Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/16/93 BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM July 16, 1993 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR A~ND~ITY COUNCIL FROM' ALAN TANDY, CIT~..)II~kNSkGER BY: JOHN W. STINSON, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Staff met with representatives from County staff regarding the Fire Fund this week. The purpose of the meeting was to confirm the numbers which have been used and discussed as part of the Fire Fund issue. It appears that City and County staff may be in fairly close agreement as to the actual numbers involved, which could make discussions with the County about the Fire Fund a bit clearer. There was also discussion with County staff about some potential options to resolve the Fire Fund issue. 2. For those members of the Council who were unable to attend the State of the city address, I am enclosing copies of ~both the Mayor's and my presentations, for your information. 3. I have included a copy of the Administrative Report, prepared by the County Administrative Officer, regarding revisions to property tax exchange policy related to city annexations. This item was before the Board of Supervisors on July 13, 1993. The Kern County City Managers Association met with representatives from the County Administrative Office to discuss the impacts of this, and requested delaying its implementation for annexations which are in progress and expressed a desire to meet further to discuss the impacts of this new policy before its final implementation. The Board of Supervisors adopted the County staff's recommendation with the amendments requested by the City Managers Association with the formation of a staff study group to be made up of representatives from the City of Bakersfield, eastern Kern County cities {Ridgecrest, California City) and Valley cities {Shafter, Wasco). There are a number of concerns regarding the County taking this action. Particularly, the potential impacts on development and all cities' continued ability to annex unincorporated areas. 4. As all of you should be aware, by now, we have received a response from John Q. Hammons regarding the hotel project. Staff will continue to review the figures and assumptions, and will develop alternatives. The Hammons group is very interested in working with the City to complete the hotel' project. Alan Tandy will be in contact with them next week, when he returns. A copy of our response letter is attached, which indicates the City's continued interest in the completion of the project. 5. A memo is enclosed with the dates set for the Council Goal Setting session. HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL July 16, 1993 Page -2- 6. Enclosed is a copy of a letter to the Kern County Waste Management Department, indicating the Council and staff representatives to the Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee, as designated by the Council at the July 7, 1993 Council Meeting. 7. City Sanitation staff is receiving a large number of responses from commercial customers interested in reducing the number of refuse containers in response to the County implementation of gate fees. We will try to provide you with some additional information on this, as this develops. The County is already receiving complaints about illegal dumping, such as people dumping concrete and debris on farmland to avoid gate fees. 8. I have included a memorandum from Community Development regarding the status of the Baker Street Improvement Plan. Please note on July 22, 1993, at 6:00 p.m., the urban planning students from Cal Poly Pomona will be making a presentation to discuss their recommended policies and strategies for revitalizing the Baker Street area. 9. An item will be included on the July 28th Council Agenda regarding a proposal to trade service areas between the City and CSA 71. I have provided a memo, for your information, which discusses several of the issues affecting this proposed action. 10. I have included a copy of our letter transmitting the Council's resolution to the County of Kern for the Hageman #1 annexation, for your information. 11. I have provided a memorandum from Ed Schulz to update the Council about the South Beltway EIR. As the memo explains, the Kern COG Board would like to add three alternative routes to the Tier I EIR. This will add approximately six months to the schedule for adoption of the Specific Plan. 12. Kudos and congratulations to the Honorable Mayor of Bakersfield Bob Price who placed second (behind the County Fire Chief, no less) in the DBA Watermelon Seed Spitting Contest at Thursday night's Street Faire. Lee Andersen came in a distant third. AT. JWS. al b Enclosures cc: Department Heads City C1 erk MAYOR'S STATE OF THE CITY SPEECH JULY 13, 1993 WHEN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD IS SPOKEN OF, IT EVOKES A VARIETY OF RESPONSES DEPENDING UPON WHERE YOU ARE AND WHO YOU ARE WITH. FROM THOSE WHO DON'T KNow THE. CITY EXCEPT WHAT THEY HAVE POsSIBLy READ OR HEARD ON JOHNNY CARSON OR HEARD BY WORD OF MOUTH FROM SOMEBODY ELSE WHO REALLY DOESN'T KNOW THE CITY, IT GENERALLY IS A NEGATIVE COMMENT SUCH AS "THAT HOT LITTLE TOWN ON THE EDGE OF THE DESERT," AND THAT'S ONE OF THE KINDER REMARKS. BAKERSFIELD HAS BEEN THE BRUNT OF JOKES AND OF B-RATED MOVIES, YET JUST LAST YEAR THERE WAS A STORy IN THE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIAN (WHICH WE ALL KNOW REPORTS NOTHING. BUT FACTUAL INFORMATION) WHICH INDICATED THAT BAKERSFIELD IS GOING TO BE THE SECOND FASTEST GROWING CITY IN THE NATION THROUGHOUT THE 1990'S. IF OUR REPUTATION IS SO BAD, WHAT THEN IS CAUSING THIS PHENOMENAL GROWTH? I THINK PERHAPS IT IS BECAUSE THE TRUE WORD ABOUT OUR TOWN IS GETTING OUT. BAKERSFIELD DOES HAVE SOME HOT WEATHER AND A LITTLE TULE FOG, BUT IT HAS SOME OF THE LONGEST AND FINEST SPRINGS AND FALLS OF ANY AREA THAT I'VE EVER' BEEN IN. IT IS A CITY OF DIVERSE CULTURES AND INTERESTS. WHILE IT IS IN THE TOP 100 LARGEST CITIES IN THE U.S. AND 13TH LARGEST IN CALIFORNIA, IT STILL MAINTAINS THAT FRIENDLY, HOME-TOWN ATMOSPHERE THAT MAKES PEOPLE WANT TO LIVE HERE. IN TALKING ABOUT THE STATE OF OUR CITY, I THINK IT WOULD BE INTERESTING FOR JUST A BRIEF MOMENT TO REVIEW ITS HISTORY, THEN TALK ABOUT SOME' OF THE PROBLEMS WHICH FACE US, AND WE DO HAVE PROBLEMS. ~ FINALLY I'M GOING TO END UP ON A NOTE WHICH I THINK WILL INDICATE TO YOU THAT BAKERSFIELD. HAS A GREAT FUTURE, AND ALL OF US IN THIS ROOM HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE A PART OF IT. THE HOSPITALITY OF BAKERSFIELD'S PEOPLE IS WELL FOUNDED IN ITS ORIGIN. IN 1990 THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD WAS A RECIPIENT OF THE ALL-AMERICA CITY RECOGNITION AND THE NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE STAMP OF APPROVAL BECAUSE OF ITS EFFORTS IN MEETING THE NEEDS OF ITS CITIZENS, IN OTHER WORDS BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN BAKERSFIELD VOLUNTEER A LOT OF TIME, ENERGY AND RESOURCES TO HELP OUT. AS I STATED, ITS HISTORY· REFLECTS THAT TYPE OF HOSPITALITY FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. THE SETTLEMENT OF BAKERSFIELD BEGAN IN 1858 WHEN COLONEL THOMAS BAKER MADE HIS LAND AVAILABLE AS A RESTING PLACE FOR TRAVELERS COMING IN FROM THE EL TEJON PASS.- COLONEL BAKER HAD BOUGHT A FIELD AND WELCOMED WEARY TRAVELERS TO STOP AND REST AWHILE IN BAKER'S FIELD. THIS CONVENTION CENTER SITS ON PART OF THAT ORIGINAL FIELD. BY 1869, THE TOWN OF BAKERSFIELD WAS FORMALLY SETTLED WITH A TELEGRAPH OFFICE, 2 STORES, A NEWSPAPER, 2 BOARDING HOUSES, 1 DOCTOR, A WAGON SHOP, A HARNESS SHOP, A SALOON, 50 SCHOOL PUPILS, AND, OH YES, ONE ATTORNEY. BAKERSFIELD WAS FIRST INCORPORATED IN 1873 WITH A POPULATION OF 4,400. HOWEVER, THE CITY WAS NOT DESTINED FOR SMOOTH SAILING AND BY 1876 IT D!SINCORPORATED. 'SOME HISTORIANS SUCH AS FRANK MORGAN, AUTHOR OF "HISTORY OF KERN COUNTY," CITE THE CAUSE OF DISINCORPORATION AS THE TOTAL FAILURE OF THE GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING GOVERNMENTAL WASTE AND .INCOMPETENCE. ALEX MILLS, THE TOWN MARSHAL, WAS ONE REASON WHY DISINCORPORATION WAS CONSIDERED. MARSHAL MILLS IGNITED FEAR IN THE TOWNSPEOPLE. HIS ACTIONS WERE TOTALLY I~EPENDENT ON THE MOOD HE WAS IN AND HIS SHOTGUN. ACCORDING TO HISTORIAN RICHARD BAILEY, AUTHOR OF "THE HERITAGE OF THE GOLDEN EMPIRE," "MILLS WOULD ENTER A BUSINESS AND, IF MONEY DUE THE TOWN WAS NOT HANDED OVER IMMEDIATELY, HE WOULD'SHOOT HOLES IN THE FLOOR AROUND THE PROPRIETOR'S FEET." (RAILROAD) AFTER MANY EFFORTS TO CIRCUMVENT THE TERROR OF MILLS, THE TOWN REALIZED THAT THE ONLY POSSIBLE WAY TO RELIEVE ALEX MILLS OF HIS DUTIES WAS TO ABOLISH THE POSITION OF THE TOWN MARSHAL, BUT NO.ONE HAD NERVE ENOUGH TO FIRE HIM. (ELECTION) SIXTY-NINE RESIDENTS SIGNED A PETITION CIRCULATED BY H. A. JASTRO TO DISINCORPORATE THE CITY, AND ULTIMATELY DO AWAY WITH ALEX MILLS. AFTER HIS REMOVAL FROM OFFICE, ALEX MILLS' CONTINUED HIS HARSH LIFESTYLE AND, ACCORDING TO DOCUMENTS IN THE HALL OF RECORDS, HE DIED A DEBTOR IN THE YEAR 1896. ALTHOUGH THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD HAD A SHAKY START, THE CITY WAS ONCE AGAIN INCORPORATED IN 1898. IN 1910 THE CITY OF KERN, FORMERLY THE TOWN OF SUMNER IN EAST BAKERSFIELD, WAS ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD. IN 1915, THE CHARTER ESTABLISHING A GOVERNMENT OPERATED UNDER THE COUNCIL-MANAGER SYSTEM WAS ADOPTED. BAKERSFIELD WAS ONE OF THE FIRST CITIES TO ADOPT THE COUNCIL-MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT. ALTHOUGH BAKERSFIELD HAS GONE THROUGH MANY CHANGES AND HAS GROWN SINCE THAT FIRST RESTING LODGE, THE CITY STILL MAINTAINS ITS ORIGINAL HOSPITALITY EXTENDED BY COLONEL BAKER AS EVIDENCED BY THE 1990 ALL-AMERICA CITY AWARD. SO HOW FAR HAVE WE COME AND WHAT IS THE STATE OF OUR CITY NOW? AS I STATED, WE STARTED AS A HOSPITABLE REST STOP AND WENT THROUGH A ROCKY PERIOD, BUT SINCE THAT TIME THE CITY HAS CONTINUED TO GROW. I WOULD LIKE TO USE EXAMPLES FROM THE TIME THAT I HAVE BEEN AssOCIATED WITH THE CITY, STARTING IN 1956 WHEN I FIRST BECAME A ROOKIE POLICEMAN WALKING A FOOT BEAT ON L STREET. AT THAT TIME, THE CITY'S POPULATION WAS 51,000 WITH A TOTAL OF 14 SQUARE MILES. BY 1973 WHEN I WAS APPOINTED CHIEF OF POLICE, THE CITY HAD GROWN BY 47% TO 76,000 OR ABOUT 1,400 PEOPLE A YEAR AND ENCOMPASSED 29 SQUARE MILES. DURING THE 15 YEARS OF MY TENURE AS CHIEF OF POLICE, THE CITY WENT THROUGH EXPLOSIVE GROWTH AND GREW 106% TO 157,000 PEOPLE AND 85 SQUARE MILES WHICH WAS ABOUT 5,400 · NEW PEOPLE A YEAR. WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE LAST 5 YEARS INDICATES GROWTH NOT AS EXPLOSIVE, BUT I THINK PROVES THAT THE PREDICTIONS OF BAKERSFIELD BEING THE SECOND FASTEST GROWING CITY ARE CORRECT. FROM 1988 TO TODAY, THE CITY HAs GROWN BY ABOUT 7,600' PEOPLE A YEAR TO 195,000 AND ENCOMPASSES 106 SQUARE MILES. ALL OF THIS GROWTH IS NOT WITHOUT ITS PROBLEMS. THE CITY HAS HAD TO CHANGE THE WAY IT PROVIDES SERVICE AND THE LEVEL OF SERVICE IT PROVIDES. FOR INSTANCE, WHEN I FIRST BECAME A POLICE OFFICER, WE HAD A RULE THAT WE WOULD RESPOND TO ANY CALL WITHIN 5 MINUTES. BY THE.TIME I RETIRED AS CHIEF OF POLICE, WE HAD PRIORITIZED CALLS AND SOME CALLS DID NOT RECEIVE POLICE SERVICE FOR SEVERAL HOURS. HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO A 1993 SURVEY, WE STILL RESPOND TO THE EMERGENCY CALLS, THOSE WHICH ARE LIFE THREATENING OR ENDANGERING, WITHIN 5 MINUTES. I USE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AS AN EXAMPLE BECAUSE IT IS THE DEPARTMENT I KNOW BEST, BUT EACH OF THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS WITHIN.' THE CITY HAS HAD TO TAKE THE SAME TYPE OF APPROACH AND THAT IS TO PRIORITIZE WHAT IS IMPORTANT. AT ONE TIME, WE REPAINTED THE STRIPING ON EVERY STREET IN THE CITY ONCE A YEAR. THAT IS NOT OCCURRING TODAY, NOR IS IT NECESSARILY IMPORTANT TO DO SO. - MUCH EMPHASIS HAS BEEN PLACED IN THE LAST 2 YEARS ON CUT'BACK MANAGEMENT WITHIN GOVERNMENT. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT THE · CITY OF BAKERSFIELD HAS BEEN INCREASING ITS EFFICIENCY OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS. IN 1980, THERE WERE 8.8 EMPLOYEES PER THOUSAND PEOPLE. AS OF '1992, THERE WERE 5.3 EMPLOYEES PER THOUSAND PEOPLE. MUCH OF THAT IS BECAUSE OF MORE EFFICIENT WAYS OF DOING THINGSi MECHANICAL REFUSE COLLECTION, BETTER TOOLS AND SUCH. THIS YEAR THE CITY. WENT THROUGH ONE OF ITS MOST DIFFICULT BUDGETS IN WHICH THE GENERAL REVENUE BUDGET WAS CUT BY 8.9% OF THE 1992-93 BUDGET. THAT IS THE BUDGET WHICH FINANCES ESSENTIAL SERVICES SUCH AS POLICE AND FIRE. THE TOTAL CITY BUDGET IS DOWN FROM 209 MILLION TO 169 MILLION WHICH IS A 19% DECREASE. · NOW YOU WILL HEAR THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TALK ABOUT CUTS, BUT I THINK IF YOU EXAMINE THOSE CUTS,-YOU WILL FIND THAT THEY ARE ACTUALLY CUTS IN THE RATE OF INCREASE AS OPPOSED TO THE FORMER YEAR'S BUDGET. WE CUT THE BUDGET AND DECREASED THE EMPLOYEE POPULATION BY ANOTHER 3._~9. SO THE STATE OF THE CITY IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO MORE WITH LESS, AND THE ECONOMY HAS BEEN SLUGGISH. BUT NOW LET'S HEAR THE REST OF THE STORy. I BELIEVE BAKERSFIELD IS ABOUT TO BEGIN ANOTHER CYCLE OF ECONOMIC CHANGE FOR THE BETTER. FIRST OF ALL, BAKERSFIELD JUST EXPERIENCED FOR THE 5TH STRAIGHT YEAR A DECREASE IN THE MAJOR CRIME RATE. (EXPLAIN) WE SEE A LOT OF INTEREST BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS AND GOVERNMENT IN RIDDING OUR COMMUNITY OF THE BLIGHT OF GRAFFITI. WE HAVE JUST ENDED A LONG PERIOD OF DROUGHT AND, HOPEFULLY,. ARE ENTERING A TERM OF GOOD WATER YEARS. IF YOU LOOK AT BAKERSFIELD'S CENTRAL CITY, IT IS BECOMING RECHARGED. VACANCIES DOWNTOWN ARE LESS AND THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION AND THE CITY HAVE ENTERED A NEW COOPERATIVE ERA TO DEAL WITH THE UNREINFORCED MASONRY PROBLEM. AND, WE WILL WELCOME ABOUT 350 MORE PEOPLE DOWNTOWN WHEN THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS MOVES IN. THE POSSIBILITY OF THE COMPLETION OF THE CONVENTION CENTER HOTEL IS ONE OF THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS TO OCCUR, AND WHILE IT IS STILL NOT A POSITIVELY DONE DEAL, THERE IS NOW REAL HOPE FOR PROGRESS WHICH WILL CHANGE AGAIN THE FACE OF DOWNTOWN. WE RECENTLY HAD A GROUND BREAKING FOR STATE FARM INSURANCE, A MULTI-YEAR PROJECT WHICH WILL BRING OVER 1,000 JOBS TO BAKERSFIELD. U.S. COLD STORAGE IS MOVING IN AND THE KERN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION INDICATES THAT THEY ARE RECEIVING CALLS OF INTEREST AT AN EXCELLENT RATE.' WE JUST COMPLETED A FIRE FIGHTERS' OLYMPICS WHICH BROUGHT OVER 1,800 COMPETITORS AND OVER 5,100 VISITORS TO THE CITY. THE CITY'S GREENWOOD WASTE FACILITY IS .ON THE CUTTING EDGE OF RECYCLING TECHNOLOGY AND WILL BE EXPANDING IN THE NEAR FUTURE, AND WHILE WE HAVE HAD OUR DIFFICULTIES WITH THE STATE, WE HAVE NOT SAT IDLY BY AS MYSELF, THE VICE MAYOR AND TRUDY SLATER OF THE MANAGER'S OFFICE TOOK THE CITY'S POSITION TO OUR LEGISLATORS IN SACRAMENTO. WE NEVER AGAIN INTEND TO SIT SILENTLY BY AND ALLOW THE STATE TO MANDATE WITHOUT PAYING.' BAKERSFIELD IS UNIQUE IN THAT IT HAS THE BUSINESS CONFERENCE IN OCTOBER WHICH IS PUT ON BY THE LOCAL FIRM OF BORTON, PETRINI AND CONR©N. NOWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES IF IN THE WORLD HAS SUCH AN AWESOME ARRAY OF SPEAKERS PRESENTED TO ABOUT 10,000 PEOPLE FROM THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES AND SOME FOREIGN COUNTRIES. AS I SAID, THIS IS UNIQUE, AND IT SHOWS THE ABILITY OF BAKERSFIELD PEOPLE TO DO THINGS WHICH ARE UNIQUE AND IMPORTANT. WE HAVE MANY GOVERNMENT AND PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP ORGANIZATIONS WHICH ARE WORKING TO IMPROVE OUR ECONOMIC SITUATION. I HAVE BEEN PRIVILEGED IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS TO HOST A GROUP OF SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF EACH OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS, AND I TELL YOU THAT THEY ARE ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT MAKING SOME CHANGES WHICH WILL GIVE BAKERSFIELD A MORE FRIENDLY BUSINESS CLIMATE. I HAVE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF OBSERVING CITY GOVERNMENT FOR ALMOST 36 YEARS, AND i'M HERE TO TELL YOU I THINK WE HAVE ONE OF THE BETTER AND HARDER WORKING CITY COUNCILS THAT I HAVE SEEN DURING MY TIME WITH BAKERSFIELD. THAT IS IMPORTANT WHEN YOU HAVE A GROWING CITY AND NEED TO DEAL WITH SOME VERY DIFFICULT PROBLEMS. SO WHAT CAN WE SAY ABOUT BAKERSFIELD? WELL, IT IS HOT SOMETIMES, BUT IT IS NOT SMALL. IT IS NOT ON THE EDGE OF THE DESERT, BUT RATHER · IN ONE OF THE MOST PRODUCTIVE AGRICULTURAL AND OIL AREAS IN THE U.S., IF. NOT THE WORLD. YES, WE STILL HAVE MANY PROBLEMS, BUT WITH THE COLLECTIVE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, THOSE PROBLEMS WILL BE OPPORTUNITIES AND BAKERSFIELD' WILL CONTINUE TO BE THE ALL-AMERICA CITY WE HAVE ALL KNOWN, THAT IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN, AND EACH OF US CAN TAKE PRIDE IN SAYING WE LIVE IN BAKERSFIELD, TRULY THE HEARTLAND OF CALIFORNIA. State of the City Speech - July 13, 1993 John W. Stinson Yesterday was my 40th Birthday, and as one of my co-workers pointed out "You're not exactly young and you're not exactly old, you're somewhere in that gray area." Birthdays are always a time for reflection and setting goals, especially this one. So having endured a day of cake, ice cream an your typical number of over the hill jokes, I decided it was time to make a few notes and create an action plan to take me beyond this milestone. My action plan included several items typical for people my age: 1. Exercise and lose weight (40 years of ice cream & cake) 2. Pay attention to my wife and family (wife talks to me during Dodger games) 3. Plan for the future (peers are planning for retirement) 4. Learn new skills (Golf lessons as a gift) 5. Have fun and celebrate (typical birthday wish) 6. Help someone else (I've had 40 years of help, time to pay back) While this plan is not necessarily inspiring it did give me some guidance on what I need to do over the next 20 to 30 years. My plan also made me think about the challenges facing the City of Bakersfield and that maybe some of these same principles applied there as well. So, lets' start with the number one item, "Exercise and lose weight." Thanks to the State government, the City of Bakersfield is experiencing significant downsizing in its staffing levels. We must be lean and mean and be more efficient in how we provide public services. In a recent "Governing" magazine article ranking the top 100 largest cities in the nation, Bakersfield was ranked 96th in the number of employees per capita. Our employees will be required to work harder and smarter due to limited resources. This will be hard work but the payoff will be a healthier organization. Next, the number two item, "Pay attention to my wife and family" It is very easy to take things for granted. We are used to operating and communicating in set patterns. Due to the state budget crisis and the resulting impacts on local government it is more important than ever that Cities, Counties, Schools and other local governmental agencies communicate effectively. It is critical that we become active listeners (Just ask my wife she reminds me of this fact nightly) and not just patronize each other. In order to survive this ongoing economic crisis we must work together towards common solutions that benefit the entire community. The City and County should work together to provide opportunities for business attraction and retention. The long term economic vitality of our community depends on our ability to cooperate and become facilitator of economic activities. We must also look at the most efficient way to provide services by avoiding service duplication, encouraging cooperative services delivery, and the annexation of areas which logically should be within the City and already receive or impact city services. The actions of the state will have adverse effects on all local governments and tend to pit us against each other. We must resist the temptation to act as the state has, by raiding revenue sources of other entities to solve our current fiscal shortfalls. Most importantly we must pay attention to our constituents, the public. If we fail to meet their needs as consumers of public services we are failing as government entities. We need to determine their priorities and reflect them in our fiscal policies. Now, to the number three item, "Plan for the future" In times of economic uncertainty it is critical to prepare for unforeseen events. Who would guess that the State would attempt to shift almost four million dollars of property taxes from the City of Bakersfield. Who knows what type of surprise they have up their sleeves for next years budget. There is considerable uncertainty about the success of the proposed half cent sales tax measure for local government and the City should be prudent and plan for such contingencies. The City also needs to plan for orderly growth and determine ways to fund the necessary infrastructure such as roads, parks, waste water treatment plants and other public facilities. Failure to adequately plan for these will result on increased strain on existing systems. The 2010 General Plan has provided a blueprint for this anticipated growth, and its implementation in the future will reflect the success or failure of our planning efforts to provide adequate services and facilities. Implementation of the 2010 Plan becomes more difficult when the uncertainty of local government revenue sources makes long term fiscal planning an impossible task. This piecemeal and jigsaw approach to local fiscal management encouraged by the state continues to work against the economic development goals of cities throughout California. The number four item "Learn new skills" is an important one. Due to the decreasing number of City employees providing public services it becomes important that we train them properly for the difficult tasks they must perform. 2 Police employees must be trained in the latest legal procedures and law enforcement techniques. Our Fire department must train its employees to deal with increasingly complex hazardous materials and medical aid responses. We must train our employees how to take advantage of computer technology such as automated drafting and geographic information systems to increase their efficiency. We must constantly be looking to find ways to work smarter and eliminate unnecessary tasks. Item number five is my favorite, "Have fun and celebrate" We need to remember that we should all enjoy and find meaning in our work. In these tough times it is important to maintain a sense of humor and not take ourselves too seriously. We should keep some perspective and celebrate our successes. Things such as the opening of the State Farm Building are significant achievements and should be celebrated by the community. We should also look towards the City of Bakersfield's Centennial in 1998 as a great opportunity to celebrate the many accomplishments of our community. Finally, the last item "Help someone else" Difficult times are measured by the character of the people who provide leadership. My wife gave me a great definition of character which I would like to read to you: "Character is defined by what you are willing to do when the spot light has been turned off, the applause has died down and no one is around to give you credit" These times demand leaders of character such as yourselves to meet the challenges of the City of Bakersfield, County of Kern and the State of California. And, while I don't like the idea of being forty, I know I still have many good times and opportunities ahead of me. So does the City of Bakersfield. Thank You. 3 BAKERSFIELD Alan Tandy · City Manager July 1'51 1993 Mr. Dave JoneS, President John O. Hammons Hotels John Q. Hammons Building 300 John Q. Hammons Parkway Springfield, MO 65806 Dear Mr. Jones: On behalf of our City Manager Alan Tandy, I am acknowledging receipt of the materials on the proposed Bakersfield Hotel Project; which we received July 14, i993. We appreciate your timely response, and are encouraged by your continued interest in this important project. I have been in communication with Mr. Tandy and' he agrees that a conference call between the City, McDevitt and your office would be a productive approach to further clarify the issues remaining for this project. Mr. Tandy will return Tuesday, July 20th,. and will contact your office to arrange the call. As you indicated in your letter, there are still a number of matters which must be resolved to ensure the viability of the project, but 'we are very encouraged by your interest and dedication in bringing this project to completion. Sincerely, John W. Stinson Assistant City Manager JWS.alb cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Bakersfield · City Manager's Office · 1501 TruxtUn Avenue Bakersfield · California · 93301 /RNr-,'~ qgf,_qTql · FAY (RN~¥ BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM July 15, 1993 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:- JOHN W. STINSO~,b'~ACTING CITY MANAGER SUBJECT' CITY COUNCIL GOAL SETTING The following dates have been confirmed for City Council goal setting: .Monday, July 26, 1993 Monday, August 16, 1993 The meetings will be at 12:00 noon in the City Manager's conference room. Work Shop time has been set aside on August 25 if the Council feels more time is needed. JWS'jp cc: Carol Williams, City Clerk BAKERSFIELD Alan Tandy · City Manager July 12, 1993 County of Kern Waste Management Department 2700 "M" Street, Suite 500 Bakersfield, CA 93301 ATTN: Joel Heinrichs Resource Management Agency Director RE: City Appointments to Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee Dear Sir: Due to the recent Special City Council election and retirement of Paul Dow, Water & Sanitation Manager, the City of Bakersfield would like to designate a replacement and alternate member to the Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee. As amatter of record, the following City Advisory Board members are designated to represent the City of Bakersfield: Council Representative: Pat DeMond Alternate: Randy Rowles Staff Representative~ Mike Sides Alternate: Gene Bogart Your assistance in this matter is appreciated. Sincerely, City Manager ° City of Bakersfield · City Manager's Office · 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield · California · 93301 (805) 326-3751 · FAX (805) 325-9162 July 14, 1993 TO: Alan Tandy City Manager FR: George Gonzales.C',,~, Community Developn~t Coordinator RE: Status Concerning .the Preparation of the Baker Street Improvement Plan The team 'of urban planning students from Cal-Poly University, Pomona are displaying their · major findings at 1201 Baker Street (East Bakersfield Branch of the Bank of America) for review by interested persons. On July 22, 1993, at 6:00 P.M. the students will discuss their recommended policies and strategies for revitalizing the Baker Street retail area. The final public meeting will be .held at 1301 Baker Street (Bakersfield City School District Board chambers). A final report will be made available to the City after the meeting. Attached is a copy of the final draft executive summary that is currently on display at 1201 Baker Street. Councilmember Pat DeMond has expressed an interest in receiving a copy of the executive summary. We intend to provide you with a copy of the final report by the end of the month. As you are aware, primary funding for the Baker Street Improvement Plan is being provided by the Kern Council of Governments. Expenditures for this study will total approximately $9600 with approximately $6510 going towards City direct delivery costs. CITY 14 J~[. c)5 , ~ileldrafexcit. vst BAKER STREET CORRIDOR II STUDY AND ACTION PLAN Executive Summary INTRODUCTION There arc several altcrnativc futures for thc Baker Street Corridor that were identified through -thc data collected during thc initial stages of thc study. Thc data from existing land usc maps identified thc types of businesses which currently exist in thc Corridor. Thc usc of study sketches and photography (print, slides and video) together with thc recognition of architectural styles prodded a medium which would aid in determining and incorporating facades for future renovations. Surveys were conducted with Corridor merchants, residents and customers. Meetings were held with thc merchants, thc elected district representative, and city staff. City and county documents were collected and reviewed. During a two week period in thc month of December, four days were spent on site by thc entire ten person study team observing, listening and talldng with individuals frequenting thc Corridor. After systematically recording thc information, thc team developed ten conceptual plans for proposed changes. All of thc concepts have their particular development constraints and opportunities for implementation. From their dc~,clopmcnt and analysis a clcarer understanding of thc Corridor was realized. With this information thc following recommended Action Plan was produced. Problems, Issues and Considerations Physical, social and economic improvements must be made to the Baker street Corridor if it is to become useful and competitive again. Buildings must be restored and interior spaces dramatically altered to meet today's business practices. Thc daily needs of thc local residents, merchants, and customers must be considered if any revitalization efforts arc to be successfully implemented. Simply planting a few trees and repainting faded building details or signs on thc numerous vacant storefronts is not sufficient. Such cosmetic efforts arc unrealistic and effectively deny thc deeper structural problems of some buildings. Too many structures arc in need of costly repairs duc to agc, owner ncglcct, and/or are potential safety hazards in thc event of a major earthquake. Too many commercial structures' remain vacant as their former tenants rush to relocated in more substantial commercial districts in and around Bakersfield. Too many shops are vacant. What little attention has been given to the public right-of-way is carelessly conceived in a mesh-mash of unrelated bits and pieces which have been integrated into an eclectic urban streetscape which reflects the poor public image of the area. New and different generations of potential customers have located within the neighborhood. These new residents bring their own sense values and cultural beliefs. The surrounding commercial activity seems not aware of these residents; at least not enough to accept, attract and serve their special needs. What was once a thriving commercial district is now under- developed and under-utilized in various stages of despair and disrepair. Recommended Action Plan The production of the recommended Action Plan has been conducted through a research and planning process that gives recognition to the challenges of planning in an uncertain world;~ that is, in terms of complex social, economic and political pressures from within and outside the Baker Street Corridor. It recognizes, for example, that not every citizen and merchant cares equally about Baker Street. Some individuals may not want to see it changed to something different while others Cannot seem to agree on what the changes should be. This is an urban setting Where a sense of shared philosophy has not arisen. Moreover, some decision- makers may be experiencing difficulty in choosing how they should act in response to some particular problem with which they are currently concerned; for example, the problems of International Park and the homeless. Nevertheless, no one is entirely comfortable with what has happened to the Baker Street Corridor over the last three decades. Within all areas of decision-making concerning the Corridor there are a number of important related actions to be considered and implemented. Each decision involves a range of sometimes mutually exclusive options to be explored; thus leading to actions to be combined for addressing the entire situation. The following recommended Baker Street Corridor Action Plan brings together the most important actions generated out of this process. GOALS OF THE ACTION PLAN · To improve the overall social andphysical image of the Baker Street Corridor · To attractpeople, especially EastBakersfield residents, to Baker Street on a regular basis, to enliven its public areas and to enhance the street as a place to do bUSiness and socialize · To improve the commercial activities within the Corridor · To retain and increase the historic value of Baker Street · To remove unsafe andproblematic conditions · To involve all merchants and surrounding residents in the processes of change · To suggest viable sources and resources for the Plan's implementation Questions and Relationships Finding the most appropriate range of actions (private and public) available in the revitalization of the Baker Street Corridor could only be determined through the analysis of the required decisions that must be addressed and understanding their inter-connectedness for an effective implementation process. The more complex and unclear become the decisions and relationships, the more problematic become the private and public~ responsibilities of shaping the problems and choosing effective actions, and the more vital it becomes that the process be capable of use in a flexible and relatively non-technical way. . Decision-making concerning the revitalization of the Baker Street Corridor, therefore, requires a number of important related decisions to be considered. Those required decisions are presented here to convey the important questions that must be addressed in order to bring about revitalization and thus change the Corridor's negative images as perceived by the general public of Bakersfield. DECISION: What means of involvement and what levels of particiPation are available for residents and merchants for assisting in reshaping the image of the Corridor within and outside the normal planning process? DECISION: What procedures and guidelines (public and private) are there or should be there for the organization, administration, implementation of projects and programs ensuring the planned changes; and how does one carry out the ongoing management of the Corridor? · DECISION: What type and location of land uses and related activities types should occur and could occur in the Corridor through public and private development and redevelopment efforts ? DECISION: What physical and visual improvements should be made tb the Corridor involving building facades and streetscape features? DECISION: What improvements should be made to shop fronts, signs, and window display areas to help improve sales and the overall imagery of the commercial activities along Baker Street?. DECISION: What changes are required in the Baker Street commercial mix to satisfy the existing and projected customer demands without damaging important existing businesses? DECISION: What projects and programs are required in the effective promotion and marketing of the Baker Street as a viable retail commercial district? DECISION: What public and private actions are effective in dealing with the negative social activities within the Corridor? DECISION: What is the most effective time frame for approved courses of action related to the adopted changes to the Corridor? Also, here are important decisions that must be made concerning the impact of the increasing transient population and International Square, the state of the areas SRO's, and the impaction of social service activities on the community. Development and Redevelopment Actions The recommended Action Plan proposes the development and redevelopment of the Baker Street Corridor into three carefully orchestrated districts of retail-commercial and residential activity. Two of these districts (southern and middle) are tied to the dictates of a historic district designation. The basic objective for each district is as such: · The Northern District (Rte. #178 overpass to Monterey Street) is to become the "community-oriented" zone within the Corridor where most businesses work to serve the immediate surrounding neighborhoods. The Action Plan involves giving the Baker Street snip a cultural identity. (U.S. Census tract information covering the area reveals that the population is as high as 60 % Hispanic.) This district already has the public library, several churches, the Education Center, and a Boys and Girls Club. More small office space and service buildings are encouraged: small fresh fruit, vegetable and meat markets, bakery, laundry facilities, hardware store, shoe repair, newsstand, senior center, child-care facility, etc. Street landscaping is improved to include shade trees and other street furniture. The exterior features of the Education Building and Tejon Theater would be rehabilitated to their original design features. The interior space of the Tejon Theater would be convened to smaller theaters or for live performances. · The Middle District (Jackson Sn'eet to Monterey Street) becomes the Corridor's primary retail-commercial core to serve the sub-region. It involves upgrading all commercial structures, facades, and making structural adjustments to URM buildings. The Plan proposes affordable housing for the elderly and a more relevant retail-commercial mix. The current SRO's are to be upgraded in physical form, management practices and tenant selection. Here existing shops would be upgraded and complemented with a new variety of businesses that eater to the daily shopping needs of surrounding communities as well as local residents, e.g., clothing and footwear store, hoUsehold goods, cinema, doctor and dentist offices, food market, pharmacy, book store, music and video shop, travel agents, local cafes. These businesses would open also to the rear parking areas. This means there is a need to upgrade these neglected areas with proper lighting, landscaping, rear facade improvements, signs, alley maintenance, and security personal. West of Baker Street the Plan envisions the addition of 200 to 400 medium density dwelling units for moderate to low-moderate income families and individuals. It recommends the re- zoning of parcels designated for commercial and light manufacturing activities. Property owners would bear most of the costs for private improvements. Street landscaping is improved to include shade trees, bus shelters, and other street furniun'e. Adjustments are made to the on-street parking; with landscaped angle parking alone Jackson Street and Lake Street. · The Southern District ( Sumner Street to Truxtun Avenue) is upgraded to cater to the restaurant patrons and inca'easing light industrial activities. Customers arrive during the lunch hour from the downtown businesses and government offices and at night from all over the region. Here exist most of the area's ethnic restaurants. The Action Plan envisions professional offices and design studios as well as more ethnic restaurants, light industrial and distribution facilities in the district. To compliment the restaurant and cafe u'ade, other commercial services are proposed, e.g., newsstands, camera store, book and card shops, deli, savings and lending institution, pharmacy, flower shops, postal annex, dry cleaners, print and copy shops, and specialty clothing stores. Between 21st Street and Sumner Street, the Baker Street right-of-way has been dedicated to a landscaped outdoor plaza mainly focused on the surrounding eateries and entertainment. The adjacent buildings are rehabilitated or replaced with commercial activities on the ground floor and housing and/or office activities on the second floor. At Sumner Street, the under-utilized Southern Pacific Train Station building is proposed for renovation and its western end converted to a minor museum and/or cafe. It is to be landscaped and surrounded by a more historically correct fence. International Square would be restructures and re-landscaped to symbolize its railroad connection. Also, there is a legal change in terms of its use by the public for disruptive activities. Although a proper commercial mix is the most important element to attracting customers regardless of the location, each district will need a major "face-lift" to improve its image through facade improvements, basic landscaping, stricter sign controls, handicap access, and sedure parking. A costly effort is required to address.the structural needs of the URM bUildings. Thc city must finance proposed improvements in the public domain through tax increment pass-through formulas, standard assessment district., City appropriations, Federal grants, and negotiated development agreements with developer contributions and payback. The detailed. iVmancing of thc various projects, which fail under the responsibility of both the public and private sector, must still be resolved beyond the estimated costs to follow. Thc Action Plan docs not attempt to determine a time frame for above recommended development and redevelopment actions. Nevertheless, as a schematic tool for thc beginning steps in thc revitalization process and what must be done within the first year after adoption of thc Action Plan, thc following actions arc recommended for Baker Street properties onlY: · adopt and implement bus shelter program · . place water tolerant trees from Truxtun to Oregon Street · construct gateway landscaped median divide fi:om Truxtun to 21st Street · implement code enforcement program concerning ail commercial parcels · replace of all public trash receptacles · articulate crosswalks at every block and at railroad crossing · restructure lease covering public usc of International Square · restoration of thc Tejon Theater. Finally, there is thc issue of the URM structures which must be upgraded according to California Law. The City staff needs to work with building owners in the Corrid°r to estimate thc current costs of repairs and thc oncoming costs of conformance so that a full costs analysis is prepared and used in an informed way to determine whether a structure should be saved or pulled down. General Recommendations Based upon the observations of the study team and recorded comments from the various merchants and residents, there are three major issues effecfing the Baker Street Corridor that require special attention. They are inter-connected to play one major part in the perceived negative imagery by the general public and particularly by those living and doing business there. For some, it is because of these issues that the Corridor suffers economically and socially. · International Square International Square was once seen as part of an organized effort to stimulate business activity in the Corridor. An IntemafionalVillage Business Association was formed in 1968. Three years later the Southern Pacific Railroad constructed a small park (International Square) on its land adjacent to its tracks and leased it to the city as its contribution to reverse urban blight. Soon, however, the Square became a magnet for the increasing population of homeless and the focal point of illegal activities. There are three logical reasons why the Square has become what it is and not remained the center of optimism for the community. Firstly, railroad lines have always been an illegal but convenient travel mode for the nations transient population. From the beginning of the area's growth in agricultural and industrial activity men have traveled to East Bakersfield to find permanent and temporary employment. The switching yards of Southern Pacific became one of the featured jumping off points. Work could be found nearby in the sheep camps, oil fields, cotton fields, etc. Today, the number of those types of jobs has decreased. New technology, and the recent years of recession have increased the rolls of the unemployed as well as increased the transient population of the Corridor. Secondly, the attraction of area for the unemployed has been enhanced by the number of social service organizations doing business there. The concentration of organizations is predictable because that is where they are allowed to locate without being hassled by the community. It is also where their clients concentrate. However, the clients concentrate there because that is where they can get help from these organizations. Thirdly is a reason few people will want to accept as valid. The economic and social conditions found in the Corridor enhance the area's acceptance as a place for the homeless. The vacant and deteriorating buildings, low-end commercial activities, and the obvious lack of community pride creates a void into which the transient population and criminal activities can prosper. The message is very clear to the eye: No one here cares. People eau frequent the Corridor without the strong social controls found in other parts of the City. It has become a convenient and politically acceptable place for the City to shift its problems. Not only is it the location of the homeless and social service Organizations, but SRO's and "halfway" houses. Better them' than in some other district of Bakersfield. Recommendations: International Square is the only landscaped open space for public use in the Baker Street Corridor. One major complaint of the Square, however, is that it is being used by private groups to distribute food to transients; even though the City has asked them repeatedly not to do so. Because the activity is occurring on "public" land and being performed by religious groups'the City seems hesitant to regulate against the practice. The community believes such activities only attract more transients to the area and detract from the Corridor's image. The homeless shelter near Truxtun and Sumner is the most appropriate place to provide meals. Some residents and merchants want the Square removed. It should be retained, but under different and controlled circumstances. This recommendation should be explored by the City and S.P.: · Southern Pacific Railroad should retract its present land lease with the City and convert the "Square" into a park which is on its private property; · Southern Pacific Railroad should enter into a "joint-venture" with the City to cover the use of the park by S.P. employees and the public ( somewhat the way a shopping center parking lOt is on private property but usable by the public for defined purposes) under the regulations that specify: a) The hours of the day the park mn be used by the general public b) The activities that can and eaunot occur there, e.g., distribution and preparation of food stuff, drinking alcoholic beverages, gambling, solicitation for prostitution, loud and disorderly activities, sleeping, etc. · While the interior design of such housing need to fit the needs of the category of residents who will be living there, thc exterior features need not reflect that reality. There are several · SRO projects in downtown Los Angeles, Pasadena, and San Diego that demonstrate striking design and enduring qualifies arc possible. Thc exterior features should be renovated and restored to recapture thc original historic quality of the structures or, when necessary, modernized facades, compatible with thc revitalization of Baker Street, and shows sensitivity to both personal and public space. · A SRO Task Force should be organized and made up of representatives from BCAC, BSRM and other public and private participants. Thc group must pull together thc Corridor community to encourage the SRO owners to change thc existing situation. This includes management and maintenance practices as well as tenant selection. Thc group should arrange to tour SRO projects in Southern California. · If any new SRO's are built in the Baker Street Corridor, they should be for low-income seniors and retired tenants only. (All new units should be low-income affordable without the need for any government subsidy. When subsidy is provided, the units should become affordable to very low-income retired persons.) · Economic strategies must be devised to renovate the buildings and encourage financial incentives that the City can provide for improvements. · The City of Bakersfield should review its building and safety codes to determine how to raise the physical attributes of SRO's, but without unnecessarily raising the cost of construction. · Community Service Organizations The large concentration of transients in the Corridor is due in part to thc concentration of community service organizations (public, private and non-profit) catering to their daily needs. While they provide important services to their needy clients, their activities also help promote the negative public image of the area. These organizations must be made aware of their full responsibility not only to their clients but also to the surrOunding general public. It is recommended that this issue be one of the f'trst to be discussed by the Baker Street Advisory Council with the organizations invited to participate. * Under such an agreement the City would be totally reSponsible for the enforcement of the regulations and the maintenance of the park. · SRO's (Single.Room Occupancy) There are three SRO's (single-room occupancy residential hotels) on Baker Street. One of the uncertainties of the action plan is how to take the SRO's into account in the recommendations presented for improving the Corridor's overall image. The community sees these contemporary boarding housings as negative's due'to their management practices, design, occupants, and government regulations. The two most important distinguisl'dng features of SRO housing, however, are their low rents and that they cater to the population which cannot afford regular market rate apartments. In most cases, the rent is subsidized by a government agency. The SRO's along Baker Street are former participants in the original urban fabric that catered to the employees and travelers of the railroad. Today their occupants tend to be low-income or unemployed males of who too often are dependent on alcohol and drugs and/or have medical problems. A small percentage are females under the same circumstance of life, What the population has in common is low incomes and the propensity toward limited interaction with others. Life's routine falls into three categories: the pursuit of basic needs, medical and social services, and personal activitieS. Pursuing basic needs includes getting food and, for some, satisfying an addition. SRO neighborhoods include businesses that cater to them, including inexpensive restaurants, pawn shops, second-hand stores, convenient food stores and liquor establishments. This is the traditional skid row environment. While Baker Street is along way from skid row the image, in the Public's opinion it is such a place. As long as that perception is held the Corridor will not be able to generate a new image. Recommendations: · No more such SRO's should be built in the Corridor without design and management. restrictions. Impacting the Corridor with SRO's and thus their occupants does not help an' already difficult situation. The same can be said for most forms of "half-way" housing. Estimated Costs ITEM DESCRIFFION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ITEM TOTAL RECOMMENDED PLAN Streetscape Improvements: NOTES: Paving - Sidewalk 24,000 SF $2.50 $60,000 · Because it is assumed that the Decorative (plaza) 15,000 SF $15.00 $225,000 recommended'programs and projects Ramps 138 EA $250.00 $34,500 described in this Action Plan are to be initiated and fully implemented in phases Street Trees (24 in.) 274 EA $600.00 $164,400 over the next 10 years and beyond, thc Median Landscape 5,000 SF $1.50 $7,500 nature of public and private financing is not Irrigation - Medians 5,000 SF $0.50 $2,500 exact and expected to change. This is Irrigation - Bubblers 274 EA $35.00 $9,590 especially tree under the shrinking budget Electric Service 3 allow $300 situation of most governments. Lesser Controller 3 allow - $1,500 lovels of Federal grants, State funds, and County funds will bo available to the City Water Meter (1.5 in.) 6 EA allow $20,000 of Bakersfield, thus making it all the more Street Lighting (historic) 60 EA $3,000.00 $180,000 important that the City and private sector Benches 14- EA $500.00 $7,000 create a parmership of shared Monument Sign allow $2,000 responsibilities and financial obligations. Bike Racks, 'Trash Bins, misc. allow $5,000 · The cost of rehabilitating the numerous URM su'uctures within the Corridor was Sub-total . $719,290 not determined due to the lack of information and expo'rise in this area. Construction Contin. (10%) $71,929 (Most seismic upgrading costs are Project Admin. (5%) $35,964 computed on a gross building area basis. Experience in Los Angeles area cities suggests .an $8- to $16-per square foot . range, entirely separato from facade renovation costs which estimated at $250 per linear foot.) · ana own TOTAL $827,183 havo to determine tho design requirements and cost involved in basic facade and shop front renovations. ~ae.h situation is different and therefore cannot be determined in such a short period of time. June 1993 .... JOSEPH E. DREW ' 0 E I V E D scorr aONES D~rector ol Buclge~ & Finance . COU~ ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER JUL -8 1993 AUEL C. KLEIN MARY WEDDELL D~rector ol Pohcy Analvs,s Ass,stant County Adrn,nis,ra,ve Otficer CITY OF TAFT , Imergovernmen[al Rela,ons KERN COUNTY WlU.IAM C. DOUGLAS Eml~lo~ee Rel~nom Olt~er ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE July 13, 1993 Board of Supervisors Kern County Administrative Center 1115 Truxtun Avenue · Bakersfield,. CA 93301 REVISIONS TO PROPERTY TAX EXCHANOE POLICY RELATED TO CITY ANNEXATIONS "FISCAL IMPACT: UNKNOWN On February 16, 1993, your Board directed the County. Administrative Office 'to review the County's current property tax exchange policy related to city annexations and to present recommended changes for Board consideration. On June 15, 1993 this matter was continued until July 13, 1993.in order that the Administrative Office could meet with city managers within the County. A report on local government financial structure and fiscal impact of city annexations was presented to your Board in November, 1990 and is attached for your reference and information. Although minor portions of the report are outdated, e,g. a reference to cigarette tax revenues, the report provides an excellent overview of the current annexation policy, its origins and its impacts. As is noted in the attached report, the current policy applied to the exchange of property taxes due to annexation was established in 1980 by agreement reached .between all incorporated cities and the County. The agreement provides for the application of a 'formula whereby the County permanently transfers to the annexing city that amount of property tax revenues necessary for the 'County and City to Share. the property tax reVenues derived from the annexed area in the same ratio that property taxes are shared between the .County and the city in the entire incorporated area of that city. When this standardized formula was initially instituted, it was entitled the "cost/sen, ice ratio". At that time, it was presumed that the existing distribution formula for property taxes, combined with other revenues, afforded each entity the financial wherewithal to provide services at an adequate level and thus, de facto, it was rational for this existing split to continue into the future. Inherent in this presumption was the concept that the cost of the services being transferred and assumed by the annexing city was directly correlated to the amount of property tax revenues concurrently being transferred. Also, at the time this agreement was reached, the County was well over its Gann limit, and unable to utilize a=portion of its tax proceeds. Unfortunately, there is n._9.o correlation between the cost of the services being assumed by the annexing city and the amount of property taxes being relinquished by the County. For example, 1115 Truxtun Avenue, 5th Floor BAKERSFI~! ri, CALI~O~ 93301 (805). 861-2371 FAX(805) 325-3979 BOard of Supervisors REVISIONS TO PROPERTY TAX EXCHANGE POLICY RELATED TO crrY ANNEJ/ATIONS FISCAL IMPACI':. UNKNOWN July 13, 1993 Page 2~ the Cost/service ratio currently provides for the City of Bakersfield to be transferred 45 percent of the property taxes that, had the annexation not occurred, would have accrued to the County's General Fund~ However, the only service responsibilities that are~transferred to the City that are funded from the City's .General Fund are police and alatrn:al control. While planning and building i,nspection services are also transferred, these services are funded primarily-through user fees. ThUs, while the Clty is transferred 45 percent of the County's property tax revenues in the annexed area, and assumes few service responsibilities, the County retains responsibility for the provision of the most costly of services--those that are provided Countywide, irrespective of city. boundaries: public health and human services, as well as the.entire c~mtnaljuStice system, from court Operations and prosecution to adult and juvenile detention facility operations and probation activities. In addition to transferring 45 percent of the County's property tax revenues, the County also loses all of the sales tax revenues that would have accrued to the County General Fund from the annexed area due to the situs methodology for the distribution of sales tax. Further, the COunty loses court fines and forfeitures, transient occupancy tax, and real property transfer tax revenues. In years past, the application of the standard formula for anneXations,· while detrimental to the County, did not grossly adversely impact the County's ability to continue to provide quality services. The County, along with the rest of the State, enjoyed a healthy economic growth and a corresponding increase in revenues with which to fund services. However, in recent years, this situation has reversed. As the economy has slowed, the effect has been an increasing demand for the services the County is mandated to provide along with a sharply declining revenue base. While annexations afford local agencies the opportunity to plan for orderly growth and the associated' infrastructure needs, and serve, perhaps, to enhance the cost effectiveness of service provisions, it is also important that exchange of revenues associated with anneXations be fair and ' equitable and that there Is a direct correlation between the cost of services transferred and the revenues transferred. Each annexation proposal contains unique Characteristics. Some annexation .proposals encompass currently developed residential properties, others consist of properties to be developed into residential areas with commercial centers, and still others consist of existing strictly retail 'outlets. Thus, to continue to utilize a standardized formula for the transfer of proPerty taxes for all annexations, regardless of the type of properties being annexed, is an inherently flawed, questionable practice. A much more reasonable approach is to process each annexation based upon the particular characteristics of the properties to be annexed. It is proposed that for each annexation, the actual cost of services being provided by the County that will be transferred to a city upon annexation be determined, and that the negotiation for the exchange of property taxes be based on this factor. Over the last year, the County has devoted considerable resources to the ·development of a sound methodology for determining the fiscal impact on the County due to new development. This same methodology, with some variations,' could verY aptly be applied to anneXation proceedings. This methodology is founded on the cost Board of Supervisors REVISIONS TO PROPERTY TAX EXCHANGE POLICY RELATED TO. CITY ANNEXATIONS FISCAL IMPACT: UNKNOWN July 13, 1993 Page 3 of services at the current fiscal year~s level and can be applied to currently developed property as well as property proposed for development based on the proposed zoning. Along with ensuring that there is a direct correlation between the cost of serv-ices being transferred and the amount of revenues being relinquished, it should be noted that while in the past the transfer of resources due to annexations have addressed property taxes only, this is not a statutory requirement. Included in the negotiation process should be consideration of all revenues being forfeited by the County: sales tax; transient occupancy tax; real property transfer tax; and court fine and forfeiture revenues. While the State Board of Equalization distributes sales tax to cities and counties based on the point of origin, there is no prohibition as to the sharing of this revenue source by agreement between cities and counties. Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 99 and 99.1 specify the process and time. frames that must be adhered' to by local agencies affected by an annexation. Pertinent to this diSCussion is the requirement that the local agencies whose service area or service responsibilities are altered by virtue of an annexation or detachment must negotiate an exchange of property taxes within 30 days of notification. This exchange, and hence the annexation proceeding, iS only effected If both agencies involved present adopted resolutions to the executive officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission. An alternative to subjecting each annexation proposal to this stringent timeline is also provided for in Section 99. Specifically, it is permissible for local agencies to enter into a master property tax transfer agreement. A master property tax transfer agreement is not limited to addressing only property tax eXchanges; it can encompass all of the aforementioned revenue sources. An agreement would allow for ministerial annexation proceedings to move more quickly through the required process, and would allow a city to initiate proceedings knowing the revenue stream and thus able to plan its service delivery accordingly. Any. agreement would provide for an exemption for unique circumstances, such as a large annexation or the annexation of a particular type of development. Also attached for your BOard's information are worksheet which depict the fiscal effect on the County and the City of Bakersfield which will occur due to the Hageman # 1 annexation currently in process. The first sheet describes the property to be annexed and the current "standard" property tax split. Subsequent pages display the fiscal affect of this property upon development, both assuming annexation and without annexation. THEREFORE, IT IS RECOMMENDED, that your Board: 1) authorize the Administrative Office t,o negotiate on your behalf the exchange of revenues associated with annexation and detachment proceedings; 2) direct that each annexation proceeding be approached· with consideration given · to the unique characteristics of the property encompassed in the 'annexation; 3) direct' that all Board of Supervisors REVISIONS TO PROPERTY TAX EXCHANGE POLICY RELATED TO CITY ANNEXATIONS FISCAL IMPACT: UNKNOWN July 13. 1993 Page 4 · :. sources of revenue including property .tax, sales tax. ~-ansient occupancy tax, real property transfer tax. and court fines and forfeitures be considered in the negotiation process; 4) authorize the Adrnints~tive Office to enter into negotiations for the development of master property tax transfer agreements with those cities desiring such an agreement. Sincerely, ~Clunty Administrative Office JED~CI~dr\anxpol. bos Attachment cc: All City Mangers Auditor:Controller County Counsel LAFCO REIK)I~ ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL STRUCTURE AND FISCAL IMPACT OF CITY ANNEXATIONS ~. Tm~ 'I'ROPOSrl~ON ~' TI~.NSl~O~T~ON OF ~C~ GO~ ~~ ~e ~~ of ~~on 13 .(~e ~-~ C~l~fo~ ~m~don) ~ 1978 ~~ ~fom~ lo~ ~v~~ ~nce ~u~out ~e State of ~o~ ~or to ~ p~le of ~oposifion 13, ~ loc~ iov~m~ ai~ ~d ~e ab~ to le~ ~ed pm~ ~es to ~ s~~ ~ for ~ pw~. ~osi~n 13 ~d~y ~ted ~e ad ~o~ ~ ~le on ~ pwp~ to 1~ of ~ket ~ue, ~t to cov~ ~t~-a~w~ debL ~ ad~fio~ it e~b~hed ~ 197~76 ~ ~ b~e ~ for det~i~in~ ~ ~b~ ~ue of pwp~, ~ p~d~ ~t pwp~ co~ be mapp~ o~ ~on ~e of o~ or for n~ co~om ~e ~u~ ~e ~ ~ed ~fion for pm~ not n~ com~a~ or ~ o~~ w~ limited to ~ ~o~ ~c~r ~t ~ ~ 2~ ~ y~. ~e ~~te ~ea of ~ ~ ~os~ by ~o~on 13 ~ a StatUe 1~ of ~e to $7 b~o~ or appw~t~ 5~, ~ b~'p~ ~ ~u~ for ~ 197~79. ~e ~ of K~ ~~ced ~ imme~te de~e of ~36 millio~ or 47%, ~ ~ p~ ~ ~u~ for ~ 1978-79. ~ ~omo~ lo~ ~ ~u~, co~ed ~ ~e ~ ~m on lo~ gov~fs ab~ to ~e r~u~ ~u~ pw~ ~, ~ a StatUe ~ ~. ~e State ~h~ ~o~ed to ~e ~opos~on 13 ~ ~ p~ ~ le~fion (SB' 1~; ~pt~ 292, Smmt~ of 1978) w~ pm~ded ~ ~ouC ~ for ~ 1978-79 ~ ~ ~ounr of ~.4 b~on for drip, co~, ~e~*i ~, ~ s&ooh. ~ State. ~ou~.~g c~e ~m ~ ack.ted State Bud~t ~1~ ~ ~ fo~: (1) State ~g for K-14 s&ool ~ ~ ~ed, (2) ~e 'State t~o~ ~ ~ of ~ ~W cos~ r~ted to ~e Me~-~ ~~ ~ ~ed Co~p~t~ w~ ~~, ~d (3) blo~ ~ tong $835 million w~ p~ded to drip, co~, ~ ~ '~ b~ed on ~e~ed fom~ tied to pmp~ ~ loss~. ~ on~ 'solu~on' to ~e ~opo~on 13 ~c~ ~ app~ed o~y to ~ 197~79. ~ 1979, ~e M~~ ~l~ed i~ long't~ 'solu~on' for ~~g lo~ ~v~ent ~u~-~e p~ge of ~ 8 (~pt~ 282, Stamt~ of 1979). ~ 8 ~ed ~e me~ w~ m~t be ~ed for ~o~ nmo~ ~ lo~ gov~t a~ ~ pm~ ~ ~g ~om · e 1% ~~ ~ ~te set ~ ~o~don 13. ~ le~on ~ ~b~d ~ m~ for de~~~ ~ lo~ gov~~ ag~s prop~ ~ b~e, ~ ~t~ ~e S~nl D~ct Au~m~on F~d to pm~e ~1 ~s~t~ce to ~e~ ~. ~d of coning S~te bio& ~ to ~e ~ 1~ pmp~ t~ losses, ~ 8 p~snm~ ~ a,po~on of ~e prop~ ~ ~m s~l '~ to co~fies, drip, ~ ~.1 ~, w~ p~enfly ~~g ~ State ~ ~n for school ~c~. & ad~o~ ~ S~te ~ed ~e Coif s~ of corn for ~e Me~-~ ~~ ~d for &e S~l~ Se~F ~come/ S~~ Se~ P~ ~~ ~d ~ed ~ ~ of ~ Co~ cos~ r~ted ~o Co~-pm~ded h~irh s~c~ (so~e of ~e ~ 8 Co~ H~ S~c~ Subv~on), ~e ~d ~o F~ ~ D~~r ~~ ~o~ ~d ~e Bo~ H0~fio~ ~o~ IL POST-PROPOSITION I~ FIN~~ STRUCTURE.OF ~ GOVERNMENT A. ' l~undine Som'~es The' e. nacuneaz of Propo_~on 13 has played a major role in reshaping the basic .' m-uaure of all local govemmem agendes in California..The m~.~dve reduaion in property 'lax revenues'resulting imm Proposizion 13 has made all local ~Overltmpnr agencies more dependenz upon Store financial assistance. However; fluae mil. ezis~ some very' fun~-,~-,,~i differences in sources of funding amons coumies, cizies, school disuias, and spe~! disnic~s. The sources of revenues for each v/pe of aliency/or FY 1988-8g are shown below ($~atewide tougs). FINANCING SOURCES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES IN CALIFORNIA rellim (K-12) Propew/Taxes: 24.6% 8.6% 18.1% . Pmper~ Assessm~m- 0,0~ .4% O.O~ Special: Sales Taxes: 1.7% 11.5% 0.0~ 0.0~ User Fees: Smr~ Aid: 136.6% 7.4% 60.8% ~ 4.9~ Federal Aid: 18.8% 3.4% -' 6.3% All Orh~ Revenues: 10.0% 30.4% 7.4% 17.7% TOTAL REVENUES 100.0% 100.0~ 100.0~ 100.0% The da~a shown above ver~ clearl,/shows the followins major differences in financial sm~crure 'amonfl coumies, cizies, school dim/c~, and special dimic~s: o The prlm~ry source of fundini for counties and school di.micts is State Aid, ~ counties also beins heavily dependem up°n Federal Aid. These major sources of funding are largely unconm~llable at the local level (£e. the revenue received must be spent on specific prograz~). o Local property rexes comprise the second large~ hmdin~ source for counlies and school di.mi~. o Service charges/user fees and local sales mx revenues are the larg~ revenue sources for cities. 2 o .Cities are much less dependent on local property taxes than are coumies, Cities and special districts receive a very stn:~li portion of their fiaancin~ /rom State/Federal sours, and are dependent primarily upon local revenue sources which are subject to _treater local control B. Revenue l~i.~in~ Authority_ · The Calif°~ Constitution serves as the basis for local ~ovemment taxing authority, and provides as follows: o All local governing-hr agencies are authorized to levy proper~ taxes, but the tax rate and method of property valuation are limited by the cousfimtional 'provision added by Proposition 13 (Article MIIA). o The State Lesislature ha~ the sole authority to levy taxes on personal income, alcoholic beverages, corporalions,- banks, and other t%~nei,1 iusfimtious. o COUllties are llmir~d ill file types of taxes which they may levy. Because counties lack the constitutional grant of authority over their 'municipal affairs,' they can only levy the. types of taxes spedfically authorized by State statutes. County r~ng authority aurently 'extends only to property taxes, local sales taxes, tra~ie_n_r occupancy taxes, property tramfer taxes, and (with the passage of SB 2557 in conjunction .with the FY 1990-91 State Budget) utility user taxes and business license taxes. o Charter cities have broad taxing authority, limited only by restrictions contained in the State Constitution. Charter cities are generally free to enact any tax not prohibited or llmlred by their chartm. General law cities were l~iven taxing powers ~imost as broad as charter city authority through the enactment of State lel~islation in 1982, although new or increased taxes are subject to voter approval The enactment of Proposition 62 in the November, 1986, general elect/on resulted in a requirement applicable to all local government agencies, except charter cities, that any new or increased general tax (to be used for general . purposes) must be approved by a majority of the voters, ltfunher required · that any spe~nl tax (to be used for specific purposes) be approved by a two- thirds vote of the people. Proposition 136 appearing on the Nowmber 6, 1990, ballot would extend these voter approval req~ents for new or higher taxes to charier cities. Both. counties and ~i~i~ (general hw and charter) do have autho~y to charge fees for the services which they provide, with the fee amount limited to the actual cost. of providing the service. This fee authority is broader and less restricted for dries and for charter counties than for general law counties such as Kern County. General law counties ~-.hat~e.fee~.._fgr services om'y to the extent..spe~ifum]ly auth°zized b S_V_~._~._~ User fees for many types of County services are nm allowed by State law, and. the amount of fees which may be charged for other types of County services a~e spe~S~lly limited by State statutes. III. PROCESS FOR APPORTIONING PROPERTY TAXES · The basic provisions Of AB8 (C~apter 282, Statutes of 1979) have r~maln~d unchanged since 1979, and ~ govern the disu~ution of property taxes among all units of go~ in accordance with the requirements of Proposition 13 (Article XIHA, California Constitution). Under these stilLcurrent statutes, 'property taxes are allocated to local governm~mt as follows: o Property ~-derived from the 1% local goverr~t tax rate aze apportioned among ail taxing agencies on a pro ram basis, determln~d by the relative pro_~ortion of total ~rozmm, taxes received by each agency prior to the passage of Proposition 13. _ The relative propo~ion of total property taxes received by counties, cities, and special distrim is based on the ~ percentage of total property taxes received in the three yeats ~mmediateiy preceding the passage of Proposition 13 (1977-78, 1976-77, and 1975-76). - The relative proportion of total property rnv,~ received'by school disttic~ is based' on each district's property tax allocation for FY · 1977-78 om'y. o Under the pro rata distr~ution formula, each taxing agency now receives the same amount of property taxes received in the prior year plus or minus its share of any ~ in property tax revenues resulting from annual changes in assessed valuation of properties located wiflga its service boundaries. This provides for sims dism~ution of property tax revenues. Each agency's share of .property tax growth is. determined by the pre-Proposition 13 percentage factor described above (adjusted for any property tax exchanges or formation of new redevelopment agencies). o Within the boundaries of redevelopment agencies, any growth in property tax revenues resulting from assessed valuation increases is allocated to the redevelopment agency, absent specific tax sharing agreements 'with other agencies. IV. PROPERTY' TAX EXCHANGE UPON ANNEXATIONS A. Lesral Reauirements: In addition to'prescribing the allocation formula for property tax revenues, AB 8 (Chapter 282, Statutes of 1979) also established requiremen~ for local government jurisdictional changes. This 4 State law pto~. es that prior to the effective date of any local agtmey juzisdkfionnl change, such as an annexation, demchme~ or consolidation, the govemi~ bodies of ail agencies whose service areas or service respo~ would be akered by.such change ~ on flee amouu~ of adopt resolulions agreeing m an exchange of property lax revenues. If ~ agencies 'are unable ~o agree on an exchange of property ~ax revenues wirign r, he 30-day period, all proceedings of ~e jurisdictional change will automatically be teminated. Therefore, no annexation involving a uansfer of service responsibilities can take effect without all of the affected agendes agreeing on the amount of property tax revenues to be exchanged. B. Current Progeny Tax l~ehant, e Policy: In 1980, the County and all incorporated ~iri~ reached agre,,m,.~r on a formula .for detenninin~ the exchange of property tax revenues for city annexations. This formula is still being used and refle~ the Counts current policy with respect to city an~---~ion of unincorporated areas. The current formula evolved from a negotiated agreement with the City of BakersfieM 'developed in 1980. The logic for the formula is simply based on providing the ratio in annexed areas that ~ in the e. mire area of the city. The amount of property tax entidement uansferred from the County to ann~-ing cities under this formula is NOT based on the actual cost of service responsibilities of either the city or the County. The uam~er fOrmula addresses only Property tax revenues, ~d does ~OT take ~ consideration Courm/losses in sales taxes and other revenues. The current po..licy and Property mx exchange formula, which apply annexations involvins the transfer of service responsfl~ilifies, provides as follows: o County permanently wansfe~ to the annexi~ ci~ the amount of property tax revenues necessar~ for the County and city to share the property tax revenues derived from the annexed area in the ~ that property taxes are shared between the County and the city in the entire incorporated area of that city. o The exchange of property tax entitlement continues in all future fiscal years, and property tax increment revenues resulrlng from future assessed valuation growth within the annexed areas are shared between the County and city based on the same tax sbarin~ ra~io used to determi,~e the initial property tax exchange. o When there is no transfer in responsibility for strucm.,al fire protection, there is no wansfer of property taxes allocated to the County Structural Fire Fund. ~ City of Bakersfield Annexation of Unincorporated Area (Hypothetical Example) Current Properly Tax SbA~tn~ WJth~n Fniire City of BakersfJ,,-ld City $16,150,519 % of Total 45.46% County ' ~ % of Total 54.S4% County and C.,ity Total $ 35,525,940 100.00% 5 Propem Tm Pmper~ Tm Coun~ nd Cay Perunmse or ~ of ~ .,. $ ~,~ $ ~,1~ 7~ ~.~ ~W of ~ $19,375,421 $16,150,S19 45~ ~ ~ of c~!f~ ~ $ 5~,438 $ ~5~ S~5~ 43.45~ ~ of ~l.~n $ ~389 $ ~7,516 49~ 5o.~ ~ of ~ $ ~ S ~,4~ ~ ss.~ ~ of ~~ $ 1~2 $ 115,~1 37~3~ ~.4~ ~W of ~ S 1,536,412 $ ~9,5~ 29~ 70.61~ ~ of S~ $ 393,891 $ 2~8 38.47~ 6153~ a~ of r~ $ 5~,511 S 351,898 ~.~ s9.Ol~ a~oiT~ $ 41S,6Se $ 4S0,Sn Sl~~] ~.l~ ~W of W~ $ 614,~ $ 258,93~ 29.~ 70.37% D. ~rlm~r~ County Revenue Loss Data has pzev/o~ been accumulated on the loss of Comuy property mz revenues resuldz~ fzom ~ azm,,~z~dom ~ duz~g the 5-year pez~d of 1~ 1985-86 through b'Y 1989-90. A tor~l of 58 city annexa~ns occurred during this peziod, ~ in a mud ]ess in County property tax zevenues of $1.2 ~m~on (see App._ a~ A fox d~ Usdng). It should be noted rhnt th~s amouz~ does no~ include pz~eny mx losses zesulfing from azmezarions oc~ between FY ].978-79 and FY 1984-85, nor does it ze~cr loSSes ~ other Couz~ revenues due ro azmexadons. V. O'I'H',~ COUNTY REVENUES AFFEC'I'ED BY ANNEXATIONS The locally imposed !% sales and use tax is allocated entirely to the Cotmry in unincorporated areas (estimated at $17.5 million for FY 1990-91), and entirely to cities in incorporated areas. In the case of city armerations, the County loses all sales.tax revenues derived ~rom the annexed area, and the annexing city gains all of the sales taxes lost by the County. The amount of sales tax revenues lost by the Co,,~ry in a partiodnr city annexation'depends on the' .degree of commere/n!/business development (taxable sales) within the annexed areas, as wen as future-commercial/business development within the area. It is not poss~le to accurately estimate the Counts loss of sales tax revenues .due'to ally part~slnr anl/exa.ti.oll. 'No program ,~ ~xi~gts to cross-reference annexation or tax rate areas with sales rn~r information. However, the data presented as Appendix B clearly shows thatsales tax growth in the unincorporated area has not kept pace with the rate of sales tn? growth within the City of Bakersfield, due in large measure to the advexse impact of anne~rations on County sales r~r revenues. Tcallsient Occtroancv Tax: The County receives all transient occupancy tax revenues derived' from motel/hotel occupancy m the unincorporated area (6% tax rate), and cities receive all transient occupancy taxes, collected within city areas (rate varies by city). County revenues from the transient occupancy tax are expected to total $872,000 for FY 1990-91. In the case of city annexations, the' County loses all transient occupancy tax revenues derived from the annexed area, and the ann~i~g city gains all of the transient occupancy tax revenues lost by the County. The amount of transient occupancy tax revenues lost as a result of any particular annexation depends on the number and type of motel/hotel establishments located in the annexed area, or developed in that area in future years. Court Fines and Forfeitures: County reVenue imm court fines and forfeitures are also adversely affected by city annexations. Kern County is expected to receive $6.4 million from the source in FY 1990-91 (excluding penalty assessments which are levied for special purposes). In_ unincorporated ar~s.,..the Count. r_.ece_iv~__~__ 1_0.0% of.the fines and forfeitures resulting imm Penal Code or Vehicle Code violations, irrespective of the arresting agency. Most of.the fines and forfeitures (base amount) resulting from arrests by city office, ts within city boundari¢~ are alloCated to rimt city, with a lesser portiOn allocated to the County. The allocation of fines and forfeitures (base amount) resulting imm penal Code and 7 Vehicle violations varies by city according to the shazin8 percentages speci~d in Penal Code Section 1463, as shown, below, ~m ~ and inaide etty Cil~ V_~_b'b' Code Viohtimm) City Sham Count~ Slmm City Shore Count~ _T-~I.,~ 87o/o 13% 50q~ 50°~ lV[Ar~opa 64% 36q~ 50~ 50°~ *-qt~;~er 85~ 15~ S0q~ $0~ Taft 81% 19°~ 50~ 50o~ W~,fl 72% 28% 50~ $0o~ AU Odan* CJIis 88% 12% 50~ Fines and forfeitures from drag-related vioLirions (Health & Sal~e~ Code) are allocated d/f:ferendy. For dmg-re]a~ed arregrs by city officers inside the cit% 25% of ~ fine./forfeimre is allocated m r. he city, and 75% ro the Stare. For drug-related a_,res~ by any agency in unincorporated areas, 25% of ~e fine/forfeitures is allocated m d~ Cotm~ and 75% tq apportioned Clearly, ci~ armexadons resuk in the loss of Coun~ revenues derived imm fines and forfeitures. In fl3e case of City of Bakersfield annexations, the Coun~ loses 90% of fmes/forf *emlres (base · amount) for mos~ tlrpes of violations occurring in d~e annexed area. The amount of revenue loss will vary wi~ each particular annexation, 'depending on the population and development characteristics of ~he annexation area. The allocation o~ penal~ assessment3 (specified o/b of base fine amount), which accrue to resnicred-use ftmds for specifically designated purposes (such as court consm~crion or alcohol prosr~,,,) remain unaffected by ciIy annendons, Real Property_ Transfer Tax: The Coufl~ receives all real property transfer mx revenues ~rom real property sales unincorporarecl area (.11% of sale. amounI). The County is expected ro receive $2.4 million ~rom this source in FY 1990-91. Within incorporated areas, the Coun~ reCeives 50% .of d~e real property wansfer ~ax revenues, and the ci~ receives 50%. 'In d~e case of city ann--,,dons, d3e Comuy loses one-b:~lf of all real property tax revenues genera£ed from real property transactions within the annexed area. 8 All counties and cities receive a share of the cigareue tax collec~ed by. l~e State w be used for general purpgs~ ~ The Countyis expeaed w receive $336,000 from ~ source in FY 1990-91. The ~mnunI of ~ lax anocated to each ag~mcy is based on local sales mx collections and popula~n.' In ~he case of ci~ annexations, ~ Count7 experiences a reduction in both sales mx revenues and popula~m (ff annexed area is popularzd). Therefore, city annexations resuk in a loss in cisarem mx alloca~ious.to u~e County, and a con~ponding revenue gain to ~e anuexing dry. VI. REMAINING COUNTY SERVICE R~qPONSIBfl.ITIF~q IN ANN1Eg'k'~ AREAg City an~-v~ions of unincorporated Comuy area generally involve .rite uansfer of ~he following major sexy/ce respons/bflit/es/mm r. he Coumy to rhe annez/ng city:. o Police pro~eClion/law enforceme~ o Sumctaual fire proteclion (ff city operates own fire depamnen0 o . Plannins uildins l pec ion o Auimal Conu~l Services o Slzeet Main~enance/Consu'uclion o -Community Developmen~ Services Upon completion of annexagous, rite C~unty of Kern retains respous~ility for providing the following major services: o Courts and Criminal Justice - Superior Court - Municipal Court - Jury Services - Grand Jur~ - Probation (Adult and Juvenile) - Disuict A~omeY (incl. Forensic Sciences Lab) - Public Defender/indigent Defense - Sheriffs Civil Services o Comuy Jail Services o Juvenile Derm~ion~ehabilimfion Services o County Hospil:al Services (Kern Medical Center) o Public Healr~ Services o Environmental Heakh Services o Elnergellcy Medical Selvices o Mental Healfl~Subsmmce Abuse Services o Welfare Services o Veteran's Services o. Office on Aging Services o Agricultural Prote on/Eniorcement services o Farm and Home Advisor Services o . Wei~h~ and Measures Enforcement 9' Solid Waste Mana~,~ment Resional Parks Services Musemn ~ ~ Services Property Tax Colleclion Services ~ Taz .~J~o1mt41~'t~' County ~ Go~ and Cenn'al Support S~vic~s VII. COST OF COUNTY SERVICES VERSUS REMAINING PROPERTY TAX .~I.IOCATION IN ANNEXEI} The actual cost of Comuy services which su31 must be provided to newly annexed city areas can va.,'y ~'eatly depending on the specific area which is annexed. Total population, demographic charactexistics, developm,,nr characted.sdcs, location, and a vaxiety of other variabl~ determine the actual c°st of County services provided to a specific geographical area which has been annexed by a city. The net fmancial'~act of a particular annexation also is dependent upon which city is involved in the annexation, due in parr to the great variance in property tax shaxing ratios from city to city. It can be concluded that the smOllllt of provertv taxes which the County receives from a developed annexed ar~a of any city does not cover the cost of the County services which stiilmust be provided tO Omi armexed area (as previously listed). This general conclusion is supp0ned by the fact that . the cost of Coumy services provided to each city area (determined primaffiy on a per capita basis) far exceeds the amount of property n~Y,.~ allocated to the County from that city area. This has been documented by County service cost studies previously developed for the cities of Bakersfi~, Ridgecrest, and Arvin. The same conclusion can also be ~ed to other cities. The explanation for this is quite simple-mOst of Kern County's property taxes are degved from the unincorporated area, which includes virtually all of the oil/gas properties, compxidng about 41% of the. County's property tax base. At the same time most of the population which benefits f~om Countywide services is Concenn~ted in incorporated areas. " This conf. lusion is suppol~ed for Ci~ of Bakersfield annexmions by the analysis presented as AFpendix "C'. This analy3~ shows that r~he es~mated ~ rehr~! to County services provided within the Gi~ of Bakenfield area for FY 1990-91 torni.q almo~ $51.4 mfll;_fl~, compared to property mYes received by the County wirfLin the Ci~ area of only $39.4 mfillon_ This leaves a "gap" of $32.0 m,~l~nn between the cost of County sen~ces and property rexes received-and "gal)" must be filled by property rexes collected from the unincorporated area and from o~her genre'al-purpose revenues received by r. he Count. Since propefl7 ~az revenues received by the Coun~ from within'r~e City of BakenfieM total less than half of the cost of County services provided to the Ci~ area, and since the City/County property ~ax sluring ratio ~ applies to the en~e Ci~ a~o applies to newly .-~_.T.d areas, it is clear rhat the property m~s received by the County from the anne. zed area afmr the formula-based proper~ mx exchange do not come close to covering the acuml cost of r~ County services which still must be provided to developed annexed areas. In all City of Bakm3fieM annen~ions, the County loses (r~rou~h formula-based uan~fer to r~e City) 45.46% of its property mx revenues derived f~m the ~-~n~on area, but does not ~ome e. ic~e to reducing ~ ~ost of sm by that ~ Or by an equi~r dollar amom~ writh the passa~ of Proposition 13 'and subsequent hnplemenling legislation, the nature of local government finance has dramatically changed. No longer can local governments levy property r~es tn .an amoun~ wKie. h would produce the necessazy revenues to fund local government s~. Instead, the 1% property tax is dism~uted by a fixed formula. Additior~lly, the State ~has assumed an increasingly donfinant role in the funding (or lack of funding) of County provided services. As a result of these changes, as annexations reduce the amount of property tax awilable to the County at a greater rate than service respon~ilkies are reduced, increasing pressure is placed upon r~n~iqing County discretionaty services. APPENDIX ~A SUblblAFIY OF: E~rlMA'Tlg~ COUNTY PFIOPEFrrY 'rAX ~ FFIOM CrTY ANNEXATIONS, FY lg85-8~ THROUGH FY lgSg.-g0 NUMB~ OF E~'rIMATIg) AMOUNT OF CITY ANNEXATIONS PROPERTY TAX TRANSFERRED Arvin 2 $2.836 · General Fund Bakersfield 30" $914,896 General Fund Delano 3 $301 General Fund $178 Fire Fund Maricopa 3 $1,429 General Fund RidgecreSt 5 ' $3,069 General Fund Shatter 5 '° $62,606 General Fund $3,179 Fire Fund Taft 5 $118,380 General Fund · . $85,920 Fire Fund Tehachapi 4 ' $1,738 General Fund Wasco I ' $0 General Fund TOTAL ' 58 $1,105,255 General Fund $89,277' Fire Fund Annexations approved but no transfer of proPerty tax until FY 1990-91. Bakersfield: 6 annexations; e~mated transfer of $14,727 (G.F.) Delano: 2 annexations; estimated transter of $14,431 (G.F.) Ridgecrest: 2 annexations: estimated transfer of $270 Tehachapi: 2 annexations; estimated transfer of $842 (G.F.) Wasco: 1 annexation; estimated transter of $208 (G.F.) Annexation approved, but no transter of property tax until FY 1991-92 Shatter: 1 annexation; estimated transfer of $3,422 (G.F.). APPENDIX 'B' .. SUMMARY OF CHANGF, S IN SP-Y-~CI'ED ~ SOURCF, S COUNTY OF KF. RN VS. crIT OF BAKF, RSFP~-~-n COUNTY OF K]iRN crry OF BARERSI~v-r~ FY 1980-81 FY 1990-91 % Incr. FY 1980-81 FY 1990-91 % Incr. Sales & Use $ 13.6 $ 17~5 28.7~ $, 13-2 ' $ 24.7, 87.1% · TaX. ~ Transient $ 0.3 $ 0.9 200.0~ i $ 0.8 $ 2.9 262.5% Occupancy Tax Property Taxes $ 52.3 $139.6 166.9% $ "5.6 $ 169- 189-29% Charges for $ 38.9 $ 48.9. 25.7% $ 0.7' $ 4.0 471.4% Services I APPENDIX 'C' SUMMARY OF NETCOST OF cOuNTY SERVICE~ pROVIDED WITHIN CITY OF BAKERSRELD V~. PROPERTYTAXE~ RECEIVED Total County Population: 549.114 City of Bakersfield Population: 169.501 (30.9% of total county pop.) Greater Bakersfield Area Population: 329,400 County Services Provided SHARE OF FY 1990-91 NET COUNTY COST BUDGETED PRORATED TO CITY OF ~ NET COUNTY coST BAKERSFIELD AREA GENERAL COUNTY GOVERNMENT Assessor $5,948,036 $1.837,943 Auditor-Controller $1,965,789 $607,429 Treasurer/Tax Collector $933,035 $288,308 Board of Supewisors $1,588,312 $490,788 County Admin. Office $1,576,780 $487,225 Clerk of the Board of Supv. ' $486,304 $150,268 EmPloyee Benefits $1,009,200 $311,843 Purcflasing · · $1,113,054 $343,934 i lnformation Systems $6,355,520 $1 ,g63,855 County Counsel 151.940,005 $599,462 Personnel $1,445,539 $446,672 County Clerk- Elections $1,081,008 $334,031 General Services (all budgets) $10,637,132 $3,286,874 Public Works .~ . $723.54{[I General Government Subtotal $38,421,294 $11,872,1 80 PUBLIC PROTECTION Superior Court $2,523,214 $779,673 Bakersfield Muni. Court- 943,722 $519,991 Court Bailiffs- Superior Court $600,000 $330,600 Court Bailiffs- Bakersfield Muni. Court $560,000 $308,560 Sheriff- Civil Division $994,000 $307,146 Court Guards & Prisoner Transportation $3,399,278 $1,873,002 (Superior Court & Bakersfield Muni.) Grand Jury $139,060 $42.970 jury Service $655,532 $202.559 County Clerk $1.980,205 $611 883 District Attomey $7,366,078 ' $2,276 118 District Attorney Crime I. aJ3 $392,130 $121 168 Public Defenaer $4,688,801 $1,448.840 Sheriff's Jail Facilities $19,840,625 $6,130,753 (excl. court support services) Prol3ation $9,052,335 $2,797,172 Juvenite Hall' &.Juvenile Rehal3ilitation $7,869,692. $2,431,735 AgdculturaJ Commieeioner $1,163,3~0 $368,758 Weights & Measures $438,574 $135,519 Coroner -' $1,681,705 $519,647 LAFCO =~ET..ESE S64.167 Public Protection Subtotal $64,526,000 $2i ,270,260 .. HEALTH & SANITATION Public Health ServiCes $3,031,322 $936,679 Mental Health ServiCes $1,328,275 $410,437 Environmental Health ServiCes $1,088,663 $336,459 Ambulance. ServiCe Subsidy $1,050,000 $324,450 Kern Medical Center- Gen. Fund Subsidy $10,500,000 $3,244,500 Emergency Medical ServiCes $221,269 $68,372 Solid Waste Disposal- Gen. Fund Subsidy ~ ~ HeaJth & ,~uiil~tion SubtotsJ $20,842,465 $6,440,322 PUBLIC ASSISTANCE · Welfare Admin. $8,803,703 $2,565,844 Welfare Direct Aid $6,094,925 $2,501,332 Veterans ServiCe $353,363 $109,189 OffiCe on Aging ~133.357 $41.207 Public= AssistanCe Subtotal $16,885,348 . ·$5,217,573 Library ServiCes- Inside City Only $4,606,310 $4,606,310, Farm & Home Advisor ~378.212 ~116.868 Education Subtotal' $4,9iN ,522 $4,723,178 RECREATION AND CULTURE Regional Par~ Near Metro Area $3,102,247 $1,709,338 (BVARA,K.C.R.P.,Metro Rec. area) CountY Parks Inside City $30,000 est. '. $30,000 Museum Services Recreation & Parks Subtotal $3,650,769 $1,899,561 ' G FIAND TOTAL $149,310,396 $51,423,073 'NET COST. OF COUNTY SERVICES PROVIDED Wll CITY OF BAKERSFIELD: $51 ;423,073 PROPERTY TAXES ALLOCATED TO COUNTY Wll CITY OF BAKERSFIELD: $19,375,421 (Basecl on 3.5% delinquency factor) NET COST OF COUNTY SERVICES PROVIDED TO CITY IN EXCESS OF PROPERTY TAXES RECEIVED WITHIN CITY AREA: $32,047,652 APPENDIX D DISTRIBUTION oF PROPERTY TAXES FROM 1% LOCAL GOVERNMENT TAX RATE COUNTY OF KERN FY 1990-91 SPECIAL DISTRICTS 5.7% CITIES 5.8% R.D.A. 1.4% COUNTY 40;5% . SCHOOLS 43.9% S.D.A.F. 2.7% S.D.A.F. - SPECIAL DISTRICT AUGMENTATION FUND R.D.A. - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIES BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM': ED W. SCHULZ, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR BY: FRED L. KLOEPPER, ASSISTANT PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTO~,~ DATE: JULY 13, 1993 SUBJECT: CSA 71 Two items are in' process on CSA 71. First is the proposal to trade service areas in order to take advantage of economies of service that are available. Second, the County inquired as to the applicability of amended Bakersfield Municipal Code section 14.16.020 to the existing CSA 71 City-County agreement. The Council Urban Development Committee met again.on the issue of trading service areas in CSA 71 to maximize service and minimize costs. The Committee agreed that the proposed trade was beneficial to both the City of Bakersfield and Kern County. The Committee should probably file a report to the Council. Public Works will be bringing.the issue back to Council for action. Regarding 'applicability of Bakersfield Municipal Code section 14.16.020 to the City-County CSA 71, attached is a June 24, 1993 memorandum from the City Attorney's Office. Mr. Sherfy's opinion is that the amended section does not apply to the CSA 71 City-County agreement. Therefore, County residents may not be forced to annex in order to receive City sewer service. Attach. MEMORANDUM June 24, 1993 FROM: ROBERT M. SHERFY, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY SUBJECT: APPLICABILITY OF BMC § i4.16.020 TO CONTRACT WITH County FOR SERVICE OF CSA NO..71 You inqUired whether the provisions of recently amended Bakersfield Municipal Code' section 14.16.020 (which reqUires property owners to take steps toward annexation to the City when they make an application'for sewer connection to the City-owned sewer system) wouId applyto those areas within the County~covered by City Agreement No. 89-197, and amendments thereto, ~which agreement provides that certain County areas covered by that agreement are to be served by the City's sewer service. It is our opinion that the newly amended Bakersfield Municipal Code section should not be applied to the County area covered by the contract. A contrary interpretation of the ordinance would have the effect of impairing an obligation of contract, which is constitutionally impermissible. Additionally, there is no indication in the ordinance that it was intended to be applied retroactively to cover the property in qUestion. ~ Please let me know if you have any qUestions. RMS:kkr ' ~5~isc\starnes.6~ BAKERSFIELD JUL ? 1993 ' MEMORANDUM ?UBLJC WORKS DEPARTMENT July 6'~ 1993~? TO' FRED KLOEPPER, ASSISTANT PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR FRO~: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CSA 71 I am unclear as to the status of the disagreement between the City and County on CSA 71. I know that the County wrote us and asked for clarification, or appeal, on what the meaning of the agreement was. I am not aware of us having responded as of this date. Please update me on the status. AT. al b . BAKERSFIELD Alan Tandy · City Manager July 16, 1993 Mr. Bill Turpin LAFCO 2700 "M" Street, Suite 302 Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Annexation No. 374 (Hageman No. !) Dear Mr. Turpin: Please find enclosed a copy of the Resolution adopted by the City Council at its meeting of July 7, 1993. P!ease note the City of Bakersfield will be providing fire protection service and, therefore, the Resolution contains a transfer of the entire Fire Fund to the City. Please also note the County has, at thc request of the City, adopted a resolution pursuant to Government Code §25643 agreeing that the County not levy the Fire Fund Within the City of Bakersfield. Thus, because the City provides its own fire protection, the Fire Fund is collected on behalf of the City and belongs only. to the City for fire protection purposes. The City has been in contact with the County, but is uncertain at this time of whether they will pass a similar resoluti°n. In previous ~annexations, the County-has advised you that the JPA was providing fire protection services both before and after the annexation, thus, obviating the need to transfer the Fire Fund. This was an incorrect assumption on the part of'County staff in that the JPA is not an entity in itself and does not provide any fire service. The City provides fire protection service in all areas, of the City. It does so in certain-areas by agreement with the County to exchange duties, whereby the County protects certain areas'within the City and th'e City protects all the islands and other areas within the County's unincorporated areas. Such exchange agreement does not eliminate the basic resp°nsibility of the City to protect all its citizens from fire, whether they be newly annexed or.otherwise. City of Bakersfield · City Manager's Office · 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield · California · 93301 Mr. Bill Turpin LAFCO July 16, 1993 Page -2- ' We do hope this will not delay the processing of this current annexation. Sincerely, John W. Stinson Assistant City Manager JWS.alb Enclosure cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council City Finance Department City Clerk's Office Planning Department RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF PROPERTY TAX REVENUES UPON LOCAL AGENCY JURISDICTIONAL CHANGE RESULTING FROM ANNEXATION NO. 374, LAFCO'PROC~'~ING NO. 1135, HAGEMAN NO. 1 ANNEXATION (WARD 4). WHEREAS, Section 99 of the Revenue.and Taxation Code (enacted by Chapter 282, amended by Chapter 1161, Statues of 1979) provides that prior to the effective date of any local agency jurisdictional change, other than a city incorporation or formation of a new district as defined in Section 2215 of the Revenue and Taxa~ion Code, 5he governing bodies of all agencies whose service areas Or service responsibilities would be altered by such change shall determine the amount of property tax revenues to be exchanged between and among such affected agencies; and ~REAS, Section 99(b) of the Revenue and Taxation Code provides that no such jurisdictional change may become effective until each county and· city included in such negotiation agrees, by resolution, to accept the negouiaued exchange of property tax revenues;, and WHEREAS, Section 99(b) of the RevenUe and Taxation Code, further provides that in the event that such a jurisdictional change affects the service area or service responsibility of one or more speCial, districts, the Board cf Supervisors of the County in which such district or districts are located shall, on .behalf of the .district or districts, negotia~,e any exchange of property tax revenues; and W74RREAS, the Kern County Local Agency Formation Commission has requested that the Kern County Board of Supervisors and the City Council of the City Of Bakersfield determine property tax revenues which should be exchanged between and among the local agencies involved in the pending jurisdictional change identified as: CITY OF BAKERSFI~ Annexation No. 374, LAFCO Proceeding No. 1135, (Hageman No. 1 Annexation); and WHEREAS, the County Administrative Officer, on behalf of the Board of Supervisors', and the City Manager, on behalf of the City Council of the City of Bakersfield, have examined and conferred regarding the Notice of Filing regarding LAFCO Proceeding No. 1135, and found and reported to their respective governing bodies the determinations set forth in this resolution. NOW, T~{~gR~, BE IT RE$OLVEDby the Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: 1. That, provided the Board of Supervisors of the County of Kern adopt a resolution concurring in determination made herein, a determination is hereby made that there will be no transfers of service, responsibilities to the City of Bakersfield from loCal agencies currently serving in the area of the proposed City of Bakersfield Annexation No. 374 by reason of such annexation, except as follows: county of Kern General Fund ....... Partial (44.7090%) Fire Fund. ' Full~ and, accordingly, that prcpers¥ 5ax revenues which may accrue within the tax ra~e areas comprising 5he proposed City of BakerSfield Annexation No. 374 for fiscal year 1993-94 and.thereafter should be transferred to'the City of Bakersfield as follows: From county of Kern General Fundr that portion determined by multiplying ~he proper~y tax revenues received by the County of Kern General Fund from the area of the proposed annexation in fiscal year !992-93 by the quotient determined by dividing the amount of property tax'revenues received by the'CitY of Bakersfieid in fiscal year 1992-93 · by the sum of the amount of property tax revenues received Dy the County of'Kern General Fund from within the City of Bakersfield in fiscal year !992-93 plus the amount of property tax. revenues received by the City of Bakersfield in fiscal year 1992-93. It is estimated that the amount to be transferred for the fiscal year 1993-94 and thereafter is as follows: Kern County General FUnd Current Entitlement Transfer to City Tax Rate Area 116-004 "Base Amount" $0.00 $0.00 · % Annual Tax Increment 32..5008% 14.5307% Tax Rate Area 116-031 "Base Amount" $10,939.96 $4,891.95 °-·of Annual Tax Incremen~ 32 5008% 14.5307% Tax Rate Area 116-03.9 · "Base Amount" $0.00 $0.00 % of Annual Tax Incremen~ 32.5008% 14.5307% _2_ From Kern County Structural Fire Protection Area, the entireamount of the property tax revenues received by the Kern County Structural Fire Protection Area from the area of the proposed annexation in fiscal year 1993-94. 2. The Clerk of the City of Bakersfield is directed to inform the Board of Supervisors of the County of Kern, the managers of service areas named herein, the Kern County Local AgencyFormation Commission, and the Kern County Auditor-Controller of the aforesaid determined by transmittal to them of certified copies of this resolution.~ o0O - 3 - I HE, wRY CERTIFY that the foregoing ReSolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regUlar meeting thereof held on - ._1~ 0 7 1993 , by the following vote: AYES: COUNClLMEM8ERS McDERMOTT, EDWARDS, OeMOND, SMITH, BRUNNI, NOES: COUNCILMEMr3ERS ABSTAIN: COUNCILME~3~R~ ~,.- I ~, ,-, .- ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the Council of the City .Df Bakersfield APPROVED JUL 0 ? ~3 · "/ ~"~ k' / I ' BOB PRICE~' ~ r4AYOR of th'e City of Bakersfield APPROVED as to form: LAWRENCE M. LUNARDINI City Attorney C~ief Assis[ant ·City Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager ~ FROM: Ed Schulz, Director of public Works DATE: July 16, 1993 SUBJECT: South Beltway EIR Kern COG Board Meeting; July 15, 1993 At the Kern COG Board meeting held at 7:00 P.M., July 15 at the COG conference room, the Board considered the South Beltway Tier I EIR and decided to add three alternative routes to the Tier I EIR. The three alternative routes to be added are as follows: 1. Buena Vista Road (approximately 2 miles south of Taft Highway) 2. The preferred alignment between I-5 and Union, with a northeast diagonal from Union Ave. to S.R. 58 3. The Taft Highway alignment between I-5 and Union, with a northeast diagonal from Union Ave. to S.R. 58 This will add at least six months to the schedule for adoption of the specific plan. The COG staff presented the traffic model information for the alternatives requested by the Board at their last meeting - Bear Mountain Blvd., and an option that combines the preferred alternative west of Union Avenue and Bear Mountain Blvd. east of Union Avenue. Neither of these routes carry sufficient traffic to justify a freeway location there, so these routes are no longer under consideration. City and COG staff will begin working on the exact placement of the additional alternative routes immediately.