accept and Appropriate $83,663 in Funding for the Administration of the Foster Youth to Independence Initiative
RESOLUTION NO. H-25-275
Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2025-26 ADOPTED BUDGET TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE $83,663 IN FUNDING FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION OF THE FOSTER YOUTH TO INDEPENDENCE
INITIATIVE.
4. Approval of the Housing Successor Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Approve the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-2025 Housing Successor Annual Report.
5. Approval of an Amendment to the 2009 Promissory Note with the Burbank Housing Corporation for the Keeler Elliott Habitat Project: 1902 Keeler Street, Burbank, California
Approve an amendment to the terms of a 2009 Promissory Note with the Burbank Housing Corporation for the Keeler Elliott Habitat Project, located at 1902 Keeler Street, Burbank, California, and determine the project to be exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Adjournment:
There being no further business to come before the Housing Authority, the meeting was adjourned at 9:26 p.m. in memory of Sal Moreno, longtime community activist and World War II veteran, to Monday, December 15, 2025, for a City Council Reorganization Meeting at 10:00 a.m. in the Council Chamber - 275 East Olive Avenue, Second Floor. __________________________
Kimberley Clark
Clerk
__________________________
Nikki Perez
Chair
APPROVED DATE:
77 1
PARKING AUTHORITY MINUTES
A JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2025
Call to Order:
A Joint Meeting of the Parking Authority and the City Council of the City of Burbank was held in the Council Chamber, 275 East Olive Avenue, on the above date. The meeting was called to order at 6:06 p.m. by Chair Perez.
Chair Perez acknowledged October 2025 as Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
Moment of Reflection:
Chair Perez held a Moment of Reflection to begin the meeting with positive and collective support for our beloved community.
Flag Salute:
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chair Perez.
Roll Call:
Present: Member(s) Anthony, Mullins, Rizzotti, Vice Chair Takahashi, and Chair Perez
Absent: None
Also Present: Executive Director Hess, City Attorney McDougall, and Secretary Clark Member Anthony left the meeting at 8:50 p.m.
Closed Session, Study Session, Announcements, Council Presentations/ Recognitions, City Manager Report, Presentations, Reporting on Closed Session, Public Hearing, Reports to Council, Council Comments, and Introduction of Additional Agenda Items were City Council items only and can be found in the City Council Meeting Minutes.
Joint General Public Comment:
Appearing to comment were: Ron Bax, Mike Derian, Nelly Rumi, Rennie Gabriel, Shirley Tom, Mark Scroggs, John Rumi, Madlin Girgis, Martha Rugeles, Diana Pulver, Julio C. Jaramillo, Susan O'Carroll, Kristy Maloof, Daniel, Jo Pimienta, Renata D'Egidio, Liz Bax, David Donahue, Mary O'Hare, and Harry Timuryan.
Calling in to comment were: Arby Gharibian, Anonymous, Jackie Waltman, Jennifer Bax, Sam Kuiumdjian, Danielle Vincent, Amal Salib, Z Simon, George Gerro, Heidi Sorenson, April Fangio, and Emily Gabel-Luddy.
Council, City Manager, and/or City Attorney Comment:
Members and Staff responded to Public Comment.
Consent Calendar:
It was moved by Member Mullins, seconded by Vice Chair Takahashi, approve the Consent Calendar. to approve the Consent Calendar. For Item Nos. 1-4 and 6-7, the motion carried 5-0 with the following roll call vote: AYES: Anthony, Mullins, Rizzotti, Consent Calendar
Item #4
78 2
Takahashi, and Perez. NOES: None. For Item No. 5, the motion carried 4-0-1 with the following roll call vote: AYES: Mullins, Rizzotti, Takahashi, and Perez. NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: Anthony.
Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 and 4-7 were City Council items only and can be found in the City Council minutes.
2. Parking Authority Minutes
Approve the Parking Authority Minutes of the Joint Meeting of September 9, 2025.
3. Adoption of a Resolution Amending Fiscal Year 2025-26 Citywide Fee Schedule for the Valet Parking Meter Fee
RESOLUTION NO. 25-29,655
Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING ARTICLE I, SECTION 14 OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE FOR THE VALET PARKING METER FEE.
Adjournment:
There being no further business to come before the Parking Authority, the meeting was adjourned at 9:28 p.m. to Tuesday, October 28, 2025 for a Regular Meeting in the Council Chamber - 275 East Olive Avenue, Second Floor.
__________________________
Kimberley Clark
Secretary
__________________________
Tamala Takahashi
Chair
APPROVED DATE:
79 1
YOUTH ENDOWMENT SERVICES FUND BOARD MINUTES
A JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
CALL TO ORDER:
A Joint Meeting of the Youth Endowment Services Fund Board and the City Council of the City of Burbank was held in the Council Chamber, 275 East Olive Avenue, on the above date. The meeting was called to order at 6:05 p.m. by Chair Perez.
MOMENT OF REFLECTION:
Chair Perez held a Moment of Reflection to begin the meeting with positive and collective support for our beloved community.
FLAG SALUTE:
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chair Perez.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Directors Anthony, Mullins, and Rizzotti, Vice Chair Takahashi, and Chair Perez.
Absent: None.
Also Present: Executive Director Hess, City Attorney McDougall, and Secretary Clark.
Closed Session, Announcements, Council Presentations/Recognitions, City Manager Report, Reporting on Closed Session, Public Hearing, Council Comments, and Introduction of Additional Agenda Items were City Council items only and can be found in the City Council Meeting Minutes.
JOINT GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT:
Appearing to comment were: David Donahue, Angela Towne, Ron Bax, Mark Scroggs, Mike Derian, Jamie Keyser, Stephanie Cyphers, Jim Lane, Diana Pulver, Mary O'Hare, Jackie Waltman, Steve Starleaf, Paul Darrigo, Elizabeth Bax, and Edward Parker (Bridging Community Resources).
Calling in to comment were: Allison Thomas, Gevik Sherverdian, Dimple Chirumamilla, Jo Pimienta, Liliana Martirosyan, Michelle Papazyan, and Hovik Keshishian.
COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER AND/OR CITY ATTORNEY COMMENT:
Directors and Staff responded to Public Comment.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
It was moved by Director Mullins, seconded by Vice Chair Takahashi, to approve the Consent Calendar. For Item Nos. 1-6 and 8, the motion carried 5-0 with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Anthony, Mullins, Rizzotti, Takahashi, and Perez. NOES: None. For Item No. 7, the motion carried 4-0-1 with the following roll call vote: AYES: Mullins, Rizzotti, Takahashi, and Perez. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: Anthony.
Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-5 and 7-8 were City Council items only and can be found in the City Council minutes.
6. Youth Endowment Services Fund Board Minutes
Approve the Youth Endowment Services Fund Board Minutes of the Joint Meeting of February 25, 2025.
Consent Calendar
Item #5
80 2
REPORTS TO COUNCIL:
Reports to Council Item No. 3 was a City Council item only and can be found in the City Council minutes.
1. Approval of the 2025 City of Burbank Investment Policy (with All Agencies) Krystle Ang Palmer, City Treasurer, presented the PowerPoint presentation and responded to Youth Endowment Services Fund Board inquiries.
Chair Perez left the dais at 8:05 p.m.
Joint Public Comment:
Appearing to comment was: None.
Council Action:
It was moved by Director Rizzotti, seconded by Director Anthony, to approve the 2025 Investment Policy as proposed. The motion carried 4-0 with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Anthony, Mullins, Rizzotti, Takahashi. NOES: None. ABSENT: Perez.
2. Review of City Treasurer's Investment Portfolio Report for June 30, 2025 (with All Agencies)
Krystle Ang Palmer, City Treasurer, presented the PowerPoint presentation and responded to Youth Endowment Services Fund Board inquiries.
Director Anthony left the dais at 8:25 p.m.
Joint Public Comment:
Appearing to comment was: None.
Council Action:
It was approved by Board Consensus to note and file.
Chair Perez returned to the dais at 8:30 p.m.
Director Anthony returned to the dais at 8:37 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business to come before the Youth Endowment Services Fund Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:07 p.m. to Tuesday, September 30, 2025, for a Joint Meeting in the Council Chamber – 275 East Olive Avenue, Second Floor. ___________________________________
Kimberley Clark
Secretary
___________________________________
Tamala Takahashi
Chair
APPROVED DATE:
81 1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: January 13, 2026
TO: Justin Hess, City Manager
FROM: Marisa Garcia, Parks and Recreation Director
BY: Diego Cevallos, Assistant Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Correcting Resolution No. 25-29,664 Authorizing the City M anager to E xecute a Design- Build Contract with L andscape Structures, I nc. and D elegating Authority to A pprove Plans and Specifications for Shade Structures at Robert E. Gross Park Ballfields
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK CORRECTING RESOLUTION NO. 25-29,664 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACT WITH LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES, INC. AND
DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR SHADE STRUCTURES AT ROBERT E. GROSS PARK BALLFIELDS.
BACKGROUND
The Robert E. Gross Ballfields Shade Structures Project involves the installation of new shade structures over the bleachers at the two ballfields to improve comfort, safety, and usability for players, spectators, and park patrons. Funded through the Fiscal Year 2025– 26 Adopted Budget, the project will be delivered using a design -build contract with Landscape Structures, Inc., leveraging a cooperative purchasing agreement to streamline delivery and reduce costs.
On November 18, 2025, City Council (Council) adopted Resolution No. 25- 29,664 authorizing the City Manager to execute a design- build contract with Landscape Structures, Inc. for the installation of shade structures over the bleachers at the Robert E.
Gross Park ballfields and delegating authority to approve plans and specifications for the project.
PARKS AND
RECREATION
Consent Calendar
Item #6
Following adoption of Resolution No. 25-29,664, staff identified a minor discrepancy in 82 2
nature and does not alter the scope, cost, intent, or authorization of the project previously approved by Council.
DISCUSSION
The staff report and proposal for the installation of shade structures over the bleachers at the Robert E. Gross Park ballfields presented to the Council on November 18, 2025, accurately identified the contractual amount as $ 229,489.29 (Attachment 1). After Council’s approval, staff identified a necessary correction to the contract amount stated in Resolution No. 25-29,664. The Resolution, as adopted, incorrectly referenced the total contract amount as $362,486. To ensure the administrative record is accurate and consistent with the materials considered and approved by the Council, staff is submitting a corrected Resolution revising the erroneous contract amount (Attachment 2). No other elements of the Council-approved action are being modified.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This activity involves administrative changes to correct the contract amount stated in Resolution No. 25- 29,664 and has no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and as such, is not a “project” subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 14 Cal. Code Regs § 15378.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact resulting from this report.
CONCLUSION
The approval of the Resolution corrects Resolution No. 25-29,664 (adopted on November 18, 2025), which updates the design-build contract with Landscape Structures Inc. to the correct contract amount of $229,489.29.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 – Staff Report - November 18, 2025
Attachment 2 – Resolution
the Resolution language that requires correction. The discrepancy is non- substantive in 83 1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Justin Hess, City Manager
FROM: Marisa Garcia, Parks and Recreation Director
BY: Diego Cevallos, Assistant Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Design- Build Contract with Landscape Structures, Inc. and Delegating Authority to Approve Plans and Specifications for Shade Structures at Robert E. Gross Park Ballfields
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A DESIGN -BUILD CONTRACT WITH LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES, INC. AND DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR SHADE STRUCTURES AT ROBERT E. GROSS PARK BALLFIELDS.
BACKGROUND
Robert E. Gross Park (Park), located at 2800 West Empire Avenue, Burbank, CA 91504, is managed by the Parks and Recreation Department (Department). The Department provides a variety of recreational programming at the Park, including youth and adult programs, seasonal camps, classes, and organized sports leagues. The Park’s two ballfields host adult softball leagues, youth Hap Minor baseball and Ponytail softball, fall youth softball, and are also utilized by various permit groups throughout the year. The Park ballfields are also passively used by ultimate frisbee groups, pickup soccer players, and park patrons for open play and recreation. Other programming uses of the Park include youth sports camps, adult slow pitch softball, fast pitch softball, private rentals, and special events such as the Centennial Retro Camp Out.
PARKS AND
RECREATION
Consent Calendar
Item #2
During the Fiscal Year (FY) 202 5-26 Budget Process, City Council (Council) approved Attachment 1
84 2
improvements will include new shade structures over the bleachers on Ballfields one, and two. There is a significant need for shade in these areas, and the new shade structures will enhance the Park experience for visitors.
DISCUSSION
Landscape Structures, Inc. ( Contractor) is a design- build company with expertise in design, conceptual development, engineering, fabrication, manufacturing, and installation. The Contractor provided the City with standardized shade products that meet the requirements for this project. The products are known for their durability, high-quality materials, and ability to withstand varying weather conditions, ensuring long- lasting functionality and aesthetic appeal. Currently, the Contractor’s shade structures are installed over ballfield bleachers at Valley Park , George Izay Park, and various picnic areas and playgrounds throughout the City. The Contractor’s familiarity with the City’s parks, coupled with the exceptional services they provided, led staff to identify Landscape Structures, Inc. as the preferred vendor.
For this project, the Department is seeking to utiliz e a Cooperative Purchasing Agreement, an alternate delivery method that allows the City to leverage another public agency’s competitive bid process. This reduces the cost of goods and services by aggregating the purchasing power of public agencies nationwide, awarding contracts to companies offering the best value. The process eliminates much of the time required for a traditional bid and is ideal for shade structure equipment and installation, as manufacturers offer proprietary equipment. This method also helps streamline the project timeline and provides nationwide pricing, with manufacturers typically offering an 8% price reduction. This process is an optimal method for procuring the shade structure installation, offering flexibility and reduced costs.
Under Burbank Municipal Code (BMC) § 2-2-116, subdivisions I and J, Council may waive the requirement for competitive bidding by Resolution, finding that it is in the City’s best interest and awarding the contract to the proposer offering the best value as defined in the solicitation.
The Contractor submitted their proposal under the City’s existing Sourcewell cooperative agreement (Sourcewell Contract No. 010521- LSI). Sourcewell offers cooperative procurement opportunities to participating public entities and selected Landscape Structures as a vendor through a national competitive bidding process. BMC § 2-2- 111 allows the City to secure contractors through cooperative purchases when advantageous.
The design- build delivery method will facilitate smoother coordination of design, demolition, and installation. With one contractor responsible for both design and funding to add new shade structures to ballfields at multiple park locations . These construction, staff anticipates the p roject will be completed on time and within budget.
Attachment 1
85 3
Landscape Structures' versatility and proven track record will help ensure the p roject is delivered efficiently without impacting the construction timeline.
If the proposed resolution is approved, the project will commence in January 2026 and completed by May 2026.
Design Immunity
To invoke design immunity protection under California Government Code § 830.6, Council or an employee exercising discretionary authority must approve the final plans and specifications for a project prior to construction. BMC § 2-2-104 grants certain employees such discretionary authority over technical specifications, plans, and drawings.
In a traditional design-bid-build project, design or plan approval often occurs when Council awards the construction project after bidding. However, in a design-build project, final plans and specifications are not completed until after Council’s approval. Therefore, staff requests that the Council delegate the authority to approve the final plans and specifications to the Parks and Recreation Director.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Staff recommends Council find the Project Categorically Exempt from environmental review under California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 14, §§ 15301, 15302, 15303, and 15311. Specifically, CCR, Title 14, § 15301 exempts activities involving the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use ; § 15302 exempts activities pertaining to replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities, where the new structures and facilities will be located on the same site and will have substantially the same purpose and c apacity as the structures and facilities being replaced; § 15303 exempts activities involving the construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures, installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures, and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure; and § 15311 exempts activities consisting of construction, or placement of minor structures accessory to (appurtenant to) existing commercial, industrial, or institutional facilities . The shade structures will be shading the existing bleacher areas and will involve negligible or no expansion of capacity.
FISCAL IMPACT
The total contract price is $229,245.05. There will be no fiscal impact resulting from the recommended action as the Gross Ballfield Shade Structure Project was approved in the FY 2025- 2026 Adopted Budget. Sufficient funds are available in the following pr oject Attachment 1
86 4
account: 127.PR21A.70003.0000.25124 (Public Improvements, Facility Planning and Development, Park Improvements, Gross Ballfield Shade Structure).
CONCLUSION
The approval of the resolution to execute a design- build contract with Landscape Structures will enable the City to enhance the Park ballfields by providing much- needed shade structures. These structures offer numerous benefits, including improved safety and comfort for players and spectators by protecting them from UV rays and extreme heat. They will enhance player performance, and create a more enjoyable experience for fans, potentially encouraging longer attendance at games. Additionally, shade structures increase the facility's appeal and usage, which could generate higher revenue t hrough increased demand for field rentals and community events. Overall, the shade structures will contribute to a safer, more comfortable, and sustainable environment for athletes, spectators, and the broader community.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 – Sourcewell Proposal
Attachment 3 – Rendering
Attachment 1
87 ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. __________
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURBANK CORRECTING RESOLUTION NO. 25-29,664
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A
DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACT WITH LANDSCAPE
STRUCTURES, INC. AND DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO
APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR SHADE
STRUCTURES AT ROBERT E. GROSS PARK BALLFIELDS
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK RESOLVES:
1. Resolve No. 4 of Resolution No. 25 -29,664, The current total construction budget of the Project is estimated to be $362,486 but may be adjusted by the City Manager or his designee up to the total budgeted amount for the Project is hereby amended to read as follows:
4. The current total construction budget of the Project is estimated to be $229,489.29 but may be adjusted by the City Manager or his designee up to the total budgeted amount for the Project.
2. All other resolves of No. 25-29,664 not otherwise inconsistent with this Resolution shall remain in full force and effect.
PASSED and ADOPTED this ______ day of ________, 2026.
__________________________
Tamala Takahashi
Mayor
Approved as to Form:
Attest: Office of the City Attorney
____________________________ By: _______________________ Kimberley Clark, City Clerk Catherine Kim Assistant City Attorney
88 ATTACHMENT 2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF BURBANK )
I, Kimberley Clark, City Clerk of the City of Burbank, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by a vote of the Council of the City of Burbank at its regular meeting held on the ____ day of ________, 2026, by the following vote:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:
_____________________________
Kimberley Clark, City Clerk
89 1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: January 13, 2026
TO: Justin Hess, City Manager
FROM: Patrick Prescott, Community Development Director
BY: Simone McFarland, Assistant Community Development Director SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Awarding Contract Documents Including Plans , Specifications and Environmental Analysis, and Authorizing the Execution of a Construction Contract For Bid Schedule No. 1542, Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles ( HALA) Access Center, to Cal-City Construction, Inc. , as the Highest Ranked Bidder and Best Value to the City
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK A WARDING
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS INCLUDING PLANS , SPECIFICATIONS AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR BID SCHEDULE NO. 1542, BURBANK’S HOME
AGAIN LOS ANGELES (HALA) ACCESS CENTER, TO CAL -CITY CONSTRUCTION, INC., AS THE HIGHEST RANKED BIDDER AND BEST VALUE TO THE CITY.
BACKGROUND
At Council’s direction, staff has been working to develop approved plans and environmental documents for tenant improvements to the City-owned building located at 2244 N. Buena Vista. Staff has now completed the construction bidding process and is asking for approval of the contract documents, plans and specifications , and environmental documents along with authorizing the execution of a contract for Bid Schedule No.1542 for Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) Access Center . If approved, construction will begin in February 2026 and is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2026.
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
Consent Calendar
Item #7
90 2
The City owns the land and associated building located at 2244 N. Buena Vista (Property) through a “Fee Simple” title1, which includes an approximate 4,500 square foot structure built in 1949 by the City for use as a fire station. From 1994 through 2021, the Boys and Girls Club leased the Property until they vacated it i n May of 2021. T he Property is currently sitting vacant and t he building is in severe disrepair with no substantial improvements having occurred since its construction 70 years ago.
I
n 2021, Council directed staff to prepare a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) seeking a non-profit that serves the Burbank community to lease the building . HALA, a non- profit homeless service agency, was the successful responder. In late 2022, Council approved staff’s request to negotiate with HALA to lease the Property . In June 2024, Council approved an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement ( ENA) with HALA, who then provided a payment of $64,000 as a good faith deposit. On December 16, 2025, Council approved the execution of the lease agreement with HALA, amended Fiscal Year 2025-26 Adopted Budget to a ppropriate funds, and authorized the City to a ccept future funds under the lease agreement.
HA
LA will be leasing the Property from the City to utilize as Burbank’s HALA Access Center for families. The Project includes four transitional housing units and meets a goal in the City’s Five-Year Homelessness Plan (2022-2027) under Strategy 3: Create interim housing that can include shelters and/or transitional housing including a tiny home village.
Bot
h HALA and the City will be contributing to project improvement costs. The City will be funding their portion of the project through Community Development Block Grant, Permanent Local Housing Allocations and Redevelopment Loan Repayment Funds.
Additionally, HALA has obtained two grants totaling $1,000,000 for the Project.
DISCUSSION
Staff issued an RFQ which was advertised on the City’s PlanetBids online platform from May 6, 2025 to May 29, 2025, and requested bids from contractors that possessed a valid class A (General Engineering Contractor) or B (General Building Contractor) license at the time that the contractor submitted the bid. From this list , three respondents were selected as qualified bidders.
F
rom October 17, 2025 to December 3, 2025, Bid Schedule No.1542 was advertised on the City’s PlanetBids online platform and then extended for another week to allow additional time for the bidders to submit. Staff requested bids from the three contractors selected as qualified bidders during the RFQ process . From these bidders, Cal-City Construction, Inc. was the sole bidder.
1 A “Fee Simple” title provides the landowner with complete/total ownership of a piece of land and all properties on it. The landowner may make any changes to the property if it falls within all established easements and zoning law 91 3
COMMUNITY OUTREACH
Staff held two community meetings for this project. A virtual meeting was held on Wednesday, March 5, 2025, and an in- person meeting occurred on Thursday, March 6, 2025. Approximately 35 people attended the meetings. While there were many questions about the project, there were no significant concerns voiced during the community meetings.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as the Project falls under the emergency shelter crisis, declared by the City Council on April 9, 2024, and complying with Government Code §8698.2 that exempted the improvements from CEQA.
Furthermore, this approval involves a lease that would not result in any expansion of the building’s existing use. As such, this activity is exempt from CEQA under 14 CCR section 15301.
A
lso, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, staff concluded that the proposed development is categorically excluded under Department of Housing Urban Development (HUD) regulations, 24 CFR, Part 58 et. al.
S
urplus Land Act (SLA)
A lease that extends longer than 15 years is subject to the Surplus Land Act (SLA). The City Council declares that the Lease is not subject to the Surplus Lands Act (“SLA”) under SLA Guidelines, section 103(c)(3)(A) E xemptions include: “Small Surplus Land Parcels.
Land that is: (A) Less than one-half acre in area (21,780 square feet) and is not contiguous to land owned by a state or local agency that is used for open-space or low- and moderate- income housing purposes.” This Property is 0.23 acres and is not contiguous to land owned by a state or local agency.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funds have already been allocated to the project and consist of Former Redevelopment Agency funding, Community Development Block Grant, and Permanent Local Housing Allocation along with grant funds that HALA has received.
CONCLUSION
In partnership with HALA, the Project will create an Access Center for families in Burbank along with four proposed transitional housing units. This aligns with the City’s Five-year Homeless Plan which calls for the addition of transitional housing units. These units would support homeless families, including parents and children suffering from domestic abuse.
Staff recommends Council approval of the resolution and thereby, allowing construction to begin at 2244 N. Buena Vista.
92 4
ATTACHMENT
Attachment 1 – Resolution
93 ATTACHMENT 1 – 1
1 RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURBANK AWARDING CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
INCLUDING PLANS , SPECIFICATIONS AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, AND AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR BID
SCHEDULE NO. 1542, BURBANK’S HOME AGAIN LOS
ANGELES (HALA) ACCESS CENTER, TO CAL -CITY
CONSTRUCTION, INC., AS THE HIGHEST RANKED
BIDDER AND BEST VALUE TO THE CITY
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK FINDS:
A. The City owns the property located at 2244 N. Buena Vista (Property) through a “Fee Simple” title, which includes an approximate 4,500 square foot structure built in 1949 by the City for use as a Burbank fire station.
B. The Property at 2244 N. Buena Vista is in severe disrepair with no substantial improvements having occurred since its construction 70 years ago.
C. In 2021, Council directed staff to prepare a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) seeking a non- profit that serves the Burbank community to lease the Property. Home Again Los Angeles (HALA), a local non-profit, was selected to as a potential tenant of the Property to operate a Homeless Access Center.
D. In June 2024, Council approved an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) with Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) to operate the Property. HALA provided a payment of $64,000 as a good faith deposit.
E. On December 16, 2025, Council was asked to approve a lease agreement with HALA that outlined the financial terms for rent and tenant improvement costs.
F. From May 6, 2025, to May 29, 2025, the City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) posted on PlanetBids resulting in three qualified bidders.
G. The City issued Bid Schedule No.1542 on October 17, 2025, in accordance with approved procurement guidelines as stated in Burbank Municipal Code §2- 2-113 and §2-2-116 and requested bids from the three qualified contractors. Prior to the close of the bid schedule period, the City extended the deadline eight days allow for additional time for proposers to respond.
H. Pursuant to notice provided according to law, bids for Bid Schedule No. 1542 Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) Access Center Project have been received, publicly opened, declared, and evaluated.
94 ATTACHMENT 1 – 2
2 I. The City Manager reports that the lowest responsive and responsible bid for the Project was received from Cal-City Construction, Inc., that the bid is as set forth below, and recommends that the bid be accepted.
J. The Plans and Specifications for the Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) Access Center Project, Bid Schedule No. 1542, are on file at the Public Works Department, Community Development Department, and the City Council Office. The City Council has reviewed and considered the Plans and Specifications for the Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles Homeless Access Center Project, Bid Schedule No. 1542, and approves the plans and specifications.
K. Both HALA and the City will be contributing to project improvement costs. The City will be funding their portion of the project through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Permanent Local Housing Allocations and Redevelopment Loan Repayment Funds. Additionally, HALA has obtained two grants totaling $1,000,000 for the Project. The City funds have been appropriated to the CIP and Community Development Block Grant accounts.
L. This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as the Project falls under the emergency shelter crisis, declared by the City Council on April 9, 2024, and complying with Government Code §8698.2 that exempted the improvements from CEQA. Furthermore, this approval involves a lease that would not result in any expansion of the buildings existing use. As such, this activity is exempt from CEQA under 14 CCR section 15301. Also, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, staff concluded that the proposed development is categorically excluded under Department of Housing Urban Development (HUD) regulations, 24 CFR, Part 58 et. al.
M. This lease is exempt surplus land pursuant to the Surplus Land Act (SLA) Guidelines section 103(c)(3)(A) which exempts land that is less than one -half acre in area (21,780 square feet) and is not contiguous to land owned by a state or local agency that is used for open- space or low - and moderate-income housing purposes. This Property is .23 acres and is not contiguous to land owned by any local agency as open space or housing purposes.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
1. FINDINGS. The Findings above are true and correct, and incorporated herein as if restated in their entirety.
2. The Contract Documents consisting of all the documents within Bid Schedule 1542, including but not limited to the Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Bidder's Proposal, Addendum(s), Bidder's Performance and Payment Bonds, Agreement, City of Burbank Additions and Amendments to the Standard Specifications for Construction, Special Provisions, Appendices, and Plans and Specifications for Bid Schedule No. 1542, Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) 95 ATTACHMENT 1 – 3
3 Access Center (collectively, the Contract Documents) are on file in the Community Development Department and City Council Office, and are approved and adopted as the Contract Documents, Bid Schedule No. 1452, subject to final review and approval with non-substantive changes as may be deemed necessary by the City Attorney.
Reference is made to these Contract Documents for further particulars.
3. The lowest responsive and responsible bidder for Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) Access Center in accordance with Bid Schedule No. 1542 is Cal Cities Construction Inc., whose address is 16605 Norwalk Blvd, Cerritos, CA 90703 and whose total lump-sum price of $5,087,200 ($4,964,200 plus a $123,000 additive alternate) is set forth in the Bidder's Proposal included in the Contract Documents, on file in the Purchasing Division. This bid is accepted, and the City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to reject all other bids once the lowest responsive and responsible bidder has executed and forwarded all necessary Contract Documents to the City.
4. The City Council has reviewed and considered the Plans, Specifications, and Environmental Analysis for Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) Access Center, Bid Schedule No. 1542, and approves the Plans and Specifications. The Community Development Director and/or Public Works Director , or his designee, is authorized to approve any changes to the Plans and Specifications.
5. The total Project budget for Bid Schedule No.1542 shall be $ 5,850,280 which includes a 15% contingency in the amount of $763,080. Any adjustment in the Contract Price or Contract Term shall be agreed to, in writing, through a change order.
The sources of funding for this contract includes Community Development Block Grant, Permanent Local Housing Allocation, and Redevelopment Loan Repayment along with State grant funds obtained by Home Again Los Angeles.
6. This Project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as the Project falls under the emergency shelter crisis, declared by the City Council on April 9, 2024, and complying with Government Code §8698.2 that exempted the improvements from CEQA. Furthermore, this approval involves a lease that would not result in any expansion of the buildings existing use. As such, this activity is exempt from CEQA under 14 CCR section 15301.Also, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act the proposed development is categorically excluded under Department of Housing Urban Development (HUD) regulations, 24 CFR, Part 58 et. al.
96 ATTACHMENT 1 – 4
4 7. The City Manager, or their designee, including the Community Development Director, is authorized to execute all necessary Contract Documents under Bid Schedule 1542 and future change orders (if any) up to the amount budgeted for this project with such non- substantive changes as may be approved by the City Attorney and the City Clerk is authorized to attest.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of January, 2026.
__________________________
Tamala Takahashi
Mayor
Approved as to Form:
Attest: Office of the City Attorney
_____________________________ By: ________________________
Kimberley Clark, City Clerk Ray Johal
Senior Assistant City Attorney
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF BURBANK )
I, Kimberley Clark, City Clerk of the City of Burbank, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by a vote of the Council of the City of Burbank at its regular meeting held on the day of January 2026, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Kimberley Clark, City Clerk
97 1
RESOLUTION NO. 26-29,676
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURBANK AWARDING CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
INCLUDING PLANS , SPECIFICATIONS AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, AND AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR BID
SCHEDULE NO. 1542, BURBANK’S HOME AGAIN LOS
ANGELES (HALA) ACCESS CENTER, TO CAL -CITY
CONSTRUCTION, INC., AS THE HIGHEST RANKED
BIDDER AND BEST VALUE TO THE CITY
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK FINDS:
A. The City owns the property located at 2244 N. Buena Vista (Property) through a “Fee Simple” title, which includes an approximate 4,500 square foot structure built in 1949 by the City for use as a Burbank fire station.
B. The Property at 2244 N. Buena Vista is in severe disrepair with no substantial improvements having occurred since its construction 70 years ago.
C. In 2021, Council directed staff to prepare a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) seeking a non- profit that serves the Burbank community to lease the Property. Home Again Los Angeles (HALA), a local non-profit, was selected to as a potential tenant of the Property to operate a Homeless Access Center.
D. In June 2024, Council approved an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) with Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) to operate the Property. HALA provided a payment of $64,000 as a good faith deposit.
E. On December 16, 2025, Council was asked to approve a lease agreement with HALA that outlined the financial terms for rent and tenant improvement costs.
F. From May 6, 2025, to May 29, 2025, the City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) posted on PlanetBids resulting in three qualified bidders.
G. The City issued Bid Schedule No.1542 on October 17, 2025, in accordance with approved procurement guidelines as stated in Burbank Municipal Code §2- 2-113 and §2-2-116 and requested bids from the three qualified contractors. Prior to the close of the bid schedule period, the City extended the deadline eight days allow for additional time for proposers to respond.
H. Pursuant to notice provided according to law, bids for Bid Schedule No. 1542 Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) Access Center Project have been received, publicly opened, declared, and evaluated.
98 26-29,676
2 I. The City Manager reports that the lowest responsive and responsible bid for the Project was received from Cal -City Construction, Inc., that the bid is as set forth below, and recommends that the bid be accepted.
J. The Plans and Specifications for the Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) Access Center Project, Bid Schedule No. 1542, are on file at the Public Works Department, Community Development Department, and the City Council Office. The City Council has reviewed and considered the Plans and Specifications for the Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles Homeless Access Center Project, Bid Schedule No. 1542, and approves the plans and specifications.
K. Both HALA and the City will be contributing to project improvement costs.
The City will be funding their portion of the project through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Permanent Local Housing Allocations and Redevelopment Loan Repayment Funds. Additional ly, HALA has obtained two grants totaling $1,000,000 for the Project. The City funds have been appropriated to the CIP and C ommunity Development Block Grant accounts.
L. This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as the Project falls under the emergency shelter crisis, declared by the City Council on April 9, 2024, and complying with Government Code §8698.2 that exempted the improvements from CEQA. Furthermore, this approval involves a lease that would not result in any expansion of the buildings existing use. As such, this activity is exempt from CEQA under 14 CCR section 15301. Also, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act , staff concluded that the proposed development is categorically excluded under Department of Housing Urban Development (HUD) regulations, 24 CFR, Part 58 et. al.
M. This lease is exempt surplus land pursuant to the Surplus Land Act (SLA) Guidelines section 103(c)(3)(A) which exempts land that is less than one-half acre in area (21,780 square feet) and is not contiguous to land owned by a state or local agency that is used for open-space or low- and moderate-income housing purposes. This Property is .23 acres and is not contiguous to land owned by any local agency as open space or housing purposes.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
1. FINDINGS. The Findings above are true and correct, and incorporated herein as if restated in their entirety.
2. The Contract Documents consisting of all the documents within Bid Schedule 1542, including but not limited to the Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Bidder's Proposal, Addendum(s), Bidder's Performance and Payment Bonds, Agreement, City of Burbank Additions and Amendments to the Standard Specifications for Construction, Special Provisions, Appendices, and Plans and Specifications for Bid Schedule No. 1542, Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) Access Center (collectively, the Contract Documents) are on file in the Community Development 99 26-29,676
3 Department and City Council Office, and are approved and adopted as the Contract Documents, Bid Schedule No. 1452, subject to final review and approval with non- substantive changes as may be deemed necessary by the City Attorney. Reference is made to these Contract Documents for further particulars.
3. The lowest responsive and responsible bidder for Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) Access Center in accordance with Bid Schedule No. 1542 is Cal City Construction Inc., whose address is 16605 Norwalk Blvd, Cerritos, CA 90703 and whose total lump-sum price of $5,087,200 ($4,964,200 plus a $123,000 additive alternate is set forth in the Bidder's Proposal included in the Contract Documents, on file in the Purchasing Division . This bid is accepted, and the City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to reject all other bids once the lowest responsive and responsible bidder has executed and forwarded all necessary Contract Documents to the City.
4. The City Council has reviewed and considered the Plans , Specifications, and Environmental Analysis for Burbank’s Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) Access Center, Bid Schedule No. 1542, and approves the Plans and Specifications. The Community Development Director and/or Public Works Director , or his designee, is authorized to approve any changes to the Plans and Specifications.
5. The total Project budget for Bid Schedule No.1542 shall be $ 5,850,280 which includes a 15% contingency in the amount of $ 763,080. Any adjustment in the Contract Price or Contract Term shall be agreed to, in writing, through a change order.
The sources of funding for this contract includes Community Development Block Grant, Permanent Local Housing Allocation, and Redevelopment Loan Repayment along with State grant funds obtained by Home Again Los Angeles.
6. This Project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as the Project falls under the emergency shelter crisis, declared by the City Council on April 9, 2024, and complying with Government Code §8698.2 that exempted the improvements from CEQA. Furthermore, this approval involves a lease that would not result in any expansion of the buildings existing use. As such, this activity is exempt from CEQA under 14 CCR section 15301.Also, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act the proposed development is categorically excluded under Department of Housing Urban Development (HUD) regulations, 24 CFR, Part 58 et. al.
100
26-29,676
4 7. The City Manager, or their designee, including the Community Development Director, is authorized to execute all necessary Contract Documents under Bid Schedule 1542 and future change orders (if any) up to the amount budgeted for this project with such non-substantive changes as may be approved by the City Attorney and the City Clerk is authorized to attest.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 13th day of January 2026.
_s/Tamala Takahashi_________
Tamala Takahashi
Mayor
Approved as to Form:
Attest: Office of the City Attorney
_s/Kimberley Clark_____________ By: _s/Ray Johal______________ Kimberley Clark, City Clerk Ray Johal
Senior Assistant City Attorney
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF BURBANK )
I, Kimberley Clark, City Clerk of the City of Burbank, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by a vote of the Council of the City of Burbank at its regular meeting held on the 13th day of January 2026, by the following vote:
AYES: Anthony, Perez, Rizzotti, Mullins, and Takahashi.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
_s/Kimberley Clark_____________
Kimberley Clark, City Clerk
101
1 STAFF REPORT
______
________________________________________________________________ DATE
: January 13, 2026
TO: J
ustin Hess, City Manager
FR
OM: Mandip Kaur Samra, General Manager, Burbank Water and Power VIA: Riad Sleiman, Chief Assistant General Manager
BY: Michael Wang, Principal Electrical Engineer
SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Ratifying And Approving Community Energy Reliability And Resilience Investment Program Grant Applications f or an Award of $5,186,701 f or the Burbank Grid Forward 12kv Conversion Project, Commitment to Fund $36,800,000 over Fiscal Years 2027-28, 2028-29, 2029-30, and 2030-31, and Authorizing the Burbank Water and Power General Manager, a s the City Manager’s Designee, t o Negotiate, Execute, and Implement All Required and Related Agreements and Forms with the California Energy Commission and the Department of Energy RECO
MMENDATION
1. Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK RATIFYING AND APPROVING GRANT APPLICATIONS FOR AN AWARD OF $5,186,701 FROM
THE COMMUNITY ENERGY RELIABILITY AND RESILIENCE INVESTMENT (CERRI) PROGRAM FOR THE BURBANK GRID FORWARD 12KV CONVERSION
PROJECT (PROPOSED PROJECT) BY BURBANK WATER AND POWER (BWP), COMMITMENT TO FUND $36,800,000 OVER FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2027-28, FY 2028- 29, FY 2029- 30, AND FY 2030- 31, AND AUTHORIZING THE BWP GENERAL MANAGER, AS THE CITY MANAGER’S DESIGNEE, TO NEGOTIATE, EXECUTE,
AND IMPLEMENT ALL REQUIRED AND RELATED AGREEMENTS AND FORMS
WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION (CEC) AND THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (DOE) (Attachment 1);
2. Aut
horize BWP General Manager to accept all grant funds under these agreements.
BACKGRO
UND
As BWP’s distribution system ages, staff has committed to systematically replacing and upgrading equipment as needed under an annual 4-12kV conversion program. These
WATER AND
POWER
Consent Calendar
Item #8
102
2 activities focus on standardizing the distribution grid to use a 12kV voltage level and will help improve reliability and resiliency of our distribution grid and reduce overall costs .
Typical e quipment that is replaced is overhead transformers, deteriorated poles, and undersized conductors and cross-arm configurations.
I
n May 2025, the CEC announced a new Grant Funding Opportunity (GFO) through Round 2 of the CERRI Program (GFO-23-312-r2). The grant is funded under the Federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) to the CEC. As the direct “Recipient” of the IIJA funds, the CEC has entered into an agreement (Federal Grant Agreement) with the United States Department of Energy (DOE) to administer the distribution of funds to “Subrecipients”. This GFO m akes available over $5.1 million to support grid -hardening and grid resilience projects that strengthen and modernize California’s power grid against wildfires, extreme weather, and other natural disasters. The due date for GFO-23-312-r2 applications was August 29 , 202 5, and BWP submitted a grant application with the Proposed Project, and the scope of this project is based on the typical scope of our annual 4-12kV conversion program, focusing on conversions of three major 4kV areas originating from Victory, Winona, and McCambridge Substations.
On
December 1, 2025, BWP received notice from the CEC that the Notice of Proposed Award for GFO -23-312-r2 includes an award of $ 5,186,701 for the Proposed Project , pending final approval and review by the Department of Energy (DOE). The final review package to DOE will be sent on January 30, 2026, and it is expected to be completed within 3-6 months. Part of the DOE submittal package requires a cost match commitment letter that guarantees funding from the City of Burbank (City) to perform the project’s scope of work. This commitment letter is a required component of the DOE submittal package.
S
hould the grant be awarded, engineering and construction related to the work scope covered in this application are expected to occur starting in July 2027 and continue through June 2031.
DISCUSSION
GFO-23-312-r2 and the proposed grid infrastructure improvements provide a beneficial opportunity for BWP as they would provide substantial financial support for work that aligns with BWP’s overall reliability and resiliency strategy. The proposed scope of work would enable the electrical load from three 4kV substations to be transferred to the 12kV distribution grid, providing a path to retirement. In total, 30 circuit miles of distribution lines will be upgraded from 4kV to 12kV standards, which is estimated to include replacement and installation of 318 climate- hardened equipment, 212 distribution poles, and 2,121 units of 12kV pole arm equipment. This work aligns with the longstanding BWP strategy of retiring 4kV substations and focusing on serving all customer loads at 12kV and above. 103
3 As has been discussed at previous Burbank City Council (Council) meetings, the retirement of 4kV substations provides many benefits to the utility, providing increased reliability and resiliency by increasing the ability to provide redundant feeds in the field, increased system efficiency from using a higher voltage level, reduction in Operations and Maintenance (O&M) costs by reducing the total number of substations, and freeing up the valuable land and points of electrical interconnection at these substations to host other technologies and equipment vital for the future distribution grid as BWP strives to meet its carbon-free generation goal.
U
nder the Federal Grant Agreement, the CEC is the “Recipient ,” and Burbank is the “Subrecipient”. The various terms of the Federal Grant Agreement “flow -down” to Burbank, including customary environmental, Davis -Bacon Act requirements, Buy America requirements, foreign collaboration restrictions, fraud, lobbying restrictions, cost matching, contracting and procurement provisions, auditing, and indemnification. In addition, Burbank will be entering into the CEC grant agreement, which contains certain standard terms, including, but not limited to, cost compliance provisions, prevailing wages, contracting and procurement provisions, retention, recordkeeping, auditing, and indemnification. In addition, the CEC may terminate for breach of the CEC grant agreements and may terminate at its convenience (in which case, Burbank would be responsible for all remaining amounts).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
During the application process, staff worked with an environmental consultant and determined California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemption would be applicable as related to the following 3 Categorical Exemptions under Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCRs).
CCRs,
Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section 15301 exemption relates to work on existing facilities of publicly-owned utilities that provide electric power amongst other services, the project scope will be upgrading and replacing existing BWP facilities. CCRs, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section 15302 exemption relates to replacement or reconstruction work. Replacement of a commercial structure with a new structure of substantially the same size, purpose, and capacity is exempt. Additionally, replacement or reconstruction of existing utility systems and/or facilities involving negligible or no expansion of capacity. This project will be replace existing infrastructure with new infrastructure in the same place and the capacity of load to be served will remain the same. Lastly, CCRs, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section 15303 exemption relates to new construction of electric lines to serve new construction, which there may be additional circuit added to serve new customers in these areas. 104
4 Similarly, a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) categorical exclusion would apply.
BWP expects the project to qualify for the following NEPA Categorical Exclusions under Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B . Exclusion B4.6 relates to additions and modifications to transmission facilities, specific activities include replacement of poles, conductor, transformers , and cross arms, which are contained in the scope of the project. Exclusion B4.11 relates to electric power substations and interconnection facilities. This project scope covers the interconnection to these substations and grouping existing loads to be served by different stations. Lastly, exclusion B4.13 relates to upgrading and rebuilding existing powe rlines; all the work included in the scope focuses on rebuilding existing powerlines and related equipment.
T
hese environmental determinations would be filed as a first step after an agreement with CEC has been finalized and entered into.
FISCAL IMPACT
As the operating agent, Burbank would be reimbursed for its costs in the implementation of the CEC grant agreements. Much of the work scope is for activities that need to be completed in the upcoming FYs, and this grant award will only serve to reduce the financial impact. A commitment of funding by Council would include $36,800,000 of funds for use across the project duration of FY 2027-28, FY 2028-29, FY 2029-30, and FY 2030-
31. The grant award from the CEC will reduce the overall fiscal impact by $5,186,701.
CONCLUSION
Adopting resolutions ratifying and approving grant applications with the CEC for the CERRI program, and authorizing the BWP General Manager, as the City Manager’s Designee, to negotiate, execute, and implement all related agreements and forms , is in the best interest of the City. Approving the full budget amount for all years of the project is a required component for receiving the award. Upon completion of this work, 30 circuit miles of distribution lines and accompanying infrastructure will be upgraded fr om 4kV to 12kV standards, allowing the retirement of three 4kV distribution substations. By taking the recommended action, Council would reduce the financial impact typically caused by large capital investments in the distribution grid.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 – CEC Standard Grant Terms and Conditions
Attachment 3 – Federal Award Terms and Conditions
105
ATTACHMENT 1
A1-1
RESOLUTION NO. ____________________
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURBANK RATIFYING AND APPROVING GRANT
APPLICATIONS FOR AN AWARD OF $5,186,701 FROM THE
COMMUNITY ENERGY RELIABILITY AND RESILIENCE
INVESTMENT (CERRI) PROGRAM FOR THE BURBANK
GRID FORWARD 12KV CONVERSION PROJECT
(PROPOSED PROJECT) BY BURBANK WATER AND
POWER (BWP), COMMITMENT TO FUND $36,800,000
OVER FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2027-28, FY 2028-29, FY 2029-30,
AND FY 2030-31, AND AUTHORIZING THE BWP GENERAL
MANAGER, AS THE CITY MANAGER’S DESIGNEE, TO
NEGOTIATE, EXECUTE, AND IMPLEMENT ALL REQUIRED
AND RELATED AGREEMENTS AND FORMS WITH THE
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION (CEC) AND THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (DOE)
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK FINDS:
A. Burbank Water and Power conducts an annual program focused on upgrading 4kV distribution grid infrastructure to meet 12kV standards.
B. The California Energy Commission (CEC) has made $5,186,701 available to support the distribution grid upgrade efforts under the Community Energy Reliability And Resilience Investment (CERRI) Program Round 2 (GFO-23-312-r2).
C. The CERRI Program is funded under the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) to the CEC, and as the direct “Recipient” of the IIJA funds, the CEC has entered into an agreement (Federal Grant Agreement) with the DOE to administer the distribution of funds to “Subrecipients”.
D. The City of Burbank (City) and BWP submitted an application to the CEC’s GFO-23-312-r2 for a grant funding opportunit y under the CERRI Program Round 2 for proposed upgrades to the 4kV distribution grid infrastructure (Proposed Project).
E. On December 1, 2025, BWP received notice from the CEC staff that the Notice of Proposed Award for GFO-23-312-r2 includes proposed funding for $5,186,701 for the Proposed Project grant application as a “Subrecipient”.
106
ATTACHMENT 1
A1-2
F. The Department of Energy (DOE) will conduct a final review of the application beginning on January 30, 2026. Part of that application package requir es a match share commitment for funding the project in its entirety in order to receive the final approval. The commitment would be for City Council to include funds of $36,800,000 in future budget years FY 2027-28, FY 2028-29, FY 2029-30, and FY 2030-31 for use in the Proposed Project.
G. After final DOE approval is received, CEC and BWP will work on finalizing an agreement and seek to begin the project by July 2027.
H. The California Code of Regulations , Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section 15301 exemption relates to work on existing facilities of publicly -owned utilities that provide electric power amongst other services, the project scope will be upgrading and replacing existing BWP facilities and therefore qualifies for the exemption.
I. California Code of Regulations , Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section 15302 exemption relates to replacement or reconstruction work. Replacement of a commercial structure with a new structure of substantially the same size, purpose, and capacity is exempt. Additionally, replacement or reconstruction of existing utility systems and/or facilities involving negligible or no expansion of capacity. This project will be replace existing infrastructure with new infrastructure in the same place and the capacity of load to be served will remain the same and therefore qualifies for the exemption.
J. California Code of Regulations , Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section 15303 exemption relates to new construction of electric lines to serve new construction, which there may be additional circuit added to serve new customers in these areas and therefore qualifies for the exemption.
K. NEPA Categorical Exclusions under 10 CFR 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B, exclusion B4.6 relates to additions and modifications to transmission facilities, specific activities include replacement of poles, conductor, transformers and cross arms, which are contained in the scope of the project and therefore qualifies for the exclusion.
L. NEPA Categorical Exclusions under 10 CFR 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B, exclusion B4.11 relates to electric power substations and interconnection facilities. This project scope covers the interconnection to these substations and grouping existing load to be served by different stations and therefore qualifies for the exclusion.
M. NEPA Categorical Exclusions under 10 CFR 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B, exclusion B4.13 relates to upgrading and rebuilding existing powerlines; all the work 107
ATTACHMENT 1
A1-3
included in the scope focuses on rebuilding existing powerlines and related equipment and therefore qualifies for the exclusion.
N. It is in the best interest of the City, on behalf of BWP, to ratify and approve the Proposed Project grant application, to accept the grant award, and to authorize and direct the BWP General Manager as the City Manager’s designee, to execute, negotiate, and implement all required and related agreements and forms with the CEC, and other subcontractors and vendors, to commit $36,800,000 in funding for the Proposed P roject in future budget years FY 2027-28, FY 2028-29, FY 2029-30, and FY 2030-31, and to implement and carry out the Proposed Project subject to the terms and conditions required by the CEC for the CERRI funding.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK RESOLVES:
1. The City ratifies, approves and accepts the grant applications and the associated Notice of Proposed Award for GFO-23-312-r2 that includes $5,186,701 for the Proposed Project grant application by BWP.
2. That the General Manager of BWP, as designee of the City of Burbank City Manager, is hereby authorized and directed to execute, negotiate, and implement all required and related agreements and forms with the CEC, and other subcontractors and vendors, and to implement the Proposed Project subject to all terms and conditions required by the CEC for the CERRI funding, subject to review and approval of the City Attorney’s Office and up to an amount available within any City Council–approved Fiscal Year Budget.
3. Commit to include funds in the budget for the Proposed Project of $36,800,000 for use across FY 2027-28, FY 2028-29, FY 2029-30, and FY 2030-31.
4. The General Manager of BWP, as designee of the City of Burbank City Manager, is hereby authorized and directed to submit any required documents, invoices, and reports required to obtain grant funding and any other documents, invoices and reports required under any agreements with the CEC.
5. Execute any other ancillary documents, including amendments and letters, in form and substance satisfactory to the City Attorney’s Office and up to an amount available within any City Council–approved Fiscal Year Budget; and
6. Accept all grant funds under these agreements.
108
ATTACHMENT 1
A1-4
7. The City finds that the Proposed Project has less than significant effects, and involves existing facilities, reconstruction and replacement of components within such existing facilities, and new construction or conversion of small structures and therefore is categorically exempt under Sections 15301, 15302, and 15303 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Article 19.
8. The City finds that the Proposed Project has less than significant effects, and involves additions and modifications to transmission facilities, electric power substations and interconnection facilities, and upgrading and rebuilding existing power lines and therefore qualifies for categorical exclusion under exclusions B.4.6, B.4.11, and B.4.13, of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B.
PASSED and ADOPTED this ____ day of ___________, 2026.
Tamala Takahashi
Mayor
Approved as to Form:
Office of the City Attorney
Attest:
By:
Christopher Chwang
Kimberley Clark, City Clerk Senior Assistant City Attorney
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF BURBANK )
I, Kimberley Clark, City Clerk of the City of Burbank, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Burbank at its regular meeting held on the ____day of __________, 2026, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
____________________________
Kimberley Clark, City Clerk
109
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
EXHIBIT C
CEC STANDARD GRANT TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE
COMMUNITY ENERGY RELIABILITY AND RESILIENCE PROGRAM
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
1. G
RANT AGREEMENT ...................................................................................................... 2
2. DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE .......................................................... 3
3. STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE .................................................................................... 4
4. DUE DILIGENCE .............................................................................................................. 4
5. PRODUCTS ..................................................................................................................... 4
6. AMENDMENTS ................................................................................................................ 6
7. CONTRACTING AND PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES .................................................. 8
8. PAYMENT OF FUNDS .................................................................................................... 15
9. TRAVEL AND PER DIEM ................................................................................................ 21
10. PREVAILING WAGE ....................................................................................................... 22
11. RECORDKEEPING, COST ACCOUNTING, AND AUDITING .......................................... 25
12. WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE .................................................................. 27
13. PERMITS AND CLEARANCES ....................................................................................... 27
14. EQUIPMENT .................................................................................................................. 27
15. STOP WORK .................................................................................................................. 27
16. TERMINATION ............................................................................................................... 27
17. INDEMNIFICATION ........................................................................................................ 29
18. CONFIDENTIAL SUBRECIPIENT INFORMATION .......................................................... 29
19. PRE-EXISTING AND INDEPENDENTLY FUNDED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ........... 30
20. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY .......................................................................................... 31
21. ROYALTY PAYMENTS TO THE COMMISSION .............................................................. 32
22. GEN
ERAL PROVISIONS ................................................................................................ 32
23. CERTIFICATIONS AND COMPLIANCE .......................................................................... 34
24. CALIFORNIA TAXPAYER ACCESS TO PUBLICLY FUNDED RESEARCH ACT ............. 36
25. COMMISSION REMEDIES FOR SUBRECIPIENT’S NON-COMPLIANCE ....................... 38
26. RECEIPT OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION AND PERSONAL INFORMATION .......... 39
27. DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................. 40 ATTACHMENT 2
A2-1
110
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
1. AGREEMENT
This project is being funded with a grant from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), which provides funds through the federal Community Energy Reliability and Resilience Investment Program (CERRI ) to demonstrate measurable improvements in energy resilience in the United States and mitigate climate related risk; invest in modernized grid infrastructure that can enable consumer access to lower -cost energy and accommodate increased electrification, increased penetrations of variable renewable electricity and distributed energy resources, and other evolving system needs over the coming decades; and invest in clean energy and decarbonization solutions to achieve a carbon-free power sector by 2035 and net- zero greenhouse gas emissions economy-wide by 2050. Public Law. No. 117-58, 136 Stat. 429 (2021); Infrastructure Investment in Jobs Act (IIJA) section 40401(d).
The California Energy Commission (Energy Commission, Commission, Recipient, or CEC), as the recipient of a portion of IIJA funds through the CERRI Program (CERRI funds) has entered into an agreement with the United States Department of Energy (DOE) to administer distribution of these funds, including entering into grant agreements with subrecipients, such as this Agreement, to improve electric grid infrastructure and resiliency consistent with IIJA section 40401(d) requirements.
This grant agreement (Agreement) between the California Energy Commission and the grant Subr ecipient includes: (1) the Agreement signature page (form CEC-146); (2) the scope of work (Exhibit A); (3) the budget (Exhibit B); (4) these terms and conditions (Exhibit C); (5) any special terms and conditions that address the unique circumstances of the funded project, which take precedence in the event of a conflict with the standard terms and conditions (Exhibit D); (6) a contacts list (Exhibit E); (7) all attachments; and
(8) all documents incorporated by reference.
All reimbursable work and expenditure of funds (CEC-reimbursed and/or match share) must occur within the Agreement term specified on the CEC -146 form. The CEC cannot authorize any payments until all parties sign this Agreement.
The Subrecipient’s authorized representative shall sign all copies of this Agreement and return all signed packages to the Energy Commission's Grants and Loans Office within 30 days. Failure to meet this requirement may result in the forfeiture of this award. When all required signatures are obtained, an executed copy will be returned to the Subrecipient.
The term of this Agreement or the Agreement Period is the length of this Agreement between the Energy Commission and the Subrecipient. Project means Subrecipient’s specific project that is funded in whole or in part by this Agreement.
The Subrecipient’s pr oject may coincide with or extend outside the Agreement Period.
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-2
111
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
2. DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
The documents below are incorporated by reference into this Agreement. These terms and conditions (this Exhibit C and if included, Exhibit D) will govern in the event of a conflict with the documents below, with the exception of the documents in subsections (e) and (f) below. Where this Agreement or California laws and regulations are silent or do not apply, the CEC will use the federal cost principles and acquisition regulations listed below as guidance in determining whether reimbursement of claimed costs is allowable. Documents incorporated by reference include:
Solicitation Documents (if award is made through a competitive solicitation) a. The funding solicitation under which this Agreement was awarded.
b. The Subrecipient’s proposal submitted in response to the solicitation as accepted by CEC
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-3
112
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
Nondiscrimination
c. 2 California Code of Regulations, Section 11099 et seq.: Contractor Nondiscrimination and Compliance.
General Laws
d. Any other federal, state, or local laws or regulations applicable to the project that are not expressly listed in this Agreement.
3. STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE
In performing work under the Agreement, the Subrecipient and its lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and vendors and their employees are responsible for exercising the degree of skill and care required by customarily accepted good professional practices and procedures for the type of work performed.
4. DUE DILIGENCE
The Subrecipient must take timely actions that, taken collectively, move this project to completion. The Commission Agreement Manager (CAM) will periodically evaluate the project schedule for completion of Scope of Work tasks.
If the CAM determines that: (1) the Subrecipient is not diligently completing the tasks in the Scope of Work; or (2) the time remaining in this Agreement is insufficient to complete all project tasks by the Agreement end date, the CAM may recommend that this Agreement be terminated, and the Commission may terminate this Agreement without prejudice to any of its other rights and remedies.
5. PRODUCTS
a. “Products” are any tangible item specified for delivery to the CEC in the Scope of Work, such as reports and summaries.
If the CAM determines that a product is substandard given its description and intended use as described in this Agreement, the CAM, without prejudice to any of the CEC’s other rights and remedies, may refuse to authorize payment for the product and any subsequent products that rely on or are based upon the product under this Agreement.
b. Confidential Products
Please see Section 18 (Confidential Subrecipient Information) for instructions regarding confidential recipient information in products. c. Rights in Products
The CEC owns all products identified in the Scope of Work, with the exception of products that fall within the definition of “intellectual property.” ATTACHMENT 2
A2-4
113
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
As between the CEC and the Subrecipient, the Subrecipient owns all intellectual property developed under this Agreement (please see the “Intellectual Property” section).
d. Failure to Submit Products
A Subrecipient’s failure to submit a product required in the Scope of Work may be considered material noncompliance with the Agreement terms. Without prejudice to any other rights and remedies, noncompliance may result in CEC actions such as the withholding of future payments or awards, or the suspension or termination of the Agreement.
e. Final Report and Payment
The Subrecipient may only submit a request for the final payment (including any retention) after the final report is completed, submitted to the CAM, and CEC management has verified satisfactory completion of work.
f. Legal Statements on Products
1) All documents that result from work funded by this Agreement and are released to the public must include the following statement to ensure no Commission endorsement of documents:
LEGAL NOTICE
This document was prepared as a result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission and the U.S. Department of Energy. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Energy Commission, the U.S. Department of Energy, their employees, or the State of California or United States. Neither the Commission, the State of California, U.S. Department of Energy, United States, nor the Energy Commission’s or U.S. Department of Energy’s employees, contractors, or subcontractors make any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability for the information in this document; nor does any party represent that the use of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This document has not been approved or disapproved by the Energy Commission or U.S. Department of Energy, nor has the Energy Commission or U.S. Department of Energy passed upon the accuracy of the information in this document. 2) The Subrecipient will apply copyright notices to all documents prepared for this Agreement that are released to the public (including reports, articles submitted for publication, and all reprints) using the following form or any other form that may be reasonably specified by the CEC.
“ [Year of first publication of product] [the Copyright Holder’s name].
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-5
114
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
All Rights Reserved.”
6. AMENDMENTS
a. Procedure for Requesting Changes
The Subrecipient must submit a written request to the CAM for any change to the Agreement. The request must include:
• A brief summary of the proposed change;
• A brief summary of the reason(s) for the change; and
• The revised section(s) of the Agreement, with changes made in underline/ strikethrough format.
b. Approval of Changes
Unless otherwise allowed in this Agreement, no amendment or variation of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by both of the parties except for the CEC’s unilateral termination rights in Section 16 and Section 25 of these terms. No oral understanding or agreement is binding on any of the parties. Changes to the Agreement must be approved at a CEC business meeting or by the Executive Director (or his/her designee).
Upon the Subrecipient’s request, the CAM or Commission Agreement Officer will provide the Subrecipient with a document titled “Changes to Grants – Level of Approval and Notification Chart” commonly referred to as the “Changes Chart.” This document explains the level of CEC approval required for a proposed change.
c. Personnel Changes
To the extent permitted by 2 CFR 200.308, except when replacing “key personnel,” the Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and vendors can make changes to their respective personnel without written approval. Although changes to “key personnel” do require written approval, that approval can be requested and granted through an email communication or other form of written communication.
Subrecipients may be reimbursed for actual expenses incurred by new “key personnel” during the term of the Agreement, even if written approval comes after an individual begins work on the project. However, if the replacement is not approved, then the CEC will not reimburse for any expenses charged for the individual. Accordingly, Subrecipients are strongly encouraged to obtain advance written approval for “key personnel”, or risk not being reimbursed for their work.
Subrecipient must keep the CAM informed of personnel changes through monthly calls and quarterly progress reports. In addition to any other rights and remedies available to the CEC, the CEC retains its authority to ATTACHMENT 2
A2-6
115
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
issue a Stop Work Order if it becomes clear that the personnel, key or otherwise, of the Subrecipient, a Subcontractor, any lower-tiered level of Sub- Subtractor, or Vendor are unable to fulfill their responsibilities under the Agreement. In addition to all other rights and remedies, the CEC shall not pay (or may require Subrecipient to repay if the CEC has already paid) for personnel who are unnecessary to complete the scope of work or otherwise perform under the Agreement.
d. Budget Reallocations
See Exhibit Z, Federal Award Terms and Conditions, Subpart A, Section 27, Revision of Budget and Program Plans.
e. New Items Under Materials and Miscellaneous, and Equipment Without having to execute an amendment to this Agreement, the CAM must approve in writing of any new materials and miscellaneous expenses of $5,000 or more or new equipment the Subrecipient or any lower tier subrecipient, contractor, or vendor plans to purchase and be reimbursed under this Agreement that is not already listed in Exhibit B, Budget. To accomplish this, the Subrecipient can submit either prior to invoicing or with its invoice a completed form titled “NEW EQUIPMENT/M&M FORM” which includes a description of the item and a brief explanation of the need for the item. The CAM will approve items that he or she determines to be necessary to the Agreement and do not exceed budgeted amounts for each Budget Category unless Subrecipient follows the process in this Section 6, part d. directly above.
Any restrictions in the solicitation or elsewhere in the Agreement still apply to the specific items under Materials and Miscellaneous, and Equipment that can be purchased using CEC Funds or Match Share Funds. The restrictions still apply even though a CAM does not have to approve new materials and miscellaneous expenses under $5,000.
f. Assignment of New Personnel to a New or Existing Job Classification The Subrecipient, or any lower tier subrecipient or contractor can assign new personnel to a new or existing job classification without CEC approval.
However, the Subrecipient shall keep the CAM informed of all personnel changes and provide any information requested by the CAM during monthly calls and/or quarterly progress reports.
g. Promotion of Existing Personnel to a New or Existing Job Classification The Subrecipient, or any lower tier subrecipient or contractor can promote existing personnel to a new or existing job classification without CEC approval. However, the Subrecipient shall keep the CAM informed of all personnel changes and provide any information requested by the CAM during monthly calls and/or quarterly progress reports. However, as stated ATTACHMENT 2
A2-7
116
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
in section 8.c. below, the CEC will not pay more than the total amount in each Budget Category, including Direct Labor, without an amendment. h. Replacing Subcontractors or Vendors
Under these Terms, all changes of lower tier subcontractors and vendors require advance written approval by at least the CAM. A higher level of approval may be required based on CEC policy. Required approvals are included in the “Changes to Grants – Level of Approval and Notification Chart” commonly referred to as the “Changes Chart.”
Subrecipients ma y be reimbursed for actual expenses incurred by a new Vendor during the term of this Agreement, even if CEC written approval comes after the entity has completed work on the project. However, if the new Vendor is not approved by the CEC, the CEC will not reimburse for any expenses charged for the entity. Accordingly, Subrecipients are strongly encouraged to obtain advance written approval for new Vendors or risk not being reimbursed for their work.
However, an y work completed by an entity that may replace an existing Subcontractor WILL NOT BE REIMBURSED for any work completed prior to advance written approval. If a Subcontractor expends funds prior to approval, they can only be claimed as Match Funds.
7. CONTRACTING AND PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES
This section provides general requirements for Subawards (as that term is defined in Section 28 below) or Subcontracts entered into between the Subrecipient and subrecipients, contractors, and vendors for the performance of this Agreement. a. Subrecipient’s Obligations
1) The Subrecipient is responsible for handling all contractual and administrative issues arising out of or related to any Subawards or Subcontracts it enters into for the performance of this Agreement.
2) Except for the “CEC as Third-Party Beneficiary” term (see section
22.m), nothing contained in this Agreement or otherwise creates any contractual relation between the CEC and any lower tier subrecipient, contractor, or vendor, and no Subaward or Subcontract may relieve the Subrecipient of its responsibilities under this Agreement. The Subrecipient agrees to be as fully responsible to the CEC for the acts and omissions of its lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and vendors or persons directly or indirectly employed by any of them as it is for the acts and omissions of persons directly employed by the Subrecipient.
The Subrecipient’s obligation to pay its subrecipients, contractors and vendors is an independent obligation from the CEC’s ATTACHMENT 2
A2-8
117
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
obligation to make payments to the Subrecipient. As a result, the CEC has no obligation to pay or enforce the payment of any funds to any of Subrecipient’s lower tier subrecipient, contractor or vendor.
3) The Subrecipient is responsible for establishing and maintaining Subawards/Subcontracts with and reimbursing each lower tier subrecipient, contractor and vendor for work performed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
4) A lower tier subrecipient means a person or entity that receives grant funds directly from the Subrecipient and is entrusted by the Subrecipient to make decisions about how to conduct some of the Agreement’s activities. A lower tier subrecipient’s role involves discretion over grant activities and is not merely just selling goods or services.
Characteristics that support the classification of the entity as a lower tier subrecipient include when the entity:
• Has its performance measured in relation to whether
objectives of a CEC program were met;
• Has responsibility for programmatic decision-making;
• Is responsible for adherence to applicable CEC program requirements specified in the CEC award agreement;
• In accordance with its agreement, uses the CEC funds to carry out a program for a public purpose specified in authorizing statute, as opposed to providing goods or services for the benefit of the Subrecipient or Subcontractor; or,
• Provides match share funding contributions to this Agreement. 5) A contractor or vendor means a person or entity that sells goods or services to the Subrecipient or any lower tier subrecipient, in exchange for some of the grant funds, and does not make decisions about how to perform the Agreement’s activities. A contractor or vendor’s role is ministerial and does not involve discretion over Agreement activities. A contractor or vendor is an entity selected through a competitive process or is otherwise providing a product or service at a fair and reasonable price. Characteristics indicative of a procurement relationship between the Subrecipient, and a contractor or vendor are when the contractor or vendor:
• Provides the goods and services within normal business operations;
• P rovides similar goods or services to many different purchasers;
• Normally operates in a competitive environment;
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-9
118
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
• Provides goods or services that are ancillary to the operation of the CEC program; and
• May not be subject to compliance with all of the requirements of the CEC program as a result of the agreement, though similar requirements may apply for other reasons.
b. Flow-Down Terms
Lower tier subrecipients funded in whole or in part by this Agreement must include language conforming to the terms below, unless, to the extent permitted by state and federal laws and regulations, the Subawards are entered into by the University of California (UC) or the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) national laboratories. UC may use the terms and conditions negotiated by the CEC with UC for its Subawards.
DOE national laboratories may use the terms and conditions negotiated with DOE (please contact the Commission Grants Officer for these terms).
Subrecipients do not have to flow down the terms on this list that in their respective sections only state “[RESERVED].”
• Standard of Performance (Section 3)
• Legal Statements on Products (included in Section 5, “Products”). This term does not have to be included if the lower tier subrecipient will not generate any Products.
• Profit (Section 7.g.)
• Travel and Per Diem (Section 9). This term does not have to be included if the lower tier subrecipient will not be reimbursed for travel with CEC funds.
• Prevailing Wage (Section 10)
• Recordkeeping, Cost Accounting, and Auditing (Section 11) • Equipment (Section 14). This term does not have to be included if the lower tier subrecipient will not be reimbursed for equipment with CEC funds.
• Termination, Executive Order N-6-22 – Russia Sanctions (Section 16.d) • Indemnification (Section 17)
• Confidential Subrecipient Information (Section 18). This term does not have to be included if the lower tier subrecipient will not have access to or generate confidential information
• Intellectual Property (Section 20)
• A
ccess to Sites and Records (included in Section 22, “General Provisions”) • CEC as Third-Party Beneficiary (included in Section 22, “General Provisions”)
• Nondiscrimination (included in Section 23, “Certifications and Compliance”)
• California Taxpayer Access to Publicly Funded Research Act (Section 24) • Receipt of Confidential Information and Personal Information (Section 26) • Survival of the following sections:
o Equipment (Section 14)
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-10
119
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
o Recordkeeping, Cost Accounting, and Auditing (Section 11) o Intellectual Property (Section 20)
o Access to Sites and Records (included in Section 22, “General Provisions”)
o CEC as Third Party Beneficiary (included in Section 22, “General Provisions”)
o California Taxpayer Access to Publicly Funded Research Act (Section 24)
o Receipt of Confidential Information and Personal Information (Section 26)
Subrecipients funded in whole or in part by this Agreement must also include the following:
• A clear and accurate description of the material, products, or services to be procured.
• A detailed budget and timeline.
• Provisions that allow for administrative, contractual, or legal remedies in instances where subcontractors breach contract terms, in addition to sanctions and penalties as may be appropriate.
• Provisions for termination by the Subrecipient, including termination procedures and the basis for settlement.
• A statement that further assignments will not be made to any lower tier subrecipient or contractor without additional advance written consent of the CEC.
c. Vendor Flow-Down Terms
The flow-down requirements either come from the CEC, the terms and conditions of the Federal CERRI award to CEC, or the law. Subrecipient does not have to include any of the CEC-created Subrecipient flow-down terms in its Subawards or Subcontracts with Vendors unless it is necessary for the Subrecipient to meet its obligations to the CEC under this Agreement or required by Exhibit Z Federal Award Terms and Conditions.
But the Subrecipient is still required to make sure Vendors comply with all applicable laws. For example, the Subrecipient still must ensure any Vendor complies with applicable Public Work Requirements, including the payment of prevailing wage, and also with the Nondiscrimination clause.
These are requirements under the law.
The Subrecipient does not have to include in its Subawards or Subcontracts with Vendors, CEC-created terms, such as Equipment, Travel and Per Diem, Retention of Records, and Audits, if the ATTACHMENT 2
A2-11
120
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
Subrecipient does not need them to fulfill its obligations to the CEC. An example of when the Subrecipient might need to include a CEC-created term in a Vendor Subaward or Subcontract is if intellectual property and royalty payments are involved. The Subrecipient must ensure the CEC has the intellectual property rights required under this Agreement and receives royalty payments due. If, for example, a Vendor creates intellectual property that the Subrecipient provides to the CEC as part of this Agreement, the Subrecipient shall ensure its Vendor Subaward or Subcontract secures the appropriate rights. Another example is the receipt of confidential information of personal information. If a vendor will have access to confidential information of personal information provided by the Energy Commission or a third-party for the performance of this Agreement, the Subrecipient must ensure its agreement with the vendor includes the Energy Commission’s special terms and conditions for the receipt of confidential information and personal information before the vendor has access to any such information.
d. Audits
All Subawards or Subcontracts entered into for the performance of this Agreement are subject to examination and audit by the CEC and/or Bureau of State Audits for a period of three (3) years after payment of the Subrecipient’s final invoice under this Agreement.
e. Copies of Subawards or Subcontracts
The Subrecipient must provide a copy of its Subawards or Subcontracts upon request by the CEC.
f. Conflicting Subaward or Subcontract Terms
Prior to the execution of this Agreement, the Subrecipient will notify the CAM of any known or reasonably foreseeable conflicts between this Agreement and any of its Subawards or Subcontracts (e.g., conflicting intellectual property or payment terms). If the Subrecipient discovers any such conflicts after the execution of this Agreement, it will notify the CAM of the conflict within fifteen (15) days of discovery. The CEC may, without prejudice to its other rights and remedies, terminate this Agreement if any conflict impairs or diminishes its value.
g. Profit
1) Subrecipient shall ensure that only lower tier subrecipients, contractors, or vendors meeting the definition of an “Unrelated Company” include in their budgets, invoice for, and receive a profit.
2) For purposes of this Agreement, an Unrelated Company is defined ATTACHMENT 2
A2-12
121
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
as a for-profit business, appropriately licensed and in good standing, that does NOT meet any of the following criteria:
a) Directly or indirectly, partially or fully owns or controls Subrecipient. This includes, but is not limited to, owning 5% or more of Subrecipient’s stock.
b) Is directly or indirectly, partially or fully owned or controlled by Subrecipient. This includes, but is not limited to, having 5% or more of stock owned by Subrecipient.
c) Has one or more common employees, including, but not limited to, owners, officers, directors, or managers, with Subrecipient.
d) Shares a Parent Company with Subrecipient. For purposes of this Agreement, Parent Company is defined as an entity that directly or indirectly, partially or fully owns or controls both the Subrecipient and the Subcontractor or Sub-Subcontractor or shares the same employees with them. This includes, but is not limited to, owning 5% or more of stock in both the Subrecipient and Subcontractor or Sub-Subcontractor.
e) Does not, for any other reason, have an arm’s-length relationship (e.g., a relationship involving independent, competing interests) with the Subrecipient. This could be due to any reason, including but not limited to, both entities being part of the same business group or could stem from family or personal ties between officials of the two entities.
3) S
ubrecipient shall further ensure the profit to each Unrelated Company that is a Subcontractor, or a Sub-Subcontractor does not exceed 10% of only the CEC funds the Unrelated Company will receive. None of the following count towards the 10% profit maximum:
a) T
he Profit Amount Itself. For example, assume Subrecipient and its Subcontractor SubX agree to a total, all inclusive, budget amount of $200,000 in CEC funds. SubX cannot claim $20,000 of this as profit. If $180,000 is the base for expenses on which profit is calculated, 10% is only $18,000 and not $20,000.
b) Non-CERRI Funds in any Form. Only CEC funds, or federal CERRI funds flowed to a Subcontractor pursuant to this
Agreement, will receive can count towards profit. For example, assume Subrecipient’s Subcontractor SubX has a budget
showing it receiving $100,000 in CEC funds (not including the profit amount) and $50,000 in federal funds with the federal ATTACHMENT 2
A2-13
122
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
funds counting as match under the CEC’s grant. The maximum SubX can be paid with CEC funds for profit is 10% of $100,000 CEC funds, or $10,000 (assuming the $100,000 CEC base
does not include any of the other expenses that cannot be included in calculating profit). The $50,000 in federal funds does not count towards the profit calculation because it is not CEC funds.
c) Equipment. Continuing the example from b), assume SubX’s $100,000 CEC budget shows $10,000 earmarked for
equipment. The maximum SubX can be paid with CEC funds
for profit is 10% of $90,000, or $9,000 (assuming the $90,000 base does not include any of the other expenses that cannot be included in calculating profit).
d) Amounts Paid to Sub-Subcontractors and Vendors. Continuing the example from b) and c), assume SubX’s $100,000 CEC
budget also shows $20,000 earmarked to pay Sub-SubY. SubX cannot include in its profit calculation the $20,000 to Sub-SubY.
The maximum SubX can be paid with CEC funds for profit is 10% of $70,000 ($100,000 in CEC funds minus $10,000 in
equipment from c) above and minus $20,000 to Sub-SubY) or $7,000.
Vendor Unrelated Companies do not have a 10% profit
maximum and also do not have to adhere to the same
restrictions in a) through d) directly above. However, as stated in the requirements for Vendors in Section 7.a.5) in this Exhibit C, Subrecipient must be able to demonstrate that the Vendor was selected through a competitive process or is otherwise providing a product or service at a fair and reasonable price. 4) Profit can only be paid by the CEC as the amounts on which it is based are invoiced and paid. Profit will NOT be
advanced.
Continuing the example from 2.d) above, assume SubX submits an invoice for $5,000 (of its $70,000) in costs on which profit is based, and the Subrecipient includes SubX’s invoice as part of its invoice to the CEC. The Subrecipient can include in the invoice, and the CEC will pay, assuming other Agreement requirements are met, $500 in profit on this particular invoice.
Please realize that Retention (see Section 8.n. in these Terms) may reduce the CEC’s overall payment on the invoice.
5) Budget changes may affect an Unrelated Company’s profit. For example, funds moved from a Subcontractor’s direct labor, a category counting towards the profit calculation, to a Sub- Subcontractor, a category that does not count towards the profit calculation, would reduce the allowable profit.
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-14
123
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
h. Penalties for Noncompliance
Without limiting the CEC’s other rights and remedies, failure to comply with the above requirements may result in the termination of this Agreement and repayment of any profit amounts in violation of these terms.
8. PAYMENT OF FUNDS
a. Definitions
For purposes of this Section 8, the following terms have the following meaning:
• “Advance Payment” means the CEC pays Subrecipient prior to the Subrecipient Incurring or Paying the expense.
• “Incurred Cost” means an expense for which the Subrecipient has become liable (legally obligated) to pay. Here are examples of incurred costs:
o The Subrecipient’s staff has completed work during the month but has not been paid by the Subrecipient. These labor and
associated costs (e.g., fringe benefits) are considered Incurred Costs.
o T he Subrecipient has purchased a piece of equipment and received an invoice, bill, or receipt. The Subrecipient has not yet paid the invoice. The invoice shows the amount to be paid and confirmation of the sale. This is an Incurred Cost.
Incurred Costs for equipment DO NOT include purchase orders unl
ess accompanied by an invoice, bill, or receipt that shows the payment amount due to the seller for the equipment.
• “Paid Cost” means an expense for which the Subrecipient has already made payment.
b. Advance Payments
Recipients can receive Advance Payments only for subawards or contracts with the U.S. Department of Energy laboratories. Otherwise, Advance Payments are NOT allowed under this Agreement. The CEC in its sole discretion, and not the Subrecipient, decides if the CEC will make an Advance Payment.
c. Reimbursable Cost Requirements
In addition to any other requirements in this Agreement, the CEC is only obligated to reimburse the Subrecipient for Incurred and Paid Costs that are (1) incurred during the Agreement Term; (2) invoiced within the required timeframes of this Agreement; (3) made in accordance with the Agreement’s Budget; and (4) actual and allowable expenses under this Agreement.
The only exception to the CEC paying actual expenses is rounding to the ATTACHMENT 2
A2-15
124
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
nearest cent. The Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor shall round invoiced amounts to the nearest cent ($0.01) using standard rounding, which is rounding down from $0.000 through $0.004, and rounding up for $0.005 through $0.009. Rounding cannot be used to exceed the amount in any Budget Category or exceed the total Agreement amount.
Please note that rates listed in Exhibit B, the Budget, are NOT “negotiated rates” that can be charged – documentation must be made available upon request to show that the rates charged reflect actual costs incurred.
This Exhibit C’s terms allow the Subrecipient, and any lower-tiered level of subrecipient or contractor to receive reimbursement for actual Indirect Costs.
Option 1: De Minimis
The Subrecipient and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor can elect to invoice and receive a de minimis amount at the set rate of 15% of the Modified Total Direct Costs (MTDC) for Indirect Costs. This cannot be combined with any other Indirect Rate option.
MTDC is defined for purposes of this Agreement as all direct salaries and wages, applicable fringe benefits, materials and supplies, services, travel, and up to the first $25,000 of each subaward (regardless of the period of performance of the subawards under the award). MTDC excludes equipment, capital expenditures, rental costs, tuition remission, scholarships and fellowships, and the portion of ach subaward in excess of $25,000.
Entities choosing this de minimis option for Indirect Costs will not have to provide backup documentation for the de minimis amount.
Option 2: Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or other Federally Approved Indirect Rate
Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor that has a federally approved indirect rate from DCAA or another Federal agency may use the approved indirect rate for this Agreement. A copy of the Federal agency’s letter must be provided, and the letter, or the letter together with other supporting documentation, must allow the CEC to verify that the rates charged to the CEC are the federally approved rates.
This rate will typically shift annually, and this shift is generally acceptable.
This is the only Indirect Cost option that is not strictly subject to the maximum rate cap that typically applies to Indirect Costs. If the federal rate decreases from year to year, that will be a cost savings under this budget category. If the federal rate increases from year to year, this will require a budget reallocation. If the CEC, in its sole discretion, determines that a budget reallocation to accommodate an increased Indirect Rate would risk the ultimate success of this Agreement, or is otherwise not in its best interest, the CEC reserves, in addition to all of its other rights and remedies, the right to either propose a smaller increase that would not risk the ultimate success of ATTACHMENT 2
A2-16
125
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
the project, or refuse to increase the Indirect Rate. For any increase the CEC will not reimburse from CEC Funds, the entity can choose to charge the increase as Match Funds.
d. Subrecipient’s 14-Day Payment Requirement for Incurred Costs The Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor shall pay ALL Incurred Costs within 14 calendar days of receiving payment under this Agreement for the Incurred Costs. For example, if the Subrecipient invoices and then receives payment from the CEC on September 15 for an Incurred Cost of $10,000, the Subrecipient shall pay the entire $10,000 by September
29. This requirement is needed to prevent entities from creating long lead times for Incurred Costs (e.g., invoicing and receiving payment from the CEC but not paying for the Incurred Costs for weeks or months).
The Subrecipient shall only invoice the CEC, Subcontractors shall only invoice the Subrecipient (and so on for any lower tier subrecipient or contractor), for Incurred Costs it will pay within 14 calendar days of receiving payment of CEC funds. For example, assume the Subrecipient has an Incurred Cost for a piece of equipment that costs $300,000 and will pay in three installments of
$100,000 each over three months. The Subrecipient shall only invoice the Commission for $100,000 each month. The Subrecipient shall not invoice for the entire $300,000 and retain the balance over the three months.
For any Incurred Costs for which the Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor has received CEC funds and does not pay within 14 calendar days, the entity shall on the very next business day after the 14 calendar days submit repayment of the unpaid amount back to the CEC.
Repaid funds will be placed back into the Agreement and will be available to reimburse allowable costs in accordance with this Agreement.
When making a repayment under this provision, the Subrecipient shall specify “Repayment of Unspent Funds under Agreement [Insert this Agreement #].” Subrecipient shall remit the repayment to:
California Energy Commission
Accounting Office
715 P Street, MS-2
Sacramento, CA 95814
This repayment requirement of the Subrecipient is in addition to any other rights the CEC can enforce relative to this Agreement. Subrecipient agrees and acknowledges that time is of the essence in paying Incurred Costs and submitting repayments and the CEC can treat the Subrecipient’s breach of either requirement as a material breach. Subrecipient can contact the CAM for any questions about the logistics of making repayments. e. Payment Requests
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-17
126
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
The Subrecipient may request payment from the CEC at any time during the term of this Agreement but no more frequently than monthly. The final payment request, including retention, MUST be received by the CEC no later than the Agreement end date.
Subrecipient agrees and acknowledges that time is of the essence in submitting the final payment request. The CEC has a limited period of time, set by law, in which it can reimburse funds under this Agreement. Without prejudice to the CEC’s other rights, the Subrecipient risks not receiving any funds, and relieves the CEC of any duty and liability whatsoever to pay, for any payment requests received after the end of the Agreement.
No reimbursement for food or beverages shall be made other than allowable per diem charges.
All Subrecipient expenditures, reimbursable and match, must occur within the approved term of this Agreement.
f. Invoice Approval and Disputes:
Each request for payment is subject to the CAM’s approval. Payments will be made to the Subrecipient for undisputed invoices. An undisputed invoice is an invoice submitted by the Subrecipient for work performed, for which project expenditures meet all Agreement conditions, and for which additional evidence is not required to determine its validity.
The invoice will be disputed if the invoice is inaccurate or if it does not comply with the terms of this Agreement. If the invoice is disputed, the Subrecipient will be notified in writing.
g. Subrecipient’s headquarters:
For purposes of payment, the Subrecipient’s headquarters is the location of the Subrecipient’s office where the majority of its employees assigned responsibilities for this Agreement are permanently assigned. h. Multiple Non-Energy Commission Funding Sources:
No payment will be made for costs identified in Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor invoices that have been or will be reimbursed by another source, including but not limited to an agreement with another government entity.
“Government Entity” means: (1) a state governmental agency; (2) a state college or university; (3) a local government entity or agency, including those created as a Joint Powers Authority; (4) an auxiliary organization of the California State University or a California community college; (5) the federal government; (6) a foundation organized to support the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges; and (7) an auxiliary organization of the ATTACHMENT 2
A2-18
127
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
Student Aid Commission established under California Education Code Section 69522.
i. Reduced funding:
If the CEC does not receive sufficient funds under the Budget Act to fully fund the work identified in Exhibit A (Scope of Work), the following will occur:
1) If the Energy Commission has received a reduced amount of funds for the work, it may: (1) offer an Agreement amendment to the Subrecipient to reflect the reduced amount; or (2) cancel this Agreement (with no liability occurring to the State).
2) If the Energy Commission has received no funds for the work identified in Exhibit A: (1) this Agreement will be of no force and effect; (2) the State will have no obligation to pay any funds to the Subrecipient; and (3) the Subrecipient will have no obligation to perform any work under this Agreement.
j. Allowability of Costs
1) Allowable Costs
The costs for which the Subrecipient will be reimbursed under this Agreement include all actual costs, direct and indirect, incurred in the performance of the work identified in the Scope of Work. Costs must be incurred within the Agreement term. Factors to be considered in determining whether an individual item of cost is allowable include: (i) reasonableness of the item, including necessity of the item for the work; (ii) applicable federal cost principles or acquisition regulations; and (iii) the terms and conditions and any other requirements of this Agreement. 2) Unallowable Costs
Subrecipient shall not invoice or obtain from the CEC any profit for itself under this Agreement. This Agreement is a grant for the Subrecipient’s project. This is not a services contract to the state.
The Subrecipient is already receiving the benefit of the grant funds.
The CEC shall not pay profit to the Subrecipient on top of the benefit it is receiving from the grant funds in this Agreement. Some subrecipients and contractors may be able to receive up to 10% profit (please refer to section 7.g. in these terms).
Below are examples of other unallowable costs. Details concerning the allowability of costs are available from the CEC’s Accounting Office. a) Contingency costs;
b) Imputed costs (e.g., cost of money);
c) F ines and penalties;
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-19
128
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
d) Losses;
e) Excess profit taxes; and
f) Unapproved, increased rates and fees for this Agreement. 3) Subrecipient will use the federal cost principles and/or acquisition regulations when determining allowable and unallowable costs. k. Payment Request Format
The Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor with a total budget of $100,000 or more, shall use the Invoice Template and any further modifications to it, provided by the CAM. The CAM can change the Invoice Template without amending this Agreement.
Please submit invoices electronically per the instructions included in the document entitled “Procedures for Submitting and Reviewing Grant Invoices Electronically” available at https://www.energy.ca.gov/media/4469.
Subrecipient shall provide documentation showing the Subrecipient’s payment of Incurred Costs as soon as possible and not later than three working days from a request from CEC personnel.
l. Certification
The Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor with a total budget of $100,000 or more shall include and sign the certification provided by the CAM in the Invoice Template. The CAM can change this certification without amending this Agreement.
m. Retention
The CEC shall retain 10 percent of any payment request or 10 percent of the total CEC award at the end of the Agreement. The CEC has the sole discretion to decide which of these methods of retention will be used in this Agreement.
The Subrecipient must submit a completed payment request requesting release of the retention within the required timeframe (see part e. “Payment Requests” above in this term). The Commission Agreement Manager will review the project file and, when satisfied that the terms of the funding Agreement have been fulfilled, will authorize release of the retention.
Retention may be released upon completion of tasks that are considered separate and distinct (i.e., the task is a stand-alone piece of work and could be completed without the other tasks). Tasks for administration or management of the Agreement and/or subcontractors are not considered separate and distinct tasks. The tasks for which retention may be released prior to the end of the Agreement must be identified in Exhibit B (budget) or elsewhere in this Agreement.
When the CEC withholds 10% retention from each invoice, the Subrecipient ATTACHMENT 2
A2-20
129
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
can choose to flow down the retention requirement to its lower tier subrecipients subject to the following restrictions and any other requirements in this Agreement:
• The Subrecipient shall not flow down retention requirements to U.S. Department of Energy national laboratory subrecipients. • The retention flowed down to lower tier subrecipients can only be up to a total of 10% of the amount of CEC funds the lower tier subrecipient is to receive. The Subrecipient is responsible for carrying the retention for its funded portion of the entire Agreement and cannot pass its share of retention to subrecipients, contractors, or vendors.
• Here are three examples:
i. A lower tier subrecipient submits an invoice for $100,000 to the Subrecipient, and the Subrecipient in turn submits it to the CEC. The CEC will only pay $90,000 of the invoice and the Subrecipient can elect to pay only $90,000 to its lower tier subrecipient.
ii. A lower tier subrecipient is the U.S. Department of Energy national laboratory or other entity to which retention requirements do not legally apply, and it submits an advance request for $100,000 to the Subrecipient, including any other documents required in the CEC’s U.S. Department of Energy Terms and Conditions. The Subrecipient in turn submits the advance requests to the CEC for payment. The CEC will pay the full amount of the advance requests to the Subrecipient and the Subrecipient must pay the full amount to the U.S. Department of Energy. iii. The Subrecipient submits an invoice for its own staff in the amount of $20,000. The CEC will only pay $18,000 to the Subrecipient, and the Subrecipient cannot withhold the $2,000 difference from its lower tier subrecipients, contractors, or Vendor reimbursements.
These requirements apply to all levels of Subcontractors (e.g., any lower- tiered level of Sub-Subcontractors).
9. TRAVEL AND PER DIEM
a. Any travel taken that is not listed in Exhibit B, the Budget is at the financial risk of the Subrecipient, Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor taking the trip. Please note that the Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor cannot invoice and be paid for more than the total amount in the Travel Budget Category without an amendment, except as otherwise permitted under this Agreement.
b. No reimbursement for food or beverages will be made other than for allowable per diem charges.
c. The Subrecipient will be reimbursed for authorized travel and per diem up to, but not to exceed, the rates listed on the ECAMS Resources webpage.
Because the rates on the ECAMS Resources webpage can change over ATTACHMENT 2
A2-21
130
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
time, Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor will be allowed to be reimbursed for the rates in the Grant Manual when the trip expenses become an Incurred Cost. The CEC shall notify the Subrecipient in writing by way of the Active Agreements Listserve if the travel rates in the Grant Manual change. Please sign up for the Active Agreements Listserve to stay informed of all updates.
d. Lodging
The Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor can invoice at standard room rates. The CEC will not reimburse for luxury accommodations.
e. Airfare
The Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor can invoice at coach rates on commercial flights. The CEC will not pay for upgrades on flights.
f. Rental Car
The Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor can invoice for vehicles appropriate for the purpose of the travel. The CEC will not reimburse expenses for luxury vehicles.
g. Bus/Train
The Subrecipient, and any lower tier subrecipient or contractor can invoice for standard coach rates. The CEC will not reimburse for upgrades. h. Per Diem
Per diem is allowable for actual costs incurred up to the total daily maximum for the following combined expenses:
• Meals
• Incidentals (i.e., tips for hotel staff and taxi/ride share drivers) • Parking
• Tolls
• Taxi/rideshare
The CEC will not reimburse any expenses under this Agreement for alcoholic beverages. In addition, the daily per diem is for the individual expenses of those traveling and working on the Agreement only. It cannot be used to pay expenses of others (e.g., it cannot be used to buy a meal for someone else).
10. PREVAILING WAGE
a. Requirement
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-22
131
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
Projects funded by the Energy Commission often involve construction, alteration, demolition, installation, repair, or maintenance work over $1,000.
Such projects might be considered “public works” under the California Labor Code (See California Labor Code Section 1720 et seq. and Title 8 California Code of Regulations, Section 16000 et seq.). Public works projects require the payment of prevailing wages. Prevailing wage rates can be significantly higher than non-prevailing wage rates. b. Determination of Project’s Status
Only the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) and courts of competent jurisdiction may issue legally binding determinations that a particular project is or is not a public work. If the Subrecipient is unsure whether the project funded by the Agreement is a “public work” as defined in the California Labor Code, it may wish to seek a timely determination from DIR or an appropriate court. As such processes can be time consuming, it may not be possible to obtain a timely determination before the date for performance of the Agreement.
By accepting this grant, the Subrecipient is fully responsible for complying with all California public works requirements, including but not limited to payment of prevailing wage.
As a material term of this grant, the Subrecipient must either:
1) Timely obtain a legally binding determination from DIR or a court of competent jurisdiction before work begins on the project that the proposed project is not a public work; or
2) Assume that the project is a public work and ensure that:
• Prevailing wages are paid unless and until DIR or a court of competent jurisdiction determines that the project is not a public work;
• The project budget for labor reflects these prevailing wage requirements; and
• The project complies with all other requirements of prevailing wage law, including but not limited to keeping accurate payroll records and complying with all working hour requirements and apprenticeship obligations.
California Prevailing Wage law provides for substantial damages and financial penalties for failure to pay prevailing wages when such payment is required.
c. Subrecipient and Vendor Flow-down Requirements
The Subrecipient will ensure that its Subcontractors, and any lower tier subrecipient, contractor, and vendors also comply with the public works/prevailing wage requirements above. As applicable, the ATTACHMENT 2
A2-23
132
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
Subrecipient will ensure that all agreements with its subrecipients, contractors, and vendors to perform work related to this Project contain the above terms regarding payment of prevailing wages on public works projects, and also as applicable that subrecipients, contractors, and vendors also contain these terms. The Subrecipient is responsible for any failure of any lower- tiered level of subrecipients, contractors, or vendors to comply with California prevailing wage and public works laws. d. Indemnification and Breach
Any failure of the Subrecipient or its lower tier subrecipients, contractors, or vendor to comply with the above requirements will constitute breach of this Agreement which excuses the CEC’s performance of this Agreement at the CEC’s option, and will be at the Subrecipient’s sole risk. In such a case, the CEC will refuse payment to the Subrecipient of any amount under this award and the CEC will be released, at its option, from any further performance of this Agreement or any portion thereof. The Subrecipient will indemnify the CEC and hold it harmless for any and all financial consequences arising out of or resulting from the failure of the Subrecipient and/or any of its subcontractors to pay prevailing wages or to otherwise comply with the requirements of prevailing wage law.
e. Budget
The Subrecipient’s budget on public works projects must indicate which job classifications are subject to prevailing wage. For detailed information about prevailing wage and the process to determine if the proposed project is a public work, the Subrecipient may wish to contact DIR or a qualified labor attorney for guidance.
f. Covered Trades
For public works projects, the Subrecipient may contact DIR for a list of covered trades and the applicable prevailing wage.
g. Questions
If the Subrecipient has any questions about this contractual requirement or the wage, record keeping, apprenticeship, or other significant requirements of California prevailing wage law, the Subrecipient should consult DIR and/or a qualified labor attorney before entering into this Agreement.
h. Certification
The Subrecipient will certify to the CEC on each payment request form either that: (a) prevailing wages were paid to eligible workers who provided labor for work covered by the payment request and the Subrecipient and all contractors and subcontractors otherwise complied with all California ATTACHMENT 2
A2-24
133
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
prevailing wage laws; or (b) the project is not a public work requiring the payment of prevailing wages. In the latter case, the Subrecipient will provide competent proof of a DIR or court determination that the project is not a public work requiring the payment of prevailing wages.
Prior to the release of any retained funds under this Agreement, the Subrecipient will submit to the CEC the above-described certificate signed by the Subrecipient and all Subcontractors, and any lower-tier subrecipient, contractor, and vendors performing public works activities on the project. Absent this certificate, the Subrecipient will have no right to any funds under this Agreement, and CEC will be relieved of any obligation to pay any funds.
11. RECORDKEEPING, COST ACCOUNTING, AND AUDITING
a. Cost Accounting
The Subrecipient will keep separate, complete, and correct accounting of the costs involved in completing the project and any match-funded portion of the project. The CEC or its agent will have the right to examine the Subrecipient’s books of accounts at all reasonable times, to the extent necessary to verify the accuracy of the Subrecipient’s reports. b. Accounting Procedures
The Subrecipient’s costs will be determined on the basis of its accounting system procedures and practices employed as of the effective date of this Agreement, provided that the Subrecipient uses generally accepted accounting principles and cost reimbursement practices. The Subrecipient’s cost accounting practices used in accumulating and reporting costs during the performance of this Agreement will be consistent with the practices used in estimating costs for any proposal to which this Agreement relates; provided that such practices are consistent with the other terms of this Agreement and that such costs may be accumulated and reported in greater detail during performance of this Agreement.
The Subrecipient’s accounting system will distinguish between direct and indirect costs. All costs incurred for the same purpose, in like circumstances, are either direct costs only or indirect costs only with respect to costs incurred under this Agreement.
c. Audit Rights
The Subrecipient will maintain books, records, documents, and other evidence, based on the procedures set forth above, sufficient to reflect properly all costs claimed to have been incurred in the performance of this Agreement. In addition to the rights of the federal government, the CEC, another state agency, and/or a public accounting firm designated by the ATTACHMENT 2
A2-25
134
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
CEC may audit the Subrecipient’s accounting records at all reasonable times, with prior notice by the CEC.
The Subrecipient will allow the auditor(s) to access such records during normal business hours and will allow interviews of any employees who might reasonably have information related to such records. The Subrecipient will include a similar right of the state to audit records and interview staff in any subcontract related to the performance of this Agreement.
d. Refund to the Energy Commission
If the CEC determines that any invoiced and paid amounts exceed the actual allowable incurred costs, the Subrecipient will repay the amounts to the CEC within thirty (30) days of request or as otherwise agreed by the CEC and the Subrecipient. If the CEC does not receive such repayments, it will be entitled to take actions such as withholding further payments to the Subrecipient and seeking repayment from the Subrecipient.
e. Audit Cost
The Subrecipient will bear its cost of participating in any audit (e.g., mailing or travel expenses). The CEC will bear the cost of conducting the audit unless the audit reveals an error detrimental to the CEC that exceeds more than ten percent (10%) or $5,000 (whichever is greater) of the amount audited. The Subrecipient will pay the refund as specified in subsection (d) and will reimburse the CEC for reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the CEC in conducting the audit.
f. Match or Cost Share
If the budget includes a match share requirement, the Subrecipient’s commitment of resources, as described in this Agreement, is a required expenditure for receipt of CEC funds. The funds will be released only if the required match percentages are expended concurrently or in advance of the CEC funds. The Commission Agreement Manager, in writing and with supervisor approval, can authorize a Subrecipient to spend CEC funds in advance of Match Funds pursuant to a Match Fund Spending Plan. The Plan must estimate how Match funds and CEC funds will be spent over each quarter and briefly explain why it is not practical to spend Match Funds concurrent with CEC funds. While this term allows flexibility, the Subrecipient agrees to spend the agreed match as soon as practical during the Agreement in order to resume proportionality between CEC funds and Match funds spent. The Subrecipient must maintain accounting records detailing the expenditure of the match (actual cash and in-kind, non-cash services), and report on match share expenditures on its request for payment.
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-26
135
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
12. WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE
a. The Subrecipient warrants that it carries Worker's Compensation Insurance for all of its employees who will be engaged in the performance of this Agreement and agrees to furnish to the CAM satisfactory evidence of this insurance upon the CAM’s request.
b. If the Subrecipient is self-insured for worker's compensation, it warrants that the self-insurance is permissible under the laws of the State of California and agrees to furnish to the CAM satisfactory evidence of the insurance upon the CAM’s request.
13. PERMITS AND CLEARANCES
The Subrecipient is responsible for ensuring that all necessary permits and environmental documents are prepared and that clearances are obtained from the appropriate agencies.
14. EQUIPMENT
As between the Subrecipient and CEC, title to equipment acquired by the Subrecipient with grant funds will vest in the Subrecipient. The Subrecipient may use the equipment in the project or program for which it was acquired as long as needed, regardless of whether the project or program continues to be supported by grant funds.
However, the Subrecipient may not sell, lease, encumber the property (i.e., place a legal burden on the property such as a lien), or even transfer possession of it during the Agreement term without the CAM’s prior written approval.
The Subrecipient shall refer to the applicable federal regulations in this Agreement for guidance regarding additional equipment requirements.
15. STOP WORK
CEC staff may, at any time by written notice to the Subrecipient, require the Subrecipient to stop all or any part of the work tasks in this Agreement. Stop work orders may be issued for reasons such as a project exceeding budget, noncompliance with the standard of performance, out of scope work, project delays, and misrepresentations.
a. C
ompliance. Upon receipt of a stop work order, the Subrecipient must immediately take all necessary steps to comply with the order and to stop the incurrence of costs allocable to the CEC.
b. Canceling a Stop Work Order. The Subrecipient may resume the work only upon receipt of written instructions from CEC staff.
16. TERMINATION
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-27
136
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
a. Purpose
CEC may terminate the Agreement as set forth herein and proceed with the work required under the Agreement in any manner it deems proper.
The Subrecipient agrees that upon any of the events triggering the termination of the Agreement by the CEC, the CEC has the right to terminate the Agreement, and it would constitute bad faith of the Subrecipient to interfere with the immediate termination of the Agreement by the CEC.
b. With Cause
The CEC may, for cause, terminate this Agreement upon giving five (5) calendar days advance written notice to the Subrecipient. In this event, the Subrecipient will use all reasonable efforts to mitigate its expenses and obligations. The Subrecipient will relinquish possession of equipment purchased for this Agreement with CEC funds to the CEC, or the Subrecipient may purchase the equipment as provided by the terms of this Agreement or otherwise by the CEC, with approval of the CEC.
The term “for cause” includes but is not limited to the following:
• Subrecipient fails to perform the requirements of this Agreement in the time and manner provided herein.
• Partial or complete loss of match funds;
• Reorganization to a business entity unsatisfactory to the Energy Commission;
• Retention or hiring of subrecipients, contractors or vendors, or replacement or addition of personnel, that fail to perform to the standards and requirements of this Agreement;
• The Subrecipient’s inability to pay its debts as they become due and/or the Subrecipient’s default of an obligation that impacts its ability to perform under this Agreement; or
• Significant change in federal, state, CEC policy such that the work or product being funded would not be supported by the Commission. c. Without Cause
The CEC may terminate this Agreement without cause upon giving thirty (30) days advance written notice to the Subrecipient. In this event, the Subrecipient will use all reasonable efforts to mitigate its expenses and obligations.
d. Executive Order N-6-22 – Russia Sanctions
On March 4, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-6- 22 (the EO) regarding Economic Sanctions against Russia and Russian entities and individuals. “Economic Sanctions” refers to sanctions imposed by the U.S. government in response to Russia’s actions in ATTACHMENT 2
A2-28
137
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
Ukraine, as well as any sanctions imposed under state law. The EO directs state agencies to terminate contracts with, and to refrain from entering any new contracts with, individuals or entities that are determined to be a target of Economic Sanctions. Accordingly, should the State determine Subrecipient is a target of Economic Sanctions or is conducting prohibited transactions with sanctioned individuals or entities, that shall be grounds for termination of this agreement. The State shall provide Subrecipient advance written notice of such termination, allowing Subrecipient at least 30 calendar days to provide a written response.
Termination shall be at the sole discretion of the State.
17. INDEMNIFICATION
To the extent allowed under California law, the Subrecipient will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the state (including the CEC) and state officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims and losses in connection with the performance of this Agreement.
18. CONFIDENTIAL SUBRECIPIENT INFORMATION
a. Identification of Confidential Subrecipient Information 1) For the purposes of this Section, “Confidential Subrecipient Information” refers to information belonging to the Subrecipient that the Subrecipient has satisfactorily identified as confidential, and the Energy Commission has agreed to designate as confidential under Title 20 California Code of Regulations Section 2505.
2) Prior to the effective date of this Agreement, the Subrecipient will identify all products (or information contained within products) it considers Confidential Subrecipient Information, and provide the legal basis for confidentiality, in Attachment 1 to this Exhibit. If the CEC agrees the information is confidential, it will not disclose it except as provided in subsection (b).
3) During the Agreement, if the Subrecipient obtains or develops additional products (or information contained within products) not originally identified as Confidential Subrecipient Information in Attachment 1 to this Exhibit, the Subrecipient will follow the procedures for a request for designation of confidential information as specified in Title 20 California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 2505.
The CEC’s Executive Director will make the confidentiality determination. Such subsequent determinations may be added to the list of confidential deliverables in the Attachment 1 to this Exhibit. The CEC will not disclose information subject to an application for confidential designation except as provided in subsection (b).
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-29
138
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
4) When submitting products containing Confidential Subrecipient Information, the Subrecipient will mark each page of any document containing Confidential Subrecipient Information as “confidential” and present it in a sealed package to the Contracts, Grants, and Loans Office.
The CAM may require the Subrecipient to submit a non-confidential version of the product, if it is feasible to separate the Confidential Subrecipient Information from the non-confidential information. The Subrecipient is not required to submit such products in a sealed package.
b. Disclosure of Confidential Subrecipient Information
The CEC will only disclose Confidential Subrecipient Information under the circumstances specified in Title 20 CCR Sections 2506, 2507, and 2508.
All Confidential Subrecipient Information that is legally disclosed by the Subrecipient or any other entity will become a public record and will no longer be subject to the CEC’s confidentiality designation. c. Waiver of Consequential Damages
In no event will the CEC, or the state of California be liable for any special, incidental, or consequential damages based on breach of warranty, breach of contract, negligence, strict tort, or any other legal theory for the disclosure of the Confidential Subrecipient Information, even if the CEC has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
Damages that the CEC, and the state of California will not be responsible for include but are not limited to: lost profit; lost savings or revenue; lost goodwill; lost use of the product or any associated equipment; cost of capital; cost of any substitute equipment, facilities, or services; downtime; the claims of third parties including customers; and injury to property. d. Limitations on the Disclosure of Products
During the Agreement, the Subrecipient, Subcontractors, any lower tier subrecipient, contractor, or vendor must receive written approval from the CAM prior to disclosing the contents of any draft product to a third party.
However, if the CEC makes a public statement about the content of any product provided by the Subrecipient and the Subrecipient believes the statement is incorrect, the Subrecipient may state publicly what it believes is correct.
19. PRE-EXISTING AND INDEPENDENTLY FUNDED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ATTACHMENT 2
A2-30
139
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
[RESERVED]
20. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Subject to Exhibit Z, Federal Award Terms and Conditions, Subpart A, Section 16, Intellectual Property:
a. The Subrecipient owns all intellectual property, subject to the licenses described below.
b. CEC owns all tangible products specified for delivery in the Scope of Work, with the exception of any intellectual property.
c. Nothing in this Agreement gives the Subrecipient any rights to “Confidential Information” and “Personal Information” as defined in Section 26, other than using Confidential Information and Personal Information for the limited purpose of performing Subrecipient’s work under this Agreement in accordance with Section 26.
d. CEC has a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual license to use, publish, translate, modify, and reproduce intellectual property created under this Agreement for governmental purposes. If any intellectual property that is subject to the licenses above has been designated as confidential as specified in Section 18, all license holders will only disclose the intellectual property under the circumstances specified in Title 20 CCR Sections 2506, 2507, and 2508.
e. Subrecipient has a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual license to use, publish, translate, modify, and reproduce written products created for Agreement reporting and management purposes, such as reports and summaries.
f. Access to and Preservation of Intellectual Property
1) Access to Intellectual Property
Upon the CAM’s request, the Subrecipient will provide the CAM and any individuals designated by the CEC, with access to the Subrecipient’s intellectual property in order to exercise the license rights described above.
2) Preservation of Intellectual Property
The Subrecipient will preserve intellectual property at its own expense for at least three (3) years after payment by the CEC of the Subrecipient’s final invoice.
g. Intellectual Property Indemnity
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-31
140
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
The Subrecipient may not, in supplying work under this Agreement, knowingly infringe or misappropriate any intellectual property right of a third party and will take reasonable actions to avoid infringement.
The Subrecipient will defend and indemnify the CEC from and against any claim, lawsuit, or other proceeding, loss, cost, liability, or expense (including court costs and reasonable fees of attorneys and other professionals) to the extent arising out of: (i) any third party claim that a product infringes any patent, copyright, trade secret, or other intellectual property right of any third party; or (ii) any third party claim arising out of the negligent or other tortious acts or omissions by the Subrecipient or its employees, subcontractors, or agents in connection with or related to the products or the Subrecipient’s performance under this Agreement.
21. ROYALTY PAYMENTS TO THE COMMISSION
[Reserved]
22. GENERAL PROVISIONS
a. Governing Law
This Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of California as to interpretation and performance.
b. Independent Capacity
In the performance of this Agreement, the Subrecipient and its agents, , any lower-tier subrecipients, contractors, vendors, and their respective employees will act in an independent capacity and not as officers, employees, or agents of the CEC or the State of California. c. Assignment
This Agreement is not assignable or transferable by the Subrecipient either in whole or in part without the consent of the CEC in the form of an amendment.
d. Timeliness
Time is of the essence in this Agreement.
e. Severability
If any provision of this Agreement is unenforceable or held to be unenforceable, all other provisions of this Agreement will remain in full force and effect.
f. Waiver
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-32
141
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
No waiver of any breach of this Agreement constitutes waiver of any other breach. All rights and remedies in this Agreement will be taken and construed as cumulative, meaning in addition to every other right or remedy provided in the Agreement or by law.
g. Assurances
The CEC reserves the right to seek further written assurances from the Subrecipient and its team that the work under this Agreement will be performed in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. h. Change in Business
1) The Subrecipient will promptly notify the Energy Commission of the occurrence of any of the following:
a) A change of address.
b) A change in business name or ownership.
c) The existence of any litigation or other legal proceeding affecting the project or Agreement.
d) The occurrence of any casualty or other loss to project personnel, equipment, or third parties.
e) Receipt of notice of any claim or potential claim against the Subrecipient, any lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and vendors for patent, copyright, trademark, service mark, and/or trade secret infringement that could affect the CEC’s rights.
2) The Subrecipient must provide the CAM with written notice of a planned change or reorganization of the type of business entity under which it does business. A change of business entity or name change requires an amendment assigning or novating the
Agreement to the changed entity. If the CEC does not seek to amend this Agreement or enter into a new agreement with the changed or new entity for any reason (including that the CEC is not satisfied that the new entity can perform in the same manner as the Subrecipient), it may terminate this Agreement as provided in the “Termination” section.
i. Access to Sites and Records
CEC staff and representatives will have reasonable access to all project sites and to all records related to this Agreement.
j. Prior Dealings, Custom, or Trade Usage
These terms and conditions may not be modified or supplemented by prior dealings, custom, or trade usage.
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-33
142
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
k. Survival of Terms
Certain provisions will survive the completion or termination date of this Agreement for any reason. The provisions include but are not limited to:
• Legal Statements on Products (included in Section 5, “Products”) • Payment of Funds (Section 8)
• Recordkeeping, Cost Accounting, and Auditing (Section 11) • Equipment (Section 14)
• Termination (Section 16)
• Indemnification (Section 17)
• Pre-Existing and Independently Funded Intellectual Property (Section 19)
• Intellectual Property (Section 20)
Royalty Payments to the Commission (Section 21)
• California Taxpayer Access to Publicly Funded Research Act (Section 24)
• Receipt of Confidential Information and Personal Information (Section 26)
• Change in Business (see this section)
• Access to Sites and Records (see this section)
• Venue (see this section)
• CEC as Third-Party Beneficiary (see this section)
l. Venue
Any court action to enforce any part of this Agreement shall take place in Sacramento County.
m. CEC as Third-Party Beneficiary
The Subrecipient shall ensure that in all of its agreements with all lower tier subrecipients that the CEC is specifically named as a third-party beneficiary to the agreement. In addition, the term shall state the entity agrees that if the CEC brings a court action, the entity agrees to venue in Sacramento County.
23. CERTIFICATIONS AND COMPLIANCE
a. Federal, State, and Local Laws
The Subrecipient is responsible for obtaining all required permits and shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, codes, rules, and regulations for all work performed under the Agreement. b. Nondiscrimination Statement of Compliance
During the performance of this Agreement, the Subrecipient, Subcontractors, any lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and vendors ATTACHMENT 2
A2-34
143
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
shall not unlawfully discriminate, harass, or allow harassment against any employee or applicant for employment because of sex, sexual orientation, race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin, physical disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental disability, medical condition, age, marital status, or denial of family care leave. The Subrecipient and any lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and vendors will ensure that the evaluation and treatment of their employees and applicants for employment are free from such discrimination and harassment.
The Subrecipient and any lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and vendors shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code Sections 12990 et seq.) and the applicable regulations promulgated thereunder (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 11000 et seq.). The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission implementing Government Code Section 12990 (a-f), set forth in Chapter 5 of Division 4.1 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, are incorporated into this Agreement by reference and made a part of it as if set forth in full. The Subrecipient and any lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and vendors shall give written notice of their obligations under this section to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other Agreement.
The Subrecipient will include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this section in all agreements with Subrecipients, that perform work under this Agreement.
c. Drug-Free Workplace Certification
By signing this Agreement, the Subrecipient certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that it will comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 (Government Code Section 8350 et seq.).
In addition to any other rights and remedies available to the CEC, failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of payments under the Agreement or termination of the Agreement or both, and the Subrecipient may be ineligible for any future state awards if the CEC determines that any of the following has occurred: (1) the Subrecipient has made false certification, or (2) violates the certification by failing to carry out the requirements of the Act.
d. National Labor Relations Board Certification (Not applicable to public entities)
The S
ubrecipient , by signing this Agreement, swears under penalty of perjury that no more than one final unappealable finding of contempt of court by a federal court has been issued against the Subrecipient within the immediately preceding two-year period because of the Subrecipient's failure to comply with an order of a federal court that orders the Subrecipient to ATTACHMENT 2
A2-35
144
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
comply with an order of the National Labor Relations Board. e. Child Support Compliance Act (Applicable to California Employers) For any agreement in excess of $100,000, the Subrecipient acknowledges that:
1) It recognizes the importance of child and family support obligations and shall fully comply with all applicable state and federal laws relating to child and family support enforcement, including but not limited to disclosure of information and compliance with earnings assignment orders, as provided in Chapter 8 (commencing with section 5200) of Part 5 of Division 9 of the Family Code; and
2) To the best of its knowledge is fully complying with the earnings assignment orders of all employees and is providing the names of all new employees to the New Hire Registry maintained by the California Employment Development Department.
f. Air or Water Pollution Violation
Under state laws, the Subrecipient shall not be:
1) In violation of any order or resolution not subject to review promulgated by the State Air Resources Board or an air pollution control district;
2) Subject to a cease-and-desist order not subject to review issued pursuant to Section 13301 of the Water Code for violation of waste discharge requirements or discharge prohibitions; or
3) F
inally determined to be in violation of provisions of federal law relating to air or water pollution.
g. Americans With Disabilities Act
By signing this Agreement, the Subrecipient assures the State that it complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Section 12101, et seq.), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA.
24. CALIFORNIA TAXPAYER ACCESS TO PUBLICLY FUNDED RESEARCH ACT a. As a condition to receiving funding under this Agreement, the Subrecipient agrees to fully comply with the California Taxpayer Access to Publicly Funded Research Act (California Government Code sections 13989 et seq., the “Act”) and provisions of this section, which apply to publications describing knowledge, an invention, or technology funded within the scope of this Agreement.
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-36
145
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
b. For purposes of complying with the Act and this section of the Agreement, the following definitions shall apply.
1) “Peer-Reviewed Manuscript” means a manuscript after it has been peer reviewed and in the form in which it has been accepted for publication in a scientific journal.
2) “Research Grant” in the Act and “this Agreement” in this section mean this Agreement.
3) “State Agency” in the Act means the Energy Commission. c. The Subrecipient shall provide for free public access to any Peer- Reviewed Manuscript developed within the scope of this Agreement. d. The Subrecipient shall ensure that any publishing or copyright agreements concerning Peer-Reviewed Manuscripts:
1) Fully comply with California Government Code section 13989.6; 2) Do not conflict with the Energy Commission’s rights under this Agreement;
3) Secure for the Energy Commission the rights provided under this Agreement, including the rights to Intellectual Property as specified in Section 20; and
4) Recognize the free public access to the Peer-Reviewed Manuscript.
e. The Subrecipient shall report to the CEC the final disposition of any Peer- Reviewed Manuscript, including but not limited to if it was published; when it was published; where it was published; and, when the 12-month time period expires, where the Peer-Reviewed Manuscript will be available for open access.
f. Not later than 12 months after the official date of publication, or sooner if specified in the Schedule of Products, the Subrecipient shall make available to the CEC an electronic version of any Peer-Reviewed Manuscript that is developed within the scope of this Agreement. g. The Subrecipient shall make publicly accessible an electronic version of any Peer-Reviewed Manuscript that is developed within the scope of this Agreement, not later than 12 months after the official date of publication, on a repository approved in writing by the CEC, including but not limited to the University of California’s eScholarship Repository at the California Digital Library; the California State University’s ScholarWorks at the Systemwide Digital Library; or PubMed Central. The Subrecipient shall notify the CEC when the Peer-Reviewed Manuscript is available on an CEC- approved repository.
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-37
146
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
h. If the Subrecipient is unable to ensure that its Peer-Reviewed Manuscript is accessible on an CEC-approved, publicly accessible repository, the Subrecipient may comply by providing the manuscript to the CEC not later than 12 months after the official date of publication. i. For any publications other than a Peer-Reviewed Manuscript, (herein referred to as “Other Publications”) including scientific meeting abstracts, developed within the scope of this Agreement, the Subrecipient shall:
1) Provide an electronic version of the Other Publications to the CEC not later than 12 months after the official date of publication. 2) Ensure that any publishing or copyright agreements concerning Other Publications:
a. Do not conflict with the CEC’s rights under this Agreement. b. Secure for the CEC the rights provided under this Agreement, including the rights to Intellectual Property as specified in Section 20.
j. The Act states that “Grantees are authorized to use grant money for publication costs, including fees charged by a publisher for color and page charges, or fees for digital distribution.” Subrecipient agrees that for purposes of this Agreement, the Subrecipient is only authorized to use funds under this Agreement, including Matching funds, for these purposes if the expenses are included in the Agreement’s Budget and meet the other Agreement requirements for payment, including that the CEC will only reimburse the Subrecipient for expenditures incurred during the Agreement term. If these expenses are not included in the Budget, both parties must agree and amend the Budget to include such expenditures before Subrecipient is authorized to use Agreement funds, either reimbursable expenses or match, for these purposes.
k. Should a conflict exist between the terms in this Section 24 and other terms of this Agreement, the terms in this section prevail.
25. COMMISSION REMEDIES FOR SUBRECIPIENT’S NON-COMPLIANCE Without limiting any of its other rights and remedies, the CEC may, for Subrecipient’s noncompliance of any Agreement requirement, withhold future payments, demand and be entitled to repayment of past reimbursements, or suspend or terminate this Agreement. The tasks in the Scope of Work are non- severable, and completion of all of them is material to this Agreement. Thus, the Commission, without limiting its other rights and remedies, is entitled to repayment of all funds paid to Subrecipient if the Subrecipient does not timely complete all tasks in the Scope of Work.
I
f over the course of performing under this Agreement, the CEC and the ATTACHMENT 2
A2-38
147
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
Subrecipient agree that a change is warranted to the Scope of Work, the parties can amend this Agreement.
26. RECEIPT OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION AND PERSONAL INFORMATION a. For the purposes of this Section, “confidential information” refers to information the CEC has designated as confidential pursuant to Title 20 CCR Section 2505 et seq., information the CEC has otherwise deemed or stated to be confidential, and other information exempt from public disclosure under the provisions of the California Public Records Act or other applicable state or federal laws.
b. Fo r the purposes of this Section, “personal information” refers to information that meets the definition of “personal information” in California Civil Code section 1798.3(a) or one of the data elements set forth in California Civil Code section 1798.29(g)(1) or (g)(2). Personal information is a type of confidential information and is therefore subject to all requirements for confidential information provided in this Agreement and applicable law. However, there are additional requirements specific to personal information.
c. For the purposes of this Section, “special terms for confidential information” refers to the CEC’s special terms and conditions for the receipt of confidential information and personal information. The CEC’s special terms for confidential information include, but are not limited to, having in place an Information Security Program Plan and obtaining nondisclosure agreements from all individuals who will be provided access to confidential information or personal information.
d. If the Subrecipient will receive confidential information or personal information from the CEC or a third-party for the performance of this Agreement, the Subrecipient must first agree to and comply with the CEC’s special terms for confidential information.
e. If any other individual or entity participating in any way with this Agreement, including but not limited to subcontractors, subrecipients, vendors, and other project partners, will receive confidential information or personal information from the CEC or a third-party for the performance of this Agreement, that individual or entity must first agree to and comply with the CEC’s special terms for confidential information. The Subrecipient must flow-down the CEC’s special terms for confidential information into each subcontract, vendor agreement, or other project partner agreement that will be provided access to confidential information or personal information before the individual or entity has access to any such information. Subrecipient must also require all individuals and entities to flow-down this Section to any lower tier subcontractors, sub- subcontractors, vendors, project partners, and other individual or entity participating in any way with this Agreement that will be provided access to Confidential Information or Personal Information before the individual or entity has access to any such information.
f. If this Agreement does not include the CEC’s special terms for confidential information and CEC determines the Subrecipient or any other individual ATTACHMENT 2
A2-39
148
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
or entity participating in any way with this Agreement will receive confidential information or personal information from the CEC or a third- party for the performance of this Agreement, the CEC reserves the option to amend this Agreement to add its special terms for confidential information.
g. Except as provided in Title 20 CCR Sections 2506, 2507, and 2508, and the CEC’s special terms for confidential information, Subrecipient or any other individual or entity participating in any way with this Agreement may not disclose any information provided to it by the CEC or a third party for the performance of this Agreement if the information has been designated as confidential or is the subject of a pending application for confidential designation.
27. DEFINITIONS
• Agreement means this grant agreement executed between the CEC and the Subrecipient.
• Agreement Term means the length of this Agreement, as specified on the Agreement signature page (form CEC-146).
• Budget Categories means the following categories in Exhibit B, Budget:
Direct Labor, Fringe Benefits, Travel, Equipment, Materials and Miscellaneous, Subrecipients and Vendors, and Indirect Costs and Profit.
Budget Category means one of these Budget Categories.
• CAM means Commission Agreement Manager.
• CEC means California Energy Commission.
• Data means any recorded information that relates to the project funded by the Agreement, whether created or collected before or after the Agreement’s effective date.
• Effective Date means the date on which this Agreement is signed by the last party required to sign, provided that signature occurs after the Agreement has been approved by the CEC at a business meeting or by the Executive Director or his/her designee.
• Equipment means products, objects, machinery, apparatus, implements, or tools that are purchased or constructed with Energy Commission funds for the project, and that have a useful life of at least one year and an acquisition unit cost of at least $5,000. “Equipment” includes products, objects, machinery, apparatus, implements, or tools that are composed by over thirty percent (30%) of materials purchased for the project. For purposes of determining depreciated value of equipment used in the Agreement, the project will terminate at the end of the normal useful life of the equipment purchased and/or developed with CEC funds. The CEC ATTACHMENT 2
A2-40
149
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
may determine the normal useful life of the equipment.
• Incurred Costs means an expense for which the Subrecipient has become liable (legally obligated) to pay.
• Intellectual Property means: (a) inventions, technologies, designs, drawings, data, software, formulas, compositions, processes, techniques, works of authorship, trademarks, service marks, and logos that are created, conceived, discovered, made, developed, altered, or reduced to practice with Agreement or match funds during or after the Agreement term; (b) any associated proprietary rights to these items, such as patent and copyright; and (c) any upgrades or revisions to these items. “Works of authorship” does not include written products created for Agreement reporting and management purposes, such as reports, summaries, lists, letters, agendas, schedules, and invoices. • Invention means intellectual property that is patentable. • Match Funds means cash or in-kind (i.e., non-cash) contributions provided by the Subrecipient, Subcontractors, any lower-tiered level of Sub- Subcontractors, Vendors, or a third party for a project funded by the CEC.
If this Agreement resulted from a solicitation, refer to the solicitation’s discussion of match funding for guidelines specific to the project. • Materials means the substances used to construct, or as part of, a finished object, commodity, device, article, or product and that does not meet the definition of Equipment.
• MTDC (Modified Total Direct Costs) means all direct salaries and wages, applicable fringe benefits, materials and supplies, services, travel, and up to the first $25,000 of which subaward (regardless of the period of performance of the subawards under the award). MTDC excludes equipment, capital expenditures, rental costs, tuition remission, scholarships and fellowships, and the portion of each subaward in excess of $25,000.
• Ownership means exclusive possession of all rights to property, including the right to use and transfer property.
• Paid Costs means an expense for which the Subrecipient has already made payment.
• Product means any tangible item specified for delivery to the CEC in the Scope of Work.
• P
roject means the entire effort undertaken and planned by the Subrecipient and consisting of the work funded by the CEC. The project may coincide with or extend beyond the Agreement term.
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-41
150
Exhibit C
XXX-XX-XXX
Subrecipient
CEC Standard Grant Terms
for CERRI [ECAMS]
• Subrecipient means the entity that executed this Agreement with the CEC and subrecipient of CERRI funds.
• State means the state of California and all California state agencies within it, including but not limited to commissions, boards, offices, and departments.
• Subaward for the Subrecipient means all agreements it has with lower tier subrecipients.
• Subcontractor means a person or entity that receives grant funds directly from the Subrecipient and is entrusted by the Subrecipient to make decisions about how to conduct some of this Agreement’s activities. A Subrecipients role involves discretion over grant activities and is not merely just selling goods or services.
• Sub-Subcontractor has the same meaning as a Subcontractor except that it receives grant funds from a Subcontractor or any lower tier level of a Sub-Subcontractor.
• Unrelated Company has the meaning set forth in section 7.g. of this Exhibit C.
• Vendor means a person or entity that sells goods or services to the Subrecipient, a Subcontractor, or any lower-tiered level of Sub- Subcontractor, in exchange for some of the grant funds, and does not make decisions about how to perform the grant’s activities. The Vendor’s role is ministerial and does not involve discretion over this Agreement’s activities.
ATTACHMENT 2
A2-42
151
P
age 1 of 32
EXHIBIT Z
FEDERAL AWARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Subpart A. Award Specific Provisions ...................................................................................................... 3
1. Purpose ................................................................................................ .............................................. 3
2. Summary of Award ............................................................................................................................. 3
3. Resolution of Conflicting terms .......................................................................................................... 4
4. Documents Incorporated by Reference ............................................................................................. 4
5. Funding Restrictions........................................................................................................................... 4
6. Flow Down Requirements .................................................................................................................. 4
7. Reporting Requirements .................................................................................................................... 4
8. Stewardship ................................................................................................ ........................................ 5
9. Site Visits ................................................................................................ ............................................ 5
10. Audits ................................................................................................ ................................................. 5
11. Refund Obligation ............................................................................................................................... 5
12. Foreign Travel ................................................................................................ .................................... 6
13. Program Income ................................................................................................ ................................. 6
14. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) ........................................................................................ 6
15. Historic Preservation .......................................................................................................................... 6
16. Intellectual Property............................................................................................................................ 6
17. Post-A ward Due Diligence Review .................................................................................................... 7
18. Construction ................................................................................................ ....................................... 7
20. Davis-B acon Act Requirements ......................................................................................................... 7
21. Buy America Requirement for Infrastructure Projects ........................................................................ 9
22. Performance of Work in United States ............................................................................................. 13
23. Foreign National Participation .......................................................................................................... 13
24. Foreign Collaboration ....................................................................................................................... 13
25. Foreign Government-S ponsored Talent Recruitment Programs Prohibition ................................... 14
26. Transparency of Foreign Connections ............................................................................................. 15
27. Cost Match ................................................................................................ ....................................... 16
28. Revision of Budget and Program Plans ........................................................................................... 16
29. Continued Use of Real Property and Equipment ............................................................................. 16
30. Interim Conflict of Interest Policy for Financial Assistance .............................................................. 17
31. Organizational Conflict of Interest .................................................................................................... 17
32. Publication of Information on the Internet ........................................................................................ 18
33. Requirement to Report Potentially Duplicative Funding .................................................................. 18
34. Flood Resilience ............................................................................................................................... 18
35. Indemnity ................................................................................................ .......................................... 18 ATTACHMENT 3
A3-1
152
36. Rebudgeting and Recovery of Indirect Costs .................................................................................. 19
37. Real Property – Grid Resilience ....................................................................................................... 19
38. Cybersecurity Plan ........................................................................................................................... 19 Subpart B. General Provisions ................................................................................................................ 21
1. Compliance with Federal, State, and Municipal Law ....................................................................... 21
2. Record Retention ............................................................................................................................. 21
3. Allowable costs ................................................................................................................................. 21
4. Indirect Costs ................................................................................................................................... 21
5. Property Standards .......................................................................................................................... 21
6. Insurance Coverage ......................................................................................................................... 21
7. Equipment ........................................................................................................................................ 22
8. Supplies ............................................................................................................................................ 22
9. Property Trust Relationship .............................................................................................................. 22
10. Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Financing Statements ................................................................ 23
11. Conference Spending....................................................................................................................... 23
12. Lobbying ........................................................................................................................................... 23
13. Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment Prohibition ........................... 23
14. Affirmative Action and Pay Transparency Requirements ................................................................ 24
15. Nondiscrimination ............................................................................................................................. 25
16. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ........................................................................................... 25
17. Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty ................................................................................ 26
18. Nondisclosure and Confidentiality Agreement Assurances ............................................................. 26
19. Export Control .................................................................................................................................. 26
20. Corporate Felony Conviction and Federal Tax Liability Assurances ............................................... 27
21. Insolvency, Bankruptcy or Receivership .......................................................................................... 27
22. Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards ................................ 28
23. Final Incurred Cost Audit .................................................................................................................. 30
24. Required Reporting under the Federal Funding and Transparency Act of 2006 ............................. 30
25. Unique Entity Identifier ..................................................................................................................... 30
26. Annual Independent Audits .............................................................................................................. 31
27. Integrity and Performance Matters ................................................................................................... 31
28. Fraud, Waste, and Abuse ................................................................................................................ 32
ATTACHMENT 3
A3-2
153
Subpart A. Award Specific Provisions
1. Purpose
The purpose of this exhibit is to provide the federal terms and conditions for California Energy Commission’s (CEC) Award to Subrecipient under this Agreement. This Award is made pursuant to the Section 40101 (d) Formula Grant or Community Energy Reliability and Resilience Investment program (Program) as authorized under Section 40101(d) of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
2. Summary of Award
Federal Award Identification Information (2 CFR §200.33 2)
Name of Federal awarding agency U.S. Department of Energy or DOE Name of Recipient /pass-through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the Recipient California Energy Commission or CEC Name of Subrecipient
Subrecipient’s unique entity identifier (DUNS)
Federal award identification number (FAIN)
Federal Award Date of award to the Recipient by the Federal agency
Subaward period of performance start and end date
Amount of Federal funds obligated by this acti on by the pass- through entity to the Subrecipient
Total amount of Federal funds obligated to the Subrecipient by the pass-through entity including the current obligation Total am ount of the Fe deral a ward commi tted to the Subrecipient by the pass-through entity
Federal award description as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) Assistance Listings number and Title; the pass -through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the Assistance Listings Number at time of disbursement;
Identification of wh ether the award is res earch and
development (R&D)
Indirect cost rate for Federal award (including if the application of the de minimis rate per §200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs) [refer to Sub’s grant application]
ATTACHMENT 3
A3-3
154
3. Resolution of Conflicting terms
In the event of any conflict in the terms of this Agreement, this Exhibit will take precedence.
4. Documents Incorporated by Reference
The following documents are hereby incorporated by reference:
a. Award Agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and CEC, Award No. DE - GD0000005 (DOE Award).
b. Public Law 117-58, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL).
c. U niform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2 CFR part 910, located at h ttp://www.eCFR.gov.
d. The Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) for this Program , l ocated at https://www.fedconnect.net/FedConnect/default.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2ffedconnect%2f%3fdoc% 3dDE-FOA-0002736%26agency%3dDOE&doc=DE-FOA-0002736&agency=DOE.
e. T he standard DOE financial assistance intellectual property provisions applicable to various types of recipients , located at: https://energy.gov/gc/standard- i ntellectual-property-ip- provisions-financial-assistance-awards.
f.
The National Policy Assurances , l ocated at: http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/rtc.jsp and https://www.energy.gov/management/articles/national-policy-assurances-be-incorporated- award-terms.
g. R
esearch Terms and Conditions and the DOE Agency Specific Requirements at http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/rtc/index.jsp (if the Award is for research and the Award is to a university or non-profit).
h. T
he CEC Agency Specific Requirements at https://www.energy.ca.gov/media/9025.
5. Funding Restrictions
Funding is contingent upon the availability of funds appropriated by Congress for the purpose of this program and the availability of future-year budget authority.
6. Flow Down Requirements
a. Subrecipient must require inclusion in all lower tier subrecipient or subcontract agreements, all federal award terms and conditions in 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2 CFR part 910 as set forth in 2 CFR 200.101 and ensure strict compliance.
b. Subrecipient must require inclusion in all lower tier subrecipient or subcontract agreements all applicable Intellectual Property provisions and N ational Policy Assurances incorporated by reference in Subpart A.3.
c. Subrecipient must require inclusion in all lower tier subrecipient or subcontract agreements, all other requirements as applicable in this Exhibit or elsewhere in the Agreement.
7. Reporting Requirements
a. The federal reporting requirements are described in the Federal Assistance Reporting ATTACHMENT 3
A3-4
155
Checklist, Attachment 3 of the DOE Award.
b. CEC’s noncompliance with reporting requirements may result in withholding of future payments, suspension, or termination of the Award, and withholding of future federal awards.
c. Subrecipient must assist CEC with meeting all federal reporting requirements by maintaining sufficient records to substantiate the required information and, upon request by CEC or DOE, provide information for reporting purposes within the timeframe requested. Failure to by Subrecipient to comply with this requirement is a material breach of this Agreement .
8. Stewardship
The DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and the CEC will exercise normal stewardship in overseeing the project activities performed under this federal grant agreement.
Stewardship Activities include, but are not limited to, conducting site visits; reviewing performance and financial reports; providing assistance and/or temporary intervention in unusual circumstances to correct deficiencies that develop during the project; assuring compliance with terms and conditions; and reviewing technical performance after project completion to ensure that the project objectives have been accomplished.
9. Site Visits
The CEC, DOE and NNSA's authorized representatives have the right to make site visits at reasonable times to review project accomplishments and management control systems and to provide technical assistance, if required. The Subrecipient must provide, and must require its lower tier subrecipients to provide, reasonable access to facilities, office space, resources, and assistance for the safety and convenience of the United States Government and CEC representatives in the performance of their duties. All site visits and evaluations must be performed in a manner that does not unduly interfere with or delay the work.
10. Audits
a. Subrecipient and its lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors must provide any information, documents, site access, or other assistance requested by DOE or Federal auditing agencies (e.g., DOE Inspector General, Government Accountability Office) for the purpose of audits and investigations. Such assistance may include, but is not limited to, reasonable access to records of the Subrecipient and its lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors relating to this Agreement.
b. Consistent with 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2 CFR part 910, DOE may audit the financial records or administrative records of the Subrecipient and its lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors relating to this Award at any time. Government-initiated audits are generally paid for by DOE.
c. DOE may conduct a final audit at the end of the project period (or the termination of the Award, if applicable). Upon completion of the audit, the Subrecipient and its lower tier subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors are required to refund to DOE any payments for costs that were determined to be unallowable. If the audit has not been performed or completed prior to the closeout of the award, DOE retains the right to recover an appropriate amount after fully considering the recommendations on disallowed costs resulting from the final audit.
11. Refund Obligation
Subrecipient must refund any excess payments, received from CEC, including any interest.
ATTACHMENT 3
A3-5
156