Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/29/94 - -----,- "-,, ~ . I - BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM April 29, 1994 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNC~ 1 FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER ~ SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. We have been worki ng on the 1 andscape and parks mai ntenance di stri ct assessments. In rolling up some of the information on the original version of the consoli dated di stri cts, we saw what we thought were a number of problems in terms of the impact on multiple lot owners. We have been reworking the concept using four different multipliers, based upon intensity of landscaping in the streets cape areas. It seems to be working better. You will find the information on this contained in the Agenda packet. 2. We may 'have a Union grievance over my not having called a holiday for Wednesday, when former President Nixon was buried. Some of the Unions interpreted our contracts to require it, since it was Presidentially declared. We did not have enough notice to do that, and did not feel that the requirement in our MOUls was specific enough to this instance that it triggered it. That could be litigated, however. 3. David M. Griffith & Associates, your consultant on the City Attorney selection, has in mind that you were going to meet on May 14th to interview I the finalists that you, presumably, will select during the Workshop at your I May 4th meeting. My discussions with several members of the Council ,I indicate that was not adequately cleared and that it is, in fact, a conflict. You will have to deal with the consultant when he is here on an alternative time and date. 4. It must be an election year... the Clerkls Office has Qeen getting lots of requests for campaign statements, statements of economic interest, and the 1 i ke. 5. You will find enclosed a memo showing the options we have relative to supporting an effort to get the Fox going. The substantive question is, Ills there still enough private sector support and push?1I We want to help - not be the lead. 6. Your pre-meeting workshop on the 4th is primarily related to working with David M. Griffith & Associates on setting finalists for the City Attorney recruitment process. You may also have a brief labor negotiation update. I have two children entering BHS next year and, unfortunately, that is their enrollment time period, and my wife is out of town. I ask to be excused and will have one of the Assistant City Managers fill in for me on those items where you would want them. I am available to discuss anything about the City Attorney selection procedure before or after, with any or 'I all of you. ~ I I ~ ~ ,', ,I, ,~ --- --- - ---~ -------------- ---- I: ---'-- .r.-'-7.~.~ HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL April 29, 1994 Page -2- 7. The Convention Center tells me that II CATS II has been re-booked for 1994, and that they are working diligently and getting closer to trying to bring in ilLes Miserablesll for 1995. Let's hope that can happen; it would be a real IIpositive.1I 8. The Fair Housing joint contractual agreement with the County expires in July. We believe they may want to quietly leave the joint operation. They have recently had some personnel turnover and have some issues pertaining to where that function is assigned. They will be continuing to work on this as we move toward the contract expiration. We believe it would not cost us any more if we do separate it out. 9. We are continuing to get hassles from the County on all proposals related to tax spl its. A recently sent proposal to Joe Drew, and his response, is enclosed, stonewalling both efforts. 10. An updated 1 etter on our research on EDA Grant money potenti a 1 for the Wastewater Treatment Plant is enclosed. We will be proceeding to see if we can get on their list. 11. There are responses to Council Referrals enclosed regarding an intersection study of Claire and O'Neil Streets, as well as the most impacted Public Works operations by last yearls budget cuts. 12. We won all the early issues on the Jamieson/County lawsuit. There were cross cl aims agai nst us. The wri t i's the next topi c before the Judge, which is the action that can require the appropriate traffic mitigation payment. Congratulations to Judy Skousen and Laura Marino on phase I. 13. There is a Los Angeles Times article on speed humps enclosed, for your information. 14. The Hotel plans have been received, reviewed by Building and turned around to the architect, with comments. We have listed approval of the plans and specs on your next Agenda on the assumption that the corrections will be made by then. AT.alb Enclosures cc: Department Heads City Cl erk - ------- - -- -,- ----- I -- I 1 MEMORANDUM April 22, 1994 I Alan Tandy, City Man~er fl1 ' ¡ II TO: RECEIVED \ I ~er, coni' ic Deve~nt Director j i I[ FROM: j II " '1 ? 100ft i . .. ,oJ~~ i ,I SUBJECT: Funding Options for the Fox Theater Project ¡ II I: ~ CITY MANAGER'S OFFiCE ~ ,'- . .",_., This memo will serve as a summary to three¡ possible funding mechanisms available to the City for the Fox Theater renovation. The two simplest funding sources to address are CDBG and the Off-Street Parking Fund. CDBG funds can be applied in various forms. In this instance, the optimum category for eligibility is Historic Preservation. In order to expend CDBG funds on the Fox Theater, the structure would need to be first placed on a federal, state or local historic register. I would recommend that the simplest course of action would be to have the Historic Preservation Commission designate the Fox a cultural resource. The ordinance allows the City Council to initiate this process. Once designated, CDBG funds could be used in a variety of ways such as: 'II acquisition, design, construction (would trigger Davis-Bacon) and FF&E. The use of CDBG funds would not require a tie-in to a benefit to low and moderate income 'I households. :Ii The second form of funding available to this project 'would be the Off-Street Parking ' ! I Fund. As you are aware, the Fox Theater property does not include any space for parking. Adjacent to the Fox Theater is the former site (now vacant) of an auto body/paint shop. The Off-Street Parking Fund (or CDBG) could be used to acquire this parcel and to construct a parking lot. By leasing the parking lot to the operating entity, lhe lot could be reserved for the Theater's exclusive use. The last possible funding source is a bit more complex. Prior to his departure, I asked Mr. Duddy fora legal opinion on whether tax increment funds could be expended in providing some form of assistance to Fox T~eater. The complicating factor in I considering whether tax increment can be u~ilized is that the Fox is located just II outside the Redevelopment Project Area boundary (H Street). The following few sentences are some general rules about project eligibility. Redevelopment law is quire II clear that tax increment funds cannot be spent outside the project area except for a " blight-reducing public improvement or for a low and moderate income housing project. II !I Also, while recent changes do allow Redevelopment Agencies to provide rehabilitation I' " assistance to manufacturing, industrial and commercial uses within the redevelopment proiect area, it still limits rehabilitation assistance outside the project area. - ,1:1-- . .' , 'II i ' Page 2 Fox Theater Project A different consideration is whether tax increment fund could be used for the purchase of the Fox. State law does specifically allow this activity as well as leasing obtaining options, acquiring by gift, and grant bequest for real property. It also appears that if our redevelopment plan had contemplated the purchase of real property outside the project area (beyond housing projects) it might have been possible to acquire the Fox. Mr. Duddy, however, concludes that the Redevelopment Plan by making repeated references to the purchase of properties within the project area seems to preclude the acquisition (or some other form of "acquisition") of the Fox. He does, however, go on to state that it may be permissible for tax increment funds to be used outside the project area to purchase land and to construct improvements if: 1. The City Council agrees to such use. 2. The land to be acquired and or improved is publicly owned. 3. The City Council determines that such an activity is of benefit to the project area. 4. The City Council determines that no other reasonable means of financing the project are available to the City. Mr. Duddy specifically cites that purchase of property and the construction of a parking . lot would fall within this definition. However, the fourth circumstance he listed is that the City would need to determine that no other means of financing are available. As I has indicated, we do have available to us the Off-Street Parking Fund. If, however, it becomes depleted by funding other projects', tax increment funds could then be utilized for this purpose. By way of summary, CDBG funds seem to offer (as usual) the greatest flexibility. c Secondly the Off-Street Parking Funds could help alleviate the need for'dedicated parking. Somewhat more problematic but still possible would be the use of táx increment funds. Please call if I can be of further assistance. ,I Im:ED2ITANDY,MEM II I I I '; ~ , i' - - ..- -~ -"., .., ' I -(-.-,.,-q- ..--.. . ".' i ,\-" j " Ii Co ...., Co i .,¡ 1:: ...c I MEMORANDUM' ! - , , j I i January 27, 1994 L. ¡ 'Co: ¡::(';', 'dTY MANAGER 'J OF. h_':, . - TO: JOHN F. WAGER, JR. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: EDWARD DUDDY ~ h SUBJECT: USE OF REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT REVENUES FOR ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA By separate oral requests on January 14 and January 26,1994, 11 you requested our advice as to whether or not redevelopment tax II increment revenues could be used to acquire or to provide II improvements for real property which is located outside of the ,I Downtown Redevelopment Project Area. Your request is concerned in particular with the Fox Theater which is located on the northwest corner of 21st Street and "H" Street. There is under consideration by a committee of the City Council a proposal or suggestion that the Theater might be renovated for use for a museum or other cultural arts purposes. By memorandum of December 17, 1993 (copy attached), we advised you I that because of its location outside of the Project Area, " II redevelopment tax increment funds could not be used to renovate the 1 ;¡ Theater even though it would be operated by a nonprofit ': organization for the above-referenced purposes,. That advice ,i prompted your questions about improvements for or acquisition of , the Theater property by the Agency. . Article 70f Chapter 4 of the Community Development Law, commencing with Section 33390 of the California Health and Safety Code, regulates the acquisition of real property by a redevelopment agency. Section 33391 of the Law has specific application to your inquiry and reads as follows: "Wi thin the survey area or for purposes of . redevelopment an agency may: " ( a) Purchase, lease, obtain option upon, acquire. by gift, grant, bequest, devise, or otherwise, any real or personal property, any interest in property, and any improvements on it, including repurchase of developed property previously owned by the Agency. THIS MEMORANDUM IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE AND' IS PROTECTED BY THE ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGE I' II I Iii ", .~ " Memorandum January 27, 1994 Page 2 " (b) Acquire real property by eminent domain. n Section 33390 of the Law defines real property as follows: "Real property means: n(a) Land, including land under water and waterfront property. "(b) Buildings, structures, fixtures, and improvements on the land. "(c) Any property appurtenant to or used in ii connection with the land. i "(d) Every estate, interest, privilege, easement, franchise, and right in land, including rights-of-way, terms for years, and liens; charges, or encumbrances by, way of judgment, mortgage, or otherwise and the indebtedness secured by such liens." . If only the Redevelopment Law were applicable, the above-cited statutes would provide clear authorization for acquisition of and improvements to the Theater proRerty, assuming that a redevelopment purpose for the acquisition could be shown. However, the Agency may voluntarily determine that it will not avail itself, of authority and powers granted to it by the Redevelopment Law, so the Downtown Bakersfield Redevelopment Plan ("the Plan") must be looked to 'also, to find out whether or not the Agency has placed any limitations upon itself in respect to property acquisitions and improvements. ,- Section 301 of the Plan provides .that the Agency proposes to eliminate blight by inter alia, the acquisition of certain real property (1); by the installation, construction, or reconstruction I of streets, utilities and other public improvements (6); and by the I rehabilitation of structures and improvements by present owners, their successors, and the Agency (9). Again fairly clear authorization for acquisition of the Theater property, even though it is outside the Project Area, if a finding can be made that such acquisition, by itself or as part ofa more 'extensive project is for a redevelopment purpose and will help eliminate blight. 'I~ Unfortunately, at this point we run into Section 303 by which the Agency may have limited to property within the Project Area its I power to acquire real property. In pertinent part, the first I . I 'II!' -. Ii Memorandum January 27, 1994 Page 3 paragraph of Section 303 reads, "... the Agency may acquire. . ., any real property located in the Project Area, by any means authorized II by law." There are a number of allusions throughout the Plan which 1'1 make it appear that the Agency did intend in Section 303, except . for affordable housing replacement purposes, to limit its property 1'1 acquisi tion powers to the Project Area - Sections 304, 309 and 310, ,I for example. 11 II Because of Section 303' s language, and again except for housing replacement purposes, I would recommend against using tax 11 increment funds to acquire real property outside the Project Area Ii unless the Plan is amended to fully utilize the authorization I granted by Health and Safety Code Section 33391, or unless a I validating action on the question is brought pursuant to Sections 860-870 of the California Code of Civil Procedure and results in a I judgment that the Agency has not deprived itself of the authority I bestowed by Health and Safety Code Section 33391. The second part of your inquiry is concerned with whether tax increment revenues may be used to make public improvements to the Theater property or nearby property. This part of our response assumes that the Theater itself will be owned by some third party, that the redevelopment purpose is still present in the proposed use of the Theater, and that the improvements -will be made to or installed upon publicly-owned property. The last of the foregoing assumptions would not in most cases foreclose disposition of the improvements by the Agency after acquisition or completion. I have not considered that question to be included in your inquiry and therefore, I offer no advice in respect thereto. Section 33445 of the Redevelopment Law authorizes the Agency to use tax increment revenues, either within or without the Project Area, to pay for land and the cost of installing or constructing any improvement to land under the following circumstances: II 1. The City Council consents to such use; II 2. The land, whether to be acquired or only to' be II improved .is publicly owned; II 3. The City Council determines that the buildings, ; structures or other improvements are of benefit to II the Project Area or to the immediate neighborhood il in which the project is located; and Ii :1 4. The City council determines that no other II reasonable means of financing the project are I' available to the City. . ------- i .'--- ii Memorandum January 27, 1994 Page 4 Section 33445, taken together with the broad acquisition power granted to the Agency by Section 33391 as discussed above, gives the Agency the authority to acquire and improve property outside the Project Area from public or private owners for purposes set . forth in Section 33445 and in the Plan if the property will be publicly owned when the improvements are installed or constructed, and if the Plan doesn't impose any limitations on this authority as in the case of the general acquisition power granted by Section 33391. Sections 316 and 326 are pertinent. Both apply outside of the' Ii Project Area as well as within. Section 326 limits the types of ili publiCly-owned improvements which may be financed with tax increment revenues to off-street public parking facilities and to development in the Hotel/civic Auditorium complex. Section 316 of the Plan effectively eliminates the strictures of Section 316 and 'II. contains a non-inclusive list of the type of improvements which i could be acquired and financed by the Agency. I' I refer you to Section 316 for that list. An illustration of Ii utilization of the authority granted in this regard would be that II the Agency acquires a parcel which is near or part of the Theater II property, clears the parcel and constructs a surface parking lot on I it, landscapes it, and then conveys the parcel to the City. If the i conveyance is deemed to be "for development", then the hearing and report requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 33433 would I' apply. To lessen the troublesome aspects of such application, the I conveyance from the Agency to the City could condition the transfer il in such manner that the reuse value would be negligible, as in the I convention center hotel site conveyance. II Please let me know if you wish to discuss any aspect of this memorandum. Attachment ED:rb ed\,meoos\wager. m 1/71/94 1 -~- -- - - I Ii '. ," ~ "'" ,II" - . MEMORANDUM FilE CûPY il Ii .: December,l?, 1993 i I TO: JAKE WAGE~, ECONOMIC DEVE~PMENT DIRECTOR FROM: EDWARD DUDDY Ú-J 4- SUBJECT: USE OF REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FOR RENOVATION OF FOX THEATER I By oral request on November 19, you asked for our advice II as to whether or not redevelopment tax increment revenues could be " ' used in the following circumstances: II i The Fox Th~~~~, presently in private ownership, is located on the north~ corner of 21st Street and uRn Street. That location is just outside of the Downtown Bakersfield Redevelopment project Area. There is a proposal, or suggestion, by, a committee of the City Council, that the Theater be renovated. It is intended, if the proposal is'brought to fruition, to convey it to a non-profit public benefit corporation for operation as a II museum. The proposal is hereinafter referred to as "the Project." I' The cost of the renovation is roughly estimated to be in the range of $ 200,000. You wished to know if the Project was III eligible for funding with tax increment revenues from the Downtown Redevelopment Project. You asked for a preliminary response only, II at this time, without engaging in extensive research on the II question. ii II It does not appear that, in the circumstances set forth above, the Proj ect could be funded with redevelopment tax increment II revenues. I Until the most recent legislative session, it has been II generally accepted ,that tax increment revenues could not be used to , renovate or rehabilitate privately owned commercial, manufacturing I or industrial property. It has also been the general rule, apart from payments made pursuant to. "pass-through agreements," that tax I increment revenues could not be expended by an agency outside of Ii the redevelopment project area, except where the legislative body II' makes a finding that the expenditure is for a blight-reducing 'I public improvement or for a low- or moderate-incoming housing which i will benefit the project area and which cannot reasonably be I financed by other means. The requisite finding by the legislative I body could appear in the redevelopment plan or in a resolution . adopted for the specific improvement. I I ,;r -.:¡,~ Õ' , , Memorandum to Jake Wager December 17, 1993 Page 2 Even if the cost of rehabilitation of commercial buildings were a generally acceptable use of tax increment revenues, section 319 of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan would clearly limit such activity to the Project Area. It appears to me that if the Project were located within the Project Area, it could be structured so that redevelopment tax increment revenues could be utilized. Annexation of the Project property could thus probably permit tax increment financing. 11 However, you informed me that, for the present time at least, Ii annexation of the property into the Project Area was not an I acceptable alternative. I, II My interpretation of the Conununity Redevelopment Law, as set forth above, is supported by Legislative Counsel's interpretation of a recent change in the law. Chapter 942 (AB 1290) of the 1993 Legislative session substantially revises the law. This. change will be effective January 1, 1994. In particular, Chapter 942 conditionally authorizes an agency .to provide financing assistance for the development or rehabilitation of property that will be used for manufacturing or industrial purposes. Legislative counsel, in his digest for Chapter 942, state that such an agency financing loan assistance may now be provided for commercial uses within the project area. The Digest is a summary of changes to existing law. Thus, Legislative Counsel is of the opinion that, even with the changes in the law, tax increment financing for commercial uses is available only within the project area. . Please let me know if you have any further questions or if you believe there may be some consideration which I have overlooked. ED:kkr I kkrl\duddy\!DEDJ.t.ax I 4: . -- B A K E R 5 F I E L 0 Alan Tandv 8 Ci~v Manager April 20, 1994 Mr. Joe Drew, County Administrative Officer Ms. Adel C. Klein, Senior Deputy CAO County of Kern 1115 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Dear Joe and Adel: This letter is to formalize the City staff's effort to come to an amicable conclusion with you on several aspects of the tax split subject matter. . Obviously, anything that we might agree with would be subject to consideration by our respective legislative bodies. I think we have generally agreed that raw land, improvements result in growth for both the City and County. We, therefore, propose that raw land improvements be continued under the historic tax split assumptions that have been in place since 1978. We_have many developers who have opted to be in the City for the purpose of obtaining sewage treatment, water and other factors. and it is critical that they begin their planning process knowing, with certainty, that the thousands of dollars they spend preparing will not be wasted because the City and County come to some kind of disagreement over a tax split issue. Obviously, Castle & Cooke is an examplewhere they are currently investing huge amounts in planning activities. In any event, we believe that both parties will benefit and, where the developer has opted to be in the City under its ,regulatory requirements, the historic split should be in effect. With respect to Rosedale No.5, we have forwarded a proposal which would provide you what you are requesting on the base amount of taxation, or the existing taxation levels. For tax growth in the future, it would revert to the formula which has, historically, been the split between City and County. This has the practical impact of, essentially, holding the County harmless from loss of revenue during the short term, while, at the same time, providing the City with a share of the future growth in revenues so that the City can 'Jrovide the necessary services to that industrial area. .Ve are awaiting your reply on our proposal in this regard. City of Bakersfield .8 City Manager's Office 8 1501 Truxtun Avenue - , Mr. Joe Drew Ms. Adel> C. Klein April 20, 1994 Page -2- With respect to the broader question of developed areas, we are, currently, studying concerns Adel Klein expressed relative to feasibility of some kind of formula under which the City would assume responsibility for County parks and/or library services. We have. requested some information from your office, and we intend to continue to work with you on concepts along that line in the future. I Once again, it is our hope to bring at least these issues to an amicable conclusion. SinCejlY, --------- Ii 1/ ¡é; Ii ¡/j n Tandy' LCity Manager II ,,' :1 AT. al b I i I 11 .1 -- - - Ii t:""',>" ':<':~-- 04/25/'34 08: 48 KERN CAD 002 i I II ,JOSEPH E. DREW SCOTT JONES COUNTY ADMINI5TRA TM OffICfR Dlrec:tof of 8",,1 eo Finance II MMY WfDDEU. ADEL C. KLEIN II AAØ,,' (;o¡mly AdministrlllM: Olfiœr 01_101' of PoIIc\I I\rIaI\l8l8 I " tnl~1II1 Relati0n8 I! . 1'[ ~~~ , EIII IIo /er Rel8t1an8 Offlcør ,], - - Ii I II COUNTY ADMINISTRA riVE OFFICE I Apri125,1994 Alan Tandy, City Manager City of Bakersfield ' 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 , ii Dear Mr. Tandy: :1 It W8sa pleasure to receÍVe your letter formalizing City staff's Intent to resolve the Issues related to property tax splits attendant to annexations In an amicable manner. Please let me assure you that County staff Is also committed to resolution of these issues. It is only through a Joint and well-considered effon that we will achieve our common goal of providing the best service possible to the County's citizenry. I believe a review of the foundation on which the County's property tax split proposal was based will be helpful to our discussions. The very purpose of negotiating a property tax split is to appropriately redistribute revenues in such a manner that there is a rela1ionship between the amoun1 of property taxes being 1ransferred and the services being transferred. The proposal does not fully accomplish this. In fact,l ,I' we have alrea~ conceded to the cities the provisIon that the County will not retain revenues associated; if with VLF, franchise fees, transient occupancy taxes, real property transfer tax, or homeowners property tax II relief subvention; 100% of these revenueslue proposed to be transferred to the annexing entity. The il County's proposal addresses only property tax and sales tax. As a result, the County Is, of course, .. transferring all of the previously listed revenues, as well as a portion of the property tax and existing sales tax with entitlement to future sales tax also being transferred to the annexing enrlry. As 8 result, the County is still coming out on the .shon~end., If you will, even with the proposed reduction (from the histone tax spilt) in the amount of property taxes and sales taxes to be transferred. The County's proposal considers the revenue transfer issue In the aggregate, in that the proposal accounts for the cost of the provision of services to residential, commercial. industrial, agricultural (raw land) properties on an averaged basis and Is based on '8 percentage of all revènues (includin9 those not proposed to be retained) which are associated with population growth. If we were to base the proposed transfer percentage on only property taxes and sales taxes. I'm sure you understand that the percent that the County is proposing to retain would be correspondingly higher and the percent transferred 'I correspondingly lower. In your letter you stated that raw land results In growth for both the City and the County and thus the property tax split attendant with annexation of raw land 'Should continued to be processed under the former historic tax split. I must admit that in consideration of the complexities of dealing with property tax splits based upon land use at the time of annexation, I am somewhat at a loss in understanding the basis of this statement. Additionally, you have not proposed a basis for the use of the historic tax split, other than perhaps, that it Is indeed, historic. I 1115 Truxtun Avenue, 5th floor BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (805) 861-2371 . FAX (805) 325.3979 ,j " 04/25/94 08:49 KERN CAD 003 <:-;;::,...........'~ Ii Ii Alan Tandy I April 25, 1994 Page 2 i As we have previously discussed, It Is possible to create a model wherein all types of land uses are considered separately for the purpose of determining an appropriate transfer of revenue; however, the model becomes very complex when all pertinent factors are considered. In using the argument that commercial and industrial properties generate, proportionally, substantially les8 demand for services than do residential properties, it is a logical extension that proportionally less revenues should be transferred inasmuch as proportionally less services are being transferred, even though commercial and industrial properties generate proportionally more In property tax and sales tax revenue. As a further logical Ii extension, one could argue that raw land generates virtually no demand for service, thus no revenues, 'II should be transferred upon annexation. And to extend this premise one step further, one could argue revenue transfers should change over time as the use of annexed property changes. As you can see, II dealing with property tax splits based on land use can get very complex very quickly. Notwithstanding, the' County Is more than willing to reView any model that you may develop which addresses these issues in a concrete and comprehensive manner. II I understantl the concern of the development community In regard to the tllfferences that the City anti the 'I' County may be haVing over the IslSue of the transfer of revenues. I too believe that those proposing developments should be able to plan their communities with a degree of certainty regarding the provIsion I' of sewer and water services. My staff has met with representatives of Cåstle & Cooke, at their request. . il Durfng that meeting, my staff continually provided assurances that the County has no reason to believe that 'I the City and the County can not come to resolution regarding revenue transfer Issues, noting the ongolog ^ III discussions that have been conducted to date. Also, since during this meeting it also became clear that " there was a misunderstanding regarding the cause of recemly "failed" annexations, and that these "failed" II Ii 'I " annexations were generating concem. County staff provided clarifying Information. , You noted in your letter that you are awaiting a response from the County with respect to your proposal for the transfer of revenues attendant to the Rosedals #5 annexation. While Ms. Klein committed to relaying your proposal to me and others involved in annexation issues, her understandin9 01' the outcome of the meeting was that you were goIng to forward to the County Information' which provides a basis, foundation or Justification for the use of the hIstoric tax split. Although you have provided a piece of this Information in your letter, noting that "... the funds would provide the City with a share of the future growth In revenues so that the City can provide the necessary services to that Industrial area", the County Is looking for the rational for use of the historic split. This information is extremely important to the County inasmuch as the County, through all of our considerable discussion and analysis, cannOt ascertain any continued Justification for lhe use ofthe historic tax split. Further, as we discussed last fall, looking at the ~historic. tax split for all incorporated areas wIthin the County provides no Insights Into how the splits were originally detel1Tllned. You indicated that there Is a minor amount of sales tax currently being generated within the' proposed Rosedale #5 annexation. Please forward the specifics of that information to me. Your response to this request will allow us to review this factor in an informed manner. Additionally, it was our understanding that it was your intention to provide ,to the County a Concrete proposal regarding the funding of library and/or park services inconsideration of the County withdrawing Its proposal to retain a portion of sales tax. Your request for fInancial data regarding the current cost otlibrary services has been compiled by the librarian and Is enclosed. I look forward to receiving your proposal in this regard and in continuing our discussion along these lines. I - --- ~ ~:"""r-." 04/25/94 08:50 KERN CAD 004 II I Alan Tandy April 25. 1994 Page 3 , I Without hesitation I. can say thai II Is also my hope. that we can bring these issues to an amicable conclusion. Sincerely. I, I' il Ii )1 ! I! I .. ~ "~Ð~ MEMORANDUM ~ \ fJJ~~ . ~~v~ . ~þ~ RECEIVED . ~'7 ~ D ll:1 April 27, 1994 ~ ~~\ tI%.\*h\~ r OR ? '1 ~ v~ " TO: Jake Wager . (,l?-r:~ \~\ FROM: David LYmán + CI1Y MANAG ER'S 0 FFICE ~,) \I;j ~ ~ RE: EDA GRANT REQUEST ~ After further review of the EDA's grant criteria, discussions with Joe Turner of Wasterwater, and considering the deadline of Apri129th, an application for EDA funds for Plant 2 near-term improvements should be our first priority. We do not anticipate that an application for funds for the regional sewer plan currently being evaluated would be successful, nor is the time available to generate the information required. The same holds for expanding Plant 3 to annex the Texaco refmery. Joe Turner has indicated that while we have the capacity to accept Texaco's flows to Plant 3, technology doesn't exist for Texaco to lower their selenium (heavy metal) to an acceptable level that would eliminate the risk to the future disposal operations at the plant EDA places a high priority on projects that have an immediacy to them. The following matrix describes the requirements EDA sets forth for each eligible project and further identifies the current status of the information requested. Project Status Plant 2 Plant 3 Regional Environmental clearance completed Yes No No Site controlled by applicant Yes Yes No II Plans, specs & estimates prepared Yes No No Written interest from non-IDA funding sources Maybe Maybe No I[ Can project begin construction in 6 months Yes No No II In addition EDA is giving greater consideration to projects which: I . benefit areas with substantial economic distress II . are located in designated enterprise zones . alleviate conditions of persistent unemployment in distressed areas II Plant 2 is essentially at its design capacity in both flow and ability to handle BOD & TSS. Without the II near-term improvements the plant will not be able to accept any industrial uses which require large II volume or substantial BOD/TSS processing ability. In addition, Joe Turner has had discussions with I two large facilities nearby (Bolthouse Farms & Kern Oil Refinery) that have desires to connect to Plant 2 to alleviate their disposal problems. These two companies could be used as potential end users of the I improvements to quantify the direct private investment and jobs being retained which the EDA requires. Plant 2 near-term improvements are estimated to cost $2.8 M, of which EDA could fund up to 50% or $1.4 M of the improvements. I I Applying for an EDA grant for the regional sewer plan would likely result in a very low ranked project for the following reasons: . The area of benefit is not an economically distressed area, or within an enterprise zone. . It would be difficult to quantify the direct private sector jobs created, and show that the majority would benefit low-to-moderate income individuals. . It would be difficult to show the exact funding sources for the future regional sewer facility. . As shown above, the project status is years away from construction. . The area served by the regional sewer plant is not an area of persistent unemployment. . The southwest area served by the regional sewer plant is one the higher income areas of the city, with a successful record of new companies locating there. For the above reasons, we should perhaps consider submitting an application for Plant 2, and begin gathering the required information for next year's submittal on the regional sewer plant and/or Plant 3. - ~-- - ----- -------- - ~~~~~.. c . c'. MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager I' FROM: Fred L Kloepper, Acting Public Works Dlrec~ ~- I! I DATE: April 25, 1994 SUBJECT: INTERSECTION STUDY OF CLAIRE AND O'NEIL STREETS , Council Referral Record #131?7 (Salvaggio) The attached Traffic Engineer's April 15, 1994 memo explains that the intersection does not currently meet warrants for a multi-way stop configuration. The Traffic Section will continue to study the intersection. ### ":'L" RECE~VE 0 ¡.~ CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE REF13197.FLK Attach. , ~ '" -I Ø~~l'~ ~ " . I i I M e m 0 ran dum T r a f f i c E n gin e e r i n g DATE: April 15, 1994 TO: FRED KLOEPPER, ACTING PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR FROM: STEPHEN L. WALKER, TRAFFIC ENGINEER ~ SUBJECT: COUNCIL REFERRAL #13197, REQUEST FOR MULTI-WAY STOP WARRANT STUDY OF INTERSECTION OF CLAIRE AND O'NEIL STREETS IN WARD 7, Intersection Number 3057 This intersection was last analyzed about 11 months ago and a memo report distributed on May 24, 1993. At that time the, intersection had only about 1/4 of the volume needed to meet the minimum volume warrant. The records indicated no accidents had been reported to the Bakersfield Police Department for the previous 12 month period, therefor the accident warrant of 5 or more reported, and correctable by means of additional controls, accidents was not met. Traffic Engineering staff will perform another complete traffic control analysis on the intersection within the next 30 days. Target date for release of the new report is May 16, 1994. If 4- way stops are still unwarranted, alternate control measures or improvements will be suggested for implementation. cc: Bruce Deeter, CE III Brad Underwood, CE III PIJ Memo Files Traffic File - Claire/O'Neil intersection No. 3057 saved under d:\wp\Clair_On.eil III .> - """ ," """'-:"";'-'}'--'-'" "" S1-v ~- " --"'.P----, ,,-,-,"l,,-, ' ,oil---- I . ' " ,,- ' II . I' '; ,', ' BE' , C '-r:-:<I¡.., 11" "'\~; ~"fj~"> , . ., ~I ,,' . ' " ~,!I.",,-~,'<"'---~-~"'~---" - '.~-- ,,- -"-'---' -",' ',°,' '" "",",", "",:",""",'-"1("," I II , ' , ,-- -- - -CITY' couNcti-. REFE-RR'AI.. ~~~"'~~~'~~ -- "-"'-:-_è~_.~:-,- CPLyè' " '.~" ~ I " ! ,! - I" . ~ / ,,! -- ,. , -- APR 1 3 1994 ii I MEETING OF: 04/06/9~: , I h PUBLIC 'I.II"""'S r,CC¡'Rï"rNT !i yylA\1\ .;!:,;-", I'}!: Ii ,I ' , r 1...-1> 4 -- : I !! REFERRED TO: PUBLIC WORKS RRbJAS Di~?-c..:- . /~---L----' ITEM: RECORD# 13197 Traffic proþlemsat i;ntersection 'ofClaÚ-e and O'Neill Avenue. (Salvaggio) ".:. ACTION TAKEN BY COUNCIL: SALVAGGIO REFERRED TO STAFF THE TWO-WAY STOP/TRAFFIC PROBLEMS AT CLAIRE STREET AND O N~ILL AVENUE AND THE FEASIBILITY OF A FOUR-WAY STOP AT THIS INTERSECTION. , 0 -¡tV'/; .AI' -- 3 ;; ~ 7 BACKUP MATERIAL ATTACHED: NO DATE FORWARDED BY CITY CLERK: 04/08/94 ii ii Ii Ii il II II í~ Ii ¡ I 'I _"~__n_'____'_n ",-, - -- -- ,- '~\-- --------- II 1 ,,~-, " ,'- ~ il '.- ",' r-. Æ il . Ii RECEIVED II \ -'R?2~ I ~ I - 'I ~ B A K E R 5 F I E L D , I PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. MEMORANDUM CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE April 19, 1994 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER' FROM: F~D L. KLOEPPER, ~TI~ ~LIC ~~S DIRECro~~ SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL RECORD NO. 12879 This memorandum is to respond to a City Councilmember inquiry at the . January 26, 1994 City Council meeting. The Councilmemberrequested a report indicating which Division within the Public Works Department took the most cuts during the 1993-94 budget process. Listed below is a brief summary of the major General Fund reductions experienced by the Streets Division which affected the level of service provided to the public. Description: Amount Eliminated a Street Maintainer position $ 30,000 Eliminated 6 temporary Street Maintainer positions ' $ 50,900 Transferred Data Entry Clerk to General Services $ 8,600 Reduced Street Materials and Supplies Account $ 40,000 Eliminated rental of pneumatic roller used during oilsand resurfacing season $ 10,000 Experienced a reduction in liability insurance costs $ 26,000 Transferred Front-end loader to Storm Sewer Maintenance and Transferred Street Sweeper to Street Cleaning $ 90,000 Reduced Purchases of Miscellaneous Diesel Fuel $ 18,400 I Total General Fund Reductions: $273,900 ! I I Should you have any questions or require additional information do not hesitate to contact me. I --~~~~~- --- --------~ II ",~l,'" """,,' , . """",.." ,'" : ,:,~" ' ,:", '. " """", ...: . ' ,0 jl;/.""~' r. .' "," " ¡,¡, '.J! ,..- '/, ' ,t,.,L:¡, ',.' ,:",-~,--".,..~.", ~'.'-CIT+'-CÒON'C~r-REFERR>Q'--~ "'L"'~~'1:itW1ED' '/' '~:..~ '--, " , ' í ' L~ ' :1 ' " " ", ' - to' I MEETING, OF: 0'1 /26/94 ~ ~ JAN 31,1994 I ,."'- .. ' ,~'~"",~;....;",.;.,;",--".w-".., " ' PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT , ¥""""-"""":~~"'" i\:!'>'~r""",m.;""'rá"."~-""""';""""¥'C"'-:t""""';~ -1",-"" ",- ,5-'-' , , I ',:eEE:ERR :~~etlB'~'1:{e~WORK-S""f::i,E )$CR IJ[.:Z~, I REFERRED TO :'CITY MANAGER -A' T'Ä'NDY i REFERRED TO: POLICE DEPT S BRUMMER Ii REFERRED TO: WA TER/ SANIT A TION DEPT,. G BOGART ,I REFERRED TO: SANITATION M\KE SI:DE5 :'11, ITEM: RECORD# 12879 , ! Budget Workshop. (A Tan Tandy) I I- ACTION TAKEN BY COUNCI L: " ; , "',, ' , i 1) SALVAGGIO REQUESTED A REPORT BACKON'WHICH " :¡il 'DIVISIONyJITHINPUBU!C WÒRKS~ DEPARTMENT JOOK' THE ,¡¡MOST ,CUTS, DURING FY93/94 BUDGET' PROCESS. 2 ) 'Ii EDWARDS REQUESTED STAFF PROVIDE HIM WITH A ! EXPLANATION OF THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING HOW. I AND WHEN ASSET FORFEITURE FUNDS AREU~ED. 3) I BRUNN I REQUESTED STAFF PROVIDE HER WITH A 'II CHARTING OF THE POLICE PATROLS. 4) MCDERMOTT .: REFERRED COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REGARDING POLICY FOR, REGULATION OF DISCHARGES OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE TO STAFF. BACKUP MATERIAL ATTACHED: NO DATE FORWARDED BY CITY CLERK: 01/28/94 ,/ i, II Ii I' I! ,- II ,I I' " II II I' II ¡: II I: , , - ~,- 1, ,,- - ~~~ " 'i '0",,-", '-"~"""""O"""<IIt'IJ~-o-:::.~---';:;;--;~~<II~~ :~ <110,>;"" (2.,O.<II'caa¡.=<II g ¡<IIt.:;>......:=: ='0<11":: .:;:J:-OO ') æ m 00 8. s ¡:: ;S m"" .... ~ <II 8: 8.. cu g cu ~ Õ .~f=:' 'cu 1::,. Ó. ...... '0 1 t'IJ ::s 0 ...... ...... <II::S. "" i, g ¡:: Q ¡:: .= ~ ' :s! '3 ~ .... 1:5 ~::I: ~ m '0 c¡¡ CJ = ,boO g u:i "8 ::So , l' 'O-! --, e 't:S I:: -g' ~ g, t'IJ ~ 0 ~ CU, =' S 8 ;S ,~ '8 .~ cU ~ cU -g ~ ' ' ,-t;:¡"" <II ::s~1:: CUo'::s'= .!II:'Om <II m<ll- !~~m a¡æcUo ~.... m~....~~ ~boO~I::O~::SI::'o '::S (2., ,- 0- m "" 'I:: I:: ,"" ~boO' E;::::::O:::.~ m (2.,m:í <II....: <II<IIb.OO<llcU~'-""cU~ ~ ,-"" ::s'1;'- (2.,<II~. :t;~I::"""" ..c:..c:æ5 -Em'O '=k't:S,1:: <U~~ ,~~,",=~Eo....b.O"" u<ll ='<II<II~ .... &1 E QÍ -S u b.O' : 1: 'cU: cU æ "" 8 8:E 'Q3 ~S Q, ,5 ~ ;.e: '='~ <II ,s::OboO'¡¡:;>I::<II'O,m¿boO 0<1:1 I:cU ....'..... ....."" -S .9 S:¡I:: æ . ~ -< S ;S ..s::'oS 0 f QÍ g ~ ~ >-'<11 "" ~ ~.,~ u:i:::: ~ ~ ' ~cU ~""~:;:J--cU ~<II¡::o "" ¡::cUO..:: I ~ ].9 '5 'g"" ~ S Æ ¡ä 8 §b...'~ ~"" e oS 0 ""13-;'~ ,~~m ~ ~:Sj!~i~¡ti~§a~~:II~I~I:~~i!i .9~~$<II<IIi:í¡::::S~$'O~S2§~I~U2sa¡¡~~~ <II~;>.!II:I::""~<II<II"::<II~ 0"" ::s ~'O"">(2., b.O8'= b.O~E°cUo(2., ~'=<IIt'IJ"",cU;S:¡It:)~~ .E ,._t'lJ~<I:I<II'-....., I I:: ""8 8 ,000'=--<IIt'IJ> o~ _cU» Sm<llo' ,- c¡¡ <II (2., boO ,- .:::: S. "":õ..s:: <II c¡¡ ~ '8"" ~ m "" "fo 0 <II .=. u:i Iii >-'<IIm '0 ::s '.... ....m'O 00<11'<11<11 '=""""'" - b .... -< ~:; ~ ': ~ <II g ';;; ~.~ ~ <II ~ 'õ ~ .~ § æ t ~æ :E ;;;...... ==:dëü t'lJl::,<II.~cU.....",,>-<......<IIl::l::oS<II 0 ,- 'O<IIt'IJ<II,-~.~æ~ I' ,- ,~ ~ '8 .c: ~ cU ~ ,~~:§ '6'0 ,""","" '0 C¡¡5 a¡ ~ '~ ~ '~,iJ 0 t'IJ ~ 1\ Þ~~Sc¡¡....t'IJ b""a¡~I::.S~¡~b~(2.,<II~5<1:1cU....f::s ~'Ot......s::JJt'IJ~OO~O~l::t'IJ"""'=cU,~'Ot'IJ~<II..c:I>-.'O¡~ cU cU,::.... .... cU' Š '0 Q, 'S Q.. . ~ ~ '¡¡:¡ I:: 0 <1:1 ....' boO I:: 1~~~=~....'O~~0~~il::ag~'t:Sl::f~æl::¡ZSS~b Eo< ~ ;.= ~ ,!!¡ ::s ~ ,S:¡ S ~ .þ I: 'ë-.E g <II 8 '0 .g: ~ ~g <II'~ 'S ¡ , 'g .- ~ § ~ ,g <II' "g,~ <II Q, 'Ej e <II "" 5 b..o <II I:: ' <II 'Q) J ,- ~ Q,~ , bÕ 2 ~ æ :;:J, U.~ =§ '¡::: ~ ~, § <II Eo< -g' ~ '¡¡: f õ ~ < ~ ~-g ~ Eo< Ê ~ § C¡¡, ! ,5: ~ E S,' ~ t'IJ ,;:; -< E.c: 5 ::s 0: ;;:: I:: ~~..o cU t) ~ .c:.t: I <11'"'8': 00""'0""<11 ¡::lml:cU <11<111<11', I , ..c:,s '~'~.... 0 ""0.= <ë:iJ'O~ ..s::t'IJ....t;:¡"" ¡, .... .,N E"" ~ !J"""", ,<II~oai' ""¡ä'æ"¡:::' ,<II ' , " ~ -5 ;:::¡""":::í ¡ >.Q g:l 0" ~ "" Q,~,.~ :í~' Q,.8- Èi, , ]" -æ:ë5 ~ o~ t- '5'~e"" ~,l::it'IJ~ "O>-.~.... <II >-.~ ..0 ....'~o S ""::S'O mO '000 ~<II ::s I: , cU t'IJ <II -< ::s cU ...... Q.. 0'" I:: .... m <II cU..s:: cU cU cU \ (2.,.c:, ,0' ëØ 0 m"" (2.,<11 8 '0 '->; ,5 '.0"" ..0'1:: ",,'.c:<IIcU<IIcU5Q, ""'1:: " r "o"""""<1ÏcU ,- ....t)~"" .....= <1:10 ¡g...."",:=: ......' ...... 0 <II ...;, <11'- m .... ::s....E-< ,- 0 cU ,CU ::s m 0 m 'g 0 - cU j¡ . ,'0 ::s..c: 0"" It:) .= .c: "":<"., ~ ,b.O I 0 :;.... ~ S 't:S > " ¡g O"~,"" a¡ .... ~ boO:E ~, ~ -; S '.,!!¡ '~Ð~S - f...... ~f<ll>-.b 'g~<II::ScUl::æo~"O ~~ I:: = .... .c:Om 0 <II ' ,t'IJ=~'-<II~.'(2.,~ :;5cU:g,¡:::m ..c:o""""~,~c.J~<II(2., I:: ,<1101: ,<IIcU>-.go O<ll~Ot'IJ m..c:, ~ '<IIt'IJ .=t'IJ ,cU ¡ '~I::'C::s,~..o5.!11:' 't:Í' ....~'-'::S ~t'IJ"".....c:<II'-""""""':'c.J [ ,.... 0 ...... <llcU "", °cU' ..c:'o"- ) 't;:¡ <II 5 t'IJ ~ ,m '~'(3 !.,!!¡..o:;:J:::: Q.. 2 t'IJ ' 5 - .c: S;,~ ~ b.O ~ I:: ~ S ~ (2.,t5(2.,cUßcUl::::S"""0~~'<II<II <llcU'OEo<8 ;;::¡::SMc.JcU .~ .5cUOS<ll""~::S2S"",-~>,b.O ~~<II' -~'õ cU<II:>S ~< .E = ~'.Ê ~:í ~8 b.O,Ër~.9 ~'6'0~~ E 'š ~~ ~ ,t'IJ!~.g ~ ~ --~, ~ 8' <11.8 >- ëü '0 t'IJ cU ~ '(3:=: ,< (2., m '.9:§,~ S >-. ¡::õ <II i 0 ¡H~U.;~~~ ~in.! ~.ãU~~~ ¡¡~:§h~. 1 <IIt'lJ5""" ""..c: ~~'O 0, 'Q,""::S"" 0 i ..1, St'IJ<II.c: cUl::<II-O ,0 0' '-t'IJ ,0'<11 ""..c:c.JOU.... .. oo" "",. ~" ¡¡. ~ " . . ~ - . . ~ '" 0." I I ~. 0,5 Eo< .9 ~ ~ <II. Š .c: > . 0 ~ .s::. 5 æ .= 'Q) 0 :9.; >-'>-. t.: m ¡;:: ãJ . ':::t'IJ .t'IJ""0"~......;"!!9~~5"",,,""=>-""'<II""~b~""¡g.;'1;...... ¡ ~ 1 ~ ,§ "8 -g ~ Eq~ Q. ¡gS ~ ~ 8.,~ § ~~ 'õ ~ .ð"ë,t- ~-;g ~t. J:3 ~ I ='O""::ScUëØ""::S<ll ""'Ow.... m 'O""~'=cU"" .= ~ r=,-cU""S8<11o.=-,¡::¡g'¡¡:¡1:: .t'lJt)""'-"""<II<II~""=I::'õ~"" .t'IJ"""U b.Ou t'IJ'°<llcU<II(2., ""t'lJcU(2.,~""~ <II cU I . :<113=<11"" "".!II:;jboO""...... ,!!¡o>-"- o::S"""'O""sé5 - ""<II~~ .!II:...... """""Q,cU- cU~1:: : r:J'J . ~ IX: t'IJ .g 0 oS: :g - <II' ~ 00 <II t. c.J § "" r:. ¡g ~ 2 I::.~ boO c.J <II <II ! I;J ,5(2., ,5 ~ ~Q, 5- s.s::æ cU'O'O.9~ .,!!¡~SoS I ------- I -" I »<11:5 »Cú'õ 1 ~<II'O 1 <11""»>-' 1 ':¡:;..c: t'lJO~t)1:: 10<11 ~ I ~ en <:1:1 ~"'O <11..00 cU..c: '0 o<ll¡::(2.,æg~~ ¡::boOboOu ~""O<lloa¡~~ = , ~ ~ o. é5 >-.» 1ð.... ~ a¡ ~.Ê cU ~ (2., m c.J 8.5 'Q3 S . ~ ~:=:::s t'IJ "" i Q - ~ ~'6 0 C,j "" <110(2.,..... mt'IJ,~, .!II: >-.c.JmcUO".!II:..c:'O ' .c u:: ~Š~ ~ji: !....~~s~~~~!i.9cU!J~~~J;~oS§~ '--- 0,- e,¡..¡ c..::::I::, t'IJ<II..c:..c:- ScU"" """,,"" ::so=æ ,- 'ø,. Ji~ -o""'~ 5».... I:: S~:l'O,=......Eo<b.O't'IJ"O w~p=%<II<II "S~......c: go~~fIJ 'ü',Q -æ 1: ::1<11<11 OcUt'IJ <11'3 ,::S.~~"".!!l <II :::<II<IIcU m""'O"O~ c.c..a ~ ~5f """.s::¡::ffoCú1~geoo~"O~<II~S~~~Q,~§»<II::st ::s .!:!> ~ 0 >- 5 <ï2 '(3 ~ .- 1?-1il ~ 0 <II <II t'IJ ~ "" '(3:; - æ "0 .~ I:: ::s ] g..c: <ï2 :; ,9' .8 '" t¡,; ~ '01::'-<110 ",,"" ¡:: ::S¡;::Ot'IJ, Q.. ""~ O<l)eo;s- z~..,¡g¡::~ ::s~..::...ëüw~ N'OcUS°'õ..c:S'....'O<II<II¡....~~<,~t)cU:¡ \ ,~ ! u C <:1:1 ~ ¡¡¡ .... -< s 8"0"" m ;j S'-- ~ -;::] b..c:..c: I:: t'IJ ~; J 5 õ ~ "", ¡;;'O t).! ' <I) 0 "~.c..... ~ """u:iC:u:i»æ~I~::s-@~,s<ll<ll.~~:§¡g"E......:::",,>~-g°5"";8ø,. , .. QJ UJ_""'('J Ç/1 ... ~ (2., 8 .,!!¡ ~ ..s::.9 ::s:2..c: <11..0 boO~ > 0 (2., cU 8.c: ~ boO""" ~ ~ (2., ~ § a¡ J .... :=: J ,,¥~'~, "aO""":&:: t¡,; ~ SwIOcUëü"::~<IIfcU¡::o;j~t'lJt.:.E~~~~<II<II(2.,"";j""~æi ca.....~C,j I- ~::S.b.Ol:: '~""t'IJ t'IJ'-~o <11,0 ~::I ""Cú.!ll:::s°cUt) ('i ¡ 0 c::s 0 ~: §..c: ,51 <~ ãJ ~ ëü § J ~ <II ~ '0 S ~] go ~ '0 8 ~ e,":: Š ~;g] "" Q.. go J J?, ) D: ~ 0":: -.'" Q S Eo<>::s..c: Eo«II..c:<II<IIo.- I::Eo«II ..c: ß= boO ,-8....1:: ¡ ~~CJ"J - <1)'- >,::!: <110.3 oo(2.,b.O-t'lJc.J""~=,tocU t'IJ""u'J ~cU'Q3t'IJ<II::s.<II'ca . Q..,-..J::: ¡:Q ¡: æ c.J e ~ ~ ,5 '¡::: .5 t) (2., cU ,~.... b .E..sa ,5 m ~ -t; I:: ,5 oS ..c: ~ (2., I: 11 I - '"- /'/-~""'/-""<" Iii STATE CAPITOL :~ m 1"'{" ... 7fT' ... 1 t COMMITTEES: i.li. SACRA~il~~~4;-~¡:49-0001 ~a....,...r......1.. ...P.'. rtt1~.'i..:. i~ig¡t.\,;>....~ß........ 1..1\. a ur~ ~~~~ULTURE ! I DISTRICTOFFICES:-," { i"" :--.:, "/"" WATER, PARKS, AND WILDUFE ': 0 100 W. COLUMBUS STREET <Y' /""" i,;ST4 i} ,,'. HEALTH ,. SUITE 201 . , ~, BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 (805) 324-3300 0 821 WEST MORTON AVENUE. IIC pORTERVILLE. CA 93257 (209)783-8152 RECEIVED ~ CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE ,---,,- .- --,~- - .~--- -. .._--- ._,---- -- -- . -- April 18, 1994 Alan Tandy City Manager city of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Dear Mr. Tandy: I have received your letter regarding your views on Assembly Bill 3505 (v. Brown). You may be assured that I will keep your views in mind as this bill moves through the process. in addition, I will be " responding further to your correspondence as soon as I have had I the opportunity to fully evaluate: this bill. . J'----..., --~-'-' --.. ---.- -- - -_. - Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this issue. Please continue to keep me informed of your positions on state issues of interest to you. . Sincerely, c ¿ ~ ~/ ./~/.~ TRI CE HAAVEY-- . Assemblyman, Thirty-second District TH:mt:cl I Printed on Recycled Paper