HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/06/04 B A K E R S F I E L D
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
MEMORANDUM
August 6, 2004
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Alan Tandy, City Manager/~ T'~,,../,
SUBJECT: General Information
1. The good news of the week- the County Board of Supervisors supported entering
into a contract with us on the Sphere of Influence issue. It supports our position on
properties 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 (see the attached map). It also supports our position on
the issue of Shafter encroaching into our exiting Sphere and joint planning area. It
would hold off any immediate decision on the areas to the north of our current
sphere which are disputed by Shafter.
It is a very favorable vote for us. State law says the LAFCO has to give such a
contract "great weight". It will appear on your agenda on August 18th- LAFCO is
scheduled to meet on August 24th. The County decided not to enter into such a
contract with Shafter.
2. More good news in follow-up to the budget adoption by the State. Booking fee
reimbursement was in and out the last few days, as various compromises were
discussed. Our information is that it was included in the final adopted budget. The
good news about that is that we have prepared our budget conservatively,
assuming that revenue source would be lost. Since it was not, we will be able to
come back with a positive adjustment to the revenues to hire more staff. We also
analyze whether any other revenue trends are positive as we prepare that. The
final numbers will also depend on the negotiations with the County on their
requested booking fee increase. Those discussions are continuing.
3. The adoption of the State budget also allows us to proceed with the hiring of the 24
positions that were budgeted. The actual hiring was delayed until the State budget
adoption. They did not increase the pain to us to the extent we could not make
those hires.
4. Councilmember Salvaggio requested a report on the differences between the
League of California Cities' viewpoint on the value of the protection we are to
receive if the' State referendum passes on the November ballot, and the position of
my office and past actions of the City.,. The report is enclosed.
A "Q and A" summary, prepared by the League, on the local revenue protection
measure, now known as proposition lA, is enclosed for your review.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
August 6, 2004
Page 2
5. We have another small financial victory reported by Water Resources. The Snow
Surveys section of the State Department of Water Resources originally asked for a
100% funding increase. After several discussions, they have agreed to keep the
fees at the previous years' levels through FY 04/05 - that is the good news. The
bad news is they have indicated they will ask for a 40% increase next year. There
may also be other future fee raises from the State Department of Health for our
domestic water permit fees and from the Regional Water Quality Control Board on
storm water fees. We will continue our discussions with them and report any
changes that may occur.
6. A report from Public Works with information on Phase 2 of the 2004 Street
Resurfacing/Reconstruction projects is enclosed.
7. One of the difficult cuts we made in the 2004/05 budget was the funding for the
Employee Incentive Committee's two major recognition programs -the Excellence
in Action Awards and the Employee Appreciation Breakfast. Now that the State
budget has been adopted, and we have more clarity on our financial situation, we
will be able to restore those activities in the current budget. Our employees have
risen admirably to the challenges imposed by our financial constraints, and it is
appropriate that we recognize their good efforts.
8. The Wayside Spray Park is in the final stages of completion. Several photos are
enclosed that show it in operation. A ribbon cutting ceremony is tentatively
planned for Monday, August 16th at 10:00 a.m. We will have more information for
you next week.
9. It can not all be good news. As has been the case recently, we got only one bid on
the Jefferson pool rehabilitation, and it was $450,000 over budget. It had cone in
over budget in a bid last year, and we had to wait for more block grant money in
connection with the start of the new fiscal year. We will value engineer and see
about breaking it into separate pool and building packages to attract more bidders.
We will recommend re-bidding again at your next meeting.
10. We will be going out with a request for proposals on our health care consultant
contract. We had earlier indicated to the Personnel Committee that we would
recommend an extension. There were concerns expressed, and we have decided
to do the request for proposals in response.
11. A minor part of the hotel issue may be back on your agenda on the 18th. Brighton
has decided to have a holding company own the hotel, which has a different name,
although it is under Mr. Fan's ownership. Brighton would manage it. The potential
agenda item would be to clarify that the second name for the holding company was
appropriate for the transfer. It is a technicality.
12. The activity report from EDCD regarding on-going projects during the fourth
quarter of FY 2003/04 (May to July) is enclosed.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
August 6, 2004
Page 3
13. Responses to Council requests are enclosed, as follows:
Councilmember Ma.q.qard
· A report is enclosed which identifies possible future City infrastructure risks, as
a part of our overall efforts to ensure appropriate maintenance procedures and
inspections;
· The enclosed letter was sent to CalTrans expressing the City's concern
regarding the delay of the Highway 178/Fairfax overpass project;
Councilmember Couch
· A synopsis of the tentative and final map process is enclosed.
AT:rs
cc: Department Heads
Pam McCarthy, City Clerk
Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst
: :, ~--, '- :-4'~' F"i'~"?-,'"'i-~ ..... ~ ....... ':-'-:':,¥; ....... ~ ~'r'? :"'
-' ' '~' ' ~ ~ ....... : ~; ; ~ ~ '.,,,, .~ - CI~OF BAKERS'~ELD
-: . , ~ ~. ~,--'- ~'"--!¢ ~ ~ , · ·~ ".: i ....... SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
L.~ c ............ 2'~ '- ........... /
~ .,' . _J.._~ ........ ~ ..... ~ ~--~;.-..-~ ~ ........
~'-?T'~_~ '~ ' ' ~', ; / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~:' '? ~ "~ .... ~ F ~ .............. ~ .......... ~ ............... LEGEND
' ' ' I"t'-"; ........ ,_; ;:r~'--"-'l ? }'
.... ~ ~ ' ~ ..... , ~ ~NE~L P~ ~UND~Y
~ ...... ~-~.., ;!~ r~ ~ ~ ; i/~' '-d ~ i __ ' ...... ~ ....... ~-~:'~'~' "-~ h-- --~'~ ....... : ~ "" , ~; ~'~,~'--:~ ':._ ~ ..............
h :- ......... ~ ....... "~ ~ '''?J
.' ........ ~'-: .... '*~"~'~ ' , .-, DATE: ~5/~
au~ 85 2884 19:11:28 qi~ ~x . -> 324185B ~lan E. T~n&u Page BB1 0£ BB7
L 'E AG U E 4oo Su,,,, 4o0.
OF CALI['O~ lA Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916.658.8240
':' C I T I E S ~.~cities. org
TO: MayOrs, Council Members and City Managers
FROM: Megan Taylor, Director of Communications
SUBJECT:. Proposition lA: Some Questions Answered
DATE: August 5, 2004
Attached is a "Q&A" developed with'the assistance of our legal-counsel, Betsy
Strauss. It is intended to help answer Some of the.moro technical questions that
city officials and others have raised about Prop. lA, the local revenue protection
measure' that was passed by the legislature last week as State Constitutional
Amendment-No. 4 (SCA 4).
Please note that there are also a number of materials that have been developed
or are under development by our consultants, and we are working with them to
get these completed as quickly as possible. These include a more generic,
layperson's version of a Q&A, as well as talking points, sample resolution, fact
sheet, PowerPoint presentation, sample opeds, letters to editor--the full range of
collaterals that city officials may need to understand and explain Prop lA to
residents and other interested parties. These will be available in downloadable
versions from the Proposition lA website (www.protectlocalservices.com).
I hope this is information is helpful. If you have additional questions, please call
me at'916.658.8228, or send an email to: mtavlor~cacities.or.q..
Attachment
~ RECE-,,]:VED': 8/ 5/04 4:12PM; ->CTTy OF BAKERSF:I:ELD; #869; PAGE 2
~ug 85 2884 19:11:41 Via Fax -> 3241850 ~]an P.. ?an&y Page 882 0£ 887
E AG U E 14o0 K Street, Suite 400- Sacramento, California 95814
O F CALl FOP, N IA Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916:658.8240
C I T.I E S www. cacities, org
Proposition lA - "Protection of Local Govemment Revenues":
Constitutional:Protection for Local Govemment'Revenues
Questions and Answers
Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 4 (,SCA 4) enacts substantial reforms to the
legislature's ability to .raid the local government shares of the property tax, sales
tax and vehicle license fee ~to pay for state programs. It will appear on the
November 2, 2004, general election ballot as Proposition lA and be entitled
"Protection of Local Government Revenues".
This document Containskey questions and answers about this mportant ballot
measure, which-is stronglY supported by the League of California Cities.
PROPERTY TAX
Background: Proposition 13 reduced 'the property tax rate to $t.00 per $100
of assessed valuation'countywide. This single rate replaced the multiple
property tax rates imposed by local governments prior to Proposition 13.
The .revenue ~from the $1.00 rate is shared in each county by the county, the
cities, the special districts, and .the schools. Each jurisdiction's share of the
$1.00 rate was based originally upon the property tax rates in effect prior to
Proposition 13. The shares have been modified over the years by the
Legislature.
1. What's the basic protection for ~the property tax in Proposition IA?
Proposition lA.will end the practice of state raids on local property tax,~by allowing
only two loans within a 10 year period - and those may occur only if the state
meets certain criteria.
SpecificallY, prOp., t A prevents the Legislature from reducing the combined
property tax shares of cities, special districts, and the county, except to borrow the
funds on a temporary basis to address a "severe state fiscal hardship". If, for
example, on November 3, 2004, the property tax shares of cities, special districts,
-and the county of the hypothetical "California County" equaled 60% of property.
taxes collected in that county, the Legislature cannot pass a law that reduces the
percentage below 60% .except to respond to a significant state fiscal problem.
Additional restrictions are:
RE¢ff--IVED: 8/ 5/04 4:13PM; ->CITY-OF BAKERSFIELD; 8869; PAGE 3
Aug 05 2884 19:12:88 Via Pax -> 3241858 Alan P,. Tandy Page 883 Of 08?
· The 2003 VLF GAP Loan must be repaid before borrowing could occur;
· The Joan could only occur twice within a 10 year period;
· The loan ("the total amount of revenue losses") must be repaid with interest
within 3 years, and prior loans must be repaid before borrowing could occur a
second time within 10 years;
· The-amount ofthe loan is limited to no'more than'8% ofthe total amount of
property tax allocated to cities, counties, and special districts in the previous
fiscal year; and
· The.reduction could 0nly occur-with a 2/3 vote of the Legislature.
· 2. Can the Legislature continue to reallocate property.taxes on the lOcal
level?
Yes, but with a significant new restriction on that ability. Since the passage of
Proposition 13, the Legislature has had the power to .reallocate proPerty taxes
among local governments, but its major experience with .this over the last 25 years
has been to allocate city, county and special district shares of the property tax to
schools through ERAF and reduce state general fund support for schools.
Proposition lA'would prevent future allocatiOns of local government shares to
schools (except.on a temporary basis, when the funds may be borrowed, as
eXplained in questions 1 and 4). However, the state retains the authority to
transfer property taxes among cities, counties, and special districts'with a 2/3 Vote
of the Legislature. Under current law, the state can make this type of transfer with
a majority vote of the Legislature.
3. Could.the state reallocate property taxes in order to'.fund a state mandate?
No. The amendments to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the state constitution specify
that, "Ad valorem property tax revenues shall not be used to reimburselocal
government for the costs of a new program or'higher level of services."
4. Does :Proposition lA allow the state flexibility to respond to a significant
state fiscal problem?
Yes, by allowing the state to borrow local property tax if it first meets the criteria
identified in Question #1. Beginning in the 2008-2009 fiscal year, if the state has
already paid cities and counties the amount owed from the 2003-04VLF Gap
Loan (est. $1'.22 billion), the governor may.issue a proclamation that declares that
there is a "severe state fiscal hardship" that requires the state to temporarily
suspend Proposition 1A's basic protection for the property tax. Next, the
Legislature must first adopt a statute with a 2/3 vote that contains a suspension of
the basic protection for that fiscal year only. Then it.must adopt a separate statute
that requires the state to repay cities, counties, and special districts the total
amount of property tax loss caused by the suspension within three years.
5. What will suspension of the property tax protection in Proposition lA
allow the state to do?
RECE~"J:VED: 8/ 5/04 4:13PM; ->CTTY OF BAKERSFTELD; #869; PAGE 4
During the one-year period of a suspension, the state can take property taxes
from cities, counties, and/or special districts (".local agencies") and transfer them to
the schools o'r to some other agency that operates within the county in which the
property taxes were generated: This transfer will reduce the protected- pr;operty tax
percentage. However, the reduction 'may not result in a property tax loss that
exceeds 8 percent of the total amount of property tax allocated to cities, counties,
and special districts in the previous fiscal year. Currently this percentage is the
equivalent of roughly $1.3 billion.
6. When will local agencies be repaid if proPerty tax is taken during a
suspension period?
No later than the end of the third fiscal year following the fiscal year to which the
reduction applies. If the reduction applies in the 2010-11 fiscal year, then
repayment must occur no later than June 30 of 2014. Repayment will be for the.
"total amount of revenue losses" including interest.
7. Can the Legislature suspend the Proposition lA protection each time
there is a "severe state fiscal hardship?"
No. Suspension of the'protection may only occur twice in a ten year period; and
· only ifthe VLF Gap Loan amount has been repaid; and if only any prior
suspension of property tax has been repaid with interest.
8. Why was the redevelopment propertytax increment not explicitly
protected in the final version of SCA 4?
It was the opinion of key legislators and legislative staff that Article 16, Section 16
of the state constitution, already .protects the redevelopment property tax
increment. Further, the Governor insisted on the inclusion of language in the ballot
arguments for Proposition lA that declares that the redevelopment increment is
already protected by the state constitution.
SALES TA.X
Background: The sales and use tax laws allow cities and counties to imposle
the basic 1% sales-tax as well as a variety of other use taxes such as taxes i
for transit, jails, open space, etc. The basic 1% rate is distributed back to the
jur. isdiction in which it was collected. Both cities and coUnties may increase
the sales and use tax by one-quarter cent for general governmental
purposes with a majority vote. Last year the Legislature suspended °ne-.
quarter cent of the .basic 1% sales tax until the state's fiscal recovery bonds
are repaid.
1. What's the basic protection for the sales and use tax in Proposition lA?
RECI~TVED: 8/ 5/04 4:14PM; ->c'rTy OF 8AKERSFTELD; #869; PAGE 5
t~ug 85 2884 19:13:84 Via Fax -> 3Z41858 t~lan E. Tancly l~age 885 Of BFi?
Proposition lA prevents the state'from borrowing or taking local sales and use
taxes. While the measure allows the state to borrow local property shares after
meeting specific criteria, Prop. lA does not allow the state to reduce the current
funding that local governments receive from sales and use tax or require that
sales tax revenues be distribUted based upon population rather than the location
or.in any other way restrict a city or county from imposing sales and use taxes in
accordance with existing law.
2. What about -the current suspension of one-quarter cent of the sales tax
occurring as a result of the passage of'Proposition $77 Does Proposition lA.
require .the sUspension to end when the fiscal recovery .bonds are .repaid?
Yes. Proposition 1^ prevents the state from extending the period during which
the one-quarter cent is suspended; from failing to pay the property tax backfill
during the period Of suspension; and from failing to restore the full sales tax rate
When the bonds are repaid.
3. Can the state take any action .that affects'the sales 'and use tax?
Yes. It gives the Legislature the authority .to authorize two or more local agencies
within a county to exchange property tax and sales tax but only if the governing
bodies of each of those agencies approves a locally-negotiated exchange
agreement. Voter approval is not required to make the exchange.
Additionally, the Legislature can change how sales tax is distributed if the change
is 'required by federal law or.to participate in an interstate agreement that
addresses payment of sales tax for Intemet purchases.
VEHICLE .LICENSE FEE
Background: The constitution currently guarantees all VLF revenue to cities
and counties. No particular amount of revenue is guaranteed, however,
because the amount depends upon the VLF rate that is set by the
Legislature. The current VLF rate i's 2%. Over the past several years, the
Legislature has reduced the portion of the 2% rate paid by. the -taxpayer and
made up the difference to cities and.counties through a .backfill of state
general funds. During this fiscal year, cities and counties have not received
a backfill of state general funds even though the taxpayer is paying only 1/$
of the 2% rate (0.65%). Under Proposition lA, cities and counties will receive
these funds in the .form of increased allocations of the property tax beginning
in this fiscal year.
1. What is the basic protection for the VLF in Proposition lA?
Proposition lA provides constitutionally guaranteed VLF revenue to cities and
counties at the rate of 0.65% of the value of a vehicle. The Legislature will decide
how much of the revenue paysfor realignment programs and.how much is
distributed for general purpose local government programs. This is a significant
RECEIVED: 8/ 5/04 4:14PM; ->'CITY OF BAKERSFIELD; #SEi~); PAGE S
l~ug 85 2884 19:13:33 I/ia Fax -> 3241858 I~lan E. ?anJy Page 886 0£ 887
change for cities and counties, because currently the constitution does not
guarantee .VLF revenues to cities and counties at any specific rate.
2; What happens if the Legislature lowers the rate below 0.65% ?
Proposition lA requireS-the Legislature to enact a law that provides for an
allocation to cities and counties equal to the difference between the revenues
received from 0.65% rate and the lower rate.
3. What will cities receive in place of the 2004-05 states General Fund VLF
backfill?
Beginning in the 04-05 fiscal year, and continuing each year thereafter, cities and
counties will .receive property tax, instead of VLF backfill from. the state general
· -fund, in an amount equal to the difference between revenues that would be
received from the VLF if at the 2% rate and the revenue received from the VLF at
the 0.65-% rate. The additional property tax will be distributed 'by reducing each
local agency's contribution to ERAF. The first receipt of this additional property tax
will occur in the January distribution of the FY 2004-05. property tax. The amounts
received in subsequent years will increase at rates corresponding to the rate of
increase in local property .taxwithin a 'county. The entitlement to backfill is in a
statute, not in the Constitution, but the new property tax has the same protections
as other parts of the property tax (see Property Tax section)'.
MANDATE REFORM
Background: The Constitution requires the state to reimburse Iocal~
governments for state-mandated programs. The Legislature has sometimes
"suspended" the mandate,, rather than .reimbursing local governments. There
are a group of mandates that the state has determined require
reimbursement for which the Legislature has never reimbursed local
governments. Finally, the Legislature has .not reimbursed local governments
when it,transfers additional-respOnsibility for a state program or service to
local governments when the local government already had partial
responsibility .for that program or service.
1. Does Proposition lA strengthen.the requirement to reimburse cities,
counties and special districts forthe costs of state-mandated programs and
services?
Yes. Beginning in 2005-06, in each fiscal year's budget, the Legislature must
either appropriate sufficient fund to reimburse local governments for'their costs of
complying with a mandate or suspend the operation of the mandate for that fiscal
year,
2. Does the "fund or suspend" requirement apply to all mandates?
No. Thererare two exceptions. The first is for employee and employee
organization related mandates. The second is for costs incurred prior to the 2004- ..
RECB'rVED-- 8/ 5/04 4.-15PM; ->C'rTY OF BAKERSFTELD; #86g; PAGE '7
flus 85 2884 19:14:82 I/ia pax -> 3241fl58 fllan P.. landy Pas-- 887 Of 887
05 fiscal year that have not been paid prior to the 2005-06 fiscal year. These
costs may.be paid over a five-year period beginning in 2005-06. The five-year
period is established in statute, not in the Constitution.
3. What happens when the state transfers additional responsibility for a
program or a service that the local government already had some
responsibility for?
prOposition lA defines "mandate" to include a transfer of additional responsibility
for a state.program or service.
7
B A K E R S F I E L D
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
August 5, 2004
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Co~nc~.~
///-/
FROM: Alan Tandy, City Manager///~/
SUBJECT: League of California Citiesrand Future Revenue Protection
Councilmember Salvaggio asked that I write up an objective document discussing the
differences between the League of California Cities' viewpoint on the value of the protection
we are to receive in the future and the commentary/position of my office and the past actions
of the City. An effort to do that follows:
Bi.q Picture Issues
The City of Bakersfield will lose nearly $7.0 million over ihe next two years, most of it ($6.4
million) from the General Fund. In exchange, there will be a referendum on the November
ballot that, if it passes, would place certain constraints on the ability of the State to take City
revenues in the future.
The position that Bakersfield took was to support Proposition 65 which would have protected
our revenues (the $7.0 million) and absolute future protection, had it passed.
We will now never know whether Proposition 65 would have passed or not. We will also
never know whether, with an all out effort to defend our $7.0 million and the balance from
around the State, the legislature would have taken more, less or the same amount from the
cities and counties.
Although the League is very positive about passage of the referendum, we also do not know
with certainty that it will pass. Proposition 65 was at least clear - it would protect public safety
dollars. The new compromise is complex and hard to explain to the voters. We are not
predicting that it will fail.' It is not, however, inevitable that it will pass.
The League pushed the compromise with the Governor very hard. When the legislature
would not go along, they fought hard again and then accepted the best thing they could get
under the political circumstances. The bigger picture summary of their actions was that they
Honorable Mayor and City Council
August 5, 2004
Page 2
gave up $2.6 billion Statewide ($7.0 million to us), and they got a watered down referendum
issue on the ballot. They then declared that as a victory - based on the assumption that
Proposition 65 would not have passed and that the legislature could have taken more, etc.
Again, since history did not proceed down any other path, we will never know what would
have happened had the alternate routes been followed. While the League argues that the
best case scenario took place, it is also possible, had there been no compromise, that
Proposition 65 would have passed and we would have saved $7.0 million and gotten real
long-term protection.
A summary of the current law, Proposition 65 and the "Compromise" from the League is
attached.
Smaller Issues
If the referendum passes will it be real and meaningful protection, or not? The League has
argued yes, although they fought for months for stronger versions.
Here are a few of the weakness:
· They can still take money twice a decade, with no limit on how much.
· Redevelopment money is not protected at all.
· The State has ignored other constitutional provisions in the past, like passing a budget on
time and not using Gas Tax for General Fund purposes, and can do this in the future in
regard to the new "deal."
Smaller issues- bright side
Assuming the amendment passes, perhaps they will feel some political pressure to honor the
intent.
Since the initial deal is for two years, we should not, hopefully, have to worry about more
capture next year, except for redevelopment.
Summary
What is, is.
Our budget is adjusted for it.
We can hire the 24 new positions contained in the budget.
It is time to move on. We will never know where we would have been had the other alternate
paths been pursued.
·
3al 27 2884 23:53:31 Via Fax -> 3241858 Alan E. Tandy Page 881 OF 883
Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916.658.8240
(~,A,L ! FO www.cacities.org
ITI
TO: Mayors, Council Members and City Managers
FROM: Megan Taylor, Director of Communications
DATE: July '27, 2004
SUBJECT: Local Government Agreement- Revised Side-by-Side Comparison
Attached is an updated copy of the comparison of the Compromise Agreement
that we Sent out about earlier this afternoon with a'memo from League Executive
Director Chris McKenzie. We realized that we had erroneously stated that VLF
rates in current law, Prop. 65 and the Compromise were capped at :2% in the
constitution, instead of statutorily. The correct statement is now included in this
comparison.
Our apologies for the error, and thanks for understanding.
Attachment
RECE~:VED: 7/27/0.4 8:54PM; ->C'rTy OF BAKERSFI'ELO~ .#818; .PAGE 2
Jul 27 2884 23:53:4S'via Fax -> 3241858 i~la. E. Tan~y Page 802 Of 883
PROPOSED LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT .COMPROMISE
Current Law Prop 65 . . Agreement
VLF Rate, " Currently at 2°1o Currently at 2% Reduced to 0.65% statutorily and
property tax backfill provided
between 0.65% and 2%
Backfill if VLF None Backfill provided ifBackfill provided if rate reduced
Reduced. rate reduced, below 0:65%
Increases in VLF Set at 2% in statute.Nochange from Capped at 2% statutorily.
Rate Can only be used for current law. Constitutionally guarantees
city or county '0.65% for cities and counties.
purposes.
VLF Gap Loan Statutorily required in Statutorily requiredStatutorily required in 2006-07.
Repayment 2006-07. in 2006-07 unless No future property tax
voters change, loan/suspension if unpaid.
Agencies None. Legislature Cities, counties, City, county, special district. No
'Protected may reallocate at will special districts and further protections for ADA
to ERAF and among .RDAs beyond existing provisions of
agencies. Art. 16, Sec.' 16 of state
constitution.
Reallocation Legislature can With voter Local share (non-school/ERAF)
Among Local reallocate by simple approval, may be reallocated by 2/3 vote
Agencies majority vote, to other local govts. In a county.
including to ERAF or Legislature may not reallocate to
other state fund. ~ncrease school or ERAF share.
Reallocation of property tax may
not be done .to support state-
mandated programs.
Suspension None. May take' None Beginning in 2008-09, if
Trigger permanently at will. Governor proc~laims "significant
state fiscal hardship."
SuspenSion Vote Simple majority to Voter approval 2/3rds vote - separate bill
Needed. take permanently-- providing for repayment.
no repayment.
Suspension None. May take None. --No more than 2 times in .10
Limits .permanently at will. years.
--No loan until VLF Gap loan and
previous suspension loan paid.
--Cap of 8% of local share of
property taxes ($1.3 billion
today).
Current Law ' Prop 65 Agreement
Repayment I No provision for ,[None. [ Legislature must pass a statute
terms repayment, to fully repay loan with interest
2
REcE[~D: 7/27/04 ..e:s4~M~ ->CZTY OF BAKERSFIELD; #818; PAGE 3
~=l~'Z~' ZBB4'Z3:54:13 ~ia Fax -> 3241858 ~'lan ~. Tendy 'Pa~e BB30f 883
· . (as provided by law). within three
I I · I fiscal years.
~~.,;,,~~~;~',~,~~ ............. ~~'.. ~,, ~~~ ................................................................
Protection None. Legislature. Yes, unless voters Protects the rate and method of
may reduce rate or change. ~distribution of the local Bradley-
change method of Burns sales tax and Transactions
distribution. Prop. 57 andUse Tax. Guarantees
triple flip ½ cent payment of property tax backfill
sales tax not. for Prop. 57 sales tax ~ cent
protected, suspension. Also guarantees
return of ½ cent Bradley Burns
sales tax when ·Prop 57 bonds
retired.
Reallocation May be allowed. Law If voters approve. 'None.
unclear.
~,~.~ ........................
Scope-- None Suspended at Statute imposing mandate is
Consequence of discretion of localsuspended if no state funding
Nonpayment agency except for specified employee
rights and benefits. Applies only
to city, county, special district
mandates.-
Mandate State may shift Clarifies mandate definition to
'Definition costs to local include cost shifts from the state
governments to locals.
without triggering
reimbursement
requirement.
None. Legislature may approve a
statutory framework for voluntary
exchanges of property tax and
sales tax.
[Revised 7/27/2004 8:47 PM]
3
From: Alan Tandy
To: Rhonda SmileY.
Date: 8/6/2004 8:04:14 AM
Subject: Fwd: Street Resurfacing/Reconstruction
>>> Raul Rojas 8~5~04 7:39:39 PM >>>
Thursday, 8~5~04: For your information.
>>> Luis Peralez 8/5/2004 10:42:21 AM >>> ,
Attached .is our 2004, Phase II, Street Resurfacing/Reconstruction-List. We will be able to complete all the
streets on the resurfacing list this year (2004). We may not be.able to complete all the streets on the
reconstruction list in 2004..Those streets that we do not complete will be done in the spring of 2005.
These streets are funded out of the GAS-TAX fund. We are stil! working on some streets in Ward I and
Ward 2 that are funded by ED/CD "HUD" funds.
· In our Phase I, 2004, Street Resurfacing/Reconstruction projects we did streets in ~Ward 1,2, 5 and 7.
During this second Phase We are doing streets in Ward 3, 4, and 6.
On this second Phase of our resurfacing projects, It may appear that we are doing a lot of streets in Ward
3. However, the majority of streets in Ward 3 are short Cul-De-Sacs which are only 200 to 300 feet long.
As time allows, I have been updating our street resurfacing/reconstruction list. It does not look good. It
keeps growing faster then we can keep up with repairs.
Page 1 of 3
STREETS DIVISION
STREET RESURFACING/RECONSTRUCTION LIST - GAS TAX FUND
PHASE II - 2004
STREET RESURFACING LIST
· STREET NAME AREA DESCRIPTION WARD
Warrenton Ave. - ..................................... Newberg St. to 13220 Warrenton Ave. 4
Birk£eld Ave. - ........................................ Candy St. to the east end. 4
~ candy St. - ............................................. Birkfeld Ave. to Frenchglen Ave 4
Frenchfeld Ave. - ..................................... Harrisburg St. to MaryHurst St. 4
Maryhurst St. - ......................................... Frenchfeld Ave. to Warrenton Ave. 4
Unity Ct. - .............................................. Kingwood St. to the west end 4
Kingwood St. - ........................................ Frenchfeld Ave. to Brogan Ave. 4
Brightwood St. - ...................................... Frenchfrld Ave. to the north end 4
Brogan Ave. - ......................................... Brightwood St. to S. Jenkins Rd. 4
Harrisburg St. - ....................................... Brogan Ave. to the south end. 4
Silverton Ave. - ...................................... 208 Scottsburg St. to Newberg St. 4
Cascadia St. - ......~ ................................. Silverton Ave. to Warrenton Ave. 4
Panorama Dr. - ...................................... Fairfax Rd. to approx. 50/75 fi. east of Juniper Ridge Dr. 3
Royal Oak Dr. - .................... -' ................ Highlander St. to Fair Oaks Dr. 3
Fair Oaks Dr. - ...................................... Royal Oak Dr. to Oak Tree Ave. 3
· Oak Tree Ave. - ..................................... Fair Oaks Dr. to Highlander St. 3
Highlander St ....................................... Oak Tree Ave. to Royal Oak Dr. 3
Oakridge Dr. - ....................................... Panorama Dr. to Highland Oaks Dr. 3
Hidden Oaks Dr. - .................................. Highland Oaks Dr. to Highlander St. 3
Auburn Oaks Dr. - .................................. Fairfax Rd. to the east end. .- 3
Sweet Trail Ct. ----~ ...... , ....... , ................. Auburn St.to the north end. 3
Sierraglen Ct. - .......................... r ........... Aubum St, to the north end. 3
Deer Trail Ct. - ........... , .......................... Auburn St. to the north end. 3
Page 2 of 3
Street Resurfacing List Cont. WARD
Parkfield Ct. - ....................................... Auburn St. to the north end. 3
Eastridge Ct. - ...................................... Auburn St. to the S/E end. 3
Fawndale Ct. - ..................................... Auburn St. to the north end. 3
Piper Ct. - .......................................... Auburn St. to the south end. 3
Aberden Ct. Aubum St. to the south end. 3 ~
Eissier Ct. - ........................................ Auburn St. to the south end 3 '
Kilcarey ........................................... Auburn St. to the south end. 3
La Costa Ct. - ..................................... Auburn St. to the south end 3
Loch Fern Ct. - ................................... Auburn St. to the south end 3
Loch Ness Ct. ' Auburn St. to the south end 3
Highland Ct. - ................................... Auburn St to the south end 3
Auburn Ct. - ............................... , ..... Auburn St. to the south end 3
Maywood Dr. - ...........~ ...................... Auburn St. to Glenbrook Ave. 3.
STREET RECONSTRUCTION LIST
Appleblossm Dr. - .............................. New Stine Rd. to Edmonton St. 6
Edmonton St. - ................................. Planz Rd. to Santanna Ave. 6
Estero St. - ................... . .................. Santanna Ave. to Hahn St. 6
Summer Side Ct. - ............................. Summer side Ave. to the north end .6
Santanna Ave. - ................................ Edmonton St. to Actis St. 6
Actis St. Santanna Ave. to Planz Rd. " 6
Trenna Ave. - ........................... ....... Edmonton St. to the west end 6
Actis St. - ....................................... Wilson Rd. to Posada Ave. 6
Barbara Ave. - ................................. Akers Rd. 'to the Westend 6
Barbara Ave. - .................... , ............ Akers Rd. to the east end 6
Lillian Wy. - .................................... Akers Rd. to the east end 6
Page 3 of 3
S~treet~Reconstruction List Cont.
Lillian wy. - ........ · ............................ Akers Rd. to the west end 6
Coony Wy. - .................................... Akers Rd. to the east end 6
Coony Wy. - ........~ ........................... Akers Rd. to the west end 6
Ricky Wy. - ..................................... Akers Rd. to the east end · 6
Appletree Ln. - ................................. Akers rd. to Pepper Tree Ln. 6
AU6- 3 200, '
B A K E R S F I E L ?_ MANAGIER'SO,.
Economic and Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
~,/~,~ ~ July 29, 2004
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager ,~_.)~v~'''-
FROM: Donna Kunz, Economic Development Director
SUBJECT: Economic and Community Development Department Activity Report
This memo will serve as an update for Fiscal Year 2003-04, 4th quarter (May 1 to July 1)
concerning on-going housing, economic and community development projects.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
1. Automated Chemical Controllers for Swimmin.q Pools
Funds of $45,500 .(FY 02-03) were budgeted to install automated chemical controllers at
Jefferson and Martin Luther King Jr. Parks. The controllers are scheduled to be installed
when the swimming pools are rehabilitated. Martin Luther King, Jr. pool rehabilitation was
completed June 15, 2004. Construction bid opening for Jefferson pool rehabilitation will be
August 3, 2004. Construction is scheduled to start in August and completed by April 2005.
2. Acquisition and Demolition Pro,qram
Funds of $210,350 (FY 03-04) are available for acquisition and demolition of deteriorated
industrial,, commercial and residential properties in economically distressed areas for
economic development projects. These funds are earmarked for the Baker Street corridor
in connection with the Old Town Kern Mixed Use Project. The acquisition process is
currently under way on multiple commercial sites and demolition will take place when the
properties have been acquired. About one-third of the funds remain.
3. Baker Street Streetscape Improvement Project (Phase II)
Funds in the amount of $250,000 (FY 03-04) were budgeted to design and install
streetscape improvements from the railroad tracks on Baker Street south to Truxtun
Avenue. Design should be completed by August 2004. Construction is scheduled to start
by November 2004 with completion early 2005. We are waiting to hear if an additional
$300,000 will be received from HUD under their 2005 budget. If successful, this project will
be upgraded with enhanced streetscape work.
S:\VZ\QTLY~FY04\Final 4th Quarter 2003-04.doc
1
4. Brundage Lane Streetscape
Section 108 loan funds of $325,000 were budgeted to install median streetscape, sidewalk
and lighting improvements from Chester Avenue to Union Avenue. HUD deadline for City
expenditure of the Section 108 funds is by December 31,2004. Design was completed in
late April 2004. Public Works forces installed the curbs and gutter portion of the project.
Construction began in May and should be completed by October 2004.
5. California Avenue Streetscape Project
Section 108 loan funds of $413,500 were budgeted for median streetscape, sidewalk and
lighting improvements in the public right-of-way of California Avenue from Chester Avenue
to the railroad tracks east of Washington Avenue. HUD deadline for City expenditure of
the Section 108 funds is by December 31, 2004. Design was completed in June. The
construction bid was awarded on July 21,2004. Installation is expected to start by August
and be completed by October.
6. Fire Station #5 Construction Project
Funds of $20,955 (FY 02-03) were budgeted for acquisition, design and construction of a
new fire station no. 5 to be located at Union Avenue and White Lane. Site acquisition and
construction design were delayed until more funds become available in FY 04-05. Property
Management has initiated site selection which should be completed by September 2004.
An environmental document can be prepared and project design can proceed, only after an
eligible building site has been identified.
7. Jefferson Park Swimmin.q Pool Rehabilitation
Funds of $629,000 (FY 01-02, FY 02-03 and FY 03-04) are available for rehabilitation of
the swimming pool at 801 Bernard Street. Funding is from a Section 108 loan and CDBG
funds. The Section 108 loan funds ($300,000) became available last August and the HUD
deadline for City expenditure of these funds is by January 31,2005. In addition, $234,770
from the Recreation and Park Department budget is also available. Construction bids were
rejected in December 2003 for being too high. Construction bids will be opened again on
August 3, 2004. Construction is scheduled to start in September and be completed by
April 2005.
8. Martin Luther King Jr. Breezeway and Restroom Roof Improvement Project
Funds in the amount of $28,000 (FY 03-04) were budgeted to replace the breezeway and
restroom roofs at the MLK Jr. Park Community Center. A construction bid of $21,500 was
approved on April 14, 2004. Roof installation began in late May 2004 and is scheduled for
completion by July, 2004.
9. 19th Street and Eye Street Streetscape Improvement Project
th
Funds of $209,000 (FY 03-04) were budgeted for streetscape improvements on 19 Street
from H Street to Eye Street and on Eye Street between 18th and 19th streets. Construction
was delayed because some of the available funds were rebudgeted for the construction of
the aquatic center. Additional funds have been budgeted in FY 04-05 for this project.
Design is scheduled to start in August and be completed in September 2004. Construction
should begin in January and completed by February 2005.
S:\VZ~QTLY~FY04~Final 4th Quarter 2003-04.doc
2
10. Planz Park - Wet Play Area Proiect
Funds in the amount of $250,000 (FY's 01-02, 02-03 & 03-04) were budgeted for the
design and construction of a wet play area and improvements. Project design is scheduled
to start in October with completion by November 2004. Construction is expected to begin
in January and be completed by April 2005.
13. 32 Acre Park Improvement Project
Staff received approval notice of their application for $314,822 in grant funds to the
California Department of Housing and Community Development. Grant funds were
available through the Jobs-Housing Balance Incentive Grant Program. The grant requires
that funds will go towards constructing the children's playground for Rio Vista Park. The
park is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Stockdale Highway and the
Kern River. The contract between the State and the City was approved by the City on
June 25, 2003 (the funds must be expended by June 25, 2006). Design was completed in
late March 2004. Recently construction bids were rejected for being too high. A redesign
and re-bid for construction will be issued in Fall 2004.
14. Southeast Bakersfield Street Improvement Project
Funds in the amount of $300,651 (FY 02-03) were budgeted to install curb and gutter and
to rehabilitate sidewalks in an area bordered by California Avenue on the north, Pershing
Street on the east, Brundage Lane on the south and "Q" Street on the west. Construction
started with Public Works in June and is expected to be completed by October 2004.
15. Southeast Bakersfield Street Li.qht Improvement Project
Funds of $42,000 (FY 01-02) were budgeted to upgrade street lighting in two areas of
southeast Bakersfield. Area #1 is bordered by California Avenue on the north, City limits
and Washington Street on the east, Brundage Lane on the south, and Union Avenue on
the west. Area #2 is bordered by Casa Loma Drive on the north, Cottonwood Road and
Hale Street on the east, White Lane on the south, and Union Avenue on the west. Project
design has been completed. There is currently a shortage of City forces and/or funds
available to complete the lighting project.
16. Southwest Corner of Chester Ave. and Brunda.qe Ln. St. Improvement Project
Funds of $91,046 (FY 01-02) were budgeted for curb, gutter and sidewalk reconstruction.
The adjoining property owner intends to develop a McDonald's Restaurant. Design is
underway and is scheduled to be completed in September. Construction cannot proceed
until the adjoining wedding chapel on Brundage Lane is demolished by the owner. The
demolition should take place by August 2004.
17. Street Reconstruction Improvements-Low Income Residential Neiqhborhoods
Funds in the amount of $220,709 (FY 03-04) were budgeted for the reconstruction of
streets in qualified Iow-income residential neighborhoods. City crews started construction
last May and completion is expected by July 2004.
S:~VZ\QTLY~FY04\Final 4th Quarter 2003-04.doc
3
18. Union Avenue Area Street Project (3rd to 4th streets)
Funds of $77,546 were budgeted (FY 02-03) to provide street improvements in an area
bounded by 4th Street on the north, Union Avenue on the east, 3r~ Street on the south and
"V" Street on the west. PG&E moved four power poles on 3rd Street so that the street
improvements could be installed. Installation started early this year and was completed in
June.
19. Union Avenue Street Improvement Project
Section 108 funds of $61,500 were budgeted for installation of median streetscape,
sidewalk, and lighting improvements on Union Avenue from California Avenue to Belle
Terrace. The Section 108 loan funds became available last August and the HUD deadline
for City expenditure of these funds is by December 31,2004. The available funds will only
allow for the installation of street lighting from Terrace Way to Fourth Street (Phase I).
Phase II (the rest of the project) will be constructed should more funds become available.
Design for Phase I is scheduled to be completed in July. Construction is expected to start
in September and be completed by October 2004.
20. Union Avenue Area Street Light Improvement Project
Funds of $16,241 (FY 01-02) were budgeted for installation of 15 new street lights and the
upgrading of 11 existing street lights in an area bordered by California Avenue on the
north, Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard on the east, Brundage Lane on the south, and
Union Avenue on the west. Design was completed last January. There is currently a.
shortage of City forces and/or funds available to complete the lighting project.
21. Wayside Park Playground Improvement Project
Funds of $223,000 were budgeted (FY 03-04) to replace old playground equipment with
handicapped accessible equipment. Design was completed in early April. Construction
bids were opened on May 26th and awarded on July 7th. Installation is expected to start in
August with completion by October 2004.
22. Wayside Park - Wet Play Area Project
Funds in the amount of $317,000 (FY's 98~99, 00-01, 01-02, 02-03, and 03-04) were
budgeted for design and construction of a wet play area at Wayside Park. Design was
completed in May. Construction bids were rejected on June 9t' for being too high. City
forces began construction in June and they are scheduled to be completed by end-of-J'~..
NON-PROFIT/PUBLIC FACILITY PROJECTS
Economic and Community Development staff is assisting the following various non-profit
organizations to acquire or improve their public facilities.
1. Construction of Facility to House Career/Training Center
Section 108 loan funds of $200,000 were budgeted for construction of a career
counseling/training center in southeast Bakersfield. The Section 108 contract deadline for
City expenditure of these funds is January 31, 2005. Originally planned was a 4,000
square foot facility to be located .on HACK property at East California Avenue, however,
recent correspondence from the Housing Authority of the County of Kern indicates that due
to cutbacks in state and federal funding, the training center is not be feasible at this time.
S:~VZ\QTLY~FY04\Final 4th Quarter 2003-04,doc
4
To preserve these funds and meet the Section 108 deadline, the $200,000 will need to be
reprogrammed with HUD Washington to another existing unfinished Section 108 eligible
pool project which would require an amendment to the current Section 108 contract.
2. The Bakersfield Police Activities League (BPAL)
FY 02-03 CDBG funds of $108,000 were made available to BPAL April of last year in order
to install modular building units at 301 E. 4th Street. They are to be used as classroom and
office space for an after school tutorial program. This project is another phase in BPAL's
development of the youth center. The total construction cost is estimated to be $155,000.
BPAL will receive approximately $13,000 from the County of Kern CDBG program and
make up the rest with private funds. JTS Construction was the only respondent to the
second bid with a price of $127,380. City will provide $108,000, County will provide
$13,000, and BPAL will pay the balance of $6,380. BPAL accepted this bid and City of
Bakersfield issued its notice to proceed on March 30, 2004. The classroom project is
expected to be completed by July 2004.
3. Bakersfield Police Department Southeast Satellite Office
The Bakersfield Police Department is using $85,000 of FY 03-04 CDBG funds to lease and
staff a satellite office in southeast Bakersfield. The site is located on Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr. Blvd. in the Oro Vista public housing complex. The office is open from 8am to
5pm, Monday through Friday. A full time officer, a Crime Prevention Specialist and a
technician are assigned to the office. Lieutenant Dave Haskins will be in the office several
days each week. Public services are on-going.
4. Bakersfield Senior Center
The Bakersfield Senior Center located at 530 4th Street will use $50,000 (FY03/04 CDBG
funds) to continue its current level of services to seniors in southeast and central
Bakersfield. The current services provided include: noon time meals, recreational
activities, physical fitness activities, senior advocacy, human services referrals, and
transportation for clients. The senior center will also add noon-time meals and periodical
access to a nurse on their premises, this year. City funds have been fully expended.
5. Bakersfield Rescue Mission
The Bakersfield I{escue Mission, (BI{M), located at 830 Beale Avenue proposes to use
$260,000 (FY 2003-04 CDBG funds) to expand their food services operations to
accommodate 700 meals per day, served to homeless and Iow income families and
individuals in Bakersfield. BI{M intends to purchase the nearby Salvation Army building.
BZA granted a conditional use permit for the anticipated usage of the Salvation Army
facility last December. BI{M is now procuring an appraisal to form the basis for a purchase
offer. Escrow has opened and the purchase will take place by July for approximately
$256,000.
6. Employment Reports
Staff continues to review annual (performance) employment reports for businesses that
received CDBG funds.
S:\VZ\QTLY~FY04\Final 4th Quarter 2003-04.doc
5
Emergency Shelter Grant Funded
1. Bakersfield Homeless Center
An agreement with Bethany Services (dba The Bakersfield Homeless Center) requesting
approval for ESG funds (FY 03-04 - $51,000) was approved by the City Council last
November. Funds will be used for operation and maintenance. About 70% of the ESG
funds have been expended and public services for the Bakersfield Homeless Center are
on-going.
2. Bakersfield Rescue Mission
An agreement with Bakersfield Rescue Mission requesting approval for ESG funding (FY
03-04 - $51,000) was approved by the City Council last November. Funds will be used for
operation and maintenance. About 50% of the ESG budget has been expended and public
services for the Bakersfield Rescue Mission are on-going.
HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION PROJECTS
Economic and Community Development staff is assisting the following private and non-
profit organizations to acquire or improve their housing projects and
neighborhood/commercial facilities.
1. Community Action Partnership of Kern (CAP of Kern)
An agreement has been executed that allows CAP of Kern to utilize $100,000 of
Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) funds to be used for their housing
acquisition and rehabilitation program. Of the $100,000, CAP of Kern will utilize $75,000
as a revolving loan fund from which homes would be purchased, rehabbed or constructed,
and sold to qualified first time home buyers. The remaining $25,000 will be used by CAP
of Kern for operating expenses associated with operating their housing program. The
agreement was executed by Council last December and the CHDO deadline for completing
this program is no later than December 2006. Currently staff is re-certifying CAP of Kern
as a CHDO, at which time a Notice to Proceed will be issued.
2. Habitat for Humanity
An agreement has been executed that allows Habitat to utilize a total of $100,000 in CHDO
funds to build five affordable single family homes. These homes will be sold to families
whose income is between 30% and 50% of the area's median income. The selected
Habitat family and volunteers provide the needed sweat equity labor to construct the
homes. In addition to assisting with acquisition costs, the loan to Habitat will assist in
paying for such construction costs as school fees, building permits, appraisal fees and
construction supervision. Habitat will initially have access to $50,000 to expend within 18
months. If they perform satisfactorily Habitat would have access to the additional $50,000
to expend also in 18 months. Habitat has submitted a request for the purchase of their first
property 337 Haley and is currently being reviewed by staff.
S:\VZ~QTLY~FYO4\Final 4th Quarter 2003-04.doc
6
3. Tax Defaulted Properties
The County of Kern compiled a list of real properties for which property taxes have not
been paid for a minimum of five years. Pursuant to the County selling these properties at
auction, the City objected to the sale and offered to buy five of the properties for the cost of
back taxes, any liens and expenses associated with the auction. EDCD staff was
successful in gaining the right to purchase two of the five properties located at 19 Milham
and 301 South Owens. After the final waiting period, the City only received one of the
project properties, 301 South Owens. All of the documentation has been completed and
title to the property has been received. Along with the two properties previously purchased,
staff is currently working with Bakersfield College to transfer the lots for development of
affordable housing through their Construction Training Program.
4. The Parkview Cottaqes Housing Proiect
The City was awarded a $1.4 million HELP grant that is targeted for the Parkview Cottages
housing project near Central Park. The project will consist of 74 single-family housing
units, ranging from 1350 to 1750 square feet a unit. Each unit will be two stories and have
a two car garage. Staff revised the recapture language to include an equity sharing
provision which will eliminate the possibility of any undue enrichment. The estimated total
project cost is $10.4 million of which $1.1 in HOME and RDA funds have been set aside for
the City's Down Payment Assistance program. The developers schedule is to have two
models and three units for purchase completed by January. The anticipated completion
date remains January 2006. Site grading has been completed and trenching for
underground services has begun and is expected to continue through August 2004.
5. Southeast Bakersfield Infill Housing Project
The City was awarded a $500,000 CalHFA loan to build affordable housing on scattered
lots in southeast Bakersfield. The RDA assumed all rights and obligations of the CalHFA
HELP Loan on February 26, 2003. Round two of the infill housing project has commenced.
Currently, D and D Development; T and T Construction, and D.O.D Development, are
building homes in the area. Key round two changes include: no grant for property
' acquisition; increase of loan amount from $50K to $65K; agreement time frames increased
from 18 months to two years; and each developer is obligated to complete at least four
homes within the two-year period which expires July 2005. This fiscal year, six new homes
were constructed, bringing the total of new homes to thirteen. Staff anticipates the
completion of another ten homes by the end of June, 2005.
6. Maranatha Corporation Housing Project
At the February 6, 2002, City Council meeting, Maranatha Corporation received approval to
use $100,000 in HOME funds to purchase property in the Southeast Infill Project area and
build up to 14 affordable homes for Iow income households. The HOME funds were project
savings from several HOME activities from FY's 98-99, 99-00, and 00-01. Maranatha
received $126,000 from the Bank of America and the Federal Home Loan Bank of San
Francisco to subsidize the mortgages and make the homes affordable. Maranatha will use
factory built wall panels to assemble attractive affordable housing in half the time it takes
for conventional construction. Last month staff toured the Moreland Corporation wall panel
assembly plant (part of the Maranatha project), and walked through a model home built in
the factory. The plant is completed and fully operational.
s:~VZ\QTLY~FYO4~Final 4th Quarter 2003-04.doc
7
To date, Maranatha has signed purchase options on seven properties in the project area.
Maranatha reported delays in property purchases as the reason they have not moved
forward with the project. Last November the Council extended the Maranatha agreement
expiration date to June 30, 2004. This agreement has expired and staff is working on a
new agreement that will recommend Maranatha be given an additional six months to
complete the homes. The new agreement is expected to go to Council in August 2004.
7. Sin.qle-famil¥ Rehabilitation (SFR) Pro_qram
Rehabilitation is underway on seven home improvement projects. Twenty-five applications
are currently under review and four projects were completed during the quarter. Twenty-
three SFR rehabilitation applications were received during the quarter.
8. Home Accessibility (HA) Pro.clram
The annual HA contract with Muxlow Construction was approved November 2003 in the
amount of $55,000. To date, 28 have been completed and staff is currently working on
another 5 pending applications. Approximately $5,000 in encumbered funds remains in the
contract.
9. Housin.q Rehabilitation Marketin.q
Staff received approximately 75 inquiries about our various programs and mailed
information for assistance to potential clients. Staff gave out another 50 applications at
various marketing events. Staff continues to distribute housing brochures to potential
clients by mail, walk-ins, neighborhood marketing and through various community events
and fairs. Staff also enhances marketing by installing Home Improvement Program
marketing signs in front of all current construction projects. Staff has also used weekend
radio shows to market the housing programs.
10. Fair Housin.q
Quarterly statistics compiled from reporting data collected from April through June indicate
approximately 325 calls on the fair housing hotline. There were 43 substantial service calls
that dealt with fair housing issues. There were two formal complaints filed this quarter.
Both complaints are being reviewed by staff. The fair housing discrimination complaints
and inquires to the Fair Housing Hotline breakdown as follows: Familial Status - 45%,
Race- 40% and Disability- 5%.
In accordance with HUD regulations, the City is required to conduct an Analysis of
Impediment ("Al") to Fair Housing Choice as a component to its Consolidated Plan 2010
("ConPlan"). Staff has prepared a RFP for an Al for the City which is a comprehensive
review of a jurisdiction's laws, regulations, and administrative policies, procedures, and
practices affection the location, availability, and accessibility of housing as it relates to fair
housing choice. The impediment analysis is also a disclosure and review of impediments
to fair housing choice in the public and private sector.
EDCD has been awarded a $30,000 transportation related grant from Kern COG for
investigating transit issues related to fair housing choice. The funds are the primary funding
source to hire an outside consultant to conduct the Al. Request for Proposals have been
mailed out to twelve consultants who specialize in this field. The proposals are due in July.
A consultant contract is pending for Council action' in August.
S:~VZ~QTLY~FY04\Final 4th Quarter 2003-04.doc
8
11. California Avenue Senior Housin~ (CVE) Project
Capital Vision Equities (CVE) is in the process of developing a 180 senior housing unit
(one-bedroom) project in the southeast Bakersfield redevelopment project area. The CVE
project consists of property acquisition, clearance, relocation, and new construction. CVE's
total cost for the project is estimated to be over $12 million. They are receiving City loan
assistance of about $2.7 million ($1.7 million HOME and $1 million in tax increment
financing) in the form of a loan - 3% simple interest over a 40 year period. The remainder
of funds for the senior housing project will come from tax credit and developer equity/fee
sources. CVE was successful .in their tax credit funding application and was tentatively
awarded about $13.7 million. Framing of the three story complex is currently underway
with an anticipated completion date by December 2004.
12. Kozee Apartment Complex Project
The Kozee project consists of the construction of 38 housing units. In addition to the
40,000 square foot apartment complex, Mr. Lee will construct 30,000 square feet of
commercial/retail buildings adjacent to the apartment complex. The Agreement was a
forgivable loan for clearance of existing structures in the amount of $183,000 in
Redevelopment Agency tax increment funds. The City funds have been expended and
construction has begun on both the commercial and residential portions of the project.
Construction of the commercial part of the project is anticipated tobe completed by the Fall
of 2004 with the construction of the housing units to follow.
13. Bakersfield Senior Center Housin.q Project
The Bakersfield Senior Center (BSC) was awarded $932,000 in HOME funds to assist in
the development of 80 housing units for very Iow income seniors at "R" and
5th street. The
project is a joint venture between the Bakersfield Senior Center and Retirement Housing
Foundation which was federally approved with a HUD 202 funding reservation of about
$6.7 million. Project implementation and responsibilities was transferred by assignment
last year to Bakersfield Senior Housing, Inc. The project is now complete and staff expects
the ribbon cutting and first occupancy to happen in July.
15. Restoration Community Project INC., Youth Buildin.q Bakersfield (YBB)
An agreement has been approved that will allow RCPI to receive $195,000 in CHDO
HOME funds for the purchase and rehabilitation of deteriorated housing in southeast
Bakersfield area. RCPI will employ at-risk youth from 16-24 years of age to do the
rehabilitation Work. YBB will have a training component for the youth, an educational
component to secure a GED, and other counseling and referral services. The program will
last for three years after which, graduates will receive a monetary bonus and referral to
apprenticeship programs or higher education. The rehabilitated homes will be sold to Iow
income families and the sales proceeds will be used to purchase and rehabilitate other
properties in the target area. RCPI closed escrow on its first project property in August
2003, located at 1306 Potomac. Early this month, training of the five initial students was
initiated and rehabilitation on the first property is underway. About one-third of the funds
have been expended and the project agreement expiration deadline is September 2005.
S:~VZ\QTLY~FY04\Final 4th Quarter 2003-04.doc
9
16. Baker Street Revitalization Project (Old Town Kern Mixed Use Project)
The proposed project is the development of a mixed-use project that includes 40,000 +
square feet of new commercial space, and the construction of 120 + units of affordable
housing. The mixed-use project will also include the construction of a public plaza open
area. Total cost of the project is projected to be about $19 million. HuD funds earmarked
for this activity to date include $1,000,000 (Section 108 Loan), $250,000 (Brownsfield
Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) funds), $300,000 (HOME New Construction
Assistance), $360,000 (tax increment funds) and $210,000 (CDBG Commercial/Industrial
Acquisition and Demolition program) to assist ih land acquisition and relocation of existing
businesses/tenants. A subrecipient agreement with the RDA has been developed for
transferring project responsibility and funds for complying with HUD requirements for this
project. The HUD deadlines for City expenditure of the Section108 loan funds is
December 1,2004, and for the BEDI it is December 1,2005. Staff is exclusively working
with developer, Urban Innovations, LLC, to develop a Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA). Urban Innovations, LLC is anticipating applying for federal Low Income
Tax Credits (LITC) for the120 + units in conjunction with a LITC housing developer. The
City/Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency has purchased eight properties, has two pending
acquisitions, and is negotiating, for five additional properties. Two residential tenants and
two businesses have been relocated. The relocation of six additional tenants is currently
underway.
18. 24th and "M" Street Development (The Village at Towne Centre)
Staff, through the Redevelopment Agency, worked with a local developer to acquire a
vacant Caltrans parcel at 24th and "M" streets. The developer is currently constructing an
upscale mixed use project at the long vacant (formerly Sangera Buick/Volvo) auto sales
site across the street. The acquired Caltrans parcel will allow adequate parking for the
future tenants. The project will contain over 40,000 square feet of commercial space at an
estimated cost of $6 Million.
19. Mill Creek District Project
The City awaits word from the California Department of Parks and Recreation regarding
the City's $3 million grant. The grant application for Mill Creek, a 1.5 mile linear park
proposed along the Kern Island Canal from Golden State to California avenues. A decision
on this application is due "summer/fall 2004." In addition to the State grant application, an
application to Kern Council of Governments (KernCOG) was submitted July 9 to help fund
the trail and pedestrian bridges. A separate request to consider funding was submitted to
The California Wellness Foundation July 7 for purchase and installation of two sets of
exercise equipment designed for senior adults.
20. Bakersfield Redevelopment Areas Cleanup Effort (BRACE)
This revolving loan program, funded by a $1 million grant from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), funded its first project. A subgrant was made to the Assistance
League of Bakersfield to fund the cleanup of asbestos from its new location at 1924 "Q"
Street. This first project assists the relocation of the Assistance League in order to make
room for private development around the new Aquatics Center and Ice Sports facility. In
the coming weeks, a major marketing effort will begin to promote the availability of these
funds in the three, redevelopment areas.
S:~VZtQTLY~FY04~Final 4th Quarter 2003-04.doc
10
21. Consolidated Planning
EDCD staff is developing a new Consolidated Plan (ConPlan) in order to continue receiving
federal funds from the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
The existing ConPlan will expire June 30, 2005. Beginning FY 05/06, the City must
demonstrate to HUD that it has completed and is following an approved Consolidated Plan.
The main components of the new ConPlan include: a housing, community and economic
development needs assessment; a housing market analysis; an Analysis of Impediments
to Fair Housing Choice; a strategy that reflects general goals (priorities) and performance
outcome measurements for allocating HUD funds to address the HCD needs; a list of
specific objectives for each priority need (including proposed accomplishments); and an
annual action plan (one year funding) describing how federal and local resources will be
used to address the needs and objectives identified in the ConPlan. During the
preparation of the ConPlan 2010, City staff will be soliciting input from community residents
and stakeholders involved with housing, job development, public facilities, and health/social
services. A community needs survey has been developed and posted on the City's website
in order to facilitate this process.
22.' Bakersfield College Construction Alliance for Student Achievement Project
The City of Bakersfield collaborated with Bakersfield College (BC), County of Kern,
Coleman Homes, Habitat for Humanity, Housing Authority of the County of Kern (HACK),
Restoration Community Project, Inc., and Bakersfield Adult School to form the Construction
Alliance for Student Achievement (CASA) project. BC, the project lead, was awarded a
HUD grant of approximately $500,000 in late spring, 2003 to implement CASA. The project
is a collaboration of organizations that will address the City's demand for skilled
constructions workers and the need to provide job development and training skills among
minority populations located in older Iow income neighborhoods of Bakersfield. The City's
contribution to the collaboration is to provide up to four vacant lots in our revitalization area,
for CASA participants to build four affordable single family homes. Presently, BC is
reviewing a draft application to transfer ownership of the properties from the City of
Bakersfield to BC. Staff anticipates submitting this agreement for City Council action in
September of 2004. Staff is also exploring the possibility of BC serving as a developer in
the Southeast Infill Area and accessing the three percent loan program.
S:\VZ~QTLY~FY04~Final 4th Quarter 2003-04.doc
11
B A K E R S F I E L D
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
August 5, 2004
To: Alan Tandy, City Manager
From: Darnell Haynes, Assistant to the City ManagerD~7~
Subject: City Council Referral - 000831
Maggard - Identify Infrastructure Risks
Councilmember Maggard requested staff at various levels throughout the
organization assist in identifying city infrastructure which may be potentially at risk in
the future.
I contacted each department head and requested assistance to respond to the Council
referral and asked them to assign staff at various levels within their departments to work
with me on a response. I received feedback from Public Works, Development Services,
Finance, Water Resources, Fire, City Attorney's Office and the Recreation and Parks
Department. I scheduled individual meetings or made phone calls to the various
department contacts to obtain the information included in this memorandum. The
following is an overview by department of the process followed.
I met with Brad Underwood Public Works Operations Manager, Steve Hollingsworth,
General Services Superintendent and spoke to Ernie Medina, Equipment
Superintendent, and Arnold Ramming, Civil Engineer IV Design, to ask them if they had
any infrastructure concerns related to their respective areas of responsibility. The
general question I asked all of them was what current processes and procedures are in
place to ensure adequate, maintenance of existing city infrastructure. A follow up
question was could they identify any concerns about infrastructure in their respective
areas of responsibility that may be at risk in the future. 'Topics covered in our
conversations are listed below by department. In general, there is a heightened sense
of awareness among the staff of the importance of having appropriate procedures and
processes in place to ensure adequate maintenance inspection and safe keeping of city
facilities and infrastructure.
Public Works · Storm and Sewer Lift Stations
· Sewage Treatment Plants and Plant Dams
· Roadway and Canal Crossings
· Bridge Under and Over Crossings
· Above. and Below Ground Fuel Storage located at Fire Stations 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 10,
13, 15 and the Southwest Police Sub-Station
· Corporation Yard unleaded gasoline, diesel and liquid compressed natural gas
station
· Downtown Police Garage Facility unleaded gasoline, diesel and liquid
compressed natural gas station
Development Services
I met with Jack Leonard, Building Director to ask him if he had any infrastructure
concerns related to his areas of responsibility. The general question I asked was what
current processes and procedures are in place to ensure adequate maintenance of
existing city infrastructure. A follow up question was could he identify any infrastructure
concerns that may be at risk in the future.
· 18th and Eye Street Parking Garages
· Mobile Emergency Trailer Staff is currently developing an earthquake
preparedness response plan to create an emergency trailer containing a tent,
emergency generator, a self-contained computer to process building permit
related activities and ultimately a backup mini-AS 400 computer system which
runs the building permit system. This program is currently in process.
Water Resources
I spoke to Florn Core, Water Resources Manager and received correspondence from
Mark Lambert Water Resources Superintendent. The general question I asked was
what current processes and procedures are in place to ensure adequate maintenance
of existing city infrastructure. A follow up question was could he identify any
infrastructure concerns that may be at risk in the future.
· Kern River Levee
.· Kern River Channel and Canal system
· Weirs
· Domestic Water Storage
Recreation and Parks
I spoke to Alan Christensen, Interim Recreation and Parks Director, Ken Trone, Park
Construction and Facility Planner, Greg Kronk, Director of Park Operations and
received correspondence from Ken Trone. The general question I asked was what
current processes and procedures are in place to ensure adequate maintenance of
existing city infrastructure. A follow up question was could he identify any infrastructure
concerns that may be at risk in the future.
· Park Playgrounds
· Restroom Refurbishing
· Park Re-forestation
· Tree Pruning
· Irrigation Infrastructure
I also received comments from the Finance and Fire departments, however, based on
the information received, it was not necessary to schedule additional meetings.
In conclusion, as major community projects such as the Westside Parkway are
constructed, and local Transportation Development projects paid for by new
development are constructed, along with future capital improvement projects, and
increased residential and commercial development, construction, these projects will
provide strategic opportunities to upgrade existing older infrastructure throughout the
city and ensure that no city infrastructure is at risk in the future.
Going through this process was also helpful in identifying the frequency and type of
inspection and maintenance schedules that are in place in each of these areas.
Please let me know if anything further is needed.
3
RECEWEE)
~, MANAGER'S OFFICE
K E R S F I E L D
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
MEMORANDUM
August 4, 2004
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: LETTER TO CAL TRANS RE: 178/FAIRFAX
Council Referral #819
Councilmember Maggard requested Public Works staff prepare a letter to
CalTrans. Express Council's extreme displeasure regarding the delay of the
overpass project at Hwy. 178/Fairfax, and the lack of median in the area between
Oswell and Fairfax which has resulted in the loss of life.
The attached letter was faxed to Caltrans today, copies sent to the news media, and the
original placed in the U.S. Mail.
G:\GROUPDA%Referrals~2004\06-23\819 - Jack.doc
B A K E R S F I E L D
CALIFORNIA
~ ~ $ August 4, 2004
~ .__ Mr. Jay Norvell, Interim Director
State of California
Department of Transportation
CITY COUNCIL District 6
1352 West Olive Avenue
aarveyL, aan Fresno, CA 93728
Mayor
DavidCouch RE: STATE ROUTE 178 @ FAIRFAX ROAD INTERCHANGE
lf~ce-Mayor'
Ward4 Dear Mr. Norvell:
IrmaCarsOnwardl It is with great sadness and heavy heart that I write this letter to you. On
June 17, 2004, Kathi Ko°p tragically died in an automobile accident on
SusanlVLBenham State Route 178 near Fairfax Road. Kathi was not only a devoted wife
Ward2 and mother; she was also a pillar in her church and a highly respected
member of our community.
Mike Maggard
Wards This tragedy is.magnified given the fact that the State Route 178 and
}taroldW. Flanson Fairfax Road interchange project should have been well on its way to
WardJ being completed at the time the accident occurred. Instead,
bureaucratic delays have caused the project to be delayed by more then
JacquieSullivan three (3) years.' Had this improvement been completed, this tragic death
Ward6 may have been avoided.
Mark Salvaggio
War,Z? Mr. Norvell, what can be done to expedite this process and prevent
another tragedy from occurring. I stand 'ready to assist in any way
possible to insure this project gets completed as early as possible.
Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
Mike Uagglrd~-~''---'~)
Councilmember, Ward 3
copy: Alan Tandy, City Manager
Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director
1501 Truxtun Avenue · Bakersfield, California 93301 · (661) 326-3767 .'Fax (661) 323-3780
MEMORANDUM 1AUG-2200 ' I_I
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER ' '~' ~""~ ..... -~?'
FROM: .~ACK HARDISTY, DEVELQPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE: August 2, 2004
SUBJECT: TENTATIVE AND FINAL MAP PROCESS
Council Referral No. REF000848
VICE-MAYOR COUCH REQUESTED STAFF PREPARE A SYNOPSIS OF TENTATIVE AND
FINAL MAP PROCESSES AND EXTENSION PROCEDURES FOR THESE TYPES OF
MAPS.
The attached flow charts/diagrams explain the process and timeline for vesting rights. Included
is the following.
Flow chart for vesting tentative map process.
· Flow chart for final map process .....
· Linear timeline and explanation of vesting rights.
JIq:djl
Attachment
P:\CCReferral\Ref000848.doc
VESTING TENTATIVE MAP PROCESS
I APPLICATION SUBMITTEDI
COMPLETENESS REVIEW
LETTER TO APPLICANT
APPLICANT RESPONDS
I
TO COMPLETENESS ITEMS I
APPLICATION DEEMED
COMPL/RIGHTS VEST/
P.C. HEARING SET
P.C. HEARING I I
I MAP APPROVEDI I MAP DENIED I
I I
13 YR MAP LIFE I' APPEAL tOI I no APPE^LI
I
t MAP DIES I
ALL PHASES OF REQUEST .
MAP RECORDED. ~ EXTENSIONI I CITYCOUNClL
HEARING/^CTIONI
(SEE FINAL ' I I
MAP PROCESS) I P.C. HEARING I
I MAP MaP
APPROVED DENIEDI
2 YRS 2ND
(TOTAL 5 YRS)
CITY COUNCIL
NOTES:
· TYPICAL MAP LIFE - INITIAL 3 YEARS WITH 5 ADDITIONAL YEARS OF EXTENSIONS
IS 8 yEARS
· . EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE MAP CAN ONLY BE DENIED IF FAILURE TO DO SO
WOULD PLACE THE RESIDENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION OR IMMEDIATE COMMUNITY IN A
CONDITION DANGEROUS TO THEIR HEALTH OR SAFETY OR TO COMPLY WITH FEDERAL LAW
· THE SUBDIVISION MAP'ACT PROVIDES FOR AUTOMATIC EXTENSIONS WHEN
SUBDIVIDER IS REQUIRED TO EXPEND $125,000+ TO CONSTRUCT OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS
(SEE ATTACHED TABLE) VEST~ ~ P~OC~SS
FINAL MAP PROCESS
. (RECORDING A PHASE OR ALL OF A TENTATIVE MAP)
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
I PROCESSED
I(MAY REVIEW SEVERAL
I PLAN CHECKS)
C.C. APPROVES
AGREEMENTS
] FINAL MAP CHECK [
MAP RECORDS
(VESTING RIGHTS
LAST 1 YEAR)
I
ALL PERMITS SOME OR NO
PULLED PERMITS PULLED
I
NEW FEES I1 YR EXTENSION
PA D I REQUESTED
P.C. HEARING
I
I URN'ED I I ^PPROV DI
I I
APPEALED TO NEW FEES ALL PERMITS NEW FEES
CITY COUNCIL PAID PULLED UNDER PAID
I VESTED RIGHTS AFTER 1 YR
EXPIRES
I CITY COUNCIL I
HEARING/ACTION
I
I APPROVED I IDENIED I
I
PULLED UNDER PAID PAID
I VESTED R GHTS AFTER 1 YR
NOTES: EXPIRES
· VESTING RIGHTS AUTOMATICALLY LAST FOR 1 YEAR AFTER RECORDATION
· APPLICANT'MAY REQUEST A 1 YEAR EXTENSION OF VESTING RIGHTS. THIS 1 YEAR
EXTENSION IS DISCRETIONARY AND REQUIRES NO SPECIAL FINDINGS
FINAL MAP PROCESS
VESTING RIGHTS LIFE
SUMMARY: The vesting rights for a map start on the date the tentative map application is
deemed complete by the Planning Department and extend for a period one year (or two years
with Planning Commission approval) after each phase of the map is recorded. Since the
developer controls when each phase is recorded, the vesting rights for a map can last from 18
months to 17 years in some cases. It is not a fixed time period because it depends on when
each phase is recorded during the life of the tentative tract.
Typical Tentative Vestinq Map Life
State Map Act (SMA) says map expires after 24 months or after any additional period of
time prescribed by local ordinance not to exceed 12 additional months. City ordinance
gives 36 months at the beginning.
BMC ,! 6.16.080A & B
SMA 66452.6(a)(1) 66452.6(e)
3 yrs. initialCity extensions 5 yrs. Final recorded Additional yr.
life (mandatory w/o vests 1 yr. may be
health & safety issues) approved by
Planning
Commission
0 3 yrs. 8 yrs. 9 yrs. 10 yrs.
Map with $125~000 + in offsite improvements - phased vestinq map.
aMC 16.16.080A 16.16.080E 16.16.080B
SMA 66452.6(a)(1) 66452.6(a) (1-3) 66452.6(e)
3 Record Record Record City Final Additional
years Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 extensions Recorded yr. may be
initial add 3 add 3 yrs. add 1 yr. 5 yrs. Vests 1 approved by
yrs. auto. auto. yr. Planning
auto. Commission
3 yrs. 6 yrs. 9 yrs. 10 yrs. 15 yrs. 16 yrs. 7 yrs.
(max. auto) (Ttl. possible)
Explanation of Vestinq Riqhts Life (after each phase is recorded)
At any time during the life of the tentative map, the subdivider can record some or all of the
phases of the map. The State Map Act says the vesting rights for the recorded phase shall last
for no less than one year and no more than two years beyond recordation as stated in the local
ordinance. The city's local subdivision ordinance (BMC 16.24.090C) adopted 1 year. A one
year extension to this time frame may be requested by the applicant (BMC 16.24.090C.3., SMA
66498.5(b)). This one year extension is discretionary and requires no special findings.