HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/22/94_ ��
_ .
,,, - '�';' -
`t
(. •
B A K E R S F I E L D
MEMORANDUM
July 22, 1994
T0: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION
1. I regret to report:
a. We met with County staff, this week, on the Fire Fund after their
executive session with the Supervisors. They want and, in fact,
demand very significant changes to the lateral hire policy which we
had developed and received approval on from the Fire Civil Service
Commission to bring in County firefighters to City employment. One of
the changes they want is to do away with probationary period, which is
required by our Charter. They indicate that they will have another
executive session next week, and may have a list of additional things
they want to have changed. We will send them a counter proposal on
these matters and work positively toward resolution; however, I have
to say that it is a substantive step backwards.
Enclosed you will find copies of the JPA Agreement and Settlement
Agreement, as they were agreed to by both parties prior to the
County's last retrenchment and reconsideration. You will start to
hear rumors and questions about this and, as a result, I thought you
might want to read the full copies. Please call me if you have
concerns or c�uestions.
b. On a parallel train, we have another annexation in the south coming up
(Stine #10). The information we have from the County, based on our
meeting with them, is that they will not let us have the Fire Fund on
that one ei�ther, arguing that we do not have a"done deal" on the JPA.
They will not change their policy, but we have asked them to
reconsider.
I could editorialize, but at this point, it hardly seems necessary.
2. We met with the Kern County City Managers this week to plan for the meeting
with the County on September 6th. We also decided to try to find a
legislator to carry a bill to remove the County's unilateral ability to
veto annexations through the tax split. I am scheduled, along with Joe
Drew, to meet with the editorial board on this subject next week.
�
4.
Riverlakes Ranch did pay their $200,000 traffic mitigation fee on time.
There is no change in status on the delinquent sewer assessments, however.
Enclosed, you will find a summary of the next General Plan Amendment cycle.
y � �
?r
.. . � a
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
July 22, 1994
Page -2-
5. With respect to the Hotel, the concrete contract has been let to a local
union firm. In the near future, you will start to see concrete work, as
well as steel studding, go in. We will have pickets over the mixture of
union/non-union and/or prevailing wage in time.
6. There is a document enclosed articulating a reorganization plan we need to
implement in the Water and Sanitation Department. It is a trade out of
position classifications with a net savings to the City; however, it would
target positions more at the level we need. In order to accomplish this,
two of the job descriptions need to flow through the Civil Service
Commission and receive Council approval. Please call me if you are
interested in discussing this item.
7. It appears that we will get a free, or very low cost, survey done in the
Castro and Curran areas, or those islands most central to Bakersfield, to
determine what resident's attitudes are about annexation and what
incentives/dis-incentives they perceive. Thus, we would be better able to
target literature and information to their specific concerns.
8. There is a nice letter enclosed from the BIA relative to cooperation
received from our newly appointed Fire Chief.
9. There are notes from both the Development Services and Community Services
Departments enclosed regarding the status of several things pending in
those operations.
10. A memo is enclosed relative to information gathered from the Federal
Aviation Administration and technical experts on the subject of the
apartment complex proposed to be at the end of the Airpark runway. I am
afraid it is not positive. This will be before you shortly.
11. With the topic of the tax split issue gearing up, you will find several
items enclosed, as follows:
a. A copy of a new set of two proposals sent to the County on possible
compromises on this issue. One deals with taking over County parks,
if we annex the areas around them. The other deals with cooperating
(not paying) on library funding. It is clear that neither have
Council approval and they are being submitted for discussion. These
were the seventh and eighth proposals sent to the County trying to
resolve this issue. The others have been ignored, or not responded
to.
b. A summary of the offers and "answers" of the various proposals we have
made to the County to resolve the tax split issue. Apparently, the
Supervisors ar.e not informed by the CAO as to what these discussions
consist of. As things come up on the street, or in newspaper
articles, you may be interested in having this as background.
c. A draft of a possible proposal to send them relative to LAFCO. I am
not sure that this should officially come from the City. Perhaps
another source would be better. Perhaps it would be too divisive to
,C , "�
��4.- . . ,..
e e �- �
HONORABLE MAYDR AND CITY COUNCIL
July 22, 1994
Page -3-
send at all! I would be interested in any comments you have on
forwarding this proposal. It suggests the County could save money,
and the cities be reduced from regulatory constraints, by collapsing
LAFCO into a County department, rather than having a special staff for
that purpose.
12. As you will see in the newspaper, or under separate cover shortly, the
disposition of the Deja Vu case is finished. It will cost us over
$100,000, and will probably cost us some adverse publicity.
13. For your information, there is a letter enclosed going out to our
commercial sanitation customers about the rate increase.
14. There is an update enclosed from the Fire Department on preventative
efforts being made to reduce fire hazard problems on the bluffs near
Panorama Drive.
15. Responses to Council Referrals and inquiries are enclosed regarding the
reporting of fire loss information, the proposed sign plan for the Kern
River Parkway (which will be going to Committee soon), cancellation of a
future Council Meeting, additional information on the maintenance district
issue and my letter to the County regarding Union #10 tax split resolution
(Fire Fund). There are also five referrals responded to by Public Works
for various street related concerns.
16. A letter to attorney Bill Kuhs is enclosed regarding Valley Communities.
AT.alb
Enclosures
cc: Department Heads
City Clerk
i
,�� � '
� . __
a
AGREEMENT NO.
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
City of Bakersfield - County of Kern
Fire Protection Services
This agreement, made and entered in this day of
, 1994, by and between the City of Bakersfield,
a municipal corporation with its incorporated city limits in the
County of Kern (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and the
County of Kern, a political subdivision of the State of
California (hereinafter referred to as "County"}.
W I T N E S S E T H
WHEREAS, in order to provide cost-effective and uniform fire
protection within the metropolitan Bakersfield area, to eliminate
duplication of services, and to pravide for the continuing
development of public fire protection resources the City and
County entered into a joint powers agreement on May 7, 1980 which
provided for the exchange and identification of specific areas of
responsibility for total fire protection within the metropolitan
area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the May 7, 1980 joint powers agreement
the City and County have established a joint training program,
integrated their emergency dispatch and radio communications,
formulated a response system based on the closest available
responder, and scheduled the relocation of personnel and
JOINT POWERS AGREEII�NT
Page 1 of 13
�
,,' ;z
a
facilities necessary for the implementation of the agreement; and
WHEREAS, in a Memorandum of Understanding entered into on
October 8, 1985, and in furtherance of the goals of the May 7,
1980 joint powers agreement, the City and County established the
specific boundary areas of fire protection for each entity and a
schedule for the relocation and construction of fire stations
within the metropolitan area; and
WHEREAS, the relocation and construction of facilities has
been accomplished; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that it is in the public
interest to conduct a new study to also analyze the fire
�revention, protection and suppression services provided by the
City and County, including the location of new fire stations; and
WHEREAS, City and County agree that this revised Joint
Powers Agreement will provide a means of implementing specific
measures to eliminate the duplication of services, with the goal
of continuing to develop the public fire protection resources.to
provide an acceptable level of fire protection for the citizens
of the City and the County with the most economical expenditure
of funds; and
WHEREAS, the City and County by agreement may jointly
exercise any power common to both (pursuant to Chapter 5,
Division 7 of Title I of the Government Code} and the power to
provide fire protection services is a power common to both
entities; and
WHEREAS, a dispute has arisen between the City and County
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
Page 2 of 13
,' z
� �
with respect to the allocation of property tax revenues as a
�
result of City annexations and the provision of fire services
within the annexed areas; and
WHEREAS, the parties hereto wish to update their agreement
with respect to the rights, duties and obligations of the parties
regarding mutual fire protection within the metropolitan
Bakersfield area as well as providing a mechanism for the entity
providing fire services to receive that portion of the property
tax referred to as the Fire Fund or the Fire Fund Equivalent for
all of the areas for which the entity provides fire services;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED by and between the
parties hereto as follows:
A. EXCHANGE OF FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES
1. This agreement supersedes and replaces the May 7, 1980
Joint Powers Agreement (Agreement No. 80-70); Report No. 2-82,
dated March 3, 1982; Report No. 6-82, dated November 17, 1982 and
the October 8, 1985 Memorandum of Understanding (Agreement No.
85-215), (collectively referred to hereinafter as the 1980 JPA)
and any rights duties or obligations arising thereunder are
terminated.
2. City and County hereby agree and establish that certain
area, encompassing both unincorporated portions of the County and
incorporated areas of the City as outlined on the map attached to
this Agreement as Exhibit No. l, to be the area affected and
governed by this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the Fire
Agreement Area). City and County further agree to the
JOIIVT POWERS AGREEII�NT
Page 3 of 13
_ __
� __ _ � _
,. ' s
� _
establishment of fire protection service areas within the Fire
Agreement Area and which are designated as City or County service
areas on Exhibit No. 1. Said Exhibit shall be executed along
with this Agreement by the same signatories.
3. Areas annexed into the City which were not within the
Fire Agreement Area prior to annexation shall be automatically
included within the Fire Agreement Area from the effective date
of annexation into the City. Except for such annexations,
neither the boundaries of the Fire Agreement Area nor the areas
to be protected by each party may be modified except by formal
amendment of this agreement by the Board of Supervisors and the
City Council. Annexed areas will be added to the fire protection
service area providing the closest fire response.
4. City hereby agrees to provide to County total fire
protection for those areas within the unincorporated portion of
the City's designated fire protection service areas on Exhibit
No. 1.
5. County hereby agrees to provide to City total fire
protection for those areas within the incorporated portion of
County�s designated fire protection service areas on Exhibit No.
1.
6. For purposes of this Agreement "total fire protection"
shall mean all fire suppression and prevention related
activities, management of all emergency equipment, emergency
personnel, and emergency incident scenes, fire prevention
inspection responsibilities, pre-fire planning, arson
JOIlVT POWERS AGRELMEN'i'
Psige 4 of 13
investigation and prevention, public education, fire hydrant
maintenance, and enforcement of the Uniform Fire Code.
7. The site plan review process shall remain a function of
the City in the incorporated areas and of the County in
unincorporated areas and shall include, but is not limited to,
fire hydrant locations, fire flow designation, built-in fire
protection, and enforcement of applicable codes and ordinances
with respect to new development.
8. The fire chief assuming fire protection
responsibilities for an area outside his jurisdictional
boundaries will acquire authority for fire protection of said
area.
9. (a) The parties acknowledge that they are jointly
pursuing a study of fire protection services within the
metropolitan Bakersfield area which will include an evaluation
and recommendation of criteria for the siting of new fire
stations within the Fire Agreement Area. Until the parties have
jointly adopted criteria for the siting of new fire stations,
each party must obtain the written approval of the other party
prior to the location and/or the construction of any new fire
stations or for the relocation of any existing fire station
within the Fire Agreement Area. Each party must also obtain the
written approval of the other prior to the location and/or
construction of any new fire stations or for the relocation of
any existing fire station within five (5) miles of the Fire
Agreement Area.
JOIIVT POWERS AGREEMENT
Page 5 of 13
T �
�
(b) If the parties have not jointly adopted criteria for
the siting of new fire stations or for the relocation of any
existing fire station within the Fire Agreement Area, within two
years of the date this agreement is executed, then a party
desiring to site a new fire station without the approval of the
other shall give written notice of its intent to construct or
relocate a fire station within the Fire Agreement Area or within
five (5) miles of the Fire Agreement Area and request in writing
negotiations between the parties. In the event the parties are
unable to reach agreement within one hundred eighty (180) days
after service of the written notice of intent, then no approval
will be required for the construction and�or relocation of fire
stations.
10. The parties shall jointly establish service criteria
and service response times for fire protection services provided
to each other pursuant to this Agreement.
B. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES
11. County agrees to prepare, maintain, update and keep
current a data base containing the assessed valuation of each
parcel of property within the Fire Protection Area for the
purposes of determining the amount of Fire Fund revenue generated
by each parcel or the amount of the Fire Fund Equivalent (as
defined hereinafter) for that parcel. City agrees to pay one-
half of a fair and equitable cost to the County for the
maintenance and updating of such data base. County has estimated
the cost to prepare, maintain, update and keep current such data
JOIIVT POWERS AGREEII�NT
Psq�e 6 of 13
�' .
a
base to be approximately twenty-one thousand dollars ($21,000.00)
to twenty-six thousand dollars ($26,000.00) annually. County
shall provide an itemized statement to City each year commencing
on July 30, 1995 and each year thereafter. Payments for
maintenance of the County data base may be used in determining
the net payment required in Paragraph 14 of this Agreement.
12. County agrees to maintain for a period of five (5)
years all data and documents relating to the establishment of
information necessary to the data base and the cost of
maintenance and upkeep and make such records available for review
by City upon City's request. City may conduct its own audit of
the data base at its sole expense as often as it desires.�
13. For purposes of this Agreement, the following
definitions shall apply:
a. "Fire Fund revenue" means that portion of property
taxes, levied by County, on behalf of the County's Structural
Fire Fund by County.
b. "Fire Fund Equivalent" determined in a given fiscal
year, shall mean, either:
(1) for property annexed into the City before
1978 and for any property for which no property tax was ever
levied on behalf of the County's Structural Fire Fund, the amount
that is derived by multiplying one percent (1�) of the then
current assessed vaivation of a parcel by nine and thirty nine
one hundredths percent (9.39$); or
(2) for any property, except property annexed
.IOIIVT POWERS AGREEMENT
Page 7 of 13
a
into the City before 1978, for which property tax was at some
time levied on behalf of the County's Structural Fire Fund but
for whatever reason, is no longer so levied, the amount that is
derived by multiplying one percent (1�) of the then current
assessed valuation of a parcel by that certain percentage (fire
fund factor) which was previously levied on behalf of the
County's Structural Fire Fund. Said fire fund factor shall be
determined from the records of the Kern County's Auditor-
Controller. The Kern County Auditor's office has on record on
its "APO run" the percentage of property tax for each tax rate
area which is now or was in the past levied on behalf of the
County's Structural Fire Fund and was known as the Fire Fund
Factor.
In the event that percentage, the fire fund factor, is
impossible to ascertain, then nine and thirty nine one hundredths
percent (9.39�) will be used.
The formula for calculation of the Fire Fund Equivalent is
applied in order to determine the amount of general property tax
revenue that will be received by the party providing fire
protection service in an area for which a Fire Fund is not
designated.
c. In the event County eliminates the Fire Fund or the
collection of property taxes on behalf of County's Structural
Fire Fund, Fire Fund revenue, for purposes of this Agreement,
shall be determined by using the last actual fire fund factor for
each parcel as set forth in paragraph b.(2) hereinabove.
JOIIVT POWERS AGREEMENT
Page 8 of 13
14. The entity providing fire protection service to an area
shall receive the Fire Fund revenue or Fire Fund Equivalent
revenue for that area.
a. For each fiscal year, commencing with Fiscal Year 1994-
95, the County shall determine the total amount of Fire Fund
revenue and the total amount of the Fire Fund Equivalent
associated with each fire protection area for all property within
the Fire Agreement Area. The County shall calculate the total
amount of Fire Fund revenue or Fire Fund Equivalent revenue for
all areas within the City's jurisdiction for which City provides
fire protection services and for all areas within the County's
jurisdiction for which City provides fire protection services
(amount payable to City). The County shall also calculate the
total amount of Fire Fund revenue or Fire Fund Equivalent revenue
for all areas within City's jurisdiction for which County
provides fire protection (amount payable to County).
b. County shall notify City of the amounts so calculated
and provide copies of its calculations and the basis for same on
or before July 30th of each year. City shall have thirty (30)
days to review said calculations and to notify County whether
City agrees with same. In the event City disagrees with said
calculations, City may at its own expense conduct an audit and
calculate said amounts.
c. Should the amount payable to City exceed the amount
payable to County, County shall pay to City the net difference.
Should the amount payable to County exceed the amount payable to
JOIIVT POWERS AGREEMENT
Page 9 of 13
e
City, City shall pay to County the net difference.
d. Transfer of funds pursuant to this Agreement shall be in
two installments, made at the same time and together with the
property tax distributions made by County in January and May each
year, provided that the first transfer shall be made in January
1995. Each installment shall be for one half of the amount due
for that fiscal year.
e. County estimated that the net amount County would have
transferred to City pursuant to paragraphs 14(b) and (c)
hereinabove for the 1993/1994 year to be $802,459.00. This
Agreement is based on that estimate although the parties
recognize that it is an estimate and the exact amount will change
each year with the change in assessed value of the property in
each fire protection area. Attached as Exhibit No. 2, for
purposes of illustration only, are County's estimates for 1993/94
Fire Fund amounts for the listed fire protection areas.
15. In all future annexations by the City, distribution of
the property tax revenue collected on behalf of the County
Structural Fire Fund shall be allocated to the City as part of
the property tax transfer upon annexation. County shall take all
necessary steps to effectuate such transfer pursuant to the
requirements of the California Revenue and Taxation Code.
C. MISCELLANEOUS
16. This Agreement shall remain in force uritil modified or
dissolved by mutual agreement by both City and County.
17. The parties stipulate and agree that the incorporated
JOIlVT POWERS AGILEEMENT
Page 10 of 13
8
City of Bakersfield does provide structural fire protection
services within its boundaries and that for the purposes of
Government Code Section 25643, County does not provide structural
fire protection services within the incorporated boundaries of
the City of Bakersfield.
18. Neither party shall be liable to the other party for
any loss, damage, liability claim or cause of action for damage
to, or destruction of, property or for injury to or death of
persons arising solely from any act or omission of the other
party's officers, agents, and employees.
19. City and County agree to indemnify and hold harmless
from any and all claims, demands, liabilities, losses or causes
of action which arise by virtue of its own acts or omissions
(either directly or through or by its agents, officers, or
employees) to such extent and in such part as the respective
parties are found by reason of law to have proximately caused the
injury or damage.
20. The party against whom any claim arising from any
subject matter of this agreement is filed shall give prompt
notice of the filing of the claim to the other party.
21. Government Code section 850.6 shall govern County and
City responsibility for any injuries or damage for which
liability is imposed as a result of the acts or omissions of
their respective employees occurring in the course of providing
fire protection and emergency services, and each party shall be
responsible for the acts and omissions of its own employees. For
JODVT POWERS AGREEMENT
Page 11 of 13
E
purposes of Government Code section 850.6, those areas within the
City but protected by County pursuant to this agreement shall be
"outside of the area regularly served and protected" by City and
those unincorporated areas protected by City pursuant to this
Agreement shall be "outside of the area regularly served and
protected" by County.
22. This Agreement does not terminate, nullify nor modify
the following agreements between the parties:
(a) Agreement No. 036-89 - Agreement to furnish
supplementary and mutual fire protection;
(b) Agreement No. 90-48 - Agreement for joint use of Fire
Dispatch Center;
(c) Agreement No. 85-90 - Agreement for in-service training
and instructional services;
(d) Agreement No. 84-52 - Agreement for joint use of Olive
Drive Training Facility.
23. This Agreement may be modified only by mutual agreement
of the parties in writing approved by formal action by the County
Board of Supervisors and the City Council.
----------000----------
� JOIIVT POWERS AGREEMENT
I Page 12 of 13
�,'- � _:
//
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and County have caused this Agreement to
be executed by their authorized agents on the day and year first
above written.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By
JUDY K. SKOUSEN
Acting City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL
By
Bernard C. Barmann
County Counsel
JKSUPA-IXC.AGR\FINAL
July 12, 1994
"City"
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
By
BOB PRICE
Mayor
"County"
COUNTY OF KERN
By
JOIIVT POWERS AGREEMENT
Page 13 of 13
Title
. =:-. _ .�.
_ ��t,,.
AGREEMENT NO.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
AND
RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS
This settlement agreement and release of all claims is
entered into between the COUNTY OF KERN, a subdivision of the
State of California (hereinafter "County), and the CITY OF
BAKERSFIELD, a municipal corporation with its incorporated city
limits in the County of Kern (hereinafter "City").
WHEREAS, a dispute has arisen between City and County with
respect to the allocation of property tax revenues collected on
behalf of County's Structural Fire Fund upon the annexation of
territory into the City and which City provides fire protection
services under the terms of the Joint Powers Agreement dated May
7, 1980 (Agreement No. 80-70) and the Memorandum of Understanding
dated October 8, 1985 related to the provision of fire services
within the metropolitan Bakersfield area; and
WHEREAS, City has claimed that County is required to
distribute to Citv the Fire Fund revenues for all areas within
the City and that County has failed and refused to do so; and,
WHEREAS, County has claimed that City has failed to
reimburse County for the construction of certain facilities; and
WHEREAS, City and County have determined to execute a
revised agreement for the provision of fire services within the
SETTI.EMENT AGREEMENT
Page 1 of 8
' P.
metropolitan area that included the allocation of property tax
revenue that is agreed upon by both parties, attached to this
agreement and entitled Joint Powers Agreement - Fire Protection
Services; and
WHEREAS, in order to avoid litigation, City and County,
without admission of fault or responsibility, have agreed to
settle their differences upon the following terms and conditions.
This document is intended and agreed in fact to be a complete
memorandum of the terms and conditions of settlement, and each
party affirms its understanding of the terms as contained in this
document. The parties agree there is no inducement or
consideration for settlement other than as contained in this
Agreement.
SETTLEMENT TERMS
1. Pavments to County. City shall pay to County, for one
half of the cost of construction of the engine house located at
the Fire Training Center, the sum of $145,450.
City shall pay to County the sum of $320,500 for the cost of
the Brundage Lane Fire Station. County shall provide clear title
to the Brundage Lane Fire Station to the satisfaction of City.
Such sums shall be paid by City in three equal installments
of $155,316.67 commencing January 1, 1995 and continuing
thereafter on the first day of January each year until paid in
full. No interest will accrue on such sums, and City is not
required to pay any interest to County on such sums.
Any other past debts alleged owing between the parties
SETTI.EII�NT AGREEMENT
Page 2 of S
„ �-
involving the Joint Powers Agreement, the Joint Training
Facility, the Emergency Communications Center, past fire station
transfers and Fire Fund are hereby waived and forgiven.
2. Cost Sharincx of Independent Study. City and County
agree that their interest will be served by obtaining an,
independent study to recommend more practical and effective ways
tv provide fire protection in the metropolitan area.
Accordingly, City and County shall share equally in the cost of
such independent study to include those areas within City
boundaries and the urbanized metropolitan Bakersfield area of the
County. City and County shall equally and jointly design and
formulate the study, draft the Request for Proposals, select the
consultant, supervise the work and review the data and final
study. Agreement of both parties must be reached prior to
commencing the study. The desired time frame within which the
parties would like to accomplish the study is as follows:
RFP issued
Consultant selected
Study completed
Final consideration/action
on report's recommendations
July, 1994
Oct., 1994
April, 1995
Aug., 1995
Implementation Oct., 1995
3. Vacation of Rio Bravo Fire Station.
(a) Although designated on Exhibit No. 1 to the Joint
Powers Agreement - Fire Protection Services as a City fire
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Page 3 of 8
� ,
�
station with the City to provide full fire protection services
for the surrounding area, County does now and shall continue to
occupy-the Rio Bravo Fire station and provide fire protection
services for the surrounding areas until July 1, 1995., On July
1, 1995 County shall vacate the Rio Bravo Fire Station. County
will maintain and repair said facilities, including landscaping,
and will leave the station, facilities and fixtures appurtenant
thereto in good, clean and working condition. City will occupy
the station on that date and provide full fire protection
services for the surrounding areas as shown on said Exhibit No.
1.
(b) City shall pay to County the sum of $650,000 in
consideration of County's operation of the Rio Bravo Fire Station
until July 1, 1995. Said sum shall be payable by City in two
equal installments with the first installment due in January
1995 on the same date City receives from County the first
transfer of Fire Fund revenue, and the second installment due on
the same date the City receives from the County the second
transfer of fire fund revenue pursuant to the new Joint Powers
Agreement to be executed between County and City concurrently
with this settlement agreement.
(c) In order to lessen the impacts of any potential layoffs
resulting from the County's vacation of the Rio Bravo Fire
Station, City shall offer employment at the rank of firefighter
to County firefighters in the following manner. City shall allow
"qualified firefighters" (qualified by completion of the Academy
SE7TLE11�NT AGREEMENT
Page 4 of 8
at the Joint City/County Fire Training Facility and in possession
of a EMT-1 certificate and having served one (1) year as a full
time Kern County firefighter) who are currently employed by
County to be placed on a"lateral hire" list without requiring
such fire fighters to take and pass the normally required written.
exam. Such firefighters shall be required to comply with all
other recruitment requirements of the Fire Civil Service Board
including a physical agility test, a physical exam including a
drug screen, an oral interview and a probationary period. For
purposes of employee benefits, rights and duties such fire
fighters shall be treated as any other newly appointed employees.
This "lateral hire" list would have priority over the regular
eligibility list for the firefighter position in the City for a
period of one year. This "lateral hire" list will no longer be
maintained after six County firefighters have obtained employment
with the City.
(d) County shall provide notice to City by February 1, 1995
of the number'of firefighters to be offered employment. City
shall take all necessary steps to amend or modify its civil
service rules or any other of its procedures necessary to permit
the offering of employment required by this paragraph.
4. Joint Execution of Joint Powers Agreement. City and
County shall each execute that document entitled Joint Powers
Agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit A. Said "Joint Powers
Agreement" to be executed by the parties concurrently with this
Settlement Agreement and the financial provisions contained
therein are and form the consideration for this Settlement
SETTI,EMENT AGItEE11�NT
Page 5 of S
, � . .
Agreement. In the event said "Joint Powers Agreement" is not
executed and approved by the Parties then this Settlement
Agreement is null and void.
RELEASE OF CLAIMS
City and County each release, acquit and discharge one
another, for themselves and their agents, employees, officers,
representatives, heirs, assigns and executors as pertinent to
each. City and County intend this release to extend to all
claims, controversies, causes of action, demands, rights,
damages, costs, attorney fees and compensation which each party
has or which may accrue or be hereafter discovered and which
relate (1) to the allocation of property tax revenues in
annexations to the City of Bakersfield after January 1, 1985, and
(2) to the payment to the County for the cost of the engine house
at the Fire Training Center and the Brundage Lane Fire Station,
or which could have been asserted with respect to these claims
whether related or not.
It is further expressly understood and agreed that all
rights which the parties may have pursuant to California Civil
code � 1542 are waived, as are all rights arising under any
similar laws whether local, state or federal. Section 1542
provides:
"A general release does not extend to claims which the
creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his favor
at the time of executing the release, which if known by
him must have materially affected his settlement."
SETTI.EMENT AGREEMENT
Ps�ge 6 of 8
e
The parties, for themselves and their representatives,
employees, officers, successors in interest and all related in
interest to each party declare their understanding and agreement
to this document, and their intention to be permanently bound by
this agreement. Each party reaffirms their understanding that
this document is the entire agreement between them and that no
extrinsic promise or inducement has been or will be made. Each
party affirms its acceptance of this agreement is voluntary, and
has been discussed with their respective attorney.
----------000----------
SEITLEII�NT AGREEMENT
Page 7 of 8
�fi �i ..: in
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties sign this agreement on the
respective dates indicated.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By
JUDY K. SKOUSEN
Acting City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL
By
Bernard C. Barmann
County Counsel
JKS\SE1"fLE.A(3R\FINAL
July 12, 1994
"City"
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
By
BOB PRICE
Mayor
"County"
COUNTY OF KERN
By
SEITLEMENT AGREEMENT
Page S of 8
Title
z
= _.-'��_
,w
TO:
FROM:
MEMORANDUM
July 13, 1994
ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
JACK HARDISTY, PLANNING D
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS SCHEI�'CJLED FOR PLAN1�iING
COMMISSION MEETING ON SEPTEMB�R 15, 1994
5EGMENT I: Martin-McIntosh for Castle & Cooke located at the southeast
corner of Ming Avenue and Haggin Oaks Drive. '" Requested is
a change to la�ger lots, single family resi.�ences - unlikely
to have signi�cant issues.
�
SEGMENT II: Milazzo and Associates for Commercial Developers, Inc.
located at 5700 Stockdale Highway (adjacent to Stockdale
Village) request for retail commercial. Very likely to be
controversial with adjacent residents. Vons is anchor of
existing center and will not grant any access, making this
a stand alone center. * This project continued by applicant
fiom June 17 hearing.
SEGMENT III: Martin-McIntosh for Castle & Cooke located at the southwest
corner of Gosford and Pacheco request from Industrial to
residential on 320 acres. Issues include noise (railroad
track concrete factory), hazardous materials (haz. site
adjacent on north side, endangered species (Tipton
kangaroo rat) and small lot residential development.
Request (R-2 zoning) could permit 320 acres of lots less
than 6,000 sq.ft. * This project continued by applicant
from June 17 hearing.
SEGMENT IV: Martin-McIntosh for Castle & Cooke located at the northwest
corner of Reliance and Panama Lane in Silvercreek. Request
to permit small lot residential development. If approved,
there will be one site left for apartments within
Silvercreek development. * This project continued by
applicant from June 17 hearing.
+' _ �`'.� -
Alan T�ndy
:..,
July 13, 1994
Page 2
SEGMENT V: Marino Associates for Gardiner Farms located adjacent to
the west side of Polo Grounds. Request is for residential
development similar to Polo Grounds. * Only identified
issue is ag land conversion, above the 80-acre threshold (95
acres used by the State Department of Conservation as
"significant. "
SEGMENT VI: DeWalt Corporation located at the northwest corner of
Hageman Road and Jewetta Avenue (4.78 acres). Request is a
small lot (< 6,000 sq.ft.) residential development.
Project is consistent with existing small lot subdivision
which "wraps" around the commercial corner. Only issue:
resultant commercial acreage less than "encouraged" by
2010 Plan (5-acre minimum for commercial sites). * This
project continued by applicant from the June 17 hearing.
SEGMENT VII: Milazzo and Associates located at the northwest corner of
Stine Road and Panama Lane. Requested commercial project,
two vacant commercial corners exists at this intersection,
same project denied by Planning Commission last year. Only
change, there is more commercial acreage in immediate area
since last request. * This project continued by applicant
from June 17 hearing.
SEGMENT VIII: Cuesta Engineering for West Kern Corporation located at
Renfro Road and Stockdale Highway. Request is to move 13
acres of commercial acres across street. No issues
identified. * This project continued by applicant from June
17 hea�ing.
SEGMENT IX: Cornerstone Engineering for Joe Fambrough & Cecil Tackett
located east of Wible Road north of Berkshire Road. * A
case which is predicated on the continuing changes to land
use along Wible Road south of Panama Lane.
These cases are anticipated at the City Council in early November 1994.
MG:pjt
m\mat7.13
MEMORANDUM
July 18, 1994
TO: Central District Development Agency
�
FROM: Jim Eggert, Principal Planne "
Development Services Dep tm nt - Planning Division
SUBJECT: Progress report regarding downtown zoning
___: �����v��
�
�,y�� 2 0 i994 �
� _ �
�R�E � IY1l�11H��t����-�.J4"�i�i:..�
Work is progressing by the Planning Department with respect tv the development of new
zoning districts for the downtown area. The department has commenced work in the following
areas:
General Plan Amendments
l. Rescind the existing Redevelopment Element - This element is not a mandatory
requirement for the city's General Plan. After much study, staff has identified areas
that are outdated or are duplicated in the newer 2010 Plan. Relevant polices will be
incorporated into the Land Use Element with a new section that specifically identifies
downtown.
2. Amend land use designarion of downtown to reflect the mixed use concept identified
in the general plan.
Zonm�
1.
2.
Adopt new zoning districts as recommended by the Central Business District Advisory
Committee. Drafts are completed.
Rezone the downtown areas as identified by the Committee.
Environmental Review
Staff will be able to utilize the existing environmental impact report completed in 1984
that was prepared for the downtown redevelopment element. Staff will have to upaate
specific sections to reflect the changes proposed.
The deparhnent is on schedule to prepare the above mentioned general plan amendments
and zoning during the 4-94 General Plan cycle (fall/winter) for public hearings by both the Planning
Commission and City Council. The CDDA will be given the entire proposal sometime in September
for review and comment, prior to any public hearings. Staff is available to answer any questions
regarding this memorandum.
� Alan Tandy, City Manager
��iP����; 11 "I'J.
d�1�' ' ';� '°
,,��- � � �- =
, , �,
�aM =•,,�' �1H�Uuw� e
r ��
==/�,1 `,\tl.
��
"'=,,� t'.�.1��n����
���own
�•
•
-•
MEMORANDUM
JULY 22, 1994
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL SERVICE BOARD
JOHN W. STINSON, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
�; � � i ��
�� � '
i
��
SUBJECT: REORGANIZATION OF WATER AND SANITATION DIVISION
There currently exists or will exist due to retir�ment in the ;�ater
and Sanitation Department several vacancies of Management and
Supervisory positions. These vacancies provide an opportunity for
the City Manager to reorganize the Department of Water and
Sanitation to better accomplish its mission and to provide the
required level of management and supervisory skills necessary to
meet the increased level of expertise required in these specialized
areas of management. Water and Sanitation management has become a
very technical and politically active area of responsibility.
There are numerous state and federal mandates and regulations which
must be monitored and adhered to by managers and supervisors. In
addition, as the City has grown the management responsibilities and
expertise required in these areas has also grown significantly.
The proposed reorganization involves the creation of the new
position classification of Solid Waste Director. This position is
to be at a parallel level to the existing Water Resources Director.
The Solid Waste Director position will be responsible for the
overall management of the Sanitation Division including the
numerous recycling programs and facilities. This position will
also be responsible for responding to legislative mandates and
intergovernmental relations. This position is to be funded with
the deletion of the vacant Assistant Sanitation Superintendent
position and the Sanitation Supervisor I position which will become
vacant in several months due to a planned retirement.
Related to this change is a revision of the Sanitation
Superintendent job specification to Solid Waste Superintendent.
This revision is to coordinate this specification and the job
requirements with a new superintendent position classification
being recommended of Water Superintendent.
The new position classification of Water Superintendent is to
replace the vacant Assistant Water Resources Director position.
This change more appropriately reflects the level of operational
authority and responsibility of this position and provides for an
appropriate level of internal comparability to the Solid Waste
Superintendent position. It is anticipated that a position would
become vacated due to a promotional recruitment for this position.
The vacated position would likely be deleted as part of the
reorganization.
�'i
REORGRNIZATION OF WATER AND SANITATION DIVISION
PAGE 2
The downgrading of this position also reflects the shifting of some
administrative responsibilities to another new position of Business
Manager. The new Business Manager position is required to
supervise the business operations of the department which involves
utility billing, numerous contracts which must be administered,
significant departmental budgetary responsibility, and assisting
the Water and Sanitation Manager with the day-to-day administrative
oversight of the Department. The budget for the Water and
Sanitation Department now exceeds twenty-six million d�llars
($26,000,000) annually and requires complex statistical and
financial monitoring and administration.
The reinstatement of the position of Accounting Clerk II which was
eliminated last year due to budgetary downsizing is recommended to
provide continuity of staffing and to provide the clerical
assistanee needed by the Business Manager position.
This proposal has been formulated by the City Manager and the Water
and Sanitation Manager Gene Bogart, with the assistance of myself
and Human Resources staff. It will result in four (4) positions
being deleted and four (4) positions added within the Department,
and an overall department savings of twenty-six thousand, one
hundred ninety-two dollars ($26,192) annually.
JWS/kec
MEMO\CIVIL.SER\WAT&SAN
.
�„ . i
:,..
:�
MEMORANDUM
BAK
�OFocovoar� S�
�
V
� �'.
� �IFO
TO: John Stinson, Assistant City Manager
,= -;
!.1 i �
FROM: Gene Bogart, Water and Sanitation Mana er f/
SUBJECT: WATER AND SANITATION REORGANIZATION
July 19, 1994
As a follow-up to our discussions regarding the reorganization of the Water and
Sanitation Department, the attached "Organization Chart" represents the results of our
meeting yesterday. As proposed, the reorganization would delete four e�risting and add four
permanent positions to the Department. Although the reorganization would not change the
current number of employees, the change will result in the following annual savings:
Positions Deleted:
Asst. Wtr. Res. Director
Water Supervisor III
Asst. San. Superintendent
Sanitation Supervisor I
Positions Added:
Business Manager
Solid Waste Director
Water Superintendent
Account Clerk II
Unit
MGMT
SUPV
SUPV
SUPV
SUPV
MGMT
MGMT
B&W
Water
Fund
($59,906.76)
($53,981.04)
$22,939.08
$57,582.84
8 490.10
TOTAL (SAVINGS) _ ($24,875.78)
Refuse
Fund
($49,431.36)
($42,515.88)
$22,939.08
$67,680.48
($ 1,327.68)
As proposed, the reorganization will help offset our current shortfall in administrative
and statistical support for the Department, primarily in the Solid Waste activities. The
reorganization will provide a total Departmental savings of $26,203.46 annually, and will
allow the Water Division to restore the Account Clerk II position that has been filled with
a full-time "temporary" position for the last llh years.
�'.� �� J4ATER AND SANITATION REORGANIZATION July 19, 1994
To e3cpedite the process, I request we begin recruitrnent for the Business Manager,
Solid Waste Director and Water Superintendent as soon as practical. If you have any
questions or need further information, please call me.
GB:sr
cc: Alan Tandy, City Manager
Attachment
2
HYb� SuP,
(AG. WA1�R)
Su P �t
���
�.
�
WTR 4 sW M6R
WrR RES DIR.
•�������►������•
: ASSIST. D�R :
.......�.......
L.� r � r
Win. SUPT :�
��
AC ]r J ... .. .. . ...
. wt S,1B :
1
. . .. .....
( OoME511C WA'[ER)
SuP. 1C
�____
tB�g � �
_.. __
�5096 w�z.}
5096 SAU 1
(�nuN� RES)
SuP. Z[
...... .....
; Sup I ;
..... ... ....
�SOUti WS1E DiQ7
L�rr� .�.r.�.r �
SAN. SuPT.
.....�.....
:A381i.S�1P'G :
..... .....
(MUNi ca�) (co�ct�a' sE
S�P, IC SnP, a
— PRo POSE � R E O RGAN►ZATION —
I�EPARTMENT of WATER and SOLID V1�AST'E.
• •1���• ♦• •������I���• �� �� ��
• fbsiT�oNS oet.�t�D : rPosmoNS::.��oED�
:. .. ............ ... �.�___--_ _
ASStSTANT WA�ER RES. DIRECIDR BU5lNE5S MANA�6 ER
WATtR SUPERV►SOR �L S�l.1D WASTE 41REC1bR
ASS�b'� SAN. SUPERlMENOENT WAIE'R SUPER1t�Ci'�ND�NT
�ANITA11oN SI�QERVtSOR I A�COLi1SC CLERK Zt
�cuue ��sJ
S�P IL
SuP. 2
7- �8-94
_ __ �+
�� �TL
.� ,�.
;
�: ;.
. ■
�
BUILDING tNDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
OF KERN COUNTY
6901 McDIVII'T DRIVE, SUITE C
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93313 - 2047 -:- 805/832-3577 FAX 805/832-0258
July 15, 1994
Mr. Michael Kelly, Fire Chief
Bakersfield Fire Department
2101 'H' Street
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Dear Mike:
���
°�.�..,�
��������. � � �
1
� � � 1994 �
8-� tViP►I�A�GE�'S O�FiC�.
C
�_ „ On behalf__of the Building Industry Association _of. Kern County, I
wish to express our appreciation for your patience and persistence
in working with the organization regarding combustible roofing
materials on neww homes in the Rio Bravo area. You_�:have- been `
cooperati�e__and --helpful__in --allowing the BIA the time necessary to
make sure that all those affected were informed and concurred with
the position taken by the association.
We fully understand your concerns regarding the potential fire
hazards in the Rio Bravo area, which you have defined as an area
from Fairfax, on the west, to the easterly city limits, and from the
southerly city limits to the northerly city limits between the
eastern and western boundary. It should also be cTear that these
boundaries will be the only area in which this agreement applies.
The BIA concurs that, within these defined boundaries, your
department will be reviewing, on a project by project basis, the
fire hazard potential based on the Field Evaluation Form Criteria
check list (copy attached.) Based on the evaluation points total,
your department will be making recommendations as to �he extent of
noncombu5tible roofing materials necessary from a life safe�ty_stand-_,
- - ---
point. You have assured us that your intent_-is to--be as-flexible"as '
possible in �setting these_conditions and=you wish to offer new hame �-�
� _ ___
buyers�choices— iri �roofing� types- whi�le��still _addressing fire safety-in-=�.
the -area. _; T-he BIA _feels that this is an excellent approach. .,
During the review period, the developers in the Rio Bravo area
discussed the proposal and have no objections. The attitude of
those most directly affected was of utmost importance in the BIA's
decision to support this concept.
There-was-one_request_made by the BIA, during our last meeting, that
we would ask be done as soon as possible to assist those developing
and building _ within the identified boundaries . 2t- would - be-- helpful,
if:=�the.fire department would create a map of the-_area-defining-those
'�``ar-eas of highes.t _fire hazard -from the department's perspe.ctive�.� This
map should also identify areas of moderate and low fire hazard. With
this map, the developer will have a more clear understanding of
whether or not there will be potential roofing material restrictions
on the project. This would be extremely helpful in the early
planning stages.
�r t - -__
i, t ' '
.� _
'R
`�,.
Michael Kelly
Bakersfield Fire Chief
Page two
The BIA of Kern County supports the approach of your department to,
review on a case-by-case basis, roofing material restrictions within
the defined boundaries of the Rio Bravo area. This support is
conditioned upon the good faith execution of this agreement by your
depar�` n�,��, BIA support will continue as long as an attitude of
flexibility and cooperation exists when working with builders and
developers in this area. We fully understand, however, that the
evaluation form will be utilized as a basis for your recommendations.
Once again, thank you for working with the BIA to address this issue
�.�_-,.�_in—a co�operative-manner : --------_-�_--�°-_-� - __ ��------_ - - -- -- -
Sincerely,
�,,
,
� / J' �i � ,r
� �!J��%��r �-' ��,�' .� �- ' >
, �,;%-/� -��.
Barbara Don Carlos
Executive Vice President
BDC:am
Enclosure
cc: Alan Tandy, City Manager
City Council
BIA Board of Directors
t �
�_ _ _:,?'il.�' .
I :'
l i
,��c::t10/'E�:-
MAR 2 1 1994
� � �. nr �cFRry �r
�: ,, . ,; ' .
-- _ `• _ ; � -��se��
FIELD EVALUATION FORM
�'�\ VERY HIGH FIRE SEVERTTY ZONES
`' � e � �.
` �t,�.5 � N � U ��,rG �-- f-� �; .�..
PLEASE CIRCLE THE POINTS THAT FIT THE FACTOR THAT REPRESENTS THE
RATING FOR THE ZONE. THERE ARE A TOTAL OF THIRTEEN (13) POINTS
THAT MAKE UP THE FOUR MAJOR FACTORS. MITIGATING FACTOR POINTS
FOUR (4) PLUS AND Ti�iREE (3) MINUS MUST BE FIGURED•IN THE TOTAL
POINT CONFIGURATION. A VERY HIGH FIRE SEVERITY ZONE MUST FALL
,_ I�ITO THE TEN ( ZO ) TO TFiIRTEEN (13 ) POINT SPREAD.
A. FUEL---- POINTS
1. SMALL, LIGHT FUELS (GRASS, WEEDS, SHRUBS) +1
2. MEDIUM FUELS (BRUSH, LARGE SHRUBS, SMALL TREES) +2
3. HEAVY FUELS (TIMBER, WOODLAND, LARGE BRUSH
OR HEAVY PLANTINGS OF ORNAMENTAIS) �
B. TOPOGRAPHY-SLOPE----
1. FL•P_T TO MILD SLOPE (0-9.9%)
2. MILD TO MEDTUM SLOPE (10-19.9%)
3. MEDIUM TO MODERATE SLOPE (20-39.9%)
4. MODERATE TO EXTREME SLOPE (40$ +)
C. DWELLING DENSITY----
l. LOW (LESS TiiAN 1 STRUCTIIRE PER 10 ACRES)
2. MEDIUM (1 STRUCTURE PER 5-Z4 ACRES}
�'� � --- 3 : —HIGH ( l STRUCTURE PER 0-5 ACRES ) _ _ _
D . WEAT.TiER----
1. MODERATE
2. HIGH
3. VERY HIGA
+1
+2
�
+4
+l
�
+3
+1
+2
�
.'
MINUS
l. INFRASTRUCTUFZE----
MITIGATION POINTS
MET OR EXCEED MINIMUMS OF (ISO 8
NFPA 1231, PUC 103, PRC 4290)
POINTS
-1
�_ �
�����
4� 1
-ay
2. HOUSING OR ROOFING ORDINANCES CLASS "B" OR BETTER RfJOF,
SPRINKI�ERS REQUIRED, FIRESAFE CONSTRUCTION, FUEI,
MODIFICATION, LOCAL OPTION. � -1
3. PRC 4291 ORDINANCE OR BETTER AND BEING ENFORCED -1
_ s
_ -__ _ �r___: - - -�-,._�.___ v.-�-�- _
._. - _ ,_�_ � �__ _.� --� , -�. - __.__
PLIIS , _. - __. _ _ �....<_ _ _._ . - P02r1TS—"--s�"` ',..�.� � _
1. ROUGH TOPOGRAPHY-- WITH STEEP CANYONS OR DRAWS THAT
WOULD IMPEDE RESPONDING PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT. +l
2. FIRE HISTORY--- AN AREA WITH FIRE HISTORY OF HIGH
OCCURRENCE, RELATING TO SURFtOUNDING AREAS, BECAUSE
OF Hr..�VY LIGHTNING, RAILROAD FIRES, DEBRIS BURNING,
ARSON ETC... , +I
3. SEVERE FIRE WEA'I'FiER-°- AREAS SUBJECT TO STRONG WINDS,
LIGHTNING, AND HAVE CONSTANT SEASONAL WEATHER PATTERNS
WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO INCREASING FIRE ACTIVITY. +1
4. OTHER-- HEAVY CONCENTR.ATION OF FLAMMABLE ORNAMENTAI,S
OR VEGETATION HUMAN INTRODUCED
TOTAL POINTS . . �f . . . . . .
VERY HIGH FIRE SEVERITY ZONE
.�--�,
Ge.S�¢yr f�v`2, �(�IJ °F—CDr=
�`� NO . .
-�-1
------ --- -.. -. ..DE�CRIPTION OF ZONE : -
._�_ �. __.,�-� �_- ---- - _ -_.r._ - _�. �_.,__- - -
- 1. LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE..
2 . TOWNSHIP, SECTION, RANGE a%N .��� . .S�4T�':4`. �.��: �° : l -P$ `P��O- /7
3. NAF2RATIVE OF ZONE /8���-2o-p�l"��-27��8-�-5-30
---� r..
� _ ��'��a,�
� � ,, � , ���"L
..................................................
..................................................
...................o..............................
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
DATE .�.� .-!�. � 3 . . .
c ..---- � �
\`-'� RATER' S S IGNATURES . . �? ! ": . . . . .`�..``�:�� . . , ,�,�-JGt1(, � . . . . . . . .
.� .,:. .
,
Notes to Atan from Jack
/� /9�
l.a) The Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan comment period closed last
week. Only two comments were received; the first was critical of giving money to the
state to manage preserves and the other encouraged inclusion of a strong mosquito
abatement component to the plan. Peter Cross, F&WS, said he would find out what to
. do next and anticipated permit issuance in August, but he was just guessing since he's
never done one of these before.
b) The Northeast Sewer HCP comment period will close next week. The mosquito
abatement comment has also been submitted on this.
2. Development Fee Review is being coordinated by Gail. At our last meeting with Roger
McIntosh & Jack Haddad she explained our willingness to take the time and provide the
information used to determine the fee amounts. They were a bit more comfortable with
not having to resolve everything at once.
3. Permit Streamlining is related to the fees because it relates to the cost of doing business
for us and applicants. I have just returned from a conference on permit streamlining in
San Jose. Major points I'll be sharing from that are: Business participation,
consolidation, computerization and attitude. It was a worthwhile meeting. More to
come.
4. Castle & Cooke is pressing forward with their planning the west side of the city, inside
and out. They are presuming a successful land swap with the Kern County Water
Agency. For the past 13 months we have been watching them develop their corporate
decision as to the project description so we could have something to evaluate. It
continues to evolve in area, shape and planning concept. I have talked to Becky Ullman
about out concerns over the need to resolve water issues, tax issues and annexation.
We'll be meeting with county staff on July 28, 1994, to discuss the contingencies and
problems with this proposal.
5. Kern Delta Irrigation District representatives met with Florn Core and me last Friday to
express their concern over ground water overdraft and the state's requirement to develop
an overdraft mitigation plan. They are trying to figure out how to deal with some of their
farmer's long-term plans to convert to urban uses. As a beginning they will take more
seriously our notices on projects and respond to them.
6. T'he Cogen Plant CUP has been appealed and is scheduled for hearing by the City
Council on August 10, 1994. Staff is preparing the administrative report to respond to
each of the points of appeal. This should facilitate the hearing for the City Council.
7. The City Council will also be conducting a hearing to confirm (or not) the Building
Director's finding that a nuisance exists in the form of an unsecured building at 1033 "H"
Street. Since the property owner won't secure the premises the Building Director needs
the Council's order to secure. Once the work is done, the City places a lien on the
property for the cost.
r,°°°-m-= --- �._ . _
1\1nta7.15
����Q�°��� ;
� G
� �
J!R o 8 �d �
.,
crrv �������•s o���c �
a
�' �-y
�IIIIII///////iii•
11���II �:� \,1,J����
1�1 ' �• ���_
o``�.� ` r �°
:.y.' _ ��� ��
�_i�n l�Nllluiny
J
`.i' ��
`'�.�,` `a��>o``
����ii//-��\ 7�111111
ii//%/%//lI
MEMORANDUM
�7uly 15, 1994
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: LELAND J. ANDERSEN, COMMUNITY SERVICES MANAGER
SUBJECT: COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT STATUS REPORT
The following information is provided so that you will have an idea
of some issues that the department is currently addressing. From
time to time I will give you an update to keep you informed.
Should you have any questions, please call me at your convenience.
1) YMCA
The issue of the YMCA working in conjunction with the
City Recreation Department was referred to the Recreation
Department for research and implementation. Contact was
made� with the YMCA Executive Director to set a
preliminary meeting. On the date scheduled we were
informed that the Executive Director had resigned,
therefore making it impossible to meet. I have been in
contact with YMCA board members who indicated that a new
Executive Director is now on board. We are in the
process of contacting him to schedule a meeting.
2) Boys & Girls Club:
We are in the process of contacting the �Executive
Director of this organization to set a meeting to discuss
the possibility of co sponsoring programs. This will be
very similar project to that of the Y M C A.
Councilmember DeMond has shown interest in this and has
encouraged us to try to get something going.
3) Panorama Hills Park
As you know, I have been attempting to schedule a meeting
with Pat Smith to discuss the $500,000 contribution from
Destec. She has indicated that she does not wish to meet
until after the BZA reviews an appeal scheduled for
August lOth. Following their meeting of June 28th, I
will again contact Pat Smith to coordinate the meeting.
Also, the survey which precedes formation of a
maintenance district that is scheduled to go to the
citizen's of Panorama Hills is being held up pending
outcome of this meeting. Public Works would like to
include language regarding the $500,000 and its impact on
development of a park site. I will keep you posted.
������
�,� i � i�a ��,
;
� �n�������s a�����
j ' �
] .ti
4) Parks and Recreation/Convention Center Committees tMerger):
These committees are awaiting approval from the City
Council to merge. Community Services Council Committee
has been unable to meet for the past several months so
that we may get their approval/disapproval. Both
citizen's cammittees are in agreement, staff is ready to
go and a new resolution has been prepared. Hopefully we
will be able to resolve this issue at the July meeting.
5) Kern River Parkway/Plant Materials:
As you know staff sent a list of acceptable plant
material to the Kern River Foundation for their approval.
I personally have not had any feedback regarding that
letter but I would expect at some point something will
come through. I will be in contact with Rich O'Neill on
another matter at which time I will ask him the status of
the letter.
6) Convention Center Computerization:
We are continuing research toward the acquisition and
implementation of a new computer program for the
Convention Center that will allow the new hotel access
for potential available dates. We are in contact with
hotel personnel and we will continue to meet with
prospective companies toward that end. I will keep you
advised.
7) Marquee:
We have currently received four responses to our RFP' s to
replace the sign. We will be evaluating these proposals
and making a selection. We will keep you advised arid
s�ek your input when we have completed the task.
8) In-Line Hockey/Jastro Park:
Two problems have arisen regarding in-line hockey at
Jastro Park. 1) Scheduling problems, and 2) Noise and
parking complaints. The scheduling problem has been
resolved. One concerned group will be mov'ing to N O R to
conduct their program which has freed up Jastro for the
original group to continue. The parking issue is being
looked at in cooperatiQn with public works. We hope to
have alternates to this prablem within the next 30 days.
A report will be generated addressing this �ssue and
forwarded to you for your review.
9) Kern River Parkway Signage:
A proposed policy regarding signage has been developed
and is being forwarded for your review. I hope to
present the draft to Council Community Services Committee
on August 15 for their action.
� .
s - . �
10) Kern River Parkway:
On July 8 meeting was held with Councilmember Rowles to
discuss the Kern River Parkway. At issue is the access
point at the North end of Empire Drive. Staff will be
researching alternate solutions to this issue. Several
alternatives are being looked into. When feasibility and
cost issues are determined a report will be submitted to
you for your review. T hope to have this completed
within the next 30 days.
11) Hotel:
Construction is moving rather slowly at this time. I
expect increased activities within the next couple of
weeks. We are making contact with the project
:�uperintendent and will also make contact with the City' s
representative to coordinate.efforts.
Also, I am awaiting contact from their marketing
representative. I thought she would be in town this week
but as yet I have not heard from her. When she makes
contact, we will coordinate efforts and include the CVB
in our meetings.
12) Centennial Cammittee:
I will be looking into the planning of an opening event
and trying to develop a time frame and cost for your
review. I hope to have something to you within 30-45
days.
13) Convention Center Policy:
Staff, along with Attorney's office, will be submitting
a report to you updating a resolution for operation of
the Bakersfield Convention Center. The existing
municipal code has changed and the code sections are
outdated. This is simply a clean up matter and should be
nan-controversial.
14) Co-Sponsorship Program/Policy:
I will be forwarding to you shortly a recreation co-
sponsorship proposal. Since we have received
considerable input regarding co-sponsorships I would like
to have some sort of policy in place to address this
issue. I am not sure if it's necessary to have council
approval but I will forward the document to you and await
yaur suggestions and recommendations.
15) Convention & Visitor's Bureau Executive Director Search:
The C V B Board has entered into an agreement with Larry
Combs of CAREER AND FINANCE, INC. to begin the search.
Maximum compensation will not exceed $15,000. The Board
will attempt to perform many of the functions that a
consultant might have otherwise provided. We will keep
you posted as information becomes available.
y _ :�
,�. .�� o
� a
16) Maintenance Districts:
Saved the best for last! Since Council approved
consolidation on Jun 29th, staff will begin monitaring
the impact of that decision. As per your request, staff
will provide you with a monthly update of the new
program. I would anticipate the first report to be
available by mid-August.
Again, if you should have any questions regarding the above please
contact me at your convenience.
LJA/lg
�i�
FROM:
MEMORANDUM
July 15, 1994
ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
JACK HARDISTY, PLAN1vING
SUBJECT: CASA LOMA SPECIFIC PLAN
- GPA 2-94, SEG. V
Hodges and Shutt, a consulting firm specializing in airport planning, engineering and management, studied the Bakersfield
Municipal Airport and delineated the compatibility zones for the airport. The housing project (255 + units) is within the
B 1 zone defined as the area where the aircraft are less than 400 feet from ground and within departure zone. The B 1
zone is identified in an October 1993 report by these consultants as an area of substantial risk - in fact, there has already
been an aircraft crash on the project site.
Staff has also communicated with California Division of Aeronautics and the Federal Aviation Administration. They have
advised (Larry Felan, Counsel for Division of Aeronautics) that this project is a bad idea from a safety hazard perspective
to both people on the ground and in the plane. Surprisingly, Mr. Felan stressed the greater problem as the on-going
compllints that will be made by new residents within the flight path, and that noise complaints typically have much greater
political impact!
Contrast the fact that experts have delineated the potential risk areas for this airport, the fact that there has already been
one crash on the site (since 1984) against the finding required by Section 21679(b)(1) Public Utilities Code necessary to be
made by the City Council should they approve the project. In jurisdictions without Airport Land Use Commissions
(ALUC) (Kern County now has no ALUC) disbanded by Board of Supervisors 1994) it is necessary on legislative acts (i.e.,
Specific Plan Amendments) that governing bodies adopt a resolution declaring the proposed action is consistent with the
purposes of article 3.5 (Airport Land Use Commission) stated in Section 21670.
This section states (paraphrased) "the purpose of this article is to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the
orderly expansion of airports (proposed project inconsistent with this idea) and the adoption of land use measures that
minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that
these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses. Casa Loma Plan states the area at end of runway (in which the
project is located) designated industrial was intended to provide a compatible land use with airport. Although the
Planning Commission found this project compatible, staff is still of the opinion that changing to residential is inconsistent
with the intent of the plan and appears inconsistent with... minimizing the "publics exposure to excessive noise and safety
hazards."
It should be noted the Casa Loma Specific Plan is a joint City-County document requiring solicitation of each entity for
any change and the Board of Supervisors has gone on record as recommending denial of the case based on inconsistency
with the intent of the plan to provide an industrial buffer at the end of the runway.
If this project is viewed in conjunction with the fact there is ample vacant land within the Casa Loma Specific Plan, outside
the area of risk, available for this project, with necessary public infrastructure, it makes it hard to justify the
recommendation of the Planning Commission
MG:pjt
m�nat7.13a
,,�L i 8 i994
r,
�
'..-�.
B A K E R S F I E L D
Alan Tandy • City Manager
July 20, 1994
Mr. Joe Drew, County Administrative Officer
County of Kern
1115 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Dear Mr. Drew:
The purpose of this letter is to continue to forward proposals which might represent common
ground for the City and the County to come to terms on property tax split differences. While
they may represent a different approach than has been proposed by Kern County to date,
each is intended to address the issue of the shortage of local government resources to
provide services and, thus, to address the tax split issue.
1. I have advised you, in the past, that I was willing to enter into discussions in which
mutual benefit would be obtained by both the City and the County for annexations.
While I do not yet have approval from my legislative body on this concept, I would
like to forward an offer for administrative consideration.
The elimination of service duplication in adjacent geographic areas is, in my opinion,
the area of potentially greatest efficiency and common gain for the City of Bakersfield
and Kern County. In looking at the issue of parks, we do have jurisdictional overlap.
It seems to me that, as a condition of annexing certain areas, it would be reasonable
for the City to assume that those annexations would include the City taking over the
County parks that those populations are served by. We understand that you currently
have two parks which are in, or at, the City limits. Several other County parks are in
areas to the East into which the City could grow in the future.
I have not thought through a complete and comprehensive plan. Instead, I hope j�st
to forward to you a concept that could be subject to comment, refinement and
additional work. The concept is this: Elimination of service duplication could be
recognized through the City assuming responsibility for certain County parks. For
example, if the City were to annex a certain population base in islands or in areas
proximate to the City, or if we were to annex certain geographic areas within
proximity of the park, we would, at that point in time, assume functional and
operational responsibility for the park. In looking at a map of where County parks
are, it appears that Panorama and College are the two areas that would be the most
logical to go first in such a process. For the purposes of discussion, let us say that
the City and County agree that, if the City annexes 3,000 people and/or 400 acres of
developed lands, we would assume responsibility for a County park if one was in the
vicinity of the annexations. Thus, if we annexed what we refer to as Columbus #1,
City of Bakersfield • City Manager's Office • 1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield • California • 93301
(805) 326-3751 • Fax (805) 324-1850
t,
�4
Mr. Joe Drew
'� �`�"`` July 20, 1994
Page -2-
Columbus #2 and Haley #1, or roughly, that section which is north of Highway 178,
we would assume responsibility for both College and Panorama Parks. If we
annexed a portion of East Bakersfield, roughly,, between Niles and Mt. Vernon, south
of 178, we would take over responsibility for Heritage Park. According to our
analysis, the costs of this offer to the City would be substantive - particularly since
many of the parks need substantial rehabilitation. Again, this is simply a concept.
A full plan and identification of how this would take place, in terms of specific
annexations, would have to be developed and agreed to. This offer is, of course,
based on the assumption we return to the historic ta�c split.
2. On the question of libraries, the funding need is much greater and the complexity of
how such a service could be addressed is also much greater. In addition, dividing
up the provision ofi library service between the urban and non-urban areas is really
going backward in terms of trying to streamline and improve the efficiency of
operations so that we are not duplicating services close to one another. On this
subject, we continue to hear that legislation is being processed through the State
which would help establish special assessment funding for libraries. SB 1448 is
through the Senate and progressing in the Assembly. It affords such an opportunity,
In Billings, where the City operated a County-wide library system, voters approved,
by a very wide margin, a new tax levy to support the libraries. That was within two
years of voter rejection of a General Fund levy. SB 1448 also allows the assessment
to be created from protest hearings where the likelihood of voter rejection is less than
through election. Perhaps the speciai district concept for library support would
receive a comparable welcome here by the taxpayers, if supported by the City and
County governments. We are willing to work with you along that line, should you
have such a desire.
By my count, I have previously forwarded seven ideas to you on ways to positively address
the tax split issue (see my letter dated May 4, 1994). I also forwarded to you a letter dated
June 23, 1994, rebutting the Sokolow study.
The above two concepts are additional attempts to bring this subject to positive resolution.
I will anxiously await your reply.
Since ly,
�
lan Tandy
City Manager
AT.alb
d
SUMMARY OF IDEAS BROUGHT FORWARD BY BAKERSFIELD
TO RESOLVE TAX SPLIT ISSUE
CITY OFFER
1. Improve efficiency of both City and County by working
toward a plan to clean up boundary irregularities - both
City and County save money on route efficiency,
avoidance of unnecessary driving time, etc.
2. City would agree to mutually develop an annexation
plan with the County so we would take in high cost to
serve/low revenue production areas whenever we took
a "lucrative" area.
3. For Rosedale #5, City offered to take 20% of current
property taxes if we got the his±oric split on growth to
fund infrastructure.
4. City offers to work on metro-wide revenues that would
be the same between City and �ounty. Example - we
passed a 12% Transient Occupancy Tax by working
with the Convention Bureau to give them money for
advertising - there were no protests.
5. On undeveloped land, we offered to separate out this
issue at historic tax split levels, since both City and
County have real revenue growth and since the County
transfers no services. For example, the County may
now receive $1,000 for a piece of agricultural land - after
annexation and development, it may be worth $10,000
per year to the County based on the 55% historic split.
d
COUNN RESPONSE (as viewed by City)
���i
� �t � I
No recognition of the validity of the offer. The County staff will
only discuss revenues and do not seem interested in
expenditure reductions.
No seeming interest. County staff seems to contend they lose
money on all annexations.
Offer rejected, "not enough."
No interest. The County staff does not want to impose new or
increased taxes or fees.
Rejected - County contends they will have to provide service
"sometime" to the new population. This position contradicts
primary argument of County for the 80%/20% as being justified
by services transfer.
Page -2-
CITY OFFER
6. City Manager's group offered, on behalf of all cities, to
address service duplication and waste to save money
for both the cities and County.
7. City offers, under certain conditions of annexation, to
assume responsibility for County parks.
8. City offers to work with County on SB 1448 to get
special funding for libraries.
COUNTY RESPONSE �as viewed by Citv)
County staff agreed to a long-term study, but unilaterally
imposed the new tax split policy anyway.
Awaiting response.
Awaiting response.
\7�
' �I
�� I
COST SAVING PROPOSAL �����
Kern County has a LAFCO which costs in excess of $200,000 per year over its revenues.
While the County is under some statutory obligation to fund LAFCO, if the LAFCO Board
would agree to requesting less than its current allocation, then the County has the
statutory right to fund them at the lower level. A proposal is contained herein for a
mutually beneficial concept that would save the County money through reducing funding
to LAFCO. The cities in Kern County would also derive specific benefit.
LAFCO, under its current administration, has imposed unreasonable regulations making
it cost prohibitive to do things which were streamlined under the previous administration.
For example, the sphere of influence used to be changed by consultation with LAFCO,
followed by a routine processing of paper. The current administration wants hours of
staff time and literally hundreds of thousands of dollars in studies to allow sphere
changes to take place. In addition, the current administration has removed the right of
the city, in at least two cases, to be the lead agency on sphere changes; thus,
necessitating extra legal and administrative costs and/or making it impossible to change
the sphere.
In a variety of other areas, the current administration of LAFCO has also created huge
cost increases for the cities. They require environmental studies which are not statutorily
required in order to annex agricultural lands, or they do not allow the annexation of
agricultural lands at all. Under the previous administration, this was routinely done
without any problem. LAFCO, now, routinely turns down annexations based upon the
1
e
a
interpretation of whether the annexation is too big or too small, and substitutes the City's
protest hearing with their own. That used to be a decision which was predominantly left
to the City's discretion and, under law should be left to the cities. The time taken to
complete processing of documents has also grown and compares unfavorably to the
time needed by the other LAFCOs. Other examples exist, but suffice it to say that
LAFCO in Kern County has become an excessively bureaucratic, over regufatory
hindrance to growth and municipal services. Attached, as appendices, are documents
validating some of these comparisons.
Attached is a study which shows how LAFCOs around the State are structured and
staffed. In about three out of four cases, the LAFCOs are "dependent." In other words,
the duties are assigned to County staff as additional functions, thus reducing costs for
staff dedicated to only one function.
At a minimum, the County could save the Executive Director's salary and, probably,
some additional amount of the $200,000 budget by such a move. The cities would
derive the benefit of going back to a friendly and more reasonable relationship with
LAFCO, where spheres of influence could be changed without hundreds of thousands
of dollars in environmental studies and where otF�er unnecessary costs would no longer
be imposed by a third and unnecessary layer of government.
2
�
e
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE CHANGES
City of Merced, County of Merced Pop. 57,000; 16.7 sq. miles
• If the city initiates the sphere amendment, the city would be the lead agency to
do environmental document.
• The city allows and has agriculture zoning in the city and sphere boundary.
• The sphere amendment takes 2� months for LAFCO to process.
• Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration or EIR would be done
depending on project proposal.
• The City of Merced has three county islands. They, in the past, have tried to
annex the islands but were not successful. The City Council never adopted an
application to LAFCO.
City of Tulare, County of Tulare Pop. 34,000; 15 sq. miles
• The city would be the, lead agency.
• The city allows agriculture zoning in city and sphere boundary.
• Has not amended the sphere in the last 15 years. Therefore, do not know how
long it would take to process sphere amendment.
• Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration or EIR would be done
depending on project proposal.
• The city has two county islands and is not an issue.
• The LAFCO Board does not accept or weigh public protests.
City of Visalia. County of Tulare Pop. 78,800; 25 sq. miles
• LAFCO would be the lead agency.
• Agriculture zoning is allowed in the city and sphere boundary.
• Cannot answer how long the process would take.
1
a
• Cannot answer because have not proposed a sphere amendment.
• The City of Visalia has a few county islands and is an issue, however, they have
not pursued these areas.
• LAFCO does not weigh public protests.
City of Hanford, County of Kings Pop. 32.000; 11 sq. miles
• LAFCO would be the I��d agency.
• Agriculture zoning is allowed in the city and sphere boundary.
• Have not processed a sphere amendment so does not know how long it would
take to process.
• Environmental review would be done by the city.
• Have county islands and have, in the past, proposed annexations.
• LAFCO does not weight the public protests.
City of Fresno, Countv of Fresno Pop. 370,000; 100 sq. miles
• The city would be the lead agency.
• Agriculture zoning is allowed in city and sphere.
• Several months processing time similar to an annexation.
• EIR would be conducted.
• LAFCO Board denied several annexations based on public protests, including
island annexations.
City of Wasco, County of Kern Pop. 13,900; 6.5 sq. miles
• The city would be the lead agency.
• Agriculture zoning would be allowed in the city and sphere boundary.
�
❑
Do not know how long the processing would be for sphere amendment.
• They have been working toward a sphere of influence amendment for the past six
months. They have completed a Master Environmentat Assessment which will be
used for a revision to the general plan and the sphere of influence amendment.
• The Planning Director's opinion is that the city will do anything l�4FC0 requires
for the sphere amendment and/or annexation.
• They have one county island and is not an issue.
City of Shafter, County of Kern Pop. 9,800; 2.1 sq. miles
(does not include the recent
annexation completed in 1992)
•
•
•
•
The city was the lead agency with their sphere amendment.
Agriculture zone and property is allowed in the city and sphere boundary.
The process took as long as annexation to the city.
Negative Declaration was done for sphere amendment as a requirement.
• The Planning Director, Lawrence Tomasello, stated that a Fiscal Impact analysis
was complete for the Council and was submitted as additional information to
LAFCO. However, was not a requirement.
• No issues on county islands.
City of California City, Countv of Kern
•
•
•
•
•
The city was the lead agency.
Pop. 8.000; 186 sq. miles
(does not include the recent
annexation completed Nov. 1992)
Agriculture zoning is allowed in the city and sphere boundary.
The process took the same as the annexation.
A Negative Declaration was prepared for project.
County islands is not an issue.
�
,.
City of Modesto. Countv of Stanislaus Pop. 172.300: 30.46 sa. miles
• Lead agency
• Agriculture zoning is allowed in sphere boundary.
• The process depends on the environmental document, however, generally would
be six months. �
• Depending on the proposed project, would need EIR or Negative Declaration.
• They have a few county islands, but not an issue. They have left the county
islands alone.
4
PROCESSING TIMES FOR ANNEXATIONS
LAFCO AGENCIES IN CALIFORNIA
Tulare County LAFCO
All cities within jurisdictions have a"standing" property tax agreement. Processing time
is between 3 to 5 weeks from the time they receive an application to the hearing date.
The board meets once a month. Application consists of a resolution, map,
environmental document, legal description and plan for services. Once received, check
for completeness, if complete, issue a certificate of filing and distribute for review.
Notices sent and posted 15 days prior to hearing. , ,
San Bernardino LAFCO
Processing time is between 3 to 6 months from the time they receive an application to
the hearing date. The application consists of a resolution, map, environmental
document, legal description. Once received, check for completeness, issue certificate
of filing and distribute for review. Notices sent and posted 15 days prior to hearing.
Fresno County LAFCO
For the cities that have a"standing" properry tax agreement, processing time is about
45 days from the time they receive an application to the hearing date. They must meet
the 15 days noticing deadlines.
Sacramento County LAFCO
The timing for processing an application varies on a case-by-case basis. The LAFCO
does a separate environmental review and document from the city's (this is similar to
what Kern LAFCO used to do). A certificate of fi{ing is issued when the application is
complete, in most cases, a letter is sent to the city wanting additional information. The
review of the application takes about 30 days then the 21 day notice for the
environmental document occurs. Their board meets once a month.
Madera County LAFCO
Processing time is between 2 to 3 months from the time they receive an application to
the hearing date. The board meets once a month. The application consists of
application, legal description, maps, filing fee, prezone resolution and environmental
document. Once received, review for accuracy and set hearing. Fifteen day notice for
hearing requirement.
1
InYO County LAFCO
Processing time is about 45 days from the time they receive an application to the
hearing date. They must meet the 15 day noticing deadlines.
Kern Countv LAFCO
Processing time is between four to six months, with the average time being 5-1 /2
months, from the time they receive an application to the hearing date. The application
consists of resolution, legal description, map, filing fee, prezone ordinance,
environmental dr��ument and for u�ditional information submit a copy c# the Plar9ning
Commission staff report. Once received, a copy of the map is submitted to the Kern
County Assessor's Office in order to acquire the tax area code. LAFCO sends out
application for review. Then, submit to County Auditor-Controller to formulate properly
tax split (processing time about 1 to 2 months). The Auditor-Controller notifies City
Finance Department and City Attorney's Office to provide tax split within 30 days of
letter. Once LAFCO receives resolutions for property tax split, then schedules the
noticing for a public hearing. Noticing requirement is 15 days and they just submit
notice in the paper. The board, as of March 9, 1993, meets once a month (the fourth
Tuesday of each month).
�
LOCAL ItGENCY FORII�ATION C01�YtSS10�1
DEPART0IENT HEAD: WillFem Turpin (Appuinted by Canvnisslw�)
A�N: The item County l.ocal Agenry Forrna�tion Commisaion 1LAFGQ) was
creaead and funciions under�►e roquirernems ai tF►a Knaoc N�sbsd Ad. The P�Y
Pu�pose at LAFOQ is tlss discoairagarnent of ur�an afxewi and laratitadon ci tha
orderiy tormafion and deve3opment ot bcal gouemment ager►cias based upon bcal
cand'd�ans and c�rairnstances. IA�Cd revisws and acts �pnn all qapossd
I i
r +b i
-- � . �
fom�atioaia� ennsx�iona, tblachme�ts. and dher chengea in boundariea at �tiUea,
s�ecial dief�icta� artd service azeas wilhiar ths County. The Convrissicn is compaead
d iive rnembere. twa repreaer�ing 1hs County, iwo reprecenting cides. and ane
ropresenta�'we o# tha p��lic. Tha Gommiasion appoints an executare oi�ioer wta
rt�n�paa 1hs dey-to'daY business of t�►e Cornrnfsaior�.
BUDGET H1G4iUGHT8 PRdPQSED POSITION ADDlTlOHSJDE�ETIONS - None
• Oecrease in total en�enditures irom FY 1992-93 Budget: 878 1.3s6 NARACT ON �iOtiRA1AS18ERYICES
• Oacrsase �n t�et General Fund Cast hom FY 199Q-93 Budget is87b1 0.A3X
, ii►e FY i993-94 budpet is reoomrneoded as subanitted by tlrs LocaJ AgencY
Formation Carmrsaion. R ahould be ootad tl�ai Ssc6an 56381 of ths
Goverm�eat Cada roquares t9nat,1'he board of s�►pesvieors �I�aU provWe 1or N►e
use oi ths c�rMTMSSion during t�a� fiscal yeer no! bsa Ihan ti�s acrwunt of money
equal b airy ane d the foaawin�: {a� the amourrt fnced by tha eo4rrnission, �bj
�e u�wu�t appropniatad in the prior liscal year inaeased by the sarne
P���9d as llss appropriaobna limit d 1l�e county lor lhat fiscel yeor wiA ba
increasad hvm ths prior fiscaf year, (cj ihe amount detenrw�ad in s�bdi►asioa b''
plus atry edcidanal amaurrl U►e board ot supenrisms deerta. neoessery.' Ths
racomir�anded FY 1999•9� budg� pro+ridea an appropr�ticn which it the lesset
ci tfw stalutory oprtiona dasorbed aDov�.
;;�a�
• Ths FY 1890•94 recorrrns�d�d buclget wU �►iow ior the provision af 1he same
faval of aentices cunesWy p�avided.
REIlENUE$
• FY i 993-84 revenues derived korn armexaxion�detac4�ment fiiYng faes are
expe�c�ed lo tcAal s18,006.
REI+IS OF dISAGREEYENT - Nione
ST�7E CQfT101.i�f
GOIKfY Rt�C£T AC�
�E !
AtCt. ��MAIIGIdC tllE3
Mb. t1ASSLFiGTIEM
i2�• SALARDE3 R HI�kOYEE iE1EFI1's
ai� su�s � w�s - e�aut.�
i12f S1LA1[IEl t WI�fS - rMERTlIE
f�t� S�LIWIE3 � YACE3 - E]c�ItA IEIr
i41r O�.SDR_CeN1�DAICM
fA3a !i�?E f�TI�HENT
i3!• HM�L6'1tE[ C*OUF �1CAE DLS-I!i
ib3t BpEC1fEE CRO�N� OBffAL I11S-TSF
ia» t�ra�xr tar nrs-ss�
r�» �as �+ttiaw aa-rss
• s�u.�r�ES : s�or� ee�na
, fiM S�VZCES �I �CI'rLIES
ib�1 [al�1-iEt8�M1E i YELl9�AN!
i!M 11lAIl11fi�
il7i IMDI�ElU110E E�IIlIE![i
1M� l�ERSNIf't
T45i AFi�CE E71lEIl�E
TK2 OFFlCE E]f106E-'r'Oi?�CE
75�� 1'�OF � 8lEL SE�flCES
T525 FS!lAtTA t�I11C
7iq PL�LICAT7M6 i REiA! �TIteS
Tl�� iI1R11ST0�TifION � T�4�E1.
TT3� i7�ERS01�L Y�iCLE NiLEAOE
� fEiYZGES t SI�lL�
eu� nx�d �Ts
sa�� �ause++ear-�oetr�aru�
. �exm �us�s
,� �r+ui�r raiu
c�rr o� ��
S1ATE OF C�IFO�lQ� UICAL ACE7�ICY f0101ATIAI Co1M1
lIIOCET WIt FiNR11C11� IISE3 OET�II 277� M�IIC �O?ECTIOM
�OM FISt�L YE11R 11l3 - 1!!� � �
A*!lOrE�l Al101riE0 � ftM!
bWllO OF lO�Rb OF tCE11ERAL
�titiA� i�O�IL� E31'DIIi�D �iEO 31�ElIII30�s '.fIRERYISOtl IM.�Sf
il�1-�R im-!3 a!!2-�s i!l3-i4 1!!3-!i 2!!s-9�1 �CATHI
=st,�s
�
!.�
1.7Si
l��4f
1sS�1
i,sz�
iss,u�
t�13�
1�Y3i
1N
�i5
�s�
i.i33
lL�i72
l�i3i
4,�2�
s,e�
1,156
�i, Ni4
x,ns
z,ns
i�,u�
22a1sT2!
»�
N�
�sH!
1L���/
13��T1
1,31�
ss�
i,�
i�r,�i�
l�1/•
1.�l�•
la��•
445
�,S�•
1,5�•
31,t5i
l,ti*
�i�N
�,���
3i���
�iS,Kl
1R'f.�ib
�z
�ittl
l�SS4
]2+111
1���3
t�
i,cs
u+,sr�
l.la�
l,ill
2!i
asa
1�l1!
ib!
�a415
EMl
lrll!
s,z�
Mf
d��
1i4,�13
sa
�
1t,3�!
lf►���
12.s7i
l�SK
��
t,�a�
ar�,szs
1,iH
1���
��
Ki
3����
l,i��
tf�23�
1���•
Ei���
ii���
3r�N
� r�
lSi�i23
s�s
���
1�,3/�
LS,��•
12�5�i
l,�bi
ist
i,»r
sn,3ts
li���
l��N
5�1
NS
ia1/�
1�5��
li�23�
ti���
3����
is���
5����
K,qS
�s,�ra u►,ss� x�.�u zes,n�
:;ns
i
COUMi'1 bulx+t � ..� �
SCHt7�IX.E 9
A000111iT FIMI�IIC 1l16 I�S
IRR6ER C�l�SSIPDC1lTI0N
6y00 SAURIPS t Ei�'LOYEE BENEFITS
611i SaE.iRLES i MA6E5 - REi�111.1R
612i SltllUtlES i MACfS - OttE1tT11E
62is S11LA8IE5 � U�B3 - FlCfiti HELP
643• OASOI CaMil[ISUTIDN
643� STATE REi]AEIEMT
651� ElIP20YEE 6itOlr IBICAL DtS-TSf
6i'J� EIPLOYEE CRilt1P GE�AL IMS-I3F
6571 ����T � �"�F
K�• MG��S Cq�E1LSATI01 IILi-1Sf
� SALJIRIlS � E34LOYfE �iIT5
��� SE�YDCES i StlPRIES
bs43 COfM-iELiPF1E i TE1.E6AiPH
by« �AIICE
697a e1JlDf�DWICF E���
�nr� ��
7451 �FFII� F%PEHSE
7452 OfFICE E71P£MSE�OG?l6E
75Di PROf k S� S£�I�ES
T52b PSSlDATA PNOCE3SIMC
7�� rue�iuiiass t �u. MoncEs
i14� iRa1L5P4R1ATInM i iRAYEL
7731 T7JPE:SaNA1 VEFtICLE EIRLEI6E
rt SERYICES i SUPPLIES
is0i flliEA ASSEi4
i6�� E�MEK['FAD3TIOIIAl.
M Ftl� AiS�T�i
� o��Rns�Kr Tu�ru
8U06Ei �ItLLI Y1ew+..�nn w._.. _ •-•-
FOR FIS[A1. YEAR 1993 - tl94
AC71J�L
1991-42
127���6
527
lr�93
2s739
�,d9s
1,231
1r520
i5�s234
2,�3•
1.233
l6E
443
s,zas
1.833
1�.1�2
1.SSi
4,f27
b,sl9
1,255
3A�464
1, 71i
1.71fr
19/ s414
AC7Ual
1�92-45
12! �435
374
1�746
1��54T
1I�419
1.655
3.5�
1,s97
165�b95
1�279
1+206
273
443
2,s�e
895
11,365
612
1,i74
�,es�
622
24.Sb3
190,175
01MER Pitolt��jw•
ADOPT�
60ARC CF
REQIIESTEn SUPERYI90RS
1993-9i ]143-94t
]134,si3
500
sea
10,300
15s0l0
12,576
i.3a6
550
1►7�e
177a�
1ri�0
1,40i
600
445
a,eo�
�.sea
?3,230
1r�0•
3,6A0
�,e+o
3,OOi
R5�ii5
223s10�
134�E13
3�8
50t
10,30�
15,A�0
24,0.18
I,512
18�i
1,7�0
2T9aiZ7
1r4/0
1s40�
5�!
�4b
3,�0�
i,sss
25,230
1,00�
3,�0�
7,a00
8i0��
45,6?5
FI�D
� CENEIGL
UGLE59
Il�ICAT£0)
t2���2 �
t�"
� �
�
�
134 �
PART I
CALAFCO EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SALARY SURVEY
1989 - 90
Otficial Functioning % Time
County Status E.D. Title E.D. Title Salary on
LAFCO
Alameda No Response
Alpine Dependent Karen Keebaugh Same $34,000 0
Executive Officer/ (This
Recording Secretary Year)
(County Clerk)
Amador Dependent W. Gary Clark Same $3,000 yr < 5%
Butte Dependent Bettye Kircher, Paula I.easure $37,612 80%
Planning Director Senior Planner
Calaveras Dependent Danny Mao, Same $2,288 10 hrs/mo
Planning Director
Colusa Dependent Stanley M. Walker Same $44,216 10%
Director of Planning
& Building
Contra Costa Dependent Dewey E. Mansfield Same $55,608 100%
Executive O�cer
Del Norte Dependent Ernest Perry Same $46,516 5%
Director Planning/Bldg
El Dorado Dependent Ben Hulse Margaret Wilkenfeld $30,275 95-100%
Comm. Dev. Director Dep. Ex. Officer
Fresno Dependent Marvin L. Panter Same $55,900 100%
Fxec. Officer
Glenn Dependent John Benoit Same $43,154 5%
Planning Director
Humboldt Dependent Thomas Conlan Joel Canzoneri $29,600 25%
Dir. Planning/Bldg. Planner III
Imperial Dependent Jurg Heuberger Same $1,200 yr 12%
Exec. O�cer
Inyo Dependent Roger De Hart Same $44,920 10%
Planning Director
Kern Independent William A. Turpin Same $55,472 100°10
Exec. Officer
Kings Dependent Charles Gardner Same $54,072 12%
Planning Director
Lake Independent William O. Kranz Same $18,000 50%
Executive O�cer
L,assen Dependent Robert K Sorvaag Same $43,632 15%
Planning Director
I.os Angeles Ruth Benell Same $83,261 100%
Exec. Officer
Madera Dependent Donaid Handly Stell Manfredi $45,848 8%
Ass`t Admin Officer
PART I Page 2
CALAFCO EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SALARY SURVEY
1989 - 90
Ofticial Functioning % Time
County Status E.D. Title E.D. Title Salary on
LAFCO
Marin Independent Dawn Mittleman Same $50 hr 25%
Exec. Officer
Mariposa Dependent Tony Lashbrook Same $35,530 < 10%
Planning Director
Mendocino Independent Mary Spangler Same $16,200 30%
Exec. Officer
Merced Dependent Robert E. Smith Same $66,000 ± 20%
Exec. Officer
Modoc Dependent Pamela Townsend Same $30,000 6%
Planning Director
Mono No Response
Monterey Dependent Jim Cook Same $49,080 50%
Exec. O�cer
Napa Dependent Charles Wilsbn Same $48,790 100%
Senior Admin.
Nevada Independent Jane Magel Same $15,000 53%
Exec. O�cer
Orange Independent James Colangelo Same $49,646 100%
Exec. O�cer
Placer Dependent Thomas D. Monihan Same $68,605 10%
Exec. Ass't to Co.
Exec. Officer
Plumas Dependent John Momonow Same $50,587 2%
Exec. Officer
Riverside Independent George J. Spiliotis Same $64,600 100%
Exec. Officer
Sacramento Dependent John S. O'Farrell Same $64,880 10%
Fxec. Officer
San Benito Dependent Ace Mendiola Same $46,420 16%
Exec. Officer
San Bernardino Independent James M. Roddy Same $50,820 100%
E�ec. Officer
San Diego Independent June P. Merrill Same $73,719 100%
Exec. Officer
San Joaquin Independent Gerald F. Scott Same $54,534 100%
Exec. Officer
San Luis Obispo Dependent Robert E. Hendrix Paul L Hood $49,725 10%
Exec. Officer Dep. Ex. Officer
Princ. Admin. Analyst
San Mateo Independent William D. Dave Same $50,376 + 100%
Fxec. Officer auto a11ow.
Santa Barbara Independent Robert D. Perkins Same $47,200 100%
Exec. Officer
PART I Page 3
CALAFCO EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SALARY SURVEY
1989 - 90
Official Functioning R'o Time
County Status E.D. Title E.D. Title Salary on
LAFCO
Santa Clara No Response
Santa Cruz Independent Patrick McCormick Same $46,176 100%
Fxec. Officer
Shasta Dependent Richard W. Curry Bill Ramsdell $33,840 60%
Fxec. Officer LAFCO Planner
Sierra Dependent Tim Belle Same Not < 8%
Dir. Trans & Planning provided
Siskiyou Dependent Robert Sellman Same $46,000 5%
Co. Planning Dir.
Solano Dependent John E. Taylor Same $64,008 4%
Dir. Env. Mngmt.
Sonoma Dependent Tom Schopflin Vivian Lock $39,744 100%
Co. Admin. Officer Asst. Ex. Officer
Stansilaus Dependent Victor Holanda Same $81,838 5%a
Co. Planning Dir.
Sutter No Response
Tehama Dependent George Roberson Same $41,652 < 10%
Co. Planning Dir.
Trinity No Response
Tulare Dependent Roberta Maoglashan Same $15,752 25%
Exec. Officer
Tuolumne Dependent James E. Nuzum Larry A. Holberg $31,000 42%
Exec. Officer Asst. Ex. O�cer
Ventura Dependent Robert L. Brautman Same $56,262 50%
Exec. Officer & Manager,
Government Organization
Yolo Dependent Elizabeth C. Kempher Same $40,955 100%
Exec. Officer
Yuba Dependent Frederick J. Morawczneki Same $88,288 20%
Exec. Officer
Clk. to Board of Super.
Co. Administrator
�P � ° �' � f � b � y Q `� Y � )LOCAL AGENCY �OR�IIATION COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT HEAD: Willlam Turpin (Appointed by Commisslon)
MISSION: The Kern County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) was
created and functions under the requirements of the Knox-Nisbett Act. The primary
purpose of LAFCO is the discouragement of urban sprawl end facilitation of the
orderly formation and development of local government agencies based upon local
conditions and circumstances. LAFCO reviews and acts upon all proposed
Budqet Unit 2770
formations, annexations, detachments, and other changes in boundaries of citieR,
special districts, and service areas within the County. The Commission is composed
of tive members, two represeMing the County, two representing cities, and one
representative of the public. The Commission appoints an executive officer who
manages the day-to-day business of the Commission.
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS PROPOSED POSITION ADDITIONS/DELETIONS - None
• Decrease in tota) e�enditures irom FY 1992-93 Budget: 2 975 1.3%
• Decrease in Net General Fund Cost from FY 1992-93 Budget: 875 0.43%
The FY 1993-94 budget is recommended as submitted by the Local Agency
Formation Commission. It should be noted that Section 56381 ot the
Government Code requires that, 'The board of supervisors shall provide for the
use of the commission during that fiscal year not less than the amount ot money
equal to any one oi the following: (a) the amount fixed by the commission, (b)
the amount appropriated in the prior tiscal year increased by the same
percentage as the appropriations limit of the county (or that fiscal year will be
increased irom the prior tiscal year, (c) the amount determined in subdivision 'b'
plus any additional amount the board of supervisors deems necessary' The
recommended FY 1993-94 budget provides an appropriation which is the lesser
ot the statutory options described above.
:;n5
IMPACT ON PROGRAMS/SERVICES
• The FY 1993-94 recommended budget will allow for the provision of the same
level of services cunently provided.
REVENUES
FY 1993-94 revenues derived from annexatioNdetachment filing iees are
e�ected to total 518,000.
REMS OF DISAGREEMENT - None
�
+{_>, `��.i B��� s
� �
� �
U
�q�� ��
July 19, 1994
The City of Bakersfield
Sanitation Division
Commercial Business Owners
City of Bakersfield
Bakersfield, California
To Whom It May Concern:
Please accept this letter as notification that commercial refuse collection rates will
increase 1.9% effective August 1, 1994. As a result, the average commercial customer
with a single bin/twice weekly collection service, will see an increase of approximately
$2.00 per month. Kern County landfill disposal fees will not increase in 1994-95, thus
disposal rates shown on your refuse bill will remain the same.
City commercial collection rate increases are below the establisbed cost of living index
for the past year, and are necessary to offset a portion of the cost of State mandated
waste diversion and recycling programs.
Also included in this mailing is a flyer describing The City of Bakersfield's expansion of
a Commercial Cardboard Recycling Program. If cardboard is a significant portion of
your waste stream, you may realize savings in your refuse bill by becoming involved in
this beneficial waste diversion venture. To indicate interest, please fill out the lower
portion of the "Get On Board With Cardboard" sheet and retum. Actual
implementation of the expansion may not occur until January 1995.
If you have questions regarding either your billing or recycling programs, please contact
the Sanitation Division.
Sincerely,
Gene Bogart
Water & Sanitation Manager
By: Mike Sides
Sanitation Superintendent
\RATEINC.C94
��������
il
; �1�� 2 0 ��4 �
;
�',r^Qt F . .. r. .- . � . . � .
' � •'�-
� ��
CITY COLLECTION RATES FOR 1994/1995 FISCAL YEAR
MONTHLY CITY BIN COLLECTION RATES TO BE ADDED TO COUNTY DZSPOSAL FEES:
PICKUP DAYS PER WEEK
1 2 3 4 5 6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
. 1.5 YD $57.31 $71.64 $113.42 $158.19 $205.94 $257.67
BIN SIZE 2 YD. $71.64 $89.54 $141.77 $197.49 $257.19 $321.35
PER CUBIC YD 3 YD $85.95 $107.44 $170.12 $236.77 $308.41 $385.02
**DETACHABLE COMPACTOR BINS are charged three times the standard bin rate
-----------------------------------------=-------------------------------------
PICKUP DAYS PER WEEK
2 3 4 5 6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMERCIAL CANS: � OF CAN 2 $16.42 $23.89 $31.83 $39.79 $47.75
3 $23.89 $35.81 $47.75 $59.69 $71.64
4 $32.33 $48.25 $64.17 $80.08 $96.01
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RATES FOR SPECIAL SERVICES PROVIDED BY CITY SANITATION DIVISION:
KERN COUNTY DISPOSAL FEES WILL BE ADDED TO THE LISTED COMMERCIAL CHARGES
REFUSE ROLLOFF COMPACTOR BINS:
SANITATION HOURLY RATE:
DETACHABLE BIN RENTAL:
LOCKED BIN SERVICE:
COMMERCIAL AUTOMATED CP,RT:
RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED CART:
SPLIT BILLING SERVICE CHARGE:
SPLIT BILLING BIN RENTAL FEE:
ILLEGAL CONTAINER IMPOUND FEE:
SPECIAL SERVICE BIN RATE:
CARDBOARD SERVICE (RECYCLING):
$178.33/PICK UP
$ 50.95/HOUR
$ 18.50/BIN/M4NTH (when available)
$ 5.00/BIN/MONTH (when available)
$ 23.89/MONTH (when available)
$126.00/YEAR/RESIDENCE
$ 5.00/MONTH/BUSINESS
$ 5.00/MONTH/BUSINESS
$ 50,95 PICKUP CHARGE + $1/DAY
$ 50.95 (1st bin) + $Z0.00 (each add. bin)
$ 85.00/BIN/3 DAY WEEKLY SERVICE
KERN COUNTY COMMERCIAL DISPOSAL FEES FOR 1993/94 FISCAL YEAR
$29.00 PER TON OR $2.00 PER CUBIC YARD
MONTHLY COUNTY DISPOSAL FEES TO BE ADDED TO CITY COLLECTION FEES:
PICKUP DAYS PER WEEK
1 2 3 4 5 6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.5 YD $12.99 $25.98 $38.97 $51.96 $64.95 $77.94
BIN SIZE 2 YD $17.32 $34.64 $51.96 $69.28 $86.60 $103.92
PER CUBIC YD 3 YD $25.98 $51.96 $77.94 $103.92 $129.90 $155.88
2 N/A $5.54 $8.31 $11.08 $13.86 $16.63
� OF CANS 3 N/A $8.31 $12.47 $16.63 $20.78 $24.94
4 N/A $11.08 $16.63 $22.17 $27.71 $33.25
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COUNTY DISPOSAL FEES WILL BE ITEMIZED & INCLUDED IN CITY COMMERCIAL BILLINGS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
! y '�
r� �+ tl
Get on bo�rd with Cardboard!
With the cost of doing business getting higher each year, it's important to examine
every cost-saving opportunity that passes your way. This is one of those.
In days gone by, most people had no idea about what was in their garbage can. They
opened things up, took out merchandise and threw boxes, bags and barrels into the
dumpster. Today, we likewise acquire merchandise in "throw-away" containers...but
today the price of tossing it into the dumpster has gone up.
Thus, we offer your company an alfernative. RECYCLE! More specifically, RECYCLE
YOUR CARDBOARD! Take those "throw away" containers of yesteryear and become
a part of the garbage solution this year!!
The City of Bakersfield is currently running a Pilot Cardboard Recycling Program,
whereby businesses designate a 3-yard bin for the collection of cardboard only. The
bin is picked-up by the City 3 times pei week at a significanfly-reduced fee. This
program has proven to be successful for the businesses in fhe pilot, many of which
have reduced their refuse biNs,
The City of Bakersfield is looking to institutionalize this program, making if a service
offered to local businesses. We encourage you to come on board! We realize that
some businesses may not generate enough cardboard to require a three times per
week collection, thus we are examining both a 1 time and a 2 time per week pick-up
schedule. Anyway you look at it, the savings are significant...helping to improve your
bottom line!
If you're interested, indicate by signing-up below. We hope to expand the program
in the next several months...Get on Board with Cardboard!
..��_------------�-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, 1'm interested! I understand that my business wil! be responsible for
designating a dumpster for cardboard only, for breaking down all cardboard
boxes, and for keeping the cardboard load CLEAN... NO TRASH!
Name ofbusiness:
ContactPerson:
Store Address :
Billing Address:
Te%phone#:.
Approximate weekiy amount of cardboard gerterated:
� � I I I I I I l l///// � � i i i i� i� i� �
� ``a``,� , ���-_.._ '—. �
�' `
� 1e
i flA'f r,. . �
� �
�, :
= ��,, ' ,�
s�"'Q '��ma 'm U! d n I���'
•
.�
��
M E M O R A N D U M
"WE CARE"
Alan Tandy, City Manager
Michael R. Kelly, Fire Chief
July 19, 1994
,
._ =.• _�
��(�j�s���p� � =_-- __ ,
,
JUi � g ��4
_� ;�
�!� Pydqji��QC�� • �
� � ���g���L'(',
SUBJECT: HAZARD REDUCTION/SPECIALIZED FIRE AP�pARATUS
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Councilmember Pat 5mith, Chief McCarthy, and myself inet this
morning to discuss the hazard posed by dry vegetation at the top of
the bluffs just north of Panorama Drive.
As you are aware, we had a fire in that area last week that came
very close to some of the homes. A fire break has been cut below
the top of the bluffs, but there is enough vegetation at this time
of year that the fire jumped the fire break and proceeded toward
the top of the hill.
In order to reduce the current risk, the Fire Department will
conduct grass fire training exercises along the top of the bluffs
beginning this Thursday at 6:00 a.m. (if wind conditions are
favorable). This training exercise will possibly take three to
four days, and we hope to reduce the hazard in the area between Mt.
Vernon and Fairfax.
At this time we do not propose burning near the condominiums that
over look the old dump. These condominiums hang out over the edge,
and there is too much of a possibility that we might damage the
structures . I will continue to give more thought on how we can
deal with this particular problem.
We are currently in the process of identifying all the property
owners in the projected work area. We will have a meeting for all
of these property owners on Monday, July 25th at 6:00 p.m. at Fire
Station No. 8 located at Mt. Vernon and University. At this
meeting we will share information with them as to how they might
better protect their property and work in conjunction with the Fire
Department to avoid a serious situation in that area. The,private
property owners in the projected work area will be contacted in
advance of the burn and notified of our intent.
On another topic, research is continuing on the purchase of
specialized fire apparatus. I am as anxious to purchase the
equipment as I am sure you are to receive a recommendation as far
as specific apparatus configuration.
_.. _ .._ . ---.._ . _. � . .. _. __..; ... _.
` r
iw �- f
t� Si
�' '
Page 2 `
July 19, 1994
HAZARD REDUCTION/SPECIALIZED FIRE APPARATUS �
� �
We have contacted 75 fire departments in an effort to receive
, feedback regarding specialized fire apparatus such as Squirts,
' Quints, and special use apparatus. A�majority of those surveys
have been returned, and it is my understanding a�final report is in
progress and should be available soon.
, - .
Members of the Fire Department Apparatus Committee, as well as the ,
d liaison have been on vacation and that has slowed
Corporation Yar ,
- the process somewhat. I would hope that within a maximum of one
month a final report, including a recommendation, will be available I
for.your review. � , �,
s:Kelly\Hazard � � � ���
;
J I
0
� \
� .
0
� �
j'
L �
: ,. r v
. O� �N��`@�Eo�,p�
� , ��
. .
�
�'�taFOR qe
T0:
FROM:
DATE:
M E M O R A N D U M
"WE CARE"
Alan Tandy, City Manager
M. R. Kelly, Fire Chief
July 18, 1994
SUBJECT: Questions Raised by Councilmember Conni Brunni
1.
2.
3.
4.
Direct Fire Loss
The significant increase in fire loss is a result of one large
structure fire which occurred at 110 New Stine on April 30,
1994. Structure loss was estimated at $900,000 with a content
loss of $350,000 for a total fire loss of $1,250,000.
The increase in the number of firefighter injuries is a result
of injuries which occurred while fighting structure fires.
The majority of these injuries deal with joint injuries such
as knees, ankles, and shoulders. The frequency of these
injuries is impossible to predict. These injuries occur even
though personnel are adequately trained and equipped with
proper safety apparel.
Index Figures
The number of fires per one thousand population is down this
year since we have had over 100 fewer fires. Also a proactive
fire prevention and public education program has helped reduce
the number of fires.
The fires per one thousand buildings is also down due to a
reduction in the number of fires.
Fires and Losses by Type of Buildinq
Once again, the loss amount is accelerated because of the one
large fire on New Stine.
Causes of Fires in Buildinq
As far as fire causes that are termed "other", all fires where
the cause is unknown at the time of the fire fall under the
category of unknown. The reason the unknown category has
increased such a large amount is, once again, because of the
fire on New Stine. The cause of this fire was initially
listed as unknown. Subsequent investigation has changed the
cause determination to suspicious. There are no suspects at
this time.
: ;, •
Page 2
5. Personnel Data
, Total Davs Lost for Sickness:
There are currently several long-term leave of absences due to
employee�illness. These include illness due to stress, knee,
broken hand, and appendectomy. Total days lost for sickness
fluctuates with influenza outbreaks.
Total Davs Lost for Injurv:
The number of firefighters listed on injury leave are the
result of several long term injuries. As an example: back
irijury; knee injury; cut finger; hip injury; shoulder strain
and muscle pull. As stated in Item #1, the frequency of these
injuries are impossible to predict. .
�
�
a
�
0
,
.�- �
'� ��,�� _d�
�
. no � n .,
0
ers� eld '�Fire De - �.�`=�°�
� . Page 1
ONSOLIDATED MONTHLY REPORT
FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE ,�q 94
This �as} This This Last
CLASSIFICATION OF ALARMS Month Month Month Year Year
Last Year to Date to Date
HOW ALARMS RE RECEIVED: I,
T Ms 1278 1236 1310 7170 7179 '
FIRES: •
Fre Explosion Not Classified 10-19 5 3 2 25 15
Structure Fre 11
Mobile Property Used as a Structure 12 _ 1 � 1 �
Mobile Property Inside Structure 13
Mobile Properfy Outside 14
Trees, Bush, Grass 15
Refuse Fre 16
Other Ouside Fres 1 7
TOTAL FIRES
CALLS OTHER THAN FIRES:
Overpressure, Explosion (no fire) 20's
Medical Call 30's
Rescue Call 35
Misceilaneous Medical 30-39
Hazardous Condition 40's
Public Service 50's
Good Intent Call 60's
False Call 70's
Natural Disaster 80's
Not Classified � 00-90's
TOTAL CALLS OTHER THAN FIRES
TOTAI EMERGENCIES
DIRECT FIRE LOSS
Fre Loss j8est Fgures to Date)
PERSONS KILLED BY FIRE: r7
Civilian �
�
Firefighters
PERSONS INJURED:
� Civilian
This
Month
��
N/A
N/A
��
��
� :.
m�
��
.1 �
��
���
This Month
Last Year
291,5�.Q
N/A
o����-.i
���
� �� �
t �.� .�
� :•� S
.1 � �:
-��-
This Year
to Date
s-�„T
7��
N/A
Last Year
to Date
�RQ R1 �
N/A
Additional data used in INDEX FIGURES: Population 201, 769 Valuation of Real Estate, corrected to irue
va�ue � 3, 915 , 072 , 783 guildings in City 57 , 666 gui�ding permits issued WE.R,E 142 , 7 DEMUI.ITIUNS
NOTE: Buiiding Fires and Losses only are used in INDEX FIGURES and LOSS BY SIZE OF FIRE.
' `' STRUCTURE LOSS BY SIZE OF FIRE
' Over $ 50,000
$ 1.000 - b 49.999
Less than a 1,000
No Loss
10TAL
This Month
Fires Losses
� I G�b.0
_
.
� Page 2
� This Year to Date Last Year to Cate
Fires Losses �� of Fires % of Loss % of Fires � of Loss
2 732 5
FIRES AND LOSSES BY TYPE OP BUILDING This Year to Date Last Year to Date
Fres losses Fres Losses
l. Type Not Classified/Undetermined
2. Type I Previously Fre Resistive I
3. Type II Previously Non-Combustible
4. Type III Previously Ordinary
5. Type IV Previously Heavy Timber - -
6. Type V Previously Wood Frame 1 2 177 720 1 857 190
TOTALS IN BUILDINGS 154 , , 52 190 , 389 , 815
CAUSES Of FIRES IN BUILDINGS
1. Ovfside Fires ' 0's
2. Spark from Cutting/Welding Torch 11-12
3. Heat/Spark from Natural
Gas/LP/Liquid Fueled Equipment 13-19
a. Chimney (Spark/Heat) 21,22
S. Heat/Spark Coal/Solid Fuel 23-20
6. Electrical Short 31-36
7. Defective Electrical Equipment 37-30
8. Heat from Hot Object 40's
9. Munitions/Explosives 51-53,55,59,50
) 0. Freworks 54
11. Incendiary Device 56
12. Open Fres (cigarettes, matches► 60's
13. Natural Source 70's
14. From other Fire 80's
15. Other 90's
iOTAL BUILDING FIRES
•:� . -,,�.::. ... -�-_--�-_:_
Nb. of . This Year to Date
Fires No. of % of
this �ires Loss (Best Fgure) Totol
Month Loss
��
��
��
��i
��
��
��
��
��
� / `
Last Year to Date
of % of
S Loss (Best Fgure) Total
Loss
111,800 4. 9 15 167 7,00 12.07
132,550 4, 5 41 131,420 9.46
87,400 3 20 17 218,500 15.72
29,700 .09 4 � 12,750 .92
37,250 .36 8 130 050 9.36
182,350 6.67 33 284 750 20.49
9,600 .35 1 50 .00
4,300 .16 8 74 500 5.36
214,500 7.85 21 74 975 5.39
4 60 .17 1 0 .00
95 450 � 58.39 720 12.93
732,520 �100.00 1 1,389,815 100.00
Page 3
` HOW ALL FIRES WERE CONTROLLED �� This Month This Year Last Year
to Date to Date
` Self Extinguished 1
Makeshift Aids 2 �
Portable Extingusher 3 '
Automatic Extinguishing System 4
Water Camed on Apparatus 5
Water from Hydrant, Draff, Stondpipe 6
Water from Tanker Shuttle 7
Ground Crew/Air Suppo�t 8
Undetermined/Not Reported 9/10
TOTAL FIRES 25
MISCELLANEOUS WORK This This Year Last Year
Month to Date to Date
New hydronts �
installed 2 i1
Hyd�ants painted 618
Hydranis repaired 476 �
�
This Last Same This This Year Last Year
PERSONNEL DATA Month CHANGES:
Month Month Last Year Month to Date to Date
MANPOWER: Appointment� _ 1
Total personnel at end of month 191 192 198 Resignations 1 3 1
Total Days lost for sickness � Retirements - 1 3
Total days lost for injury ' Dismissals -
Average daily absences Deaths _
Smallest fighting force on duty Promotions
Largest fighting force on duty � Demotions
This Year to Date Last Year to Date
INSPECTION BY REQUEST ONLY Total No.of Fire Total No.of Fire
Inspections Fires Loss Inspections Fires Loss
Residential I I 157 I 962 965
This Year to Date Last Year to Date
REGULARLY INSPECTED OCCUPANCIES Total No.of Fire Total No.of Fre
Inspections Fires Loss Inspections Fres Loss
Exclude apartmenis, houses, private garages,
and incendiary fires 2, 796 28 1, 410 , 470 4909 33 I 426 , 850
i. _ .. . _ __
1,250,000.00 �uSS WAS DUE TG THE
110 NEW STINE FI.R.E .
; THE IGNITIuN FACTG.R, WAS
' CATEGu.R,IZED AS uTHE.R„
(_ALL FIRES WHERE %AUSE IS
UNKNGWN AT THE TIME FAL1. UNDE.R, "
THIS CATEGO.R,y - A�,S� USED FG.R,
� UNKNGWN) .
�
� , i
�
i
. � `J _ . �
_ . � _ _ �
JUNE 1994 Poge4
This Year to Date Last Year to Date
INSPECTIONS, FIRES AND LOSSES BY OCCUPANCIES Inspections Fires �osses �nspections �res Losses
Eng. FSC Eng. FSC
OCCUPANCY OF BUILDING
A. Flammable Liquids
1. Bulk Stora e 10 2 - - 7 7 - -
2. D cleanin iants 4 5 1
3. Flammable finishes 7 $ 4 3 -
4. Oil bumin E ui ment
5. Service Stations 1 5 3
6. Under round Installation
7. Trans ortation
8. Other flammable li uids
B. Special Hazards
1. Combustible fibers - 4 - - 2 - - -
2. Hazardous dust - 5 - - - - - -
3. Ex losives - 10 - - 12 - -
4. Re air ara es 44 6 - - 73 10 - -
5. Tire reca in lant 2 - - - 2' - - -
�. Hazardous chemicals 88 2 - - 49 1 - -
7. Hazardous lastics 1 - - - 2 1• - -
S. Lumber Yards 1 2 - - 9 1 - -
9. Woodworkin lants 10 14 - - 13 - - -
l0. Metol rocess 4 1 - - 6 - - -
i i . Radioactive material - - - - 4 - - -
C. Miscellaneous Hazards
1. Solid fuel and ashes - - - - - - - -
2. incinerators - - - - - - -. -
3. Railroads 2 - - - 1 - - _
a. �unk stora e 1 12 - - 3 5 1 0
5. General stora e 6 9 3 17 500 9 14 - -
6. Wholesale houses 13 5 - - 7 5 - -
7. Weldin and cuttin 7 6 - - 30 4 - -
8. Restaurants 112 38 2 1 000 121 27 - -
9. warehouse 15 38 1 0 60 45 -
10. Oilwells/Tank facilities - 1 - - - 683 -
D. Flammable or compressed gas
l. Liquid petroleum gas 1 18 - - 2 5 - _
2. Com ressed as 9 4 - 17 4 - -
3. Other fiammable as - $ - - - 10 -
4 .Trans ortation 1 - _ _ _
E. Supplementai Fire Prevention Activities
�. scnoo�s 6 50 � 1 0 3 2 1 7 500
2. Hos ita�s 5 51 - - 15 41
3. Rest Homes 1 7 1 6
4. 24 hr. Child-Adu�t Care - 116 - 1 15 1 20 0
S. Da Care Nurseries 1 50 - 1 74
6: Jaiis 1 1
7. Churches 30 24 1 30 000 22 23 11
s. Hotels 9 6 - 4 25
9. Theaters 1 14 - - 3
10. Auditoriums 1 g
11. G mnasiums 4 1
12. Public Assembl $ 147 1
13. Game Rooms 7 2 _ _ 19
1 a. tvtortuaries - - - - 1 1 -
15. like Occupancies 6 1 - - - 1 1 60 000
"INSPECTIONS BY OCCUPANCY" CONT: ON NEXT PAGE
JUNE 1994
Page 5
FOLLOW-UP ON INSPECTIONS AND OTHER fIRE PREVENTION WORK This Month Last Month This Year to Date Last Year to Dat
Fre FSC Fre FSC Fre FSC Fire FSC
NUMBER OF CASES IN WHICH THE FOLLOWING WORK WAS
DONE
Inspections 202 3 9
Complaints received • �
vio�otions tound 39 38 39 35 227 284. 308 756
Notice ot vio�ation 19 48 19 15 137 284 192 714
violation corrected 48 - 31 - 205 - 635
�tems reffered to other departments 6 5 - 7 14 32 103 58
Tota� reinspections 37 38 19 41 163 242 174 567
Extensions of Time 9 3 4 7 39 27 31 28
Fire-Arson-Investigations — 59 — 74 — 389 — 525
False alarm investigations - 1 - - - 1 -
Arrests made ' - 9 - 8 - 31 - 8
Court actions I - 6 - 3 - 16 - 38
weed abatement 70 145 18 164 195 1115 233 993
Fre drills supervised ° - - - 23 ' - 39 - 89
Ta�k or lectures 24 2 11 2 72 35 96 13
Tota� oudience 222 54 599 3 3681 157 2496 116
stake out - 1 - 1 - 2 - 23
specia� inspections 3 45 - 12 613 194 64 188
Office time (reports, etc.) - 276 - 275 - 1891 - 2514.
n�eetings attended 8 91 6 98 80 589 80 1159
Demonstrations 5 - 14 - 49 3 51 12
Photographs taken - 97 - 120 - 556 601
=:_ ,:.: -�.a.�_ ._ _:_«:_�_..;__-.
�
_ • � ' JUNE 1994 - Pa9e 6
- This Last rhis Last
`` INVESTIGATION OF FIRES Month Month Year Yeor
� to Date to Date
TOTAL FIRES INVESTIGATED 25 2� 86 99
Determined accidental 6 5 28
Under investigation 20 1� 4
Undetermined �
Incendiary 1 15
INCENDIARY FIRE:
Fres for which arrests were made 5 4 22 13
Number of arrests 7
Cases in which convictions were secured 2
Number of convictions 4
FALSE ALARMS:
Alarms for which arrests were made - - - -
Cases in which convictions were secured - - - -
MISDEMEANORS (in connection with fires)
Convictions - - - -
REMARKS ON INVESTIGATION WORK
CuUNSEL &.R,ELEASE 6 1 14 20
Ci1U.R,T . APPEARANCES 2 2 g 27
,. _ �;
�' �� � JUNE 1994 Page 7
r
;,, � � WORK OF FIRE COMPANIES
ENGINE COMPANY Na Number
of Runs
Engine 1
Truck 1
Patrol 1
Engine 2 �
Engine 3 •
Engine 4
Engine 5
Engine 6
Patroi 6
Engine 7
Truck 7
Patrol 7 '
Engine 8
Patrol 8 �
Engine 9
Engine 11 .
Haz-Mat 11 - —
Engine 13 �
Illpy'� 1 \�Ii„
J ����'
d��� �� '
,��,��� � ��� -=
� �._
.. ,
''� _,,,; �+Hmu,,,� �'
\� :�; \�,;
�,,,
= 7. . ,
__,� ,��:,�a., ��
,,,,,,,,,,,,�,� ��
N���
FROM:
SUBJECT:
AlIE11AOR�INDUM
,7uly 14, 1994
ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
LELAND J. ANDERSEN, COMMUNITY SERVICES MANAGER
SIGN POLICY FOR THE KERN RIVER PARKWAY
(Council Referral No. 13048)
�
�
�ttached is a draft of a proposed sign policy concerning the Kern
River ParKway that wa� prepared by Jennie Eng, Ass�ciate Planner in
the Planning Department. This information is in response to a
request on behalf of the City Council Community Services Committee.
The existing sign ordinance does not specifically have criteria for
the parkway. Therefore the City Council should direct staff in
regard to the appropriate criteria to be used because the parkway
is City-owned property for the purposes of a public park. The
proposed policy contains two sections: 1) Recommendations on the
sign criteria and, 2) Summary of the applicable policies and
ordinance requests.
The policy has been reviewed by the Parks and Water Departments,
Rich O'Neill from the Kern River Parkway Foundation and the
Citizen's Park and Recreation Committee. Responses were favorable
and there were no recommended changes. It is staff's
recommendation that the sign policy be implemented upon Council's
approval. Staff feels the proposed criteria addresses concerns
relative to the Kern River Parkway.
I respectfully request you review the attached criteria and with
your approval I would like to su}�mit this information to Community
Services Committee for their meeting on August 15, 1994.
If you need additional information, please contact me at Ext. 3700
at your convenience.
LJA/lg
Enclosure
cc: Gene Bogart, Director Water Resources
John Stinson, Asst. City Manager
Frank Fabbri, Parks Superintendent
Jennie Eng, Associate Planner
_-RECE !/ED �
°� �
,IUL 181� ; �
� � �
�CITY It/IA{i���ER'S ��=�@�;�� ±
' `A'
*
�
�����.������
�1
: D� e
a�
�
5��:'.�'��?;`s A: '��;'�'��I�?,"���;tdLA�:1D �>��N CR�7'�:RIA
�%�=;;v ���f�i; �'��'i"�il��d'R'���, �C�;gZI� RIV�;�Z �'��.�Z�CihfA.Y .
;
��'�i� ���a�-��vs:, c�F �Eais s�gn critci�ia fa�� llae Kea�n IZiver I'<�z�kw�ay is �1) to �
����ran�flde siga�s i;'� ?�Il Od�C�GI'Iv 111CI at.lz�aciive n�aa�nca�; 2) to Iirovide st�incl�rcls
t;� safegzxa,cl ti�e }>!lbi;c weif�a�c, ar�d; �) e;asiit�e sigras a��e cbnsistet�t witli tl�e
���ce��sia. �c� ��i`✓turt��ipaf C;ode �nd polickes of tlae Metropolita�� B�kcrsfield
?�JzU �e�zer=�1 i'1<izi, ���t�icli i��clud�s tl�e ICern �ivei• Parkw�y 1'I�n.
,
i .
�: �?'�I �? � :,�, �, � � F:�" �J �.fA'�''I �:� ��:
;
r'�.�� �ig��s i:,� d��q�ri���ci to:
,
�. �'^!��'c���ta� fs,� tla� ���;�1A�aved sigrx c��x�ex'Aa, 1nd be coi�siste�at witl� tlae
�;����:n��.�C���ca ;��a�,�a;c�q�tii �vc>�le :>;.�;>> �rc�i►��nce and 2010 Ge»eral Plau
h:<:ia?:;;f:5 ,Ci;':i�ll"<4IlCL' i,l3C� ��C�lC�/�.
�E
j;
� a:� � Sh�e�s sx��ib� �e �����i�ec] tc� l��nse ��ecess�ay� [or directiol�s
s'a3�i1 �?a'i'$�iiS��',S iv'�,'Iaflf�C'rl�.SO�I. .���I1 S1Z�� C�CSI�II� CU�01'� tCXiUTC�
� �~,,,�dti,���;a!s ��t�� �c�c�atic�a� sl�zl�, to i}ae greltest;exieiat �ossible,
ta�� co!�R�?<i�;;!,€e t�ii}i gize c�j�e�i ss�ace. (Po1icY);
:<:. �'�;4:;.�,�:� �zl���� s:c� i`�e l�l�i!cd;r�p, �.�e�;t. f�>t� ��eview �nd bbtain �p��roval
't;d' ;i'�;i �5Si7�'"'srC.c. t3i F� 51�91 �)��Z�Ia;P�. ��i!�C�111� �C�?i:. S�lil�� CUIISUI� Wlf�l
'i�iz '. ;'<'E1 �{S a.l„°�r.;&.�;i �i�:a �'11:t�.FE' �CSOLlE'C�S UC�t..
i
.�. 1�f�i:.3iSa s� �;£;�l Y�('�"s3=.°�: �?l,Ua' i4 k1�S��ia��1�:3fli�. ��1C])11�1I1CC�
�� 1�.�;�RS�� +:C'"�t�°?K'>!J 8{7 1�1�}�:�.�4I�Citi9'(�.5. ��v�'d�tFdt1�1I1GE;�
:T��.°�S :i�'..e.9d� &3C'° �.',S: .'a;�VlVCCR ��3`CD'1�.illlC.". rifl},U' k`�O�iCy�.
R. �"����.c�,�sa :�4ti .;?����i ��i�;l�[�-v�'-��y ;�k� ta ii�l:er£ere willi tl�e public s�fety.
i'�?�i:S�..Ss.i9&L�'� a ,{tC? �'C1�eC;y`�
n�. ��,�:�3:����� �� ����:: ��' t�ti�. pa�i����a�y �'l�oclw�y liiae. {i�rdin�nce an� P�licy}
,
;� � � ' ' �:
�;` ���� �R�GrN�M �
.._i_ �-a�
: ��
k_1�•
\5��i��c.K.it.;'
;
�, �
Preparec� ii,�uii a�. �S'9� ' .
I
�
� -
i
' *.�., �
, . �
, � . � i � ' . . ..
�
I
�''�i.t',£;'? i:►Vt'i' eFili'{C'�vi1?� �'ib1:S !
�'%'si�(: ..! ti� � ' �
�A:�ra;.��.�zr
c,
i3
� . ,
i
C:ity � c�u»cit c.i���-�rc�v,�i „���1 he rec�uir�ct: �
�. �� �f si��� as cioz�s;,ti.i� to t3�e City. _ .
2. ��i ��?��c���s;,! is tc� r.a«�� R�i ai�ea �s tiidical�ed itt ����� below.
'�'�� ;��U�-�c?s� si :��:�::�� �c�t� z.� �lt��;� c�� t�je �'aa�lcw�iy afier a �.iersa�a/group, place,
i2.Si'v�'l::it� £:'✓t�idE (Ts �:;i�3�'�I'� c'�)�7�IC-F3(It :��ilit�f StIUll�lli R 1�il�I' C7� fUSit�ICc'111OI1 c1[IC�
�:,b.���s ��a�- �e;�;���� i,y� ���.e �:;�ty ���.zcil�: l-1.��y ��i�oposed »a�aie sliall l�ave direct
' i • ' ` "� £ 'z '� : y, �u d th is ret 1
�:��i���.�v�>,:.s�i�� ��;� ��R�.;. A�...��za a�ar�a� I� ���I wa . � alioftslti � sl�all be
i'.:��.i�,'�.iz�€`.;i� ,�:1 i�;�f, 6� yCi..„', � �.
j
�. �.�': ,,ccorti,i��ce w�t9� Gci�e.r:�[ Pian Jaolic;y, tlae preference is tn use
� ;ac:�. =:z�<,? (F��►x�a�zc) ��; �����es �v31ic�; are taecessary �'or clirections or
�� �s e n �� -�� f� � 4� ��, i n3� n� I�AI.f,'���u It avei� P � yf J
�(:I.>5 S si.�� d.i? hCra�.iC}�a a.l,� r,., ill�k�i�il Ll�, Of
,%�:n�i.El'r,fd�s'l�Dn il:i�� 'rf i'.�)I:'�1Ci1l1�E`.� iIC�IVIt.y U111C�UC 10,iI11L IOCilil011 �1.(,'.�
�t7:Cl3lu itl'C;�ty t'eS� S1.Ca��, (J}tl�iilf.)��.
2. �'���;��s �;?�:��t iiz�:���;ic;. <� �i����wa����t:� sce�t� o� tlAe }�ro�iGSed sign slaowing
�+fi�i:iy ���::5''�� �?{y a�xdklfidiSt(ii1S� Tllrli�d'Iit�S� CG10f'S� c9I1Ci jll'O�)OSC-`C� �OC1t1011.
";:"��:;; ;�:e:;t���a �:�cs sx:,z �a����t�; t�, a s����t wl�icl� vialy iiidicates t(ie locatioi� oE
:3:j. .=f °:�,�.s,�; :s;.csx .. �,;���si�� :a.�ea, 1.ailce ��:tt�� or direetioats.��
Prc��a�c�4l0�,ri! 11. 199�t
�
� �
,�
�� "\� • ' '. ._ .._ .,,,,...,,._,i�o, '- , � r
�._ �QR (.�����(�, .
� _.e.._:..._. _ . A�..,
�- _. . . �.
�
I
, - •c'
sti. � . ,
a, �. ; •
�:�(`�:� ��di'��'i �i��1i��'lR�� .Jn�I�lr3
r�.'�i.".?C � .)i J
�,i•�Rf ;' ,' ,�'.3' �' �t ' �'�
� "� � 4 `�, 8
�^;�; ?;? i^� � �,J (i'R �: ( `�i ��,
�$i�,'�T'iS.�*.€:�'
4ti
i
I
,
C�ZI'�'��.�1� i�������,�iR��N1J.�U
il I
�y
t.
�
� c,
n
�
s
LC
1'!
ii
es
�
1i
k
is
e
i
sz
es
Y
►
�
�'�Otl[SItICHIi S]�'tla c�raly.; �'yio�as ai�d llboards are nat �1lowed.
(f.Jrcii��s9n�;e a��d Geuvr�l P1aa� Po1i ) ,
L�it�zeixsic�d�s: i�-a�:�i►a�icita sc������e�foo <�gc =;,24 squ�►re [eet;
i��zx�s�����,i h�ight = 4(eet; M�ximutn base =
16 scjc�3a e feet or T�o a�ore tlian 50%� of sigia
�
a��e�.
' NO'�'E: ' Si�;i� Grdi��a► •e �Ilows i»axin�un� 32
sc�ia�a�e l��l, z��cl a�i��xi iutaa 8 feet I�igh. "I'he 24
sq�;�la�e ��ef is based v� thc Cvnz�uu�tity Services
� � Conin��i�tce's �jlprov�ti oE tiiE I{erti River
J'�� Ic����y �^ound�ition' sign. 'i,lie 4 foot I�eight
l:az:i! ser��aa �,���1'Uf)I'i1 10 11t�1(1i1111 CIC11' V1eWS.
�i`��1�4'.l�J�;�S: �,�i11"�1��E; 1A�1PUI`71 ll�l�llE �i15 OI' I]1Ri(:1�Ir1�S 7IlC�
colors desigiz�cl ta ble d with surrout�ding
ve.�;et�f.ion �a� str�ictur witl�ic� tl�e Pai�kw�y.
(I'c?iicY) .
�_�:a���lioNa ��� �cl�tai.ify 1oc�tion of m� in Paa�kw�y fe�tur�es;
��!c.�aat;�r ��,inw �s trticti�zacut� �tur ber �s Jlossible.
(Orcliti�i��ce Sr I'olicy) __= . -
�'�:��/(.�t�t?y: I?:t�ecil� rclated ta I'at way: (Ol�di�iatice &
I'olicy) ; �'rs�taZii�ent.iy cl ��layii�g "Kcrn River
Patkw«y." /1,lso, incl«cl "City of Bakersfield,"
ru�c� i� �+,�}�lic�t�ie, activ ty unique to iocation
�i.�.y }��c;���c a;��a, rest ��p, ��arking). I'refer
�:e��ttai;(genct�ic) natt� . t'��oposzls to na�i�e
�, 7�� �r�;� �f ti�� �'�rkwa lfter a persora,
c��i�i��liy, gi�o:��� o►- eve �t ��iust i►iclude a letier
' � e►� just�ficatic�ax. �
,
; �
�
• N _. ,.,... ,.- _
3 —
�( ���� � - -..._._.�„ '!
-. .,�.i� _,;..,�.,.�...,::: �� ���� `
-- �...-�y,�
I'r€jia�cc# Aptil [l. ',99d �
�
�
-�
� , • , ,
�
►:_
� � 1
�i
8' z.
�'�.:7z���1 r�Ci'v'i,d s�eta`�C'��5's��% �iS�:iS �
i
k � `, � ;- � i C,7 � ;�y `
����rj=��. �_�.�.� �>�c:;� d�.�4�^���;:���n ���;c;:�r���n-��;�r��t;�� ;
. _ __ __ _ _ .. ,�
�_�;.tl� �.�a-��;i'���.���.�'���'��'�; �"z��►�aaae;,�,c�a<tiv�:,�, xtrer�a�ax�i,�� p�a�ue, tal�iek wr cornerstonc are
r�e;:��,�. `ac��ta 6.lic. 5i�sz'CrcJi�xrta�ce; ho�vcver,'sig��swithin tlie
,t°:Er���•�a�y s�ac�ulci tar�ve City Ca�►�aci1 �J�p��ov:►1.
�:�it�ae.�asb���as: SV��xil���sxaa �0 squ.�re f.eet; M�xi��iui�� height 8
fl"e c* t. �
I'��:z�.�a����: �7ua�i��e �}at«ral ara�teainls oa- anaterials ai�d
� coloa-s uesi�net� to bl�end with surz�ounciing
v��ct�iiiati na' sEa���ciu��es wilhin tlae Pa��kw�y.
(('c�lic'Y) �
; �
� �.�_��.�tavz� ��u kcic;aitiFy 1oc�tiv�a �oI' ����aiaz I'aa�kw7y features;
t��a��;i;��; �� ����ic�w <�s i��ti�ti�x�u�t� n�imbea� as possible.
(�:)a���;�FZrzce �i Pc�licy) ,
. '��c:��i.,"�<;�:�y: . i�:ti�-ectiy z��:��.�ecl tv I'ark��ay. (Uldi��alice �c.
�'oa:n.y) Pro��t�sals to coi»»ie�noratc,
�;xe��tL3ri� 1i�e er �ra�ne �n are� of tl�e Parkway
����t� ���es�sod�, colnp�»y, group o�� event must
� ;:acliscie ��� !et�cr of just.ific7ticiii. �-�
u.. ;:�,:� � i'�., �!;��ti�, ���� �s��-,���i�aa�aises, i!�cicic.�ta� sig�� designed to guidc or drreet or
� d��._, i���'aFi�%�_ ��,:,��`��'Y�nl � �:?�'�1�+��'t�CS a1F:.'l'�II:L'tl�. Zi?±Ue'�111c7.t-IUiI Ui }OC�iilUlt �01� 11S2S.
� i�
. �
� �:3�R;,���aasa��iss: ��1KzxiYjzc.�i� 10 sc}a�r��e feet; Maxintum height 8
f�;ei. (C�i�liaz<u�cc�) �
A�xi:tc�a�i��'s: Dux�aL,l� '�����t�ar���t =.�i�teriais or�u�aterials and
colv�s c;�sig:�e�1 to blend wit.h surrounding
veget.<ition o.� s!nrctures ivitliin tlie Parkway.
(I�olic;y)
. , ,:
�
� ' , � ,
�,`?CI�t��(�tl c�'t: xt.+C;lCaBI3%:�t� 11SC;. � 1-�
;.
� i.,� i's's i) �� a:
`��t�;�?;1�;.'�?����: Si�a�� :��a��11 tar�t c�ntain aclvert.ising but t�ily.liave
� ;ia.°;;:;�„� r ��i �� sejiizre—��:��L o�F-�?�-c-�£-�s�nal n�tme
vt� 4��bc�(��� DR��,��
�
, ,�.�� �
�it(=Ns.K[ti' I'rr�anrcJnpcir St, iG44
e
, ��
.� T . - .
a
�
r ' q/ S�p ts
�i!�i'�i3 d�.iV�;�� � ita :\`✓z'.J' b" � � .�
E7i':��� � i.�� '.� � . � . . . �
�ii;C;'�'iON 2: I'z��,tCdI�,S �'�N,.L? �ftd)INANC:I�,S '
� > >> ,•
���_t���, k�;vr�� �'�K�ia ?;�l�a»ea�t oa t��e �ie�icral 1 ���,. ,
�:`?�H�.y ,�.�.� ���. Si�;;is s�i;�i's t�c liiuited to i.i�ose tiecc'ssary [ur ciireclions .�t�cl prcii�ises
1C�C.�i.�i�ii:<1i1(iiZ. �1�n,i! SI'7.C� C�t%51�i1� CO�OI'� i.CXi.11l'C� 111i1�C1'lil�S� i�li(�
�c�cr�:.ic,�:� si���!i, tr� tiie greatesi exterzi ��ossible, be cot»��atib�e with tl�e
' (`'�)�,j,� $a'ii��. C;�tilliicie�� of the; ztea. '.
�.,,�;� �, ;j.�..3 ���)j. �',c:vet�tss:�?g sig�as a�zd bilibo� rds sl�{�li i�ot be �llowed within the
•_ �,;- secc���c1��a-•, �:���clways of tl�e ICern IZive,r.
;?i r,>>�e�y . . ,
�-�,;r;; 5.;� {�;) (�,��. 1'�.i� �Ea�4a{:i�����s, �1cc;,t :��cips, sl�al# i���i��tain a nainin��uiu setback of 90
aee� �rvi��a ql�e ��e�i�n�r�� floodw�y liue.
t�,��t_?1 t':l`�CI" �l'<t� E_����! ��I�111:
."'` �} 'n q ��j '��'( q f t �/� t
�}.�x����-��� .��9 el��lt7(�i� te'�l/E1�,.� �Yl�l��:i�l�.!l� /TAeC�SU1�i. ' .
t
��-�;;5:��� �,►tic� sit� s3.�v�:�tt1"(',S Iil rest, (�aaki�.g �IiC� 1�CC1'E1L1011 11'Ei1S IIl RCCOI�Cii1110E
:_,�:�:� ti�c: c.s.���sta=�i�.ts oi' ;���<,p,r�l��l�y, ��ip�cri�» vegc;i�ttis�n, and otlier ��1tua��l feattires.
�� '_';,;�, "� r� �;��r�� €:�1te��i�ils Q�t�r� col��rs tl�at t�le��d wi!h t.la.e sur��aundi�ig vegetation
(�i ..�.� S�i.�}.�.e;.�.5 j�7�i'�1s9i I.hi� �icj�i;�'1�[��. '
r- ,� ''T�tJi<3* �j�i, p������` ����,�t.�.LDIi��
•.�?::.._._.___ _.___ .__1,..:,... .... ,
�;:.�:"����� ��_„�.G�'�� (N)(d). I�i� j?ylo►� s;gras a.�e �llowed withi�� the Kern River
¢;,y_�:s�.��,,,. '}:�i�� ���;?y :;i����: �1�c����c,d iil'E I1lCilUIllCil� St�,ns �nc! directioi�ll signs.
y,,..�a�� . �7.�f).�.3�;�; r:�eCiisiiiuE�s: ':
�.�,�.��.1si a
s"�������ieti7R�r�1" �inta EtZeat�s �tl-prextbises siga�, i►�ciclental sign designe to
�;,�.t^� c��' �i.,��:t:i- ����3�.stri���� �;nd tie[�ic��l�ar U��i[[ic. Sucli sigus shall not
e.;,.�;�`q 't; i�°ci ;;b i�,�_��;�ak Ur- ?� sc�;�<ea�� Ieet in �rea. Sign shall i�ot coi�tair��
�c��,��,:;n;,���� ijc,i �az��}, �i��ve -'� sc�tal��c ic�;t of l���c�fessiot�al nan�e icleutifieation
��� �r��;��. �
. •�: .
; .
?• "�;.C2;lilil"s�'idt" �Ib(1 i�l:'=�.:tS �l �I�C�S�;�ilC3.�ilg 1Ci�l3tli=c,ati�n sign which is
� �,-E_;��„��.�;����;��f ���ac�sc�����'�. Ovet����l ;teA�lat shaEl t�ol exceccl 8 feet atid a
� ����.�;;i�r����,s ex� 32 �:����:d��� ��=et. '1'la� b�se Qr s��pp�rt'� syste��i sl�all �iot exceed
J�✓nf,,�:� �� ��s,� s;;ia ;cr;.�:�< <�z- �6 scls��re feet. ,
�
. � _ __...__
; --- - • �!
�.S;,CS('14.ICIiP I'ieparccl .�p,il i l� 1994 � �0�� � �1� � � � /` �. r
� i - — _ �.. . -_ � �_. . � �
�. ' r,
:if '^%`—. � . t
� � _ e
i
b r. I
i
i
i
i
.�i��'�j��a 'n�� eV�� A.7C�: t{�F:'ii�� i7i��•'}S . :
h'i,�f" � i7� V
Se.;aic�t?� �7.G0.(?6fl t13,'°'.���}?,1� i.7.G�,08(�: GLttct�ll �nd S��ecific Pr�hibitions and
�!i'.�ii1i,`<tT71�, i ,
F' �tiF�I1lOi�;&S� �'7`,�':�ii+-'.� $:lii:�,i Ol' CC33'fiG'!'SiOIlE,' �il'E C'•XelllOt; �IUVVCVCI'� i1
� ��;;T7�MJ�s�;:��a<i °:�f ��ti 5('a;z.,'�S�c^�. df`.L,i� 5CG1i1S ?�il i�+�)(��1'i7j)1'17�t�.0 SIZC �OI' i�iC.' �i1f�CWAy.
e� v:�:;,�s �I;; ,:c,t :A1:<�,VCCI ��;ti��u tlie strer;i right-of-w�y or to intertere witli
t��_� E,��3;�c =,<;y��iv. state or
� �..'•'3;'�;CZ4�:�i7Fx.E� '�'�';;:'2�6:'�� <?2' �d1�J�'I�.lit�xUall SIuII cll�tho��izcd liy �'edcral�
tl'.i'f�i�'a�ii4i <tiZ#'�c:?�11V �"+i�)' �?l` CKCiII�)1. ��X�id11�)jCS Oi lhe5e si�ns include
;�,,.�::t c;:� `-�i��c- ��E=�t� ���.a��; `'�;ti:' ¢c;t� t.��� Sc�ci�ii S^curily Uf[ice, or f.00d aud
t 6r •
301i�.+�tti�, ;r�``:}ii:i �i�� [i2_'.4=;;':'Ji:�+�:'.� ,
�.l�$1 ���;.f�es ��t�c,t�it�� ���i�At I'�r�rut zss�zc:] lay tl�e I3uilclir�g Dept.
�
L;ICN`i.r;iZl'
('�cparcc! April I l. 199�1
, ,:
�'
� �
� � f ,
� ����? � . _ ..�
R��iIV�i
- �-, � _ _� ���_-... _.�ti �
A
�puiii�i� ��.�.
`�p�'��.--�T��.�J�_
\�\�\.� rI
\:� '�,� J'1I ���\
��7 =�11\ mll�'�u1114 �\
�`. � l ��\
_-.:.
�� �
'_�?; ����``°
_.,/,..�•,•;�����ni'
��..iuivm�
�
.�
MEMORANODUM
July Z8, 1994
ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
CAROL WILLIAMS, CITY CLERK
CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL NO. 13636
JULY 13, 1994 MEETING
/�' / j _ �
In response to the request by Councilmember Demond, I have reviewed
the Council Meeting Calendar, specifically the October and December
meetings. I recommend canceling the October 19th Meeting.
There are no hearings set and there will only
be two weeks before the next meeting on
November 2, 1994.
I recommend canceling the December 7th meeting. However, the
issues for the December meetings are a little more complicated, and
I want to share them with you.
The newly elected and/or reelected
CounciTmembers would take office on December
14, 1994.
Since there will be three weeks between the
November 16th and December 14th meetings, the
agenda might be heavier than you would like
for the first meeting of the new Council.
Traditionally, this is also the time the
Council selects a Vice-Mayor and committees
are assigned. (Perhaps this could be postponed
until the next regular meeting.)
I was planning to schedule the first meeting
in January on the llth rather than the 4th.
Agenda preparation for the 4th would take
place the week between Christmas and New
Years, and this usually is a time when many
staff take vacation.
cw/naw
A:MTG.DA
cc: Gail Waiters, Assistant City Manager
G°3���C'�%'�C?- --
� --= - -_ _,,
!� .9i il 1 91994 `
�- -- - - � _ ___� �i
,,V ,, ��,�,��� ��af��� °'1
. .: . :��_a a., 0—=u_ ��--J
J
s•*'—� =' �� .
v�
't -.
CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL
MEETING OF: 07/13/94
REFERRED T0: CITY CLERK C WILLIAMS
ITEM: RECORD# 13636
Cancellation of Council Meetings. (DeMond)
ACTION TAKEN BY COUNCIL;
DEMOND RE�UESTED STAFF TO LOOK INTO THE
FEASIBILITY OF CANCELING ONE OF THE MEETINGS THAT
ARE BACK-TO-BACK IN OCTOBER AND DECEMBER.
BACKUP MATERIAL ATTACHED: NO
DATE FORI�JARDED BY CITY CLERK: 07/15/94
NOTE: STATUS CHANGES ARE TO BE ENT�RED FOR EACH REFERRAL
AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH EVEN IF NO ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN!
,
�
B A K E R S F I E L D
MEMORANDUM
July 19, 1994
T0: LEE ANDERSEN, COMMUNITY SERVICE MAN�IGER
FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER ;� �
SUBJECT: COUNCIL REQUEST ON MAINTENANC DISTRICTS
I have been asked by a member of the Council to make up one additional chart on
the whole maintenance district issue. Please have the people in Parks make it
up as follows:
1. The first column showing last year's assessment per district.
2. The second column showing the assessments that were recommended to be done
under the separate 40 district method for the 1994-95 fiscal year.
3. The third column showing the amounts sent out under the consolidated
method.
4. The fourth, and final, column showing what the final assessments were.
Your cooperation is appreciated.
AT.alb
cc: General Information
�
B A K E R S F I E L D
July 22, 1994 Alan Tandy • City Manager
Mr. Joe Drew
County Administrative Officer
County of Kern
1115 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Dear Mr. Drew:
The City Council, at its regular meeting of July 13th, reluctantly passed the tax split
resolution relative to the Union #10 annexation and instructed me to write to you to
express their position. They passed the Resolution only because of, and in reliance on,
your promises that the entity providing fire protection would get the Fire Fund, and in
anticipation of execution of the new Joint Powers Agreement which does provide for the
entity providing fire protection to get the Fire Fund.
They could not understand why the Fire Fund for that annexation should remain with the
County if the County did intend to go forward with the JPA. They were also concerned
about the delay that I was informed of on July 13th with regard to adoption of the JPA.
The purpose of this letter is to advise you that the Council adopted the resolution on
Union #10 based on the good faith negotiations that have taken place to date on the
Fire Fund/JPA issue and that, if the Fire Fund issue is not resolved by the time the
protest hearing on the annexation takes place, a few months from now, the Council will
unilaterally "kill" the annexation due to failure to resolve the Fire Fund issue.
Probably the most important point of all of this is, simply, that we need to keep moving
ahead to bring to quick resolve the JPA in order to avoid further complications of this
kind.
Your cooperation is appreciated.
Sincerely, !�'
j- ;
/i ;
,�
/i �� i
: �' ��' ��; �
„ � � ��/
�;,, �� �►�-y;
/City Manager �
.alb
City of Bakersfield � City Manager's Office • 1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield • Ca{ifornia • 93301
��
:�;
s.
�
B A K E R S F I E L D
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
Alan Tandy, City Manager
Raal Rojas, Public Works Director
July 20, 1994 �
SUBJECT: COUNCIL INQUIRIES
Attached are responses to the following Council inquiries:
City Council Referral Record# I3514 relating to the feasibility of
striping on Christrnas Tree Lane from Columbus Street to
Panorama Drive including Mt. Vernon Avenue. (Smith)
City Council Referral Record # 13577 relating to the California
Avenue median modification and street resurfacing between
Stockdale Highway and Real Road. (Brunni/Rowles)
Tra, nc Engineering Report concerning speed limit analysis for
Beech Street, North of 24th Street to 30th Street.
Tra, f,�'ic Engineering Report relative to request for curbside
parking on "F" Street (west side), between 28th Street and
30th Street.
City Council Referral Record # 13559 - Adoption of Resolution
granting permission to allow overhead electrical lines in an
Electric Underground District, (Haberfelde Building), with an
amendment to add a two year time limit, subject to appeal at that
time, to complete the underground electrical lines. (Ward 2)
REF13514;
REF13577
REF13559
Attach.
RECEIVE�
�� � �
CITY MANl��ER'� ��El��
�:
���:��':..
. ' :�
:�
MEMORANDUM
Traffic Engineering
DATE: July 14, 1994
TO: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
FROM: STEPHEN L. WALKER, TRAFFIC ENGINEER
SUBJECT: COUNCIL REFERRAL No. 13514, STRIPING ON CHRISTMAS TREE
LANE - COLUMBUS TO PANORAMA TO MT. VERNON.
Council Action: "Smith requested staff look into the feasibility of striping on Christmas
Tree Lane from Columbus Street to Panorama Drive including Mt. Vernon."
Response:
The Traffic Engineer has reviewed the location for the proposed striping changes. The
street appears to be of suitable width to accommodate the addition of bicycle lane striping,
with parking allowed. This could have a positive effect on drivers by separating cars from
bicycle traffic. Restricting lane width from the current extra-wide lane to a normal 12 foot
wide lane may also reduce the average speed of cars on this residential street.
The project will be added to the Miscellaneous Channelization Projects list for this year.
Traffic Engineering will work with the General Services division to design and schedule the
striping changes and sign installations. A schedule will be provided in the next update.
cc: Fred Kloepper, Assistant Public Works Director
Bruce Deeter, CE III, Traffic Engineering
Brad Underwood, CE III, Traffic Engineering
PW Memo Files
Traffic Engineering File - 13514 council referral
slw: d:\wp\1994\13514CC.Ref
� q i. ; �'�2 �� �... _ CC � - "i r t .t '�*g i� S � y 1 a'T � {� � � k � f . . . � �
� � ` $ 41 � s� T �
..� - �� �iE 4 � � � . � � � ,-�. i
�'�� r �`.� �a �' �y, 1 >( ' x S !`l c,., . ` � .
li � � ' t � � �.a�;:it✓ �a � � �
;� . ��,� .
,. . ...i� . y , .. ' . , . ... . , . . . . � , , . � � , ' . ..
„ � CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL�� _ - '
. . . - � : ,1tJN, 21 1994 �
, ` MEETING OF:" 06/15/94:. '�. . ' � PUBUGWORKS DEP;qRT�A€NT�
REFERRED TO: PUB�IC��IORKS:t��R`�ROJAS :.
� REFERRED TO: POLICE DEPT S BRUMMER
� ITEM: RECORD# 1"�3514 '
Feasibility of striping on Christmas Tree Lane
� from Columbus.Street to Panorama including Mt.
' Vernon Avenue. .(Smith)
,
� ACTION TAKEN BY COUNCIL:.
SMITH REQUESTED STAFF LOOK�INTO THE FEASIBILITY ,
OF STRIPING ON CHRISTMAS TREE LANE FROM COLUMBUS
STREET TO PANORAMA DRIVE INCLUDING MT. VERNON
, AVENUE. !
' BACKUP MATERIAL ATTACHED: NO
QATE FORWARDED BY CITY CLERK: O6/17/94 �
�
0
. . . S w. .. . . . .
1
_,_,,
0
;
�
B A K E R S F I E L D
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: UL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
FROM: ACQUES R.
LAROCHELLE, CIVIL ENGINEER IV
DATE: JULY 19, 1994
SUBJECT: COUNCIL REFERRAL, RECORD #13577
CALIFORNIA AVE. MEDIAN MODIFICATION AND STREET
RESURFACING
We have currently obtained a list and mailing labels in order to
mail a letter with information with respect to the construction
along California Avenue to all property owners within the existing
maintenance district. This letter is scheduled to be sent during
the first week of August 1994. Additionally, we have prepared a
press release for the "Bakersfield Californian" to be published
twice prior to the beginning of construction.
The project is scheduled to begin construction around the first
week of September 1994. Our Construction Inspection division will
be responsible for monitoring the project during construction and
ensuring that proper traffic control is maintained. Barring any
delays due to weather or utilities construction shall be completed
within the allotted time frame in the contract or liquidated
damages will be assessed to the contractor.
�
:
� � o
B A K E R S F I E L I�
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301
(SOS) 3263724
RAUL M. ROJAS, DIRECTOR • CITY ENGINEER
NEWS RELEASE
For Immediate Release
July 19, 1994
Contact Person:
Jacques LaRochelle
Design Engineer
(805) 326-3724
Public Works Director Raul Rojas announced that construction along California Avenue
between Real Road and Stockdale Highway is scheduled to take place from September 1,
1994, through April 1995.
Structural sections of locations along California Avenue where roadway failures have
occurred shalI be reconstructed. Existing medians shall be removed and reconstructed to
reduced median width by four feet. Additional landscaping for medians and an improved
irrigation system shall be constructed and a new asphalt concrete overlay shall be
constructed along California Avenue from Real Road to Stockdale Highway.
Commuters should anticipate delays due to construction during the hours of 7:00 A.M. to
4:30 P.M., Monday through Friday. This project is funded by the Surface Transportation
Program, Road Replacement Funds and Gas Tax.
� �
� � „ , _. . .
;. .
...: A . - h,y 't. , : . ' . , . � � " ' , l. . .
, :.. . , . �.. . .', . ' I
�.. .,,:r., : . . `3 wt�F.. �. . . . . . '� . ;�- . . �.
. . : - �+ �'' - .; . � : . . . . �a ,�° � �. � �. . �, n
� � CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL'' � �, . ; . :) .
_ � , ., : JUL 7 ` ,i994
� MEETING OF: 06/29/9.4 � . .
. � , `. . PUBIIC WOR!(S CE�ARTP�]EN7
,
REFERRED T0: PU:BLIC WORKS R ROJAS
. ITEM: RECORD# 13577
� Accept bid to award Contract to Griffith Company
: ($1,026,914.21) for California Avenue median
modification and street resurfacing between
•' Stockdale Highway and Real Road. (Ward 5)
�
ACTION TAKEN BY COUNCIL:
MOTION TO APPROVE AGREEMENT. APPROVED AA..
****BRUNNI REQUESTED STAFF MONITOR THE TRAFFIC
CONTROL AND TIME PERMITTED TO COMPLETE THIS
' PROJECT.�** ****ROWLES REQUESTED THAT PROPERTY
OWNERS BE NOTIFIED OF THE PROJECT TIME AND WHAT
THE WORK.HOURS ARE; AND AN ADVERTISMENT BE PLACED
IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER.****
BACKUP MATERIA� ATTACHED: NO
DATE.FORWARDED BY CITY CLERK: 07/01/94
NOTE: STATUS CHANGES ARE TO BE ENTERED FOR EACH REFERRAL
AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH EVEN IF NO ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN!
MEMORANDUM
Traffic Engineering
DA'TE: July 19, 1994
TO: RAUL M. ROJAS,. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
FROM: STEPHEN L. WALKER, TRAFFIC ENGINEER ����%��
SUBJECT: SPEED LIMIT ANALYSIS FOR BEECH STREET, NORTH OF 24TH
STREET TO 30TH STREET
As requested, a Traffic and Engineering Survey, used to change speed limits, was performed
on Beech Street. The e�sting speed limit between 24th Street and 30th Street is 25 miles
per hour.
Based on the speed survey, the speed limit could be justified and enforced at 35 miles per
hour, in accordance with the California Vehicle Code and the Ca1T'rans Traffic Manual.
The critical (85th percentile) speed, used to set the speed limit, was found to be 39 miles
per hour. The speed must be set in 5 mile per hour increments and using the next lower
increment. In this case, the speed should be set at 35 mph for a 39 mph critical speed
calculation.
The average speed on the street was 35 mph north of Drake Street and 34 mph south of
Drake Street. The "pace", a 10 mph grouping with the most vehicles in the sample, was
calculated to be from 29 to 39 mph for 71 percent of the vehicles in the sample. This
information supports the 35 mph limit and indicates that most drivers consider 35 mph to
be an appropriate speed for the conditions found on Beech street.
At this time, the 25 mph speed limit is justified by the California Vehicle Code's definition
of a"local residential street" and does not require a Traffic and Engineering Survey to justify
the 25 mph limit. No changes are proposed.
cc: Fred Kloepper, Assistant Public Works Director
Bruce Deeter, CE III, Tr�c Engineering
Brad Underwood, CE III, Tr�c Engineering
PW Memo Files
Tr�c Engineering File - Beech Street
s��: a:\wp\i9va�se�n.sPa
,,:
_ "�� i
MEMORANDUM
Traffic Engineering
DATE: July 20, 1994
TO: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
FROM: STEPHEN L. WALKER, TRAFFIC ENGINEER �,�'���
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR CURBSIDE PARKING ON F STREET, WEST SIDE,
BETWEEN 28TH STREET AND 30TH STREET
I have made an initial review of the area proposed to have inset parking spaces constructed
along F Street on the west side between 28th and 30th.
Parking area construction will be limited along F Street due to the existing deep overhangs
or awnings at some of the storefronts. The curb must be moved back 6 feet to make room
for a parking space. Many of the storefronts have an overhang that encroaches into the 6
foot area or are closer than two feet from the proposed curb location. This would be in
violation of the building code according to the Building Department.
A parking inset for two (2) spaces could be constructed at the south end the block, between
Westchester Audio/Video and Hutchinson's Interiors. Another long parking inset for about
twelve (12) spaces may be constructed between Beverly's Crafts Store and Lyles College of
Beauty, which is on the north end of the block. A series street light would have to be
relocated with this parking area. We will check with General Services on the street light
relocation possibility.
The storefronts that would not have parking directly in front due to the large overhangs
from the buildings are: Westchester Audio/Video, Hutchinson's Interiors and Beverly's
Crafts Store. If these stores would remove or cut back the large overhangs from the
building, an additional six (6) spaces may be possible.
We will be getting more information for an estimate of cost for the project in a memo to
follow.
cc: Fred Kloepper, Assistant Public Works Director
Bruce Deeter, CE III, Tr�c Engineering
Brad Underwood, CE III, Traffic Engineering
PW Memo Files
'rraffic Engineering F�le - F Street Parking - Westchester Area
stw: d:\wp\1994\F Street.Pkg
.
� STREET
. �.
a d f , e
i , ;2 � � �
�
b� b
. ,
� b �
, � /J � i � ? ,�
i �'�
ti �
i
i . •
�' SO' i � ^.
i �J
------------'_ � i
�
� �
I �•
< < s
�
�
� �
,. 6
� �
� �
�
�
' �I ' � 7
� `� • 1 .
�
�
� 8
, .
�
�
�
� � - 9
, -
�
�
� y /D
�
�
� � . -`'. • //
i
� o �, /2
160. SS' � S 1SG
c -rocr T
.
�
�I
�
�
,
�
�
v�
�
i�
�
�
��
�
�
-� �
s�
o� � 3
�
, �
s S
. 6
. 7
• 8
� 9
M 10
. //
o �2
b
30 TH `
e 6-p. ,ay- , � � � .
30'i � i
� I i
� � i '
I
; /J /�/ � I /S /6
I �
I � �
� � �
i
( � r I � / � � �.
L�
�
, r-----------;'�..20.----
I /��
I I �
, � I I '
i I I
� ��
' 4.
,� i �
� � � �
- � � �
. i I�
� �
� 1�
�
, i ��
'� !
� �
� � I
i � � I
� � � I
i I I
� I �.
� � .
, i I �
� I
� I �
. jO�i I �
� ,
28 TH
S'
i.3 ' ' ' -
1
I
I
Z � � s
i
s
� _ ��
_ •
B A K E R S F I E L. D
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEIVIORANDUM
TO: Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director
FROM: �j �acques LaRochelle, Civil Engineer IV
DATE: July 14, 1994
SUBJECT: Council Referral No. 13559
Resolution granting permission to allow overhead electrical lines in an Electrical
Underground District. (Haberfelde Building) (Ward 2)
The undergrounding of the electrical lines in the alley behind the Haberfelde Building is contingent upon
PG&E and the building owner coming to an agreement on the conversion of PG&E's transformers in the
Haberfelde Building's basement. Since the district is already established, the City has little input into the
process at this point. Perhaps the best method of tracking the progress of the project is though the
Underground Utility Coordinating Committee.
A City representative attends the quarterly Undergronnd Utility Coordinating Committee meetings held at
the County. Pending projects and new proposals are usually discussed. The agenda and minutes from the last
is attached. Public Works can make the agenda and minutes available on a quarterly basis to the Council
through the Manager's Office (It may be a good idea to add Ward No. references to any City projects prior
to sending them to the Council). The next meeting should be in August. If this meets with your approval,
Public Works can send the first update after that meeting.
AD34:�UNDRGRND�REFERRAL
JRL:mps:mps
_ _ _
� - ; - . , . / � �,
' ..�°" - - ; :. .. � .
, �~r:�• , e .'�, . . . .
- � , CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL
.-. �
� . . � �� I
• . _ . �z
'�a� ���� '�'�,���
�
MEETING OF: 06/29/94 �� ,JUL 7' 1g94
REFERRED T0: PUBLIC WORKS R ROJAS � PUBLIC W0�!�S �E'^�'�� EN?
REFERRED T0: CITY ATTORNEY J SKOUSEN
ITEM: RECORD# 13559
Resolution granting permission to allow overhead
electrical lines in an Electric Underground
Distri-ct. (Haberfelde Building) (Ward 2)
ACTION TAKEN BY COUNCIL:
MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION WITH AN AMENDMENT TO
ADD A TWO YEAR TIME LIMIT, SUBJECT TO APPEAL AT
THAT TIME, TO COMPLETE THE UNDERGROUND E�ECTRICAL
LINES. APPROVED AA. ****DEMOND REQUESTED
PUBLIC WORKS KEEP.:.COUNCIL APPRISED OF WHEN THIS
PROJECT�WILL BEGIN.****
BACKUP MATERIAL ATTACHED:�?`�� �
DATE FORWARDED BY CITY CLERK: 07/01/94
.. _ .. ' ''a.eM.:��'�-. - � - ' . . . • • .
. � . t �
�� � r
. � -�i.#� _ :.>qty`ak`�e``aSS."�,'` „� ' _
, '-t , _"'x,�,F'� s-`'� .�.�'+,. ..
. . z +:h�i`,. . -
� . .�y' �..
• .. � ... . . ' �'•, '�,%�r��'�n" ..-^�'-� .F�' . �
. . . �� .},YC` �' } .. .
0
� < ;
RJB:sju
AGENDA1.C28
UNDERGROUND UT/L/TY COORD/NA T/NG COMM/TTEE
PUBL/C SERV/CES BU/LD/NG
2700 "M" STREET
5TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM
AG EN DA
Wednesday, May 1 1, 1994
10:30 a.m.
1. INTRODUCTIONS
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3. RULE 20A - FUND BALANCES
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Southern California Edison Company
4. PENDING PROJECTS
Norris Road from east of Fruitvate Avenue to Coffee Road
i Z -� � _";:� �� :--- � r� --�'
5. PROPOSALS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION
Calloway Drive from Palm Avenue to Rosedale Highway
Oildale Drive from Roberts Lane to Norris Road
6. NEW PROPOSALS
Tehachapi-Cummings Valley Boulevard
Arvin � ��` P �- '�� ; �-> �:� t..�. � --
7. OTHER BUSINESS
8. ADJOURNMENT
�,,� o L� � L .�'s>� , ;
�
..._ ' :.. � . _.- , _..
o -
.. � l
� UNDERGROUND UTIL/TY CDORD/NA T/NG COMM/TTEE
0
PUBL/C SERV/CES BU/LD/NG
2700 "M" STREET
5TH FL OOR CONFERENCE ROOM
AG EN DA
Wednesday, May 11, 1994
10:30 a.m.
1. INTRODUCTIONS
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3. RULE 20A - FUND BALANCES
Pacific Gas and Electric Company �
Southern California Edison Company
4. PENDING PROJECTS
Norris Road from east of Fruitvale Avenue to Coffee Road �°� ^� �'�
5. PROPOSALS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION
Calloway Drive from Palm Avenue to Rosedale Highway c��---� r�
� Oildale Drive from Roberts Lane to Norris Road �-�-� ��-c'
�. NE!!t� QP,�?OSA:.S
Tehachapi-Cummings Valley Boulevard � ° � :� —�
Arvin
7. OTHER BUSINESS
8. ADJOURNMENT
�,B:,w
AGENDA t .C28
, J � • '
, - �WAS'�E MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
DAPHNE H: WASHINGTON, Director
2T00 "M" STAEET, SUITE 500
BAKERSFIELD. CA 93301
' Phone: �805) 861-2159
FAX: (805) 325-9882
'TO:
FROM:
. , ,��, ,
;,;,; ;�, . � _ -��.;;-, ` _
,��; ' �;,F,�
: ''..
_ ....;�iF•\;
� ` �. �. .':�L a
� ` ��'�`-; V�.
i , ���'_._ "' t ' �
�=�. .::.
` ,;',' t.
�;�: .. ._ -. .f`� ;1��
- ��f��c:,��
�y 3, 1994
y�rC�� � ��-lL�"�'
O _�-
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGFNCY
JOEL HEINRICHS, AGENCY DIRECTOR
AU Poliutbn Control Dbtriet
Enqin�ing d Survhr SeMas D�p�►bnMt
Pl�nning 8 O�vebpm�nt S�rviws D�pardn�nt
Tnnsportadon Mamg�msnt Dapartrnent
Wasb M�nag�m�ni Dep�rtm�nt
PvYembers oi Ur��erground Utiuity t.00rdinating �ommittee
Daphne H. Washington, Director �►
By: Rick Benson, Special Districts Coordinator �
SUBJECT: Meeting of Underground Utility Coordinating Committee
RJB:sju
L13.C29
Enclosure
File: 5230
A meeting of the Underground Utility Coordinating Cammittee has been
scheduled for May 11, 1994, in the Public Services Building,
2700 "M" Street, Sth Floor Conference Room. The meeting time is
10:30 a.m.
Enclosed is the agenda for the meeting. If you would like the committee to
address a project, please contact Rick Benson prior to the meeting or bring the
project with you.
If you have any questions, please call (805) 861-2159, Ext. 8925.
. ° � �
`r.'�'. . .,
UNDERGROUND UTILITY
COORDINATING CONIlVIITTEE
JANUARY 12, 1994
MINUTES
Auendance
Chuck Lackey and Rick Benson, Kern County Waste Management Department;
James Hurst, Kern County Transportation Management Department; Danny
McAlister, Kern County Engineering and Survey Services; Peter Smith, Kern Council
of Governments; Ed Kuehn, Lauren Dimberg and Marian Shaw; City of Bakersfield;
Pete Caldwell and Jess Lee, Pacific Bell; Anthony Garcia, Pacific Gas & Electric
Company; Bob Matthews, Southern California Edison; Bob Ruiz, Cox Cable; Mazk
Bare, Warner Cable.
Minutes
Minutes of the April 14, 1993 meeting were approved by the committee.
Rule 20A Balances
? .3 (�
P.G.& E. -- Approximately $�-million. Anthony Garcia mentioned that
there was a discrepancy between his figure and the County's. He'll discuss it with
Rick Benson.
S.C.E. -- Bob Matthews said the 1994 allocation will be deternuned soon.
Review of Pending Proposals
�
Oswell Street
McCray Street
"A" Street,Taft
Ridgecrest
Norr-is Road
�
�.�C�
.�
-- After overpass work.
-- Will be completed this year.
-- Has been delayed.
-- Late 95' to early 96'
-- Resolution will go to the Boazd of Supervisors
soon. No objections were heard from the Public.
A December 1997 clear date will be set.
���t � r c. � o �.._' ; �..,ra -' t='�': c- -' Gtrv �v �-y �'rv �Y
�.
� . r
�,'. � Y
Underground Utiliry Coordinating Committee
7anuary 12, 1994
Page 2
New Proposals
Calloway Road, from Palm to Rosedale Highway, will be submitted formally to
PG&E, as will�i�Drive, from Roberts Drive to Norris Road.
o�t�� cF
Committee Sducture
The restructuring was approved as discussed at prior meeting.
Other Business
The next meeting was tentatively scheduled for May 4, 1994.
�
UUCC.MIN (C29)
F�18:nsf
c: n .
Distribution List:
All Supervisors
Mr. Joseph Drew, County Administrative Office
Mr. Bernard C. Barmann, County Counsel
Mr. James Hurst, Utilities Engineer, Transportation Management Department
Mr. Ted James, Planning & Development Services
Mr. Tom McCarthy, Fire Chief
Mr. William Wilbanks, Engineering and Survey Services Department
Mr. Roy Doughty, Contel, Ridgecrest
Mr. Anthony Gazcia, Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Mr. Bob Mathews, Southern California Edison Company, Tehachapi
Mr. Rick Phillips, Southern California Edison Co, Lancaster
Mr. Rex Wells, Southern California Edison Company, Lancaster
Mr. J.D. Lee, Pacific Bell, San Luis Obispo
Mr. George Stulzaft, Warner Cable TV
Cox Cable of Balcersfield
Mr. Dewayne Starnes, City of Bakersfield
Mr. Ed Kuehn, Ciry of Bakersfield
Mr. Ed Schulz, City of Bakersfield
Mr. Ron Brazill, California City
Mr. Walter E. Cairns, City of Wasco
Mr. Don Campbell, City Administrator, City Of McFarland
Mr. �teven R. M�ton, City A�d�ninistrat�a.r, Gi�y Of T'e}aacha�i
Mr. Dan�ell Daugherry, City Planner, City of Tehachapi
Mr. Joe Corbett, City Manager, City Of Delano
Mr. Damon Edwazds, City Administcator, City Of Ridgecrest
Mr. Allen Kapanicas, Ciry Administrawr, City Of Maricopa
Mr. Bill Kytola, City of Taft
Mr. Wade McKinney, City Manager, City Of Shafter
Mr. Tom Payne, City Manager, City Of Arvin
Ronald Brummett, KernCog
Revised 5/3/94
. �� :. .� t
,�-�°
.�
y
PROPOSED RULE 20-A PROJECTS
C1TY OF ARVIN
i
v��s�n N�� �
PROJECT 3
N �
■tCTa111M[
U
W ��
� /�IIC[MO 0�. � .
� ' � � C .. ��,' o+ �
Q �
� °"` PROJECT 4 -�
• ��` _ ; /^� ���" ��"�'
1
. « � NM Y01MTlIN'
inuna� sr. �
ar�rt ec � � �
PROJECT 1
=
•
a
� � � M�vt� 0�. ~
.
: � ..
a
� i
__ �oee x.
�� C�� .l
� y
Ya11R IIOaO
IIO'I16 t��t[T Y� [L�O� ft.
��_""'.`
eunw�r st . SMOTNCRMON
P1i1N
i
$7F�i
f
Y
s
W
Y
� C711��01 7T.
3
eR.
a.n� e�1
1
1�.��y i = t
Y s
v�arn et.� � > � �
��---� t � ` _
L������ � J � /IITM 1V[.
:�.aao� ar.
�.
�
J
7TV�IR K
:
♦TM Nf.
OVRTM �Vt. � �
a� ♦1WU �K. �
'r
.�e. 000a
f1�T� �OIIR !!3 �
•o ,C� O
oa µ a� .o
a ��K �v< � � .
YIKL �Vt � �1YII�L �v[.
�
� �� �
IuYd 0�. O �
Y
� � k
:
MOIOtM !f. MM[M OMV(F S 7
�Y1110A �OQM
o SCMOO� � � �
a Y MO00 ff. NO00 tT.
�a
3a
a
s n�u� aL sl[R11� VUT�
� 0.EMfNTARY SCYIOOt.
r
M�71 �Tllt[T
i
��_ � a
� COY�i ►v4 i i r
i �
�
i �
Uuiurwe �vt. �
�
� � s
M�MSOw 0�. � a
� ��{
° E
u
��Ll/1100R 1V�.
OI�tM tT.
�ROAD
I
-NOT TO SCALE-
N
�
=
C��
`t �
��__ i
• p
�
B A K E R S F I E L D
Alan Tandy • City Manager
July 21, 1994
William C. Kuhs, Esq.
KUHS, PARKER & STANTON
Post Office Box 2205
Bakersiield, CA 93303
Re: Valley Communities
Dear Mr. Kuhs:
It was a pleasure to meet recently with you and the owners of
Valley Communities concerning the alleged violations of the
Endangered Species Act.
I share your frustration with the continued intrusion by the
federal government into property rights of farmers, such as your
clients. While we all are desirous of preserving our environment
and species that are truly endangered, there needs to be more
adequate checks and balances on the powers of federal bureaucrats
to enforce endangered species laws.
Because of the City's concerns over these matters, City staff has
been involved extensively in an attempt to resolve this matter with
the Department of the Interior. On April 6, 1994, a representative
from the City Attorney's Office and from the Public Works
Department flew to San Francisco and met personally with Robin
Glazer, Assistant Field Solicitor, the individual who is pursuing
the 1eg31 action against Valley Communiti�s. In addition, I have
written letters to Governor Wilson, Senator Wyman and Interior
Secretary Babbitt requesting each of these individuals to take
whatever action is necessary to see to it that the prasecution of
Valley Communities is dismissed.
The City stands ready to continue to assist Valley Communities in
this action and, if you desire, our City Attorney's Office will
file an amicus brief in support of Valley Communities' position.
While the City will continue to use its efforts on behalf of Valley
Communities, it is important to note that the City and Valley
Communities must jaintly pursue this matter. Any decision by
farmers £or Valley Communities to disk the land which resulted in
City of 8akersfield • City Manager's Office • 1 SO1 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield • California • 93301
�Qn�� ���_���i . G-.,, �an�� ��� �Q�n
.v- �
, • � .
/ .� ��--
William C. Kuhs, Esq.
July 21, 1994
Page Two
the direct killing of an endangered species may prove difficult for
Valley Communities to defend. Nevertheless, the City remains
hopeful that your continued negotiation efforts with the
Solicitor's Office and, if necessary, legal action by your office
on behalf of Valley Communities, with a possible amicus brief from
the City, will lead to a satisfactory resolution of this matter.
Sin erely,
�-
lan Tandy
City Manager
cc: Robert M. Sherfy
Assistant City Attorney
va! <an\leaersUcuhs-at.721
_ , 4 �. � � _ ,.
_ ,\ _ �. �,
��= �
B A K E R S F I E L D
MEMORANDUM
July 19, 1994
T0: DEL SMITH �
E. DEL SMITH & C0.
f j
FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
i
SUBJECT: MONITORING REPORT �
Please don't forget that I need a report from you on your activities of the last
three months, which I can utilize as a tool for discussion of the extension of
your contract with the City Council.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
AT.alb