Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/07/99 BAKERSFIELD CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM May 7,1999 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER /~)'-/_.~ SUBJECT: GENERAL' INFORMATION 1. Please try to be on time for the workshop Wednesday the 12th - the annual budget is being unveiled! 2. Our new certified population is in from the state - 230,771. We hit it right in budget projections this year! 3. Believe it or not - the Fire JPA is done and agreed to by each staff. It is scheduled for your agenda on May 26th. A copy is enclosed for your information. Please call early if you have questions or concerns. 4. Another sale is in process, and we are down to three houses on Panorama. 5. A year ago, the County wanted $1.0 million from us, in the future, for their airport project. On Thursday, in a staff follow up to the IGR Committee directives, they asked for $5.0 million - to do it right. That is a lot of money that we don't have. Perhaps we can address it positively by trying to come up with areas in which the City and County could work more efficiently to save some of those funds and apply them to the airport! 6. Staff has submitted a letter to Cai Trans to request that they consider the construction of paved shoulders between State Route 178 and State Route 184, as it is a route that carries a large volume of traffic on a two lane highway with little to no paved shoulders. The letter is enclosed. 7. Attached is a memo from the Water Resources Department outlining the most recent meeting on the Highway 58 issue. The memo explains the time frame and some of the major water issues that will be dealt with over the next two months. Some of the issues regarding improved access to the Kern River Parkway and potential for a new year-around recharge area, similar to Truxtun Lake, look exciting. Honorable Mayor and City Council May 7, 1999 Page 2 8. A summary of the Old Town Kern-Pioneer and Southeast Bakersfield PAC meetings held on April 26th are enclosed. 9. The Joint Public Hearings for the Old Town Kern-Pioneer and Southeast Bakersfield areas are scheduled for May 26th. The enclosed memo outlines the adoption process as required by state law. Due to California Community Development Law, the Council, and CDDA will only be able to accept comments "for" or "against" project area formation at the meeting. Because of written objections already received, state law requires that responses to such objections be prepared, which will require the hearings to be continued to June 16th. The attached memo also describes the process we have used to notify the public, and details how we have exceeded the · legal requirements regarding public notification of these hearings. 10. There are also two additional memos enclosed that relate to the proposed redevelopment areas; one which provides information about the notices sent out on the public hearing and one with the dates and times for the town hall meetings that will be held next week. 11. Enclosed, for those who could not make it, is the suite menu for the arena that was tested earlier this week. The quality was good. 12. A summary of the public meeting that was held on Wednesday, May 5th to provide information and receive input on the proposed skateboard park is enclosed. 13. Recreation and Parks accepted Windsor Park, in Seven Oaks, from Castle & Cooke this week. A dedication is planned for next month. 14. The Fox Theatre streetscape project was completed last week. It was a joint project between the City and Fox volunteers, which included new curb, gutter, sidewalks, streetlights, bollards and landscaping. In addition, the City relocated the traffic signal which had blocked the marquee. 15. Responses to Council requests are enclosed, as follows: · Review the possibility of using CDBG funds for curb, gutter, and sewer service; Information enclosed on 1550-1600 South Union Ave.; information on Pacheco No. 10 annexation area forthcoming; · Meet with the DBA regarding High Speed Rail; also sent representative to DBA vision meeting on 5/4/99; · Review the possibility of using CDBG funds for street repair in a gated subdivision at 499-601 Pacheco and summarize the need to bring the subdivision's streets up to City standards; Hono~ble Mayorand City Council May 7,1999 Page 3 · Extend the East Beltway alignment out to and along Comanche Road; · Status of equalizing water connection fees; more information to follow at Water Board meeting; · Clean up of weeds and debris at Manor and Union; · Status of widening Auburn Street between Fairfax Road and Morning Drive; · Information regarding the need for the mandatory right turn lane on eastbound Auburn Street at Oswell Street; · Install "No Parking Between 5:00 p.m. to 11:00 a.m." signs on public street section of West Bluff Court; · Report on the traffic congestion at the intersection of Highway 178 and Fairfax Road and methods to improve traffic flow; · Request to provide copies of the Kern COG and Kern County Planning Commission minutes; · Provide information on the methods available for the public to access agenda information; · Status report regarding the code enforcement efforts on Union Avenue; · Preliminary cost estimates for several proposed transportation projects, including report on annexation along 7th Standard Road; · Review of request from B-Cool and provide letter of support; · Meet with job applicant regarding information on the City's hiring process; · Provide additional Police patrols in Rosedale area; · Contact citizen regarding request for City assistance in developing a child care facility; · Meet with Riverlakes Ranch Master Association regarding resolution to storm water damage at beach club parking lot; · .Additional information provided regarding 4/14 request concerning noise problem with rooster. AT: rs cc: Department Heads Pamela McCarthy, City Clerk Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst City of Bakersfield Agreement No. County of Kern Agreement No. Joint Powers Agreement for Fire Protection Services, Operations of the Joint Fire Emergency Communications Center, Joint Use of the Olive Drive Fire Training Facility, and Agreement to Furnish Supplementary and Mutual Fire Protection (Kern County-City of Bakersfield) THIS AGREEMENT, is made and entered into on ., 1999, by and between the City of Bakersfield, a municipal corporation located within the County of Kern (hereafter "CITY"), and the County of Kem, a political subdivision of the State of Califomia, (hereafter "COLrNTY"). This Agreement supersedes City of Bakersfield Agreement No. 94-180 and County of Kern Agreement No. 454-94 relating to Fire Protection Services; City of Bakersfield Agreement No. 84-52 and County of Kern Agreement No. 84-074 relating to the Joint Use of the Olive Drive Fire Training Center; City of Bakersfield Agreement No. 90-48 and County of Kern Agreement No. 170-90 relating to the Joint Use of Fire Dispatch Center, and County of Kern Agreement No. 036-89 and City of Bakersfield Agreement No. 89-68 relating to the Furnishing of Supplementary and Mutual Fire Protectiom RECITALS: WHEREAS, in order to provide cost-effective and uniform fire protection within the metropolitan Bakersfield area, to eliminate duplication of services and to provide for the continuing development of public fire protection resources, the CITY and COUNTY entered into a Joint Powers Agreement on May 7, 1980, which provided for the exchange. and identification of specific areas of responsibility for total fire protection within the metropolitan area; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the May 7, 1980, Joint Powers Agreement the CITY and COUNTY have established a joint training program, provided for a common operating location for emergency dispatch and radio communications, formulated a response Fina/JPA Master Agreement.wpd Page 1 May 6, 1999 (I:I3PM) system based on the closest fire company principle, established boundary areas for the delivery of fire.protection services, and cooperated in the planning, construction and staffing of new fire stations; and WHEREAS, the CITY and COUNTY by agreement may jointly exercise any power common to both (pursuant to Chapter 5, Division 7 of Title I of the Govemment Code) and the power to provide fire protection services is a power common to both entities; and WHEREAS, the parties have previously entered into an agreement for the joint use of the Emergency Communications Center (City of Bakersfield Agreement No. 90- 48) on February 21, 1990, wherein the parties integrated the Fire emergency communications functions of the two (2) agencies by combining the City's and County's operations into a single joint operation; and WHEREAS, Emergency Communications Center dispatch facility, located at 2601 Panorama Drive, currently occupied by both the COUNTY and the CITY fire departments' dispatch personnel, was financed and constructed by, and is owned and maintained by the COUNTY; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY and CITY intend that the existing facility will continue to be used by the fire departments of CITY and COUNTY, acting jointly, for dispatching personnel and equipment to all fire, rescue and emergency medical incidents arising within the City of Bakersfield, the greater Bakersfield area, and Kern County; and WHEREAS, the parties have determined that a more efficient daily operation of Fire emergency communications is possible by assigning responsibility for the administration of daily operations with the COUNTY Fire Chief, .in conjunction with the CITY Fire Chief or their designees; and WHEREAS, to implement the intent of this Agreement, the parties will equip, operate, repair, maintain, and administer a Fire Emergency Communications Center under the terms and conditions set forth herein; and WHEREAS, the joint training facility, located at 5642 Victor Street, is funded and was constructed by the COUNTY and CITY on COUNTY owned property known as the Olive Drive Fire Training Center (herein referred to as the "ODFTC"); and Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 2 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) WHEREAS, the ODFTC will be used by the CITY and COUNTY Fire Departments for personnel training to enable CITY and COUNTY to provide quality professional and emergency services to the citizens of both entities; and WHEREAS, Article 2 of Chapter 4 of Part 2 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (commencing with Section 55631) provides that the legislative body of any local agency may contract with any other local agency for the furnishing of supplementary fire protection to such other local agency; and WHEREAS, COUNTY and CITY have heretofore found and determined, and do by these presents find and determine, that 'the public safety and welfare require the exercise of supplementary and mutual fire protection and fire suppression services by both COUNTY and CITY within and upon that certain area hereinafter referred to in this Agreement as the "fire service area"; and WHEREAS, COUNTY and CITY have heretofore found and determined, and do by these presents find and determine, that said fire service area shall be defined and delineated as follows: all of the area within the territorial boundaries of the City of Bakersfield, together with all of the area within the territorial boundaries of the County of Kern; and WHEREAS, COUNTY and CITY have heretofore found and determined, and do by these presents find and determine, that the exercise of supplementary and mutual fire protection and fire suppression services by COUNTY and CITY within and upon said fire service area should be in accord with the terms and conditions as hereinafter set forth in this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the parties hereto wish to update their agreements with respect to the rights, duties and obligations of the parties regarding supplementary and mutual fire protection within Kern County; joint fire protection within the metropolitan Bakersfield area, including the functions of the Emergency Communications Center and the Olive Drive Fire Training Center; as well as providing a mechanism for the entity providing fire services to receive that portion of the property tax referred to as the Fire Fund or the Fire Fund Equivalent for all of the areas for which the entity provides fire services; NOW, THEREFORE, CITY and COUNTY mutually agree as follows: Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 3 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) I. FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES A. Exchange of Fire Protection Services 1. This Agreement supersedes and replaces the May 7, 1980, Joint Powers Agreement (Agreement No. 80-70); Report No. ,2-82, dated March 3, 1982; Report No. 6-82, dated November 17, 1982, the October 8, 1985, Memorandum o f Understanding (City Agreement No. 85-215 and County Agreement No. 85-538), (collectively referred to hereinafter as the 1980 JPA), and the Joint Powers Agreement for Fire Protection Services of 1994 (County Agreement No. 454-94 and City Agreement No. 94-180) and any rights, duties or obligations arising thereunder are terminated. 2. CITY and COUNTY hereby agree and establish that certain area, encompassing both unincorporated portions of the COUNTY and incorporated areas of the CITY as outlined on the map attached to this Agreement as Exhibit No. 1, to be the area affected and governed by Section I. of this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the Fire Agreement Area). CITY and COUNTY further agree to the establishment of fire protection service areas within the Fire Agreement Area, which are designated as CITY or COUNTY service areas on Exhibit No. 1. Said Exhibit shall be executed along with this Agreement by the same signatories. CITY and COUNTY agree that Exhibit No. 1 depicts the service boundaries as currently designated. Any discrepancies will be resolved by both parties, utilizing the existing data which is used by the Emergency Communications Center within 60 days of the execution of this Agreement. This Exhibit will be periodically updated to reflect annexations to the CITY by execution by both parties of a revised Exhibit No. 1. 3. Areas annexed into the CITY which were not within the Fire Agreement Area prior to the annexation shall be automatically included within the Fire Agreement Area from the effective date of annexation into the CITY. Except for such annexations, neither the boundaries of the Fire Agreement Area nor the areas to be protected by each party may be modified except by formal amendment of this Agreement by the Board of Supervisors and the City Council. Final JPA Master Agreement.wpd Page 4 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) Annexed areas will be added to the fire protection service area providing the closest fire response. 4. CITY hereby agrees to provide to COUNTY total fire protection for those areas within the unincorporated portion of the CITY's designated fire protection service areas on Exhibit No. 1. 5. COUNTY hereby agrees to provide to CITY total fire protection for those areas within the incorporated portion of COUNTY's designated fire protection service areas on Exhibit No. 1. 6. For purposes of this Agreement, "total fire protection" shall mean all emergency activities, including, but not limited to fire suppression and prevention related activities, medical aid calls, rescues, hazardous materials and hazardous conditions responses, public service requests, and incident scene management; non-emergency activities shall include, but not be limited to, hazardous materials inspections, fire prevention inspection responsibilities, pre fire planning, arson investigation and prevention, public education, fire hydrant maintenance, and enforcement of the Uniform Fire Code as applicable. This excludes the inspection requirements of the Certified Unified Program within the city limits which are required to be completed by CITY personnel. 7. CITY and COUNTY will coordinate and condu6t prevention, arson investigation, and public education in a uniform manner within the Fire Agreement Area. 8. The site plan review process shall remain a function of the CITY in the incorporated areas and of the COUNTY in unincorporated areas and shall include, but is not limited to, fire hydrant locations, fire flow designation, built-in fire protection, and enforcement of applicable codes and ordinances with respect to new development. 9. The fire chief assuming fire protection responsibilities for an area outside his jurisdictional boundaries has authority for fire protection of said area. Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 5 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) 10. The CITY and COUNTY have agreed that future fire stations be located as follows: · CITY Fire Stations · In the vicinity of McCutchen Road and Allen Road · In the vicinity of Morning Drive and Paladino Drive · In the vicinity of White Lane and Buena Vista Road · COUNTY Fire Stations · In the vicinity of Hageman and Nord · In the vicinity of Reina Road/Olive Drive extension and Allen Road · * In the vicinity of Brimhall Road and Renfro Road · Note: Construction of this station has been completed. These future fire stations and their future designated fire protection service areas shall be included as part of the Fire Agreement Area as designated in Exhibit No. 1. These future designated fire protection service areas and the corresponding adjustment to the boundaries of the Fire Agreement Area shall not become effective until each fire station has been constructed, staffed, and becomes operational. Changes from COUNTY to CITY protection for each of these designated fire protection areas shall not occur until CITY operation begins. The CITY and COUNTY Fire Chiefs will coordinate closely to determine the appropriate location of future fire stations in order to ensure the most effective and efficient emergency response, minimize duplication, and limit costs. Criteria used for siting future fire stations will include, but not be limited to, topography, man-made barriers, natural barriers, distance from existing fire stations, response time, percentage of build-out in first in response area, population density in first in response area, infrastructure (roadways, bridges, etc.), existing acceptable level of service, and future planning for development of the area. A party desiring to site a new fire station without the approval of the other will give written notice of its intent to locate, construct or relocate a fire station within the Fire Agreement Area or within five (5) miles surrounding the boundary of the Fire Agreement Area and request in writing negotiations between the parties. In the event the parties are unable Fina/JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 6 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) to reach agreement within one hundred eighty (180) days after service of the written notice of intent, then no approval will be required for the construction and/or relocation of fire stations. .11. The partieS shall jointly establish minimum service criteria and service response times for fire protection services provided to each other pursuant to this Agreement. The COUNTY agrees to add an additional position of Firefighter to staff Station 53 effective with the approval of the Board of Supervisors. 12. The parties shall jointly purchase apparatus and equipment when advantageous to both parties. B. Payment for Services 1. COUNTY agrees to prepare, maintain, update, and keep a current data base containing the assessed valuation of each parcel of property within the Fire Agreement Area for the purpose of determining the amount of Fire Fund revenue generated by ehch parcel or the amount of the Fire Fund Equivalent (as defined hereinafter) for that parcel. CITY agrees to pay one-half of a fair and equitable cost to the COUNTY for the maintenance and updating of such data base. COUNTY has estimated the cost to prepare, maintain, update and keep current such data base to be approximately twenty-one thousand dollars ($21,000.00) to twenty- six thousand dollars ($26,000.00) annually. COUNTY shall provide an itemized statement to CITY each year. Payment for maintenance of the COUNTY data base may be used in determining the net payments required in Paragraph 4 of this Section. 2. COUNTY agrees to maintain for a period of five (5) years all data and documents relating to the establishment of information necessary to the data base and the cost of maintenance and upkeep and make such records available for review by CITY upon CITY's request. CITY may conduct its own audit of the data base at its sole expense as often as it desires. 3. For purposes of this Agreement, the following definitions shall apply: Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 7 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) a. "Fire Fund Revenue" means that portion of property taxes, levied by COUNTY, on behalf of the COUNTY's Structural Fire Fund by COUNTY. b. "Fire Fund Equivalent" determined in a given fiscal year, shall mean either: 1. For property annexed into the CITY before 1978 and for any property for which no property tax was ever levied on behalf of the COUNTY's Structural Fire Fund, the amount that is derived by multiplying one percent (1%) of the then current assessed valuation of a parcel by nine and thirty-nine one hundredths percent (9.39%); or 2. For any property, except property annexed into the CITY before 1978, for which property tax was at some time levied on behalf of the COUNTY's Structural Fire Fund, but for whatever reason is no longer so levied, the amount that is derived by multiplying one percent (1%) of the then current assessed valuation of a parcel by that certain percentage (Fire Fund Factor) which was previously levied on behalf of the COUNTY's Structural Fire Fund. Said Fire Fund Factor shall be determined from the records of the Kern County Auditor-Controller. The Kern County Auditor's Office has on record on its "APO run" the percentage of property tax for each tax rate area which is now or was in the past levied on behalf of the COUNTY's Structural Fire Fund and was known as the Fire Fund Factor. In the event that percentage, the Fire Fund Factor, is impossible to ascertain, the nine and thirty-nine one hundredths percent (9.39%) will be used. The formula for calculation of the Fire Fund Equivalent is applied in order to determine the amount of general property tax revenue that will be received Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 8 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) , by the party providing fire protection service in an area for which a Fire Fund is not designated. c. In the event the COUNTY eliminates the Fire Fund or the collection of property taxes on behalf of COUNTY's Structural Fire Fund, Fire Fund revenue, for purposes of this Agreement, shall be determined by using the last actual Fire Fund Factor for each parcel as set forth in paragraph b. 2. herein above. 4. The entity providing fire protection service to an area shall receive the Fire Fund revenue or Fire Fund Equivalent revenue for that area. a. For each fiscal year, commencing with Fiscal Year 1994-95, the COUNTY shall determine the total amount of Fire Fund revenue and the total amount of Fire Fund Equivalent associated with each fire protection area for all property within the Fire Agreement Area. The COUNTY shall calculate the total amount of Fire Fund revenue or Fire Fund Equivalent revenue for all ar~as within the CITY's jurisdiction for which CITY provides fire protection services and for all areas within the COUNTY's jurisdiction for which CITY provides fire protection services ("amount payable to CITY"). The COUNTY shall also calculate the total amount of Fire Fund revenue or Fire Fund Equivalent revenue for all areas within CITY's jurisdiction for which COUNTY provides fire protection ("amount payable to COUNTY"). b. COUNTY shall notify CITY of the amounts so calculated and provide copies of its calculations and the basis for same on or before July 30 of each year, unless the Assessor does ' not complete the assessment roll and deliver it to the Auditor, pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code Section 616 and 617, prior to June 30, then within thirty (30) days of the completion of the roll. CITY shall have thirty (30) days to review said calculations and to notify COUNTY whether. CITY agrees with same. In the event CITY disagrees with said calculations, CITY may at its own expense conduct an audit and calculate said amounts. Final resolution of any dispute arising from conflicting calculations by the CITY and Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 9 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) COUNTY shall be accomplished through the method set forth in Section VI of this agreement. c. Should the amount payable to CITY exceed the amount payable to COUNTY, COUNTY shall pay to CITY the net difference. Should the amount payable to COUNTY exceed the amount payable to CITY, CITY shall pay to COUNTY the net difference. d. Payment of funds pursuant to this Agreement shall be in two installments, made at the same time and together with the property tax distributions made by COUNTY in January and May each year. Each installment shall be for one half of the amount due for that fiscal year.' 5. In all future annexations by the CITY, distribution of the property tax revenue collected on behalf of the COUNTY Structural Fire Fund shall be allocated to the CITY as part of the property tax transfer upon annexation where CITY is providing fire services. COUNTY shall take all necessary steps to effectuate such transfer pursuant to the requirements of the California Revenue and Taxation Code. II. EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS CENTER. A. Designation of Dispatch Center. The communications facility, located at 2601 Panorama Drive, Bakersfield, California, is commonly referred to as the "Emergency Communications Center" (ECC). Section II of this Agreement applies to the use, operations, and maintenance of the ECC. B. Functions of ECC 1. Receive 9-1-1 calls. 2. Receive 7-digit telephone line emergency calls routed to or forwarded to the ECC. 3. Enter incident information into the computer-aided dispatch system; verify location; record caller's telephone number and source; enter specific location information and appropriate text; follow Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 10 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) emergency medical dispatcher protocols and provide pre arrival instructions,; select best suited type code; and record associated date, time and incident number information. 4. Electronically transmit fire station alert and/or printout data over appropriate radio system, provide specified encode tone for backup mode and broadcast vocal dispatch over the appropriate radio system. 5. Ensure both departments have total access to Fire computer-aided dispatch information. 6. The CITY and COUNTY Fire Chiefs or their designees will meet as necessary to evaluate the quality of service of the Emergency Communications Center in relation to agreed upon operational procedures. If, in the opinion of the CITY or COUNTY Fire Chief, the operational procedures are not being followed, the areas of non conformance will be corrected to the satisfaction of the CITY or COUNTY Fire Chief with thirty (30) calendar days. C. Operations Committee. A Fire Emergency Communications Operations Committee ("Operations Committee") is established. The Operations Committee consists of the COUNTY Fire Chief, CITY Fire Chief, a designated COUNTY Deputy Fire Chief, and a designated CITY Chief Officer. No decision may be made without equal representation. The duties of the Operations Committee are as follows: 1. Investigate and resolve any disputes with respect to the operations and expenditures of the fire Emergency Communications Center. If the Committee cannot reach agreement, resolution of the disputed issue will be conducted pursuant to Section VI. 2. Development of a mission statement for the Emergency Communications Center within six (6) months Of execution of this agreement which will establish short and long-term goals. An Operations Manual currently exists to ensure uniformity of dispatch. procedures and ensure an established chain of command. The Operations Committee will update this Operations Manual as needed. These daily operational procedures will be reviewed, Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 11 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) modified if necessary, and approved by both Fire Chiefs within thirty (30) days of execution of this agreement. 3. Meet by January of each calendar year to develop a proposed EmergenCY Communications Center budget, based upon agreed staffing and service levels, for the following fiscal year to be included in each Fire Department's budget submitted to the County Administrative Officer and City Manager by February 1 of each year. Said annual budget is subject to approval by each agency's legislative body. 4. Review the computer-aided dispatch system (CAD) iri order to develop recommendations on quantity and type of fire emergency communications equipment needed to properly provide services. D. ECC Manager The daily operations of the Emergency Communications Center will be supervised by the Communications Center Manager. The Communications Center Manager determines temporary staffing levels above maximum during periods of high activity, such as the Fourth of July. High activity periods are not to exceed twenty-four (24) hours without approval of the Duty Chief. The Communications Center Manager shall be under the supervision of the COUNTY Fire Chief in consultation with the CITY Fire Chief or their designees. The COUNTY Fire Chief is the appointing authority for the Emergency Communications Center Manager. The CITY Fire Chief, or his or her designee, will be involved in the selection process for the ECC Manager including participation in the examination procedure. The COUNTY Fire Chief, in conjunction with the CITY Fire Chief, or their designees will coordinate closely on the performance goals, performance evaluation, and oversight of the Emergency Communications Center Manager. The ECC Manager will be familiar with all CITY policies, rules and regulations, as well as disciplinary procedures established by the CITY Charter, City Fire Civil Service Board, and the Bakersfield Fire Department. In the event discipline is considered for a CITY employee, the ECC Manager will coordinate the disciplinary process with the CITY Fire Chief or his/her designee. The ECC Manager will be familiar with all COUNTY policies, rules and regulations, as well as disciplinary procedures established by the Civil Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 12 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) Service Commission, and the Board of Supervisors. In the event discipline is considered for a COUNTY employee, the ECC Manager will coordinate the disciplinary process with the COUNTY Fire Chief or his/her designee. E. Personnel. 1. Organizational Chart and Staffing Matrix. The Center shall be staffed in accordance with the organizational chart and the staffing matrix attached to this Agreement, labeled as Exhibits "A" and "B" respectively, and incorporated herein by this reference. The Emergency Communications Center's staffing complement shall consist of 16 dispatchers and 4 supervising dispatchers. The staffing for May through October totals 18, which consists of two 12 hour day shifts with 4 dispatchers and 1 supervisor and two twelve hour night shifts with 3 dispatchers and 1 supervisor. · The staffing for November through April totals 16, which consists of two 12 hour day shifts with 3 dispatchers and 1 supervisor and two twelve hour night shifts with 3 dispatchers and 1 supervisor. The Emergency Communications Center will have a total of 20 positions, which will include relief personnel which may be transferred between shifts when necessary due to long-term or scheduled absences. The ECC Manager will make every effort to reduce overtime costs in the staffing and operation of the Emergency Communications Center for both 'City and County personnel. 2. Job Titles. The City and County shall use the following designated titles for Fire Communications Center employees (Dispatchers) a.' Supervising Fire Dispatcher. b. Fire Dispatcher I (Entry Level). c. Fire Dispatcher Il. 3. Personnel Assignments. The CITY currently has six (6) full time dispatcher positions assigned to the Emergency Communications Center, two (2) of which are Supervising Fire Dispatchers. The COUNTY currently has fourteen (14) full time dispatcher positions Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 13 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) assigned to the Emergency Communications Center, two (2) of which are Supervising Fire Dispatchers. Four of these dispatchers were added in 1998 by the COUNTY. The COUNTY currently has one vacant dispatcher position. The CITY has reviewed the current staffing of the ECC, and in order to significantly reduce the amount of CITY dispatcher overtime hours and expense, particularly during peak fire season, CITY agrees to add two (2) dispatcher positions as CITY employees and adopt the staffing matrix attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by reference. COUNTY also adopts the staffing matrix set forth in Exhibit "B" and to accommodate CITY's desire to add two dispatcher positions, COUNTY agrees that it will not hire a person to fill its current dispatcher vacancy and further agrees that, when a second COUNTY dispatcher position becomes vacant, COUNTY shall not employ a replacement dispatcher. As soon as reasonably possible, City will hire one of the two additional dispatchers and will hire the second additional dispatcher when one of the County dispatcher positions becomes vacant. Once the CITY has added the two dispatcher positions and hired personnel to fill those positions, the total of twenty (20) positions at ECC will consist of eight (8) CITY dispatchers and twelve (12) COUNTY dispatchers. COUNTY and CITY will each pay all costs as set forth in Section II.F.2.b. of their respective dispatcher positions. The number of CITY or COUNTY dispatcher positions assigned shall not change without the approval of both CITY and COUNTY legislative bodies; prov. ided however, if either the CITY or the COUNTY acts to change the number of its dispatchers assigned to ECC without the approval of the other legislative body, the other party will not be responsible for any costs of any nature whatsoever related to the change in the number of dispatchers. 4. Supervising Fire Dispatchers. Both CITY and COUNTY Supervising Fire Dispatchers will be under the direct supervision of the Emergency Communications Center Manager. Supervising Fire ~ Dispatchers shall supervise a designated shift as a working Supervisor. A shift may include Fire Dispatchers from either CITY or COUNTY. Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 14 May 6, 1999 (I:I3PM) 5. Employee Recruitment. a. CITY and COUNTY agree to use the same testing procedures for employee recruitment and promotion. This will be coordinated through the CITY's Human Resources and COUNTY's Personnel Departments. b. CITY will maintain a CITY eligibility list. c. COUNTY will maintain a COUNTY eligibility list. d. The Fire Chiefs will work towards establishing a joint recruitment and hiring process so that both departments may hire from a single eligibility list. 6. Employee Evaluations. Employee evaluations will be made by each employee's supervisor, regardless of whether the supervisor is employed by the same entity as the employee, generally following the lines of authority set forth in Exhibit "A"of this Agreement. 7. Disciplinary_ Actions. The COUNTY and the CITY acknowledge that integrated procedures with respect to formal and/or informal disciplinary action brought against employees stationed at the Center do not currently exist and would be difficult to develop as the parties' respective civil service systems involve different rules and participants. The parties to this Agreement shall, to the fullest extent practical, administer the Center so that all employees stationed at the Center are treated in a similar fashion with respect to disciplinary actions and employment practices. To the fullest extent practical, the lines of authority set forth in Exhibit "A" to this Agreement shall be followed in disciplining employees. When necessary, disciplinary action will be coordinated through the Operations Committee. 8. Work Schedules. City and County dispatchers shall work the same shift schedules. The Operations Committee shall have the authority to make revisions to the work schedules, if and when needed, in order to ensure maximum operational effectiveness and to limit overtime expenses as much as possible. Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 15 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) 9. Employee Transfer. Any agreements in the future considering transfer of employees from one organization to another, will ensure no transfers will be forced or required. 10. ECC Staffing. Except as to the number of dispatcher positions as provided in Section II.E.3., any changes in the number and type of personnel assigned to the ECC which are not included in the approved ECC budget must be approved by both CITY and COUNTY legislative bodies. F. Allocation of Operational Costs 1. Shared Operational Costs. COUNTY and CITY will share certain expenses associated with operating the Emergency Communications Center. Each party's share of these operational expenses shall be the ratio of the number of emergency vehicle responses dispatched ("first responder incidents") by the Center within each party's fire protection service area to the total number of emergency vehicle responses dispatched by the Center multiplied by the actual cost of the shared operational expense item. Reimbursement for operational costs associated with the fire Emergency Communications Center shall be limited to direct costs which have been previously budgeted and approved by CITY and COUNTY legislative bodies. The following operational expenses shall be shared by the COUNTY and the CITY using the above formula: a. Facility Expenses and Maintenance. Daily operational maintenance and supply expenses such as office supplies, utilities, and janitorial services shall be shared by the County and the City. Emergency Communications Center facility maintenance and repair costs directly associated with the fire dispatch facility will be based solely on the fire dispatch portion of Control 5. b. Computer Systems Maintenance Expenses. Computer systems maintenance expenses shall include all electronic equipment associated with the fire dispatch system not covered by warranty or purchase/lease agreement, for which the County Fire Department is currently responsible for maintenance and operations. Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 16 May 6, 1999 (1:13PM) c. Software. Computer software maintenance and modifications: 1. System software maintenance costs, including programming and data input, not covered by warranty or purchase/lease agreement. 2. The costs of software changes or modifications shall be paid by the party desiring such changes or modifications. d. Salary_ and Benefits of Center Manager. Although the Fire Communications Center Manager will be a County employee, the CITY shall reimburse the COUNTY its (the CITY's) portion of the Manager's salary and benefits. e. Normal and customary operating expenses budgeted and approved by the Operations Committee within the COUNTY Fire Department's budget object of services and supplies, such as utilities, office supplies, training, travel expenses, etc. 2. Non-shared Costs. The costs of providing, operating and maintaining the following items will remain the sole responsibility of each party: a. Telephone. Telephone systems and lines will remain separate and all costs associated with each party's telephone system shall remain the responsibility of, and be paid by, the party owning the system. b. Employee Salaries and Benefits. With the exception of the Fire Communications Center Manager, whose salary and benefits shall be shared by the COUNTY and the CITY, salaries and benefits of COUNTY employees stationed at the Center shall be paid solely by the COUNTY and salaries and benefits of CITY employees stationed at the Center shall be paid solely by the CITY. Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 17 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) c. Computer Hardware. The COUNTY will pay for the Emergency Communications Center computer-aided dispatch upgrade with the exception that CITY will pay for two computer dispatch workstations and agreed upon related furniture, equipment and access6ries as shown in Exhibit "C". Any future expenditure involving the sharing of costs associated with CAD hardware, software~ furniture and equipment shall be agreed upon and approved by both the City Council and Board of Supervisors. d. Special Materials or Equipment The costs of special materials or equipment, unique to each party will be the responsibility of each party. 3. Payment by Ci _ty. The CITY shall pay the COUNTY, the City's share of the Center's operational expenses quarterly, except that the payment as shown in Exhibit "C" will be made to the COUNTY by August 1, 1999. a. COUNTY shall report to the CITY following the end of each calendar year: 1. The total number of incidents. 2. The number of incidents within the COUNTY's fire protection service area. 3. The number of incidents within the CITY's fire protection service area. b. The CITY's portion of the shared operational cost items shall be determined by averaging the ratio of the number of incidents within the CITY's fire protection service area to the total number of first responder incidents, emergency vehicle responses, dispatched by the Center, for the immediately prior calendar year, multiplied by the actual cost of the shared operational expense items for each calendar quarter in the following fiscal year. Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 18 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) c. The COUNTY will bill the CITY within thirty (30) days of the close of each calendar quarter, and payment is due from the CITY to the COUNTY within forty-five (45) days of receipt of the invoice. The invoice will include documentation of the billed costs. 4. Agreements with other Agencies Negotiations with other agencies for dispatch services using the Emergency Communications Center will be conducted between the two Fire Chiefs. Any agreements with other agencies for dispatch services using the Emergency Communications Center will be approved by both CITY and COUNTY legislative bodies. 5. Emergency Expenses Any unanticipated or emergency operational costs associated with the ECC which are not included in the approved ECC budget must be approved by' both CITY and COUNTY legislative bodies. 6. Audit. CITY may at its own expense audit the operational costs billed by the COUNTY. Should the CITY desire to contest the amount of a billing for Operational costs, the matter will be resolved as set forth in Section II.C. 1. G. Termination. In the event any party desires to terminate Section II of this Agreement, the mechanism therefore is provided in Section VIII (B). III. JOINT USE OF THE OLIVE DRIVE FIRE TRAINING FACILITY A. Section III of this Agreement shall apply to the audio and video materials and equipment, classrooms, offices, props, drill tower, water system, and those facilities directly associated with the ODFTC. B. A Training Facility Committee will be established consisting of the CITY Training Officer, the COUNTY Training Officer, the CITY Assistant Chief - Suppression Services, a designated COUNTY Deputy Chief- Operations and Training, the CITY Fire Chief, and the COUNTY Fire Chief. The operations of the ODFTC will be under the direction of the CITY and COUNTY Training Officers. Any problems beyond their scope will be handled in conjunction with the two Training Officers and their immediate supervisors. If there is a dispute and the Training Officers cannot reach Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 19 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) agreement, resolution of the disputed issue will be conducted pursuant to Section VI. C. CITY and COUNTY will receive standardized training for utilization of common, standardized operating procedures. The Standardized Training Program will be approved and implemented by the CITY and COUNTY Fire Chiefs. D. Each entity will assign a Battalion Chief and appropriate staff to the Training Division. Personnel duties and responsibility will be assigned, avoiding duplication, by the CITY Assistant Chief- Suppression Services and a designated COUNTY Deputy Chief- Operations and Training. E. The Training Division and/or administration of programs or operations unique to each department, will remain the responsibility of the respective department, except that, upon mutual agreement of the CITY and COUNTY Fire Chiefs, the training for such programs or operations may be combined as part of the Standardized Training Program referenced in paragraph III.C., above~ Examples of these types of Standardized Training Programs are: 1. .Accident investigation and safety oversight 2. Examinations - promotional, entrance, probationary 3. Reserve Firefighter programs 4. Explorer Scout programs 5. Mandated individual training records required by State 6. Reimbursable continuing education programs 7. Health and safety programs and testing 8. Non-metro/rural operations 9. Major wildland operations 10. Paramedic training 11. Pump testing F. CITY and COUNTY Fire Departments will each be entitled to equal access and use of the ODFTC. Other agencies may be allowed to use the facility when the CITY and COUNTY Fire Departments are not scheduled to use them. When other agencies utilize the facilities, they shall submit, in writing, a Hold Harmless Agreement in a form approved by County Counsel and the City Attorney. Fees shall be levied for the use of the ODFTC facilities as directed by the CITY and COUNTY Fire Chiefs. Fees may be collected for Fina/JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 20 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) use of the ODFTC according to the schedule of fees developed by the Training Officers and approved by the Fire Technology Committee. The Fire Technology Committee includes members of Bakersfield Community College and the Bakersfield and Kern County Fire Departments as recorded in City of Bakersfield Agreement No. 96-299 (1). G. The COUNTY has responsibility for budgeting and administering the monies for the ODFTC. Costs will be shared between the COUNTY and CITY utilizing the guidelines set forth in this section. The COUNTY will invoice the CITY for the CITY'S share of the ODFTC's costs on a quarterly basis no later than thirty (30) days after the end of each quarter. Payment from the CITY to the COUNTY is due within forty-five (45) days of receipt of the invoice. 1. A proposed budget for shared costs shall be presented to the CITY and COUNTY Fire Chiefs no later than February 1 of each year for the next fiscal year. Said annual budget is subject to modification and approval by each agency's legislative body. 2. Capital expenditures, such as buildings, major equipment and major maintenance, will be funded on a 50-50 basis as designated by the Training Facility Committee and budgeted and approved by each. legislative body. Expenditures not approved by both entities will be the responsibility of the entity authorizing the expenditure. 3. Special materials or equipment unique to each department will be purchased separately by each department. 4. Costs to repair major damages (except normal wear) caused to drill tower, water system, classrooms, and other facilities directly associated with the ODFTC will be paid for by the entity causing the damage. 5. Other costs associated with the ODFTC will be funded by the appropriate agency in accordance with the cost proportion percentages as follows: Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 21 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) Allocation - Salaries and Benefits ODFTC CITY's Share AV Specialist 100% 50% Custodian 36% 50% I Groundskeeper 25% 50% Allocation - Building and Grounds ODFTC CITY's Share Water 25% 50% Building Maintenance 100% 50% Landscaping Supplies 100% 50% Allocation - Suoolies and Daily Operating (examples) ODFTC CITY's Share Custodial Supplies 100% 30% Fax Line 100% 30% Office Expense '100% 30% Subscriptions 100% 30% Library Services 100% 30% Video Tapes 100% 30% PG&E 100% 30% Refuse Service 100% 30% Shared Copy Charges 100% 30% Paper Charges 100% % based on usage Copy Machine - lease or .... % based on usage as purchase to be determined chargeable by accounts H. Termination. In the event any party desires to terminate Section III of this Agreement, the mechanism therefore is provided in Section VIII (B). Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 22 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) IV. SUPPLEMENTARY AND MUTUAL FIRE PROTECTION A. All available and necessary personnel and equipment of the Fire Department of each party will, upon the request of the Fire Department of the other party, aid and assist said other party within and upon the Fire Service Area herein above described. B. The determination of the availability of personnel and/or equipment shall be vested in the Chief, or his/her designee, of the department furnishing the same. C. 'The primary responsibility for providing fire protection and fire suppression services shall fall upon the fire department in whose particular governmental area the fire occurs; provided, however, that the fire department of the party first arriving at the scene of a fire within and upon land lying within the governmental area of the other party shall take immediate action to suppress such fire and shall maintain such action until the arrival of the fire department of the other party in whose governmental area the fire exists; upon the arrival of said last-mentioned fire department it shall forthwith assume the primary responsibility for the suppression of such fire. The County agrees to provide the closest engine response to areas under the city's jurisdiction which lie outside the joint powers agreement boundary. D. Each party has heretofore found and determined, and does by these presents find and determine, that the value of its service to the other party is equal to the value of the service of the other party to it in the performance of the terms and conditions in this Section set forth; accordingly, no monetary charge shall be made by either party to the other for any service rendered under the provisions of this Section. V. INDEMNITY A. Neither party shall be liable to the other party for any loss, damage, liability claim or cause of action for damage to, or destruction of, property or for injury to or death of persons arising solely from any act or omission of the other party's officers, agents, and employees. Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 23 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) B. The CITY will indemnify, hold harmless, and defend (upon written request of the COUNTY) the COUNTY, its officers, employees, and agents from any and all loss, damage, liability, claim or cause of action of every nature whatsoever for physical damage to or destruction of property, including the property of the COUNTY, or physical injury to or death of any person, including the COUNTY's officers, employees and agents, which may arise out of any act or omission of CITY, its officers, employees or agents. C. The COUNTY will indemnify, hold harmless, and defend (upon the written request of the CITY) the CITY, its officers, employees, and agents from any and all loss, damage, liability, claim or cause of action of every nature whatsoever for physical damage to or destruction of property, including the property of CITY, or physical injury to or death of any person, including the CITY's officers, employees and agents, which may arise out of any act or omission of COUNTY, its officers, employees or agents. D. The party against whom any claim arising from the subject matter of this Agreement is filed will give prompt notice of the filing of the claim to the other party. E. Government Code section 850.6 will govern COUNTY and CITY responsibility for any injuries or damage for which liability is imposed as a result of the acts or omissions of their respective employees occurring in the course of providing fire protection, fire emergency communications, and other emergency services and each party will be responsible for the acts and omissions of its own employees. For purposes of Government Code section 850.6, those areas within the CITY but protected by COUNTY pursuant to this Agreement shall be "outside of the area regularly served and protected" by CITY and those unincorporated areas protected by CITY pursuant to this Agreement shall be "outside the area regularly served and protected" by COUNTY. VI. RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES In the event there is a dispute involving this Agreement, such dispute shall first be addressed by an operational committee, if such exists, for the matter. In the event such committee is unable to resolve the dispute, or no relevant operational committee exists, the dispute shall be considered by the City and County Fire Chiefs. If the dispute is still unresolved, the matter shall be considered by the County Administrative Officer and the City Manager. Either the County Administrative Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 24 May 6, 19990 (I:13PM) Officer or the City Manager may request the assistance of a non-binding arbitrator should any item remain unresolved. The COUNTY and CITY will share equally in the cost of arbitration. VII. IMMUNITIES CITY and COUNTY avail themselves of all statutory protections and immunities afforded pursuant to Government Code Section 850, et. seq. and other applicable laws for all duties, obligations and services provided pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. VIII. TERM OF AGREEMENT A. General Provisions This Agreement will become effective on the date when completely approved and executed by both the Bakersfield City Council and Kern County Board of Supervisors. Except for the Emergency Communications Center and Olive Drive Fire Training Facility Termination Provisions, this Agreement shall remain in force until modified or dissolved by mutual agreement of both the CITY and COUNTY. B. Emergency Communications Center and Olive Drive Fire Training Facili _ty Termination Provisions The Emergency Communications Center and Olive Drive Fire Training Facility portions of this Agreement (Section II. and Section III. of this Agreement) may be terminated by CITY or COUNTY, by giving twelve (12) months written notice of its intention to terminate this portion of the agreement to the other party. IX. MODIFICATIONS TO AGREEMENT This Agreement may be modified only by the mutual agreement of the parties in writing approved by formal action by the Kern County Board of Supervisors and the Bakersfield City Council. X. WAIVER No waiver of a breach of any provision of this Agreement will constitute a waiver of any other breach, or of such provision. Failure of the CITY or COUNTY to enforce Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 25 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) at any time, or from time-to-time, any provision of this Agreement will not be construed as a waiver thereof. The remedies herein reserved will be cumulative and additional to any other remedies in law or equity. XI. PARTIAL INVALIDITY Should any part, term, portion, or provision of this Agreement be finally decided to be in conflict with any law of the United States or the State of California, or otherwise be unenforceable or ineffectual, the validity of the remaining parts, terms, portions, or provisions will be deemed severable and will not be affected thereby, provided such remaining portions or provisions can be construed in substance to constitute the Agreement which the parties intended to enter into in the first instance. XII. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties relating to the rights herein granted and the obligations herein assumed. Any oral representations or modification concerning this Agreement will be of no force or effect excepting a subsequent modification in writing, signed by both parties. XIII. COUNTY AND CITY RECORDS At any time during normal business hours, upon the request of either party, each party will make available for examination all of its existing records with respect to matters covered by this Agreement for purposes of audit, examination, or to make copies of such records, exclusive of confidential personnel files with the exception of the Emergency Communications Manager as this employee is under the joint direction of both CITY and COUNTY. XIV. MISCELLANEOUS The parties stipulate and agree that the incorporated City of Bakersfield does provide structural fire protection services within its boundaries and that for the purpose of Government Code Section 25643, County does not provide structural fire services within the incorporated boundaries of the City of Bakersfield. Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 26 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) XV. NOTICES All notices required or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement may be personally served on the other party by the party giving such notice or may be served by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following addresses: COUNTY: Fire Chief Kern County Fire Department 5642 Victor Street Bakersfield, CA 93308 CITY: Fire Chief Bakersfield Fire Department 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 XVI. EXECUTION This agreement is effective upon execution. It is the product of negotiation and all parties are equally responsible for authorship of this Agreement. Section 1654 of the California Civil Code shall not apply to the interpretation of this Agreement. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 27 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and COUNTY have caused this Agreement to be executed by their authorized agents. APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: "CITY" By: By: Alan Tandy, City Manager Bob Price, Mayor, City of Bakersfield APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: By: By: · Bart Thiltgen, City Attorney Scott Jones, County Administrative Officer APPROVED AS TO FORM: "COUNTY" By: By: Bernard Barmann, County Counsel Jon McQuiston, Chairman Kern County Board of Supervisors APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: By: By: Ron Fraze, Fire Chief Daniel G. Clark, Fire Chief Bakersfield Fire Department Kern County Fire Department Final JPA Master Agreement .wpd Page 28 May 6, 1999 (I:13PM) Joint Emergency Communications Center- Organizational Chart ! Shift I Dispatcher Dispatcher - Dispatcher Dispatcher (City) (County) (County) (City) t Fire Dispatcher t Fire Dispatcher f Fire Dispatcher tFire Dispatcher(City) (City) (City) (City) t Fire Dispatcher ~ Fire Dispatcher ~ Fire Dispatcher ~ Fire Dispatcher (County) (County) (County) (County) --- (County) (County) - (County) (County) -- (County) (County) - (County) (County) EXHIBIT "A" City and County staffnot necessarily assigned to specific shifts as shown. Number of City and County positions subject to Section !I. E. 3 of this Agreement. Emergency Communications Center Recommended Staffing: Jan Feb March April May June July · Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec day shift 4 4 4 4 5 . · 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 night shift 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 staffing 16 16 16 16 18 18 18 18 18 18 16 16 Exhibit Fire ECC Proportionate Share of Communications System Upgrade: 6 Fire ECC workstations out of 21 total workstations is 28.6% City maintains 2 of the 6 workstations for the Fire ECC (1/3) System Fire ECC City Fire ECC Costs 3rd party Upgrade Cost Total 1/3 share Equipment Software software Total Fire Call-Taker 6~59 16,216 2,333 '$24,808 Fire Mgr 4,248 19,433 1,007 24,688 Fire Dispatcher 1.6 37,554 97,297 13,996 148,847. Fire Remote Workstations 0 $48,061 $132,946 $17,336 $198,343 $198,343 · $66,114 3rd party Common Costs Equipment Software software Total Primary Sower $35,425 $37,537 14,182 87,144 Secondary Server 24,320 26,812 5,664 . 56,796 Communication Sower 24,148 144.788 4,417 173.353 GIS Workstation 4,248 16,210 20,458 Interface Products 0 Networking 14.130 14,130 $331,881 %286 $100.638 $33,546 Sewices and Expenses Interface Products $163,100 Project Mgt Services 157,425 Mapping Services 24,500 Training Services 23,000 Liability Insur & installation 24,550 Amendment add-ons 52,500 $445,075 %286 $127~'91 $42,430 15% discount par contract w/vendor ($197,931 * .323) ($63,932) ($21,311) $362,341 $120.780 Fumiture/workstotion cost: City portion only (2 workstations) Not a shared cost $13,330 Total ~'~$62,341 $134,110 'These totals show those costs applicable to City costs and do not necessarily represent all costs of the County for the Communications System Upgrade. Exhibit "C" ~- ~-c I i I),~,' .', - ~ I [ ?~._: m~ ~i / F .- I ~ ,~'-- h. '~.~:~ I , . .. ~_:~=~]~,./..~ ~~~ ..... ~ , ~ . ~ ~ ~ .... ,. ,-.~ ~= ~.,. . .,,.,,,. ~}/~'.~ ~ 2~[" ~~.'.:.~,~ ,';,~'~...,',~,..~,, ..... / / ~F/~m ,~ - , :~ · · . , ~., . :~,:. ~ ,~ , - ,,,~, :: .I ..... .., -,., ]~ // ~:.'1 ~, ~ ~, ~!~ X .........< / ~" ¢ ,%/ ,' .... ,4- P~ ::'~' ,, / ,. . , BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (661) 326-3724 RAUL M. ROJAS, DIRECTOR* CITY ENGI~r_~R April 28, 1999 Mr. Bart Bohn Director, Caltrans District 6 P.O. Box 12616 Fresno, CA 93778-2616 Re: Paving of Shoulders, State Route 178 Dear Bart: State Route 178 between State Route 184 and the mouth of'the Kern River Canyon primarily consists ora two-lane facility with little to no paved shoulders. As you may be aware, this facility carries fairly large weekday traffic volumes, and has much larger traffic volumes on weekends and holidays. City staff and City Councilmembers have received numerous complaints about this condition. Correction of this problem would seem to be an excellent candidate for the State Highway Operational Protection Program (SHOPP). The City urges Caltrans to strongly consider constructing paved shoulders along this State Route, and to pursue these improvements quickly. Should you have any questions regarding the above, please contact Ted Wright of this Department at 661-326-3575. The City of Bakersfield would be pleased to provide any technical assistance or information needed to achieve completion of this project. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, RAUL M. ROJAS Public Works Director cc: Mike Maggard, Councilmember, Ward 3 ..,._. - Alan Tandy, City Manager Jacques LaRochelle, Engineering Services Manager Theodore Wright, Civil Engineer IV CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM April 30, 1999 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Gene Bogart, Water Resources Manager~ SUBJECT: FREEWAY WORKING COMMITTEE - Update Our first Kern River Freeway working committee was hosted by Ron Brummett at the Kem COG conference room yesterday at 9:30 A.M. In attendance were approximately 20 people repreSenting Kern COG, CAL-Trans, Rosedale-Rio Bravo WSD, Kern County Water Agency (KCWA), Castle and Cooke, Kern County Roads and the City Public Works and Water Departments. Also in attendance was Councilmember David Couch and representatives from Assemblyman Florez and Senator Jim Costa's office. Following introductions, Rosedale staff began questioning CAL-Trans on the process and potential mitigation available to preserve recharge facilities. Rosedale emphasized that alternate or replacement recharge areas must be near the existing facilities since the eastern portion of the District provides a major portion of the Districts groundwater recharge benefit. CAL-Trans explained the current status of the Tier 1 biological review and possible mitigation measures that are typically used; i.e.: 1) Bridge piers over spreading ponds. 2) Fill in portion of ponds with roadway embankment, then replace lost acreage with new ponds of at least equal recharge capacity (this can sometimes require more than one-to-one replacement acreage). 3) Provide storm water containment areas that prevent Freeway runoff from flowing into recharge areas. Questions were asked regarding the final alignment of the Kern River Freeway, and how much flexibility was available to adjust the present alignment. CAL-Trans staff explain,,ed_the hi~o_xy.&n_d - 3 FJ:J April 30, 1999 SUBJECT: Freeway Working Committee - Update process of reviewing and scoping over a dozen different alignments during the last decade. At this point in the process, the final alignment would normally only be slightly adjusted (500 feet ±) as necessary to avoid major engineering conflicts (i.e., pump stations, etc.). We then discussed using the Kern River Freeway as an opportunity to deal with other development issues along the alignment. These issues and ideas included: 1) FLOOD CONTROL - Using the Kern River Freeway project to provide needed flood-protection for the existing Texaco Refinery and Tosco properties located on the north side of the Kern River floodplain. 2) PROTECTION OF EXISTING CANALS & PUMPING FACILITIES - Providing an alignment just east of Coffee Road that runs just south of Brimhall Road, thereby avoiding Cross Valley Pump Station No. 6, the major Friant-Kern Canal gate control structures, canal syphons, and the sensitive Kern River channel area. 3) PROTECT & EXPAND GROUNDWATER RECHARGE - Provide new and replacement recharge ponds immediately east of Allen Road. This would provide both a temporary recharge area during freeway construction and provide the needed barrow material for road embankment. The new recharge area east of Allen Road would also provide a very visible, aesthetic buffer between the freeway and future development both north and south of the freeway. 4) NEW YEAR-AROUND RECHARGE FACILITY - Rosedale RBWSD, KCWA Improvement District No. 4 and No. 1 (Flood Control District), together with the City Water Department could work together and expand on the new recharge area (actually add acreage) and put together a year-mound recharge facility (similar to Truxtun Lake, only larger). 5) IMPROVE LONG-RANGE DEVELOPMENT & ACCESS TO KERN RIVER PARKWAY - Using the existing Rosedale Channel east of Allen Road, incorporate new recharge areas as public access corridors to Kern River Parkway. This has wide appeal with both Parkway and Equestrian groups. 2 April 3O, 1999 SUBJECT: Freeway Working Committee - Update The response was very positive. Ron Brummett suggested we enter into smaller working groups to further outline the ideas. Three working subcommittees were formed, as follows: · ROSEDALE WORKING GROUP Includes water recharge, Parkway access, equestrian and development issues. · CROSS VALLEY CANAL WORKING GROUP Includes canal facilities, pump station and flood control issues. · WATER BANK WORKING GROUP Includes the Freeway alignment issues west of Heath Road to 1-5. It was suggested by the City, in conjunction with Rosedale RBWSD, Castle and Cooke, and KCWA, we will begin next week with soil borings in Section 36 (East of Allen Road, North of Kern River Channel) to establish an information base for replacement recharge areas. Flom Core of our office will be working directly with Jack LaRochelle and Dave Pearson of Kleinfelder & Associates to coordinate the soils testing with Castle and Cooke (the property owners), Rosedale Rio Bravo WSD and KCWA. To keep the project activity moving, the committees will meet weekly and/or bi-weekly as necessary to complete the tasks. To maintain continuity, each person will designate an alternate so that no sub-committee meetings are missed. Ron Brummett set the next full working committee meeting for Thursday, May 27th, 1999 at 10:00 A.M. at Kern COG. At that time the subcommittees will give their updates. GB:sr cc: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director Flora Core, Water Resources Director Jack-LaRochelle, Engineering Services Manager Economic and Community Development Department MEMORANDUM April 30, 1999 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager /t~ [ ~7-} FROM: Jake Wager, Economic Development Director SUBJECT: Update of Old Town Kern-Pioneer and Sout t~t!!Jl~rsfield PAC meetings the week of April 26, 1999 Two Project Area Committee (PAC) meetings were scheduled during the week of April 26, 1999. A summary of each is outlined below. The seventh meeting of the Project Area Committee (PAC) for O1d Town Kern-Pioneer was held on Tuesday, April 27. The agenda covered the following item: Transmittal of Old Town Kern-Pioneer Implementation Plan PAC vice chair Don Cohen called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. All but three members of the PAC were present. Three members of the public were in attendance. During public statements Lorraine Unger spoke. She indicated that she had been observing the PAC meetings as a representative of the local Sierra Club whose focus this year was urban sprawl. She had attended a County Parks meeting during which a Statement had been made about using redevelopment monies to build a baseball stadium in the downtown area south of the railroad tracks'. She is concerned about such use. She also encouraged PAC members to attend CDDA meetings as the PAC meetings are now winding down. There were no other public statements. Paul Schowalter of GRC Redevelopment Consultants reviewed the Implementation Plan (IP). He explained that the State requires redevelopment agencies to adopt an implementation plan every five years. The Agency must adopt a plan for the OTK-P project. He explained that at this time little is known about future projects so the plan is pretty general in nature. Future plans will be more specific. The IP will be integrated into the Report to City Council being prepared for the May 26 Joint Public Hearing. Much of the information found in the IP has already been seen as a part of other documents. The Goals and Objectives section is straight out of the Plan. S:LREDVAREA'xPAC meetings week4-26 memo.wpd Update of PAC Meetings, Week of April 26 April 3O, 1999 Page 2 Section 13.2, Public Improvements describes what projects are available for funding, not necessarily to be done. Section 13.3 says what the agency can do with developers. Section 13.4 covers the housing assistance requirements taken directly out of the Plan. Section 13.5 covers the relocation assistance as discussed in an earlier PAC meeting. Ms. Welch asked about relocation business costs. Mr. Schowalter indicated that they could be substantial. Ms. Warren asked if a resident had to be relocated and wanted to move to Delano, would relocation cover that expense? Mr. Schowalter indicated that the move had to be within the area or very close to it in order to qualify. Mr. Schowalter went on with the IP review indicating that section 13.6 was also directly from the Plan. Section 13.7, 5-year phasing, provided as much detail as was possible at this stage - which was minimal. The dollar amounts indicated were only estimates based on practical, historical experience. Ms. Herd asked who performs the tasks outlined on page 124 (marketing programs, grant writing, community outreach, etc.)? Ms. Barnes indicated that staff generally handles most of those types of activities, occasionally a consultant is contracted, and KEDC is also used to handle economic development components. Ms. Herd asked what happens if money expended exceeds the dollars listed in the IP. Mr. Schowalter explained that these figures are estimates only. Whether the agency meets, exceeds, or fails to expend the estimates, no amendments to the IP are required. Mr. Schowalter discussed the housing assistance component, indicating that while all types of housing assistance could become available, based on the type of housing in the area, rehab/repair of existing properties will probably be the most commonly used tool. Ms. Warren asked if assistance would be in form of a grant or loan? Mr. Castro asked if there would be assistance for a new building? S:~REDVAREA~PAC meetings week4-26 memo.wpd Update of PAC Meetings, Week of April 26 April 3O, I999 Page 3 Mr. Schowalter indicated that all types of assistance could become available. Section 13.8, alleviation of blighting conditions, is required by law, according to Mr. Schowalter. The section describes how providing improvements will alleviate blight. The agency's actions must be of benefit to the community. During PAC members statements, Ms. Morales referred to an article in Sunday's paper regarding the Superintendent of Schools purchases of land which are no longer on the tax rolls. While not opposed to things that improve schools and education and may bring in more jobs, she is concerned about the reduction of tax monies with the conversion of these properties to public ownership. Ms. Morales wants to improve the tax base. Mr. Manzano also expressed concern about the impact of the properties surrounding Stramler Park. Ms. Morales indicated that a reference to the Health and Safety Code referred to a cause of blight. She said that the causes were much harder to describe than the definition. Ms. Warren said that since this plan covers such a large area, not just Baker Street, she wants a theme created for Baker Street to increase public interest. Ms. Herd asked what role the agency and the council have in determining what happens in the area. Mr. Schowalter indicated that the agency was responsible. Ms. Herd stated that in the rest of the City the constituents can contact their elected representative. The agency modifies that relationship. Going to staff circumvents the democratic process. If public goes to staff, how is that handled? Ms. Barnes explained that staff reviews public requests with a supervisor and the department head and then responds to public member. She further stated that public can use the public statement portion of the Council meeting and or CDDA to express their concerns. Mr. Cohen, on behalf of Mr. Randall, thanked all the members of the PAC for showing up to the meetings. He also thanked staff for their assistance. He also told Mr. Schowalter that he appreciated his guidance through the process. Ms. Barnes reported to the PAC that Mr. Burch had resigned earlier in the day. He was returning S:Xl~DVAREA~PAC meetings week4-26 memo.wpd Update of PAC Meetings, Week of April 26 April 30, 1999 Page 4 to his home in New York. As a result, Mr. Castro, as the elected alternate, is now the replacement and can vote. There being no further statements, Mr. Cohen adjoumed the meeting at 7:35 P.M. The eighth meeting of the Project Area Committee (PAC) for Southeast Bakersfield was scheduled on Thursday, April 29. For the second consecutive meeting, there was no quorum present to conduct business, However, Vice Chair Stephanie Campbell requested Ernie Glover from GRC Redevelopment Consultants to provide his scheduled presentations in a workshop format. These presentations covered the following documents: · Rules Governing Participation and Preferences for Owners, Operators of Businesses, and Tenants; · Rules and Regulations for Implementation of the California Relocation Assistance Law; and · Implementation Plan. All action items were deferred until a future meeting. Staff will continue to provide these updates as the PAC meetings progress. S:~EDVAREA~PAC meetings week4-26 memo.wpd BAKERSFIELD Economic and Community Development Department MEMORANDUM May 6, 1999 " TO: Honorable Mayor and City C entral District Development Agency . FROM: Alan Tandy, City Manager .fi]r/ [ ' . SUBJECT: May 26 Joint Public lteari~ reg~irding proposed Old Town Kern-Pioneer and Southeast Bakersfield/~ edev~lopment Project Areas The May 26 meeting is the culmination of our efforts to form redevelopment project areas in the Old Town Kern-Pioneer and Southeast Bakersfield areas. Because this meeting will involve several steps required by law, and will include both the City Council and the Central District Development Agency (CDDA), the procedures will be a bit more involved than you may expect. Soon you will receive a very voluminous document entitled "Report to the Bakersfield City Council" for each project area. This report contains the numerous documents that are required for the redevelopment formation process, and chronicles the steps taken during the past several months. Because of the unique process required for formation of redevelopment project areas, and because of the many documents, I thought it would be helpful to provide a step-by-step format to guide you through the process. 1. First of all, remember that we have two formation processes being condUcted simultaneOUsly. Each project area is separate and distinct and, as such, will have its own set of legislative actions. Because of this, there will be two separate public hearings. 2. On the Consent Calendar, the Council will be asked to approve two resolutions' to elect that the City receive tax increment from the Old Town Kern-Pioneer area and the Southeast Bakersfield area, respectively. Section 33376 of the California Community Redevelopment Law requires adoption of such a resolution "prior" to the adoption of the redevelopment plan. 3. The CDDA and the Council will hold a Joint Public Hearing for the Old Town Kern- Pioneer area and will receive comments; the Mayor will preside over the joint hearing ({}33355). At~er written and oral comments are received, the Mayor will close the public portion of the Joint Public Hearing. Honorable Mayor and City Council Central District Development Agency May 6, 1999 Pat~e 2 As of this date, we are in receipt of two written objections to the formation of the project areas. Therefore, as required by law, the Mayor wffi then continue the hearing to the next scheduled meeting date, which is June 16. No Agency or Council resolution, other than the tax increment ones which were discussed above, should be introduced at the May 26 hearing. 4. The CDDA and the Council will then hold a Joint Public Hearing for the Southeast Bakersfield area and will receive comments; again, the Mayor will preside over the joint hearing. As described above, after written and oral comments are received, the Mayor will close the public portion of that Joint Public Hearing. Again, because of written objections already on file, the Mayor wffi continue the hearing to June 16. 5. ' The CDDA and Council are required to respond to each written objection, whether presented prior to or during the hearing. Staffwill be developing responses and will present these to the CDDA and Council for approval on June 16. 6. At the June 16 meeting, the Joint Public Hearings will be reopened with both CDDA and Council members in attendance; however, because the public comment portion of the hearings was closed on May 26, no additional public testimony will be taken on June 16. 7. You will once again begin with the Old Town Kern-Pioneer area. There are several legislative actions you will be asked to take which are listed below. You will note that the Agency takes its actions first, followed by Council. a. The CDDA adopts a resolution responding to written objections. b. The CDDA adopts a resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) as properly prepared and making findings based upon the Final EIR. c. The Agency adopts a resolution approving the Redevelopment Plan and' recommending approval to the City Council (§33357). d. The Council adopts a resolution responding to and overruling all objections. e. The Council adopts a resolution certifying review of the Final EIR and making findings based upon the Final EIR. f. The Council gives first reading to an ordinance adopting the Redevelopment Plan. 8. Then you will take steps "a" through "f" once again, this time relative to the Southeast Bakersfield area. 9. At the June 30 meeting, the Council (only) will give the ordinance for Old Town Kern- Pioneer a second reading, finally adopting the redevelopment plan. 10. Then, the Council (only) will give the ordinance for Southeast Bakersfield a second reading, finally adopting that redevelopment plan. Honorable Mayor and City Council Central District Development Agency May 6, 1999 P. al~e 3 11. Both ordinances will become effective July 30 (30 days after the adoption of the ordinances). 12. There is then a 60 day challenge period, which ends August 30. As you are aware, we worked to assure ihat the information about the redevelopment formation process has reached the public. We have complied With state law by, · Sending letters via first class mail to all residents, property owners, businesses, and community organizations in each proposed project area, formally notifying them of the Joint Public Hearing. · Publishing notices in the Bakersfield Californian once a week for each of the four weeks prior to the hearings, as required by law. We have exceeded the requirements of state law by, · Providing the Notice of Joint Public Heating in English and Spanish. · Forwarding each returned letter that has a forwarding address to the new address. · Holding a Town Hall Meeting for each area to discuss the progress of forming the redevelopment project area and the reasons for forming such an area. Notices of thcse meetings were included in the mailed notice of joint public hearing and were printed in English and Spanish. · Providing complete sets of documents associated with the formation process in binders in the City Clerk's Office for public review. · Providing a copy of the "Report to Council" for each project area to the Beale, Baker, 'and Holloway-Gonzales libraries. · Responding to calls on our 24-hour Redevelopment Hofline. " · Responding to e-mail inquiries. · Mailing three newsletters for each project area, keeping the public updated about the process, and encouraging calls and e-mails. All mailings have provided an oppommity to receive additional information in Spanish. In summary, a. Two joint public heatings between the Council and CDDA will be held May 26. Honorable Mayor and City Council Central District Development Agency May 6, 1999 Page 4 b. Due to written objections already filed, the hearings will be continued until June 16, but the public comment portion will be closed May 26. c. All resolutions and ordinances, except for the two resolutions electing to receive tax increment funds, will not be acted upon until June 16. At that time, the first reading of each ordinance establishing a redevelopment project area will be scheduled for the Council. d. On June 30, the second readings of the ordinances will be scheduled and will be Council-only actions. As you can see, the process is very detailed as required by state law. Nevertheless, we have met all requirements as defined by state law and have far exceeded the requirements to keep the public informed about the process. Should you have any questions about the joint public hearing or any other aspect of the redevelopment project area formation process, please feel free to call Jake Wager at 326-3765. dl:\S:LREDVAREA\Couneil & CDDA step by step of JPH.wpd BAKERSFIELD Economic and Community Development Department MEMORANDUM May 7, 1999 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Jake Wager, Economic Development Director ~...~:5 ~ _,,) SUBJECT: Mailings for Redevelopment Joint Public Itear~ Notices of the upcoming Joint Public hearings for the Old Town Kern-Pioneer and Southeast Bakersfield redevelopment project areas were sent to all residents, property owners, tenants, and community organizations in both areas. These mailings numbered 21,375. Those letters that were returned with new addresses were forwarded to these new addresses; this is not required by law. Since the mailings, we have received 24 calls on our 24 hour redevelopment hotline; 12 have been regarding to the Old Town Kern-Pioneer area, and 12 have been for the Southeast Bakersfield area. Most of the callers were seeking additional information about the redevelopment process. None expressed their support of, or opposition to, the establishment of the project areas. dh\SSREDVAREAXaMailing memo to AT.wpd RECeiVeD :]:TV MANAGER'S OFFICE,, BAKERSFIELD Economic and Community Development Department MEMORANDUM May 7, 1999 TO: Central District Development Agency FROM: Jake Wager, Deputy Executive Directo~,~ c~' SUBJECT: Town Hall meetings We are moving toward the culmination of the process of forming two new redevelopment areas. A Town Hall Meeting will be held in each area -- Old Town Kern-Pioneer and Southeast Bakersfield -- next week to focus on the progress in forming each area and the reasons for forming a redevelopment project. Invitations have been mailed to all residents, property owners, business owners, and community organizations in each area. These meetings are open to the public. The Old Town Kern-Pioneer Town Hall Meeting will be held Tuesday, May 11 at 6:30PM at the Boys and Girls Club Gymnasium, 801 Niles Street. The Southeast Bakersfield Town Hall Meeting will be held Thursday, may 13 at the Martin Luther King, Jr.., Community Center Gymnasium, 1000 South Owens Street. cc: Alan Tandy, Executive Director dI:\S:LREDVAREA\CDDA Town Hall Mtgs memo.wpd i,S!TY MANAGEWS OFFICE! GREEN SALAD Fresh bed of salad greens and vegetables. BRUSCHETTA BREAD Pyrenee's French style Baguette, brushed with spicy marinara sauce, a layer of fresh diced tomatoes, red onion & fresh garlic, a blend of fresh herbs & spices, and parmesan cheese. GARLIC BREAD Pyrenee's French styled Baguett, brushed with olive oil, parmesan cheese and a blend of Italian seasonings. PARMESAN BREAD Pyrenee's French style Baguette brushed with olive oil a layer of parmesan cheese and a blend of Italian seasoning. MILANO BREAD Pyrenee's French style Baguette covered with our homemade sauce and a blend of melted cheeses. NACHOS Homemade corn tortilla chips covered with seasoned ground meat, a blend of shredded cheeses, shredded lettuce, tomatoes, olives, green onions, sour cream, homemade salsa and guacamole. SOUTHWEST CHICKEN SALAD Fresh salad greens, vegetables, toped with Southwest seasoned grilled white meat chicken. ORIENTAL CHICKEN SALAD Fresh salad greens and vegetables, toped with teriyaki marinated white meat chicken, mandarin oranges, green onions and walnuts. VEGETABLE, CHEESE AND MEAT PLATTER Fresh seasonal vegetables and an assortment of cheeses accompanied by salami, smoked ham and turkey breast meats. Served with Ranch dressing, condiments and rolls. VEGETABLE AND CHEESE PLATTER Fresh seasonal vegetables, and an assortment of cheeses served with Ranch dressing. VEGETABLE PLATTER Fresh seasonal vegetables served with ranch dressing for dipping. CHEESE PLATTER Provolone, Swiss, Cheddar, Hot Pepper and Muenster cheeses. Served with an assortment of crackers. STEAK SALAD Fresh salad greens and vegetables, covered with grilled seasoned steak, and french fries and a blend of melted cheeses. BRUSCHETTA PLATTER Pyrenee's French style Baguette bread covered with diced tomatoes, red onions, fresh parsley, fresh garlic and parmesan cheese, lightly baked. CHICKEN WINGS SPICY GARLIC & SPICY HOT GARLIC Whole fresh jumbo wings served with our homemade spicy garlic seasoning or spicy hot garlic. Served with celery sticks and ranch dressing. HOT DOGS AND KRAUT Served with all the condiments and Pyrenees's mini submarine rolls. CALIFORNIA WRAPS An assortment of spinach, tomato and flour tortillas. Filled with shredded lettuce, turkey, tomatoes, roasted red peppers, avocado and our own special sauce. Each tortilla features all of the above except the tomato which is filled with all of the vegetables including alfalfa sprouts. CHILI Ground beef, onions, garlic, jalapenos, tomatoes, pinto beans and a blend of fine spices and a fresh tomato sauce. SHEET PAN PIZZA AVAILABLE TOPPINGS: cheese, onions, mushrooms, jalapenos, tomatoes, black olives, sausage, sweet peppers, hot peppers. PIZZA ROLL Fresh Pyrenees's dough rolled with our fresh homemade sauce and a delicious cheese blend. We also have one that includes pepperoni. CHICKEN BAYOU Boneless breast of chicken, stuffed with Cajun Andouille, shrimp and fresh vegetables. Covered with a green peppercorn sauce. Covered with a fire roasted pepper sauce. CHICKEN MEDITERRANEAN Boneless breast of chicken, stuffed with couscous, fresh roasted vegetables, and asiago cheese. CHICKEN PINATA Boneless breast of chicken, stuffed with fresh vegetables, chorizo and monterey jack cheese. Covered with a demi glaze. PASTA STATION Your choice of meat marinara or alfredo sauce. One choice of pasta, rigatoni, spaghetti or fettuccini. ITALIAN SAUSAGE Italian sauce with a blend of spices, fresh green and red bell peppers, onions. Simmered with Italian sausage and served on Pyreneese mini subs. VEGETABLE STIR FRY A blend of fresh red and green bell peppers, onions, zucchini and yellow squash, mushrooms, broccoli, flesh garlic, celery, and carrots. Sauteed in a special teriyaki sauce. CHICKEN STIR FRY Fresh seasoned chicken breast combined with fresh red and green bell peppers, onions, zucchini and yellow squash, mushrooms, broccoli, flesh garlic, celery, and carrots. Sauteed in a special teriyaki sauce. NACHOS Homemade corn tortilla chips covered with seasoned ground meat, a blend of shredded cheese, shredded lettuce, tomatoes, olives, green onions, sour cream, homemade salsa and guacamole. FAJITA BAR Soft flour tortillas served with sauteed peppers, onions and mushrooms. Shredded lettuce, tomatoes, black olives, cilantro, shredded cheese, sour cream, fresh homemade salsa and .guaeamole. Chicken or Beef. TACO BAR Soft flour tortillas served with seasoned beef, shredded lettuce, tomatoes, onions, shredded cheese, sour cream, fresh homemade ~' :" salsa and guacamole. ~- SUBMARINE SANDWICHES All served open faced with shredded lettuce, tomatoes, onions, cheese and our own special dressing. These will serve 2 to 4 people. Turkey Breast, Roast Beef, Philly Steak & Cheese, Italian, and Vegetarian. CHOCOLATE-DIPPED STRAWBERRIES Fresh strawberries dipped in dark Belgium chocolate. FROZEN ICE CREAM PIE Belgium chocolate, vanilla, strawberry, chocolate ice cream, in a bed of chocolate graham crackers, and a layer of carmel. IvlAY - 6 1999 ','C~TY MANAGEFi'S OFF~C DEPARTMENT OF RECREATION AND PARKS DATE: May 6, 1999 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Stan Ford, Director of Recreation and Parks SUBJECT: Public Meeting on Proposed Skateboard Park Last night we hosted the 'first of two public meetings regarding the proposed skateboard park. Our sign-in sheets indicate that forty-eight individuals attended. Two of the local television stations and the local newspaper had reporters in attendance. The department staff made some general comments regarding the background of the project and the possible process. At this point, we accepted comments and questions from the floor. Comments and questions, and a summary of our responses were: 1. The proposed 15,000 square feet does not sound large enough to meet demand. We indicated that if additional capacity was needed we would consider options such as expansion or facilities at other locations in the city. 2. Area businesses use Beach Park for employee parking. 3. With parking an issue, where will we drop-off our kids? We stated that we would address this concern. I 4. Can the skateboard park be located somewhere else, because I'm concerned about kids riding their skateboards across Oak St.? We had no response. 5. Who will be responsible for the design? We responded that we were recommending a committee comprised of department staff, skaters, and a professional consultant(s) develop the design. 6. Will the city accept volunteers on the design committee? Our response was yes. 7. Is age a factor on who can be on the design committee? Our response was no. 8. ' The city should pay for the entire project, not the tax payers. 9. Why can't one night's revenue from the arena and Sam Lynn ballpark be used to pay for the project? We did not respond to this. 10. Was the Hanford park privately funded? We could not answer this. 11. How is fund raising supposed to happen and who is going to do it? We indicated that our proposal was to incorporate private funding and that we would not be responsible for any fund raising efforts. 12. One person indicated that she had contacted several local skateboard shops and that they all indicated that they would make donations. 13. When will the park be done? We responded that it would depend on the council's approval of the project and availability of funds. 14. Will the city accept volunteer labor and materials? We indicated that we had not recommended in-kind donations and that there may be some problems with volunteers providing labor. However, we had not discussed this specifically. 15. Will there be an admission charge? We indicated that we were recommending that the facility be open to the public with no admission fee. 16. Will the facility be lighted? We indicated that lights were listed as on option in our cost estimate. 17. If use of the facility is free, who will monitor the number of users? We indicated that we are not recommending monitoring the facility. We are approaching this like other facilities in public parks such as tennis courts or playground equipment. 18. Won't the police have to patrol the park? We did not respond to this question. 19. Will other types of skating, like in-line skating, be allowed? How can you allow one type and not another? We indicated that at this time the only type of activity that we have recommended against was the riding of bicycles. After all of the discussion, we asked for a show of hands to indicate support or opposition. The group was unanimous in their support. There was not a single person that indicted opposition or concern about the project. We collected thirteen names of volunteers to participate in the design of the facility. The majority were youth. c: Citizens' Community Services Advisory Committee Alan Christensen, Assistant City Manager ~lan Tandy - W~ndsor Park Page From: Stan Ford To: Alan Tandy Date: Thursday, May 06, 1999 11:27:48 AM Subject: Windsor Park We just accepted Windsor Park. We will need to do a little work on the turf and castle & Cooke will be doing a small repair to the sidewalk in the morning. Otherwise, staff says we're in good shape. We would like to do a dedication on June 6. I'll let you know once we coordinate the dedication. BAKERSFIELD Economic and Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager ~//'/ ~ May 4, 1999 IIII FROM: Jake Wager, Economic Devdelovlbment Directo~ x.,- SUBJECT: FOX THEATER STREETSCAPE PROJECT COMPLETED The Fox Theater streetscape project was completed last week with the installation of the remaining bollards which had been on back order for a couple of months. The Fox Theater is extremely pleased with the project. The joint project between the City and Fox volunteers coordinated the installation of new curb, gutter, sidewalks, streetlights, bollards and landscaping. In addition the City relocated the signal which was blocking the marquee for the theater. cw/jw P:\BARRIERS\tandy memo completion.wpd BAKERSFIELD Economic and Community Development Department MEMORANDUM May 6, 1999 TO: Jake Wager, Economic Development Director FROM: George Gonzales, unity Development Coordinator SUBJECT: CDBG eligibility 6/street improvements at 1550 and 1600 South Union Avenue. A request has been submitted from Councilmember Salvaggio to determine whether curb and gutter improvement could be funded with CDBG funds at 1550 and 1600 South Union Avenue. The address above are located south of Casa Loma Drive on the east side of Casa Loma Drive on the east side of South Union Avenue. The properties are zoned light industrial and are currently developed with commercial and oil related services. Exide Corporation (battery sales) is currently doing business at 1550 South Union (300' x 272' parcel) and the Bender Company is operating their business at 1600 South Union Avenue. The activities conducted on the two sites do not benefit low-income residents consequently the proposed improvements are not eligible for CDBG assistance. Similar requests have been made in other areas including the Union Avenue/Lake Street and Kentucky Street area and no CDBG funds have been expanded for those improvements. BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: APRIL 30, 1999 SUBJECT: CURB GUTTERS AND SEWERS USING CDBG FUNDS Council Referral Record #WFO018111 / O01 I Staff is requested to review the issue of curbs, gutters and sewer service utilizing Community I Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. I Councilmember Salvaggio asked if CDBG funds could be used for curb, gutter and sewer service for the Pacheco No. 10 annexation area. These types of projects are eligible for CDBG usage. We will check with EDCD to determine if this area qualifies as a Iow/moderate income area and get back as soon as we get the information. City of Bakersfield *REPRINT* ,~ WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REQ/JOB: WF0018111 / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 4~30~9~ REQUEST DATE: 4y29y9 CREW: TIME PRINTED: 11:38:59 ~OCATION: S'~'~'~': ~/~~ COMPLETION: GEN. LOC: CITY WIDE FACILITY NODESlu/~ FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: SALVAGGIO ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL USER ID: GWOLF WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: CURB GUTTERS AND SEWERS SERVICE USING CDBG FUNDS CONTACT Phone 2 - Bakersfield, CA REQUEST COMMENTS ***REFERRAL PUBLIC WORKS*** STAFF IS REQUESTED TO REVIEW THE ISSUE OF OF CURBS GUTTERS AND SEWER SERVICE UTILIZING CDBG FUNDS Job Order Description: CURB GUTTERS AND SEWERS SERVICE USING CDBG FUNDS Category: PUBLIC WORKS Task: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL Assigned Department: PUBLIC WORKS START DATE/ /.__ COMPLETION DATE / /.__ BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR / - ~._..._-~ DATE: April 3©, 1999 SUBJECT: MEETING WITH THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION REGARDING HIGH SPEED RAIL TRANSPORTATION Council Referral Record #WFO018121/001 Staff is requested to meet with the Downtown Business Association on the subject of the High Speed Rail as well as having a representative of the Public Works Department attend the DBA vision meeting on Tuesday at the Beale Library. Staff will set up a meeting with the Downtown Business Association Vision Committee at the earliest possible date to discuss High Speed Rail Transportation. In addition, Engineering Services Manager Jacques R. LaRochelle will attend the Downtown Business Association Vision Committee meeting on Tuesday, May 4, 1999 at 6:00 p.m., held in the Beale Library. G:\GROUPDAT~Referrals\DeMond\DBAmtgHighSpeed RailWF0018121 .wpd City of Bakersfield *REPRINT* WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REQ/JOB: WF0018121 / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 4~30~99 REQUEST DATE: 4~28y99 CREW: TIME PRINTED: 11:38:51 SCHEDULE DATES LOCATION: START: 4~28~99 COMPLETION: 5~10~99 GEN. LOC: WARD2 FACILITY NODES FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: DEMOND ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL USER ID: GWOLF WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: MEET WITH DBA ON HIGH SPEED RAIL REQUEST COMMENTS ***REFERRAL TO PUBLIC WORKS*** STAFF IS REQUESTED TO MEET WITH THE DBA ON THE SUB JECT OF THE HIGH SPEED RAIL. ALSO PLEASE HAVE A REPRESENTIVE FROM PW TO ATTEND THE DBA VISION MEETING ON TUESDAY, AT THE BEALE LIBRARY. Job Order Description: MEET WITH DBA ON HIGH SPEED RAIL  atggory: PUBLIC WORKS asK: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL Assigned Department: PUBLIC WORKS START DATE/ / COMPLETION DATE / ,t APR 3 0 1999 B A K E R S F I E L D 3~'r¥1~,~J,~.,sc,,...i,:~. ,~. ,~ ,-, ~,-,-,- Economic and Community Development Department MEMORANDUM April 30, 1999 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager ~ FROM: Jake Wager, Economic Development Direc SUBJECT: Councilmembers Inquiries Staff' has received telephone calls from Councilmembers Carson and Salvaggio on two separate topics. Councilmember Carson asked if CDBG funds could be used to repair streets in a gated subdivision. Terra del Sol, located at 499 and 601 Pacheco, was built with streets smaller (26 feet wide) than those required by the City's Public Works Department (36 fdet wide). Because the streets were not developed to City standards, they were not accepted as public streets or maintained by the City. It was never the intention of the developers of the tract to have the City maintain their streets because a tenant association was established to complete that role. The problem now is that many absentee property owners are not paying their association fees. Consequently, the streets are not being maintained. It is believed that the majority of property owners could meet CDBG income limits. However the 1990 census information for this area does not confirm HUD eligibility. The tract has 255 properties that would have to be surveyed to determine eligibility. A survey of the entire subdivision would be required to qualify the improvements. In addition, HUD allows for street "reconstruction" improvements but does not allow maintenance or repair to public streets. The actual project scope has not been determined. In order to develop the streets in the subdivision to City standards an additional fight-of-way would need to be secured. A right-of-way is not available, unless the subdivision is totally redesigned. Furthermore, all street improvements must be in place before they can be accepted by the City. Once this is completed, CDBG funds will no longer be needed. The second inquiry was from Councilmember Salvaggio concerning street widening on Stine Road between Fire Station 13 (4900 Poppyseed Street) and Ridgeview High School. The fight-of-way is currently developed as a two-lane road. The 1990 Census information does not indicate HUD eligibility for the area and a survey would need to be undertaken. Because that stretch of Stine Road dlk:P:\GEORGE\councilmembers requests.mem is the primary access to Ridgeview High School, the survey area to qualify the project would be very large in order to meet HUD service area definition. A survey to qualify this activity would be very time consuming. Eligibility survey requires that 51% of all property owners/tenants within the service area of the proposed improvement be at or below 80% of median income. Since the original inquiries were received telephone calls have been made to both Councilmembers to discuss the issues described in this memo. Councilmember Salvaggio recognized the HUD limitations and may pursue other avenues. Councilmember Carson asked for a brief description of the need to bring the subdivision's streets up to City standards prior to any commitment to maintain. No further action has been requested. dlk:PSGEORGE\councilmembers requests.mem From: Raul Rojas To: Rhonda Smiley Date: 5/4/99 2:59PM Subject: Councilmember Inquiries memo from Jake to AT dated April 30, 1999 Some quick notes concerning improvements on Terra Del Sol private streets, pursuant to Councilmember Irma Carson's inquiry regarding streets up to City standards prior to any commitment to maintain.. Terra del Sol - Tract 3617 Was developed as a private tract, so the improvements are not very close to what would be required for a standard City local street. The right-of-way provided is 40' with 28' of paving width. City standard is 60' right-of-way and 36' of paving width. It does not appear that additional right-of-way would be practical - it is a mobile home subdivision, and it is doubtful that there would be enough set back to the homes. NO sidewalks have been installed. City standard is a 4.5' sidewalk. There is sufficien~ room within the existing right-of-way to construct sidewalks. The curb and gutter provided is rolltop. City standard (straight-faced curb) would be preferred. Thepaving provided is 2" asphalt paving over 4" aggregate base. City standard is 0.2' (2.4") asphalt paving over 0.4' (4.8") aggregate base. City standards also require streetlights every 300'. BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy - City Manager /~/ FROM: Raul Rojas - Public Works Director~ DATE: May 4, 1999 SUBJECT: EAST BELTWAY CONNECTION TO COMANCHE AND MALAGA City Council Referral WFOO I 8113 / OO I East Beltway alignment to be extended out to and along Comanche Road. Based upon information provided by Councilman Maggard regarding the wishes and desires of all of the business owners and residents in the area, the preferred alignment of the East Beltway will be the Comanche Road alignment. Staff intends to start the initial study for this alignment within the next fiscal year. In addition, the easterly terminus of the South Beltway will be realigned to match the new East Beltway configuration. · !~i.,... City of Bakersfield ~=r~- ~,?~-~-- ~ WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 ~ ~B: WF0018113 / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 4~30~99 ~i~ REQUEST DATE: 4~28~99 ~.~ ~: TIME PRINTED: 11:38:57 JATION: ~'Ak~: 4~28~9~ COMPLETION: ~EN. LOC: WARD3 FACILITY FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: MAGGARD ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL ~EFERRAL USER ID: GWOLF WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: EAST BELTWAY CONNECTION TO COMANCHE AND MALAGA REQUEST COMMENTS ***REFERRAL TO PUBLIC WORKS*** STAFF IS REQUESTED TO ALIGN THE EAST BELTWAY TO BE EXTENDED OUT TO AND ALONG COMANCHE RD. Job Order Description: EAST BELTWAY CONNECTION TO COMANCHE at~gory: PUBLIC WORKS asK: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL Assigned Department: PUBLIC WORKS START DATE / /,__ CO~LETION DATE / / MEMORANDUM May 5, 1999 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager/.~~ ~ FROM: Gene Bogart, Water Resources Mana ,-r SUBJECT: COUNCIL REFERRAL - Councilmember Mike Maggard Re: CONNECTION FEES - Northeast Bakersfield California Water Service Company (Cal Water) is currently developing a connection fee rate for both its Bakersfield and Northeast/Olcese service areas. Presently, Cal Water charges the developer a fee for providing water service based upon the facilities needed to serve each new development; i.e., water wells, pumps, storage, mainline extensions, etc. Cal Water is currently in the process of preparing an application to the California Public Utilities Commission to change from the current method of charging developers a fee for actual facilities to a "connection fee" per residential unit (or equivalent), which is similar to City's method of applying connection fees to its customers. We currently charge $2,000 per acre ($500+ per residential unit). Cal Water has told us they will be looking at a connection fee in the range of between $450 and $6004- for the Bakersfield District. For the Northeast/Olcese area, Cal Water has initially indicated the connection fee would be closer to $700 and $850 per residential unit due to the lack of existing infrastructure and no groundwater as an alternate source of supply. When Cai Water completes their final design calculations for the Northeast Treatment Plant and distribution facilities, they will have firm cost figures to begin processing their application with the Public Utilities Commission to request "connection" fee rates for new construction. As soon as these final numbers are available from Cal Water, we can then submit our letter of recommendation directly to the Public Utility Commission (we estimate 60 to 90 days). In their contracts with the City, Cal Water has agreed and committed to provide a uniform monthly water rate to all City residents being served by Cal Water, including the central Bakersfield District and the Northeast/Olcese area. This insures that all City residents receiving water service from Cal Water will pay the same monthly use rate City-wide. This also will be part of the application package submitted to the Commission. We have tentatively scheduled the connection fee item for discussion at the next Water Board meeting on June 23, 1999. If any additional information is needed at this time, please let us kno RECEIVED S:\1999M EMOS\ConnectionFees --: MEMORANDUM May 6, 1999 TO: Randy Fidler, Chief Code Enforcemem Officer FROM: Tony DeMarco, Code Enforcemem Officer SUBJECT: Council Referral - Weeds and Debris at Manor and Union On May 5, 1999, I researched the parcel map for Manor and Union per your request. I determined that the property belongs to the City of Bakersfield. I contacted Henry Joke of the Parks Department and Luis Peralez of the Public Works Department to assist in the removal of the weeds and debris. A follow-up inspection will be conducted in the immediate future. cc: Couneilmember Maggard Alan Tandy, City Manager Jack Hardisty, Development Services Director Raul Rojas, Public Works Director Stan Ford, Recreation and Parks Director Dennis Fidler, Building Director BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: MAY 5, 1999 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORK~_!~IRECTOR SUBJECT: AUBURN STREET WIDENING BETWEEN FAIRFAXROAD AND' MORNING DRIVE Councilmember Maggard inquired as to whether a portion of the south side of Auburn Street could be widened. This section of Auburn Street is in front of high voltage power lines and widening through development is highly unlikely. The Public Works Department has also been concerned about this section of Auburn Street and desires it be widened as soon as possible. Some time ago, Mr. Darrel Ward of S.C. Anderson approached the City and inquired if he could widen this portion of Auburn Street in exchange for Traffic Impact fees to be paid for a nearby development. We agreed to this concept. Mr. Ward recently indicated to us that he still plans on constructing the road improvements. We are trying to contact Mr. Ward at this time to determine his schedule for construction. Once we have determined his schedule, we will let you know of the specific dates. RECEIVED ,~' -~N -,O~g'$ 0 BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBUC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: May 6, 1999 SUBJECT: RIGHT TURN LANE ON AUBURN AT OSWELL WARD 3 "Councilmember Maggard requested staff provide him with information regarding the need for a mandatory right turn lane on eastbound Auburn Street at Oswell Street." The mandatory right turn lane for eastbound Auburn Street at Oswell was installed with the recent paving project on Auburn at the recommendation of the Traffic Engineer. Based on a traffic study by the Traffic Engineer, the volume of traffic turning right is more than double the through traffic volume on Auburn Street in the morning peak hour. During the evening peak period of traffic, the right turn volume is nearly 240 percent more than the through traffic and over two-thirds of the total volume in the eastbound direction. By making the curbside lane a dedicated right turn lane, the intersection operates at a higher capacity and better level of service. In addition, cars can make a right turn after stopping on red and not have to wait for the single car in the lane that wanted to go straight. The Traffic Engineer has reviewed the signal operation since the lane change went into effect a few weeks ago and is pleased with the improvements in traffic flow that has resulted from the change. As with other intersections in the City, Traffic Engineering staff will monitor the traffic flow at this intersection for changes in traffic and propose changes to accommodate as may be needed or desired. If the lane configuration at Auburn proves to be undesirable, it will be changed back to the old configuration. Copy: Traffic Engineering File-WF_none.Auburn@Oswell.ref.wpd REC A :D ¢.!TY MANAGER'S0~ F[C~.'~:~ Page t of 1 BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS .DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: May 5, 1999 SUBJECT: PARKING PROBLEMS ON WEST BLUFF COURT WARD 2 Request to install, signs for "No Parking from 5:00p. m. to 11:00 a.m. "on the ipublic street section of West Bluff Court. The Traffic Engineer has reviewed the location of West Bluff Court. A work order has been prepared to have City crews sign the parking area of the street for "NO PARKING BETWEEN 5:00 P.M. AND 11:00 A.M." Since the signs are non-standard and not a stock item, please allow for several working days to fabricate the signs for installation. c: Traffic Engineering File -WF-none.WestBluffParking.ref.wpd Page 1 of 1 BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/,/~'~"" ___--- DATE: May 6, 1999 SUBJECT: TRAFFIC PROBLEMS AT STATE HIGHWAY 178 AND FAIRFAX ROAD, WARD 3 "Councilmember Mike Maggard requested staff provide him with information on the intersection of State Highway 178 and Fairfax Road traffic congestion problems and solutions." The State highway intersection of Highway 178 and Fairfax Road was recently improved with the addition of dual left turn lanes for northbound Fairfax Road, a right turn lane for southbound Fairfax Road, a dght turn lane for eastbound Highway 178 and an additional westbound lane on Highway 178. These changes, which were completed last year by the City with the cooperation of Caltrans, greatly improved the operation of the traffic signal and reduced much of the congestion at the intersection. In the short time since the completion of the improvements, the intersection is showing signs of overloading again from increased traffic on both Highway 178 and Fairfax Road. The southbound right turn on Fairfax backs up to the Auburn Street intersection in the mornings and the eastbound to northbound left turn on Highway 178 backs out into th(~ through lanes in the evening rush period. At this time, there are no available funds through Caltrans, or the City, to do any road improvements or widening for additional lanes. The solution to the problem is an interchange. The Public Works Department will be re-applying to the Kern Council of Governments for State funds for the project. Intedm improvements that staff have identified include converting one of the southbound through lanes to a second right turn lane. This may reduce the backup of traffic into the Auburn Street intersection and would be of minimal cost. This will require the cooperation of Caltrans since the signal operation would be affected by the change. Staff will also be working with Caltrans traffic signal engineers to see if the signal timing for the eastbound left turn on 178 can be lengthened to reduce the backup on Highway 178 in the evening rush period. copy: Traffic Engineering File- WF_none.178@Fairfax.ref.wpd iF~,~.~[t ~, C~ BAKERSFIELD CITY CLERK'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM May 6, 1999 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Pamela A. McCarthy, City Cler~ SUBJECT: Minutes from Kern County Agencies At the April 28, 1999 CounCil meeting, Councilmember Couch requested the full Council be provided copies of the Kern Cog and Kern County Planning Commission minutes. I spoke with both agencies, and I will be receiving their minutes and summary of proceedings as they are approved. A copy will be placed in each Councilmember's mailbox at that time. In addition, I will also provide a copy of the Board of Supervisor's Agenda and Summary of Proceedings. Council will find in their Fdday, May 7t' delivery, the Summary of the April 27, 1999 meeting and Agenda for the Tuesday, May 4, 1999 meeting. This information is also available through the County's Web page at the following: Board of Supervisors @ www. co. kern.ca.us/bos/bos.htm Kern County Planning @ www.co, kern.ca.uslplanninglinfo, htm :pmc cc: John Stinson, Assistant City Manager Alan Christensen, Assistant City Manager S :~vlEMOS~TANDY~AGENCYM1N.wpd BAKERSFIELD CITY CLERK'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM May 4, 1999 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Pamela A. McCarthy, City Cler~--~ SUBJECT: Public Access to Information At the April 28, 1999 Council meeting the issue of Council Agenda descriptions and public access to information was raised by a member of the public. I understand Bart Thiltgen, City Attorney, has addressed the legal issues, therefore, I will provide you with information regarding the availability of agenda information. During the preparation of the agenda packet, we in the Clerk's Office strive to assure all pertinent information is included on the agenda with detailed documentation attached. Once the agenda is posted, (usually by 4:30 p.m.) on the Friday before the Wednesday Council meeting, all information is made available to the public in the following manner: Complete Agenda Packet available at City Clerk's front counter for review Complete Packet available at the Public Library - Beale Branch · Agenda posted on City Web Page @ www.ci.bakersfield.ca.us The Clerk's copy of the packet may be reviewed, and copies made, during normal business hours. In addition, the Administrative Reports are scanned into LaserFiche, prior to the Wednesday meeting. This information too, may be accessed through the City's Web Page. Additionally, I will be implementing the following: Scanning the Agenda Highlights Memorandum, in addition to Administrative Reports into LaserFiche concurrent with posting the Agenda · Simplify retrieval of information from the Clerk's Web page by establishing one site, for all information, i.e., Agenda, Highlights Memorandum,and Administrative Reports · Placing the Public Packet in the Chamber Foyer by 5:15 p.m. on Council meeting day. Keeping in mind that we can always improve the process, I will explore any suggestions' you, or the Council may have. :pmc ! RECEIVED !i cc: John Stinson, Assistant City Manager : ~'" ' Alan Christensen, Assistant City Manager ,,: S :~vlEMOS\T ANDY'XPUBINOFQST .wpd MEMORANDUM May 7, 1999 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER ~,~ FROM: JACK HARDISTY, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIR~.~_ SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL #WF0018079 - UNlOCk'VENUE MOTELS Attached is a status report from Chief Code Enforcement Officer, Randy Fidler, in response to a request by Councilwoman Carson for an update on the status of problem motels along Union Avenue. JH:pjt Attachment cc: Trudy Slater m\mat-2 MEMORANDUM April 8, 1999 TO: Dennis Fidler, Building Director FROM: Randy Fidler, Chief Code Enforcement Officer SUBJECT: Union Avenue Motels The following summarizes efforts performed on Union Avenue motels to date: CHAPARRAL MOTOR INN - 333 Union Avenue 3/6/95 Investigated a complaint. Room was posted as a "Dangerous Building" and the tenants were removed. There were also other violations noted throughout the rest of the motel. The violations were abated. 9/95 A fire destroyed the 300 wing and is still under investigation of arson. The building has been stripped to the studs and is still standing. 10/95 Another fire destroyed the restaurant and it is also under investigation of arson. The structure is also standing. It has been posted as a dangerous building and it is secured. 9/96 Notice given to go to hearing. It was ordered that the open, vacant units in the north wing be secured and the trash and debris be removed by October 15, 1996 and obtain permits for demolition. 1/97 Correction notice issued to re-secure structure, drain pool and clean trash and debris. 2/18/98 A demolition permit was taken out for the south wing building and was stripped to the studs and work stopped because of an insurance arson investigation. 4/5/99 Notice to cleanup weeds and remove abandoned cars. We will be starting a new investigation. Staffwill begin necessary legal process to remove abandoned or burned buildings. Again, the time and cost will determine how far staffgoes. The cost to demolish these burned buildings could range from $95,000 to $225,000. "- bennis Fidler April 8, 1999 Page 2 TURNER INN - 701 Union Avenue 8/22/95 Responded to property for transient living in rooms. Property is unsecured and abandoned. Property is being used as a dumping ground for stolen cars. 8/11/95 Property is cleaned and secured by the owner. 12/23/96 A first notice is issued to the owner for weeds and trash. 1/28/97 The violations are not abated. A hearing is set. 2/97 The owner failed to abate the weeds and trash. The city abates the property under contract for $1,395. 3/2/99 Owner requested he be allowed to refurbish single story portion of motel. His request was denied. These buildings are owned by two different individuals. They are both fenced and maintained secure. We plan to table legal action until after completing the Chaparral Motor Inn. Again, time and cost will determine how far staff goes. Demolition of these buildings could range from $180,000 to $350,000. Rehabilitation is also a possibility but would require an occupant, business or tenant. BAKERSFIELD INN - 1101 Union Avenue 10/23/96 Violation notice sent to the owner to remove all overgrown vegetation and to repair fence. 11/8/96 Second notice to abate public nuisance and order to show cause sent to the property owner. 11/26/96 Abatement hearing. 11/27/96 Notice and order for abatement of condition constituting a public nuisance sent to the property owner. 12/96 The property is abated by the city under contract. 5/9/97 Notice of filing report and assessment list for abatement of condition constituting public nuisance is sent to the property owner. 5/21/97 Property is assessed for $1,345 for nuisance abatement. 7 -' ~)ennis Fidler · April 8, 1999 Page 3 12/11/97 Violation notice sent to the property owner for accumulation of dry palm fronds and dead vegetation. 1/9/98 Second notice and order to show cause issued to property owner. 1/20/98 Abatement hearing held. Violation abated by the property owner. 8/5/99 Violation notice sent to the property owner for overgrown vegetation, junk and trash. 8/17/99 Violation abated by the property owner. VALLEY HI MOTEL - 908 Union Avenue The motel is currently vacant and fenced. On March 16, 1998, there were ten± workers removing fumiture and debris and cleaning out the swimming pool. The new owner has employed a contractor to paint and refurbish the motel which he plans to reopen. Attempts to contact the current owner have been unsuccessful. Response to property maintenance violations in March 1997, resulted in the property being vacated and secured by the owner in July 1997. 10/13/98 Violation notice issued to the property owner for unsecured structure, weeds, trash and debris. 10/23/98 Second notice and order to show cause issued to property owner. 11/3/98 Hearing held. Owner did not appear. Mr. Mohammed called and said he would secure and cleanup the debris. 12/15/98 Mr. Mohammed called and said he would be selling the motel and the new buyer would be contacting me. 1/27/99 Code enforcement boarded the window and secured the fence. This motel is also fenced and maintained secure. The City has no action planned at this time. BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: MAY 6, 1999 ,/~/~ / TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR~ SUBJECT: COSTS ESTIMATES FOR VARIOUS TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS Per your request we have completed preliminary cost estimates for several proposed projects requested by Councilmember Couch. It should be noted that the cost estimates provided are for comparison purposes only. They are preliminary in nature and are based on industry standards for roadway construction. In addition, they are based on current dollar values and therefore not escalated to represent inflation between the present time frame and actual construction time frame. CalTrans is currently working on precise estimates for the State Route 58 to State Route 99 interchange we proposed to them earlier. The cost of each proposal as well as the assumptions the costs were based upon are contained below: FOUR (4) LANE FREEWAY ALONG THE 7m STANDARD ROAD ALIGNMENT BETWEEN FREEWAY 99 AND INTERSTATE 5 (21 MILES LONG) The following costs represent typical costs CalTrans would encounter for freeway facilities. The 7th Standard Road alignment costs including special features is as follows: Four (4) Lane Freeway 21 mi. ~ $10 million/mile = $210 million Freeway/Roadway Interchanges 8 ea ~ $10 million/ea = $ 80 million Railroad Grade Separation 1 ea ~ $10 million/ea = $10 million Freeway 99 Interchange 1 ea ~ $100 million/ea = $100 million Interstate 5 Interchange 1 ea ~ $ 25 million/ea = $ 25 million Right of way 763 ac ~ $ 30 thousand/ac = $ 23 million Special Features Relocate Electric Towers = $ 5 million FOUR (4) LANE FREEWAY ALONG THE KERN RIVER ALIGNMENT BETWEEN FREEWAY 99 AND INTERSTATE 5 (17 MILES LONG) The following costs represent typical costs CalTrans would encounter for freeway facilities. The Kern River alignment costs including special features is as follows: Four (4) Lane Freeway 17 mi. ~ $10 million/mile = $170 million Freeway/Roadway Interchanges . 6 ea @ $10 million/ea = $ 60 million Railroad Grade Separation 1 ea @ $10 million/ea = $10 million Freeway 99 Interchange 1 ea ~ $100 million/ca = $100 million Interstate 5 Interchange 1 ea ~ $ 25 million/ca = $ 25 million Right of way 618 ac ~ $ 30 thousand/ac = $19 million Special Features Kern River/Railroad Bridge = $ 25 million Total $409 million Note: The cost estimate of $409 million differs from the phase I Kern River Freeway budget of $175 million due to: 1. Interchange with State Route 99 $100 million 2. Full fwy from S.R. 99 to 1 5 instead of ending at Stockdale Hwy. $ 73 million 3. Interchange with Interstate 5 $ 25 million 4. Kern River Bridge/Railroad bridge $ 25 million 5. More freeway/roadway interchanges $ 40 million 6. Right of way for 4 lane vs. ultimate 8 lane freeway $(29 million) Total $234 million + $175 million Total $409 million FOUR (4) LANE EXTENSION OF TRUXTUN AVENUE FROM COFFEE ROAD TO ALLEN ROAD This alternate assumed a four (4) lane expressway road with signals at Calloway Drive, Jewetta Avenue, Old Farm Road and Allen Road. A large bridge structure was required to span the Kern river and Cross Valley canal. This option does not include an interchange at Coffee road or any widening of Truxtun Avenue east of Coffee Road. The necessary roadway extension would be three (3) miles long. Right of way $ 2 million Roadway $ 6 million Bridge $17 million Total $25 million It should be noted that without constructing an interchange at Coffee Road or widening Truxtun Avenue easterly, this option will exacerbate an existing congestion problem we now experience on Truxtun Avenue. In addition, this option crosses over a very sensitive area west of Coffee Road known as the Bakersfield Environmental Study Area (BESA). This area is used by Cal State Bakersfield and other groups to study native habitat in the area. HAGEMAN ROAD CONNECTION TO STATE ROUTE 204 (GOLDEN STATE AVENUE) The major element of the project is a rather long bridge that spans Freeway' 99 and a railroad spur line. Due to the complexity of thc existing interchange, no direct connccti6n is £casiblc with this project. In addition to this project, a subsequent project to widen State Route 204 to six (6) lanes will also have to be contemplated. Right of way 5 2 million Roadway 5 3 million Bridge $15 million Total 520 million In addition to the cost estimates, Councilmember Couch requested the following information: 7. Breakdown of the current 5175 million Kern River Freeway project. 8. Amount of money CalTrans would give to City if Rosedale Highway is relinquished without necessary repairs completed. 9. Length of bridge necessary to span Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District basins. 1. Breakdown of current $175 million Kern River Freeway project. Cost breakdown for the Kern River freeway is shown as follows: Right of Way 5 48,000 Roadway 5103,000 Bridges 5 24,000 Total $175,000 2. Amount of CalTrans rebate for Rosedale Highway relinquishment Assuming another route were selected, and CalTrans were to consider relinquishing Rosedale Highway without improving it, the amount of rebate money would be approximately $10 million. Since approximately 90% of Rosedale is within County jurisdiction, they would receive approximately $9 million with the remaining $1 million going to the City. 3. Length of bridge over water basins. If the Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District basins were spanned with a bridge rather than a roadway constructed, the bridge length would be approximately 2600 feet or about 1/2 mile. BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: MAY 6, 1999 // , TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR~ SUBJECT: COSTS ESTIMATES FOR VARIOUS TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS Per your request we have completed preliminary cost estimates for several proposed projects requested by Councilmember Couch. It should be noted that the cost estimates provided are for comparison purposes only. They are preliminary in nature and are based on industry standards for roadway construction. In addition, they are based on current dollar values and therefore not escalated to represent inflation between the present time frame and actual construction time frame. CalTrans is currently working on precise estimates for the State Route 58 to State Route 99 interchange we proposed to them earlier. The cost of each proposal as well as the assumptions the costs were based upon are contained below: FOUR (4) LANE FREEWAY ALONG THE 7m STANDARD ROAD ALIGNMENT BETWEEN FREEWAY 99 AND INTERSTATE 5 (21 MILES LONG) The following costs represent typical costs CalTrans would encounter for freeway facilities. The 7* Standard Road alignment costs includingspecial features is as follows: Four (4) Lane Freeway 21 mi. ~ $10 million/mile = $210 million Freeway/Roadway Interchanges 8 ea ~ $10 million/ea = $ 80 million Railroad Grade Separation 1 ea ~ $10 million/ea = $10 million Freeway 99 Interchange 1 ea ~ $100 million/ea = $100 million Interstate 5 Interchange 1 ea ~ $ 25 million/ea = $ 25 million Right of way 763 ac ~ $ 30 thousand/ac = $ 23 million Special Features Relocate Electric Towers = $ 5 million Total $453 million FOUR (4) LANE FREEWAY ALONG THE KERN RIVER ALIGNMENT BETWEEN FREEWAY 99 AND INTERSTATE 5 (17 MILES LONG) The following costs represent typical costs CalTrans would encounter for freeway facilities. The Kern River alignment costs including special features is as follows: Four (4) Lane Freeway 17 mi. (~ $10 million/mile = $170 million Freeway/Roadway Interchanges . 6 ea ~ $10 million/ea = $ 60 million Railroad Grade Separation 1 ea ~ $10 million/ca = $10 million Freeway 99 Interchange 1 ea ~ $100 million/ca = $100 million Interstate 5 Interchange 1 ea ~ $ 25 million/ca = $ 25 million Right of way 618 ac ~ $ 30 thousand/ac = $19 million Special Features Kern River/Railroad Bridge = $ 25 million Total $409 million Note: The cost estimate of $409 million differs from the phase I Kem River Freeway budget of $175 million due to: 1. Interchange with State Route 99 $100 million 2. Full flay from S.R. 99 to 1 5 instead of ending at Stockdale Hwy. $ 73 million 3. Interchange with Interstate 5 $ 25 million 4. Kern River Bridge/Railroad bridge $ 25 million 5. More freeway/roadway interchanges $ 40 million 6. Right of way for 4 lane vs. ultimate 8 lane freeWay $(29 million) Total $234 million + $175 million Total $409 million FOUR (4) LANE EXTENSION OF TRUXTUN AVENUE FROM COFFEE ROAD TO ALLEN ROAD This alternate assumed a four (4) lane expressway road with signals at Calloway Drive, Jewetta Avenue, Old Farm Road and Allen Road. A large bridge structure was required to span the Kern river and Cross Valley canal. This option does not include an interchange at Coffee road or any widening of Truxtun Avenue east of Coffee Road. The necessary roadway extension would be three (3) miles long. Right of way $ 2 million Roadway $ 6 million Bridge $17 million Total $25 million It should be noted that without constructing an interchange at Coffee Road or widening Truxtun Avenue easterly, this option will exacerbate an existing congestion problem we now experience on Truxtun Avenue. In addition, this option crosses over a very sensitive area west of Coffee Road known as the Bakersfield Environmental Study Area (BESA). This area is used by Cai State Bakersfield and other groups to study native habitat in the area. HAGEMAN ROAD CONNECTION TO STATE ROUTE 204 (GOLDEN STATE AVENUE) The major element of the project is a rather long bridge that spans Freeway 99 and a railroad spur line. Due to the complexity of thc existing interchange, no direct connection is feasible with this project. In addition to this project, a subsequent project to widen State Route 204 to six (6) lanes will also have to be contemplated. Right of way $ 2 million Roadway $ 3 million Bridge $15 million Total $20 million In addition to the cost estimates, Councilmember Couch requested the following information: 7. Breakdown of the current $175 million Kern River Freeway project. 8. Amount of money CalTrans would give to City if Rosedale Highway is relinquished without necessary repairs completed. 9. Length of bridge necessary to span Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District basins. 1. Breakdown of current $175 million Kern River Freeway project. Cost breakdown for the Kern River freeway is shown as follows: Right of Way $ 48,000 Roadway $103,000 Bridges $24.000 Total $175,000 2. Amount of CalTrans rebate for Rosedale Highway relinquishment Assuming another route were selected, and CalTrans were to consider relinquishing Rosedale Highway without improving it, the amount of rebate money would be approximately $10 million. Since approximately 90% of Rosedale is within County jurisdiction, they would receive approximately $9 million with the remaining $1 million going to the City. 3. Length of bridge over water basins. If the Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District basins were spanned with a bridge rather than a roadway constructed, the bridge length would be approximately 2600 feet or about 1/2 mile. MEMORANDUM May 6, 1999 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: JACK HARDISTY, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DI~.~-~_-~. SUBJECT: ANNEXATION ALONG 7TH STANDARD ROAD / You have asked how much of 7th Standard Road could be annexed. Seventh Standard Road runs from Highway 65 to one-half mile west of Allen Road (4-1/2 miles) within the City's Sphere of Influence which is a limiting factor. The road is also one mile north of the city limits (see attached map) so we would also need to annex contiguous properties between the city and 7th Standard Road. If there were willing property owners between the existing city limits and 7th Standard Road and willing property owners along 7th Standard Road all linked up in an annexation proposal and if the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) would approve the annexation, the city could annex property along 7th Standard Road. LAFCO as a matter of policy does not approve annexation of agricultural land into the city. Most of this area is agricultural. The non-agricultural is residential and industrial with the residential north of Olive Drive being the intervening property. As you know, representatives of that neighborhood occasionally make presentations to the City Council in opposition to annexation. Annexation of inhabited areas must include consideration of protests of property owners and registered voters. If the above problems were overcome, the city might annex as much as four square miles of land along 7th Standard Road if you were to pursue annexation of land within one-half mile of the road plus whatever intervening lands to bridge the gap to the city. A 100 percent annexation of the area within the Sphere of Influence north of Olive Drive would add about 11-1/2 square miles to the city. JH:pjt Attachment m\mat5-6 , SEVENTH STANDARD ROAD REFERRAL I/ ~'<'~ ~ BAKERSFIELD CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM May 5, 1999 TO: Couneilmember Couch FROM: Alan Tand~iW ~ana~ger SUBJECT: Referrals dated 4/28/99 The following are staff responses to the referrals made by you on 4/28/99. #1 BCOOL Letter ?e. Child Pornography and Forfeiture of Assets - The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed legislation and has provided an analysis in the attached memo. Also included is a letter sent by the Mayor supporting the proposed legislation. #2 Klassen Situation - Per your phone conversation with Mr. Stinson, he clarified the bid process with you. You indicated no further response was necessary. #3 Human Resources Issue - Mr. Stinson and Ms. Hayden have met with the individual and believe they have addressed their concern. #4 Tim Ricords - Request for additional Patrol in Rosedale Area - The Police Department contacted Mr. Ricords regarding his concerns regarding early morning residential burglaries in the Rosedale area. Police officers assigned to the area will be addressing Mr. Ricords concems for additional patrols in the area. A background memo is attached. #5 Walter Williams - Child Care - Mr. Stinson contacted Mr. Williams and discussed his request for city assistance in developing a child care facility. He was referred to Jake Wager for further information and assistance. A background memo is attached. #6 Riverlakes Ranch Letter re. Parking Lot Drainage - Public Works met with Mr. Stanton at the site to determine what the city could do to resolve the problem with the parking lot drainage situation. A background memo is attached. S:UOHNSCouncil Referals\Couch~Referrals 4-28-99 Tandy Response.wpd Item from 4/14/99 Referrals Rooster Noise Problem - The Police Department contacted the owner of the noisy rooster. The animal owner relocated the rooster resolving the noise issue. A background memo is attached. $:UOI-IN~Coun¢il Referals\Couch~Referrals 4-28-99 Tandy Response.wpd MEMORANDUM May 3, 1999 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: BART J. THILTGEN, City Attorney ~ SUBJECT: COUNCIL REFERRAL--ASSEMBLY BILL 103,5 During the City Council meeting of April 28, 1999, Council member Couch requested staff to review the April 14, 1999 letter from Bakersfield Citizens Opposed to Obscenity and Lewdness (bCOOL) soliciting support for the passage of Assembly Bill 1035, "Child Pornography and Obscenity -- Forfeiture of Assets.' The original proposed legislation authorized the forfeiture of assets used in the production of, and any property derived from, the illicit operations. It further .distributed the assets, or any proceeds from the sale of such assets, to law enforcement and an established State Children's Fund. Forfeiture of assets is a remedy currently authorized for law enforcement to more effectively attack organized crime. On April 22, 1999, AB1035 was amended to provide that any felony offense relating to child pornography or exploitation, obscene matter, or harmful matter, as defined in federal law, would constitute a felony for which current asset forfeiture laws would be applicable. This amendment removed the State Children's Fund from the agencies to which the assets, or proceeds therefrom, would be distributed. Attached is a copy of a letter sent by the Mayor to the Honorable George House (cc to Assembly member Ashburn) voicing his support for passage of this legislation. If a Council member wished to send their own letter in support, or declined to send such a letter, that is clearly within their right to so do. If the Council, as a body, wished to take official action to voice support for this legislation, the matter would have to be placed on the City Council meeting agenda. BJT:laa Attachment cc: Alan Tandy, City Manager April 27, 1999 The Honorable George House Assemblymember 25"' District State Capitol Building 3141 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Assemblymember House: Please' accept this letter as my personal support to you, and that of the Mayor's Office, for Assembly Bill 1035, "Child Pornography and Obscenity -- Forfeiture of Assets". Anything we can do to make it harder on these visual predators of our children is most important, and always hitting these people in their pocket books seems to be most effect. Keep up the good work. Yours truly, Bob Price Mayor BP/ndw cc: Roy Ashburn, Assemblyman 32nd District CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM May 5, 1999 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: John W. Stins~,~ss~iistant City Manager SUBJECT: Councilmember Couch Referral 4/28/99 - Joseph Ashcraft re. Human Resources I contacted Mr. Joseph Ashcraft on behalf of Councilmember Couch. Mr. Ashcrafi indicated he had applied for a temporary position of Code Enforcement Officer and was not hired due to a problem with Human Resources. I contacted Carroll Hayden Human Resources Manager, who indicated there was information provided by Mr. Ashcroft as part of his application which precluded Mr. Ashcraft from meeting the city's standards for employment. Being made aware of this situation by Human Resources, Mr. Ashcraft was able to provide additional documentation to Human Resources that the information provided had been corrected and he requested that the previous information not be considered in future hiring decisions by the city. Carroll Hayden and I met with Mr. Ashcraft and his representative, Sandra Acosta with the Operating Engineers. We explained that we had received the additional documentation provided by Mr. Ashcrafi and would make any furore hiring decisions on the corrected information and not on what was previously submitted by Mr. Ashcrafi. We further stated that Mr. Ashcrafi would not be precluded from employment based on the previous information and would be treated the same as any other applicant for future employment should he apply for temporary or permanent employment with the City. Carroll Hayden indicated the position that Mr. Ashcrafi had originally applied for was filled prior to the correction of his application information. There is not currently another opening in the Code Enforcement Division. Mr. Ashcraft may apply for other temporary or permanent city positions and he indicated he has applied for a Police Officer position. S:xJOI-IN~Coun¢il Refer als\Coueh~hcraft. WlXl BAKERSFIELD POLICE May 3,1999 To: Alan Tandy, City Manager From: S.E. Brummer, Chief of Police Subject: Council Referral WF18122 - Request for Extra Patrol in Rosedale Area Council Member Couch April 28, 1999 Meeting Police Department Operations staff were advised of citizen Tim Ricords concerns about early morning residential burglaries in the Rosedale area. Captain William Rector has advised me that midnight shift watch commanders were provided a "calls for service analysis" for district 16; which encompasses the vicinity of Cheyenne Drive. This information will assist the district officers in being more pro-active in the district 16 area. Additionally, officers from adjoining patrol districts will provide this area with extra patrol in the early morning hours. Additionally, Captain Rector was successful in contacting Mr. Ricords by telephone to discuss his concerns. Mr. Ricords was encouraged to contact the on duty Watch Commander or Captain Rector should he wish to discuss any future law enforcement issues. Mr. Ricords advised Captain Rector that he did not expect personal contact on this matter, however he was pleased to discuss the issue. I appreciate Council Member Couch's concern regarding this matter. I can assure you that apprehending burglars, and criminals of any nature, is a top priority of officers in this department. WRR/vrf Attachment: CRR WF 18122 -Additional Patrolling in Rosedale Area City of Bakersfield *REPRINT* ~.~__~ WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REO~JO~: WF0018122 / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 4~30~99 REQUEST DATE: 4/28/99 CREW: TIME PRINTED: 11:08:41 SCHEDULE DATES /i TION: 4Z28 9 COMPLETION: 5/05/9 GEN. LOC: WARD4 FACILITY NODES FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: COUCH ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL USER ID: PMCCARTHY WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: ADDITIONAL PATROLLING IN ROSEDALE AREA CONTACT TIM RICORDS Phone 1 661 - 5888521 10323 CHEYENNE DR Phone 2 661 - 8682470 Bakersfield, CA 93312 REQUEST COMMENTS ***REFERRAL TO POLICE DEPARTMENT*** COUCH HAS REQUESTED THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO INCREASE PATROLLING IN THE VICINITY OF CHEYENNE DR IN THE ROSEDALE AREA. CITIZENS HAVE REPORTED AN INCREASE IN BURGLARIES BETWEEN THE HOURS OF MIDNIGHT AND 3:00 AM. Job Order Description: ADDITIONAL PATROLLING IN ROSEDALE AREA Category: POLICE SERVICES DEPT Task: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL Assigned Department: POLICE SERVICES ~ART DATE / / COMPLETION DATE / / 4/30/99 Copy to: Captain Rector BAKERSFIELD CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM May 5, 1999 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: John W. Stinso~stant City Manager SUBJECT: Councilmember Couch Referral of 4/28/99 - Walter Williams re. Child Care I contacted Mr. Walter Williams on behalf of Councilmember Couch. Mr. Williams indicated that he worked with Mercy Charities and was interested in providing child care facilities in the Southeast Bakersfield area. He was interested in what types of assistance the city could provide in that effort. I explained to Mr. Williams that the city typically utilized Community Development Block Grants for that type of activity. I further explained that there was a process that needed to be followed and that he would need to talk with Jake Wager or George Gonzales from the Economic and Community Development Department to get the specifics of the program. I provided their phone number and explained that the current year funding cycle had been completed, however, he should contact Mr. Wager to get information on the funding process so he could participate in the next cycle. I also called Mr. Wager and informed him that he would be contacted by Mr. Williams regarding a child care facility. S:~IOHNXCouncil Refer als\Couch\William s.wpd BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ~~'~ DATE: MAY 5, 1999 SUBJECT: RIVERLAKES RANCH BEACH CLUB PARKING'LOT UPDATE---Cou.cil Referral Record No. WF0018124 / 00! On Tuesday, May 4, Joe Lozano, Jack LaRochelle and myself met with David Stanton of the Riverlakes Ranch Master Association. We met at the site of the Beach Club parking lot where storm water has eroded the asphalt surface to a point of disrepair. We determined that the cause of the disrepair was a combination of storm water traveling over the relatively flat parking lot surface. Mr. Stanton requested that we develop a solution to this problem that would be mutually acceptable to all parties. We offered to construct a storm drain system that would capture storm water within the street area and convey it to a catch basin located within the parking lot. In addition, we also offered to construct a cross-gutter along the entrance to the parking lot, which together with the storm drain system would eliminate any storm water entering the parking lot from a city street. Mr. Stanton indicated he would have the actual parking lot resurfaced to make necessary repairs on the asphalt surface.' This proposal appeared to be very satisfactory to Mr. Stanton. Mr. Stanton indicated he will be bring this proposal to his board in the very near future. Once we get word from him that this proposal is acceptable to his board, we will immediately begin our work to construct the storm drain system and cross-gutter. We indicated to Mr. Stanton that we could complete our work within a one week time frame and that it would be completed prior to the summer holiday. G:\GROUPDATxMemo\1999~dverlakes pkg lot.wpd >~~,,~,-~ WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 '~;SB: WF0018124 / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 4Z30~99 ~,~,~ REQUEST DATE: 4/28y99 ~W: TIME PRINTED: 11:38:49 SCHEDULE DATES LOCATION: $'l'a~'~': ~9~ COMPLETION: GEN. LOC: WARD4 FACILITY NOD~UD'~~// FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: ~EQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: COUCH ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFEKR~AL USER ID: PMCCARTHY WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: RIVERLAKES RANCH UPDATE REQUEST COM~rENTS ~**REFERRAL TO PUBLIC WORKS*** STAFF IS REQUESTED TO REVIEW THE LETTERS FROM MR. STANTON AND THEN PROVIDE AN UPDATE REGARDING THE MEETING HELD BETWEEN PUBLIC WORKS AND RIVER- LAKES; AND THE INFORMATION ADDRESSED IN THE CORRESPONDENCE.COPIES OF DOCUMENTS ARE AVAILABLE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. Job Order Description: RIVERLAKES RANCH UPDATE ~atggory: PUBLIC WORKS TasK: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL Assigned Department: PUBLIC WORKS START ~ATE/ /__ COMPLETION ~ATE / .. / RIVERLAKES RANCH MASTER ASSOCIATION c/o Pacific Management Company 2131 "G" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 April 21, 1999 /~ Honorable David Couch City of Bakersfield City Council 1501 Truxtun Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Riverlakes Ranch Master Association -- Beach Club Parking Lot Dear David, As the president of the Board of Directors of the Riverlakes Ranch Master Association, consisting of approximately 1100 homes, all of which pay very substantial taxes to the city, I have been asked to express the Association's and homeowners' frustration concerning the Beach Club Parking Lot issue which we first talked about in early February, and which I covered in a letter to you dated February 5, 1999 (copy attached): After the February 5, 1999 letter, you and I discussed this matter on several occasions. Again I received no response. Finally, in early April I wrote again (copy of letter attached), advising that we had no response, that our Board meeting for April was coming up and that the parking lot repairs should be made as promptly as possible because our heavy use of the parking lot would be during the summer. Again we had no response. Let me review the problem again. The then "master developer" granted the City a flowage easement "... for the purpose of collection and temporary storage of storm and drainage waters from adjacent subdivided lands... "apparently over the parking lot at the Association's Beach Club. (Since the property description in the easement is literally pages of metes and bounds description, we are not entirely certain as to the precise location for the flowage.) For easy reference, the document is dated June 1, 1991, and was recorded July 29, 1991 at Book 6550, Page 0093. We now have paving failure at the parking lot, which we believe is caused by runoff allegedly allowed by the easement. While, for sake of discussion only and not by way of admission, the Association as the successor to the developer may be required to honor the commitment of the developer, we do not believe that the easement entitles the City to damage our property and then leave it to us to repair it again and again. Rather we believe the City has an obligation to use the easement so as to prevent damage. Broadly, an easement imposes a duty on both the fee owner and the easement holder to act reasonably toward each other. We believe this problem can be minimized or prevented if there are some minor changes made to curb and gutter. We ask that the city contribute to the effort. Frankly we do not understand the problem in obtaining a reply (any reply, positive or negative) on this matter. We are only asking for reasonable neighborly cooperation in solving a problem to the advantage of both the Association and the city without getting into legal battles. May we expect someone to contact us on this matter shortly? I am ready to discuss this matter with you and with city staff at any convenient time. Very truly yours, David B. Stanton RIVERLAKES RANCH MASTER ASSOCIATION c/o Pacific Management Company 2131 "G" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 April .8--'F;,' 1999 Honorable David Couch City of Bakersfield City Council 1501 Truxtun Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Riverlakes Ranch Master Association Dear David, As you will recall, in early February we discussed damage to our Association parking lot, caused, we believe by drainage water discharged by the City of Bakersfield. You referred our concerns to the appropriate City department and they were to provide a response to us. As of this date, we have had no response. The facts are: The then "master developer" granted the City a flowage easement "... for the purpose of collection and temporary storage of storm and drainage waters from adjacent subdivided lands... "over the parking lot at the Association's Beach Club. (Since the property description in the easement is literally pages of metes and bounds description, we are not entirely certain as to the precise location for the flowage.) For easy reference, the document is dated June 1, 1991, and was recorded July 29, 1991 at Book 6550, Page 0093. We now have paving failure at the parking lot, which we believe is caused by runoff allowed by the easement. While the Association as the successor to the developer may be required to honor the commitment of the developer, we do not believe that the easement entitles the City to damage our property and then leave it to us to repair it again and again. Rather we believe the City has an obligation to use the easement so as to prevent damage. Broadly, an easement imposes a duty on both the fee owner and the easement holder to act reasonably toward each other. We believe this can be minimized or prevented if there are some minor changes made to curb and gutter. Summer is the period of heavy use of the Beach Club and the Board would like to know the position of the City so that a solution can be physiCally implemented before summer comes. The board believes that a cooperative approach with the City could avoid a much larger problem in the future. We do, however, need a response from the City. Our next board meeting is April 13, 1999. At the last board meeting, I reported that we were expecting a response from the City and requested that the repairs issue be tabled until that response was received. I would greatly appreciate your using your good offices to request some response, preferably so that I could report on it at the April 13, 1999 meeting. Of course I would be happy to discuss this with you or the appropriate City department representatives at any convenient time. Very truly yours, David B. Stanton, President Riverlakes Ranch Master Assn. river75.1tr 4-5-gg May 3, 1999 To: Alan Tandy, City Manager From: S.E. Brummer, Chief of Police Subject: Council Referral #WF18109 - Noise Problem with Rooster Council Member Couch Council Meeting 4/14/99 Following the April 14th Council meeting, Police Department Operations staff were assigned to contact the owner of the noisy rooster in the area of Linda Lee Lane. The animal owner relocated the rooster and the complainant Judy Yancey advised she has not experienced any further noise problems. WRR/vrf attachment: CRR WF18109 - Noise Problem - Rooster ~' ~ City of Bakersfield *REPRINT* WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REQ/JOB: WF0018109 / 002 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 4~16~99 REQUEST DATE: 4/14/99 CREW: TIME PRINTED: 15:49:28 ~ SCHEDULE DATES ~ /ATION: ~'rAKT: 4~14~99 COMPLETION: 4/26/99 GEN. LOC: WARD4 FACILITY NODES FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: COUCH ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL USER ID: GWOLF WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: NOISE PROBLEM - ROOSTER CONTACT JUDY YANCEY Phone 1 661 - 5890133 ( ) 11506 LINDA LEE LANE Phone 2 - ( ) Bakersfield, CA 93308 REQUEST COMMENTS ***DUAL REFERRAL TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES-CODE ENFORCEMENT AND POLICE-CODE ENFORCEMENT LEAD*** STAFF IS REQUESTED TO CONTACT RESIDENT ABOUT NOISE PROBLEM WITH ROOSTER. Job Order Description: NOISE PROBLEM - ROOSTER CateGory: POLICE SERVICES DEPT Task: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL AssiGned Department: POLICE SERVICES START DATE / / COMPLETION DATE / / CC: Capt. Rector