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.