HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/16/95 BAKERSFIELD
MEMORANDUM
June 16, 1995
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ALAN TANDY,~ITY ~ANAGEtA~
SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION
1. So far, it has not appeared that the modest Wastewater rate increase
contained in the budget will be controversial. In order to get that going
for July, it needs to be initiated now, otherwise we miss a months
collection, thus reducing the revenue collected from the rate increase. We
will, preliminarily, put it in the computer system for the July billing.
In the meanwhile, if you have any problem or anticipate making a motion
relative to not allowing that rate increase in Wastewater,' please let me
know. I am assuming that the absence of questions or comments on it means
that it is non-controversial.
2. This is a reminder that I will be out of the office Friday, June 16th, and
Monday and Tuesday, June 19th and 20th. John Stinson will be in charge
during my absence. I can be contacted through Andrea or John, in the event
of an emergency.
3. A copy of possible budget adjustments that we have assembled as a result of
Council comments during the hearing process is enclosed for your
information. We are sending this out early so you can review and see if
i.t, in fact, does comply with the comments made during the various
hearings. This could be incorporated in the budget through a motion on
June 28th, if it is in accordance with your wishes. Again, please let me
know if there are additions or changes you would like to see in advance of
that session.
4. The information seems to change weekly on the "BAKERSFIELD" sign. Now, we
get higher costs estimates from CalTrans to repair it, in the $90,000
range, and the on-again, off-again contribution of $20,000 from the owner
seems to be on. A memo from David Lyman summarizing the June 13th
community meeting is enclosed for your information.
5. The tax split discussions are continuing with the County along a positive
line. While all issues are not yet resolved, I would guess that we are
about 75% of the way there in terms of getting an agreement. It has been
a substantial improvement since the new CAO took over.
6. Responses to Councilmember inquiries and referrals are enclosed regarding
severance of 17th, 18th and 19th Streets from Union Avenue, and the
acquisition of the Senior Center site.
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
June 16, 1995
Page -2-
7. We re'ceived a nice "thank you" letter from John Q. Hammons. It is enclosed
for your information.
8. Enclosed is a letter from the Kern County Commission on Aging regarding the
Kern County Elder Abuse Prevention Council.
9. Two Council meetings ago, the Casa Royale complained about City inspectors
and the matter was referred to my office. The investigation showed
horrible life safety, health and other Code problems at Casa Royale, which
have worsened after requested by inspectors to correct problems. Photos
are available through Gall Waiters if you are interested. Enforcement
action there is critical.
10. Enclosed is a memo from Public Works giving a status report on the Brown &
Caldwell studies and an update on the Calloway Drive project.
AT. al b
Enclosures
cc: Department Heads
Trudy Slater
Carol Williams
BAKERSFIELD
MEMORANDUM
June 15, 1995
TO: HOI~ORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: GAI~AITERS, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: BUI~GET WORKSHOPS - COUNCIL SUGGESTED ADJUSTMENTS
Attached is an itemized listing of budget adjustments suggested by Council during the
1995/96 Budget Workshop Sessions. Staff has identified funding sources for the items
listed should the Council approve the adjustment list in its entirety. Staff is prepared to
respond to additional questions or investigate alternatives regarding individual items as
necessary.
cc: City Manager
SUGGESTED FY 1995-96 PROPOSED BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
DEPARTMENT ADJUSTMENT AMOUNT FUNDING NOTES
Fire Department Two above ground fuel tanks
sites to be determined by fuel needs assessment $24,000 General Fund
ED/CD Permanent, full time Graffiti employee to replace
temporary employee (Total salary is $48,000) $8,200 General Fund
Public Works Reinstate two Street Maintainer positions
(Salary per position $29,200) $58,400 General Fund
Community Svcs. Additional funding for the Kern River Parkway Project $50,000 General Fund (In addition, $29,000 of
94-95 funds will be
carried over to 95-96)
Water Resources Installation of wood slat fencing, irrigation and
landscaping along canal at Corporation Yard $32,100 Ag Water
Public Works Jewetta/Brimhall Signal CIP project (design only) $10,000 Gas Tax (Warranted in 97-98)
Legislative Increase Council Car Allowance
7 members x $1750 $12,300 General Fund (6/14/95 City Council
action)
Police Department Add a Traffic Sergeant/supervisory position $79,100 General Fund
Police Department Increase in booking fees $25,000 General Fund (In addition to budget
of $675,000 in 95-96)
TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS $299,100
RECOMMENDED REVENUE SOURCES
DEPARTMENT SOURCE AMOUNT
Non-Departmental Reduce Council Contingency from
$392,000 to $235,000 $157,000
ED/CD Reduce the amount budgeted for Redevelopment
Project Area studies, General Fund portion $50,000
Water Resources Reduce Ag Water Fund Balance $32,100
Executive Reduce Facility Replacement Reserve
from $2.25 million to $2.2 million $50,000
Public Works Reduce Gas Tax Fund Balance $10,000
TOTAL AVAILABLE REVENUE $299,100
ADJUSTMENTS HIGHER/(LOWER) THAN REVENUES
6/151954:45 PM ENHANCE. XLS
I 5 1995
BAKERSFIELD L '
: CITY rvl/:\NAGEFVS ¢3FF~C"
Economic and Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
June 14, 1995
TO: Alan Tandy .
FROM: David Lyma~9'L~
SUBJECT: Bakersfield Inn sign meeting
This is a summary of the June 13 community meeting I moderated to provide Caltrans input
regarding the future of the Bakersfield Inn Sign:
The issue: The structure is private property that does not meet current safety standards.
Because it crosses a state highway, it poses a liability to the state of California. Due to the
recent Loma Prietta and Northridge earthquakes, Caltrans is reviewing structures that cross
state highways. Responsibility for the safety of the structure rests with the property owner,
not Caltrans nor the city.
The comments: Fourteen individuals made comments offering various thoughts. The
comments were overwhelmingly positive and offered in the spirit of providing Caltrans relief
from the liability of an unsafe structure over their roadway while offering the owner
suggestions for the future. A sampling...
· the owner of the Tejon Theater will donate the Tejon as a site for a
fundraising location. He suggested the Tejon Theater Foundation could be the
entity to coordinate efforts regarding the sign.
· people at this meeting are willing to volunteer with fundraising, construction,
and other efforts.
· the community has formed the Fox Theater Foundation to support another
asset of Bakersfield. There is enough support here tonight to form a similar
effort on behalf of the structure.
· people are complaining that government does too much already. Private
citizens should do this without looking to government for help.
· if the sign cannot remain, move it to the proposed riverwalk.
· make the sign a memorial to former Supreme Court Chief Justice (and
Bakersfield native) Earl Warren.
· move it to the Kem County Museum. If everyone in Bakersfield contributed
$1, enough funds could be raised.
· why doesn't Caltrans want to help?
Alan Tandy
June 14, 1995
Page Two
· Caltrans always pays full price for everything. Could private parties provide
the structural analysis for a lower cost?
Caltrans encouraged residents to voice their views to the City Council about their wishes.
The audience: Those in attendance included, · Councilmember Irma Carson
· Virginia Moorhouse, Publisher, Bakersfield Californian
· Diane Hardisty, Editorial Page Editor, Bakersfield Californian
· Judy Salamacha, Future Bakersfield
· Richard Prado and Mary Helen Barro, Human Relations Commission
· Shirlyn Davenport, Chair, Historic Preservation Commission
· Scott Hudlow, Historic Preservation Commission
· Bruce Keith, architect
· Wilson Call, the architect who designed the structure in 1949
The owner: The Bakersfield Inn site is two separate properties divided by Union Avenue.
Dr. Girish Patel owns the property on the east side (formerly Bakersfield Senior Village)
which includes the overcrossing. Dr. Patel stated he would donate the sign to the city or
another entity once it has been brought up to safety standards. If the property owner donates
the structure to another entity, Caltrans would prefer it be an entity of substance that would
not disappear overnight.
The next step: Caltrans officials offered approximately 90 days for the community to show
an effort is being made to bring the structure up to safety standards. If there is no such
progress, Dr. Patel will be required to remove the sign. Dr. Patel has offered $15,000 toward
preserving the structure.
The question: Every aspect about the structure's future hinges on the question, "how much
will it cost?" The answer rests on conducting a structural analysis. After the meeting,
Caltrans asked me if the city would consider sharing the cost with Caltrans of hiring an
independent consultant to perform a structural analysis. Caltrans estimates the total cost of
such an analysis to be around $20,000.
dlfokrsfld.inn
JohnQHammons
June 12, 1995
Mr. Alan Tandy, City Manager
City of Bakersfield
City Hall
1501 Truxton Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Dear Alan:
Thank you, thank you, thank you for all th~ coi3pefatiofi and courtesies extended when
we visited your city last week. Before I say another word, you are to be complimented
for your leadership and serious interest to finish d~e hotel. Your city is certainly the
benefactor and we have appreciated the opportunity to make the hotel project a reality.
We will try our utmost to grant proper management and w~th the continued help of the
city we think it can be successful. We have not placed any orders yet for an armored
car but will try everything in the book to increase sales and make this hotel profitable.
You wi!! recall that.~t first glan.';'_e that ! qt,.esti, o~ed the ~arket's depth for a major
hotel. We will wait and see and make every effort possible to make everything
successful for both of us.
With very cordial good wishes and kindest regards, I am .~.,;~
Very sincerely yours, ..~
JQH:sr ~::~
TH~E~ HUNDreD
JOHN Q. HAMMONS PKWY.
SUITE NiNE HUNDRED
SPRINGFIELD. MISSOURI 65806
417-864-4300 FAX 864-8900
MEMORANDUM
June 7, 1995
TO: RAUL ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
/ !
FROM: JACK HARDISTY, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIREC~
/ ~,
SUBJECT: SEVERANCE OF 17TH, 18TH & 19TH STREETS FROM I)~NION
AVENUE
/
During a recent neighborhood meeting Councilwoman DeMond was asked if the city could sever
17th, 18th and 19th Streets from Union Avenue to discourage prostitution in that area. I have
informed her that a traffic study would need to be conducted which would consider several items.
A copy of that memo was forwarded to you earlier. She asked that I forward her request to do
the traffic study to you so she could understand the feasibility of those closures individually
and/or in combination.
JH:pjt
cc: Alan Tandy, City Manager
m~'nrr6.7
BAKERSFIELD
Economic and Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
June 12,1995
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager
FROM: George Gonzales,~'~unity Development Coordinator
II
SUBJECT: Information reque~d by Councilmember Salvaggio
Attached is the information requested by Mr. Salvaggio concerning the Bakersfield
Senior Center site acquisition. If you have any questions, please call this office at
326-37641
JUN 15 ~
Im:GG14~ANDY.MEM ~
C~TV MANAG~ OFF~CE-
BA_,.G.,uu;,D: Az a result cf rat'!ur ye,irs Ci. ti::en Ad;,zst~ry,,ho~,';,',t'.., .... ~,...s dur.~ng t!eveiooz:e::~.
of the Cen;~:nJty =~vo.~o2sm~nt B.lsck Grant applicarion, a concern was r.~ised for t?stab!ish-
,~nt cf a s_n~..,r center wlth.~n t.~'~., ....... mi~u of tJaket'sffe3c~ To acco;n~,:~date the
sucJ~ a facility, the City's 197S-79 CDBG oppi~c:ation included $30,000
~:tudu. to ~o.rov~''~,~. in.for~:~t'Jon am to acce.~s_ibJl.fty, uses, si~.,.,,..,t.~','~ locaCign
sites, ~t:hods of,",~;'nt_na.,~r. -~"~ ~nd '~"'-' :' .. , · ·.,,
~c:~3!b.~t:u Th.~s was intended flo be done
........~h~ r',~ .... ty ~.,'J:lct h~td budgeted $40,000 ~'Or t)>., ~e~nt project.
AC 'tho City Council.....,..t ,;n~.,.,, ~f... .~e~..,,~,,,~-y 7, 1979,. Ceuncil ,:~>:)rovcd.~
' b~C;~een Countu of Korn, City of r,-l., .... ~; ~4
, .............. ~ .....and ~uad. Con'~ultar;t.,;. . , Inc'2
phase of tho s~:.id9, and sent it to County Bo.it'd of Super'visors loc ,'~.?tion. 7'~e
u~'".pe.:.'-',/.....,_;~,'~ op~'.~d,..., not to ,%xec..~e t,he.uropc,:;ed ,,,,.~..,e~-'..,...,.,.,,-,~ nnd i~ :,':ts r~:~urrle,'[ to tko
for ,' ~' ,,~-:' -
Ser;,:~ces , · - ~ , '
recc,,m~c,.c, ud th.'~t this n:~ter l~ "~ ...._ . .,r-.
-- ,. ~.~cr,.,..u to the Cito arid County
t.~._ adviser;~ene and u.Zt.z;:v~tc~u b~ broucght back to Cour. c~ witk
...........,~.~, ,:~ct'.ion Suhse:Tuc'nulu,~ stnff formed a Senior C,.n
h.::~v~ been ou~]n to all in~ ,,- .'.
.. ............ ~.'er .10 p .......... have pa¢'ticip~ated in '~ work
of thc Task Force.
DTSCUSSiOL': The initial questions t'h.qt the Task Force investigated during
h~.ar~ngs Jnclud:?,i tke fo!to~;zn=.7:
1] Preferred !oc.'~Jon r)f a senior center t~ sc. rye t~,_e ~'id~:'i~' people of
2) Se.~g~c,'s and acCivit.iu:; to br~ ~v.~i.ln);lu 0t the C~.r~~ ·
:~yor l:',~:'t ,~ -2- 10/1/79
City Council
in r,:cos, nition that a senior center should be locate.'.! sc. that it ~¢ill principally
benefit low and moderate inco~ persons and :,'.fll be acctms~ble to al~ elderly residents
of ~h,~ City (see at.~ached), and be developed ~,'ithin an azea vcid of this type of facilitu,
the Task Force determined that: Census Trac~_ 20 (bounded -,~".~ Ca!ffornia Avenue, C]~ester
Avenue, Union A?enue and ,' .... ~-c~ , - ·
D,u ....... ~c f.~ne) ;s ti'~e ~¥)st fea.sib~e area for a sen~or center;
~wever, if circumstances turn out th~)t =ce cannot find a rcasona~le site in that tract
(20), thnt thc next ~st feasible area be consideued.
~zring the.~'e del~borat.~ons, consiSoration ~,'as giw?n to sc,%oe~ buildings that soon
~2y ~ a'~af~able. . - for ocher use. Tho T.as.% Force _~.~l~ev~ ...... that it 2s' ~e~s~ ~ costly to
ucouire, nnd renodcl an avai.~able ~c'~ol~' bui~d;~,.7., than to construct a new facil,~ty for
. ..n.o .... d on oI~ ~{,~ a~,]l_aD3 ....... 5 of a :'~ch~i building '~s expect:~d by
Jac:uary, 1990. Th:~ Tnsk Force also considers a.u a favorable site a 2.2 acre parcel of
land at the north:cost corner of Fourth and "P" Streets.
. rJ.,o., w~t'n Lhc sor~'.tco a2'e.~ end :;lz~ of tile "- '~'
. ,~o~n Hnkersf~.eld ReCreation
and Par.t~ District's Senioz' Adult CenteZ, the Tns% Force considers a m~nimum size of
senior cantor loc t,%e Ci'~., J.s lO,O00 :,'quare foot.
. oo ..... ~.~_., and activities co~:rz, n so a se:2.zoz- ccnteu ~.,'ere reviewed by
Tas]c Force. A pD~~ .;:l~dic.'ated that the nr~st p'":,.Tulnr ,..~.'~ t,,:.'", bet ~'cngz.'e,p~ce ~eal
;'olt~:~teer sorv.iccs and t)u'ii't shop oz' similar :.:.~es p.co:;:otion activities also rated
T~e costs e[ ad:niniste.l'ing senior centaur se~rvYces and activities and o6 facility
~ ...... ~o~ also wore co:~sJ, der~d ~.:y t]~c Task Force. ' '
osti;m~ted ~o he in excess of~,-~°c_~, 000. It also was o.stin;~t,~u' tha'. t~p to 75:~ of these
costs could be co~.c, re,3 by ,lupropriate arran~Te~;c, nCs k%~ CETA fi'~-~
· . - ....... ~ personnel and with
a nutrition grantee agency of ~,,', Calif'ornic~ '..,u ....
t'~..uor i,'art ~ -3- 10/1/79
C~y Counci~
AECOM,'.L:::';DATiON: The ~',]sk Force recom.-,~a, nds that the Cit[.! enJ. orse its
ation reg,:~rding th~? most !:easible area fez' a z:en£or cont~:z nnd authorize its
~:'ith the as$istancO of tho. Ta.uk ~:b,.'ce, to con~.~nu(? wlth Phn.,;e II of th)]s project by
1) u~a?cing a [:',ore precise site se!~:.ction in su£f~cient ti:::u 6or the project to be
~ncluded ~n Ehe City's I.~$0-$i Co,mmunity Development hu(']get, 2) considering pmte;',sia!
opera:ting agenzies ang means o~ administering, m~intaining and operating a senior
center, 3) determing services and activities to be provided, and 4) preparing a
preli,minarg design for the development of the pre£eured site.
,' ~'1 ~C.";,'
Apri~ 7, 1980
...........................................................
TO ~
~' -]~C~F'ecen't Sen~or Ta~' Force~et~ng
SU~, c / ' ' . . ~Z .............. ~'.u..~.c~ ..............................................................................................
On Thursday, April 3, 1980 the Senior Citize. n Task Force n;eC in the
Managers' Conference room. In attendence were Tom Folson, Department of
Age, Nancy Riely, Elenor Maxwell, Elinor Salacho, Geraldine Bradley, all
from KCEOC, Matthew LeGrant Kern County CD, Vicki Araujo, Geneva Burns and
Laura Henry seniors from the com_~.,unity.
Eleanor Maxwell, in an ~ttempt to gather inform,~tion on other Senior
Agenuies that have had a Senior Center constructed invited Mary J~ne
Thompson, the Director of 'the Senior Services Corporation (SSC) in
Stockton .toattend our meeting to give an overview of the problems that
they encountered in building their center. SSC submitte¢i for EDA grant
to help in the construction of the center. The City and County both pro-
-vided matching' funds, however no adP. dnistration or maintenance funds .are
provided by the local jurisdictions.
The 'Kern County CD staff n~e:~:bez. ;:,as asked if the (bunty st~!i planned
on contribution to the development of t~,~c· proposed Ba'.,cersfie!d Center.
The task force ~:,as told that only when an operatu~on agency was designated
to run the center, would the Counuy be in a position to allocate funds
from the C¢,unty 1982-83 Block Grant Application ::d~ich is the beginnJpg
of the next 3-year plan. Since there was ~o request for funds for a Senior
Center during the beginning of the first 3-year plan the County said we
would haw? to wa.Jr. However, i~: is the City Staff intention that when an
operating agency is designated the Board of Supervisor be contacted to
provide assistance from the County for development of t~.~e Center.
It was brought up to the Task Forces that on,?. of the major hurdles
thac is still rem,~ining was that an ope',_'ating ag(;.ncy (KCEOC) has not
officially offered to run the center. Since if: is their organization who
has initiated and organized the seniors to get the City to develop the
center~ F, leanor Maxwell (KCEOC) requested that the KCEOC Board of Director
be inforn~d that funds are available to develop a Senior facility if an
operating agency was willing to contract with the City to run the center.
Staff will be attending the KCEOC Board meeting of April 16, 1980 to see
if an offical comJnittment could be secured. Sometime during that .day we
should get together ~'o discuss what we should tell the Board.
Richard Russe!l ta!k~d both to Jim Gi!c'nrist ; and George Gonzales on
Friday 4-4-80, to reemphasize that the city manager position is that
co~:.struction of the Senior Center would only be considered if an operating
agency were found'and that '.tho County Would contribute .~'ow~'rd the idevel'~pment
of the center.
,~other area of concern was that the Cou;~ty shoul,2 also ~gree to shars
tho cost of operating the center if that responsibilit.q ever came back to
the City.
cc Richard RUssell
~-~,. POOR OR!GINA~. ,
~L~other area of concern ~,as that the Co~:nty shoul(T also agree to shars
tho cost of operating the center if that responsibility ever c;.u~e back to
the City.
cc Richard Russell
t, la~ 30,
SUB.IECT a.:n~or Center Progress R,~port :,, c
BA~K.oROb~D ' ' "" ....
T, ,. Senior Citizen Can.er Ta
:,r, f:Ol"Ce V/tiS
,uh,..u ~o assist the Con~nun~ty Development
scarf to de'velop a senior center program as part of the Co~nmuni~'' Dr. veio~ment Blonk
Grant prooram.~ The n~[,~--~.,.~,~e o'f the :~tudy is to previde n~.]cessary information as to
the feasibility, accessibility, uses, size, location of available sites, methods
maintenance and design.
At the.[r[ober. . 3, 1379 City Council ~en~'ing, .... ,?,',~r,~ss,~.:~,~.. ..... } ..... ~l was suem~.~.~, for
'l:he Ceuncil's co~sideration and reco:u:uendat'ions. As part of Pi]ese [,-'the general
location was.idenl:i 'ri ed, (Census Trac~ 20---bo~.nde(. by California Aw]nue,.Chester
AVeI1UO r:., ~-, -, , ·
, ~,tdn(,.~qu Lane and Union Avf.':nue) nnd cne types, of services am'J activit'~,']
to be available at
tnt. Center. lt. was the ~...-n,'~',~,-,,~..,.,.,~, of the Task Force tha~.'the
activities would inc'l,,,~,,
.... ,: a hot. congregate me,~t program, first aid, outreach, rcc~ re-
etlon and social activities.
The Task Force wns also av~aiting the cle!:(?~u~t~.:':tion From the ~.~tke,'~;'Field School
~istrict as to whether am,'..., school, sites were ..~chedule,:l to be clo,~,:.d.and would be
available to Lhe City to ~,',,'~' · "
~o~,,ct~ to a Senior Citizer~ ~ac'ilii:y.
The findings of ~l~e Task Fo~',-~ ~.,ot-~: endorsed hy ~'lm (:ouqr:~ r~r, P""~ber. ~ '17a The
'Coamunity~,~,n,",'e]opment_, staff, was also authorized, with Ithe ..... n~is'--,~.,,~,, of the Task" ~-~
to continue w~th Pi~ase 2 by. 1) '~"' a .... ,,' '-~ '
~. ,~:, nlli'] IliOn'r,[,, ecl.,:, site .sqlc. ctlr~n; 2) conside','
potential , ~ ,~' . ' '. .... '
· o~)~:r~,~inq adenc:es 'and n~eans, of ad;tini~'e~ng r~nd [:~aintaining'-a- Center; ......
3} det,,:..,,,~'ning service::, and activil:i~::; to be .~)rnvid~d', and 4) preparing preliminary
design for the develop,.~'~ent of the preferred site.
SITE ~'~ ~ ' ....
The Community Development staf'f investioated a,,ail-~" ' ~,-
ao,e sites in and around CT 20.tn<.~
could ac(:c.m:uodate the proposed 'facili'[y ia i0,000 sq. fL. building and required par~,"~,ngl..
Nine... sites were ]d...n~fied and members of the Task Force s~,','~.,y,_d ~ the si=~-'~, to dn~'-.~,=r.,
which sit:.o~ ~ would be the most appropriate. The criteria used rot' the selection of
most approl)t:iate site, in order of importance a~'e-
l. Minimum of two acres
2, Favorable environment
3 Acc,.s~]b~e to Public 'rransportat:on
4 Accessible by existing road systfJ:l kin:, or .....
and freeway for private vehicle ................ ~ 1 .
,, .pOop ORtGiNAL.: i
5. Close to nl,~ri:eting and other public services
6. Close to housing for tile elderly
7. Additional land available adjacent to site for expansion ._
8. blinimal a~ount of displace~,~ent
9, Reasonable cost
The Task Force, in reviewing the availnble sitt~s at thi~," t~n~,,, has e:N~',.ablished a prioril:,/
~.u.:,. ~taff i~as contacted the field ~e~.~::,._n~a~ive from the Depart-
merit of Housing and Urban Development in an atte~nF, t to develop a procedm-e to e:<pe~ite
obtaining the necessary funds to negotiate an option for the site to be developed.
The most appropriate site selected by ~h. Task Force is identified on the map supplied
to the commi
~ee. Other sites inspected are not as accessible and are too renote from
.m~rketing and other public services.
Staff concurs with this selection and.ror'"~'"...~.~.~ authorization to proceed to acquire and
develop it as a senior center.
POi'EblT iAL OPF:RAT ING AGEfl(: iES
lhe Km'n Cc. unty Econo~:~ic Opportunity Corporation (~:[:EO£) currently provides social and
nutritional services for senior c-i'Lizen'.; in Bnk~.;r~,~:ield and other co~muni~ies in the
~.ounty. i'his agency has been the only one, to dai. e, thaL t~fiq expressed an interest in
r],.,..~¢~ng the senior r:[mter. :,' '~'~ q c,;'ri-,-ntl underway to develop
a mutual u~derstanding of the obligations involved and reousrces available to assure
their fuifi!
Futu~-e progress reparts will idenLify the e:<Lent of these oSli,jations and related
resources, the extent of services and activities~ that. sho~.~ld be provided at ~he
ft~cility, and site develop~lent proposal.
The Task F¢:'co reco;-n:~!e?,ds th[',t the City Co~mcii ~,,?','~,~ , ....
u .... u,.~. the +'~om~nendntion that ~:"
niost app~"opriate site (priority one) provides the n~cst c~pl~orLunitie:~-for the senior
facility and that st~.',ff be auti~orized i:o investig~te options on priority One to be
developed as a senior ce~ter. Also, authorize staff wiLh the assistance of the Task
Force to continue with Phase 2 of this project by: !) finalizing thc operati~io
a~encies and ~,~.,ns'~ of administerinq. .... ~,aintaini~v,u and o[.~r, rat~n~.. ~ the senior cenLer-,
2) preparing i),-,~lin~inary desinn for the ' ,.~ ,-~--.~t of e ~. , '
3) proceedin,] ~vith necessary environ~i:ental review for
~...GG: g 1 p
POOP. ORIGINAL
,.h~, ~. :".ii:..' ,~. ' ~/
'" I/ l~ ~, 0
h ....
TO: " ' '~ ..... "
,',f opera~in,~ and mair,~.~i ,'; Li'~ i.mopo':,::d '" ' ' '~) '
. . '- .~:~,~or ':.;L~'....~.,., Cer~'~q".. .. . an'.:l ~
Tl~e (t(.,~',':'~ "~ ' ' ~ ,. "'
'.,",'' ~'~,c;''''i'--~'" -~.:~ ' ' Y:~rr .
, ~ .. , , ....... · _ CL'l~'
. ~,j ,:, .,~L]~ion on t.h~s 'e ...... in ~.i,~:~,_~,.-, ........ '.'t~,,,,-.~. '~- ~hL ' ..
' ' ~," h..,¢e t.o b,~
~z d,'" ' ...... ~ ~ . . '-
..:~a~]ed '" "; ' ' ·
~,. L~':f: "r'~""Ofi~'(t ~:~¢(}t' '"':"'
al)prais~'.is n,;)c~e '' "",'".",' '.' 'to .
.1. Motion Lo receive the report
2. Motion t.o aut!:ori;~[? sl.a'ff Lo q'.'.(:ure l:u'np~rty .]ppra'~sa!s; and
' '~,"' ' ' thor'izi
· ~L~ the o]',f~'r,';t'] ,? or,]an~za ha%
:. acqufF.~ Lion olllv c]ft-,- '
chosen for Lhr,.on' .... ~:, .
James J.
POOR ORIGINAL
'Senior Center p.roject
The sites under consideration are located at the southeast and south-
west corner of Brundage Lance and "P" Street, within an unincorporated
area'of South Central Bakersfield, 1.5 miles south of the Civic Center
and central downtown business district.
Freeway 58 is located directly to the south, with on-offramps at
Chester Avenue, one-half mile to the west; and South Union Avenue, one-
half mile to the east. Brundage Lane serves as a major four lane arterial
through~the area, with South "P" as a secondary connector.
The parcels are surrounded by Census Tracts 20.00 and 26.00. The
latter tract is located within the city limits; whereas the easterly
portion of the former census tract is located within an unincorporated
a rea.
According to the Kern County Planning Department, population
figures for these census districts are summarized as follows:
1970 Special Tentative
Census Tract Census 1977 Census 1980 Census
20.00 4,865 4,827 5,409
26.00 3,115~ 2,883 2,740
Total 7,980 7,710 8,149
During.the ten-year period, population increased in Census Tract
20.00 and declined in Census Tract 26.00. Population increase within
Census Tract 20.00 Was primarily a result of apartment construction;
whereas an Older population base is evident in Census Tract 26.00,
with a declining number of persons per household.~'~ !
Median income and ag~ figures a~e not available from the 1980 Census
at this time an~, therefore, a comparative study.could not be made.
An upward trend in population within in Census Tract 20.00 appears to
be indicative of new apartment construction and a younger population base.
This trend is anticpated to continue during the foreseeable future.
.~. The surrounding physical environment includes commercial retail
services and light industrial uses, which are centered on Brundage Lane,
Chester Avenue and Union Avenue, due to heavy traffic volume. Safeway
Market is located at the northeast corner of Brundage Lane and Chester
Avenue,. There are a Bank of America~branch office and a Lloyd's Bank
branch office located within two blocks of the intersection of Brundage
Lane and Chester Avenue. B.S.& E. Company, Inc., equipment rental service,.
is located at the northeast corner of Brundage Lane and "L" Street.
Several automotive service-related businesses are located on the south
side of Brundage Lane, east of Chester Avenue.
Older residences and vacant land predominate to the east of "L"
Street toward Union Avenue. Exceptions include commercial service-
related buslnesses. Single family and multi-residential uses predominate
north and south of Brundage Lane...
The trend within the area is classed as gradually upward as a result
of increased residential construction north of Brundage Lane, within proxim-
ity of the central business district. During the foreseeable future, in-
creased concentrations of apartments are anticipated for this area.
Older residences are gradually being converted to offices and
commercial service space to the west along the north and south sides
of Brundage Lane. This~trend is expected to continue. Considerable
vacant acreage, located between "P" Street and Union Avenue, on the
south side of Brundage Lane, is anticipated to be developed for commer-
cial service and light industrial uses, due to its proximity to Freeway
58.
Proximity to Freeway 58 and the major arterials of Brundage Lane,
Chester Avenue and Union Avenue is favorable for circulation and access-
ibility to public· transportation. However, it is recognized that it
also creates a~potential noise nuisance.- The Kern County Health Depart-
ment has monitored the site for noise measurements and inquiries have
been directed-to Caltrans about constructing a noise barrier between the
freeway and the site.
The neighborhood is clearly fully developed and all necessary
public improvements and utility services are presently provided. Existing
structures on the site are generally minimal, although residences are
present. However, owners have expressed a willingness to sell and there-
fore, no.major dislocation would occur. · With the exception of a single
septic tank, all structures are connected to sewer service. That single
septic tank would be. abandoned and sealed prior to construction.
Probably the most unfavorable aspects of the proposed action are
those associated·with construction of a .10,OOO square foot structure and
accompanying services during the three to four month construction period.
· Those aspects would include ·inCreased noise, traffic disruption, possible
neighborhood disruption, storm water contamination and air contamination.
Generally, however, these possible effects are not deemed significant.
Increased·noise in the immediate area~and some traffic disruption in the
streets adjacent to the site will occur temporarily during the construction
period. Waste water and storm water run-off will enter municipal
facilities and will be d'ischarged into either canals or the Kern River
Channel and will eventually percolate into the ground. The impact of trace
elements, such as-oils and possibly nitrates, is considered not significant.
Increased'dust will be generated during the construction and will tempor-
arily contaminate the air. The effect will be mitigated by sprinkling
and dampening of the construction area, as will be required of the contractors.
Finally, the scale of the proposed project is so small that no secondary
effects are expected.
The topography of the two sites is classed level at grade. Soil is
classed Grad I, Cd-TD and HI-Hd.
SITE ANALYSIS
Site 2 Size Cost Structures
Parcel 1 30,400sq.ft. $125,000 2
Parcel 2 21,225 sq.ft. $ 54,000
Parcel 3 42,900 sq.ft. $ 77,000 1
Parcel 4 101,400 sq.ft. $127,000 I
Site 1
Parcel 5 22,400 sq.ft. $50,400 0
Parcel 6 25,673 sq.ft. $70,000 0
Parcel 7 7,977 sq.ft. $60,000 1
Parcel 8 8,470 sq.ft. $48,000 1
Parcel 9 7t700 sq.ft. $51,000 I
Parcel l0 8,470 sq.ft. $44,000 I
CITY Ot~ nA~<ZaSt~n~LO. C^LnL ,'~L~
PARTIAL PAYM T~QUEST
IMPOR'I'A~N'T: £nter below the data that appears in the upp~.:
Received From ..... .~...e..r..ry. McLau&.h. lin right cc, rner of the Purchase Order issued for this shipment.
Orden Number P ..... "07...2...6...5.. .............................................................
P. O. Box 3001
.......................................................................
Ac¢ou,t r~umb~ 22-79991-212-03
Quart:z H£1.1.~. GA 93534 ......................................................................................
...................................................................... city Agency ..... ..C.i...~.y.....t:.i.a..:-,?:.e_.z.e...r.._.(..G.~) ....................... .......
Delivered To ..... .G..~..?..Y......M~....N..A...G..E..R.....{..G..D..). .................. {.- Appr. :~ame .Lan&..&...Land....Tmpr. o.xzemen.i:s ..........
·.:'~' i' · ..-. ·~:' . ,
' :':?'"'7'. ..... 7"7."'. ................. :':7.~,.'.77": ......... :.:::;:2V-
' :~::: ~"7:: '7 ~'-' · ~'.- ~' './i'C~:~:~.,:?'7 :. '. ~-iZ?~:i.~,;'~.: I~I'$TIRUC-YrION$: Use this form °nly for "reporting partial
deliveries on a Purchase Order. Use the Receiving Room Copy
.... :'.: " : ' ;,:';cc.:-.'. .... .~:~;::~;-?.: of the Purchase Order for reporting'ibc final'delivery on th~
TI~iIS IS Tlll~-..__.F_!..~....A...L. .......... PARTIAL DI~'LFI/~Y REPORT ON order.
.... ' ·
· :i!:; 'i' '?/'~'.."'. : · ;~: :.:~::.~',:i:": Forward this report~' without delay to:. '. ' ; ;,i · ': .~.,...
{ [ :,.' -. ' · ,:: ..... :~-: . ' DIVISION OF AUDITING '-; .'~;. · ., ~..:
.... . :,,..,., y!:?. CITY HALL~ BAKERSFIELD, CALIF. '
' :'.F,;'? '-"7:. ~ ~ This document will constitute, the Auditor's authority to pa~
,','~:, -.: ;. :..-"7.- 'the claim for the portion of the order delivered.
' .... ' 7 5,'~" '
QuANTz'rr · .. ,- · · ..
R£C£I'WED UNIT A,~TICLE A]~D DESCRIPTION. UNIT PRICE " ':"' -" '. ' ' ":·'AMOUNT'
"~·:'.F':.'·i;ii ·"-:-. ....! .:;: ?? ·-:..
Rehab£liCation of··the Senior C£t£zen
Ceneer located at: 530 4th St:reel:, "
Bakersf£el.d, CA Tot:a: work done $283,885.00
". Deduction l0 of work dom 28,388.50
· .Total due t:o dace 255,/+96.50
· Less Previous Payments 255,496.50
Balance dte this estimate -O-
Final Pay~mnt (10%) 28,388.50
ACCc")Uix r'rq may
~otice of: Completion 10-12-83~
I certify that the items lisled above were received and checked by me on APPROVED FOR PAYMENT in accordance with terms
.ac dates indicated· Ali commodities conformed to specifications and were of above purchase order:
, good condition except as otherxvise noted. ~'~i~'-~;-e'~'~-' '
ate .:/ .. - . .... Signed ....... Receiver Pc. lc .... . ........ - ........ 7 ....
or,
F.O.e, PAINT INVOICE TERMS-. DELIVERY PROMISED ... aUOTE .Y . ' ne""! gan
- : . .. .: :}..
I ce~ify that the'items listed o~ve were received and checked bY me on the dote ~ndicated. RE~RKS: .; .. .....',.
= ~ commoditiesconformedto specifications and were in good condition except as otherwise , ,. ! ~"
Location
The site under consideration for the Senior Citizen Center is the developed
site of the Bakersfield Association for Retarded Citizen Fourth Street Facility
(530 Fourth Street), approximately 2.56 acres. Located at the northeast corner
of Fourth and "R" Streets within the City limits of Bakersfield, east of Lowell
Park. Emerson Junior High and McKinley Elementary School are developed to the
south of the site.~ .Immediately to the east is a completely fenced Kern Island
Canal which is utilized year round. The site is approximately one mile south
Of the Civic Center and the Central Downtown Business District.
Background
Based on the results of an in-house study in conjunction with a Senior Center
Task Force, Census Tract 20 has been identified as the most appropriate site.
In recognition that a senior center should be located So that it will princi-
pally benefit low and moderate income persons and will be accessible to all
elderly residents of the City and be developed within an area void of this
type of facility, Census Tract 20 would be the most acceptable area for
development. Most senior centers are being operated out of church halls,
store front buildings or multi-use facilities where the building was not
specifically designed to provide an adequate comprehensive program. Meals
are prepared 'at one location, delivered to branch centers with no designated
facility or area for seniors to identify with.
In developing a senior center, a criteria for the selection of a most appro-
priate site has been developed by the Task Force and staff, which is as
follows: 1) Accessible to public transportation; 2) Accessible by existing
road system (major street) and freeway for private vehicles; 3) Close to
marketing and banking; 4) Close to other public services and facilities;
5) Additional land available adjacent to site for expansion; 6) Minimum of
approximately two acres; 7) Favorable environment of minimal amount of
displacement.
-1-
Trend
According to the Kern County Planning Department, population figures for these
census tracts are as follows:
~'Census 1970 Special Tentative
Tract Census 1977 Census 1980 Census
20.00 4,865 4,827 5,409
An upward trend in population within Census Tract 20 appears to be indicative
of new apartment construction and a younger population base. This trend is
anticipated to continue during the foreseeable future.
The trend within the area is classed as gradually upward as a result of
increased residential construction north of Brundage Lane, within proximity
of the Central Business District. During the foreseeable future, increased
concentrations of apartments are anticipated for this area.
Site Description
Presently, the BARC facility is comprised of: l) Administration Office (7109
square feet); 2) Classroom (1172 square feet); 3) Pre-Vocation Building (8000
square feet); 4) Leisure Skill Building (former residence - 2479 square feet);
5) Pool and Enclosure (18'x36' built in pool); 6) Tank building (2123 square
feet); 7) Shop Building (5000 square feet); 8) Recycling Shop (3750 square
feet); 9) Warehouse Storage (2400 square feet).
It is anticipated that structures 7, 8 and 9 eventually will be removed (see
attachments). The remaining structures will be remodeled to serve as a nutri-
tion center for approximately 150 seniors with a commercial kitchen to prepare
approximately 500 meals, administrative offices and recreation and craft class-
rooms. No excavation will be necessary to develop the site.
Probably the most unfavorable aspects of the proposed action are those associ-
ated with remodeling of the Pre-Vocation Building and accompanying services
during the three- to four-month construction'period. Those aspects would
include increased noise, traffic disruption, possible neighborhood disruption,
storm water contamination and air contamination.
-2-
Environmental Impact
Generally, these possible effects are not deemed significant. Increased noise
in the immediate area and some traffic disruption in the streets adjacent to
the site will occur temporarily during the remodeling period. Waste Water and
storm water run-off will enter municipal facilities and will be discharged into
either canals or the Kern River Channel and will eventually percolate into the
ground. The impact of trace elements, such as oils and possible nitrates, is
considered not significant. Increased dust will be generated during remodeling
and will temporarily contaminate the air. The effect will be mitigated by
sprinkling and dampening of the construction area, as will be required of the
contractors. Finally, the scale of the proposed prOject is so small that no
secondary effects are expected.
The topography of the two sites is classed level at grade. Soil is classed
Grade 1, Cd-TD and H1-Hd.
Possible Project Modifications
As noted above, those short-term negative environmental effects are minimal
and usu'ally can be eliminated or minimized with good construction practice
and/or proper working procedure. Therefore, it is unnecessary to modify the
proposed project or its external environment in order to eliminate or minimize
any adverse environmental impacts.
Alternatives
No Project:
A. · This alternative would allow the existing situation of scattered senior
centers being operated out of buildings designed for uses other than senior
activities. No specific designated area will be established where seniors
can congregate for mutual benefits. For these reasons, the "No Project"
alternative has been determined to be unacceptable.
-3-
B. Senior centers in every census tract throughout the City would prove to
be very costly both in construction and maintenance. According to the 1974
Special Census, approximately 10% of the total population of Bakersfield are
over 65 years of age. Some areas are already serviced by a Center. Therefore,
it has been concluded that centrally located in areas that have a high concen-
tration of seniors would be more'desirable alternative.
The sites under consideration are located at the southeast and south-
west corner of Brundage Lance and "P" Street, within an unincorporated
area of South Central Bakersfield, 1.5 miles south of the Civic Center
and central downtown business district.
Freeway 58 is located directly to the south, with on-offramps at
Chester Avenue, one-half mile to the west; and South Union Avenue, one-
half mile to the east. Brundage Lane serves as a major four lane arterial
through the area, with Soulh "P" as a secondary connector.
Tile parcels are surrounded by Census Tracts 20.00 and 26.00. The
latter tract is located within the city limits; whereas the easterly
portion of the former census t:ract is located withio an unincorporated
area.
According to the Kern County Planning Department, population
figures for these census districts are sun~arized as follows:
1970 ' Special Tentative
Census Tract Census 1977 Census 1980 Census
20.00 4,865 4,827 5,409
26.00 3, ! 15 2,883 2,740
Total 7,980 7,710 8,149
During the ten-year period, population increased in Census Tract-
20.00 and declined in Census Tract 26.00. Population increase within
Census Tract 20.00 was primarily a result of apartment construction;
whereas an older population base is evident in Census Tract 26.00,
with a declining number of persons per household.
Hcdian income and age Figures arc not available From the 1980 Census
at this time and, therefore, a comoarative study could not be made.
An upward trend in population within in Census Tract 20.00 appears to
be indicative Of new apartment construction and a younger population base.
This ~rend is anticpated to continue during the foreseeable future.
The surrounding physical environment includes commercial retail
services and light industrial uses, which are centered on Brundage Lane,
Chester Avenue and Union Avenue, due to heavy traffic volume. Safeway
Market is located at the northeast corner of Brundage Lane and Chester
Avenue. There are a Bank of /Lmerica branch office.and a Lloyd's Bank
branch office located within two blocks of the intersection of Brundage
Lane and Chester Avenue. B.S.& E. Company, Inc., equipment rental service,
is located at the northeast corner of Brundage Lane and "L" Street.
Several automotive service-related businesses are located on the south
side of Brundage Lane, east of Chester Avenue.
Older residences and vacant land predominate to the east of "L"
Street toward Union Avenue. Exceptions include commercial service-
related bus-inesses. Single family and multi-residential uses predominate
north and south of Brundage Lane.
The trend within the area is classed as gradually upward as a result
of increased residential construction north of §rundage Lane, within proxim-
ity of the central business district~. During the foreseeable future, in-
creased concentrations of apartments are anticipated for this area.
Older residences are gradually being converted to offices and
con~nercial service space to the west along the north and south sides
oF Bru~dage La~e. This trend is expected to continue. Considerable
vacant acreage, located between "P" Street and Union Avenue~ on the
south side of Brundage Lane, is anticipated to be developed fo'r commer-
cial service and light industrial rises, due to its proximity to Freeway
58.
Proximity to' Freeway 58 and the major arterials of Brundage Lane,
Chester Avenue and Union Avenue is favorable for circulation and access-
ibility to public transportation. }towever, it is recognized that it
also creates a potential noise nuisance. The Kern County Health Depart-
ment has monitored the site for noise measurements and inquiries have
been directed to Caltrans about constructing a noise barrier between the
freeway and the si
The neighborhood is clearly fully developed and all necessary
public improvements and utility services are presently provided. Existing
structures on the site are generally minimal, although residences are
present. However, owners have expressed a willingness to sell and there-
fore, no major dislocation would occur. With the exception of a single
septic tank, all structures are connected to sewer service. That single
septic tank would be abandoned and sealed prior to construction.
Probably the most u~favorable aspects of the proposed action are
those associated with construction of a 10,O00 square foot structure and
accompanying services during the three to four month construction period.
Those aspecLs would i~clude increased noise, traffic disruption, possible
ne~ighborhood disruption, storm water contamination and air contamination.
Gel~er.-311y, however, these possible effects are not deemed significant.
Increased noise in the immediate area and some traffic disruption in tile
streets adjacent to the site will occur temporarily during the construction
period. Waste water and storm water ru~-off will enter municipal
facilities and will be discharged into either canals or tile Kern River
Channel and will eventually percolate inLo the ground. The impact of trace
ele~l~ents, such as oils and possibly nitrates, is considered not significant.
Increased dust will be generated during the constructior, a~/d will tempor-
arily contaminate the air. The effect will be mitigated by sprinkling
and dampening ,of the construction area, as will be required of the contractors.
Finally, the scale of the proposed project is so snlall that no secondary
effects are expected.
The topography of tile two sites is classed level at grade. Soil is
classed Grad I, Cd-TD and HI-Hd.
KERN COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING
Chairman: 1415 Truxtun Avenue
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA-93301
Secretary: Telephone: (805) 861-2445
June 9, 1995 ,3 ,~'~
Robert Price, Mayor ? ' 2 .'~ ,2,
1501 T~xt~ Avenue
B~ersfield, Ca. 93301
Re: Kern Co~W Elder Abusc Prevention Council ~ ~
De~ Robe~Pfice, Mayor: ',.~t~ MANAGER S
~e K~ Co~ Bo~d of Su~mm r~fly approved ~e fo~ation of a Kem Co~ Elder Abuse Prev~tion Co~cil. The ~o~d-work
h~ ~ done ~d now it is ~e to ~pl~mt ~e ~ion Statement ~d Goals ~at were approved in order for ~ose agencies in K~ Co~
to work more effectively to help ~e ~lnerable elderly in o~ co~ities.
~ o~ ~p~afion ages, ~ere ~e more ~ail senior citizens who need various kinds of assist~ce to avoid beco~ng vict~s of different ~es
of abuse ~d ~ere me ~ose who ~e already caught up in some ~e of fin~cial, physical or emotional abuse who n~d o~ help.
Yo~ ag~cy has ~ idm~ ~ one whch rmders se~ice in some way or ~o~er to vinous memb~s offs at-risk pop~ation. The Kern
Com~ Core,ion on Aging, ~der whose mbrella ~e Co~cil will ~nction, respec~lly requests ~at you nominate a key person in yo~
org~ation to se~e as a member of ~e Kern Co~ Elder Abuse Prevention Co~cil.
The first meeting will be a ~aining session to acquaint ~e new co~cil members wi~ ~e missions ~d goals of the Co~cil. O~ ke~ote
~e~ roll ~ ~e publisher of~e B~ersfield California, ~s. Virgi~a M~rhouse. Orientation will be provided by representatives ~om
the Adult Protective Se~ices, Kern Co~ Long-Te~ Cme Ombu~man Pro,m, Dis~ct Attorney's Office, She~s Dep~ent, Kern
Co~ Mental Heal~ Adult Se~ices, Co~ission on Aging, ~d o~ers.
~e ~aining date is J~e 28, 1995, from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. wi~ an ho~ l~ch bre~. We will be meeting in ~e Co~ A~ims~ative
Office Conference R~m, on ~e fi~ fl~r of ~e Co~ A~inis~ative Center located at 1115 Tmxt~ Avenue, B~ersfield. ~leage
reimbursement is available.
Enclosed you will find a copy of~e reco~endations made by ~e Co~ission on Aging to ~e Kern Co~ Bo~d of Sup~isors ~d ~e
~ion S~tmmt w~ch w~ approved by ~e Bo~d of Supe~isors on May 16~, 1995. Also enclos~ is a regis~ation fo~ for ~e ~ai~ng
session.
We l~k fo~d m~ ~eat ~m~ m yo~ agra's p~icipation. Please ask your nominee to ~e Co~cil to complete ~e fo~ ~d retm
it promptly to ~e Co~ission on Aging., c/o ~e Long Te~ Cme Ombudsman Prog~ l~ated at 615 California Av~ue.
Sincerely,
~RN COUNTY
CO~ISSION ON AGOG
'DOROT~A MOAB,
Chai~
EC/dm
Encls.
P GISTRATION FOR/VI
Pleose relum completed form to
Kern County Elder Abuse Prevention Coundl
c/o Kern County Long-Term Care ~sman Program
615 California Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93304
PART I
[Please Check One}
[] I, , hereby
accept my nomination to the Elder Abuse
Prevention Council or,
[] I, ,appoint
as a Nominee to
the Elder Abuse Prevention Council.
Name of Organization:
PART I1
(To be completed by Nominee]
[] This registration will serve to coofirm that
will. attend
the orientation scheduled for June 28, 1995!
.,,
[] I regret I am unable to attend, but I will serve on
the Council. Please send me future notices to the
following address:
KERN COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING
Chairman: Dorothea Morris ~4~s Truxtun Avenue
Secretary:EddyLaine BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA-93301
Telephone: (805) 861-2445
REC OMMENDA TIONS
KERN COUNTY ELDER ABUSE PREVENTION COUNCIL
1. The establishment of an Elder Abuse Prevention Council as a Committee of the
Kem County Commission on Aging.
This Council would report regularly to the Kern County Commission on Aging.
Any policy issues requiring consideration by the Kern County Board of
Supervisors would be submitted first to the Kern County Commission on Aging.
If appro,/ed, such items would then be submitted by the Commission acting in
its on-going advisory capacity to the Board of Supervisors.
This Council would include representatives from agencies concerned with the
welfare of the elderly. Agencies invited to participate would include, but not be
limited to the following:
The Kern County Commission on Aging, the Kern County Human
Services Department, the Kern County Office on Aging, the Kem
County Sheriffs Office, the Kern County Department of Mental
Health, the Kern County District Attorney, Greater Bakersfield Legal
Assistance, /nc. Senior Legal Services and Long-Term Care
Ombudsman Programs, the Bakersfield Police Department, the
Kern County Medical Society, the Kern RN Society, home health
care agencies, the Kern County Board Association, banks, cities,
consumers, and owners or administrators of large and small board
and care facilities. Members or representatives of the Kern County
Board of Supervisors would also regularly be invited.
The Office of Kern County Counsel would be requested to provide legal counsel
when needed.
2. The adoption of a Kern County Elder Abuse Prevention Council Mission
Statement.
KERN COUNTY ELDER ABUSE PREVENTION COUNCIL
MISSION STATEMENT
The Mission of the Elder Abuse Prevention Council is to provide an information network
to facilitate the care and protection of the vulnerable elderly of Kem County.
The E/der Abuse Prevention Council is comprised of representatives from several
agencies concerned with the we/fare of the elderly. It is the objective of the council to
provide protection of the elderly from various forms of abuse.
An individual 60 years of age or o/der is considered to be "elderly". In addition, an
individual with like physical conditions or/imitations such as that of the senior adult
target group but is younger than 60 years of age will also be designated as "elderly"
for abuse intervention purposes.
Areas of abuse shall include, but not be limited to: phYSical, financial/fiduciary, neglect,
abandonment, and psychological abuse.
The goals of the Kern County E/der Abuse Prevention Council are as follows:
1. Improve the protection of the elderly by promoting interagency
coordination and abuse investigation.
2. Improve the protection of the elderly who are in danger of abuse,
by providing public education regarding abuse and abuse
prevention.
3. Develop and present educational and training programs about
abuse prevention.
4. Promote the sharing of information and educational resources
among professionals and advocates in the field of elderly abuse.
5. Solicit and administer funds, and seek county programs to provide
emergency shelter and respite care for the elderly who have been
or are in danger of being abused.
6. Promote the creation of an interagency disciplinary response to
make home visits, case management to the elderly who have been
abused or in a position of being victimized, and counseling to
elderly and other concerned parties.
7. Advocate the legislation strengthening abuse prevention,
investigation, reporting and prosecution programs.
BAKERSFIELD
MEMORANDUM
June 15, 1995
TO: Hor~,or,a~bl,e Mayor and City Council
~J, ~J
FROM' Ga~lJE~Waiters, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Cbuncil Referral: Status Report on the Casa Royale Motor Inn Complaint
At the Council meeting of May 17, 1995, Mr. Joseph Chiapuzzi of Casa Royale Motor Inn
filed a complaint of harassment by the City's Fire Department and Building Division. On
June 14, 1995, Fire Chief Kelly, Chief Code Enforcement Officer Fidler and myself met
with Mr. Soly Bina (we were told Mr. Chiapuzzi was out of town and would not be back
for a While) to investigate this allegation.
The meeting resulted in staff taking a tour of the Casa Royale Motor Inn and discussing
with Mr. Bina his allegations of harassment. Our preliminary findings .confirm that the
property does have many extensive and serious health and building code violations.
Because of the numerous issues that must be documented and analyzed, staff will be
compiling a substantial report of events to present to Council prior to July 30.
cc: City Manager
BAKERSFIELD
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager r /~~_~'~
FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Directo
DATE: June 13, 1995
SUBJECT: STATUS UPDATE
Attached please find a status report, dated June 12, 1995, in
reference to the Brown & Caldwell Studies and Calloway Drive
project.
.... :?: .- -.
' JUN I 5 ~
UPDATE1.613
Attach.
BAKERSFIELD
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
June 12, 1995
TO: Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director
FROM: Fred L. Kloepper, Assistant Public Works Direc~rf,~~fc e
SUBJECT: Status Update
Brown & Caldwell Studies
According to Steve Tanaka, B & C should be delivering the updated reports on Thursday
of this week. He said upon approval by the City they will furnish the contractual twenty
copies within one week.
Calloway Drive
Granite Construction has cleared and grubbed and has completed proof-rolling the subgrade
north of the Cross Valley Canal. They are importing material and continuing the earthwork
operation. Granite will be removing existing curb and sidewalk on Brimhall east of
Calloway in the near future.
The utility companies are progressing on relocation of the various utilities.
C. VINCENT PHILLIPS, M.D., F.A.C.S.
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
PRACTICE LIMITED TO VASCULAR & GENERAL SURGERY
DIPLOMATE AMERICAN BOARD OF SURGERY
South Pavilion, 500 Old River Road, Suite 200, Bakersfield, CA 9331 I [805) 665-0505 FAX 805) 665-7844
June 6, 1995
Patricia Smith
1501Truxtun Ave.
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Dear Patricia Smith:
Enclosed, please find an article which was recently printed in
"Forbes" Magazine. I would ask that you read this timely article.
This is an issue'-'Which Kern County is already facing, and which
will become more acute as time passes. Clearly, as elected
officials it is your responsibility to deal not only with the Labor
Union at the moment when they are at the bargaining table, but also
with the future and unfunded responsibilities of the tax payers in
both my generation and the generations to follow.
The trend cannot continue. I hope that you give careful
consideration to this issue.
Sincerely yours,
/bm
Encl.
Wonder why your local taxes keep going up? reduction in benefits tbr earl,' retire-
ment. Thus a teacher ~vho started
Check out the way the public-service unions ,,,ork~ng;at 22 could retire at 56,
are guzzling at the pension trough severa] years earlier than the normal
· retirement age for the plans.
taay'o"--, tM'king; big money here: One
Votes estimate puts thc cost of the earl,'
retirement package at $5,000 per em-
ployee. Minnesotans had just been
put on the hook tbr perhaps S 1 billion
taxes tomorrow x~4thout being consulted.
But no one called it a raise, and the
media scarcely noticed. To make the
Rule of 90 look like a free lunch, the
state legislators simply extended the
By NeilWeinberg period to amortize thc retirement
plans' already huge unfunded liabil-
IN 1989 UNIONS for Minnesota's taxpayers scarcely noticed, ides from 20 years to 30 years. The
schooltcachcrs and other public cm- Thc laxvmakcrs instructed the Min- investment returns that thc actuaries
ployccs wanted to do something tbr ncsota State Retirement System and assumed the plans would cam were
thcirmcmbcrs, butthcvkncwtaxpay- four teachers' retirement systems to also raised, from 8% to 8.5%. Thc
crs wcrcn't in a giving mood. give roughly 200,000 public servants legislature used the "gains" to offset
Never mind. Alittte pressure hcrc, a a juicy ncxv early refircmcnt package, the cost of thc pension grab.
little hint there, and 1o! thc state Thc "Rule of 90" package alloxved To call such ploys phony book-
legislature handcd thc unions a gift an employee whose age and years of keeping is to put it mildly. Govern-
worth as much as $1 billion that thc sen'icc totaled 90 to retire xvi'thout amental Accounting Standards Board,
88 Forbes · June 5, 1995
The public pension ripoff
Treading water ""
.WA VT,
Several statewide pension plans "14% UT "'. ~'~ NO U" ' MA
a~e adequately funded, but even in. ,
the~ states many local plalm are OR ' to Iov, :?.':~1 ~
example, [] Paso's funds are $151 ~. --...- 3/4%
Funding ratio (%)* I ' ' ~ ':
~ 80 to 99 -.:*' ' r: AZ DC 03%
~ 60 to 79 ~
-.
State pension fundinl ($billiom)
The 82 date peedon systems ~urveyed by
WiIMdfe Aaaodates IXlmped up assets $2SS
6oo billion, m' 69~, between :~990 and 1994. But the .... .
ilnfundld liability for'M~ddl taxpay®rB al~ on
SO0 liabfl,ty · role 1,11,8 Millon, o~ ~ A bear nmrket won :~:.,.. :..
· Funding ratio represents assets as a percentage of pension benefit obligations. F~res a~e for most recen~yean available. ', .-' Source.' W/l~/re
whcrc is thy sting? defined contribution plans. The bone- is thc four-year election cycle."
"It is much easier for public em- fits thcy pay out depend on how much As a result ofall this fun and gamcs,
ployccs to ncgotiatc higher pension thc workcr pays in, and how well the public-sector plans arc grossly undcr-
bcnctits than salaD' incrcascs, which plan's assets are managed, funded. According to a rcccnt survey
come out of current budgets," says By contrast, virtually all public pen- bv the Public Pension Coordinating
Minnesota State Representative Phvl- sion schemes are defined benefit (~ouncil, plans covering 76% of state
lis Kahn, who has sponsored Icgisia- plans. Most of these public plans cap and local government employees fell
tion to ovcrscc her state's public pen- employee contributions at around 5% $164 billion short of thc $812 billion
sion thnds more closely, of salary but guarantee retirees a pre- that actuarial assumptions say they
About 9,000 public pension plans determined amount of pension in- need. Such arc the consequences of
covcr somc 16 million working or come, almost always with tat cost-of- permittinglegislatures to impose pen-
retired teachers, fircmcn, garbage- living adjustments, sion burdens on future taxpayers.
men, tax assessors and other state and Jonathan Schwartz, who served as Corporate executives can't usc this
local government cmployccs. To- chicfactuar3.' for New York City's five dodge. The 1974 Employee Rctirc-
gcthcr thcsc plans havc asscts of $1.1 pension funds from 1973 until'1986, ment Income Security Act requires
trillion. That compares with $3.4 tril- well understands the game politicians them to fully fund their pension liabil-
lion fbr private-sector pcnsion funds play with these plans. "The challenge ities within a reasonable period. Erisa
covering over 40 million workers, of l~eing a public-sector actuary.," he also requires uniform financial report-
Thc public pcnsion plans are vcrv says, "is that bv definition actuaries lng and disclosure by corporate pen-
difl~crcnt animals from thc private- are concerned with long-range impli- sion plans. State and local politicians
sector plans. Corporatc plata sponsors cations; but, for thc principals you are not subject to Erisa. Bcsides, they
increasingly arc shitting to so-called rcport to, thc definition of long range probably won't be in office xvhen thc
Forbes · June 5, 1995
92
The public pension ripoff
bills finally come duc. II
In Illint~is thc unfundcd liabilit3.' tbr THERE IS one bright spot a~d 6% fc~r othe~r' employ-~'
its fivc rctircmcnt systems covcring X'~lt~i_'ng l'i~k in the public pension fund ecs. Workers can then se-
statc cmplovccs t total assets, S20 bil-back into netherwofld: the Mont- lect from ten investment
· gomery County, Md. Em- options. All are products
lion) ncarly doubled in thc five years l'~wa~d$ ployees' Retirement Sys- of Fiddity Investments;
through 1994, from S8.6 billion to a
current S 17 billion. Assets cover bare- tern, which covers 10,000 thus the pension money is
ly half of liabilities, one of thc coun- counry workers and retir- not managed by people
tr)."s w()rst coverage ratios (sec map, ecs. Lastyear the system be- chosen according to affir-
p. 02). In cfl~:ct, thc state owes S17 came one of the first pub- mative action quotas. Once
billion that docs not count as debt but tic fund sponsors to offer vested (three years in
employees a defined con- Montgomery County.),
must bc paid.
Grcgor3, Wass is thc director of tribufion plan. This type of workers can take their
rcscarch at Chicago's Civic Fcdcra- plan pays a worker his or pension assets with them
tit)n, a taxpayers' group. Here's hmv her retirement benefits out when they change jobs.
bc dcscribcs thc process: "In Illinois, of capital accumulated Montgomery Coun-
public unions go to thc statc lcgisla- during the employee's ty's contributions arc
mrc and attach benefit [ incrcasc ] pro- working years; unlike a slightly lower than under
visions to labor bills, which rcsult in defined benefit plan, it is the old plan, but that
never underfunded, wasn't the point. The
unfundcd mandatcs for local propcrtx'
· Montgomery County point was to reestablish the
taxpavcrs.' In othcr words, local tax-
. offers a 401(a) plan, very connection between
payers arc ordered by their "rcprcscn- similar to a corporate what a worker pays into the
tativcs" to fi)rk out.
Until rcccntlv, South Carolina's 401(k). People hired after plan and what that work-
- ~ . ~ Oct. 1, 1994 contribute er takes out.
cmployccs had to w~)rk fi~r ,~0 years ~ r
reach aec 65 to rcccivc maxintunt thc same 3% of salaries that Cut this out and send it
pension benefits. But in 1991 associa- prex4ous employees put to your elected officials.
nons rcprcscntin~ about 225,000 into the county's old de- Ask them why your state
public cmployccs prcsscd thc state's fincd benefit plan. Thc and local employees aren't
politicians fi~r an early rctircmcnt count3., also chips in 10% forcovered by defined con-
packagc that would allow them to police and firefightcrs, tribution plans.-N.W. ~
work just 25 ycars and rctirc. Thcy got
it, with only minor modifications.
South C'arolina's statcwidc public Thc general rule is: Never mind thc government from promoting so-
pcnsion plan is now undcrfundcd by cost; wc gain votcs today and thc bill called economically targeted invest-
$2.1 billion, andthccmployccass°ci" docsn't come in until tomorrow. In mcnts. But most states' taxpayers
ations arc backin Columbia, dcmand- most states thc government is bv law don't have a Jim Saxton to watch {Jut
lng elimination of thc small conccs- thc guarantor of last resort tbr a local fi)r their interests, or if they do their
sions they madc. pcnsion, oftcntimcs under thc state watchdogs arc out~unncd and out-
Kobcri A.G. Monks, a principal at constitution itsclf. Thus, according to mancuvcrcd by thc ~ublic employees'
Washington, D.C.-based investment thc recent survey by thc Public Pen- unions and thc clotted officials in
sion Coordinating Council, only 57% thcir pockets.
of thc countD"s public fund sponsors Thc Kansas Public Employees Re-
The §en¢~al t~lle i~: madc thc contributions that actuaries tircmcnt System, covering 195,000
Never mind the cost 0f fatter told thcm wcrc nccdcd to covcr liabil- workcrs an~l retirees, invcstcd hcavily
pensions; we galnvotes today itics in 1992; only 77% covered at in Kansas-based firms in thc late
least 80% of obligations. Why bother? 1980s, including an ailing savings and
and the bill doesn't come in Let fi~turc taxpayers do it. loan and a troubled steel mill. Thc
As if' all this weren't bad cnough, plan's losses on thcsc m'o investments
until tomorrow, thc potential burden on taxpayers is alone came to over S70 million.
~ worscncd by thc slovenly way many of In California thc giant Calitbrnia
firm Lcns, Inc., rcccntly chaircd a thc pcnsiot:~ funds arc managed. In Public Employees' Kctircmcnt Svs-
pension study committee tbr thc many cases, political considerations tcm (asscts, $82 billion) has devoted
Maine lct;islaturc. Monks shakes his win out over sound investment man- $375 million to a program to pro-
hcad. "You havc a [public pension agcmcnt. That has become a particu- mote single-family housingconstruc-
fund l system that on thc surthcc iii- lar conccrn lately thanks to Labor tion since 1992. Two similar pro-
vt fix'cs bamamine by equals and a level Sccrcta~' Robert 'Kcich's program of grams were set up last year, xvith S 150
of opctmcss and accountabilitT," hc cncouragingfundstosinkm°neyint° million going to single-family and
says. "In truth, none ()~' thosc phc- politically favorcd invcstmcnts. Con- low-income housing construct/on
nomcna actually exist in Maine." grcssman lira Saxton (R-N.J.) sub- and S145 million to support midsizc
N{~r anvxvhcrc dsc in thc country, mittcd a bill last month to prcvcnt thc Calif')mia firms that have difficult5.'
Forbes · lunc 5, 199~
/
The public pension ripoff
raising capital clscxvherc. Such pro- liabilities. The Louisiana fund as- being retired into private life bv tax-
grams arc useful to politicians. They sumcs its investment income will wean'voters-The problem of coming
enable them to deliver pork to favorc~l grow by 3.75% per annum faster than up With the money now falls to his
successor, George ~'ataki.
c°nstitucnts, snug in thc knowledge salarics will grow.
that any Iosscs will be pickcd up by In thc past five years, almost t~vo- Here's thc bottom line: Between
rose
thirds of thc states have cut budget 1990 and 1994 the stock market
Yet at
future taxpayers.
According to research by Kobcrt deficits with increasingly optimistic 56% and bond prices rose, too.
Monks and his colleague Ncil Minow, assumptions about future returns on the end of the period, unfunded liabil-
thc New York State United Teachers investments. From 1992 to 1994 Cai- ities for the 82 statewidc pension
Fund sold its shares of thc Tribune itbrnia Governor Pete Wilson with- systems surveyed by Wilshire Asso-
Co. a few years ago, after workers at held about $700 million in pension elates still totaled $70 billion (see
thc Tribm{c's New York Daily Nen,s plan contributions. A court recently chart, p. 92.). The investment gains, in
' short, had been handed out
went on strike. Thc fund to public employees to
cited a policy of not invest- ~ make sure the)' voted thc
lng in ant~umon compa- right way.
nits. Tribune Co.'s stock What happens if thc as-
has nearly doubled since sumptions turn out to be
thc teachers' fund sold it. far too optimistic? In a bear
Robcrta Romano, a Yale market, for examplc? For an
Law School prot~:ssor, took idea of what a bear market
a hard look at thc results of or inflation might do to
such politically motivated these funds, take a look at
investments. Her conclu- the District of Columbia
sion: They cost public Retirement Board, which
funds $5.6 billion annually covers 12,300 ac-
from 1985 to 1989, thc tive and 11,400 re-
period her study examined, tired policemen,
Thc figure is probably fircfightcrs, teachers
higher today, and judges. It began op-
Maybeth'cworstliddling crating in 1981 with
itwolvcs playing around $150 million in assets and
with actuarial'assumptions. $2.6 billion in liabilities,
By raising rcturn assump- giving it a $2.45 billion un-
tions thc trustees can hide funded liabilin.'. Since thcn,
thc costs of benefit in- assets have grown to $2.5
creases and thc losses that billion, but thc unfunded
result from politically moti- liability, has doublcd, to
vatcd invcstmcnts~and
even from fraud. A recent study by declared thc diversion unconstitu- $S.2 billion~a stunning S8,700 per
Wilshirc Associates tbund that funds tional and ordered repayment, city resident.
with high levels of unfunded liabilities ' Struggling to create the appearance Woe betide thc politician who tries
tended to make the highest thture of balance iil the New York State to stem this profligate tide. Donald
ratc-of-rcturnassumpti°ns'Thatist° budget in 1990, then-Governor Moe, a former Minnesota state scna-
say, thc worse a thnd's present fi- Marlo Cuomo and the state legisla- tor whoservedonMinnes°ta's Lcgis-
nantes arc, thc better that fund's turc changed the accounting meth- lative Commission on Pensions and
trustees claim they'll be able to do ods tbr plans covering most state and Retirement for 20 ),ears, tried. Hc
with thc assctsin thc future, local government employees so resisted many proposed benefit in-
As an example, thc West Virginia adroitly that they eliminated'for a few creases, pointing out thc cost of such
Teachers' Retirement System is about years thc nearly $1 billion a 5'ear re- generosity. Public employee unions
broke, with onh' S376 million in assets ~luircd to fund the plans, got revenge by bankrolling Moc's
and a $3.7 billion unfunded liability, Quick to demand ever more gener- opponent in thc 1990 Democratic
according to Wilshire Associates. Yet'it ous pensions, New York's public ser- priman.', and again when he ran tbr
assumes its investment income will vants were even quicker to charge state auditor in 1994. "Don Moc
outpacc salary gains by 3.7% per ycar, Cuomo and company with endanger- wants to cut your pension," ran one
thc second-highest such assumption lng their plans. Public unions sued to union-financed radio ad.
among the 82 statewide funds Wil- have the accounting changes re- In both races, Moe lost. So did
shire tracks. Thc only thnd that is more versed, and the New York State Court most of the citizens. The5' are porch-
optimistic is thc Louisiana State Em- of Appeals sided with thc workers in tiallv liable now for close to S5 billion
plovccs' Retirement System, thc 73rd- 1993. Bv then, however, the pension in uhfunded pension liabilities in what
wo~-st-fundcd plan, x~Sth S3.2 billion infunds h.~d lost S4 billion in contribu- is already among the highest-taxed
asscts and S2.6 billion in unfundcd tions and Cuomo was on his way to states in the union. ~
Forbes · lune ~, 1995