HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/26/1976 MINUTES CCBakersfield, California, January 26, 1976
Minutes of a regular meeting of the Council of the City
of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of City
Hall at 8:00 P. M., January 26, 1976.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation by Retired Chaplain
Victor Mitchell.
The City Clerk called the roll as follows:
Present: Mayor Hart. Councilmen Rogers, Sceales, Strong, Barton
(seated at 8:20), Bleecker, Christensen,
Medders
Absent: None
Minutes of the regular meeting of January 19, 1976 were
approved as presented.
Scheduled Public Statements.
Rabbi Stanley I. Robbin, representing Temple Beth E1 and
Jacob Congregation, requested that the Council adopt a
call vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Rogers,
Medders
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Barton
Sceales, Strong, Bleecker, Christensen,
B'Nai
resolution rejecting and condemning the recent actions of the United
Nations, declaring Zionism as a form of racism and racial discrimi-
nation. Rabbi Robbin also requested that copies of this resolution
be forwarded to President of the United States, Gerald Ford,
United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Daniel Patrick
Moynihan, and Secretary General of the United Nations, Kurt Waldheim.
Adoption of Resolution No. 5-76 of
the Council of the City of Bakersfield
rejecting and condemning the actions
of the United Nations declaring Zionism
as a form of racism and racial dis-
crimination.
Upon a motion by Councilman Christensen, Resolution No. 5-76
of the Council of the City of Bakersfield rejecting and condemning
the actions of the United Nations declaring Zionism as a form of
racism and racial discrimination, was adopted by the following roll
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 2
Councilman Medders recognized a group of students who
sang "God Bless America" and stated that this is part of Bakersfield
College's Bicentennial Celebration plan.
Correspondence.
A communication was received from Assemblyman of the 33rd
District William M. Thomas, dated January 21, 1976, regarding the
City Council's support of Senate Bill 839.
Reports.
Councilman Rogers, member of the Legislative Committee,
reported on Assembly Bill 337, as follows:
AB-337 (Boatwright). Property Tax Revenue Limits
Forced Tax Rate Rollbacks - Cities and Counties Asked
to Finance School Revenue Increases. AB-337 is in
response to growing public alarm over property tax
burdens and the Assembly Revenue and Taxation & Ways
and Means Committees, by a vote of 8 to 2, have
approved this bill. It would impose, for the first
time, property tax revenue limits on cities, counties
and special districts. This bill would repeal that
portion of the Revenue & Taxation Code (SB-90) which
establishes the current maximum tax rate limits for
General Law and Charter Cities. The total property
tax revenues may increase no more than the percentage
change in population plus the cost-of-living and
the cost-of-living is limited to 8% as the amount
allowable. This bill would take effect immediately.
The League of California Cities is opposing it
because it would offer benefit primarily to non-
residential property owners and little tax relief
to homeowners.
It is recommended that AB-337 be opposed not because
it limits taxation but is an imposition on local
government by removing the local control of setting
tax rates.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rogers the Council went on
record in opposition to AB-337 and the Mayor was requested to
prepare the necessary communications to Governor Brown, Senator
Stiern and Assemblyman Thomas, expressing the Council's opposition,
and contact the cities of Arvin, Maricopa, Shafter, Taft and Wasco
soliciting their support in opposition of this bill.
City Manager Bergen read a report regarding the results
of the regular annual monitoring conducted by HUD into the City of
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 3
Bakersfield's Community Development Block Grant Fund Projects,
follows:
On Thursday, January 22, HUD personnel from the
Los Angeles Area Office concluded their three-
day visit to Bakersfield. The purpose of the
visit was to monitor the City's first-year efforts
under the Community Development Block Grant Program.
As you recall, Bakersfield is one of seventeen
communities in the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles
Area Office being monitored during the first series
of such efforts. The monitoring procedures are
authorized under various sections of the rules and
regulations implementing the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1974.
Members of the staff met with HUD personnel during
these three days to discuss matters pertaining to
such items as housing, real estate acquisition,
citizen participation, financial procedures, and
equal opportunity.
The following is a summary of the major comments
made at the HUD "exit conference" Thursday
afternoon as understood by the staff. HUD will
submit a written report of these comments within
the next two to three weeks.
Ed Franco, Assistant Area Director, opened the
meeting by reviewing the purpose of the monitoring
program, and reiterated that such efforts are
part of an on-going process established in
conjunction with the community development effort.
The City Manager indicated that frank discussions
of the City's program have been helpful to both
parties. He indicated that the program can be very
beneficial to the City and he felt that the City
Council could support it provided they understand
the implications of the program and are assured
of local control in matters not a part of the Act.
He indicated that the staff is confident that the
City's program meets the intent and requirements
of the Housing and Community Development Act, but
that reassurances from HUD are important. The
City Manager indicated that the staff had been
instructed to "tell it like it is," and that we
expected the monitoring team to do likewise. He
outlined the City's need to know all the require-
ments of the Act, both as to the program, and the
rules and requirements it imposes on city operations.
Earl Fields, Program Manager, then reviewed the
City's first-year program and the projects contained
therein. He then made the following comments
about various aspects of the program:
1. Planning
Quad Consultants appears to be carrying out
their activities in line with the contract
between the City and the consulting firm.
HUD was convinced that the City did not
have adequate data to put together the
application without assistance from Quad.
as
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976- Page 4
The Community Development Plan will be
useful in attacking blight and the problems
of low and moderate income people this year
and in the future.
Spot Blight and Neighborhood Improvements
Projects
As of this date, these projects are not
underway. The City should proceed
immediately to implement them. If there
are more extensive delays, the City will be
facing very serious second-year application
time problems. In reviewing the second-year
application, HUD will be looking at the
progress made during the first year.
3. Consistency of Program with Objectives
HUD was initially concerned with the heavy
emphasis on planning and limited emphasis
in other areas. However, our discussions
during the last three days have given HUD
personnel a much better understanding of the
reasons for the emphasis put on planning in
the first-year application. As a result of
this planning effort, the City will be in a
better position to address needs during the
second and succeeding years.
4. Rehabilitation
The City should thoroughly outline its proposed
Housing Rehabilitation Program in the second-
year application. The program developed in
Bakersfield could serve as a model for other
communities. The method by which the program
will be financed should be clearly stated,
and criteria should be established for the
granting of loans. The methods by which
minority contractors can participate in the
Housing Rehabilitation Program should also be
spelled out. A time frame should also be
established describing actual inspection and
loan activities. HUD is ready to assist in
establishing the rehabilitation program if
requested to do so by the City.
5. Housing Assistance Plan
The City is making satisfactory progress in
work on the updating of the present Housing
Assistance Plan which is part of the annual
community development application. A
formalized process should be esfablished
for review of mixed private and public
subsidized housing developments proposed by
private developers. HUD assistance is
available if the City so requests.
6. Environmental Record
The City's environmental procedures have been
consistent and are in conformance with the
Act.
Bakersfield,
California,
January 26,
1976 - Page 5
7. Citizen Participation
There appears to be a gap in terms of
credibility between the City and its
residents as to the block grant program.
However, there has been participation at
the hearings. "A fair exchange of ideas"
between the City and its residents is
important. HUD assistance is available if
the City so requests.
8. Acquisition Program
To-date the City has not acquired any
property under the program. However, the
City's Spot Blight ("land bank") Program
and outlined procedures meet HUD require-
ments. HUD personnel see "no problem with
that program."
9. Equal Opportunity
The City should establish some goals and
timetables to insure equal opportunity.
Present city employment practices appear
to need further refinement. Efforts should
be made to recruit additional women and
minorities from the available employment
market. HUD understands a plan is being
worked on in this regard. HUD assistance
is available if you request it.
(Note: The Assistant City Manager for
Personnel is meeting with HUD officials
Friday afternoon to discuss the City's
present program in more depth.)
10. Labor Contracts
No major contracts have been let so far
under this program. HUD indicated that
they would work with staff, at their request,
to assist in ensuring compliance with the
Davis-Bacon Act and other appropriate labor-
related laws.
Mr. Fields concluded his comments by saying that the
HUD personnel had attempted to review the City's first-
year program in an objective manner. He indicated
that assistance from the Los Angeles Office was
available upon call. Mr. Fields thanked the staff
for their time and cooperation. He indicated that
the City will receive a written report of these
comments within the next two to three weeks.
The staff is satisfied that HUD's oral report
indicates their understanding and support of
Bakersfield's Community Development Block Grant
Program. The staff was able to get clarification
on a number of matters that will be help£ul in
preparation of the second-year application. A
good working relationship was developed.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 6
The following is a transcript of the discussion regarding
the Community Development Block Grant Funds:
Medders: Sometime ago I said when a Councilman makes a
statement he should either label it fact, opinion or fiction, etc.
Well this is as much fact as you can glean from anything to do with
Federal Government, and a lot of it is my opinion.
I've looked over the HUD "exit conference" report at some
length and depth. As a matter of fact, I spent something in excess
of two hours this afternoon looking it over again. In looking into
this, I'm trying to find some kind of tie between it and what I
already know about this program. I have no confidence in bureaucrats.
Last week I had none; I won't have any next week; and I don't have
any this week. My opinion since last week, after looking this over~
is completely unchanged, unless it's more negative. To me, the
report indicates one of two things: HUD is either incapable of
setting out guidelines which are easily understandable or they feel
that our staff is completely incompetent. I say this because it
says no less than six times in the report that HUD's assistance is
available if the City so requests. It leaves me with the feeling
that bureaucrats have come to the conclusion that anybody who is
dumb enough to apply for one of these block programs is too dumb to
carry it out without HUD's expert advice or assistance.
There are a couple of spots that I'd like to expand on.
Some items that I have found aren't so good or are objectionable.
No. 2. Spot Blight and Neighborhood Improvement Projects. There's
a thinly veiled threat which in effect says if you don't hurry up
and fall into line, you are going to be in trouble with your second-
year application~ meaning you are not going to get funding.
No. 4. Rehabilitation. "The methods by which minority
contractors can participate in the Housing Rehabilitation Program
should also be spelled out." To me this is an absolute violation
of the rules under which we operate. I've always been of the
opinion that any contract let with public funds was to the lowest
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 7
responsible bidder, and I've never concerned myself with whether
they were black, white, brown, yellow or any assortment of those
colors.
There are a couple of things that are not clear as yet.
I'd like to read No. 5, Housing Assistance Plan, and maybe
Mr. Bergen can tell me what it means. "A formalized process
should be established for the review of mixed private and public
subsidized housing developments proposed by private developers."
Community Development Director Foster: This refers
specifically to programs like the 235 Program, as you recall, the
tract of homes built in the southwest. When a private contractor
submits an application to HUD to build a hundred or a hundred and
fifty subsidized housing units, they used to work directly with
HUD. Now, because of uproars throughout the country, HUD is referring
them back to the City and saying do you in the City agree that we
should build a hundred and fifty units here. As no one has done
this before, they want us to set up a process so we don't keep the
private developers waiting so long. We have about 400 or 500
applications to build Section 8 housing throughout the whole city
on our desks now. We really didn't know what to do with them until
HUD came, and we are working with them to get some information back
as soon as we can. That's the process we are talking about.
Medders: They tell us how to do those. That's what I
was afraid of. I had another question under No. 7; I would like
that to be explained a little more. "There appears to be a gap in
terms of credibility between the City and its residents as to the
block grant program." What does that mean?
Community Development Director Foster: At this time, it
seems that the number of people who have been involved in public
hearings and so on were rather limited. It did say that they
recognize that, but somehow in the future if in our .... it just
didn't seem like there were that many people at the public meetings.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 8
Medders: I would assume that somehow we are supposed to
go out somewhere else or drag them in to be sure that the right
number come. You advertise, you send out notices and people don't
come. What should you do, did they say?
Community Development Director Foster: No, but they did
say that they would help us if we thought that we were having
problems getting the message out and communicating.
Medders: They are awful helpful. There is a statement
in No. 9, that "the Assistant City Manager for Personnel was
meeting with HUD officials Friday afternoon to discuss the City's
present program in more depth," and I haven't been apprised as to
the outcome of this concerning Equal Opportunity. Did he meet
with them, and what kind of response did he get from that meeting?
Assistant City Manager Russell: We were in Los Angeles
at the Labor Relations Seminar and told them we would meet with
them Friday afternoon in Los Angeles if we had a chance. We called
their office and found they were not there that afternoon. It was
not a definite meeting.
Medders: There are some other things~ but I don't want to
take up a lot of time because somebody else might have something
that they want to talk about.
This Block Grant Community Development Program was against
my better judgment at the time that we began considering it; however,
I reasoned that since few people came down to object to it when
they had the hearings before the Planning Commission and other places
that the idea might not be too bad. At that time we were sort of
assured that there was very little in the way of strings attached to
it. Now, as time goes along, I feel that my original perception
was a lot more accurate than I judged it to be at that time. We had
no business getting into the first year application. My better
judgment tells me, at this point, that good old federal bureaucrats
dangled that carrot in front of us and we just couldn't resist
taking that bite. However~ after chewing on it a while, it has
Bakersfield,
California,
January 26,
1976 - Page 9
,);) ~
become somewhat bitter, and I guess you could say, a little stringy.
In the beginning I surmised that this was a Community Development
Program. Now I'm not sure that it's all that wide spread over the
community. It seems to be trying to settle down in one area, and
that is kind of unpalatable to me also. At this point in time I
would be most grateful if the Federal Government would get about
doing the things the Federal Government ought to be doing, such as
providing for the national defense. They might even consider
moving the United Nations building somewhere; maybe they could handle
that. They could complete some of the Federal highways, the U.S.
highways they haven't finished; and they might remove the shackles
from private enterprise so they can get on about their business
and get people back to work. Most of all, I wish they would stop
wasting money usurping the freedom of the citizens at the local
level. Once we have given up the rights HUD will insist on us
giving up, we might just as well throw in the towel--Councils,
Board of Supervisors, State Legislators as well. Just think, HUD
and HEW do what they do without a single elected official.
Barton: Regarding the last paragraph on page 5 where
it states, "The staff is satisfied that HUD's oral report indicates
their understanding and support of Bakersfield's Community
Development Block Grant Program," is the City Manager totally
satisfied that the three-day conference with the monitors means
that we are in accordance with our original application, that we
have no hang ups and that the final report that we will get in
three weeks, or whenever they send us a formal written document,
will be one that says that we meet all the criteria of the original
first-year grant?
City Manager Bergen: I think what I'm saying here is
that we, meaning the staff~ were present, that we are satisfied
that HUD is telling us that the program that we applied for this
year does in fact meet their guidelines. They told us verbally
at this particular time that it meets their guidelines. Prior to
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 10
this time, they have given us written approval that it meets their
guidelines. Even more important, I think, is the indication here
by this "exit conference," and I have no reason to believe that we
will not receive written confirmation of this. I'm not interpreting
a number of items in here. I think that this is what they said.
I view several of these comments that HUD is not coming
in and saying we will assist you. Now that to me is a pretty good
indication that they are going to leave these decisions up to us.
If we need some assistance, we will talk to them. If we don't, we
will plan to work these things out ourselves. I think, coming back
and talking about citizen participation, the City should be able to
do that on our own; I don't think that we need to get somebody from
out of town to come in here and help us on that. Now they might
give us some suggestions on what other communities have done. If
we, in fact~ feel that they have some merit, we may use them. I
view that willingness to assist if requested as a pretty good sign
because many times the Federal Government doesn't come in and ask
or indicate that they will assist you if you request. They come in
and say we will assist you and our assistance will be a condition
of approval; so I feel that this is part of what I base my
conclusion on, that they understand our program here. I've tried
to make it very clear to them, and I think they understood that it
is important that we understand the program itself. Even as
important as the program itself is the indirect control that this
application would have on our day-to-day operations in other areas
of the City. I've tried to make it clear that we want to have a
complete open and frank discussion on that, and I have no reason
to believe that they weren't.
Barton: I appreciate your remarks in regard to the
statement that you made indicating that you feel there is
satisfaction in HUD's oral report. Getting into the area of HUD
assistance, I notice two or three places in your report where you
referred to HUD willing to participate or offer assistance.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page ll
There's one on Item 4, Rehabilitation; "HUD is ready to assist in
establishing the rehabilitation program if requested to do so by
the City." Are you able to give us some idea of the area of
assistance that they are willing to offer?
City Manager Bergen: Let me start to answer this and ask
Mr. Foster to fully explain, if he would, what our position would
be. I think the feeling here is that we probably would welcome
indications on what a program ought to be. We would evaluate that
in light of what we think is workable in this community, what would
be acceptable to this community, what is acceptable to the City
Council; and in that light, we plan to establish this type of program
which would then work for the City of Bakersfield and, we hope,
would be in compliance with HUD requirements.
Barton: Do they have a specific plan or a guideline that
they could lay before us to utilize, or are they just offering advice
in developing a plan or rehabilitation program?
Deputy City Manager Sumbardo: No, they don't have any
model for the type of housing assistance plan that we would like
to work up. We explained to them, as we've explained to the Council
a number of times, the approach the staff is recommending and, in
fact, did recommend in the resolution that you approved earlier,
last November I think it was. In a lot of these areas~ we are
talking about technical assistance. When we were talking with them
about some of the loan areas, and we explained to them the
possibilities of working with the bank on that, a couple of things
came up that we hadn't thought about, such as different ways of
doing it. We are talking basically about
type of things that the staff has to know;
appreciative of advice from others on how
technical assistance~ the
and the staff is always
to administer this
program. We are not talking about policy matters but about
administrative type of things to implement the program.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 12
Barton: On administrative assistance, are they willing
to bring in or loan out to us personnel to assist us in the
technical field or staffing in solving individual particular
problems that we think are problems?
City Manager Bergen: I'm not sure we want someone loaned
out to us as you say. I'm not sure whether they would on that
particular basis.
Barton: I'm not saying that we want to borrow from their
particular organization, but the answer was that they would allow
or lend assistance in solving technical problems. Does this mean
that they have the people available, or if we got into a serious
technical problem, would they loan us people to assist in solving
these problems?
City Manager Bergen: I think the answer is, I'm very
leafy about lending--assistance from people from Los Angeles to
come here. I'm very open to listening to advice and giving us
suggestions on how we may do it with our area here. I wouldn't
want to make a flat statement that we wouldn't accept that kind of
help. I'd sure want to make it very clear that it would be on the
basis of our request, and that if anybody came here, he would be
working for us in that particular area and that he wouldn't be
going off on his own. I'd much rather see that handled by us with
technical assistance and advice to us. I think the example that
we used is that we don't want to get involved with the lending of
the funds. We think that a local bank is much better able to
handle this. They are much more experienced at it and the very
small amount of funds that it would take for us to have a bank
do this. Then we would use these Community Development Funds to
subsidize these loans. It just makes a lot more sense to us; we
don't want to staff up for these kind of functions, and that's
the staff's feelings.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 13
Barton: Mr. Bergen, I don't disagree with you. I believe
that we should utilize every avenue that we have available to us in
our local community. I'm not debating that particular point. I'm
just trying to ascertain what is the assistance that is available
to our community from this particular program in these particular
phases. Item 5, Housing Assistance Plan, again states that "HUD
assistance is available if the City so requests." That is so stated
about three times in your whole report, and I'm trying to get down
as to what assistance is available to us. I'm not arguing the point
that we utilize the people within our community that have expertise
in the many fields we are talking about in a Community Development
Program, but what is available from HUD?
Deputy City Manager Sumbardo: HUD has people who
specialize, if you will, in these certain areas, like in the
environmental area, housing area, financial area, etc. A lot of
times, depending upon how you define that word assistance, we will
just call because many of these regulations are not written by--I
shouldn't say written by attorneys--but they are often not easy to
understand; so it's just calling to get a clarification; or for
example, the form sometimes isn't too clear as to exactly what a
certain line means. I might also say that I'm pretty confident
that in a lot of areas~ even if we ask for assistance, they may not
be able to provide it because they are working with a great many
cities. Our Community Development representative, the main person
we contact, has 15 or 20 other cities~ and I know that on a number
of occasions he hasn't been able to help or get an answer to a
problem right away because he is just too busy in his job. Even
if we ask for assistance, in a number of cases we might not get it.
Barton: All right, I understand that. The point I was
driving at, in the beginning, was that I believe we have expertise
within our community in the financial community to solve our
financial problems. The only one that I have a question on is
Item 7, Citizens Participation. They offer assistance there. Do
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 14
you feel that perhaps they have some additional expertise that we
do not have in our community to offer us where we can bring a higher
level of citizen participation?
City Manager Bergen: First of all, in citizen partici-
pation I would be opposed to having someone coming down from HUD
to run our citizen participation. I think that that could be
done; between the Council and the staff we would have enough ideas
how to do it. Perhaps, when they are dealing with other cities~
they might have some suggestions and thoughts on what another
city is doing, on how they worked out a particular program that
seemed to work in that particular city. We may listen to it, and
if it seems like it would be of some help here, we may come to the
Council and indicate that perhaps we ought to have meetings a little
oftener or we ought to make them during the day or different things
like that that might work. I wouldn't envision that assistance on
the citizen participation would involve anyone coming here and
outlining any programs for us. I think that if someone is
monitoring a number of cities and maybe if there's a particular
city that has had success in getting the citizens involved, that
they would point out what they do in that particular city. Then
we could evaluate it. If we felt it had some merit, we'd do it.
If we felt that it wouldn't work in this particular community, we
might not even accept that particular idea.
Barton: It's not my idea to ask HUD to assist us in any
area. I believe your answer is that you will consider suggestions
in the areas that you think they may offer some assistance and
advice. I don't feel that it is necessary to ask them to come in
and give us any assistance. I believe we have the expertise within
the community to guide us in the program. To somewhat conclude what
I was driving at, I am personally for the utilization of the
program and upgrading our community. I would like to say that you
can blame it on the bureaucrats, but I think you have to recognize
that this community~ each and everyone of us, in a ballot box, has
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 15
sent to Washington for year upon year, whether he be Democrat or
Republican, people in Washington to take care of the supposedly
federal needs. I don't look at Washington to be an alien type
government. Washington is just another arm of our community, and
I believe that we should utilize any program that is set forth
that is being funded by the citizens of our community. My only
hang up in this particular program is that it be utilized in the
areas of our community that need it the most. I've gone through
book after book weighing pounds and pounds; I try to read word by
word, graph by graph, page by page, of the areas that need
assistance. After having gone through it, I find that very little
of it applies to the people in my ward. The people in my ward are
part of the City of Bakersfield. What happens on 21st and Chester
or 2rid and Chester or on Laurel Drive or in Hillcrest or anyplace
else affects the City of Bakersfield. Therefore, I have to
consider that what happens in Bakersfield has an indirect affect
on the people in my ward. This is why I think that we should
participate; we should improve our community to the best of our
ability. I have to disagree with Councilman Medders. We are not
an alien of the Federal Government. We are a participant in if,
and we should therefore participate in the programs that are
available to us.
Sceales: Last week I said that you would come to this
meeting and you wouldn't know much more than you did last week.
I think that is just about the way it is. I want to read one
paragraph after Item l0 on the report. It says, "Mr. Fields,"
who I think is a representative of HUD, "concluded his comments
by saying that the HUD personnel had attempted to review the City's
first-year program in an objective manner. He indicated that
assistance from the Los Angeles Office was available upon call.
Mr. Fields thanked the staff for their time and cooperation. He
indicated that the City will receive a written report of these
comments within the next two or three weeks." I would have liked
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 16
to have had a written report this week. Apparently we don't~ and
all we are getting is a report from the City staff. As I said
before, we know nothing more than what we did last week.
Strong: I did attend that "exit conferences" and I don't
believe that anybody who attended the conference could have walked
away with the feeling that there was any attempt on the part of
anybody to indict the City of Bakersfield. I met with a lot of the
members of that team and heard them discuss various things in that
"exit conference." I think they were very highly intelligent people,
very comprehensive in their explanation of their various positions
and that they had no intentions, from the beginning, to indict the
City or any of its Council members or the staff. I was a little
disappointed that they didn't concentrate on some of the specifics
outlined in my letter. They approached the whole subject of
Community Development in a general overview kind of way so as to
hopefully get the quickest and fastest, most effective, partici-
pation from the staff. I don't know why they should be maligned
because they work for a governmental agency. If that was the case~
some of us sitting up here would fall into the same category. I
think that the comments they made regarding some of the inequities
in the program were glaring and areas in which I think our own
staff would have to admit that there are some deficiencies. One
of the things that came through to me which is the most impressive
is that I think each member of that team was convinced that the
Community Development Block Program is a good program, and most
of their comments had to do with the City of Bakersfield getting
off its duff and going ahead putting that program into action and
concerning itself with the second program year.
These aren't carrots, and I don't think they had anything
to do with this program at all. I'm sure they didn't lobby for the
program. Cities and counties lobbied for the program. It just
happened to fall, as a part of their responsibility, to administer
the program. As I said before, these aren't carrots; these are
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976, Page 17
dollars, tax dollars, our dollars, dollars that came out of this
community and dollars that should come back into this community.
Every community that I can think of in this state is participating
in this program, and I don't know why we should be any exception.
Every tax dollar I can think of has mandates as to how it should be
spent, and these dollars aren't any different. The comments that
I heard, the concerns I heard expressed, were merely saying to
Bakersfield that we are willing to give you the technical assistance
in following these guidelines so that there would be no slowdown in
your program participation. I thought that they were a very good
team. I would like to compliment the staff on its openness and
its cooperation. I think a very good dialogue was established. I
don't see any reason why we should sit here in a prolonged discussion
of the program. I think it's something we could move ahead on and
the entire City of Bakersfield can benefit from.
Bleecker: I think this Council is at a point in time
where it has to decide whether or not it wants to participate in the
largess of the Federal Government. To say that these are not
carrots, they are dollars, is very true; but they are dollars that
have already been spent many times because the Federal Government
is in debt. It's in debt more than any single entity that ever was
devised on the face of the earth, more than any other nation. It
borrows; we can see what happened to New York, which is only a
small part of this great nation. They went to the Federal Government;
they were bailed out. That's our dollars, too. The state of
New York, or the City of New York, chose the path of Federal funding,
matching funds, the highest paid municipal employees in the world,
except perhaps for San Francisco~ which I think may change. These
are all those good things that the government from Washington tells
people they are going to do for them and things they are going to
give them.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 18
When this program was first brought to this Council, it
was explained, though not in too much detail, that it was more or
less like Revenue Sharing, which up until now didn't have too many
strings attached. But the Community Development Program, sponsored
by the Federal Government, has a whole lot of strings attached.
Councilman Medders mentioned the numerous times in the report the
City Manager gave where their assistance was offered, I think it
was six times. What they are really saying is, in my opinion,
they are going to offer their assistance all right, but if you
don't take their advice that comes from administrative order, rules
and regulations (which are not necessarily in compliance with the
Federal Government's own laws), they are going to tell you how to
do it; and if you don't do it that way, you are not going to get
your second-year funding or your third-year funding if the Federal
Government happens to refund this beyond the period of time when
it's supposed to expire. You won't get any funding at all. The
whole idea, as I see it, is that these ideas and things come from
the people, from the bottom up. They do not come from appointed
Federal officials, bureaucrats, if you will, to devise ways and
means, no matter which political party seems to be in power, to
take and take and take from the people and then give part of it
back. It's very noticeable in this political year that there is a
lot of agreement between liberals and conservatives in both political
parties on one major issue, that government is too darn big,
particularly the Federal Government. It grows and it grows and it
grows. The Governor of the State of California recognizes this,
and he has made some moves to stop that growth. A number of
political candidates for President of the United States have
recognized this and have made it part of their platform. I think
the people are behind that type of politician no matter which party
he is in, irregardless of some other funny ideas he may have.
Bakersfield, California, January 26~ 1976 - Page 19
This City is at a point where it could certainly help
that effort. It could help that effort by not taking these funds.
The money is good; the controls that go along with it are bad.
Barton: I have a question of the Vice-Mayor. I presume
he was speaking in respect to his own personal opinion when he
made the statement that the six statements within the report stated
that if we do not agree to HUD's offer of assistance, we would be
mandated to live up to their strings, or however he put it there.
Is this his own personal opinion? Or does he have documented
evidence that the offer of assistance, if not taken, will be forced
upon us?
Bleecker: I can give
page 3, Item 4. Rehabilitation.
the Councilman an illustration. On
The last part of that says, "HUD
is ready to assist in establishing the rehabilitation program if
requested to do so by the City." In the body of part 4 it says,
"The City should thoroughly outline its proposed Housing
Rehabilitation Program in the second-year application. The program
developed in Bakersfield could serve as a model for other
communities." We've seen a lot of model programs. A lot of those
model programs have gone down the drain. "The method by which the
program will be financed should be clearly stated, and criteria
should be established for the granting of loans. The methods by
which minority contractors can participate in the Housing
Rehabilitation Program should also be spelled out. A time frame
should also be established describing actual inspection and loan
activities." Councilman Medders brought out the point that in this
City it is required by Ordinance, if over X number of dollars (I
can't remember what it is right now), for certain projects, that
the project must be put up for bid. I don't like to refer to them
as minority contractors, but I guess they are talking about black
contractors, brown contractors and other contractors that are not
white, if that's what they are talking about. If we have minority
contractors in this area, and I'm sure we do, they have every
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 20
right to bid on a project. They cannot be denied the right to bid
on a project. They should be contacted to bid on a project;
however, historically and according to ordinance, the bid goes to
the lowest, qualified bonded bidder. If HUD can figure out some
other way to do that, I'd like to know what it is. They say that
HUD is ready to assist in establishing the rehabilitation program
if requested to do so by the City. That has to do with participation
of minority contractors. How can they do it? It should be spelled
out. The only way they can do
bidder and they are qualified,
example right there. We see a
it is bid, and if they are the lowest
they get the action. There's an
lot of the same type of thing going
on in the City School District right now. They've got their own
darned judge sitting up there, an employee of the Federal Government,
trying to decide what's best for Bakersfield. I think that they are
shooting in the dark. I think we have a good school system here
(I don't know whether they teach them too much or not sometimes)
as far as the way it's been handled regarding minorities and
nondiscrimination and so forth. They talk about bilingual programs
and so forth and so on. You'd be surprised how many Anglo-Saxon
types, when they get out of high school, can even read and write.
They are putting it on us here in the City and on our school system.
I don't like it; I think this is a forerunner of the same type of
control. They say they might assist, but it means they are going to
tell you how to do it in the long run. There is no doubt in my
mind about it, and to make a long story short, Councilman, that is
my personal opinion.
Barton: Vice-Mayor Bleecker has brought up a couple of
points I'd like to redirect back to the Manager, if I could. Mr.
Bergen, on Item 4 it says, "The City should thoroughly outline its
proposed Housing Rehabilitation Program in the second-year
application." This is pretty self-explanatory. We haven't done
this in the first year, and they were talking about thoroughly
outlining the program in the second year. Is that correct? Is my
interpretation correct?
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 21
City Manager Bergen: I want to caution you, we wrote this.
HUD didn't write these particular points. We tried to keep notes
and therefore write a report to the Council so that you would have
something to discuss this evening. I want to caution you not to
read in a lot of things that perhaps they didn't intend. There has
been a lot of discussion brought up tonight about the assistance.
We could have used the term that they offered to help if we requested
it; but from what I heard when I was there at the meeting, I felt
that in good faith they had made the offer to assist us if we so
request. The important thing that I was listening to was the
offer of assistance; whether this was sending people here from
Los Angeles, I really never felt that that's what they intended.
Maybe they will clarify that in their written report. I think that
when we try to dissect each particular paragraph in here where
we've interpreted what they said, perhaps we are doing a disservice
to them. The gentleman isn't here this evening, and I think
Councilman Rogers and Councilman Strong were there and listened to
the whole thing. I think they could probably give you the feeling or
intent of it. I do know that the staff got the feeling that this
offer was in good faith, and they didn't come down here and say
we're going to do this for you--you're doing this wrong. There is
a tendency in some Federal Government entities to have that kind of
approach, and it was a little refreshing to me to find their
attitude in a positive manner, that of we will assist you if we
can. As I said, I used the word assistance when we wrote this
report, and obviously it's being interpreted differently by several
Councilmen. I hope that this isn't an unfortunate use of the word
on our part in the report, but it was a feeling I got. I think
Councilman Rogers and Councilman Strong could perhaps comment to
that; they were there at the meeting.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 22
Barton: I heard Councilman Strong's remarks in regard to
HUD's staff that reviewed our applications and our progress within
the program, and I felt they were very good and pointed. I
recognize his previous problems in regard to the program, and I
think his remarks were good. I'm not going to take the time to
debate every particular item in this. It's, as Vice-Mayor Bleecker
pointed out, his opinion that there was a carrot-type of concept
dangling before us and that the Federal Government was going to jump
down our throats eventually and dictate policies. I'm using a
broad analysis of what he said.
Your last paragraph stated, "The staff is satisfied that
HUD's oral report indicates their understanding and support of
Bakersfield's Community Development Block Grant Program." You would
say that you are satisfied to recommend to us that we are progressing
and that we are within the program and able to live within the program
and utilize the particular grant funds available to us as we are
operating now and as we propose
City Manager Bergen:
definite yes answer to that. I
to apply for the second-year grant?
I think I could give you a very
think the staff was satisfied that
these gentlemen came here, asked somewhat piercing questions in
some of the private interviews; but I think that was the ground
rules that we wanted to set. You know, "tell it like it is;" but
when they came in and made their overall comment, I had the feeling
that they made these recommendations in good faith and that they
weren't being dictatorial, in any sense of the manner. I was
impressed with the caliber of several of the gentlemen who were
here. I can't say that I was impressed with each one of them that
was here, but I can with several. There are two observations that
my recommendations are tied to. I realize that Mr. Russell hasn't
had a meeting with the gentlemen he was going to meet with in
Los Angeles. I personally feel that Richard Russell is doing, let
me say, an outstanding job in this area of equal employment. It's
a very difficult subject. You can talk to five different people
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 23
and get five different opinions on how you do it; but it's not an
easy subject for us. I think he is doing a good job. I do feel
that there is a restriction on these funds. I think it's almost in
the preamble that these funds are intended to be expended on the
basis of need. That's very clearly put into the particular act.
At the time the Congress adopted this act they put it in. So there
are some strict strings that these funds be spent on the basis of
need. I do think that that exists where these particular
restrictions don't exist for Revenue Sharing~ some other grants
that we have for sewage treatment plants, etc. That particular
string isn't there. I think the whole purpose of this Community
Development Grant Program was so that it would be expended on the
basis of need. That was what our application was based on, and
I think we are meeting that.
Barton: One other point, in response to Vice-Mayor
Bleecker, I'd like to state that I agree with him to a point that
if Congressman Ketchum, our two State Senators, the other Congressmen
from California and the other forty-nine states could agree that we
should not have these programs, then I would say fine; we won't
participate. Until such time as the Congress of the United States
is so changed that they do not do this, I'm going to say that we
participate. I can't see giving Bakersfield dollars to Fresno or
Tulare or someplace else. I'm going to say that I would participate
as long as possible without total mandates that we are going to have
to construct certain things in certain areas. As long as we have
the latitude of improving our community~ I will so encourage that
the Council consider participation in the program.
Strong: I think we've said it a hundred times, but I'd
just like to say this in regard to Mr. Fields' review. I was at that
meeting and it was my impression that he outlined various plans that
had been submitted to him by Bakersfield. He said at the end of his
discussion regarding each one of these topics, each one of these areas,
that had to do with the original application, he wanted the staf£ to
372
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 24
know that there was technical assistance available in all of these
areas. I think what we have to remember, also, in his position, he
sits there talking to staff members knowing full well that nobody,
unless perhaps employees of HUD, would know all of the various
programs that HUD administers. You know when you start to think
about the housing assistance program, 235 Programs, 235-A's~
203-B's, 236's--the workable programs--he sits there knowing full
well that possibly, it's just possible~ that our staff is not
familiar with all those programs. I think what he wanted to make
clear was that in those areas where we needed technical assistance,
in those specific areas that we had decided to participate, that
there was technical assistance in planning; there was technical
assistance in the environmental impact review; there was technical
assistance in the Title 800 Housing Programs; and if we had questions,
I think this was what he had in mind. I don't think they have the
time, nor do I think they have the desire to come and spend a lot of
time trying to tell Bakersfield what to do. I got the feeling that
he recognized that the programs administered by HUD were broad in
scope, numerous, and that he wanted our staff to know, in the
spirit of cooperation, that if they needed specific technical
assistance in the areas in which they had applied that the assistance
was available. I think that was all he meant and anything else,
believe, is just kind of pushing it out of proportion to what he
said.
Rogers: I've been sitting here trying to get a clear
picture of this thing. Sometimes you can get a little too close
to the forest and the trees and you don't really see the clear
picture. First of all, I'd like to ask a question of Mr. Hoagland.
Some of the funds have already been contracted for and have been
spent. If we do not pursue this program beyond where we are right
now, to what extent are we liable, or rather where do we stand,
regarding the Letters of Credit that we have~ money spent? What
do we have to give back?
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 25
City Attorney Hoagland: I wish I could answer that
question, but I can't. I can give a guess and I don't think it's a
very educated guess. I would think that we could withdraw from the
program; the money would then go elsewhere, except that which has
already been contracted for and spent, so to speak. That's just a
guess; I just don't know. I don't know of any cities that have
withdrawn in mid-stream, and you're talking about withdrawing
right as of now.
Rogers: Like tonight.
City Attorney Hoagland: I wish I had some insight into
that, but I do not have any.
Rogers: A quick comment on this statement. I did attend
the meeting, and Mr. Fields did state at the end of most of the
topics that the assistance from the Department of Housing and Urban
Development was available if it was requested. It appears to me
that it's awfully easy to get a request. Sometimes it may be sent
whether the City wants all this help or not.
some disgruntled citizen or someone else who
could request it; it could occur at any time.
I could make a request;
thought it was in order
This did not give
me a lot of comfort, even though Mr. Fields did make the statement
after just about every topic.
As Councilmen, we are elected to represent our ward and
we're elected to show some leadership. I think it's important that
we do exert leadership for the City of Bakersfield and what's best
for the future of the City of Bakersfield. Here again, backing off
and trying to get a clear picture of this Community Development
Block Grant Program, this is the way it appears to me. This program
is a clever scheme to destroy local control of cities. It's a
clever scheme to lead us deeper and deeper into the mire of socialism
by creating more debt and higher Federal taxation. It's a clever
scheme to create problems by dividing the citizens of the community.
Councilman Medders commented, and I think rightly so, on Item 7 on
page 4 of Mr. Bergen's report. This will divide the citizens of
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 26
this community and all other communities who take this bait. I
think it's a clever scheme that, after creating these problems,
the Federal and State Lawmakers use the problems that are created
as the excuse to pass more laws to take freedom from all of us. I
don't mean to make this a blanket indictment toward all lawmakers;
I guess in some sense I'm one too. I think Assemblyman Thomas and
Representative Ketchum are outstanding examples of the other type.
Some people appear to place very little value on their freedom
because these people say if we don't take this money, it will go to
other cities. If these other cities want to sell their freedom,
it's their decision. I don't think very many people in the City of
Bakersfield are ready to sell their freedom. There is just one
statement in this report that I hope comes true, and that's on
page 3, under Item 4: "The program developed in Bakersfield could
serve as a model for other communities." I hope this program that
I just outlined here, for us to withdraw from this program, is a
model that all the communities in the State of California will
recognize and £ollow because that's the only way they are going to
preserve their freedom.
Sceales: I don't know who to direct this question to,
but we hired Quad Consultants at a cost of $121,00.00. Of course,
that's not too bad an amount of money to spend if you feel that this
is going to be the plan for the City of Bakersfield for the next 20
to 25 years. What I want to know is if anyone can tell me on the
staf£, out of that $121,000.00, if they reject this HUD Program, do
we have to pay the whole thing or do we get any of it from HUD?
City Manager Bergen: Is the Council thinking about
rejecting the program that we have already approved? You know there
are various alternatives open to the Council. You could indicate
that we are not going to proceed and make any more applications.
You could say that we are going to stop it here. I wouldn't think,
but this is a decision that the Council has to make, that you are
going to go back and rescind action that you have already taken.
Bakersfield,
California,
January 26,
1976 - Page 27
Sceales: Say you stop it as of right now, tonight.
City Manager Bergen: Excepting the contracts that we
have out? You wouldn't terminate a contract.
Sceales: Are we getting money from HUD?
City Manager Bergen: I think for the part of the program
that you don't terminate you would be getting those funds. I
think the Attorney directed his comments generally to that. He
didn't know for sure. It would be in the manner that you are doing
it.
Sceales: You know we are being asked to make a decision
up here, and we don't even really know what we are doing. You say
that~ but I don't want to spend the taxpayers money and not know
what I'm doing.
City Manager Bergen: You will be getting this written
opinion or written comment from HUD within two or three weeks, and
at that time, you might want to look at it. I don't know.
Sceales: Will they tell us how much money we are going to
get from them?
City Manager Bergen: I think that has already cranked in.
They have indicated what the first year's program is; they have
told us what the second year's program is. So I don't think you
are going to get any more information on that at least for the next
two or three months. They do modify the amounts of money at times.
Sceales: I know how much we are going to get for the
first year, but have we received any?
City Manager Bergen: I think we have ....
Deputy City Manager Sumbardo: We received it all.
Mayor Hart: Did you say all the money that's due the
first year? Is that what you are saying?
Sceales: No, we have received it all.
Deputy City Manager Sumbardo: We have a letter or letters
of credit for the full $331,000.00. The amount of the Quad Contract,
by the way, was not $121,00.00; it was $59,000.00.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 28
City Manager Bergen: I think, to answer that, the program
of the storm drains and this type of thing, were approved by HUD.
They are in the program, and I think what Mr. Sumbardo is indicating
is that we have a Letter of Credit for that if we care to proceed
with it. If we don't, we wouldn't spend the money except for areas
that we have expended money.
Sceales: Well, this is just a report for tonight. We
are not being asked to .....
City Manager Bergen: No, this is not the formal report
from HUD on the monitoring. They have indicated that we would get
this in two to three weeks. This is merely a report. I know there
was interest of the Council last week. It seemed unreasonable to
expect HUD to have a written report with their monitoring day on
the Thursday. They have a lot of departments to get together, and
I don't think that it's unreasonable on their part to take several
weeks to answer a monitoring session. They spent three days here,
or the better part of three days, and they had eight or ten people
in various departments. I think that it's in order for them to
take several weeks to answer you formally.
Sceales: I make a motion that we move on to the next item
on the Agenda.
Mayor Hart: We have a motion before us that we move to
the next item. I appreciate that we have lights on, Mr. Bleecker,
but we have a motion we should act on.
Bleecker: Then I would speak against the motion, Mr. Mayor.
There is something that I might be able to clarify here or at least
help to clarify regarding a question that Councilman Sceales asked,
according to my understanding.
The fact that the City is holding Letters of Credit is one
thing. When you implement and obligate yourself to spend part of
those funds is another thing. How many dollars, Mr. Sumbardo or
Mr. Foster, have we paid Quad Consultants so far out of the Letters
of Credit?
Bakersfield,
California,
January 26, 1976 - Page 29
Community Development Director Foster: I can't answer
that exactly, but we did sign a contract for $59,000.00. We have
paid them for seven tasks, and it's a substantial amount of the
$59,000.00. We pay as they bill us.
Bleecker: I would make an observation.
part then?
Community Development Director Foster: Yes.
Bleecker: I would make an observation. I don't know
whether the Federal Government works their Letters of Credit like
they do in the business I happen to be in~ but a Letter of Credit
isn't any good if it's a Sales Letter of Credit until you produce
the merchandise you agreed to provide. The merchandise the City
agreed to provide is a program, an implemented program. I would
think that if the City has already contracted and signed a legal
and binding contract with a purveyor, a contractor, that we would
be obliged, under State law, to live up to that contract. However,
the only contract the City of Bakersfield has made, to my knowledge,
is with Quad Consultants and with ourselves for certain monies to
be spent in reimbursing our staff for time spent. Those are the
only two things I can recall. Are there any others, Mr. Foster?
Community Development Director Foster: Yes, the two
contract planners. We have contracts with two individuals. Those
are not civil service employees; they are contract employees.
Bleecker: What do those amount to?
Community Development Director Foster: They run something
like $33,000.00 for two men, and they are about halfway through,
August to August, and this would be the fifth month.
Bleecker: A total of $33,000.00 for the two of them,
combined.
Community Development Director Foster: Yes.
Bleecker: And then we are obligated for $59,000.00, and
that's all, right?
It's a substantial
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 30
Community Development Director: All, right. I think
that's all the contracts.
Bleecker: I'm talking about outside contracts. I don't
think there is any reason to believe that we can't draw on those
Letters of Credit tomorrow and go ahead and pay the people we have
contracted for with legally, unless there's some HUD requirement
that says otherwise. On all this $331,000.00 we only have two
contracts, one for $59,000.00 and one for $33,000.00, and you say
most of the $59,000.00 has already been paid or a lot of the
$59,000.00 has been paid?
Community Development Director Foster: Yes.
Bleecker: Let's say $40,000.00, as a round figure. Does
that sound plausible?
Community Development Director Foster: Yes.
Bleecker: Somewhere in that neighborhood. So I can't
see where we could lose very much, unless the Federal Government
sued us to reclaim on the Letters of Credit that we have already
drawn on, if we decided to give up this program. If they do, I
think we could defend it pretty well. I just can't see where the
taxpayer would stand any large financial loss if the City extricated
itself from this program before any other contracts are signed.
Mayor Hart: Let's move on to the next item, please.
Councilman Strong, Chairman of the Auditorium-Recreation
Committee, read Report No. 1-76, regarding Ice Skating Fees, as
follows:
The Council Auditorium-Recreation Committee held
a meeting to discuss fees for public ice skating.
Costs for presenting this activity have continued
to rise, although admission fees have not changed
since the building opened in 1962. The utility
bill plus the cost for security personnel are two
of the main items of cost increases.
The policy of the Recreation Division, of which this
function is a part, is to recover 50 percent of
cost for administering the program. To bring this
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 31
program up to this ratio, it is recommended that
the following fees be established:
Children (18 and under)
Adults (19 and over)
Skate rental
Hourly rental to private
parties
$ 1.00 per session
2.00 per session
.50 per session
50.00 per hour
The Citizens Auditorium-Recreation Committee have
also reviewed these recommendations and approved
their adoption.
A resolution establishing these rates is attached.
Upon a motion by Councilman Strong, Report No. 1-76 of
the Auditorium-Recreation Committee regarding Ice Skating Fees,
was accepted.
Adoption of Resolution No. 6-76 of
the Council of the City of Bakers-
field establishing Fees to be charged
the public by operators of the Ice
Skating Facilities at the Civic
Auditorium and rescinding Resolution
No. 10-63.
Upon a motion by Councilman Strong, Resolution No. 6-76
of the Council of the City of Bakersfield establishing Fees to be
charged the public by operators of the Ice Skating Facilities at
the Civic Auditorium and rescinding Resolution No. 10-63, was
adopted by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Rogers, Strong, Barton, Bleecker, Christensen,
Medders
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Sceales
Upon a motion by Councilman Rogers, Annual Report for 1975
of Miscellaneous, Fire and Police Civil Service Commission~ was
received and referred to the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel
Committee for further study and the Mayor was requested to write
letters of appreciation to each Commissioner expressing the Council's
gratitude for their service.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 32
Consent Calendar.
The following items were listed on the Consent Calendar:
(a) Allowance of Claims Nos. 2804 to 2946,
inclusive, in the amount of $118,209.47.
(b)
Claim for Personal Injuries from Gilbert
Lopez, P.O. Box 136, Arvin. (Refer to
City Attorney)
(c)
Claim for Damages from Betty Louise
Stanfield, 3917 Barbara Avenue, Bakersfield.
(Refer to City Attorney)
(d)
Claim for Personal Property from Roy Allen
Cox, 44½ Garden Drive, Bakersfield. (Refer
to City Attorney)
(e) Plans and Specifications for Construction
of Akers Road Park Site Sump Fence.
(f)
Map of Tract No. 3743 and Contract and
Specifications for improvements therein -
located along west side of South Chester
Avenue and north of Merrimac Drive.
Upon a motion by Councilman Christensen, Items (a), (b),
(c), (d),
following roll call vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Rogers, Sceales, Strong,
Christensen, Medders
Noes: None
Absent: None
The following is a transcript
the Community Development Block Grant Funds:
Rogers: Before we leave this discussion of
Development Block Grant Program, I guess I was caught
switch a little while ago, I wanted to make sure that
(e) and (f) of the Consent Calendar, were adopted by the
Barton, Bleecker,
of the discussion regarding
the Community
asleep at the
everyone on
the Council more or less had their say before a motion was made to
take action. I believe that has been accomplished, and before we
go any further, I would like to make a motion.
I move at this time that the City pay all obligations that
they have incurred regarding this Community Development Block Grant
Program and, second, that we withdraw from this program. I so move.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 33
Strong: I just wanted to ask of Mr. Rogers if he meant
paying the obligations that have accrued to the City from the Letters
of Credit or from the General Taxes, from the General Tax Fund?
Rogers: From the Letters of Credit, from the funds of
the Grant.
Strong: Is it your feeling that we should participate
partially in the first year's program and not completely? Is it
possible?
Rogers: Only to the extent we have participated up until
tonight and that we have obligated ourselves for up until tonight
and no further. I don't think there's anything to be gained by going
any further, and I can see a danger here that we have a lot to lose.
Strong: Could we perhaps get an opinion as to whether or
not this is possible to just only partially participate in a program,
say that we made a mistake, back out and send back the unused
portions? It seems to me it's like breaking off a piece of bread and
sending back the loaf saying we don't want it any more.
Rogers: Exactly.
City Manager Bergen: I can't give you a real answer. I
just would say that we are going to have to consult with the
Attorney and try to get an answer for you next week, and I would
be making a guess at this particular stage until I get a complete
report on where we stand.
Strong: Let me just make one other observation. It's
probably not appropriate here to say this, but during the time that
the staff is considering whether or not this could be done, that the
Council ask the staff to perhaps research what has been done in
other areas when various Councils have refused to participate in the
program. It may not be just as simple as withdrawing from the
program as it might appear on the surface,
would know all of the legal ramifications
to withdraw from the program.
and at least the Council
facing it, if it decides
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 34
Barton: I think Mr. Strong is trying to get the answer
that popped into my mind right off the bat on Mr. Rogers' motion.
If this program is terminated, as of tonight, we have hired Quad
Consultants for $59,000.00 and two other people you're talking
about for thirty some thousand dollars. This is an obligation that
we would have to pay out of the revenues of the City, as I would
interpret it. Could staff say I'm right or am I wrong?
City Manager Bergen: I couldn't recommend that you get
out of the program this evening without the staff evaluating just
the ramifications are, because I'm unable to tell you at this
what
time.
Barton: I would have to speak in opposition to Mr. Rogers'
motion. I think it's the whole ball game if we start talking about
second-year applications; but we have already gotten into the first-
year application, and I'd have to again feel positive on the aspect
of the Community Development Fund that we are talking about. Let me
just cite you one example. If you happened to take the time to read
the last Quad Report, on page 30 they were talking about a total of
approximately 228,600 lineal feet of curb and gutter in the
incorporated area which, if you go back and look at it, is all in
Wards 1, 2 and 5. This is Councilman Medders' Ward, Councilman
Strong's Ward. I just can't see cutting off our nose to spite our
face. We're going back to item 4 where you are talking about
"The program developed in Bakersfield could serve as a model for
other communities." I'd like to add a couple of words to that if
this motion passes tonight. The program developed in Bakersfield
can serve as a model of stupidity for other communities.
Bleecker: It's entirely obvious that the City Manager is
favorable to the program, but nobody asked you about your
recommendation, Mr. Bergen, on that last comment. They asked you
about money. I'm telling you, you're making those comments at your
own peril.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 35
What I want to say is let's not get this too complicated.
If you want to get out of the program, you send them their darned
money back. I don't see any big legal implications involved in it;
I hope none are made. Hopefully, and I think we can get the money
in hand that we have already contracted for, it makes sense; it's
reasonable and sound. Those monies we have not contracted to spend,
they get the money back. Even if we lose the money, I'm still
favorable to the motion. I voted against the program to start with,
and I intend to vote against it tonight. Hopefully, it would have
worked, but it's not going to work because there are too darned many
controls that go along with it; and I think that's the consideration
that this Council is going to have to make here tonight. I think
it's obvious that certain Councilmen would rather have all the money
and let the Federal Government run the ranch around here. I'm not
favorable to that. I have never been favorable to it. As far as
Revenue Sharing Funds are concerned, I've approved every Revenue
Sharing Fund that has come to this City because it was spent without
any strings attached. There weren't any; I didn't see any; we built
the Police Building with it. On sewer programs, in the past, I've
gone along with everyone of them we have had as long as I've been
on this Council. But these long term, more than one year, string
attached-type programs I'm not favorable to and I never have been. I
intend to support the motion. Let's don't get it too complicated
by waiting a week, or something like that, to see what the legal
implications are, because we won't know anything more in a week
than what we know right now. I move for the question, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Hart: We have a motion for the previous question;
we should vote immediately.
Strong: Point of clarification, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Hart: This is a question of personal privilege
you ask for?
Strong: Yes sir.
Mayor Hart: All right. It has a priority.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 36
Strong: I don't know whether this would come within the
purvey of that priority, but I noticed that Dr. Ratty came down
front. Would it be appropriate if I asked the Chair to recognize
Dr. Ratty in that he may have some .....
Mayor Hart: Not under the circumstances, Councilman Strong.
I would like to recognize Dr. Ratty for his contributions to the
community and the position he holds with the Downtown Business
Association, but parliamentary procedure calls only for your own
personal inquiry on a matter of personal privilege.
Strong: I will try to clarify what it was that I meant
when I .... whether Mr. Bleecker knows it or not, and of course I
don't know for sure, but there have been suits brought in other areas
to force cities to take money when the need was there, and it was
obvious and it was blatant, in that it's not, in every case, left
up to the municipality to decide whether or not they should take
certain monies and administer them the way they please. I think
it's an appropriate thing to do. I don't know what the success or
failure o£ these efforts have been, but I do know that there are
on-going cases right now. There have been some filed, and I think
it might serve the interests of this Council to find out how
those cases have been decided. I would also like to point out a
point or two regarding other things.
Bleecker: Point of order, Mr. Mayor. I think the
Councilman is making a statement more than anything else instead
of
Mr.
a point of personal privilege.
Mayor Hart: He wanted
Strong, let's not enlarge on
Strong: Okay.
Mayor Hart:
to qualify his vote.
that.
Please,
We have a call for the previous question.
Please call the roll Mrs. Anderson.
Christensen: Would you please state the previous question.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 37
Mayor Hart: The motion by Councilman Rogers was for the
City to pay all its obligations involved at this point in this
program and to withdraw from it.
Rogers: Pay the obligations from the Letters of Credit.
Mayor Hart: All right, Mr. Christensen? Please start
your roll call again.
Ayes: Councilmen Rogers, Bleecker, Medders
Noes: Councilmen Sceales, Strong, Barton, Christensen
Absent: None
Sceales:
that
next
(Stated during the roll call vote) Based upon the fact
I want to know how much money is involved.
Mayor Hart:
item.
The motion is lost. Shall we proceed to the
Action on Bids.
Upon a motion by Councilman Medders,
bid of D. E. Rockwood
for construction of Patio Roof at the Bakersfield Civic Auditorium,
was accepted and the Mayor was authorized to execute the contract.
New Business.
Acceptance of Donation of Gym Equip-
ment and Sauna from Bakersfield Police
Department Benefit Association to the
Bakersfield Police Department.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, donation of Gym
Equipment and Sauna from the Bakersfield Police Department Benefit
Association to the Bakersfield Police Department, was accepted and
the Mayor was requested to write a letter expressing the Council's
appreciation.
Adoption of Resolution of Intention
No. 911 of the Council of the City
of Bakersfield, declaring its
intention to order the vacation of
the Alley lying between vacated
Sacramento Street and Sonora Street,
in the City of Bakersfield.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Sceales,
Resolution of Intention No. 911 of the Council of the City of
Bakersfield, declaring its intention to order the vacation of an
Alley lying between vacated Sacramento Street and Sonora Street,
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 38
in the City of Bakersfield and setting March 1, 1976 for hearing
on the matter before the Council, was adopted by the following roll
call vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Councilmen Rogers,
Medders
Seeales, Barton, Bleecker, Christensen
None
Councilman Strong
The following is a transcript of the discussion regarding
the Community Development Block Grant Funds:
Bleecker: I would appreciate it very much if Councilman
Sceales would clarify the question he raised; I believe he said
how many dollars are involved. Did you mean how many dollars is the
City currently obligated under contract for?
Sceales: Mr. Vice-Mayor, I had asked the staff how much
money we have spent, which they tentatively had answered; but I
wanted to know how much money we were going to receive in this
grant. What it was going to actually cost the City of Bakersfield.
At that time I'll be very happy to vote one way or the other, but I
just want to know. It's still frozen; we haven't unfrozen the funds.
We are talking about one week, and I don't think that's an
unrealistic answer since, as you and I are representing the taxpayers,
I'd just like to know what I'm voting about.
Bleecker: We're looking at $59,000.00 total to Quad,
the way I understand it, and we're looking at $33,000.00 to two
contract planners; that's $92,000.00 total. Mr. Foster indicated
that somewhere around $40,000.00 has been paid already to Quad;
that leaves $19,000.00. About half of the money has been paid
already to the contract planners. Let's call that $16,000.00.
That would be $35,000.00 left, roughly, that we haven't drawn on
our Letters of Credit, if our $40,000.00 assumption and our
$16,000.00 assumption are fairly close. Is that right, Mr. Foster?
Is that somewhere near a ball park figure? I mean that's the
general idea of the thing; we've paid Quad Consultants a lot of
the money and about half the money we paid out from the Letters
of Credit to the other people. All right. What does Quad
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 39
Consultants have to do in order to get the rest of their money?
Or what do we have to do, like in the morning? How does the
Letter of Credit work in that respect?
Community Development Director Foster: In our contract,
they said they would produce so much and then we would pay them,
but we would withhold a percentage. So they have done most of the
work and we've paid for not all they have done. That we've withheld.
I can't answer the legality of stopping the contract tomorrow.
Bleecker: We're not talking about stopping the contract.
The motion was to pay everybody that we have contracted to do
business with. Isn't that right, Councilman? That was the motion.
We have a contract with Quad; we have a contract with two consultants,
legal and binding contracts. The motion was not to cut any of that
off; the motion was to fulfill the obligations that we have already
contracted for but that we would not go any further in making any
further contracts. How far along are Quad Consultants, Mr. Foster?
Community Development Director Foster: About 75 per cent.
Bleecker: When is their final report supposed to be due
according to the schedule that they outlined for us? When are we
supposed to get the whole ball of wax?
Community Development Director Foster: I can't really say
because of the speed-up work they have done. I really can't answer
that.
Bleecker: The other two people that are on contract,
they've fulfilled about half of their time on the contract?
Community Development Director Foster: Right.
Bleecker: I don't see how we could be obligated. If HUD
would refuse to pay on the Letters of Credit that we have already
committed ourselves for on contract, I don't see how we could lose
any more than $35,000.00, ball park figure. That's what it appears
to me. I just really wanted to clarify what Councilman Sceales
wanted to know as far as money is concerned.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 40
I'm sorry that Councilman Strong isn't here, because he's
the one that brought up the Federal Government. I hate to
paraphrase, but the idea that passed through my mind as Councilman
Strong spoke was that there have been occasions, according to his
knowledge, where the Federal Government decided what was best for
the people of cities other than what the Council decided and forced
these monies because they decided (these are my words, not his) that
they knew what was better for the people than the City, County or
the State or whatever the jurisdiction may have been. I'm sure that
he said that or something of that nature. If the Federal Government
wants to go somewhere around here and build an apartment building,
I don't see any reason why they can't do that, if they just want to
do it all themselves. I don't know any reason why they can't do it
unless this Council would disapprove it for some reason, for
traffic or whatever; but it points out one of the points I've been
trying to make here all night. Even though we may withdraw from
the program, the Federal Government could come in here and force
these monies upon the people of the City of Bakersfield. All I
can say to that is who the hell do they think they are.
Rogers: It's along the same lines exactly. I think
probably what will be required, and I don't mean to put words into
Councilman Sceales mouth--he's able to speak for himself--but I
think before he will be ready to vote on the motion, which I'm sure
will be brought up again next week, he would like to have an exact
accounting of how much money has been spent or is obligated to be
spent and also perhaps a phone call, by Mr. Hoagland, to the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (I hope they have some
other experiences like this) to get some idea from them where we
stand as far as the Letters of Credit and the amount of money that
we have coming that we can use to pay off these obligations. I
believe that's what Councilman Sceales wants so that he will have
an exact figure as to how much we've spent, if we can pay that bill
with the grant funds that have been advanced to us, and if so, fine.
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 41
I think those are the answers that he needs before he will be ready
to vote. I feel, that's why I voted tonight and that's why I made
the motion. If it's so tough to extricate ourselves from a program
like this after having barely stuck our big toe in the water,
heaven only knows what we would be into if we let this thing go any
further. This is why I'm for getting out just as quickly as we can.
Councilman Christensen made a motion to adjourn the
Council meeting, which failed to carry by the following roll call
vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Barton, Christensen
Noes: Councilmen Rogers, Sceales, Bleecker, Medders
Absent: Councilman Strong
Sceales: I think Mr.
I was going to give an example.
Rogers pretty well summarized it.
We have a contract with Quad
Consultants for $121,000.00, 75% completed, that's $90,750.00, plus
we have two contracts .....
It's only $59,000.00.
75% completed of a $121,000.00 contract.
No, it's $59,000.00 with Quad. That's all
Bleecker:
Sceales:
Bleecker:
it is.
Sceales:
is $90,750.00.
Am I mistaken? 75% of a $121,000.00 contract
City Manager Bergen: The contract with Quad is for
$59,000.00. I think the $121,000.00 that Councilman Sceales is
refe~ing to is the total amount that we were talking about spending
on planning, which includes the contract planners. I think if you
add that up and then some reimbursement internally, you would come
up with $121,000.00.
Sceales: I see. Now this $33,000.00 that you hired
these contractors for, are you going to be able to break that or
are you going to have to pay them $33,000.00 anyway?
Bakersfield, California, January 26, 1976 - Page 42
City Manager Bergen: No, I'd have to read the contract,
but there is a termination clause in there. Do you remember what
it was, Mr. Foster?
Sceales: Well, gentlemen, I will make your job easier.
If you would please have the details ready for next Monday night,
I'd appreciate it.
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the
Council, upon a motion by Councilman Sceales~ the meeting was
adjourned at 10:30 P.M.
Calif.
ATTEST:
I Y ~ERK and~Ex-JYgficio Clerk of the Council
of the City of Bak~4~sfield, California
ma