Copyright © 2019, Los Angeles Times | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
Advertisement
Share
News

No conflict, Carolyn Berlin says

Paul Clinton

CIVIC CENTER -- Planning Board member Carolyn Berlin released a

private legal opinion Wednesday supporting her contention the city has no

cause to remove her from the panel because of a possible conflict of

Advertisement

interest.

Berlin, a Planning Board member since 1994, hired high-profile Los

Angeles law firm Richards, Watson and Gershon to offer an opinion after

two reports by Burbank City Atty. Dennis Barlow raised the possibility

Advertisement

that her continued service could jeopardize an agreement between the city

and the airport for a new terminal. Even if Berlin did not take part in

airport discussions, Barlow said, a problem could exist because her

husband, Phil Berlin, holds a seat on the airport commission.

But Berlin said Tuesday’s, co-authored by former Burbank Mayor William

Rudell, bolsters her position that she can stay on the board as long as

she does not participate in discussions about the development agreement

for the proposed terminal.

Advertisement

Barlow, who said he does not believe a conflict of interest exists,

was nonetheless skeptical of Berlin’s private legal report.

“Their position and their responsibility isn’t to advise the City

Council,” Barlow said.

Berlin, however, said she was not trying to influence the council,

merely to make sure it had all the information available on a matter that

could affect any married couple participating in city government.

“I don’t think it’s my place to tell the council what to do,” Berlin

Advertisement

said Wednesday. “Because of the seriousness of the issues, I felt

compelled to get an opinion from experts.”

Barlow has backed off his initial contention that the Berlins’

situation might violate state law. However, he said there are still

significant risks to the city’s approval of a new terminal if Berlin

remains on the board.

Although, he said, he had not read the entire report, Barlow said it

seemed to echo his views that a conflict doesn’t exist.

“From what I read, it sounds like they agree with us,” Barlow said. “I

think it just agrees with the position we advanced.”

Despite Barlow’s reports, no council member has asked Berlin to step

down. In fact, Councilman Dave Golonski and others have suggested

amending city law to take certain advisory duties away from the Planning

Board to eliminate any potential problems. Barlow said he is researching

the plausibility of that solution and will present his findings to the

council early next year.

The city has also requested an opinion from the state attorney

general, which could take up to six months, Barlow said. The Planning

Board is scheduled to consider the airport’s terminal proposal March 20

and the City Council is scheduled to vote on it in April.

The council is in no hurry to act on the matter, Councilman Bob Kramer

said.

“I don’t feel any pressure at all,” Kramer said. “Hopefully we’ll hear

from the anttorney general.”


Advertisement