Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/03/95 BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM March 3, 1995 TO' HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COU~ ~ FROM: ALAN TANDY, CiTY MANAGER SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. You may know that the yellow and blue "Bakersfield" sign across Union Avenue is privately owned. The hotels which own it are now in receivership and they desire to have it removed. It is also no longer in compliance with CalTrans' requirements, as it has deteriorated and needs to be repaired. We are trying to get an estimate to determine the cost of having it repaired. There are some who consider it to be a historic structure, although it is not on any lists, to my knowledge. A solution may be to take it, or parts of it, to the Kern County Museum. The process of us taking it over and repairing it could be quite costly and incur significant liability. 2. There was a meeting late last week on the Amtrak Station site'. It is currently scheduled to go in behind Mercy Hospital. There was discussion over the railroad's cost estimate to move it down near the Convention Center Hotel. They had gotten up to $21 million; it may be $10 million, or less. In any event, we have maintained a consistent position of saying that, if the State cannot pay for it, we cannot. Nonetheless, it seems to remain alive in the consideration stage. Meanwhile, the new station does not get built either. 3. I earlier copied you with a letter I sent to a neighborhood group representing Stockdale Estates and Quailwood in light of the ever-growing opposition to the assessment district. I sent them a letter indicating that staff would be recommending deleting those neighborhoods from the assessment district, as well as the improvements which would be on Stockdale Highway, east of Gosford. 4. On the sports complex/baseball stadium, there were a number of events this week. County staff, for the first time, has indicated that they may be willing to participate with some one-time cash and some investment of revenues they would receive in the future, as a result of the facility. I have included a cost analysis showing both what our and the County revenues would be by having the facility. We took a Coopers & Lybrand study done for another California community and converted it over for ourselves. It saved us $12,000 to hire a similar study, and should be reasonably accurate. A copy of Dolores Teubner's conversion analysis is enclosed. The Mayor and I met with Labor Union representatives on the possibility of them being willing to donate labor, or do a project agreement with HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL March 3, 1995 Page -2- discounted labor costs, for this project, it turns out that they were "wildly enthusiastic," and are talking about significant donated time and effort. It seems their membership includes a number of baseball fans and they see it as being a positive community contribution. They will meet with the larger Labor Council and we will know more later. We are continuing to work internally on revised cost estimating and funding plans for the sports complex/stadium. With the two items above being possibilities, it gets more feasible to do without an assessment district, should both of these opportunities come through. 5. There is a memo enclosed on the possibility of using Voice Mail for some of your incoming calls to City Hall. Please review it and advise Carol Williams at 326-3767 if you are interested. 6. Enclosed is a copy of a letter from the Water Department to California Water Service Company regarding the change in water rates. 7. Enclosed is a follow-up memo on the Casa Royale Cardroom, which was considered at the Legislative/Litigation Committee meeting this week. it involves us having annexed a cardroom that operates beyond our closure hours. They want a change in rules, or an exception. 8. The 1995 Kern River Water Supply Forecast is enclosed. 9. Enclosed is a memo with information on residential greenwaste/refuse pickup schedules under the Automated Plan. 10. The Mercy Housing Project is asking for $550,000 in HOME monies - well in excess of the $300,000 discussed with Council. There is adequate money and the proforma justifies it. This is early warning so you are not taken by surprise. 11. The new federal requirements make th'e adoption of the Consolidated Plan the equivalent of adopting the Block Grant budget for the year. That is all coming up within thirty (30) days - the Consolidated Plan looks like normal federal red tape, but it is more than that. We will make a presentation at the March 22nd Council Meeting, in advance of the final action, to give question and comment opportunities. 12. A letter from Cathy Palla updating the status of URM building owners' compliance efforts is enclosed for your information. ~13. Responses to Councilmember Referrals are enclosed regarding lighting at Planz Park and the current auto theft problem in Kern County. AT.alb Enclosures cc: Department Heads Trudy Slater Carol Williams ST.ATE Oi~.~CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1352 WEST OLIVE AVENUE P. O. BOX 12616 FRESNO, CA 93778-2616 TDD (209) 488-4066 488-4058 ~, -:- '" Alan Tandy, City Manager Ref: KER-204-3.05 1501 Truxtun Bakersfield, CA 93301 Subject: BAKERSFIELD PEDESTRIAN OVERCROSSING Attention: Jake Wager Dear Mr. Tandy, Enclosed for your review is correspondence to Clifford E. Bressler concerning the above mentioned property. Mr. Bressler controls the ownership of this property, since he is the receiver for Eugene J. Majeski. Mr. Majeski is the legal owner of record, and he is now in bankruptcy. The encroachment permit for the structure has expired, and it is now necessary to secure a'new permit to either repair the structure and bring it up to current earthquake standards.,, or remove the structure entirely. It has been brought to our attention that there are interested buyers for this property. It is our understanding that both the present owner and prospective buyers do not plan to save the structure. Since'some people in the Bakersfield community may cOnsider the overcrossing a historical monument, we wish to notify the City of Bakersfield that there is a possibility an encroachment~application to remove the structure may be submitted within the near future. Before we grant such a request, we want to insure that'the City of Bakersfield and the general public is aware of this possibility. It may be, that as a result of that awareness, the community may want to save the structure. It must be clear that Caltrans is neutral in this matter, and our basic cOncern is that if the structure is to remain, that it be made safe for the motoring public. Our 'recommendation is that a public meeting on this matter be held to inform the public and seek their input. Would you please respond as to the City.of Bakersfield's position on this matter. Alan Tandy February 17. 1995 Page 2 It is imperative that we address this matter as soon as possible, and if you have any questions or need further information, please call me at (209) 445-6578, or contact Bob James at (209) 488-4289. Sincerely, HAL AVAKIAN, Chief Permits Branch BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM March 1, 1995 TO~_~AN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM ~~.B. TEUBNER, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: SALES TAX AND TOT ANALYSIS FOR PROPOSED STADIUM FINANCING PROPOSAL Per your direction, I have developed estimates of the net new sales tax and TOT revenue which will be derived from the operations of the proposed stadium facility. Background information is attached which provides detail on how the estimates were derived and on the base numbers used in the formula for calculating sales tax and TOT. At issue is a draft proposal for a stadium financing plan which was prepared as a starting point for a dialogue on possible revenue sources with which to finance the estimated $13,750,000 cost of a 5,000 seat stadium. One of the potential revenue sources for debt service includes a commitment of new City and County sales tax and TOT generated from the new facility. The draft proposal suggests that $100,000 annually in net new sales tax and TOT can be generated for the City and $50,000 for the County from the operation of the new facility. This $150,000 per year would be pledged to retire the debt on the COP's for the next 20 years. My analysis estimated the actual amount of net new sales tax and TOT that would be generated annually and the total fiscal and economic impact of the stadium on the community. Following is a summary of the estimates generated from my analysis: Revenue Source Original Estimate New Gross Estimate* City Sales Tax/TOT 15100,000 $ 89,951 County Sales Tax/TOT $ 50,000 $ 27,388 ANNUAL TOTAL REVENUE $150,000 $117.,339 * See attached background and spreadsheets for additional detail As you can see, the total annual sales tax and TOT impact to the City of Bakersfield is $89,950.91. This amount is not significantly different than the amount suggested in the stadium financing proposal. The total annual impact for the County is estimated at $27,387.78 as opposed to the $50,000 estimate that was suggested in the draft proposed financing plan. This is a fairly significant difference and is most likely due to the fact that the $50,000 figure was essentially a guess. Although, the models used in this analysis are accepted in the industry, they are not definitive and do not take into account every variable which may effect the sales tax and TOT generated by the proposed facility. Staff's recommendation is that if the Council wishes to proceed with the idea of issuing COP's to finance a major portion of the stadium, that a consultant be retained to further refine the estimates provided in this analysis. BACKGROUND - STADIUM REVENUE ANALYSIS In this analysis, staff used a combination of models used in reports prepared by Kotin, Regan and Mouchly and Coopers & Lybrand for the cities of Palmdale and Ventura respectively. The consultant models provide a formula for calculating direct spending and the total economic and fiscal impact of the proposed stadium project. It should be noted that direct spending is defined by Coopers & Lybrand as, "the materials, services and labor purchased to support the operations of the new facility and the operation of a sports franchise." The term economic impact is defined as, "changes in direct and total spending, earnings and job creation," while the term fiscal impact denotes, "changes in tax revenues." Staff calculated direct spending for stadium operations based on four factors: in-stadium spending, out-of-stadium spending, visiting team spending and miscellaneous club spending {salaries, supplies, advertising, etc.). Average attendance numbers were taken from The Spectrum Group report, the other events category was increased by two events to take into account the impact of the usage and attendance generated from the adjoining sports complex which would be part of the stadium facility. The attendance numbers were then used in the formulas for calculating in-stadium and out-of-stadium spending, as prescribed by Coopers & Lybrand. The attached spreadsheet, titled Stadium 1, details the cost components which make up these two factors. The average ticket price, concessions per capita, novelties per capita and parking charge were taken from The Spectrum Group report. The multipliers for average out-of-stadium spending per capita were taken from the Coopers & Lybrand study. Visiting team spending was calculated based on the Coopers & Lybrand formula, also using Coopers cost component data for average hotel, meals and incidental spending. Total other spending, as noted on the spreadsheet, uses a number provided by the Bakersfield Dodgers franchise owner in a report prepared in 1992. The total of direct spending is equal to the sum of the four spending factors. As the spreadsheet indicates, total direct spending is estimated at $8,235,377.50. One of the challenges in preparing this analysis was determining an appropriate leakage factor with which to adjust total direct spending to account for spending which will leave the area immediately and therefore cannot be subject to application of multipliers. Spending which does not recirculate in the local economy, but rather is transferred out of the local economy is called leakage. Both consultants' reports assumed an 18% to 20% leakage factor, however, leakage factors can range anywhere from 10% to 35% depending on the area in question and the type of spending and/or services the leakage factor will be applied to. In a draft estimate, staff used a 10% leakage factor, however after further research, staff is recommending a 15% leakage factor as a conservative estimate of spending which will leave the area immediately. Bakersfield is a central city and therefore encounters a lower leakage rate than other cities in Southern California of similarsize. However, the nature of event spending is that event promoters, owners and entertainers are often from outside the area and therefore take a larger percentage of direct spending out of the area than may be expected with other types of goods and services. The spreadsheet, titled Stadium 2, shows adjusted direct spending to be $7,000,070.88 using a 15% leakage f~ctor. Alan Tandy March 1, 1995 Background of Analysis - Page 2 reflects corporate, partnership and other earnings in the area. The column titled Gross Impacts, on the Stadium 2 spreadsheet, reflects the application of multipliers to the adjusted direct spending to calculate total gross economic impact of the proposed stadium project. The column titled net impacts, as footnoted, reflects the new spending generated from visitors outside the area only. This differentiation is made in order to note that the output and earnings of local residents may represent a reallocation of resources rather than a net increase in resources to the area. The multipliers are noted on the Stadium 2 spreadsheet, most notable is the figure of 2.90 for calculating total output, which is equal to direct and indirect spending (Coopers & Lybrand multiplier}. Both consultants' reports assume that roughly 50% of direct spending and 35% of indirect spending will be subject to sales tax. These percentages were used to calculate gross sales tax to be generated from the proposed stadium. Annual City sales tax generation, using the Coopers & Lybrand formula, is estimated at $81,550.83. Using a similar Coopers & Lybrand formula, the annual County sales tax generation will be $20,387.71. It is important to note that this analysis does not adjust downward the gross sales tax amount to account for the fiscal impact of the existing stadium and baseball franchise operations. However, since this analysis assumes that the baseball franchise will reloKate out of the area without a new stadium, it is assumed that without it there would be a total loss of current sales tax and TOT as well as any increases from a new facility. The multiplier for calculating Transient Occupancy Tax {TOT} is based on the TOT rate charged by the City and the County. The formula used by Coopers and Lybrand is the TOT rate multiplied by .01 and then applied to adjusted direct spending to determine the estimated annual TOT impact to the City and County. As the Stadium 2 spreadsheet indicates the multiplier for the City is .0012 and for the County it is .0010. In a draft estimate of City TOT, staff incorrectly estimated the annual TOT impact at $20,000. This occurred through incorrectly applying the TOT multiplier to total output rather than adjusted direct spending as prescribed by the Coopers & Lybrand formula. The estimate for annual TOT impact for the City is $8,400.09 and for the County is $7,000.07. As noted for sales tax, TOT was not adjusted downward to reflect current TOT benefit being realized from the current stadium and franchise operation. STADIUM2.XLS CALCULATION OF DIRECT SPENDING ADJUSTED FOR LEAKAGE AND TOTAL OUTPUT GROSS IMPACTS NET IMPACTS (1)i Total Direct Spending $8,235,377.50 $1,729,429.28 Adjusted Direct Spending(.85) $7,000,070.88 $1,470,014.88 Total Output (2.90) $20,300,205.54 $4,263,043.16 Employee Earnings(.99) $6,930,070.17 $1,455,314.73 Total Earnings (1 ~.68) $11,760,119.07 $2,469,625.00 Total Indirect Spending $13,300,134.66 $2,793,028.28 I CALCULATION OF SALES TAX AND TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX (TOT) I City Sales Tax (2) $81,550.83 $17,125.67 County Sales Tax $20,387.71 $4,281.42 City TOT (3) $8,400.09 $1,764.02 County TOT $7,000.07 $1,470.01 I TOTAL ANNUAL CITY SALES TAX AND TOT IMPACT (4): $89,950.91 TOTAL ANNUAL COUNTY SALES TAX AND TOT IMPACT: $27,387.78 (1) Net Impact is the spending generated by visitors from outside Kern County and is calcuated at 21% of Gross Impact. [ (2) City and County Sales Tax is based on the assumption that 50% of Adjusted Direct SPending and 35% of Indirect Spending will be subject to sales tax. Sales Tax was then calculated at 1% for the City and .25% for the County. i(3) TOT is calculated with a standard multiplier based on the TOT rate in the area. For the City · it is calcuated at .0012% of Adjusted Direct Spending and for the County it is .0010% of Adjusted Direct Spending. I [ I I I (4) Total annual impact is not adjusted to reflect current sales tax and TOT benefit that the City and County are currently realizing since it is assumed that the baseball franchise will leave Bakersfield without a new stadium. I Page 1 STADIUM 1 .XLS ESTIMATED ANNUAL ATTENDANCE EVENT # OF DAYS AVG. ATTENDANCE ANNUAL ATTENDANCE BASEBALL 70 4,500 315,000 CONCERTS 6 8,000 48,000 OTHER EVENTS 10 3,000! 30,000 TOTAL 86 1 $,500' 393,000 CALCULATION OF DIRECT SPENDING I IN-STADIUM SPENDING EVENT ATTENDANCE AVG.TICKET PRICE AVG. CONCESSION/CAP AVG. NOVELTY/CAP AVG. PARKING CHARGE BASEBALL 315,000 $4.00 $4.00 $1.00 $1.50 CONCERTS 48,000 $17.60 $4.50 $3.50 $1.50 OTHER EVENTS 30,000 $5.00 $3.50 $0.75 $1.00 TOTAL 393,000 $8~83 $4.00 $1.83 $1.33 TOTAL - TICKETS: $3,470,190.00 TOTAL - CONCESSIONS: $1,672,000.00 TOTAL - NOVELTY: I $ 719,190.00 TOTAL - PARKING:t $522,690.00 TOTAL - IN-STADIUM SPENDING: $6,284,070.00 I OUT-OF-STADIUM SPENDING ATTENDANCE AVG. SPENDING/CAP AVG. SPENDING LOCAL ATTENDEES I 334,050 $1.95 $651,397.60 VISITOR ATTENDEES 58,950 $5.40 $318,330.00 TOTAL - OUT-OF-STADIUM SPENDING: $969,727.50 I VISITING TEAM SPENDING ASSUME AVERAGE OF 36 PEOPLE PER VISITING TEAM FOR 70 GAMES HOTEL (23 ROOMS @ $50 EACH): $80,600 MEALS ($18/DAY/PERSON): $47,880 i INCIDENTAL( $20/DAY/PERSON): $ 53,200 I TOTAL VISITING TEAM SPENDING: $181,580 I OTHER SPENDING (SALARIES, SUPPLIES, ADVERTISING, ETC.) ASSUME THAT AMOUNTS PROVIDED BY BAKERSFIELD DODGERS OWNER ARE A CORRECT REFELCTION OF SPENDING IN THIS CATEGORY. I TOTAL OTHER SPENDING: $800,000 TOTAL DIRECT SPENDING: $8,23§,377.50 Page 1 BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM March 1, 1995 TO: _ ~AIL E. WAITERS, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER FROM(J~D.B. TEUBNER, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: VOICE MAIL OPTIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS I have researched the various options for 'providing voice mail service to Councilmembers and have identified four viable alternatives. The first two alternative require that all seven Councilmembers sign up to use the service. The second two alternatives allow only those Councilmembers who want voice mail to have the service, while allowing those who do not want voice mail t'o continue with the present system of receiving messages. If all of the Councilmemberswant the service then I suggest option II because it is the most cost effective. If only a few of the Councilmembers want voice mail then I recommend option III which provides the greatest flexibility at the least cost. Option I - Call Sequencer with Automated Attendant This option involves the purchase of a call sequencer which would answer all Councilmember calls coming in from a new "City Council phone number". The auto attendant would provide a greeting message and then direct the caller to press a number which corresponds with each Councilmembers mailbox. If the caller was unsure which Councilmember he/she wanted then they would be directed to the City Clerk for assistance. This option requires that all Councilmembers have this service and more importantly use it so that calls are followed up on. i have had an experience where the Councilmember did not like voice mail and therefore did not use the service he was assigned. The City Clerk ended up getting angry calls from people who had left messages on the voice mail that were never returned. This option will cost approximately $1,000 for equipment and service installation with no significant ongoing associated maintenance costs. In addition, it would require the activation of a new City Council phone number which would be listed in the phone directory. The advantage of this option is that the City Clerk would no longer be required to personally direct every Council caller. Option II - Personal Office Receptionist This option is essentially the same as Option I with a few differences. The equipment required for this option would be attached to the phone in the Council office, similar to an answering machine but with seven different message mailboxes. The equipment is more limited in the number of messages it can store, however, it still provides space for up to 13 messages per mailbox. This option is less expensive, at approximately $400 for equipment and installation. This option also requires the activation and listing of a separate Council phone number. Option III - Voice Mail from ex~stin~ City phone number This option allows those Councilmembers that want voice mail to have it, while those that don't could use the existing process for receiving messages. Under Gail E. Waiters February 28, 1995 Page 2 this option, participating Councilmembers would be set up with a voice mailbox. Calls would come in from the existing City phone number and those callers asking for members with voice mail will be connected with the Councilmembers message and mailbox. Those without voice mail will get their messages in the current fashion. This option does require that the City Clerk's office continue to personally direct and handle each call. On the plus side, this option does not require the activation and listing of a new phone number. The cost of activating voice mail for participating Councilmembers will vary according to how many opt for the service. The basic cost is $20 per month per Councilmember. Option IV - Voice Mail with separate numbers for each Councilmember This option would require each Councilmember to have his/her own separate phone number which would be listed in the phone directory. The numbers would connect to a single phone with seven extension lines. When a call came in to a Councilmember with voice mail, the call would go into the Councilmember's message and mailbox. Calls going to Councilmemberswithout voice mail would ring to the City Clerk for appropriate disposition. The cost of setting up separate phone numbers for each member and activating voice mail for those that want it would be approximately $1,700 per year. The advantage of this option is that the City Clerk's office would have a reduced number of calls that they would have to deal with directly while still providing the flexibility of choice to Councilmembers. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please let me know. February 28, 1995 Mel Byrd, District Manager California Water Service Co. 3725 South ~rI" Street Bakersfield, CA 93304 RE: CHANGE OF CBK WATER RATES AND CUSTOMER NOTIFICATION Dear Mr. Byrd: Thc City of Bakersfield Domestic Water System (CBK) has adjusted it's domestic water rates. The City of Bakersfield Water Board has approved the rate changes and an Executive Order with thc new Schedule of Rates was issued by the City Manager in June, 1994, which makes the new rates effective on April 1, 1995. The new rates are shown on the Schedule of Rates and arc attached to this letter. Both thc "monthly service charge" and thc metered "quantity rates" have been increased. Thc "private fire protection service charge" in all instances have been adjusted upward. Customer billings should partially or entirely include the rate changes, depending upon the route and billing cycles of each service account. A notification to customers in the form of a billing insert explaining the rate changes would be appropriate for inclusion in the bills that arc mailed after April 1, 1995. The language to usc in thc City portion of thc CBK service billings is suggested to read: NOTICE TO CUSTOMERS The City of Bakersfield Water System has increased rates effective Apda 1, 1996. This is the second phase of ii two part rate Increase necessary to offset a 60% Increase In groundwater pump taxes assessed by the Kern County Water Agency, as well ae higher coats of operations, power, systems replacement, and more stringent water quality testing and reporting. The effect of the rate change is a 3.3% Increase on the average monthly residential water bill or approximately $0.62. The Private Fire Protection Service fee for commemlal applications has been Increased to bring this sewlce fee In line with regular monthly service charges. This Increase will be reflected partially or In its entirety on your current bill. The new Schedule of Rates is shown on the reverse side of this notice. 1000 BUENA VISTA ROAD · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93311 · (805) 326-3715 Mel Byrd, District Manager California Water Service Co. (Continued) Page - 2 - If you have suggestions or comments on thc wording or style of the notifications, please contact mc at this office. Sincerely, GENE BOGART ' Manager Flora Core Water Resources Director Attachment cc: v/Alan Tandy, City Manager 'Gerry Feeney, California Water Service Co. Ray Worrell, California Water Service Co. Mike McMasters, California Water Service Ci~ of B~er~ield DomesUc W~er Division A~he, ~irhaven, ~nd Riverlakes ~ch Ge~ice Are~ Schedule ~ R~es General Metered Sewice ~?~?~::~~~:~?~??~ W~in F~aven & C~ Lim~s Uninco~- orated ~e~ Qu~ R~es: Fi~ ~,~0 cu. ~./m~ 0.~0 0.580 (~r 100 cu. ~./mon~) All over ~0,~ cu. ~./mon~ 0.~0 0.5~ (~r 1~ cu. ~./mon~) 5/8' x 3/4' Sewice ~.60 ~.77 1' Sewice $10.06 $13.41 1 - 1/2' ~ice $14.89 $19.84 2' Sewice $~.~ $~.19 3' ~ice ~7.63 ~0.17 4' Sewice ~.13 $72.03 6' Se~ice $96.37 $128.00 8' ~wice $147.57 $195.86 10' ~w~e $~1.66 $267.~ 1-1/2' Connection ~.85 $7.70 2' O~ne~i~ ~.80 $10.~ 8' O~ne~ion $11.70 ~15.~ 4' Connection ~15.60 ~.60 6' O~neotion $23.~ ~.65 8' Conne~i~ ~1.~ ~1 .~ 10' ConneXion ~.00 . ~1.~ 12' ConneXion ~.80 ~1.55 Mon~ly ~wice charge is a madine~-to-~we ch~ ~ich is applied to NI ~wices ~d ~y qu~t~ ~ w~er u~d is ~ addEional ch~ge com~ed ~ ~e qu~t~ rae. Conditions of service remain the same. P :\1 ~ - DATA~IATCOI~3.WK3 MEMORANDUM February 17, 1995 TO: Lieutenant Bill Horton FROM: Carl Hernandez III, Deputy City Attorney~ ~ SUBJECT: Casa Royale Card Casino I met with the operator of the Casa Royale Card Casino to discuss her operation of the casino within the City. Ms. Mailloux was particularly aggrieved that the City would not permit her an exception to operate her cardroom as she now presently operates under her county permit. Based on information which you provided us, both the state and county permits to operate the cardroom expire in March of 1995. Ms. Mailloux agreed that both permits expire in March of 1995. I explained that the state would require the Casa Royale to abide by the requirements of City ordinances. Moreover, I explained that once a county permit obtained under a county ordinance expires, Ms. Mailloux would have no further right to operate under the county ordinance but would be required to operate under the City's ordinance. Ms. Mailloux requested that the City grant Casa Royale an exemption from the current ordinance based on the hardship which would be imposed upon her if required to abide by the City ordinance. I explained that the City cannot grant exceptions to ordinances and that unfair application of City ordinances to businesses exposes the City to potential liability. I further explained that the City must require all cardroom operators to abide by City ordinances. Finally, I explained that the only recourse open to her was to ask that the City's ordinance be amended. I explained that that request must be made directly to the City Council. Ms. Mailloux then realized that it would be to her benefit to move her cardroom from the Casa Royale to a location within the county. I explained that since she had a working relationship with the county that would perhaps be her best option. She indicated that she will now discuss this option with the county. THIS MEMORANDUM IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE AND IS PROTECTED BY THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND ATTORNE~ WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGE Memorandum to Lieutenant Bill Horton Re: Casa Royale Card Casino February 17, 1995 Page 2 Hopefully this matter will now come to an end. Should you have any questions or need any further information on this matter, please feel free to contact me. cc: Judy Skousen, City Attorney Alan Tandy, City Manager CH:ha CORRl/casn-217.mmo THIS MEMORANDUM IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE AND IS PROTECTED BY THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND ATTORNEY WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGE 1995 KERN RIVER WATER SUPPLY FORECAST Distribution List C.H. Williams Kern River Watermaster Dana S. Munn North Kern Water Storage District John L. Jones Cawelo Water District C.W. Bowers Kern-Tulare W.D. - Rag Gulch W.D. Robert K. Bellue Improvement District No. 4 Hal Crossley Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District L. Mark Mulkay Kern Delta Water District e/Alan Tandy Gene Bogan Thomas Stetson Scott Slater Judy Skousen Alan Daniel 02-22-95 February 22, 1995 RE: 1995 WATER SUPPLY FORECAST The February 1, 1995 forecast, issued by the State of California Department of Water Resources for Kern River runoff during the 1995 April through July snow-melt period is 119% of normal, or approximately 550,000 acre- feet. Snowpack verification was performed by the State of California, United States Forest Service and Sequoia/Kings National Park Ser,,ice during the last week of January 1995 with measurements obtained at fifteen established snow courses and five remote snow sensor sites located within the Kern River basin. The February 1, 1995 forecast of Kern River runoff assumes median precipitation amounts will occur over the Kern River watershed subsequent to the date of forecast. According to procedure, actual precipitation received after February 1, 1995, will be reflected in the first of the month forecasts to be distributed by the State of California for March, April and May of 1995. KERN RIVER FORECAST SUMMARY 1995 April through July runoff = 550,000 acre-feet (119% of normal) AprilJuly 80% probability range = 370,000 to 870,000 acre-feet (actual runoff should fall within the stated limits eight times out of ten) 1995 March-October runoff = 690,000 acre-feet Based upon this February 1, 1995 forecast, the following table reflects City of Bakersfield Kern River water supply during the March-October period of 1995: I. CITY ENTITLEMENT SUPPLY: 119% OF NORMAL RUNOFF MARCH-OCTOBER Period = 150,000 acre-feet Less: River Losses = 20,000 acre-feet Isabella Reservoir Losses = 10,000 acre-feet = Estimated City supply available for diversion MARCH-OCTOBER = 120,000 acre-feet 1000 BUENA VISTA ROAD · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93311 · (605) 326-3715 February 22, 1995 RE: 1995 WATER SUPPLY FORECAST Page 2 II. BASIC CONTRACT DELIVERY (March-October): 1. Lake Ming and Hart Park -- 700 acre-feet 2. North Kern Water Storage District = 20,000 acre-feet 3. Cawelo Water District = 27,000 acre-feet 4. Kern-Tulare Water District = 20,000 acre-feet 5. Rag Gulch Water District = 3,000 acre-feet TOTAL = 70,700 acre-feet A 119% of normal runoff will yield a full supply for "Basic" delivery obligations of the City during 1995. The City also has a commitment to deliver 10,000 acre-feet annually to Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District. The majority of City's basic obligation to Rosedale for 1995 was satisfied during January and February 1995. III. BASIC CONTRACT PRIOR-YEAR DEFICIENCIES: As of January 1, 1995, prior-year deficiencies in delivery of Basic Contract water were as follows: 1. North Kern Water Storage District = 1,919 acre-feet 2. Cawelo Water District = 22,052 acre-feet 3. Kern-Tulare Water District = 50,246 acre-feet 4. Rag Gulch Water District = 7, 631 acre-feet Total Prior-Year Deficiencies = 81,848 acre-feet City entitlement yield as projected for 1995 should be sufficient to allow for delivery of portions of prior-year deficiencies in basic contract water. The delivery of basic contract deficiencies for 1995 will be made in accordance to the Maximum Delivery Schedule as follows: 1. North Kern Water Storage District = 1,919 acre-feet 2. Cawelo Water District = 5,000 acre-feet 3. Kern-Tulare Water District = 3,700 acre-feet 4. Rag Gulch Water District = 550 acre-feet TOTAL = 11,169 acre-feet IV. OTHER DELIVERY OBLIGATIONS: 1. Water for use on lands owned by the City and/or on lands within City boundaries = 3,000 acre-feet 2. North Kern Water Storage District - "Borrow/Payback" water, normally delivered between May and September = 10,000 acre-feet It is forecasted that 1995 Kern River runoff will yield the City adequate supply to deliver "OTHER DELIVERY OBLIGATIONS" as set forth above. February 22, 1995 RE: 1995 WATER SUPPLY FORECAST Page 3 V. MISCELLANEOUS QUAN2TI'Y WATER: After deducting the basic contract deliveries and other obligations as set forth above from City Kern River supply available for diversion March through October, a miscellaneous quantitywater supply of approximately 25,000 acre-feet would be available during the March-October period. The priority rights to purchase miscellaneous water are as follows: 1. Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District = 3333% 2. North Kern Water Storage District = 19.05% 3. Cawelo Water District = 25.71% 4. Kern-Tulare Water District = 19.05% 5. Rag Gulch Water District = 2.86% TOTAL = 100.00% Under the City/Fenneco Agreement No. 77-71 dated May 2, 1977, assigned to North Kern Water Storage District effective March 20, 1990, North Kern has the first right of refusal to miscellaneous water following Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District and the four Basic Contractors, as follows: a). Forty percent (40%) of all water City has available for use within City boundaries solely for irrigation. b). Fifty percent (50%) of first 24,000 acre-feet of other City miscellaneous quantity water including water recovered from City's groundwater banking operations. c). Fifty percent (50%) of any other miscellaneous quantity Kern River water that City would otherwise use for groundwater banking and replenishment. VI. DELIVERY SCHEDULES: On the basis of the above normal water supply forecast for 1995, the City will deliver basic contract water in conformance with the "Maximum Delivery Schedules' as set forth in Extu"oit "B~ of the Basic Contracts. Requests for delivery of Miscellaneous Quantity water should be submitted to City by those Districts wishing to participate as soon after March 1st as possible. Should you have any questions regarding the above information, please do not hesitate to call our office. Sincerely, GENE BOGART Manager By:- Director Attachments 'FEBRUARY 1, 1995 SNOW SURVEY DATA FOR KERN RIVER BASIN City of Bakersfield Water Resources APRIL 1ST SNOW WATER AVERAGE DEPTH CONTENT ~ OF SNOW SNOW CALIF. ELEV. WATER DATE IN DENSITY IN APRIL 1ST MEASURED COURSE SENSOR NUMBER IN FEET CONTENT MEASURED INCHES (%) INCHES AVERAGE BY Upper Tyndall Crk. 516 11,450 27.7 2-3 68.0 31% 20.8 75% SKNP Bighorn Plateau 250 11,350 21.9 2-3 68.7 31% 21.4 98~ SKNP Cottonwood Pass 251 11,050 13.4 1-24 61.9 25% 15.4 115% DWR Siberian Pass 252 10,900 18.3 1-26 81.3 25% 20.5 112~ DWR Crabtree Meadow 253 10,700 18.8 1-29 72.4 26% 18.8 100~ DWR Crabtree Meadow 253 10,700 19.8 14.8 75% DWR Guyot Flat 254 10,650 20.0 1-29 77.6 26% 20.5 102~ DWR Tyndall Creek 255 10,650 18.3 2-3 63.8 29% 18.5 101% SKNP Sandy Meadow 275 10,650 18.3 1-28 76.5 25% 18.9 103% DWR Chagoopa Plateau 514 10,300 21.8 Big Whitney Mea. 257 9,750 16.6 1-25 73.5 23% 16.9 102% DWR Rock Creek 256 9,600 17.2 1-29 72.3 27% 19.4 113% DWR Pascoe 569 9,130 24.9 1-30 95.8 29% 28.0 112~ USFS Round Meadow 258 9,000 24.9 1-30 86.0 32% 27.9 112~ USFS Tunnel Guard 830 8,960 15.6 Wet Meadow 518 8,950 30.3 Ramshaw Meadow 259 8,700 11.3 1-31 50.6 28% 14.4 127% DWR Little Whitney Mea. 260 8,500 13.5 1-31 63.5 299/0 18.2 135% DWR Casa Vleja Mee. 262 8,400 19.6 1-31 64.9 36% 23.3 119~ USFS Casa VleJa Mea. 262 8,400 20.9 Quinn Ranger Sra. 264 8,350 19.4 Bonita Meadows 261 8,300 13.8 1-30 64.6 33% 21.3 154% USFS Beach Meadows 265 7,650 8.9 1-31 44.9 35% 15.5 174% USFS Beach Meadows 860 7,650 11.0 1-31 44.4 290/0 12.8 116~ USFS Basin-W'~e Average [ 116~ CALIFORNIA COOPERATIVE SNOW SURVEYS February, 1995 Forecast of Unimpaired Runoff In Thoueands of Acre-Feet (TAIc) April-July Forecasts % 80% April-July of Probebility Average Rar~e Total Inflow to Shasta Lake 2,100 115 1,500-3,000 Sacramento River above Bend Bridge 2,880 116 2,(XX)-4,200 Feather River, Inflow to Lake Oroville 2,770 149 2,000-3,9(X) Yuba River at Smartville 1,530 146 1,150-2,200 American River, Inflow to Folsom lake 1,800 140 1,300-2,700 Cosumnas River at Michigan Bar 185 143 130-320 Mokelumne River, Inflow to Perdea Reservoir 660 142 520-900 Stanislaus River, Inflow to New Melones Lake 1,0(X) 140 780-1,400 Tuolumne River, Inflow to New Don Pedro Res 1,700 142 1,330-2,200 Merced River, Inflow to Lake McClure 900 146 690-1,200 San Joaquin River, Inflow to Millerton Lake 1,740 142 1,300-2,300 Kings River, Inflow to Pine Flat Reservoir 1,570 131 1,150-2,150 Ka-weah River, Inflow to Terminus Reservoir 360 127 250-500 Tule River, Inflow to Lake Success 80 127 50-130 Kern River, Inflow to Lake Isabella 550 119 370-870 W~ter-Year Forecast and Monthly Distribution Oct Aug Water 96 80~ Thru Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul & Year of Probability Jan ~ Sep Average Flange Inflow to Shasta 2,740 1,030 880 900 610 340 250 450 7,200 120 5,9(X)-9,100 Sacramento, Bend 4,660 1,500 1,300 1,200 860 490 330 560 10,900 126 8,900-13,900 Feather, Oroville 1,680 740 800 1,030 1,000 530 210 210 6,400 139 5,200-8,300 Yuba, Srnartville 1,000 400 450 520 540 380 90 60 3,440 144 2,800-4,500 American, Folsom 1,140 470 500 580 690 430 100 40 3,950 144 3,200-5,300 Cosumnes, Mich. B. 230 100 120 100 65 20 5 5 645 168 520-950 Mokelumne, Pardee 170 90 110 170 260 190 40 10 1,040 139 850-1,350 Stanislaua, N.M 290 130 185 270 400 250 80 25 1,630 142 1,330-2,150 Tuofumne, D.P. 480 210 250 360 580 560 200 40 2,680 142 2,200-3,3(X) Merced. L. McClure 260 100 150 200 340 280 80 30 1,440 149 1,150-1,850 San Joequin, M.L. 350 130 180 330 580 580 250 100 2,500 141 1,960-3,200 Kings, Pine Flat 280 90 140 270 550 530 220 90 2,170 130 1,670-2,880 Kaweah, L. Kaweah 60 30 55 . 85 135 110 30 15 520 117 380-700 Tule, Success R. 30 20 30 35 25 15 5 5 155 114 110-250 Kern, Isabella 85 40 70 130 180 160 80 55 800 112 570-1,200 This is the officiaJ State water supply forecast. Consult the Department's Bulletin 120 for more information. Prepared by the California Cooperative Snow Surveys MEMORANDUM February 23, 1995 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager ~ FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director jl~ ~' FFR ~ 3 t995 BY: Kevin Barnes, Solid Waste Director~J~ SUBJECT: Pickup Schedule for Residential Greenwaste and Refuse Upon completion of the Automated Conversion Plan, approximately 26,000 homes will be serviced weekly by 12 collection routes each day. While residents will continue to receive two pickups per week (one green and one refuse), it is important to note the departure from traditional pickup day combinations of Monday and Thursday, Tuesday and Friday, Wednesday and Saturday. To use City crews and trucks most efficiently, green waste pickups will be made on two days per week rather than three. This is because trucks can collect more greenwaste containers per day than normal refuse containers. Since three weekdays are still necessary to complete all the refuse pickups, some residents will have new combinations of pickup days shown below. Original Group # Homes Green Day Refuse Day A ,, 8,600 Monday Thursday B 8,600 Tuesday Friday C 8,600 Wednesday Saturday Proposed A 8,600 Monday Thursday B 8,600 Tuesday Friday C 4,300 Monday Wednesday D 4,300 Tuesday Wednesday Collection days will be made up one day later than normal following any observed holidays (July 4th, Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year's Day). Residential Solid Waste Collection crews will normally be off on Saturdays but will work Saturdays to make up any holidays observed during the normal Monday through Friday work week. As shown in the table, Group C and D residences would have less separation between pickup days. This may be perceived as a problem. However, it should be emphasized that essentially all homes receive once per week green and refuse pickup under the new system, so space between days should not affect them. If this concept of new pickup day combinations is acceptable, staff will proceed to lay out approximate route boundaries and develop an implementation schedule for all city-served residential areas. Cathy Palla 6615 Kane Way Bakersfield, Calif. 93309 834-7826 February 27, 1995 Dear Enclosed please find a copy of a letter written on your behalf by Nels Roselund, tO the City of Bakersfield. I know that many of you are anxious about your property. This letter should ease your con- cerns. I suggest that you contact Nels directly to check his sche- duled trips to Bakersfield. I would like to remind you that even though we~have several years until the U.R~M. deadline, y0u-~Should-~now- be ~seriouslY planning your strategy. Keep'in mind that if you start retrofitting after the Dec. 1998 deadline, you will be .required to comply with all of the provisions of the UCBC Code, greatly increasing the cost to you ! I have also included a copy of a letter to the editor of the Bakers- field Californian, written about me. Another view on U.R.M. for your file !!! As always, if I can be of any help to you, feel free to call. ~?C: As one who tins devoted Sincere ly. "~armand ~ to g~ redden~l · was appa~ed at your recent article c.~m~s O3RM) m downtown Cathy Palla a~fitional seven-year de]ay and cc: Dennis Fiddler 0~Fa~d0wn~quh~nen~, The' ! __l~ ',~_. ' ~ ~ 'praised Cathy Pa~a for Alan Tandy ~ -~_~_~ ~ ~4~ that n~y old Jake Wager ~"~~ ~ ~ ~ucracy. Tom DeNatale ~ - .-' ~-i<,~URMs~fled~the1933Lon~ D.B.P.O.A. - ; [~3~ ~1~ I.t t?l/tt:U V Ct: ~-i:- --?~.~ .The Legislature, after years of ndangers public passed.a law whose purpose was not ~,~X~ k ko,._~-_ ~ Tuesday, February 21, ~9~i~ (g~iinancewiit~a1991deadline. Palla · . , '-~iigoti~ted anaddifional seven years :_' , .'~:l.,see where the property owners --consideration for the public? Seismic , , ,, .-,3y. ern~ge~ We have had some major ' - .... ', ripe for movement, and yet The !~ , Ca/from/aa praises the owners of old 'i :'L ._ ~'~ bu/ld/n~ (which have been ~ I', depreciated several times) for ,.,t ~ Y ~: ...... ~ addilional f~gging. - 7' ROBERT L. PATRICK ROSELUND' ENGINEERING COMPANY 8453 E. YARROW ST., S. SAN GABRIEL, CA 91770 · TEL: (818) 573-2441 · FAX: (818) 573-2572 February 21, 1995 City of Bakersfield .... Economic and Community Development Department 515 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Attention: Andre Devereaux Subject: URM Incentive Program Dear Ms. Devereaux: As we discussed during our phone conversation of February 13, 1995, I am preparing Initial Seismic Assessment Reports for a number of buildings in Bakersfield. The owners of these buildings intend to participate in the City of Bakersfield's URM Incentive Program. My progress in evaluating these buildings has been hampered by commitments that I made to assist with evaluation and repair of buildings damaged by the Northridge Earthquake of January 17, 1994; several damaged buildings for which I have made commitments are still unrepaired or repair construction is underway. Most other Los Angeles area structural engineers who have specialized in repair and strengthening 'of old buildings are similarly backlogged. I have been trying to continue progress on the Bakersfield URM program; I have been proceeding with Evaluation Reports for the Bakersfield buildings at the rate of about two per month. As repairs on earthquake damage buildings are completed, I intend to accelerate that pace. This letter is to indicate to you the clients for whom I intend to prepare reports, and the status of my work for each. I hope this information will be helpful to you in administering the program, and that all who have contacted me will be allowed to participate in the URM Incentive Program with my services. Please inform me of any mandatory deadlines that will need to affect the pace of my work. If you have any questions, please give me a call. / StrUctural Engineer copy to: Downtown Business Association, attn: Cathy Palla Structural Engineering for Rehabilitation and PreServation CLIENTS OF THE ROSELUND ENGINEERING COMPANY FOR THE BAKERSFIF113 INITIAL SEISMIC ASSESSMEN I' FOR THE URM INCENTIVE PROGRAM OWNER ADDRESS STATUS Atkinson, Mel 1401 19th Street Request from owner Kress Building Beckwith, Michael -~- 2019-23 Chester Avenue Report completed Bentley, J. Philip 1200 18th Street Request from owner Bryan, Ruth W. 2010-2014 Chester Avenue Report completed Casper, Vincent 1809 Chester Avenue Request from owner Clare, Jack 1623-33 19th Street Proposal written Clifford, Gerald 1420 19th Street Report completed 1434 19th Street Report completed 1438 19th Street Report completed Cobh, Joyce 2407 Chester Avenue Report completed Crites II, Angus D. 1931 Eye St.; 1605 & 1607 20th Street Proposal written 1925-27 Eye Street (Babe's Gym) Proposal written 1817/1823 Eye St.; 1601-1607 19th St. Request' from owner Delaney, Jack 900 18th Street Proposal accepted Dennis, Paul 801 18th Street Report completed Diebel, Fred 2509 Chester Request from owner Elder, J.L. 631 E. 19th Street (Sequoia Paint) Site visit completed Engel, Bob 1105-1107-1111 19th Street Request from owner Felton, Don 506 E. 19th Street Request from owner Griffin, Michael A. 1234 19th Street Request from owner JJJ Partnership 821 18th Street Report completed Koontz, Otho 1928 19th Street Report completed Laxague, Marianne 729 E~ 21st Street Request from owner Pyrenees French Bakery, Inc. Lectorium Rosicrucianum 2430 19th Street Request from owner Lipco, Marvin 1207-17 19th Street Report completed 2 OWNER ADDRESS STATUS Maitia, Danny 620 E. 19th St. (Wool Growers Rest.) Request from owner Meyer, Gene 505-509 E. 19th Street Report completed Meyer, Paul 901 18th Street Site visit completed 903-905 18th Street Site visit completed Nichols, James 1914 Truxtun Avenue Site visit completed Nighbert, J.T. 1219 & 1221 20th Street Request from owner Palla, Catherine & Don 1919 Chester Avenue Proposal written 2022-24 Chester Avenue Proposal accepted Phillips, Sally 1022-1028 Baker Street Site visit completed (Building sold, no arrangement with new owner) Ralph Smith Trust 1918 Eye Street Report completed Ramage, John C. 1906 18th Street (The Manley) Proposal written Thorp, Tex '824 18th Street Report completed (Thorp's Harley-Davidson, Inc.) Ware, James 1407-19 19th Street Report completed Williams, Walt 2025-29 Chester Avenue Report completed 1517-23 19th Street Site visit completed Wilson, Lane & Kirk 1017-21 Baker Street Request from owner (Kern Turf Supply) Women's Club of 18th and D Streets Site visit completed Bakersfield Wong, Judge Delbert E. 1219-1221 18th Street Report completed STATUS - From beginning to completion.: Step Action Number Completed 1. Requests from owner 43 2. Proposals written 30 3. Proposals accepted 25 4. Site visits completed 23 5. Reports completed 16 MEMORANDUM February 27, 1995 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER · FROM: LELAND J. ANDERSEN, COMMUNITY SERVICES MANAGER SUBJECT: PLANZ PARK LIGHTING At the Council meeting of February 22, 1995, Councilmember Rowles referred to staff the issue of lighting at Planz Park. A citizen had called Mr. Rowles and advised him that security lighting was not available at Planz Park and that they were concerned about personal safety when walking during the evening hours. I have contacted parks staff who investigated the lighting system for possible corrections. It was discovered that the system was not operating properly and that repairs could be handled immediately. As of this date lighting has been restored and the system is fully operable. I do not be- lieve we should have further complaints at Planz. If you need further information, please contact me at your convenience. LJA/lg '. ~1 cc: Councilmember Rowles ~i " MAR ~ ~ Counci lmember Salvaggio - P~) 64-2759 MEMORANDUM March 3, 1995 TO Honorable Mayor Price and Council Members FROM s.E. Brummer, Chief of Police~ ~: ~ SUBJECT Response to Inquiry of Council Member Randy Rowles The attached memorandum provides an overview of the current auto theft problem throughout Kern County. The benefits of a multi agency task force proposal will be discussed at the next Kern County Chief's of Police meeting on March 16th. SEB/vrf attachment: 1. Memorandum "Auto Theft Task Force Proposal" dated 3/3/95 Copy to: Alan Tandy, City Manager Verne Jung, Business Manager ~ P~ 64-2759 MEMORANDUM Narch 3, 1995 S.E. BRUMMER, CHIEF OF POLICE lO SERGEANT D. MARTIN, INVESTIGATIONS FROM AUTO THEFT TASK FORCE PROPOSAL SUBJECT Vehicle theft has become California's most costly crime. In 1993, California led the nation with 313,804 vehicle thefts. Unfortunately, in the central valley, Fresno ranks number one in the state and number two nationally for vehicle thefts in 1994. With the State of California and the City of Fresno ranking number one and two respectively in the nation in vehicle thefts, we ourselves in Kern County are experiencing tremendous increases in vehicle thefts. Since 1991, vehicle thefts in Kern County have increased 49%, and at the same time, the recovery rate has decreased 8%. Since 1991, the Bakersfield Police Department has seen a 63% increase in vehicle thefts and the Kern County Sheriff's Department has seen a 58% increase in vehicle thefts. In 1994, the Bakersfield Police Department handled 1945 vehicle theft reports, and the Kern County Sheriff's Department handled 1674 vehicle thefts. The Police Department is proposing a multi-jurisdictional auto theft task force to the Kern County Police Chiefs Association in an effort to impact increasing vehicle thefts in Kern County. DM:dpm PD 64-2759 MEMORANDUM February 28, 1995 Honorable Mayor Price and Council._ _ Members TO S. E. Brummer, Chief of Police ~ FROM Police Activities League Newsletter SUBJECT For your information, I have attached an article from the most recent California PAL Newsletter which outlines Bakersfield PAL program activities. SEB/vrf cc: Councilmember Carson Councilmember Chow Councilmember DeMond Councilmember McDermott Councilmember Rowles Councilmember Salvaggio Councilmember Smith IFORNIA PAL NEWS CALIFORNIA POLICE ACTIVITIES LEAGUE. NEWSLETTER 8 · FALL 1994 Program Produces Peace Dividend in Richmond Condensed from the Contra Costa Ti~nes The long, hot bloody sum- mer of 1994 that police and community leaders feared would happen didn't. In fact, violence has been down in the most violent areas of West Contra Costa County. Many speculate that residents, particularly teenagers and young adults, just got fed up. "I think evewone was tw- lng to get cool with evewone From left to right: National PAL President L. B. Scott, Congressman Mathew Martinez, CAL-PAL Executive because they xvere sick of peo- Director Sam Holtan, CAL-PAL President C. ,4. Robertson ple dying," said Ralph Robinson, 19, of Richmond. CALIFORNIA PAL GOES TO "There were too many funer- als going on in Richmond" During thefirst5months WASHINGION D C of 1994, 6 youths were killed. Recently appointed Richmond · · Police Chief Bill Lansdowne credits PAL with helping to ~'~alifornia PAL President and Urban Development keep the peace on the streets. ~ }C.A. Robertson and and the Juvenile Justice This summer's quiet has been ~Executive Director Sam Department. a welcome contrast to last Holtan, along with other mem- The purpose of the trip was summer, when 16 people were bers of National PAL, made a to introduce National PAL to shot and 2 killed during one trip to our national capitol in members of the Legislature in June weekend, late September to meet with an effort to find a vehicle to Community leaders attrib- members of the House and fund National PAL programs uted the peace to an unprece- Senate regarding the Crime and eventually to funnel the dented number and variety of Bill which recently passed, money down to the local PALs. programs ranging from the The PAL delegation met The PAL delegation was presence of 13 California with 22 Congressmen, very well received and the trip ~ Highxvay Patrol officers in Senators, and representatives was very successful. Further colloquia o~ ~^a[ ~4 of the Department of Health meetings will be scheduled.· Bal[ersfield PAL- Another New Member! Submitted by Lt. Neil Mahan, Bakersfield PAL Tyo e Bakersfield PAL, The boxing matches also rmed in May of this attracted a number of on-duty ear, is off to a fast o~cers who dropped by to see start. Officers Chad Jackman the show and encourage the and Greg Jehle organized par- kids. Patrol Sgt. Jess Molinar ents, kids and staff of the Ora who dropped by between calls Vista Housing Project into a was so impressed with Ricky team that has reclaimed an Beltran's "heart and skill" that unused recreation center, and he wanted to buy Ricky boxing formed boxing and cheerlead- shoes for the upcoming state ing teams. PAL tournament Christi McGill, police cadet Wow! From May to July, and former cheerleader, held a the Bakersfield PAL is on a summer cheerleading camp at fast track to a successful part- the PAL center for girls ages 8 nership of kids, police officers, - 14. The "Blazing Blades" and community supporters. put on quite a show during the Many individuals have con- intermission of our first spar- tributed to this new partner- ring demonstration on July 29, ship, but without the help of 1994. California PAL, we would still Coaches Jackman and be months away from deliver- Jehle had the boxing team in ing needed services to our great form for a crowd of about community's youth. To all the 100 at Martin Luther King Jr. staff at California PAL, my Park. Boxers ages 9-17 personal thanks and pledged sparred in 9 bouts that had support for the best juvenile the crowd roaring. PAL direc- crime prevention program in tops were on hand to present the state of California. · medals to each boy participat- ing. Volunteerism was evi- dent everywhere from police ~. cadets manning the sot~ drink stand to the Bakersfield Police Spouses Association in the .i ..... . : food booth. Boxer Sterling Ensley (age 12), gets instructions from officer Chad Jackman Bakersfield PAL Blazing Blades Cheerleaders: Front- Michelle Willis, Ashley McGill, Laura Olivares, Cindy Lozano Officer Kevin Legg, and boxer ~not shownJ. Back- Nicole Ochoa, Felicia Willis, C~,stal Sepeda, Wendy Lozano. Harold Bonner (age 9). Bakersfield PAL Boxers Duke It Out Condensed from the Bakersfield Californian By Marc Benjamin O n Friday, July 29, 1994, really proud of these kids. nice the way they extended it. "Blazing Blades" cheerleading families, friends and They worked hard and showed It will keep him offthe street." squad, which performed dur- boxing fans filled the up every day". Ten~2 Robbins watched his ing intermission at the boxing bleachers at the Martin The Bakersfield PALbegan nephew John Taylor fight, event, and a three-on-three Luther King Jr. Recreation a boxing program during the "His mom didn't want him to basketball league at Martin Center Gymnasium. They summer in. what once was an doit, but I thought it would be Luther King Jr. Park. came to watch the Bakersfield unused OroVista housing pro- good for him. It's a disci- Additionally, PAL will work PAL boxers, ages 8 - 17, ject storage building. In that pline-type thing, and since the on an educational mentoring square off. The $2 per ticket South Robinson Street build- Police Department was program called "Wings" for proceeds would help pay the ing, the young pugilistic talent involved, I knew they would youngsters beginning in the young boxers' way to a is being honed by Bakersfield not only teach him to fight, but winter.~ California PAL Boxing police officers and a team of sportsmanship, too. They can Tournament in Stockton, young coaches. . shake hands after a good fight ~ ~i where they would meet other The program is gaining and be friends after it's over," young PAL boxers from across momentum. Other parents on he said. '~ey are boxing w~th ' the s~ate, the east side of Bakersfield are other kids they might have ~ ~' It was a win-win situation waiting to get their children fought anyway, and they are for all the boxers in the tour- involved. Seated with his still friends at~rward." nament, since each was 8-year-old son Darwl, Bruce Bakersfield PAL is also awarded a gold medal follow- Hollis said he is impressed by involved in several other activ- ing the bouts. Office Chad the boxing program. "In the ities; a baseball league that Jackman, who helped train next round, I am going to get they want incorporated into ~; the young boxers, said, "I am him involved in it. I think it's the PAL program, the California PAL Fighters Have An Open-Air Experience I n front of approximately It's good for us, and it's good 800 fight fans, young box- for those kids. It gives them a ers from all over the state venue." competed in the 1994 Winners of the California California PAL Boxing PAL Boxing Tournament i~ Tournament at the Stockton Stockton will represent the ~ Open Air Mall on September state at the National PAL 24-25, 1994. Championships in Kansas More than 70 boxers from 8 City in late October. PAL member cities competed The winners in the Open in the event. Boxers came category are: Shawn from East Los Angeles, Beenblossom, Joey Garcia, Bakersfield, Napa, Oxnard, Jose Navarro, Edgar Jasso, Long Beach, Modesto and Larry Mosley, Alejandro South Lake Tahoe. Stockton, Rodriquez, Octavio the host PAL, also had 4 box- Hernandez, Andres Bravo, ers. Michael Chavez and Javier Frank Dobales, boxing Gonsalez. ~ .... coach for Stockton PAL, said, Winners in the Novice cate- "It's history for us. This is the gory are: Ruben Ambriz, .?: first time we have hosted Michael Tate, John Dickerson something like this. It's an andDavidVansteon.~ honor to work with California PAL on something l/ke this." Ed Barkett, an owner of the Stockton Open Air Mall where the event was held, said, 'We think it's a great opportunity to bring people out to the mall.