Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/27/1976 MINUTES CCBakers£ield, Cali£ornia, May 27, 1976 Minutes of a special meeting of the Council of the City of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of Cify Hall at 2:10 P.M., May 27, 1976. The meeting was called to order by Vice-Mayor Bleecker. The City Clerk called the roll as follows Present: Councilmen Bleecker, Christensen, Medders Rogers, Sceales, Strong, Barton Absent: Mayor Hart Vice-Mayor Bleecker reminded the Council and public that Special Council Meetings are restricted to the items listed on the agenda. Approval of Agreements, as amended, with Rag-Gulch Water District, Kern- Tulare Water District, Cawelo Water District and North Kern Water Storage District for Sale of Kern River Water. Mr. Ralph Helm, Consulting Attorney for the City of Bakersfield, explained the technical changes in the four Water Agreements for the sale of Kern River Water that were originally approved by the Council on April 12, 1976. Upon a motion by Councilman Rogers, Agreements, with Rag-Gulch Water District, Kern-Tulare Water District, execute Ayes: Water District and North Kern Water Kern River Water, were approved and same, by the following roll Councilmen Bleecker, Christensen, Strong, Barton Noes: None Absent: None as amended, Cawelo Storage District for Sale of the Mayor was authorized to call vote: Medders, Rogers, Sceales, Adoption of Emergency Ordinance No. 2279 New Series of the Council of the City of Bakersfield repealing Chapter 6.60 of the Municipal Code of the City of Bakersfield, Service Users Tax. Councilman Christensen made a motion to adopt Emergency Ordinance No. 2279 New Series of the Council of the City of Bakersfield, California, May 27, 1976 - Page 2 79 Bakersfield repealing Chapter 6.60 of the Municipal Code of the City of Bakersfield, Service Users Tax. Councilman Medders asked for someone to indicate, to him, the source of replacement revenues for future years. Councilman Rogers stated that no one could predict with any extreme degree o£ accuracy exactly how much revenue will be coming into the City from year to year, but with increased assess- ment values based on market values of property, increased sales tax, the possibility o£ additional revenue from the sale of water due to the recent acquisition from Tenneco and the fact that Kern County is blessed with a vigorous economy, he felt that revenues will be sufficient in future years to take care of City needs without changing the present level of services. Councilman Sceales asked who called this Special Council Meeting. City Manager Bergen replied that the meeting was called by Councilmen Barton, Bleecker, Christensen, Rogers and Strong. Councilman Sceales offered a substitute motion that if the Utility User's Tax is eliminated that the Property Tax be reduced by the same amount. Councilman Medders outlined what the Utility Users Tax represents in City services and stated that what concerns him is that the money to replace these funds will be taken out of reserves for this year and will not be replaced and available for future years. Councilman Christensen stated that he feels the Utility Tax is an unjust tax because it is not based on the ability to pay and never should have been passed to begin with. On April 12, 1976 he requested that an exemption be considered, at budget time, for low income families, senior citizens and those on Social Security who are enduring a hardship, and Councilman Rogers went a step further by suggesting that it might be better to eliminate the Utility Tax entirely. Bakersfield, California, May 27, 1976 - Page 3 motion as Meeting. Councilman Barton stated that he is opposed to the Utility Tax, but is not in favor of removing it if it means raising Property Taxes. The questions that have been raised regarding depletion of reserve accounts have merit and should be answered. Councilman Sceales stated that he is not opposed to eliminating the Utility Tax, however, the backbone o£ the local government is paid for by property owners and if anybody deserves relief they do. Councilman Barton questioned the legality of the substitute it was not an item included on the agenda for this Special Vice-Mayor Bleecker stated that the Council is treading on thin ice when taxes other than the Utility Tax or Water Contracts are discussed, because, as he understands the law, nothing can be discussed unless it is relevant to what is on the agenda. City Attorney Hoagland stated that he had no comment on Mr. Barton's inquiry, but Vice-Mayor B~eecker's remarks were probably cogent to that inquiry. Vice-Mayor Bleecker ruled that any comments other than those pertaining to the items on the agenda, such as ad valorem taxes, are not in order and the substitute motion is not permissible. Councilman Medders and Councilman Sceales left the meeting at this time. Councilman Bleecker read the following prepared statement: "On June 22, 1970 the Bakersfield City Council voted 5 to i (with one Councilman absent) to establish a 5% Utility Users Tax - a tax to be imposed upon commercial and private users of water, natural gas, electricity, telephone and cable television. The single vote against this tax was cast by me. I opposed this new tax for two reasons. First because it was a new and additional form of taxation and second because it was a tax to be levied upon what I like to call the modern necessities o£ life. Since that day in 1970 I have tried very hard every way I know how to accomplish the repeal Bakersfield, California, May 27, 1976 - Page 4 ol this tax. I think my reasoning is just as good now as it was then. Nothing has changed, except this Council now has the opportunity, this afternoon, to shoot square with the tax- payers and eliminate about 1.25 million dollars from the tax burdened shoulders of all who reside and do business within this City. In political circles throughout the State it is said that Bakersfield is unique. We also have the reputation of electing City Council members who are far above average caliber. The uniqueness of Bakersfield is perhaps our strongest selling point. Let's keep ourselves unique in the circles we travel. Let's continue to merit the dignity and respect our official office deserves. And most important of all, unless we continue to lay all the cards on the table all of the time and shoot square with those who elected us, we won't be around long enough to help shape the future destiny of this fine City. The repeal of the Utility Users Tax is a necessary and mandatory step to accomplish these ends. I am very happy and proud to support its elimination." Councilman Strong stated that what the Council is here for today is very important and in the past he has stated he wouldn't consider doing anything, one way or the other, without first getting information as to the financial soundness of the City. Research was done with the Finance Department and he obtained a good idea of what the City's income would be for the next fiscal year so services would not be reduced and all financial obligations could be met, so this is not a hasty decision. Vice-Mayor Bleecker stated that the City's financial records show that the Utility Users Tax, estimated for the next fiscal year, is $1,250,000.00 and can be eliminated and that there would still be in reserves,several hundred thousand dollars in excess of those monies required by the City Charter. After further discussion, Councilman Christensen's motion to adopt Emergency Ordinance No. 2279 New Series of the Council of the City of Bakersfield repealing Chapter 6.60 of the Municipal Code Bakersfield, California, May 27, 1976 - Page 5 of the City of Bakersfield, Service Users Tax, was approved by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Christensen, Rogers, Strong, Barton, Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Medders, Sceales Adjournment. There being no further business to come before the Council, upon a motion by Councilman Christensen, the special meeting was adjourned at 3:00 P.M. VICE-~OR of the City of Bakersfield, ATTEST: CITY an o Clerk of the Council of the City of Bak~Yrs£ield, California ma Calif.