The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09/22/2014BAKERSFIELD Staff: Steven Teglia, Assistant to the City Manager 1. ROLL CALL City Council Me Terry Maxwell, C Jacquie Sullivan Russell Johnson Regular Meeting of the Legislative and Litigation Committee of the City Council - City of Bakersfield Monday, September 22, 2014 12:00 p.m. City Hall North - Conference Room A 1600 Truxtu n Ave n u e Bakersfield CA 93301 AGENDA 2. ADOPT AUGUST 18, 2014 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. Discussion regarding a Resolution in Support of the Local O Gas Industry - Gennaro 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Discussion regarding a Resolution in Support of Proposi� Gennaro � BAKERSFIELD /�/ St�v� Te�� Staff: Steven Teglia Assistant to the City Manager Committee I Terry Maxwe Jacquie Sulli Russell Johns REGULAR MEETING OF THE LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE Friday, August 18, 2014 12:00 p.m. City Hall North - Conference Room A 1600 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL Committee members: Councilmember Terry Maxwell, Chair Councilmember Jacquie Sullivan Councilmember Russell Johnson City Staff: Alan Tandy, City Manager Steve Teglia, Assistant to the City Manager Chris Huot, Assistant to the City Manager Virginia Gennaro, City Attorney Andrew Heglund, Deputy City Attorney Doug Mclsaac, Community Development Director Additional Attendees: Nick Ortiz, Western States Petroleum Association Tracy Leach, Kern Citizens for Energy Representative from Senator Vidak's Office \ I ' "' _ I_ _ ""' _ I ll_ _ \ I _ _I' _. Legislative and Litigation Comm Agenda Sur Monday, A� 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Efforts to Support Local Oil Companies (Related to Restri< Directives) Assistant to the City Manager Teglia stated that this item was plc agenda by Committee Chair Maxwell, who asked to receive an � the oil industry about the status of their operations and what chc being faced both statewide and locally. Mr. Teglia introducec representative from the Western States Petroleum Association ( Tracy Leach, from Kern Citizens for Energy. Mr. Ortiz reported that Kern County produces, refines and transport� oil in California. The industry is heavily regulated by the Californi Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR). SB-4, which was enacted in September, 2013, provides for a ne� structure that governs well stimulation, more commonly known � fracturing, or fracking. The various Petroleum Associations are cc ensuring that all timelines and provisions of the Bill are implemE challenge is that the permanent regulations do not go into effe� 2015, so the language of the Bill is still undergoing revisions. The rec ultimately cover oil and gas development, ground water protectio and endangered species. Mr. Ortiz asked for the City's support on Kern County's efforts to c Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which is a requirement of SB-4. will be conducted by an EIR Consultant who will be sequesterE applicants to ensure impartiality. The report will be very comprer will allow the County to retain local control over all oil and gas ope local water, air district and fish and wildlife agencies will also use tl their permitting needs. The final analysis will be conducted in certc by the agencies that are responsible for the necessary permitting. study of well stimulation, independent of both the industry and r being overseen by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory California Council on Science and Technology. WSPA is collaborating with Tracy Leach of Kern Citizens for Energy, of local leaders and small business owners, who are supportive of t benefits, whether they are jobs, tax revenue or philanthropy. Speci than 50,000 people are employed in the industry, both directly ar . . ,:1L. ...,. I ..... I� ...... .... � � .,... � .... F (h A /l/l/l /l/l/l /l/l/l A �.I �.1:1: ,.., ... �..I I. , ..... ,.....� 1L. �..... (h A Legislative and Litigation Comm Agenda Sur Monday, A� Statewide campaigns are underway to educate the public. Committee member Johnson recused himself from any further disc� Committee member Sullivan voiced her support to join the coalition Committee Chair Maxwell asked Deputy City Attorney Heglunc support for the coalition might cause any problems for the City. Mr. Heglund said he would research the information in more suggested that a resolution would be the formal method of suK County in their efforts. City Manager Tandy asked if consideration had been given to that would object to the oil industry's efforts. Mr. Ortiz noted that all opposing viewpoints and comments considered, such as those from the agricultural and environmental i Ms. Leach reported that there has been at least one farming op has signed on in support. Others will be approached, such as Grir Bolthouse Farms. Committee Chair Maxwell requested that a sample resolution be the Committee for discussion at the next meeting. Once the langu put in final form, the resolution can be forwarded to the full discussion and approval. 5. COMMITTEE COMMENTS Committee member Sullivan said she looks forward to further discussion on 6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 12:26 p.m. MEMORANDUM CITY ATTORNEY September 18, 2014 TO: LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE Terry Maxwell, Chair Jacquie Sullivan Russell Johnson FROM: VIRGINIA GENNARO, CITY ATTOR Y � ANDREW HEGLUND, DEPUTY CITY A NEY SUBJECT: RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE LOCAL OIL AND GAS INDUSTF At the August 18, 2014, Legislative and Litigation Committee r representatives from the local oil and gas industry gave a pres� regarding the status of their operations and what challenges they fa� statewide and locally. Staff was directed to bring back a draft resolution in support of the indu their efforts, and it is attached for the Committee's considerati� recommendation. AH:dll Attachment cc: Alan Tandy, City Manager Steven Teglia, Assistant to the City Manager Amber Lawrence, Administrative Assistant II RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY. WHEREAS, the oil and gas industry is a key component of the economy of the City of Bakersfield, the County of Kern and the State of California; and WHEREAS, activities related to oil and gas production in Kern County provide for a significant number of local jobs, property and sales tax revenues, and serve as an economic driver for our local economy; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Bakersfield understands the importance of this economic engine and supports governmental policies that promote and stimulate the safe and responsible growth of the oil and gas industry in our City, County, State and Country; and WHEREAS, the County of Kern, with support from local industries, including the oil and gas industry, is currently conducting a project-level environmental review of oil and gas production within the unincorporated areas of Kern County; and WHEREAS, the purpose for this environmental review is to provide for a clear, safe and understandable plan for oil and gas production activities to operate within and to minimize any conflicts between the activities of mineral rights holders and those of surface rights holders; and WHEREAS, the City is aware that oil and unincorporated areas of Kern County and their review does not impinge upon or supersede the activities within its jurisdictional boundaries; and gas production within the associated environmental City's authority over such WHEREAS, "Kern Citizens for Energy" is a coalition of small business owners, nonprofits, chambers of commerce, taxpayer advocates, and others that support a robust oil and gas industry in Kern County; and WHEREAS, "Kern Citizens for Energy" is committed to supporting the thousands of inen and women who work in the local oil and gas sector within Kern County and advocating continued oil and gas production in Kern County; and - Page 1 of 3 Pages - WHEREAS, in accordance with the statements above, it is the intent of the Bakersfield City Council to formally support Kern County's ongoing environmental review of oil and gas production within the unincorporated areas of Kern County and the efforts of "Kern Citizens for Energy." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: 1. The above recitals are true and correct. 2. The City of Bakersfield hereby: • Acknowledges and appreciates the significant economic impacts a thriving oil and gas industry has on the economy of Bakersfield; • Supports the timely conclusion of Kern County's project-levei environmental review of oil and gas production within the unincorporated areas of Kern County to allow for the future growth of the oil and gas industry in Kern County in a safe and responsible manner; and • Supports the efforts of "Kern Citizens for Energy." •�• - Page 2 of 3 Pages - I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on , by the following vote: YES: COUNCIL MEMBER RIVERA, MAXWELL, WEIR, SMITH, HANSON, SULLIVAN, JOHNSON NOES: COUNCIL MEMBER ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBER ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBER APPROVED : HARVEY L. HALL Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: VIRGINIA GENNARO City Attorney : ANDREW HEGLUND Deputy City Attorney AH;dll S:\COUNCIL\Resos\ 14-15\Oil&Gqsreso.Docx ROBERTA GAFFORD, CMC CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the Council of the City of Bakersfield - Page 3 of 3 Pages - ►,�lll�i��,, =,�, �� .. .. MEMORANDUM CITY ATTORNEY September 12, 2014 TO: LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE Terry Maxwell, Chair Jacquie Sullivan Russell Johnson FROM: SUBJECT: JOSHUA H. RUDNICK, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AFFIRMING SUPPORT OF PROPOSITION 13 During the Council and Mayor statements at the September 10, 2C Council meeting, Councilmember Russell Johnson requested Council su� a resolution from the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association in support of Pr The City Attorney's Office has drafted the attached resolution 1 consideration. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, AFFIRMING SUPPORT FOR PROPOSIITION 13 - THE PEOPLE'S INITIATIVE TO LIMIT PROPERTY TAXATION. WHEREAS, on June 6, 1978, Proposition 13, officially titled the " Initiative to Limit Property Taxation," and popularly known as the "Jar Initiative," was overwhelmingly approved by California's voters, � property tax rates on homes, businesses and farms, and capping thE increase in the future; and WHEREAS, prior to the adoption of Proposition 13, California' inflation had sent property tax bills in California soaring so high th� families had to sell their homes because they could not afford to pay th and WHEREAS, prior to the adoption of Proposition 13, prop assessments showed wider divergences than assessment disparities ui current acquisition-value system; and WHEREAS, with the approval of Proposition 13, real property val� adjusted to a base value equal to the 1976 assessed value of that real � thereby introducing an objective standard upon which real property v� taxed and ending the previous subjective standard for assessm� engendered the property tax assessment abuses that occurred in the 1' 1970s; and WHEREAS, with the passage of Proposition 13, taxpayers, for the � were provided a measure of certainty with respect to their property taxF WHEREAS, following the passage of Proposition 13, the homeowner has saved tens of thousands of dollars in property tax pc money that was able to be spent in the economy to create jobs ar economic development; and public revenue, even during economic downturns, which has provided benefit to local governments throughout California; and WHEREAS, since the passage of Proposition 13, proposed altern Proposition 13 would have a variety of unwelcome effects, including su tax increases for low-income and elderly homeowners; and WHEREAS, voters intended Proposition 13 to protect all property and they had rejected previous attempts to impose higher taxes � businesses, knowing that these so-called "split-roll" proposals wou irreparable harm on California's economy; and WHEREAS, Proposition 13 has become a nationwide symbol for � revolt and for citizens exercising control and power over their governme NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of thE Bakersfield as follows: 1. The above recitals are true and correct. 2. The City of Bakersfield, in recognition of the positive Proposition 13 has had on the State of California, formally our support for Proposition 13 and the benefit that it prc individual homeowners, renters, local governments anc state's overall economy. --000---------- YES: COUNCIL MEMBER RIVERA, MAXWELL, WEIR, SMITH, HANSON, SULLIVAN, JOHNSON NOES: COUNCIL MEMBER ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBER ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBER APPROVED :� HARVEY L. HALL Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: VIRGINIA GENNARO City Attorney : JOSHUA H. RUDNICK Deputy City Attorney ROBERTA GAFFORD, CMC CITY CLERK and Ex Officio CI� the Council of the City of Bal MEMORANDUM CITY ATTORNEY September 11, 2014 TO: LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE Terry Maxwell, Chair Jacquie Sullivan FROM: SUBJECT: Russell Johnson . VIRGINIA GENNARO, CITY ATTORNE � JOSHUA H. RUDNICK, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY MILLS ACT PROGRAM Recently there has been a renewed interest in preserving historic k within the City. As a result, Councilmember Russell Johnson referred di of the Mills Act to the Legislative and Litigation Committee.� The following is a brief overview of the Mills Act and key requirer implementing a Mills Act program. • The Mills Act is state legislation enacted in 1972 to provide pro� relief to owners of historic properties for the purpose of assistinc expense of restoration, repair, preservation and maintenance. • To qualify, a historic property must be listed on a national, state, c� city historic property register. � Under a Mills Act program, a property owner contracts with the Ci years to keep their historic property maintained in exchange fc break that is determined after a reassessment by the county as: accordance with California Revenue and Taxation Code. • Under a Mills Act contract, the property owner agrees to resi property if necessary, maintain its historic character, and use Legislative and Litigation Committee Re: Mills Act Program September 11, 2014 Page 2 Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior's Stanc Rehabilitation, and the State Historical Building Code. • Properties listed on the Bakersfield Register of Historic Places subject to the requirements of Bakersfield Municipal Code Chap (BMC 15.72) regarding any alteration, demolition, or relocati� designated cultural resource or property within a historic distric require prior approval by the Bakersfield Historic Preservation Cor or an appeal to the City Council with certain exceptions, such as plumbing, mechanical, roof, pool, and electrical repairs. • The contract, which is recorded, automatically renews for su� one-year periods after the 10 year period is completed unless e property owner or the city decides to terminate the contra� contract also does not require the approval from the other taxing • The reassessment formula is complicated and based on � mandated formula using the "capitalization of income" metho than simple "market value". This calculation basically results in a tax savings to the property owner and a similar tax reduction in taxes to the taxing entities, which includes the City. • If the contract is cancelled, the owner must pay a cancellation fE county assessor equal to 12 '/2 percent of the current fair market the property, as determined by the county assessor. • The City can establish a Mills Act program by amending its preservation ordinance (BMC 15.72), and implementing the I program and regulations through a resolution. • Other costs to the City include the following: o Staff time to review and process the applicati contract. Legislative and Litigation Committee Re: Mills Act Program September 1 1, 2014 Page 3 • Some cities have the property owners fill out an annual report f� submit photos and invoices showing that they are maintaini historic property. In conclusion, the Bakersfield Register of Historic Places includes properties that are potentially eligible for the benefits of a Mills Act pro the Committee is interested in moving forward, with the understanding fiscal impacts under such a program are unknown, staff could draft a� ordinance, resolution, and contract for Committee consideration. JHR:dII cc: Alan Tandy, City Manager Doug Mclsaac, Community Development Director Nelson Smith, Finance Director S:\COUNCIL\Committee\LEG & LIT\14-15\Mills Act Program.Docx B A K E R S F I E L D Community Development Department Douglas N. Mclsaac, Director M E M O R A N D U M SEPTEMBER 16, 2014 TO: LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE Terry Maxwell, Chair Jacquie Sullivan Russell Johnson FROM: DOUGLAS McISAAC, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECT� SUBJECT: MILLS ACT This memo is intended to supplement the memo from the City Attorney by providing some additional comments regarding the possible implerr of a Mills Act program. Some of this is based upon experience I had � in the City of Redondo Beach, including executing ten Mills Act contrac The majority of cities in California that have active historic preservation K operate them as voluntary programs, i.e. a property owner must participate in the program and the City may not place a property or historic register without being petitioned to do so by the property owi existing historic preservation ordinance and program in Bakersfield also � in such a manner. Some owners of historic buildings might elect to have their properties pl � �...�� .:,.��:� ��...�� ...�..,.��.. �...� ��.� �.��...� �� :�� . .��. � �...�a Legislative & Litigation Committee Mills Act September 16, 2014 - Page 2 Currently, the City of Bakersfield Register of Historic Places includes 14 (see attached). A likely reason why the number of listed buildings is so that the City has not developed any tangible (i.e. economic) ince encourage participation as noted above. The Mills Act is such an incentive that can provide a direct financial b owners of historic properties. It may not provide enough of an inceni cases to cause property owners to elect to pursue historic register de: and a Mills act contract, but in a number of cases it can. It generally � on whether the costs and the benefits of participating are the "right particular owner and property. The potential annual property savings are typically in the thousands c but a property owner generally must also desire to preserve the b� keeping with its historic character for reasons of their own. In cases like additional requirements associated with a Mills Act contract are nc burdensome or different from what they would otherwise elect to do own. Conversely, where the requirements may limit or restrict what th� wish to do with their property, the property tax savings are not like sufficient to tip the scale. Another important consideration is that while the Mills Act provide� standards that all cities must follow, there is also latitude and discretion to determine how strict the standards for preservation, alterati� rehabilitation are established and applied. A Mills Act contract can requirements that are more stringent than those normally required of listed on the local register. Some cities, however, allow the normal req� associated with being listed on the local historic register to govern contracts as well. And on that issue, local preservation ordinances vary degree as to how onerous the preservation requirements are. Currently, the City's historic preservation ordinance (BMC ChaptE generally requires exterior alterations and potentially some interior alter first be reviewed and approved. (Note: ordinary maintenance an activities do not require approval.) This level of review is not uncommor r-itiAC �niith hictnrir- r�rACArvr^itinn nrrlinrynr�Ac Legislative & Litigation Committee Mills Act September 16, 2014 - Page 3 Bakersfield that would make listing on the historic register and enterir Mills Act contract less restrictive and more appealing. In summation, the degree to which a possible Mills Act program successful will generally be related to how relevant and attractive it made to owners of historic properties. If the associated regulati� restrictions will not overly impact an owner's ability to use and mai historic building as desired, the benefits are worthwhile and it bec "win/win" for the owner and the City. As discussed above, there c options available to the City to construct a Mills Act program in such c accomplish its intended purpose of assuring the continued preser� historic buildings without unnecessarily dissuading owners from participa Should the City Council elect to move forward with the Mills Act progr can evaluate some of these options in more detail. 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) BAKERSFIELD REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES The Hayden Building 8) Curran House 1622 19th Street 222 Eureka Stree Women's Club of Bakersfield 2030 18th Street Frank Munzer House 1701 "F" Street The Guild House 1905 18t" Street Colonial Apartments 1701 "B" Street The McGill Building 1821-29 "B" Street 9) 10) Standard Oil Buil 1800 19th Street Fox Theater 2001 "H" Street 11) Spencer House 1321 "N" Street 12) Hugh Curran hoi 1910 Alta Vista C 13) Jastro House 1811 20t" Street 7) "China Alley" 14) Kern County Ch� Alley between "L" &"M"/ of Commerce BI 21 St and 22nd Streets County Museum 3801 Chester Av AREA OF HISTORIC INTEREST 1) 2) James McKamy House 2124 "E" Street R.L. Brown House 2128 "E" Street