The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/06/93 BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM August 6, 1993 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY CO~~ ~ FROM' ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Because of new Federal regulations, local broadcasting companies and our local cable firms are experiencing a significant dispute. There is a memo enclosed, from Trudy Slater, describing that in more detail. 2. There are several responses enclosed to Council Referrals. They include stop work orders, South Beltway alternatives, pushing the Calloway and "Q" Street separation of grade projects, the Citizens Parks and Recreation Committee and, finally, one on recycling. 3. There was a question raised at the Council Goal Setting Session about why the City Center was going so slowly. Plans ,were just submitted to our Building Department this week, and we will have a very quick turn around on them. I. can only presume that the School District's architectural work went more slowly than they originally anticipated, given the late arrival of the completed plans to our office. 4. There is a memo enclosed on an Economic Development Department meeting with Highway 58 businesses. 5. There is a periodic update on Asset Forfeiture monies enclosed. This has previously been requested by the City Council. 6. There is a memo enclosed responding to a Council inquiry on accelerating the budget cycle into April. After evaluation, the staff has looked at the issue and has recommended that, while we can do briefings and provide information to Council in April, completion of the budget document by April 1st would result in its losing accuracy and quality, primarily due to the fact that several of our key revenue estimates will not have arrived by that date. Please review the memo; we think we can meet the intent of the Council request through briefings, but the production of the written document would contain a significant quality decrease. 7. The Hageman Road Bridge has finally gotten clearance from the Federal agency and will be going out to bid after a long delay. 8. Enclosed is a letter to the California Public Utilities Commission commenting on the Proposed General Order regarding the new rules for electric power lines and substations. HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL August 6, 1993 Page -2- 9. There is a memo enclosed regarding the Bakersfield SPCA and their Animal Control Facility replacement/expansion plans. 10. The County Sheriff notified the Police Department that he wants to bill us for helicopter time. Our Chief has ordered tight restrictions on its use. Separately, another County department has directed ambulance companies to bill us for services they have previously paid, such as DUI arrests when the arrested party must go the hospital. We will limit usage and resist these kinds of things, whenever possible. AT.alb Enclosures cc: Department Heads City Clerk BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER~//~///August 3, 1993 FROM: TRUDY SLATER, ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST II ~ SUBJECT- CABLE ACT EFFECTS During August and September a number of things are expected to occur in relation to the 1992 Cable Act. Per federal regulations, cable companies must meet with "local" broadcasters (and others) to work out acceptable terms for carrying their stations on cable. This is the "must carry vs. retransmission" issue. Negotiations must be complete no later than September 6, 1993, which essentially backs everything up a month for adequate public notification of changes in cable line ups. This may upset some citizens, including those whose cable bills have gone up (however minimally) because ofthe increased franchise fees. Others who pay for cable may no longer receive the Los Angeles television stations. Local "low power" stations are another area which is still open for debate and may or may not be shown. Broadcast stations and cable companies are in the midst of negotiations and some patti, es. have begun public campaigns to garner support for their.perspective viewpoints. Councilmembers may receive some of the "fallout" from these "i~formation"~battles through calls from upset or indignant City consumers. !t~is.important to remember that federal regulations pre-empt other statutes when it comes to channels that cable companies will or will not carry.. Bakersfield citizens may feel that the City should have more authority than it does in this area. Some citizens have called about increased franchise fees. In explaining the situation to them, I have stressed the fact that the franchise fees ar~ charged the cable companies to reimburse the City for use of the "public rights of way." Also, the 2% increase for both companies is the first franchise fee increase since the franchises were granted to Cox in 1965 and to Warner in !978. (m080393!) Tuesday, August 3, 1993 ~ ', iPation Here are the answers you won't get from, cable company ' your ~ · QueStion: My cable company sent me a letter saying my service or rate~ may change becauae of the , ,,,~,. Cable Act. What is the Cable. Act? :' '~: The Cable TV Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 was passed by Congress to control cable rates which they believed to be excessive, correct defidencies in service and to provide equitable treatment of local broadcasting stations on cable systems. Some systems will be required to ,' reduce rates if .they don't meet certain criteria for service and competition. . My cable company says some television statto~ may seek compensation for the ~ontinued ,, carriage of their stations on the cable systema. Why should I have to pay more to receive the ',- local stations on cable when I can get them for free off of an antenna? You should not have to pay morel CongreSS has determined that cable compames are already .. -.ompem~tion charging you for local stations carried on their systems, and the new FCC rules wilt not permit the -4. avinga of with .television stations. The cable systems in Bakersfield charge you $19.95 for basic service and first y year. tier service which includes the television stations from Bakersfield, Los Angeles, and other markets r streets, a cleaner plus a variety of cable channels such as CNN. ESPN, A&E, TNT, etc. All of the cable channels you houra, artsand receive for $19.95 cost the cable companies about $4.00 a month to purchase. The broadcast signals s and recreation :ring taxea ~nd fees to cost them nothing. The remaining $15.95 (or so) of your monthly bill is for overhead and Profit for f'hJ~ will take time. the cable company. Now, you decide whether the cable company should be charging you for .,:. :ntinue to receive theh/ retransmission fees paid to local broadcasters. . rlerease$, while llew ................................................................. s of parity. ~e Qu,,sliam .~ no one will suffer ..!:ii: · Why should the cable companies have to pay broadcasters for signals that can be z, eceived _ .~d more..Indeed, we off air? :;~; mild better ture generations. Because the cable companies are charging you for those signals which they have'been.re,ceiving for ~e to~mevhend o.f free! The majority of value they receive from your monthly subscriber fee comes from local broad- ;al Worlcer~ l, oeal 103~ ~e Rea/~. A~ot~e.,- casters and ocher television ~[ations !reported for almos[ no cost. Viewing of the local stations on ~tn. edltori~i, poiley .cable far outweighs the viewing of any other Sources. All 27 to 30 of the channels programmed by . ;speete~ ,,~ a ' the cable companies account for only 27% of your viewing, yet that's the Only programming they pay · tom ltra~y exceed tile for, and that's only about $4.00 of your cable bill. ' ' ' - .=. . =..' :i ~'i'?=~'~ ' .- ~ ...~ ~ . -- "~'~.' -- ~~.:;~t~~ . -. lne cadre companies::,use ~me ot your ~D~r te~ to pur~~~~ ~y r~ve a~~~me, and ~ com~t~ ~~~eff~ 1~ ~~. and discaM ..................... · fried who ~ Hv~ ~. ::~~'~pu~ pro~ at no ~ to ~~":- for ~e ~ ~ d ~e~'~ ~eR o~ pw~ h~ r~q~~~ble . do~g ~ ~ ~ '- i to ad~ ~ ::'{=.~e abfliW of I~1 ~i6 ~ek e~i~ble com~mafion, ~eR ~~ ~afi~:.~ice ~ave s~ somehow d~ ~: ~.~_ ~ ~ w~t I f~ ~ ~ w~ I mi~ ff I l~ ~me or ~ of ~ 1~ -ork e~e, not a Yo~ 1~1 statio~:.~vide you Wi~ over 21~ hou~ of I~al ne~, h~ of hOu~.of 1~. d p~ of ~e, able ~d ,fly pra~c~ ~n pu~ic affa~ prog~ and thousan~ of public se~ice'~cem~ each y~r. .umble b~ ~d im~nt.~rce of'~e~ate emergen~'~o~afion. ~ey help mi~ hun~"~f:~o~ of ~ces. .. doll's fornOn profit:Orga~afions. ~y telecast 1~1 s~: even~, :para~'~nd co~u~ 'Mai s~v~ ~d wor~ ac~vMes. If ~ ~mce is eti~nated or er~ed~ y~:~l.l~ im~nt murces of ne~ ~"~:; ~.~}~ to fMd ~t "pMee ~d ~" M t~y's ~g eme~n~ ~O~n. diversi~ of op~on, op~niti~ for comuni~ e~ion ~i~p~ for.{~?= h~ ~o~e 8y~ ....... ........ + ....... ~ ............................................. ~'; ................ ~:~'~ ,t out ~ ~e wor~g ~e cable'.company ~ll provi~.=~U:~;.;a ~?~'~ allow you to re~ive ~om off ak. e ~H~ ~t employe~ You may have to p~?~.~ant~a on ae back of yo~ ~ Zt or on ae ~f, ff yo~. zt ~ not ~r ~e ~t ~ple to =rch," so to s~. have a buflt-in.:ante~a. .. ~ow ~t ~e work ifM '~d somehow ~: '.:.-. Mv~ge of ~e ~, F~ ~e p~l p~ for ~le I f~l I shoffi ~"~le m~ ~e ~ of~ er ~y w~g m ~e ~ l~flom ~d ~le ~ ~out ~~~ of ~ up her pMee. ~ it "j~ a ~ a ~ ~t::m my ~eld ~1l your cable?compaq. Write to your cable company. TeB ~em you don't want l~al removed from ~e cable ~s[em. Write to your Ci~ Coun~ arid ~e Kern Coun~ Board of Su~- r to he]p ~o~. ~ey con~] a& cable franchises in your area. ang cu]tura] ........................................................... ~t m ~ple ~g ~ o~er p~ of ~e co~? At als point we only know what they say they will do. Nation.de ~mew have ~ taken by independent research companies, to dete~me cable sub~fi~r aaimdes a~ut the ~$~ili~ of l~al ne~ork stations ~ing removed from their cable ~stem. ~ey say the l~al stations represent 53% of the value of their monthly cable [kc; 64% say they wo~ ~ m~ ~e~ sub~iptions if the ne~ork affiliates were removed; 78% thi~ they sho~ p~ $10.40 1~ for mon~ly semce. PACHECO Sponsored by: --..,--.-, KBAK-TV, KERO-TV, & KGET-TV work full dudng t~e day, I1~O~ (Source:. The Roper Organization, 1993 Pt,blic Altitudes Toward Television) TO: Jack Hardisty, Planning Director FROM: Jack Leonard, Asst. Building Director DATE: July 30, 1993 SUBJECT: Building Department Policy Regarding Stop Work Orders The Building Department rarely exercises the use of a stop work order. It is usually issued only in extreme cases involving a contractor's (or owner's) blatant refusal to comply with code requirements. A stop work order in this case would be issued by the area Supervisor. Building Inspectors are given authority to issue stop work orders, but are generally restricted to those involving work performed without obtaining a proper permit. It is important to stop work immediately if a permit has not been obtained. This is to prevent the potential for improper construction which could lead to costly modifications.. If an Inspector issues a stop work order, they are required to report the order to their Supervisor (and generally do by radio prior to issuance). The Building Department respects the financial burden imposed to the owner (or builder) in the use of stop work orders, and uses them in only extreme, well documented cases. Stop work orders clearly define the specific Municipal or Building Code violation. If there is a problem, our staff is available to the public to review, discuss, or interpret the requirement in question. I have polled my Supervisory and Inspection staff and within the last 12 months they estimate approximately 4 to 5 stop work orders were issued related to "refused to comply" and numerous stop work orders were issued related to "work without permit". If you need additional information, or if there is a specific stop work order in question, please contact me at Ext. 3790. cc: Dennis Fidler, Building Director JL/kg/swo BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: ED SCHULZ, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS ~. DATE: August 5, 1993 SUBJECT: 07/07/93 - CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL RECORD # 12029 South Beltway and land acquisition costs. (Wards 1,4,6,7) At the July 7, 1993 Council meeting, a Councilmember requested land acquisition costs for the South Beltwa¥: The estimated land acquisition costs for the three alternative routes included in the original Environmental Impact Report are as follows: Alt. #1 (Preferred) $ 8,994,580 Alt. #2 (Taft Hwy.) $ 36,556,592 Alt. #3 (DiGiorgio Rd.) $ 7,621,307 These costs have been recently updated and include the 210 foot right-of-way plus the interchanges at approximately 1 mile intervals. The beltway is considered to extend from Weedpatch Highway/Panama Lane to I-5 (See the attached map). For those parcels in the proposed right-of-way known to have a structure on them, a relocation benefit amount has been estimated. The unit costs used to determine this cost estimate are based on average current costs within the general area of the alternatives for commercial, light and medium residential, irrigated agricultural and permanent crop acreage. SOUTH BELTWAY PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS PANAMA LANE ~s -- PANAMA LANE · ~ IBERKSHI:RE Rd. ~ n, m~ ~ m ~ ~Mcl:UTCHEE q Rd. ~ HOSKIN~ A~. MOUNTAIN~EW Rd.- '' ~!~ ~ -- < - .................. ~'-'~xi ~ ~ ~ -' McKEE Rd. ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, c,o.c,o.o~a ~ ~. ,,.... .... . ~ ~ :~ 0 0 . .. ~ ~ Z ~E~P~TOH LOOP .. ~ HC JO"TON ROAD0 ~ ~ ' -- ~ ~R~II~ ~ ......... B A K E R S F'I E L D Alan Tandy · City Manager August ~4, 1993 Ronald E. Brummett, Executive Director Kern Council of Governments 1401 19th Street, Suite 200 Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: SoUth Beitway Alternatives/Environmental Impact Report Dear Mr. Brummett: At the July 28, 1993 City Council meeting, the Council considered and adoPted the. attached report from the Council's Urban Development Committee, regarding a Kern COG decision to study a South Beltway alternative along Buena Vista Boulevard in addition to the three alternatives' which have been· completed to date. The Council further directed staff to communicate to your office a recommendation to not pursue a study of the Buena Vista Boulevard alignment. This alignment does not serve the growing south Bakersfield area as needed to implement the 2010 General Plan. To further delay the long overdue completion of the South Beltway Study and EIR in order to study an alignment of questionable benefit, does not serve the interests of this community. Please present our concern to your Board at the next available Board meeting. · ~.~..~TANDY City Manager Attach. City of Bakersfield * City Manager's Office * 1501 Truxtun Avenue 'Bakersfield · California · 93301 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMI'ITEE REPORT NO. 2-93 July 28, 1993 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: SOUTH BELTWAY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT On July 15, 1993 the Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG) chose not to certify an EIR for the south' beltway but instead directed the consultant to continue studying alternative alignments. These alternative alignments range so far south as not to serve the growing neighborhoods of Bakersfield as needed to implement the 2010 General Plan, A delayof at.least six months will further jeopardize our ability to acquire right-of-way for this transpo/'tation facility. Evaluation of the far south alternatives should be COnsidered as a part of proposals to urbanize the' areas south of Taft Highway, if and when they are brought forward. Our need is to adopt a route to serve the urban area north of Taft Highway. The Urban Development Committee is seriously disappointed .in Kern COG's decision. It is recommended that staff be directed to develop options to encourage the rapid conclusion to ~hese studies to bring forward a proposed route for adoption. Respectfully .submitted, C~~McDermotz. Councilmember Patricia Smith Id UDC2:93.RPT July 22, 1993, 2:30pm BAKERSFIELD ,Alan Tandy'- City Manager August 3, 1993 Board of Directors Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District 608 Kentucky Street Bakersfield, CA 93305 RE: "Q"-30th-"M" Street Grade Separation·Project Gentlemen: Pursuant to a July 28, 1993 City Council directive, this is to inform the District board that the City of Bakersfield has no interest in pursuing the above referenced project. City share of funding for the project will not be available due to commitments to the Coffee Road Separation project.. The City Council also expressed a strong desire that Calloway Dfive/A.T.& S.F. and "Q" Street/A.T.& S.F. Railroad Crossing Grade Separation projects be pursued at the earliest possible opportunity. Calloway Drive will become a' through street between Stockdale Highway and. Rosedale Highway in FY 94-95 when the Kern River and Cross Valley Canal bridges are constructed. The City appreciates the Board's continuing efforts on behalf of the City of Bakersfield. ~' ~..an,T, andy City Manager cc: Ronald F. Ruettgers, Civil Engineer Engineer to the Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District 1801 2Ist Street, Suite 4 · Bakersfielct, CA 93301 City of Bakersfield · ~City Manager's Office · 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield · California · 93301 BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM July 29, 1993 TO: PATRICIA SMITH, COUNCILMEMBER, WARD 3 CHAIR, LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE FROM: TRUDY SLATER, ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST II ~~ At the Citizens Parks and Recreation Committee meeting held on July 20, 1993, the Committee discussed its request for the City Council to look into granting commission status to the Citizens Parks and Recreation Committee. I relayed to the Committee that the issue had been referred to the Legislative and Litigation Committee and was scheduled to be placed on the agenda during one of the Legislative and Litigation Committee meetings in August. After discussion among its members, the Citizens Parks and Recreation Committee decided that further information is needed at its level before the Council Legislative and Litigation Committee addresses the issue. Thus, support staff for the Citizens Parks and Recreation Committee was directed to provide the Citizens Committee with more information before the Council Committee reviews the request. This Citizens Committee action delays any Legislative and Litigation Committee action needed until further information and input is received from the Citizens Parks and Recreation Committee clarifying what that committee is seeking. Mary Sawyer, Chair of the Citizens Parks and Recreation Committee, indicated she would like to be at the Legislative and Litigation Committee meeting when the issue is discussed. I told her I would inform you as chair of the Legislative and Litigation Committee. This memo will serve to remove the Citizens Parks and Recreation Committee request from the Legislative and Litigation Committee's agenda until further information is received from them. (m0726931) cc: Mary Sawyer, Chair, Citizens Parks and Recreation Committee KAlan Tandy, City Manager Lee Andersen, Community Services Frank Fabbri, Parks O{T~ ~ANAG~R~ Jim Ledoux, Recreation Larry Lunardini, City Attorney 30JULg~ ~ 20 MEMORANDUM August 2, 1993 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager /~ / FROM: Gene Bogart, Acting Water and Sanitation aM_a_ga'glr SUBJECT RECYCLING INQUIRY BY MS. LAURA BAZELEY, W.Z.I. INC. On June 23, 1993, the City Council referred a request by Granite Construction regarding the recycling of inert materials to the Urban Development Committee. In attendance at the City Council meeting, Ms. Laura Bazeley of W.Z.I., Inc. (a local consulting firm), asked to be included in discussions regarding recycling projects. Mike Sides of our Sanitation Division contacted Ms. Bazeley the next day to follow-up on her inquiry. Ms. Bazeley stated she represented Gibson Environmental, a hazardous-waste recycling plant near Rosedale Highway on Marriott Drive. She explained that they might be interested in participating in some phase of the recycling program. Mr. Sides explained the inert/concrete recycling program as proposed by Granite Construction Co. Ms. Bazeley said she would discuss this with her client to see if there would be further interest in participating in this type of recycling program. Not hearing back from Ms. Bazeley, I contacted her on July 30th to see if she or her clients still had an interest in pursuing a program. She was very friendly and responsive, but said Gibson Environmental cannot handle or recycle concrete. She indicated that the plant can recycle soils, tank materials and petroleum by-products. After further discussion, Ms. Bazeley said she would stay in contact with the Sanitation Division to look at other possible recycling programs in the future. CITY' cc: Mike Sides 2 AU~ 95 ~ 40 Trudy Slater ' State' EPA,.. investigates '- 'Waste plant ::,, By ROB -:' State ~uvironmental [~*otecUon .Agency investigators searched Gib-' son Environmental ~"ruesitay, ~t t,Sey did not pubUcly disclose what they were looking for. ** Inve.sUgaUve~..teama entet~l_ ~.the. ~,ke~teid. I~,~U~iou.wa~:~' · ' Truxtun Zv~ shS~" ar~er' 9 a:n~.''~ and remained lllsicle for several '. . - .;. "We've executed Search war- rants at both locations," said Ed- - ~ard DotT,' senior investigator with · the Ca~ornia Department o! Toxic Substance ControL · ,~ Dory said an investigation, is in · ' · '.':. *.' '. i~s preliminary stages. He said he could not discuss what investigators * ~ere looking for, what other agen- '.:. '.' .. ' -"-- '* *'-.: "*' ~es were involved, what led to the ~arch warrant, if samples had bL, en seized and if'locations outside I~akersfleld also were being i .s~arched. ' ~ ** Likewise, Gibson officials said ~ ~tvesUgators did not provide 0~ the reason for the search. Offi- rials said they were Informed that :"" ';:::"**'/*: ~." *":*:: ..* (i/'~ ))i *:' ":.:':::":- ~ charges had been filed agaL~t ... .... . ..... C~bson. They stressed all facillUes · * * * . ' . will continue operating uninterrupt- . .' :: The warrants were issued bY a - ' *'* :*' ***- '/ ¢eurt in San Mateo County and *""**' ~:'.. : **** allowed investigators to .review "" [ii '.., . *.. .. ' .... ' · ' ~mpany documents, according to .-' - · /*. *:' c~mpany officials. cl~ef opera~g officer.' ~ underground fuel storage tanks i , i . aad other oily materials. * In March, the federal EPA cited GToson for violating numerous envi- ronmental laws and sought a $,~1,500 t'me. "~ Gibson officiah said* at that time · t~e.. violaUons were little more than a-aeries of paperwork errors. i~;The complaint in March grew · fr~n violaUons found in two inspec- by the U,2. EPA and a third I'-i * i i'~ f '** ' ' i'i .b~ the. California Department of August 2, 1993 CI'i'~ FROM: Jake Wager, Economic Development Director CI:T~r ~J SUBJECT: Freeway 58 Corridor Transportation Task Force Our meeting July 28 brought together for the first time property owners and agents, transportation carriers, economic development professionals, and local government officials to address the issues of transportation for industrial properties along Freeway 58. The consensus from the group was that the area is chronically underserved by rail. However, it offers excellent freeway visibility and access to accommodate truck transportation. Input from the trucking industry suggested national trends point to the growing use of trucks as opposed to rail as the preferred method of transportation. However, KEDC representatiyes mentioned they continually receive requests from clients for rail-served sites, even though this is not the situation elsewhere. There will, of course, always be industries which will rely upon rail transport. An obstacle to bringing rail to the area is cost. Depending upon the length of the line, issues such as securing the easement, providing grade separations or at-grade crossings, PUC filings, as well as whether the company operating the line is unionized each play a part in the total cost of extending rail service. An idea generated from the meeting was to secure an easement at the earliest possible opportunity. Securing the easement, obtaining PUC approvals, grade crossings, and everything short of laying the track, would allow us to show clients that the opportunity for rail exists; currently, no such opportunity is available. Securing the easement and all other items associated with it would clear the biggest hurdle; laying the track is the easiest part. In fact, a railroad representative stated that track could be laid in as little as one month. Such an arrangement for securing a rail easement currently exists in Stockdale Business Park behind the Castle & Cooke "spec" building. Such an easement was a lease requirement for R&G Sloane which occupies over half of the building. One solution may be an intermodal transportation hub, offering a link between rail lines and non- served properties using trucks. Such a hub could increase the marketability of the area to potential industrial users. There was discussion that property representatives need to educate themselves about the benefits intermodal transport can offer clients; because agents are n°t aware of these benefits, clients requesting rail may steered only to rail-served sites without knowing the other options available to meet their transportation needs. Such a discussion also pointed out the need for a larger agent educational effort to agents about various transportation opportunities to Mr. Alan Tandy August 2, 1993 Page 2 offer potential clients. We will be initiating discussions with Kern Council of Governments to participate in a study regarding how well Kern County is served by rail. As a component of this study, we will also want to determine the most cost-effective alignment and what is involved in obtaining such an easement. Private property owners who would benefit from such rail service would also participate in funding this study. PD 64-2759 MEMORANDUM JULY 27, 1993 TO ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER ~ FROM STEVE BRUMMER, CHIEF OF POLICE SUBJECT ASSET FORFEITURE FUNDS THE BALANCE IN THE ASSET FORFEITURE ACCOUNT AS OF JUNE 20, 1993, IS $1,714,387.26, WHICH IS AN INCREASE OF $38,961.35 FROM MARCH 31, 1993. THERE WERE NO MAJOR REVENUE OR EXPENDITURES DURING THIS PERIOD. ,HOWEVER, AS WRITTEN ON THE MEMORANDUM DATED MAY 20, 1993 (ASSET FORFEITURE FUNDS), DURING FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 THE DEPARTMENT ANTICIPATES EXPENDING $122,025 FOR THE D.A.R.E. PROGRAM; $264,100 FOR THE PROBATION COMPLIANCE TEAM; $347,036 FOR A RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM; $50,000 FOR CAPITAL OUTLAYS AS NEEDED; AND ANY OTHER MINOR FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT ITEMS (UNDER $600). SEB:VJ:jh CITY t~ANAGER.~ 4 AUG 95 9:27 BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ~ ,~ August 5, 1993 // FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: PRESENTATION OF ANNUAL BUDGET REVIEW BE MOVED TO APRIL At the July 7th Council Meeting, Councilmember Rowles recommended that the annual budget be presented for Council review in April, rather than May. The recommendation has good intent, however, I want to embellish on the process and outline some concerns. The budget calendar is prepared at the end of the calendar year, with several considerations in mind: availability of current year actual revenue in order to project revenues for the ensuing budget year; negotiated salary settlements; medical insurance premiums; workers compensation rates; PERS rates; other data vital to preparing the budget; and the workload of key budget personnel. The budget calendar is a six-month process which commences in January, with a "Kick-Off" meeting of department representatives. Typically, this meeting is scheduled to occur after the Governor presents his budget and at a time when staffing levels in the various departments are not affected by the holiday season. The City Manager's Office provides the departments with specific instructions, and the priorities, challenges and concerns of the budget are outlined. In addition, there is a budget workshop to inform Council about the upcoming budget issues and to receive input regarding their priorities. As you are aware, the budget is comprised of three components: the operating, capital improvements and revenue projections. Simultaneously, departments are preparing their operating budgets (which are due the first week of March), and their capital improvement budgets (due in February to be referred to the Planning Commission by April). In addition, at the same time, departments are also recalculating and updating figures used for the fee schedule and maintenance districts. In many cases, the preparation of the budget, calculation of fees and preparation of maintenance district assessments involves the same staff members. State law requiring 45-day notice for hearings places much of the workload on staff at the same time the budget is being prepared. In order to submit the Proposed Budget April 1st, the process must begin in December. Typically, there are many staff members who participate in the gathering and collating of budget information. Historically, the month of December is a time that our municipal work force (including the Budget Team) schedule time off to spend with their families and friends. In addition, many of the employees with outside entities with whom we must deal for information, such as State Department of Revenue, the County Assessor, etc., are also not available. RONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL August 5, 1993 Page -2- Due to the unprecedented changes in funding from the State, there is a great deal of uncertainty associated with budget preparation, and information regarding the impact of State action on General Fund revenue estimates {e.g., property and sales tax} is constantly changing. Typically, good, solid preliminary estimates for many of the General Fund revenue sources are not received until late April. Similarly, the further we are into the fiscal year expenditure history, the more accurately we are able to project year end expenditures and balances. A budget presented April 1st would have to be based on February expense reports - four full months of the year would remain and there would be a corresponding drop in accuracy of the estimates. Consequently, numerous, last minute changes are now required by the City Manager in order to present a balanced budget proposal to Council by the first Council Meeting in May. A budget submitted to Council on April 1st, without the revised revenue estimates from late April, would simply not be very meaningful. I would also like to take this opportunity to remind Council that, historically, the budget has been presented at the last Council Meeting in May. This year, staff was able to present a printed document reflecting a balanced budget to Council at their first meeting in May. While the budget is a planning document, a great deal of effort is made to provide Council with the most accurate information available at the time, so as to minimize the need for changes after it has been presented to Council. This allows Council to focus on policies and issues, rather than dealing with accounting details that should be handled by staff. Moving the budget up to April could provide the opportunity for additional Council Budget Workshops later in the budget process to allow for the reconciliation of earlier preliminary budget figures with more recent ones. While this is feasible, keep in mind that it could create some confusion with the public and City employees as they may not be able to track all the changes. Also, if numerous adjustments are made to the budget during public budget workshops, it could erode Council's credibility, as they could be perceived as being uncertain and/or always changing their priorities. We are sensitive to the need of the City Council to deliberate the budget with as few time pressures as possible. It is, however, our opinion that workshops and discussion sessions that can be held in April can provide Council with~the background and overview material that will make the formal budget consideration process more meaningful in May and June. We can, if instructed, produce a finished book by April 1st. It would, however, require so many adjustments and refinements that it would be form without much substance. We can achieve the desired benefits through April workshops while continuing to produce the "book" in early May. HR.AT.alb BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM FROM: M.A. DUNWOODY, ~MINISTRATIV~YST 'ii SUBJECT: BAKERSFIRI~ SPCA - ~I~L CONTROL FACILI~ REP~CEMENT/EXP~SION PLANS As you are aware, the~ 1992-93 Budget contained f~ds to be used as a grant for the B~ersfield SPCAto exp~d their EdisonFacility. Since the teethe money was appropriated, they have sold their Edison Facility and have been in the process of focalizing a pl~ to replace the facility. As it looks now, they are ready to present their proposal. Earlier this year, a plan to absorb animal control at the adoption center was being considered. However, since then, the SPCA has opened escrow on the property directly across the street from their Adoption Center on Gibson. Their long term plus are to build a new a~ption center on ~at property ~d dedicate the existing adoption center to animal control pu~oses. nat this involves is const~cting ke~els and t~porary facilities on the new property ~d making modifications ~d improv~ents to the Gibson facility for animal control. Any activity involving the new adoption center would be the responsibility of the Bakersfield SPCA. Proceeds from the sale of the Edison Facility will be used, in conj~ction with the gr~t monies, to make i~rovemmnts at the Gibson site for animal control pu~oses. Because the Gibson facili~was used for ke~el~g dogs and not ~al control, several improv~ents need to be made. It does not conta~ ~y facilities for euth~asia, disposal accommodations, or kennels for isolation or vicious dogs. In addition, some of the existing facilities are inadequate ~d need to be updated. ~e original agre~ent was that the SPCA would fin~ce the money for the exp~sion and receive $45,000 a year for ten years which would be applied to principal pa~ts. In retu~, the contract would be extended from 5 years to 10 years and depreciation costs on the facilities would not be considered part of the operating costs. The SPCA ~d their contractor have ~de a prelimina~ presentation to Laura Marino and myself ~d are prepared to make a presentation to Co~cil or city staff, as desired. I have asked for additional i~ormation and details on their plans and am expecting to receive something in a week or so. Meanwhile, unless directed otherwise, the Attorney's office is drafting a contract for Council approval. For some time, the SPCA has been concerned about the size and location of the Edison Facility. The facility is located in east Bakersfield off of Highway 58 and Weedpatch Highway and has only 30 kennels which are often filled with three or more dogs. One of their goals has been to relocate to a larger facility in a more centralized location. In the past, the City and the SPCA have both worked towards providing the public with quality animal control and I look forward to seeing this continue at a new location. cc: Henry Ross III John Stinson Laura Marino mad:spcawp\expnplns Page 2 CHAIRMAN: Banking, Finance and Public Assembly In(~ebtedness Califo ia Legislatu . Insurance rn , re~ Utilities and Commerce Water, Parks and Wildlife ; MEMBER: STEVE PEACE Commission of the Californias ASSEMBLYMAN July 30, 1993 ~4ANA~an Tandy, City Manager City of Bakersfield City Manager's Office 95 ~0~1 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, Ca 93301 Dear Mr. Tandy: ........... Thank you--~o-~ ~c~ntacting me to express your views on ~e~°rm-o~ the workers' compensation system. Your concerns~ played! a very importan% roll in helping us fashion a bipartisan reform package. I realize that significant change to a system as complicated as 'that of', Workers' C~6mp~hsa'ti6hi in California will be fraught with unanticipated pitfalls~ ~for 'm~any of the affected participants. Moreover, I am aware that what we have done~ will not be perfect. AccOrdingly, I welcome your continued communication of thoughts and ideas as to. how the system should be further .changed. Be assured .that the members of the Senate and Assembly will act aPpropriately · and exPeditiously on ~legislation ~to' address the .problems which Will inevitably arise with the 'major pieces of legislation just signed' into law. ... . The reform Package does not reflect everything I wou]'d' like tO 'see- in a new Workers' Compensation System, but it is a radical ~acelift for the moribund system. Just as impOrtant, our ability to produce an overwhelming bipartisan Work · product demonstrates to the business and investment communities that California can govern itself - that we can tackle tough problems with reason and compromise. I. am hopeful that this spirit will carry over in-our efforts in August to create a California Infrastructure Bank and a Capital Access Program to make much-needed .capital for the job creating industries. Again, I thank, you for your thoughts and comments regarding workers' compensation and all other issues. Please contact my office if you wish to receive specific information regarding the ~kers' compensation laws. State Capitol P.O. Box 942849 [] 430 Davidson Street - Suite B [3 1101 Airport Road - Suite C Sacramento, California 94249-0001 Chula Vista, Califorhia 91910 Imperial, California 92251 Telephone; {916) 445-7556 Telephone: (916) 426-1617 Telephone: (619) 352-3101 FAX 916-322-2271 - FAX 619-696-5430 FAX 619-355-4831 Printed on Recycled Paper . STATE OF CALl FORN IA SENATE SACRAMENTO. CALIFORNIA 95814 DAVID ROBERTI PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE JulY 30, 1993 C ~ri'~ MA~AGER~ Mr. Alan Tandy ~, ~Ci~y Manager 2 AUG 95 ~y of Bakersfield * 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Dear Mr. Tandy: ~_~ha~nk_ ygu. for contacting my office to urge passage of meaningful ~ work~sf ~compDnS~n~ ~efor~ legislation. As you are no doubt aw~r~j~st S~ch~legislation paSsed the State Senate and Assembly with/~stb0~, bipa~tisa~ ~UPP0rt'?~a~d~ was '.'immediately ~ signed ~into Last fall, disappointed with :the 'Legislature's failure to.agree on workers" compensation reform, Z met with employers large and small throughout Southern California to plan a new legislative strategy to win reforms. I pledged to use my position as leader of the State Senate to focus the debate on such key issues as stress and post-termination claims, and to appoint key legisla- tive decision makers who would make those issues, and the needs of employers and employees a higher priority than partisan .politics. _. Fortunately,_ the Governor. and ether .leg. islat~ve~e~ders pursued. parallel goals. That strategy has produced extraordinary results which far exceeded the expectations of a skeptical press and public. More importantly, it has produced a reform package which, in my opinion, is the most Significant step forward since the workers' compensation system was established over 75 years ago. I am proud 'of what· we haVe accomplished together on this. issue, and I. am. more than ever convinced that if we simply choose to Work tOgether," a. collaboration'of. California's business, 'labor an~: gdge~nmenb~'c'an: ;a6hieve' 'a~- ~sp~c'tacular-''economic%. recovery.' and July 30, 1993 Page Two Your advice in these matters is invaluable to me, and I hope that you will continue to be actively involved in the crucial public policy issues which confront us. I am pleased to enclose, for your information, a summary of the historic 1993 workers' compensation reform package. As always, if my office can provide additional information or assistance on this or other legislative matters, please don't hesitate to call on me. Sincerely, DAVID ROBERTI President pro Tempore California State Senate DR: scjg Enclosure l or °ur "'l/insiaht Revised, July 28, 1993 California Senate Off'we of Research, 1020 N Street, Suite 565, Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 445-1727; FAX324.3944 THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION SOLUTION Overview On July 16, 1993, Governor Pete Wilson signed a package of bills to restructure the state workers' compensation system, raising benefits for.disabled workers and reducing costs to employers. Wilson acted within an hour of final legislative, passage of the bills, most of which are designed to become effective immediately. He delayed signing two of the seven bills in the package, SB 30 and SB 1005, until JUly 28 to allow further review. Observers suggest .the package succeeded in winning bipartisan support because it required concessions from a variety of interests that in past years had gridlocked over attempts at reform ..................... - ..... Workers' compensation provides benefits to replace wages, vocational rehabilitation and medical care for about 750,000 workers who are injured on the job each year. The system has long been heavily criticized in California for its high costs to employers, its low benefits, its perennial problems with fraud and abuse, including those involving stress claims, and the impediments it has posed to business development and new hiring. Costs to California employers for workers' compensation have been among the steepest in the nation, while weekly benefits to injured workers have been among the lowest. Proponents predict the overhaul could pave the way for California's long-delayed economic recovery. Wilson called it "the single most important job-creation legislation that I have signed." Benefits to Workers and Employers The new laws are designed to cut costs by at least $1.5 billion in annual costs from a system which currently costs more than $11 billion, and to use the savings for the benefit of workers and employers. Under the reforms, it will be harder for unscrupulous lawyers, doctors and others to conduct wholesale abuses by processing claims in huge volumes to generate substantial incomes. Physicians' outside rural areas will be generally prohibited from referring injured workers to clinics in which the physicians hold financial interests. Employers, who finance workers' compensation, will also receive an immediate overall rate reduction of 7 percent in the workers' compensation premiums charged by insurance carriers, to be implemented by the Insurance Commissioner. Temporarily injured employees will see their workers' compensation benefits rise from a maximum of $336 to $490 per week over a three-year period beginning July 1, 1994. The benefit increases amount to $747 million. THE NEW BENEFITS FORMULA Here is how workers' compensation benefits would change under the agreement:' Weekly Benefits Current 1994 1995 1996 Temporary disability $336 $406 $448 $490 15.-24 percent disability $140 $148 $154 $160 25-69 percent disability $148 $158 $164 $170 70-99 percent disability $148 $168 $198 $230 Life Pension $64 $94 $124 $154 _Death.Benefits ......... Single ....-~--..2_dependents ..... 3~/-more dependents Current $95,000 $115,000 $115,000 July 1, 1994 $115,000 $135,000 $150,000 July 1, 1996 $125,000 $145,000 $160,000 Vocational Rehabilitation Injured workers will be limited in most cases to one vocational rehabilitation plan with a ceiling ors 16,000, including a limit of $4,500 on counseling fees. Claims previously had been averaging more than $20,000. -2- Stress Injuries Job-related events must be the "predominant' cause of stress injuries to be deemed eligible for workers' compensation benefits. In the past, only 10 percent of those psychiatric injuries needed to be caused by employment. Health Care Injured workers may use their own physicians immediately if the doctors were designated before the injuries. Depending on what health insurance options are offered, employers can control the health care of injured workers for 90, 180 or 365 days, rather than the 30 days provided previously. But the 365~day provision applies only when employees have access (o -thei~ p~%-6nal~h~siciaffs~- Other Reforms The new law presumes the. evaluation of an injury claim by the treating physician is correct, In 'disputed cases, each side -- an applicant's lawyer and an employer's insurance company -- will be limited to asking one physician to evaluate the severity of an injury, at the employer's expense, rather than using several doctors. Workers who have lost their jobs will not be able to file claims unless they have evidence their injuries occurred while they were still employed. The Bills The package consists of Assembly Bills 110 (Peace), 119 (Brulte), and 1300 (W. Brown) and Senate Bills 30 (Johnston), 484 (Lockyer), 1005 (Lockyer) and 983 (Greene). When They Become Effective Although ~ !_10,_ ~the o~nibusreform bill, .was. anurgency bill.to take effect immediately, its own provisions specify that only its changes related to implementing an immediate 7 percent rate cut are immediately effective. All other provisions, including managed care, physician self-referral restrictions, new limits on the number of medical-legal evaluations, and vocational rehabilitation limits, are for injuries occurring on and after January 1, 1994. AB 110's benefit improvements do not begin to phase-in until July 1·, 1994. AB 119, which sets new standards for psychiatric, or stress, injuries and post- termination claims, is an urgency bill, which will be effective for all injuries occurring after its enactment. -3- Descriptions of the Bills Assembly Bill 110, the omnibus bill, incorporates many of the medical-legal reforms, health treatment cost-containment provisions and vocational rehabilitation benefits. Assembly Bill 119 limits eligibility for psychiatric injuries and post-termination claims. Assembly Bill 1300 provides new and tougher fraud-prevention measures. Senate Bill 30 contains insurance-rate reform. Senate Bill 484 provides the appropriations needed for the state to administer the new reforms. Senate Bill 983 permits labor-management collective-bargaining agreements in the construction industry to adopt experimental alternative benefit and treatment provisions. Senate Bill 1005 establishes the Commission on Health and Safety and Workers' Compensation. Highlights of the package: Assembly Bill 110 Omnibus Reforms * Requires the insurance commissioner to implement a 7 percent premium rate reduction to provide immediate rate relief for employers · Develops a workers' compensation information system to assist the Department of Industrial Relations in managing the workers' compensation system effectively and efficiently. · ~ ~_E_~xpa~_d_.s_~.e. n3_p;!o_y__e[ r!g..hts~ 9%ncem!ng ~th~e_c~a~_c..~!g~_o_~n~_o_f_~_n_sp.r.__a~c_.e_ policies. · Increases the emphasis on injury prevention. · Limits physician referrals to health-care facilities in which they have a financial interest. · Places a $16,000 overall cap on vocational rehabilitation services. · Caps vocational rehabilitation counselor fees at $4,500. · Places strict limits on the number of rehabilitation plans. · Provides mechanisms for the termination of vocational rehabilitation liability for employers. and premium refunds for alternative work. - 4 - · Limits the number of employer-paid medical-legal evaluations to no more than one per side. ,~ · Authorizes managed care and other cost-containment incentives for the treatment of worker injuries and illnesses. * Requires the revision of the medical treatment fee and medical-legal fee schedules, including new limits on hospital and prescription fees. Assembly Bill 119 Psychiatric Injuries and Post-termination Claims · Creates a new and higher standard of"predominant cause" in determining whether stress related to a job is subject to workers' compensation. · Provides a slightly lower exception to the "predominant cause" standard for victims of violent crimes or direct exposure to violent acts. · Establishes new limits for any claims that follow notice of termination or layoff. Assembly Bill 1300 Fraud Allows prosecuting district attorneys to use half of fees recovered in fraud cases for additional fraud prosecutions. Requires that parties to a claim must file a statement, under penalty of perjury, that anti-fraud statutes have not been violated. · Prohibits persons convicted of workers' compensation fraud from collecting benefits associated with the fraudulent claim. Senate Bill 30 Competitive Insurance Rate Setting · Replaces the current minimum-rate law on January 1, 1995, with a "file and use" rating system, which would provide new open rate competition among insurance companies. · During the period prior to open competition, gives temporary authority to the insurance commissioner to regulate surcharging and dividend practices that are unfairly discriminatory. · Gives permanent authority to the insurance commissioner to regulate rates when necessary to maintain insurance company solvency or to prevent an insurance company monopoly. - 5 - · Requires all workers' compensation insurance policies issued or renewed between january 1, 1995, and January 1, 1996, to include a notice containing a summary of the changes in the rating laws enacted during the 1993-1994 legislative session. Senate Bill 484 Appropriation · Provides the appropriations necessary for state administration of the new workers' compensation reforms. Senate Bill 983 ......... C~llectiv_e Ba~rg~a.i.n_in~. ._ ..... ~-~ _~ ~.~ ~__--~_- .......... -~ _ ~_. · Permits a limited number of employers and labor organizations in the construction industry to experiment with alternative workers' compensation programs through their collective-bargaining agreements, as long as rights and benefits are no less than those provided by the law. Senate Bill 1005 Health and Safety and Workers' Compensation COmmission · SB 1005, abolishes the current Health and Safety Commission and reconstitutes it as the Health and Safety and Workers' Compensation Commission composed of eight members, four from organized labor and four representing employers. · Requires an ongoing examination of the workers' compensation system and the state's activities to prevent job-related injuries and diseases. The Votes Final Senate floor votes were: . ~ SB 30 (Johnston), 30-2. SB 484 (Lockyer), 36-0. SB 983 (Greene), 37-0. SB 1005 (Lockyer), 37-0. AB 110 (Peace}, 33-3. AB 119 (Brulte), 34-2. AB 1300 (W. Brown), 37-0. Additional analyses of the bills are available from the Senate Office of Research, (916)~ 445-1727. Prepared by Ken Hurdle and Steve Coony -6- July 23, 1993 Alan Tandy, City Manager - B'a'kers f'iet, d 1501 Truxton Avenue BakerSfield, CA 93301 Dear Mr. Tandy: Thank you for contacting me to urge reform of California's workers' compensation, system.... '..'7'~ ~ :. , ". . .'.:., '~ ' ..'-.L ~', ~' .~. .. .~.: ~' ..... :'y;"-.. "~,'.~_:~.~ OZ.' ,..'. 5: ~ .<: ' I am Pi~ed" ~Q- report to, YoU. >.:..that oh,qu~y'.l~,:.the .:Legislature passed',.a~d./th~"G°vern6r;. Signed~.a :~packa~ 3 of bil 1 ss'. which :enact<-~the · most remarkable reform of the system s~nce ~ts origination. We estimate that.,these.:r.efor.m~ wit.!:?save Californians, at a minimum, $1.5 billlon' in. workers..' . ComPensation c0sts..by, stripping.:. the ' .. greedy' middlemen who have profited so greatly .from the system to the detriment of employers and injured workers' alike'. Under this reform package, the savings will Provide for decreased workers' compensation insurance premiums to employers immediately, saving them at least $750 million, and increased benefits to employees of $750 million over three years.. Thus, California's businesses will experience savings and our state's workers will no //~ longer be among those receiving the lowest level of benefits in t~e- Country: ........................... Specifically, the reform package enacted: · Requires for psychiatric injury claims at work be the predominant (more than 50%) cause in order for the worker to be eligible for workers' compensation benefits. - · Prohibits most post-termination claim~ unless there is either medical rePort, s;.of.~he, inju~ry or .repo'rts.: tg..empioyer of the injury :prior. to termination.. ......... :~ .: . .:,,;:-;_-,: .... : things.', providing tha~t a~y.one .o-f:fering-a r~ward:for'.7.the,'.:-~ referral or settlement to a workers' compenSation claims · adjuster is guilty of ~a felony. state Capitol ' 220 South Spruce Avenue, Suite 101 Sacramento, CA 94249-0001. ~ South San Francisco, CA 94080 (916) 445-8020 Printed on Recycled Paper (415) 871-4100 * Provides for a seven-percent premium rate reduction for insured employers. Limits the number of costly legal and medical evaluations allowed to one per side in most cases. * Places a $16,000 cap on all vocational rehabilitation services, including a $4,500 cap on counselor fees. * Bans most physician self-referral (that.is, it bans a doctor from referring a pati.e~n~ to a clinic the ~octor has an system of $350 million. This is the area of the reform in which I was the most involved, and I am gratified that we were able to include this provision and its enormous cost savings in the package of bills signed into law. I appreciate you contacting me to let me know your opinions on workers' compensation reform. Sincerely, ~ K~8:cnc/sd