MCA Sues Burbank Again Over Disney Pact

Entertainment conglomerate MCA filed a lawsuit against the City of Burbank Monday alleging that the city failed to provide an environmental impact report and did not specify the costs of an agreement with Walt Disney Co. for a multimillion-dollar entertainment and retail complex.

It is the second suit in a month filed by MCA against the city. MCA is seeking to invalidate the agreement giving Disney exclusive negotiating rights to build the complex. MCA has repeatedly stated that it was not given the opportunity to bid against Disney.

The lawsuit alleges: “The Disney Development will have a profound adverse impact on the surrounding environment by, among other things: increasing demand for parking, utilities and other elements of the municipal infrastructure; increasing the volume of traffic in the area; requiring construction of drainage systems, necessitating the replacement and rerouting of sewer and water lines; and requiring the purchase of additional property.”

The Burbank City Council on May 5 approved a proposal by Disney to develop a retail, recreation and entertainment center costing an estimated $150 million to $300 million and covering 40 acres of undeveloped land near downtown. The plan is scheduled for final City Council approval next year after details are complete.

MCA’s Arguments

MCA maintained that the agreement is unlawful because, according to the lawsuit, “it was entered into without public bidding and without fair or adequate solicitation or consideration of competing proposals.” The suit also alleged that city officials did not make available to the public information about potential environmental hazards as required by law.

“If you’re going to approve a project of this magnitude, and they’ve already given concept approval to this project with specific reference to the financial terms, case law indicates that an environmental impact report might well be required,” said MCA attorney Daniel M. Shapiro. In another lawsuit filed in June, MCA charged that agency members violated the state’s Brown Act by meeting privately with Disney officials before awarding the contract. The Brown Act is a state law requiring local governments to act on most matters in a public forum. Disney is not a defendant in the suit.

Burbank officials have denied acting secretly to award the contract. “We believe what they are attempting to do is find everything they can to slow down the proposal, to put this whole thing on hold for as long as they can,” City Atty. Douglas C. Holland said.

Reasons for Separation

Shapiro, on the other hand, said MCA’s challenge was separated into two lawsuits because the law requires allegations of a Brown Act violation to be filed quickly.

The second lawsuit maintains that no environmental information was provided, nor was any information about various points, including the costs of the agreement, land, clearance, or relocation.

The lawsuit also alleged that “the agreement has granted Disney a price that is $30 million less than fair market value.”

“It is our opinion that this is an illegal expenditure and waste of public funds,” Shapiro said.

‘Will Follow the Law’

Holland said the city still has not answered MCA’s first suit, filed in June. But Burbank Mayor Michael P. Hastings said the city “will follow the law and will answer the complaint.” “Most of us are very puzzled,” Hastings said. “I would hate to waste the public’s money to do an environmental impact report on something that is nothing or something that is speculative.”

He said, however, that city officials will proceed to seek approval to build the complex, which would feature shops, theaters, restaurants, a ride taking passengers through replications of famous movie scenes and a Hollywood Fantasy Hotel.

“This doesn’t surprise us,” said the mayor. “MCA is just going to continue to badger us. We’re just going to move ahead, business as usual.”