HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/18/05 B A K E R S F I E L D
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
MEMORANDUM
February 18, 2005
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Co./~l .~
FROM: Alan Tandy, City Manager
SUBJECT: General Information
1. Staff met with representatives from AYSO to discuss the 40 acre soccer park site
on Stockdale Highway, as well as the 250 acre site on Taft Highway. It was just
information sharing. Separately, but related, we also got a few contacts from some
citizens wishing to help with that situation.
2. EDCD's activity report for the second quarter of FY 2004-05 (October to January)
is enclosed for your review.
3. A memo from Florn Core regarding the 2005 water supply forecast is enclosed. As
of February 1st, the forecast for the Kern River run off was at 132% of normal,
which could bring the first above average spring snow melt for the first time in
seven years. The forecast is based on the assumption that there will be average
precipitation during February and March. The current outlook calls for above
normal precipitation. In any case, it appears we are on track to have a better water
yearthan we have experienced for quite sometime.
4. This week we received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from the
Government Finance Officers' Association for the City's FY 2004-05 budget
document. It is the highest award given in governmental budgeting.
Congratulations to John Stinson, Darnell Haynes, and all the staff who contributed
to the preparation of the budget.
5. The Public Works Department is implementing a "Right Sizing" plan for the
General Services Division based on a review of their staffing needs and
opportunities created due to several position vacancies, to reallocate their staff
resources to more critical areas. The plan converts a vacant Maintenance
Supervisor position and two vacant custodial/building maintenance positions to an
Electrical Technician I and two Traffic Signal Technicians. The plan improves
staffing levels for the Traffic Signal and Street Light Section to address growth and
other service demand issues with resources from existing positions of a lower
priority. The on-going funding of these positions will be from existing resources,
and the only additional expense would involve the transfer and appropriation of
$150,000 of General Fund Balance to the Public Works Equipment Management
Fund Budget for the initial purchase of two aerial lift trucks for the two Traffic Signal
Technicians. Staff will be bringing the additional appropriation request to Council
at the first meeting in March.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
February 18, 2005
Page 2
6. The proposed MOU regarding a tax exchange upon annexation, which was
approved by the City Council last month, was approved by the County this week.
The agreement will provide that annexation of transportation corridors will be
included in the standard tax split formula, which will help with the planning of future
transportation facilities.
7. The agenda for the California High Speed Rail Authority meeting on February 23rd
is attached.
8. Responses to Council requests are enclosed, as follows:
Councilmember Benham
· Information regarding the rate basis for brown and blue carts refuse carts;
Councilmember Ma.q.qard
· Report from the City Attorney regarding possible options to prosecute
infractions and misdemeanors;
· Report on the Police Department's procedures for handling potentially violent
sex offenders if released locally;
Councilmember Couch
· Finalization of annexation informational packets, as requested by a resident in
the Olive Drive area;
Councilmember Hanson
· Painting of block wall at Mt. Vista and White Lane;
Councilmember Scrivner
· Report on the City's current practices on the treatment and handling of
biosolids.
AT:rs
cc: Department Heads
Pamela McCarthy, City Clerk
I RECEIVED
FEB' 1 4 2005
B A K E R S F ! F_. L TYM^N^GER'SOF.,CE,
Economic and Community Development Department
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager.~.~~~Y'-
February 11,2005
FROM: Donna Kunz, Economic Development Director
SUBJECT: Economic and Community Development Department Activity Report
This memo will serve as an update for Fiscal Year 2004-05, 2nd quarter (Oct. 1 to Jan. 1)
concerning on-going housing, economic and community development projects.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (Projects implemented by the PW Department)
1. Automated Chemical Controllers at Three Swimmin.q Pools
Funds in the amount of $45,500 (FY 02-03) are budgeted to install automated chemical
controllers at Jefferson and Martin Luther King Jr. Parks. The controllers are scheduled to
be installed when the pools are rehabilitated. The MLK Jr. Pool rehabilitation was
completed on June 15, 2004. Construction on Jefferson Pool rehabilitation started on
September 13, 2004 and is scheduled to be completed by April 2005.
2. Acquisition and Demolition Pro.qram
Funds in the amount of $311,340 (FY's 03-04 and 04-05) are available for acquisition and
demolition of deteriorated industrial, commercial and residential properties in economically
distressed areas for economic development projects. EDCD Staff has selected specific
sites potentially eligible for these funds in the Baker Street corridor in connection with the
Old Town Kern Mixed Use Project. The acquisition process is currently under way on
remaining multiple commercial sites and demolition will take place when the properties
have been acquired.
3. Baker Street Streetscape Improvement Project (Phase II)
In November 2004, Congress appropriated funds for special projects under HUD's Special
Economic Development Initiative (EDI). As part of this appropriation, the City of
Bakersfield received $280,000 for use towards the Baker Street Corridor, streetscape
improvement project, Phase 2. The funds will be matched with a previous CDBG allocation
of $300,000 resulting in a total allocation of $580,000 for the project. The project is
planned to include streetscape improvements on the west and east sides of Baker Street in
S:\DEBBIE'S\2nd Final Quarter 2004-05.doc I
two components. The Truxtun Avenue to Sumner Street portion will install 17 decorative
street lights, 54 trees, automatic irrigation, banners and trash containers. Sumner Street to
Jackson Street component will reconstruct the railroad crossing; install curb, gutters and
sidewalks and install four decorative street lights. The proposed development between
Sumner and Jackson Street will not include landscaping at this time. Construction is
expected to begin by June 2005.
4. Brunda.qe Lane Streetscape
Funds in the amount of $325,000 of Section 108 loan funds (FY 02-03) were budgeted to
install median streetscape, sidewalk and lighting improvements from Chester Avenue to
Union Avenue. Curb, gutter, and sidewalk work was completed July 2004. Installation of
street lights is underway and is scheduled to be completed by March 2005. The Section
108 HUD contract deadline for City expenditure of these funds was December 31, 2004.
The City requested a 6 month deadline extension from HUD last October and an approval
letter per HUD will be mailed next week. New deadline for expenditure is July 1, 2005.
5. California Avenue Streetscape Project
Funds in the amount of $413,500 of Section 108 loan funds (FY 02-03) 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.
Installation started in September 2004 and was completed on December 23, 2004.
6. Fire Station #5 Construction Project
Funds in the amount of $270,955 (FY 02-03 Amendment #9 and FY 04-05) 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 FY 04-05. Property Management completed fire station site
acquisition in December 2004. Project design is scheduled to start by May 2005 and to be
completed by November 2005.
7. Jefferson Park Swimmin.q Pool Rehabilitation
Funds in the amount of $1,829,000 (FY's 01-02, 02-03, 03-04 and 04-05) are available for
rehabilitation of the swimming pool at 801 Bernard Street. Funding is from a Section 108
loan and CDBG entitlement funds. Section 108 loan funds ($300,000) will be used for the
rehabilitation and the HUD contract deadline for City expenditure of these funds was
January 31, 2005. HUD has approved a deadline extension to June 30, 2005. In
addition, about $234,770 from the Recreation and Park Department budget is also
available. Construction started on September 13, 2004 and is scheduled to be completed
by April 15, 2005.
8. Martin Luther King Jr. Park Wet Play Area
Funds in the amount of $200,000 of Section 108 loan funds were transferred from the
Career Counseling Center Facility Project to the wet play project. HUD approved the
transfer on December 15, 2004 and extended the expenditure dead line from January 31,
2005 to June, 30, 2005. Project design was completed in December 2004. City forces
have started construction, and the project is scheduled to be completed by the end of April
2005.
S:\DEBBIE'S~2nd Final Quarter 2004-05.doc 2
9. 19th Street and Eye Street Streetscape Improvement Project
Funds in the amount of $344,000 (FY's 03-04 and 04-05) were budgeted for streetscape
improvements on 19th Street from "H" Street to Eye Street and on Eye Street between 18th
and 19th streets. Due to area drainage problems, construction has been delayed. Design
is scheduled to be completed by September 2005.
10. Planz Park- Wet Play Area Project
Funds in the amount of $250,000 (FY's 01-02, 02-03, and 03-04) were budgeted for the
design and construction of a wet play area and improvements. Project design was
completed in December 2004. City forces began construction in mid January 2005, and
they plan to complete installation by the end of April 2005.
11. 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. Funding was
considered based on the increase of home building permits during 2001. The grant
requires 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. A contract was awarded last December, and construction has begun with
anticipated completion by October 2005.
12. 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 City PW forces in June 2004 and is expected to be installed by March 2005.
13. Southeast Bakersfield Street Light Improvement Project
Funds in the amount of $81,621(FY 01-02) were budgeted to upgrade street lighting in
southeast Bakersfield. Project design has been completed. Thero is currently a shortage
of City forces and/or funds available to complete the PW lighting project; therefore, the
project will have to go out to bid to a private contractor. An amendment was approved on
November 3, 2004 which increased construction funds and enlarged the project area
boundary. An implementation schedule should be prepared by Public Works by early
February 2005.
14. Southwest Corner of Chester A ve. and Brundage Ln. St. Improvement Project
Funds in the amount of $91,046 (FY 01-02) were budgeted for curb, gutter and sidewalk
reconstruction. The adjoining property owner is developing a McDonald's Restaurant. Off
site improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) design was recently completed. Off site
construction should be completed by no later than March 2005, after the traffic signal
modification has been installed.
S:\DEBBIE'S~2nd Final Quarter 2004-05.doc 3
15. Street Reconstruction Project
Funds in the amount of $263,500 (FY 04-05)thwere budg,,e!,ed for reconstruction o! portions
of six City streets which are as follows: 8 , Haley, N, Sumner, "T" and "V' streets.
Construction on Haley, "N" and Sumner Streets was completed last October. 8th Street
was completed last November. The estimated completion date for "T" & "V" Streets is
March 2005.
16. Union Avenue Street Improvement Proiect
Funds in the amount of $61,500 of Section 108 loan funds (FY 02-03) were budgeted for
installation of median streetscape, sidewalk, and lighting improvements on Union Avenue
from California Avenue to Belle Terrace. The Section 108 HUD contract deadline for City
expenditure of these funds was December 31, 2004. The City requested a 6 month
deadline extension from HUD last October and an approval letter per HUD will be mailed
next week. New deadline for expenditure is July 1, 2005. The available funds will only
allow for the installation of street lighting from Terrace Way to 4th Street (Phase I). Phase II
will be constructed should more funds become available. Construction is expected to start
in January 2005 and to be completed in March 2005.
17. Union Avenue Area Street Li.qht Improvement Project
Funds in the amount 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 PW lighting
project. These funds were reprogrammed to the Southeast Bakersfield Street Light
Improvement Project on November 3, 2004.
18. Wayside Park Plav_clround Improvement Project
Funds in the amount of $223,000 were budgeted (FY 03-04) to replace old playground
equipment with handicapped accessible equipment. Installation started on October 12,
2004 and was completed last December.
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. The Bakersfield Police Activities Lea.que (BPAL)
Approximately $108,000 of FY 02-03 CDBG funds were made available to BPAL to install
modular building units at 301 East 4th Street. The units will be used as classrooms 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 $127,380 by JTS
Construction Company. City of Bakersfield provided $108,000, County of Kern provided
$13,000, and BPAL will pay the balance of $6,380. Construction on this facility was
completed in December, 2004. A ribbon cutting ceremony was held on January 25, 2005.
S:\DEBBIE'S~2nd Final Quarter 2004-05.doc 4
2. East and Southeast Crime Prevention
The Bakersfield Police Department is using $227,000 of FY 04-05 CDBG funds to lease,
staff a satellite office in southeast Bakersfield, and hire 3.5 FTE police officers to increase
police coverage in East and Southeast Bakersfield. This activity will benefit 23,162 citizens
of Bakersfield within the boundaries of Highway 178-North, Oswell Street and City Limits-.
East, White Lane-South, and Union Avenue-West. Services will continue throughout FY
04-05.
3. Bakersfield Senior Center
The Bakersfield Senior Center located at 530 4th Street will use $50,000 (FY04-05 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 periodical access to a nurse on
their premises, this year. A project agreement was approved by City council at their
September 2004 meeting.
4. Bakersfield Rescue Mission
The Bakersfield P,escue Mission (BP, M), located at 830 Beale Avenue proposes to use
$260,000 (FY03-04 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. The total project expenditure was $252,227.50. BP,M held its
grand opening of the new facility on September 11, 2004, naming it the Curt Kennedy
Center, after one of their founders.
5. Employment Reports
Staff continues to review annual (performance) employment reports for businesses that
received CDBG funds. Victory Circle did not attain the required employment levels in order
to continue their $50,000 CDBG loan, and were required to pay off the loan ahead of
schedule.
6. Fire Protection Services
City of Bakersfield Fire Department used $252,000 in CDBG funds to hire three additional
firefighters for Station #5 at 700 Planz Road, which will provide full strength crews of four
persons per shift.
7. Community Family Center Ramp Construction
A ramp construction request for the Community Family Center (CFC) was referred to staff
by Councilmember Mike Maggard last March. The center wants to use a modular building
owned by Praise Tabernacle Church to accommodate 34th Street Collaborative Meetings
and other community service.organizations. CFC's estimate to construct a ramp and
overhead cover is about $10,000. Staff was able to allocate savings from a completed
project for this activity through an amendment to Economic and Community Development's
FY04-05 Action Plan. A federal environmental review is now underway; staff anticipates
completion by February 11, 2005. Once environmental clearance is granted, an
agreement will be forwarded to the City Council by Spring of 2004 for review and action.
The ramp construction will take approximately 45 days to complete, once approval is
granted.
S:\DEBBIE'S~nd Final Quarter 2004-05.doc 5
Emergency Shelter Grant Funded
1. Bakersfield Homeless Center FY 2004-05
An Agreement between the City and the Bakersfield Homeless Center was approved for
ESG funds for $61,850 by the City Council on October 20, 2004. The approved funds will
be used for operation and maintenance.
2. Bakersfield Rescue Mission FY 2004-05
An Agreement between the City and the Bakersfield Rescue Mission was approved for
ESG funds for $61,850 by the City Council on October 20, 2004. The approved funds will
be used for operation and maintenance.
3. Alliance A.clainst Family Violence & Sexual Assault FY 2004-05
An Agreement between the City and the Alliance Against Family Violence & Sexual Assault
was approved for ESG funds for $15,427 by the City Council on October 20, 2004. The
approved funds will be used for operation and essential services for counseling.
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. 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 an escrow has been opened for the purchase of the property.
2. 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 can object to the sale of the properties and purchase them for future
public use. EDCD staff has been successful in gaining the right to purchase five properties
over the past few years. The current tax sale took place in November of last year and
th th
EDCD staff objected to the sale of five properties located at 814 9 Street, 917 10 Street,
242 Hayes Street and 608 Haley Street. The necessary paperwork has been forwarded to
the County of Kern and we are waiting for the necessary signatures from the County and
the State of California. The properties will be utilized for the construction of affordable
single family homes.
S:\DEBBIE'S\2nd Final Quarter 2004-05.doc 6
3. The Parkview Cottaqes Housinq Project
The City was awarded a $1.4 million HELP grant that is targeted for the Parkview Cottages
housing project near Central Park. The HELP funds will be used to acquire a portion of the
old foundry site. The project will consist of 74 single-family housing units, ranging from
1,350 to 1,750 square feet a unit. Each unit will be two stories and have a two car garage.
Staff has 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 four
units for purchase completed by May 2005. The anticipated completion date remains
August 2006. Construction has begun.
4. Southeast Bakersfield Infill Housin~ Project
The City was awarded a $500,000 CHFA loan to build affordable housing on scattered lots
in southeast Bakersfield. The RDA assumed all rights and obligations of the CHFA 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. Staff is currently working on RFP for new 2 developers and
renewal with a current developer. Key round three changes increase of loan amount from
$50K to $100K; sales prices to $165K agreement time frame will be two years; each
developer will be obligated to complete at least four homes within the two-year period
which expires July 2007. This fiscal year, nine new homes were constructed, bringing the
total of new homes to sixteen. Staff anticipates the completion of another home by the end
of June, 2005. With the spike in housing and land costs, developers have met with
difficulty in finding affordable lots and willing sellers. Activity for this project has slowed
down considerably. A downpayment program will be available to all participating home
buyers.
5. Bakersfield Colleqe Foundation Construction Alliance for Student
Achievement (CASA) Pro.qram
The Redevelopment Agency will be asked to donate residential lots to Bakersfield College
Foundation (BCF) to build infill affordable homes in the Southeast. Bakersfield College
(BC) was awarded approximately $500,000 in HUD 2004 funding under the Hispanic
Serving Institutions Assisting Communities (HSIAC) program. This grant will be used to
fund the Construction Alliance for Student Achievement (CASA) project.
BCF has collaborated with Bakersfield College, Coleman Homes (Lennox currently) and
other agencies to train students in the construction trades. The CASA program will
enhance job opportunities among Iow-income residents while assuring developers and
construction firms have an adequate skilled labor pool to meet market demands for
affordable housing. This activity would address the demand for skilled craftsmen/women in
the construction field, and provide job training skills among minority populations within
older impoverished neighborhoods of Bakersfield. Staff revised and forwarded the draft
agreement to BCF in late December, 2004. The City is awaiting a response from BCF. An
agreement could go to the Redevelopment Agency as soon as February, 2005, depending
on BCF's timeliness.
S:\DEBBIE'S\2nd Final Quarter 2004-05.doc 7
6. Sin.qle-family Rehabilitation (SFR) Pro.qram
Rehabilitation is underway on eight home improvement projects. Sixteen applications are
currently under review and four projects were completed during the quarter. Ten SFR
rehabilitation applications were received during the quarter.
7. Home Accessibility (HA) Pro.qram
An extension of the annual HA contract with Muxlow Construction was approved October
2004 in the amount of $55,000. The release of funds from HUD is complete. Staff is
beginning work on the existing pending 25 applications.
8. 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.
9. Fair Housin.q
Quarterly statistics compiled from reporting data collected from October through January
indicate approximately 249 calls on the fair housing hotline. There were 21 substantial
service calls that dealt with fair housing issues. There was one new formal complaint filed
this quarter and it is currently under review by staff. The fair housing discrimination
complaints and inquires to the Fair Housing Hotline breakdown as follows: Familial Status
- 35%, Race- 45%, Disability- 20%
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"). The Al 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 was awarded a $30,000 transportation related grant from Kern COG for
investigating transit issues related to fair housing choice. Cotton/Bridges/Associates
("CBA") contract was approved by Council action in August 2004. The draft Al was
completed in December 2004.
10. California Avenue Senior Housin.q (CVE) Project
Capital Vision Equities (CVE) is in the process of constructing a 180 senior housing unit
(one-bedroom) project in the southeast Bakersfield redevelopment project area. The CVE
project consisted of property acquisition, site clearance, tenant/homeowner relocation, and
the new construction of the senior housing. CVE's total cost for the project is estimated to
be over $12 million. They received 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 came from
tax credit and developer equity/fee sources. Construction was completed last December
and the project should be fully operational by Spring of 2005.
S:\DEBBIE'S\2nd Final Quarter 2004-05.doc 8
11. Kozee Apartment Complex Project
The Kozee project consists of the construction of a 40,000 square foot, 38 unit multi-family
housing complex as well as a 30,000 square foot commercial/retail building 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 was completed late last year on the
commercial complex and construction has begun on the residential portion of the project.
12. Bakersfield Senior Center Housin_o 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 5t" street. The
project is a joint venture between the Bakersfield Senior Center and the 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 attended the ribbon cutting on October 7, 2004.
13. 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 the Lakeview
Avenue 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 is currently in escrow for the sale of its first property to a qualified Iow-income
homebuyer. The property, located at 1306 Potomac, was acquired and rehabilitated
through the Youth Building program and escrow should close the first part of February.
RCPI is currently forming a list of potential properties of which two will be selected and
purchased in the month of February. To date, approximately $98,000 of the $195,000 has
been expended on the agreement, that has an expiration of September 2005, and the
remaining should be expended on the additional two properties.
14. 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 $381,414 (CDBG Commercial/Industrial
Acquisition and Demolition program) to assist in land acquisition and relocation of existing
businesses/tenants. A subrecipient agreement with the RDA has been developed for
transferring some project responsibility and funds for complying with HUD requirements for
S:\DEBBIE'S\2nd Final Quarter 2004-05,doc 9
this project. Staff is exclusively working with developer, Urban Innovations, LLC, to
develop for execution a three party Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) by this
summer. The developer is anticipating applying for federal Low Income Tax Credits (LITC)
for the120+ units in conjunction with a LITC housing developer.
The City and the Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency has three remaining properties to
purchase. Two residential tenants and six businesses have been relocated. The relocation
of five additional tenants is currently underway.
15. 24th and "M" Street Development (The Villa.qe at Towne Centre)
Staff, through the Redevelopment Agency, worked with a local developer to acquire a
vacant Caltrans parcel at 24th and M street. Staff received Caltrans approvals to purchase
their parcel, which the Agency transferred to the developer for the same purchase price.
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.
16. Mill Creek District Project//
The City has developed the Mill Creek conceptual improvement plan for the downtown
canal from just north of Central Park to California Avenue. The improvement plan includes
canal improvements, exercise areas, art areas, walking paths, designed to enhance the
commercial/residential potential for downtown. The City received notice from the California
Department of Parks and Recreation that the City was not awarded their request for a $3
million grant to fund the 1.5 mile linear park. However, an application to the Kern Council
of Governments (KemCOG) to help fund the trail and pedestrian bridges was funded. The
City was awarded a grant for $282,400. Also a funding request was submitted and
declined by the California Wellness Foundation to purchase and install two sets of exercise
equipment designed for seniors. In December 2004, staff submitted an application for
2002 Resources Bond Act funding in the amount of $250,000 to the California Department
of Parks and Recreation for the Mill Creek. Staff is and will continue to search out
additional grant opportunities for the project.
Chester Avenue Streetscape - Phase//In January 2005 staff submitted an amended
Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) Application requesting $1,624,000 to
continue enhancements along the public right-of-way along Chester Avenue between
24th Street and Garces Circle. The TEA funds will be combined with $222,000 CDBG
funds for an estimated total project cost of $1,846,000. The project is approximately
one half mile in length by 110 feet wide encompassing a total of 6.7 acres. The project
includes installation of street trees and shrubs along the center median and parkway,
new kiosks, decorative benches, tree grates, automatic irrigation, bollards, decorative
lights and trash receptacles. Project construction is anticipated to begin in September
2005 and estimated completion is April 2006.
S:\DEBBIE'S\2nd Final Quarter 2004-05.doc 10
18. Bakersfield Redevelopment Areas Cleanup Effort (BRACE)
This revolving loan program is funded by a $1 million grant from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). A subgrant of $51,050 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; a major
marketing effort will begin to promote the availability of these funds in the three
redevelopment areas.
19. Consolidated Plannin.q
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 2005 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 and community 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 solicited input from community residents and
stakeholders involved with housing, job development, public facilities, and health/social
services. A community needs survey was developed and posted on the City's website in
order to facilitate this process. Staff is preparing the draft strategic plan, and an advertised
public meeting is expected to take by April 2005. The deadline for ConPlan 2010 submittal
to HUD is mid-May 2005.
S:\DEBBIE'S~2nd Final Quarter 2004-05.doc 1 1
B A K E R S F I E L D
MEMORANDUM
February 16, 2005
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: FLORN ~'~R RESOURCES MANAGER
SUBJECT: 2005 WATER SUPPLY FORECAST
"Series of post-Christmas storms called real drought-buster"
Attached for your information is the initial Kern River Water Supply Forecast issued
by our Department to the City's Basic Contractors. The most recent field survey of snow
depth and water content in the Kern River Basin has resulted in a February 1st forecast for
Kern River runoff during 2005 of 132% of normal, signaling the likelihood of above average
spring snow melt for the first time in seven years. As noted in the attached letter, a 132% of
normal runoff would enable City to meet its basic water delivery obligations during the .
upcoming irrigation season, while providing for over 50,000 acre-feet of additional
miscellaneous surface water delivery. City Kern River entitlement yield as currently
projected when coupled with the anticipated State Water operations of the Kern County
Water Agency-Improvement District No. 4, should result in extensive utilization of the Kern
River Channel through Bakersfield during the upcoming May-September 2005 recreation
season.
The current long-term weather outlook from the National Weather Service Climate
Prediction Center calls for above normal precipitation for the south-half of California during
the balance of the rainy season. Actual precipitation received will be verified by additional
snow survey field measurements planned for the Kern River watershed around the first of
March, April and May of 2005. These field data, together with information collected from
the Kern's remote snow sensor network, will be used to better track the snow pack
accumulation above Lake Isabella as we progress through the year.
Should anyone need additional information regarding the Kern River operation in
2005, please have them contact our office.
Attachment
2005 KERN RIVER WATER SUPPLY FORECAST
Distribution List
C.H. Williams
Kern River Watermaster
Dana S. Munn
North Kern Water Storage District
David R. Ansolabehere
Cawelo Water District
Steve Dalke
Kem-Tulare W.D. - Rag Gulch W.D.
James M. Beck
Kern County Water Agency
Hal Crossley
Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District
L. Mark Mulkay
Kern Delta Water District
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Alan Tandy
Virginia Gennaro
Thomas Stetson
Flora Core
02-15-05
B A K E R S F I E L D
WATER RESOURCES'DEPARTMENT
Florn Core · Water Resources Manager
February 15, 2005
RE: 2005 WATER SUPPLY FORECAST
The February 1, 2005 forecast, issued by the State of California Department of Water Resources for Kern River runoff
during the April through July snow melt period is 132% of normal, or approximately 620,000 acre-feet. (The April
through July runoff period on average comprises nearly two-thirds of Kern River annual flow and is the major index
used for projecting summer-time water supply availability). Snow pack status was verified by the State of California
and United States Forest Service during the last week of January. Sixteen established snow courses and four remote snow
sensor sites located within the Kern River basin were manually surveyed for snow pack depth and water content. The
February 1st forecast of Kern River runoff assumes median precipitation amounts will occur over the Kern River
watershed subsequent to the date of forecast. Actual precipitation received after February will be reflected in the first
of the month forecasts to be distributed by the State of California for March, April and May of 2005.
KERN RIVER FORECAST SUMMARY
April through July runoff -- 620,000 acre-feet (132% of normal)
April-July 80% probability range -- 410,000 to 940,000 acre-feet
(actual runoff should fall within the
stated limits eight times out of ten)
March through October runoff -- 775,000 acre-feet
Water Year runoff = 920,000 acre-feet (124% of normal)
Based upon this February 1st forecast, the following table reflects City of Bakersfield Kern River water supply during
the March-October period of 2005:
I. CITY ENTITLEMENT SUPPLY: 132% OF NORMAL RUNOFF
MARCH-OCTOBER Period = 175,000 acre-feet
Less: River & Carder Canal Losses = 18,000 acre-feet
Isabella Reservoir Evaporation Losses = 7,000 acre-feet
= Estimated City supply available
for diversion MARCH-OCTOBER = 150,000 acre-feet
1000 Buena Vista Road · Bakersfield · California 93311
(661) 326-3715 · Fax(661)852-2127 · E-Mail: water@ci.bakersfield.ca.us
II. BASIC CONTRACT DELIVERY (March-October):
1. Lake Ming and Hart Park = 700 acre-feet
2. North Kern Water Storage District = 20,000 acre-feet
4. Cawelo Water District = 27,000 acre-feet
4. Kern-Tulare Water District = 20,000 acre-feet
6. Rag Gulch Water District = 3,000 acre-feet
TOTAL = 70,700 acre-feet
A 132% of normal runoff would provide sufficient yield to meet "Basic" delivery obligations of the City during 2005.
The City also has a commitment to deliver 10,000 acre-feet annually to Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District. This
water is normally delivered during the period of October through February, if and when short-term supplies become
available to City. A substantial portion of the Rosedale RBWSD basic supply was delivered in January of this year.
III. BASIC CONTRACT PRIOR-YEAR DEFICIENCIES:
As of January 1, 2005, prior-year deficiencies in delivery of Basic Contract water were as follows:
1. North Kern Water Storage District = 0 acre-feet
2. Cawelo Water District = 23, 604 acre-feet
3. Kern-Tulare Water District = 50,032 acre-feet
4. Rag Gulch Water District = 7,537 acre-feet
Total Prior-Year Deficiencies = 81,173 acre-feet
City entitlement yield as forecasted for 2005 should be sufficient to provide for delivery of prior-year deficiencies in
basic contract water. The delivery of Prior-year deficiencies of Cawelo Water District, Kern-Tulare Water District and
Rag Gulch Water District basic contract water would be made in accordance to the Maximum Delivery Schedules set
forth in the contracts as follows:
1. Cawelo Water District = 5,000 acre-feet
2. Kem-Tulare Water Distr/ct = 3,700 acre-feet
3. Rag Gulch Water District = 550 acre-feet
TOTAL = 9,250 acre-feet
IV. OTHER DELIVERY OBLIGATIONS:
1. Water for use on lands owned by the City and/or on
lands within City boundaries = 5,000 acre-feet
2. North Kern Water Storage District - "Borrow/Payback"
Exchange water, normally delivered by City between
May and September = 10,000 acre-feet
As set forth above, it is forecasted that the Kern River runoff will yield the City adequate supply to deliver "OTHER
DELIVERY OBLIGATIONS" during 2005.
Page 2
V. MISCELLANEOUS QUANTITY WATER:
After subtracting the basic contract deliveries and other obligations as set forth above from the City Kern River supply
available for diversion March through October, a miscellaneous quantity water supply of approximately 55,000 acre-feet
would be available during the March-October period of 2005. The priority rights to purchase such miscellaneous water
are as follows:
1. Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District = 33.33%
2. North Kern Water Storage District = 19.05%
3. Cawelo Water District = 25.71%
4. Kern-Tulare Water District = 19.05%
5. Rag Gulch Water District = 2.86%
TOTAL = 100.00%
Under the City/Tenneco Agreement No. 77-71 dated May 2, 1977, assigned to North Kern Water Storage District
effective March 20, 1990, North Kern Water Storage District has the first right of refusal to miscellaneous water
following the four Basic Contractors and Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District, as follows:
a.) Forty percent (40%) of all water City has
available for use within City boundaries solely
for irrigation.
b.) Fiftypercent (50%) of first 24,000 acre-feet of
other City miscellaneous quantity water
including water recovered from City's
groundwater banking operations.
c.) Fifty percent (50%) of any other
miscellaneous quantity Kern River water that
City would otherwise use for groundwater
banking and replenishment.
VI. DELIVERY SCHEDULES:
On the basis of the above normal water supply forecast for 2005, the City will deliver basic contract water in
conformance with the "Maximum Delivery Schedules" as set forth in Exhibit "B" of the Basic Contracts and Paragraph
11 (c) of the Kern River Parkway Water Management Agreement. Miscellaneous Quantity water delivery requests should
be submitted to City by those Districts wishing to participate as soon after March l, 2005 as possible.
Should you have any questions regarding the above information, please do not hesitate to call our office.
Flora Core
Water Resources Manager
Attachments
Page 3
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
STATUS OF LONG TERM CONTRAC'rS
Quantities in acre-feet
NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT CAWELO WATER DISTRICT
Basic Cumulative Basic Cumulative Basic Basic Cumulative Basic Cumulative Basic
Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract
Year Amount Amount Delivered Deliver}, Balance Year Amount Amount Delivered Deliver,/ Balance
1977 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 0 1977 27,000 27,000 5,024 5,024 {21,976)
1978 20,000 40,000 20,000 40,000 0 1978 27,000 54,000 35,404 40,428 (13,572)
1979 20,000 60,000 20,009 60,000 0 1979 27,000 81,000 36,780 77,208 (3,792)
1980 20,000 80,000 20,000 80,000 0 1980 27,000 108,000 30,792 108,000 8
1981 20,000 100,000 20,000 100,000 0 1981 27,000 135,000 27,000 135,000 0
1982 20,000 120,000 20,000 120,000 ' 0 1982 27,000 162,000 27,000 162,000 0
1983 20,000 140,000 20,000 140,000 0 1983 27,000 189,000 27,000 189,000 0
1984 20,000 160,000 20,000 160,000 0 1984 27,000 216,000 27,000 216,000 0
1985 20,000 180,000 20,000 180,000 0 1985 27,000 243,000 27,000 243,000 0
1986 20,000 200,000 20,000 200,000 0 1986 27,000 270,000 27,000 270,000 0
1987 20,000 220,000 20,000 220,000 0 1987 27,0(30 297,000 27,000 297,000 0
1988 20,000 240,000 20,000 240,000 0 1988 27,000 324,000 12,821 309,821 (14,179)
1989 20,000 260,000 20,000 260,000 0 1989 27,0(30 351,000 22,460 332,281 (I 8,719)
1990 20,000 280,000 20,000 280,000 0 1990 27,0~0 378,000 17,723 350,004 (27,996)
1991 20,000 300,000 20,000 300,000 0 1991 27,000 405,000 29,316 379,320 (25,680)
1992 20,000 320,000 14,381 314,381 (5,619) 1992 27,000 432,000 28,868 408,188 (23,812)
1993 20,000 340,000 23,700 338,081 (1,919) 1993 27,000 459,000 32,000 440,188 (18,812)
1994 20,000 360,000 20,000 358,081 (1,919) 1994 27,000 486,000 23,760 463,948 (22,052)
1995 20,000 380,000 21,919 380,000 0 1995 27,000 513,000 32,000 495,948 (17,052)
1996 20,000 400,000 20,000 400,000 0 1996 27,000 540,000 32,000 527,948 (12,052)
1997 20,000 420,000 20,000 420,000 0 1997 27,000 567,000 32,000 559,948 (7,052)
1998 20,000 440,000 20,000 440,000 0 1998 27,000 594,000 32,000 591 ,~48 (2,052)
1999 20,000 460,000 20,000 460,000 0 1999 27,000 621,000 29,052 621,000 0
20~O 20,000 480,000 20,000 480,000 0 2000 27,000 648,000 27,000 648,000 0
2001 20,000 500,000 20,000 500,000 0 2001 27,000 675,000 15,670 663,670 (11,330)
2002 20,000 520,000 20,000 520,000 0 2002 27,000 702,000 18,270 681,940 (20,060)
2003 20,000 540,000 20,000 540,000 0 2003 27,000 729,000 27,115 709,055 (19,945)
2004 20,600 560,000 20,000 560,000 0 2004 27,000 756,000 23,341 732,396 (23,604)
KERN-TULARE WATER DISTRICT RAG GULCH WATER DISTRICT
Basic Cumulative Basic Cumulative Basic Basic Cumulative Basic Cumulative Basic
Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract Contract
Year Amount Amount Delivered Detiver,/ Balance Year Amount Amount Delivered Deliver,/ Balance
1977 20,000 20.000 4,673 4,673 (15.327) 1977 3,000 3,000 449 449 (2,551)
1978 20,000 40,000 23,690 28,363 (11,637) 1978 3.000 6,000 3,550 3,999 (2,001)
1979 20,000 60,000 24,122 52,485 (7,515) 1979 3.0~0 9,000 3,550 7,549 (1,451)
1980 20,000 80,000 23,403 75,888 (4,112) 1980 3,000 12,000 3,550 11,099 (901)
1981 20,000 100,000 23,700 99,588 (412) 1981 3,000 15,000 3,550 14,649 (351)
1982 20,000 120,000 20.412 120,000 0 1982_ 3,0(10 18,000 3,351 18,000 0
1983 20,000 140,000 4,587 124,587 (15,413) 1983 3,000 21,000 ~ 18,600 (2,400)
1984 20,000 160,000 20,000 144,587 (15,413) 1984 3,000 24,000 3,000 21,600 (2,400)
1985 20,000 180,000 20,000 164,587 (15,413) 1985 3,000 27,000 3,000 24,600 (2,400)
1986 20,000 200,000 20,000 184,587 (15.413) 1986 3.000 30,00~ 3,000 27,600 (2,400)
1987 20,000 220,000 20,000 204,587 (15,413) 1987 3,000 33,000 3,000 30,600 (2,400)
1988 20,000 240,000 11,763 216,350 (23,650) 1988 3,000 36,000 1,764 32.364 (3,636)
1989 20,000 260,000 16,635 232,985 (27.015) 1989 3,000 39,000 2,495 34,859 (4,141)
1990 20,000 280,000 0 232,985 (47,015) 1990 3,000 42.000 0 34,859 (7,141 )
1991 20,000 300,000 20,000 252,985 (47,015) 1991 3,000 45,000 3,000 37,859 (7,141 )
1992 20,000 320,000 9,089 262,074 (57,926) 1992 3,0(X) 48,000 1,363 39,222 (9,778)
1993 20,000 340,000 29,332 291,406 (48,594) 1993 3,000 51,000 4,394 43,616 (7,384)
19<34 20.000 360.(~0 18,348 309,754 (50,246) 1994 3.000 54,000 2,753 46,369 (7,631)
1995 20,000 380,000 32,733 342,487 (37,513} 1995 3,000 57,000 4,993 51,362 (5,638)
1996 20.0~0 400,000 23,700 366,187 (33,813) 1996 3.000 60,000 3,550 54.912 (5,088)
1997 20,0~0 420,000 23,700 389,887 {30,113) 1997 3,000 63,000 3,550 58,462 (4,538)
,1998 20,000 440,000 23,700 413,587 (26,413) 1998 3,000 66,000 3,550 62,012 (3,988)
1999 20,000 460,000 23,700 437,287 (22,713) 1999 3,0Q0 69,000 3,550 65,562 (3,438)
2000 20.000 480,000 20,000 457,287 (22,713) 2000 3,000 72,000 3,000 68.562 (3,438)
2001 20,000 500,000 11,610 468,897 (31,103) 2001 3,000 75.000 1,740 70,302 (4,698)
2002 20,000 520,000 8,659 477,556 (42,444) 2002 3,000 78,000 1,299 71,601 (6,399)
2003 20,000 540,000 20,000 497,556 (42,444) 2003 3,000 81,000 3,000 74,601 (6,399)
2004 20,000 560,000 12,412 509,968 (50,032) 2004 3,000 84,000 1,862 76,463 (7,537)
FEBRUARY 1, 2005 SNOW SURVEY DATA FOR KERN RIVER BASIN
City of I~akersfield FINAL
Water Resources
APRIL I ST SNOW WATER
AVERAGE DEPTH CONTENT % OF
~ SNOW SNOW CALIF. ELEV. WATER DATE IN DENSITY IN APRIL 1ST MEASURED
COURS~E SENSOR NUMBER IN FEET CONTENT MEASURED INCHES ~/~ INCHES AVERAGE B~Y
Upper Tyndall Creek 516 11,400 27.7 1-31 86.3 30% 26.0 94% DWR
Bighorn Plateau 250 11,350 23.7 1-30 74.4 33% 24.4 103% DWR
Cottonwood Pass 251 11,050 14.8 2-02 59.6 37% 21.9 148% DWR
Siberian Pass 252 10,900 20.0 2-01 71.5 34% 24.3 122% DWR
Crabtree Meadow 253 10,700 19.6 1-29 79.4 30% 23.7 121% DWR
Crabtree Meadow 253 10,700 19.8
Guyot Flat 254 10,650 20.8 1-29 84.9 31% 26.1 125% DWR
Tyndall Creek 255 10,650 18.8 1-30 72.3 31% 22.7 121% DWR
Sandy Meadows 275 10,650 19.2 1-30 74.0 31% 22.7 118% DWR
Chagoopa Plateau 514 10,300 21.8
Big Whitney Meadow 257 9,750 17.2 1-27 74.7 33% 24.4 142% DWR
Rock Creek 256 9,600 17.8 1-29 80.0 29% 22.9 129% DWR
Pascoe 569 9,150 24.9 2-01 91.0 35% 31.6 127% USFS
Round Meadow 258 9,000 24.1 2-01 69.7 39% 26.9 112% USFS
Wet Meadow 518 6,950 30.3
Tunnel Guard 830 8,900 16.6 1-26 56.0 34% 19.2 123% DWR
Ramshaw Meadow 259 8,700 11.5 1-27 62.2 32% 20.0 174% DWR
Little Whitney Meadow 260 8,500 12.9 1-26 68.7 32% 22.3 173% DWR
Quinn Ranger Station 264 8,350 18.9
Bonita Meadows 261 8,300 13.6 1-27 54.7 39% 21.3 157% USFS
Casa Vieja Meadow 282 8,300 19.8 1-24 74.7 36% 27.1 137% USFS
Casa Vieja Meadow 262 8,300 20.9
Beach Meadows 265 7,650 8.3 1-27 35.8 33% 11.8 142% USFS
Beach Meadows 860 7,650 11.0 1-27 38.8 33% 12.8 116% USFS
Dead Horse Meadow 249 7,300 10.7 2-02 35.6 31% 10.9 102% USFS
Basin-Wide Average I 129%J
B120 (02/08/05 1355)
Department of Water Resources
California Cooperative Snow Surveys
Feb 1, 2005 FORECAST
OF UNIMPAIRED RUNOFF
(in thousands of acre-feet)
April-July Forecast
April Percent 80%
thru of Probability
July Average Range
NORTH COAST
Trinity River at Lewiston Lake 640 97%
Scott River near Fort Jones 175 88%
SACRAMENTO RIVER
Sacramento River above Shasta Lake 290 97%
McCloud River above Shasta Lake 390 98%
Pit River above Shasta Lake 900 83%
Total inflow to Shasta Lake 1700 92% 1140 - 2650
Sacramento River above Bend Bridge 2250 89% 1370 - 3620
Feather River at Oroville 1700 91% 1100 - 2910
Yuba River at Smartville 1080 103% 690 - 1790
American River below Folsom Lake 1410 110% 910 - 2160
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
Cosumnes River at Michigan Bar 140 108% 80 - 270
Mokelumne River inflow to Pardee 570 122% 430 - 840
Stanislaus River below Goodwin Res. 900 126% 630 - 1210
Tuolumne River below La Grange 1630 133% 1250 - 2130
Merced River below Merced Falls 870 137% 660 - 1140
San Joaquin River inflow to Millerton Lk 1730 137% 1280 - 2300
TULARE LAKE
Kings River below pine Flat Res. 1700 138% 1240 - 2300
Kaweah River below Terminus Res. 380 131% 270 - 560
Tule River below Lake Success 75 116% 40 - 125
Kern River inflow to ~ke ~b~la ...... ~29 ~ 1~2% ..... 4lq_- .... ~4~
NORTH LAHONTAN
Truckee River,Tahoe to Farad accretions 280 103%
Lake Tahoe Rise, in feet 1.4 97%
West Carson River at woodfords 65 117%
East Carson River near Gardnerville 240 126%
West Walker River below Little Walker 190 124%
East Walker River near Bridgeport 85 130%
Water-Year Forecast and Monthly Distribution
Oct Aug Water 80%
thru Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul & Year Probability
Jan Sep Range
Inflow to Shasta 1535 700 750 670 500 300 230 410 5095 4020 - 7085
Sacramento, Bend 2465 1150 1050 860 670 420 300 520 7435 5490 - 10465
Feather, Oroville 750 400 600 650 590 300 160 150 3600 2535 - 5630
Yuba, Smartville 345 250 350 390 430 210 50 45 2070 1445 - 3205
American, Folsom 500 310 400 490 560 290 70 25 2645 1880 - 3885
Cosumnes, Mich. Bar 99 70 75 75 45 17 3 2 386 260 - 655
Mokelumne, Pardee 115 70 95 140 235 160 35 10 860 670 - 1220
Stanislaus, Gdw. 230 120 140 240 350 240 70 25 1415 1050 - 1840
Tuolumne, LaGrange 440 180 230 350 570 510 200 40 2520 2030 - 3160
Merced, McClure 280 140 160 180 315 280 95 35 1485 1190 - 1850
San Joaquin, Mil. 300 150 180 325 590 565 250 90 2450 1890 - 3160
Kings, Pine Flat 240 130 160 290 590 560 260 95 2325 1760 - 3070
Kaweah, Terminus 70 50 60 85 140 115 40 15 575 420 - 820
Tule, Success 34 30 35 34 25 11 5 3 177 110 - 275
Kern, Isabella 110 50 85 130 220 18~ 90 55 920 640 - 1350
Notes:
50 year averages are based on years 1951 to 2000. Unimpaired runoff represents the
natural water production of a river basin, unaltered by upstream diversions,
storage, or by export or import of water to or from other watersheds. Forecasted
runoff assumes median conditions subsequent to the date of forecast. Runoff
probability ranges are statistically derived from historical data. The 80%
probability range is comprised of the 90% exceedence level value and the 10%
exceedence level value. The actual runoff should fall within the stated limits
eight times out of ten.
26,,~
8600
R I V E R
BASIN
LAKE
ISABELLA
Kern County Admmistratl e'Office
County Adminis!rali~.,e Ce~ller
~ 1 ~I~ Tmxtlm Avenue; FiSh Floor · :Bak(~rsfiekl~ '~ 9330'1.4639 ~OTT El.lONE5
y 2005
Board of Supervisors
Kern County Administrative Center By Ci~ Olerk
1115 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301 Oate o~~i'~-~5
PROPOSED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITII CITY OF BAKERSFIELD RE TAX
EXCHANGE UPON ANNEXATION
Fiscal Impact: Unknown
This is to request your Board's approval of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the City of
Bakersfield. The agreement provides for a standard property tax exchange for certain types of annexations.
BACKGROUND
Following the passage of Proposition 13, the County entered into tacit agreement with cities as to the
percentage of the County's property tax entitlement that would be transferred to each city upon annexation of
unincorporated territory into the city. The agreed upon formula, termed the "cost/service ratio," provided for
each city to receive the same proportion of property taxes in the newly annexed area as it did for the entire
incorporated area of the city. The formula was inequitable in that there was a wide variance between cities
as to the percentage of property taxes being transferred, ranging from 11% to 55%, and the formula was
inequitable to the County because, in most instances, the County was transferring more in property tax
revenues than the cost of the services being transferred to the annexing city.
Additionally, when an annexation occurred, not only was the County transferring a disproportionate share of
its property tax entit~emetxt relative to the COSt of services, being transferred, but, due to the:situs distribution
of sales tax, all sales tax revenue was also lost to the County.
As a result of these issues, the Board of Supervisors in 1993 directed the County Administrative Office to
commence discussions with the cities to determine a more equitable exchange of tax revenues upon
annexation. The result of those discussions, a mathematical model was developed that accounted for the
County's cost of the services that are retained upon annexation, as well as the cost of services incurred by
each city when an annexation occurs. The model showed that at a 62.5%/37.5% tax revenue split, the
County's percentage of the cost of services being covered was the same before as it was after annexation.
When the tax revenue exchange was presented to the city managers there was agreement in the concept of
holding the County harmless, but they desired a tax split percentage that affected all of the cities with some
degree of equality. The result of these discussions is the tiered model that is at Attachment A of the
memorandum of understanding.
CURRENT MOUs
In 1995, the County entered into memoranda of understanding with seven of the eleven cities in the County:
Arvin, Bakersfield, California City, Delano, Shorter, Tehachapi, and Wasco. These memoranda of
Board of Supervisors
Proposed MOU with City of Bakersfield
re: Tax Exchange Upon Annexation
February 15, 2005
Page 2
understanding will expire in September of this year, excepting Tehachapi, which will expire in December.
The memorandum of understanding with each city is virtually ~dentical.
CURRENT PROVISIONS
Tax Revenue Exchange
The MOUs provide for a set property tax entitlement transfer to each city for routine annexations and for
annexation of areas that do not generate significant tax revenues, defined as sales and property taxes less than
$15,000. Per the MOUs, the standard tax revenue entitlement transfer would apply to the following types of
annexations:
Annexation of uninhabited land and residential development.
Annexation of land that is substantially surrounded by incorporated properties and which do not
generate a sales and property tax revenue in excess of $150.00 per capita.
Annexation of commercial, industrial, and/or mineral producing properties that do not generate
significant tax revenues.
All other types of annexations require a separate negotiation for the exchange of tax revenues, including
consideration of sales tax revenue.
Term and Renegotiation
The term of the current MOUs is 10 years. A provision is included which requires renegotiation should
significant changes in statute be enacted that affect land use control, the annexation process, or the
current funding streams for local government. The MOUs also provide that if the city manager and the
County Administrative Officer cannot arrive at consensus for a revised MOU, that a joint meeting of the
city council and the Board of Supervisors will be scheduled for the issues to be resolved. In summary,
the MOUs provide for: 1) a standard property tax revenue exchange for routine annexations and those
that do not generate significant revenues, essentially holding the County fiscally harmless; 2) a separate
negotiation for the exchange of tax revenue, including sales tax, for non-routine annexations; and 3)
renegotiation of the MOU should significant changes in law affecting local government revenues or land
use authority be enacted.
PROPOSED CHANGES FROM CURRENT MOU
The proposed memorandum of understanding with the City of Bakersfield contains some updates from
the current MOU, as follows:
The definition of "significant tax revenue" is increased to $50,000 (sales and property tax).
The tax revenue to capita ratio is increased to $500.
Annexations for the purpose of acquiring right-of-way or easements for transportations corridors
are added as a type of annexation for which the standard property tax exchange will apply.
A provision to apply a cost of living allowance (COLA) amount to the definition of "significant
tax revenue" and the tax revenue per capita ratio is added.
The proposed term of the memorandum of understanding is 20 years.
Board of Supervisors
Proposed MOU with City of Bakersfield
re: Tax Exchange Upon Annexation
February 15, 2005
Page 3
The proposed increase in definition of "significant tax revenue" acknowledges the rapidly escalating housing
costs experienced in the Bakersfield area, as well as general price inflation over the, p~t 10 years, The
increase in the tax revenue amount appropriately addresses the proper value escalations that have occurred
over the term of the agreement, and the application of a COLA factor annually under the proposed MOU will
ensure that the agreement keeps pace with inflationary factors. A more important consideration, however, is
the appropriate dollar threshold that triggers special negotiation sessions and meetings between County and
City staff. When the amount "at stake" is relatively small, it is very likely that the net result of such special
negotiations would vary only slightly (if at all) from application of the standard tax sharing percentages. An
amount of $50,000 in relative terms, and in this context, is considered an appropriate threshold for triggering
special negotiation when the related staff costs and the likelihood of little difference in the net result (versus
the $15,000 threshold) is considered.
There is no way to accurately estimate the actual fiscal impact of the agreement over the proposed term
because the impact will be driven by the annexation activity of the City. Also, the end result of special
negotiations when the "significant revenue threshold" is exceeded cannot be predicted or quantified, but past
experience suggests that special negotiation dealing with amounts under $50,000 will be close to the same
result yielded from application of the standard formula.
As requested by the City, the proposed term of the agreement is 20 years. The agreement provides for
renegotiation of the agreement should change in state law or state budgetary actions significantly affect the
allocation of revenues to cities and counties, which in turn would affect the proportion of revenues received
by the City and the County. As such, the long term of the agreement does not place the County in financial
jeopardy, but does provide sufficient stability and consistency for the annexation process which will allow
the City to develop long-term plans for growth and development, including roadways and other
transportation needs, and water and sewer infrastructure.
The proposed memorandum of understanding was approved by the Bakersfield City Council on January 12,
2005, and has been approved as to form by County Counsel.
Therefore, IT IS RECOMMENDED that your Board approve the Memorandum of Understanding with the
City of Bakersfield regarding tax eXChange upon annexation and autl~orize the Chairman to sign.
Sincerely,
Scott E. Jone.$~~
County Administrative Officer
S g31AC K/POLAGRAN X BKFLD
Attachment
cc: City of~iiake~td ~
LAFCO
Auditor-Controller-County Clerk
Joseph-E. Petrillo, Chair ARNOLD SOHWARZENEGGER
Marc Adeirnan, V~e-Oh~r
L~n ~he~k
Mehdi Morned, ~ec~ve Director
CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED ~IL AUTHORI~
RECEIVED_
FE9 4 2005
Februa~ 11,2005
, CI~ MANAGER'S OFFICE
Dear Stakeholder:
The California High-Speed Rail Authority's February 23~d public Board Meeting will be held in San
~ Diego~at_the_Sa~_Diego_Associatio~-oLGovemme~s~B~o~located-at-40-1-B-St~et~e
800. Please note the meeting is scheduled to begin at 8:00 am.
At the Februa~ 23rd public board meeting the Authority will be discussing the Implementation Plan
issues presented to the board at the September, November and December Authority meetings.
This is an all-day workshop; and pa~ of the regularly scheduled Authority meeting.
At the Janua~ Authority meeting the board took the following action related to the staff
recommendations for the identification of preferred alignments and station locations for the Final
Program EIR/EIS:
'~ccept staff recommendations on identifying general alignment and station locations as
preferred alternatives in the Final Program EIR/EIS with the following exception. The Board
directs that additional study of an alignment option between Fresno and Bakersfield, or
variations thereof, to se~e a potential Visa/ia station located in an existing and/or planned
urbanized area, is to be conducted prior to the commencement of project-level environmental
documents for this segment and submiEed to the Authority for any appropriate action,
provided, however, that such additional study is to be unde~aken only if sufficient funds to
complete it are provided in the 2005/06 FY state budget."
*F~d~iti~l-i~f~ti~t~t~s recommend~i~-n~ on ~f~d~i~gnment al~~e~'~it
the CHS~ webs/re at ~.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov.
Sincerely,
Mehdi Morshed, F:xecutive Director
925 L Street, Suite 1425 ,. Sacramento, CA 95814 ':'. 916.324.1541 fax 916.322.0827
www. cahighspeedrail.ca.gov
CALIFORNIA HIGH SPEED RAIL AUTHORITY
PUBLIC MEETING
February 23, 2005
San Diego Association of Governments
401 B Street, Suite 800
San Diego, CA
8:00 a.m.
Agenda Items Responsible Party Status
1. Approval o£ January 26, 2005 Meeting Minutes Chhirperson Petrillo A
2. Authority Members' Meetings for Compensation Chairperson Petrillo A
3. Members' Reports Chairperson Petrillo I
4:_ Executix~e Direc~to{'s Report ......... Mehd..i.Morshed _~ A
5. Implementation Plan Workshop ' Chairperson Petrillo A
Staff will present recommendations on the Implementation Plan for board discussion and '
consideration.
6. Public Comment
An opportunity for public comment will also be provided during each public agenda item.
7. Adjournment
"A "denotes an "Action" item; '7" denotes an "Information" item.
Reasonable Accommodation for Any Individual .with a Disability
Any individual with a disability who requires reasonable accommodation to attend or participate may request assistance
by contacting the Authority at (916) 324-1541. Requests for additional accommodations for the disabled, signers,
assistive listening devices, or translators should be made no later than one week prior to the meeting.
925 L Street, Suite 1425, Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 324-1541, (916) 322-0827 fax
For further information you may visit the California High-Speed Rail website at
www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov
B A K E R S F I E r D RECEIVED
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FEB 1 4 2005
MEMORANDUM
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager
FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director ~
DATE: February 11, 2005
SUBJECT: BLUE AND TAN TRASH RECEPTACLES
Referral No. 1044 (Meeting: 2~09~05)
COUNCILMEMBER BENHAM REQUESTED STAFF FOLLOWUP ON
CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE RECYCLING SUBCOMMITTEE OF KBBC, DATED
JUNE 9, 2004, AND ADDRESS THE SUGGESTION THAT THE PROGRAM PROVIDE
PARITY BETWEEN THE COST OF A SECOND TAN CART AND THE COST OF AN
INITIAL OR SECOND BLUE CART.
In response to the June 9, 2004 letter from the KBBC, staff prepared an August 3, 2004
report as a one year review of the citywide curbside recycling program (copy attached).
The report was intended for presentation to the Budget and Finance Committee of the
City Council. However, the committee has not been able to schedule the matter as an
agenda item thus far.
G:\GROUPDAT\RefermlsX2005\02-09\Re~I044- Kevin Barnes.doc
City of Bakersfield
Curbside Recycling Program Review
August 3, 2004
The purpose of this report is to indicate the progress of Bakersfield's curbside
recycling program after the first year of operation, to report on past and current
efforts to improve the program, and to consider suggestions made by the Keep
Bakersfield Beautiful Committee's June 9, 2004 letter to the City Council
(attached). Staff recommendations are included for consideration by the Budget
and Finance Committee of the City Council.
Pro.qram Status
Bakersfield's curbside recycling program was offered to all single family homes,
beginning in July 2003, after completion of a one year pilot program. The pilot
program included various neighborhoods representing one tenth of the city.
About 10 percent of the pilot area homes participated by paying $6 per month for
the optional service. Following the first year of citywide service, about 4 percent
of homes participate by paying the new rate of $6.67 per month (billed at $20 per
quarter). About 2,500 homes currently subscribe to the service. New signups
continue to occur, at a slow but steady pace. A few dozen residents have left the
program after service was interrupted for nonpayment.
Citywide participation is much lower than in the pilot program. Low participation
seems to be caused in part by the amount of the service fee, and in part by
limited public awareness. A primary challenge is to build public awareness at the
least expense, to avoid increasing the service fee.
Past Promotional Efforts
During the course of the citywide program, several promotional efforts were
made to increase public awareness. These include:
1. Several large, color newspaper ads donated by the Bakersfield Californian
2. Several television and radio news features and public service
announcements donated by various stations
3. Paid television ads
4. Program flyers mailed to all homes, with postage paid by a curbside motor
oil recycling grant (Note: the state oil grant is well funded, compared to
curbside recycling which has very limited grant opportunities)
5. Program flyers included in startup packets sent to all new homes
6. Several gift certificates for service distributed through community and
sporting events.
7. Promotional booth at community events
Current Promotional Efforts
Over the next year, the main promotional effort will be hand delivery of program
flyers to all homes. Previously, direct mailing of the flyers to all homes produced
only limited results. It is likely that the flyers were disregarded by residents as
junk mail. To better gain the attention of residents, the next issue of flyers will be
hand delivered and attached to each tan colored refuse container citywide. This
is a large task, and would be cost prohibitive as a stand alone project. However,
the cost will be minimal, as the flyers will be attached during an upcoming
citywide inspection of refuse and greenwaste containers. The inspection is
necessary for warranty considerations as the City's container inventory
approaches ten years of age. As the labor and transportation for this task are
covered by basic refuse collection operations, the recycling flyers will be
delivered at very little extra cost. Labor cost will also be minimized through the
use of work release personnel to walk the flyers along the street.
Suggestions by the KBB Committee
The Keep Bakersfield Beautiful Committee has suggested that the City Council
increase publicity, incentives, and education for curbside recycling through four
proposed steps, listed below with staff's consideration and recommendation:
I. Provide the community with additional awareness by advert/ring more,
and by creating promotions to foster sign-ups. An example might be
to give a subscriber a month off their service if they get a neighbor
to sign up for the service.
Media advertising is a costly item, and could easily equal or exceed the cost
of providing the service. Staff endeavors to find cheap advertising
opportunities, and takes them when possible. However, discounts for
neighbors' si~n-ul~s may be a cost-effective promotion, since the offer
can be made as an insert in the regular billing. Staff recommends this
step.
2. Provide parity between the cost of a second tan cart (~3. g5/mo.) and
the cost of a blue cart (~6.67/mo.).
In comparing fees for the blue recycling carts and extra trash carts, it must be
noted that the blue carts are serviced every other week, instead of weekly as with
trash carts. Therefore, the customer pays more per pickup for recycling
compared to trash. The main reason for this difference is truck travel time; trucks
drive many miles to service optional recycling carts, but not for extra trash carts
as they service regular routes. However, the efficiency of curbside recycling
would improve if blue cads were the only option for extra container space instead
of extra trash carts.
Curbside recycling (blue) cart service was established as a self-supporting
program, with no funding from regular refuse fees. Therefore, the City's cost of
$6.67 per month is charged to the users. In contrast, the cost of an extra trash
cart is partly subsidized by refuse fees. Although the actual cost is $6.11 per
month for service and billing, only $4.14 per month is charged to the user. The
subsidy was a policy decision made in favor of large households, during the early
stages of the automated refuse program in 1995. Approximately 2,200
households pay for extra refuse carts.
Another option for extra trash Service, that of trading in the basic green cart for a
second trash cart for free, was also established in the early stages of the
program in 1995. This option is based on the premise that some households do
not need a greenwaste cart because their gardener removes the material.
However, this is a difficult policy to enforce, because residents are freely given
extra greenwaste carts. Approximately 6,000 households have free extra trash
carts in lieu of greenwaste carts. These are also subsidized from basic refuse
fees.
Staff does not recommend chan.qin.q the rates at this time.
3. Provide neighborhoods with high recycling percentages a reduced
rote...
Although this is logical, it may be counterproductive by causing rates in some
neighborhoods to be relatively high, reducing overall participation. Staff does
not recommend this,
4. £ncrease education of recycling at events and schools...and encourage
the use of KgB volunteers and staff to spread the Keep America
Beautiful "Waste in P/ace" message in our schools.
The KBB subcommittee for education has promoted the Keep America
Beautiful "Waste in Place" program to our local school system, and has
offered training for interested teachers. This effort is ongoing.
June 9, 2004
To Council Members and Alan Tandy,
The Bakersfield residents take pride in their community and work hard to keep it clean.
Curbside recycling is a positive step for our community and its environment. Currently,.
nearly 2,500 homes have subscribed to do curbside recycling, but thc Keep Bakersfield
Beautiful Committee and Recycling Subcommittee would like to see more residents in
Bakersfield participate in curbside recycling.
The Keep Bakersfield Beautiful program sponsors boast of having the "best participation
for our Great American Clean-up" event with over 3,100 people turning out to cleanup
our community. We have students all over the city participating in recycling efforts at
their school sites and in community organization, citizens lug tons of recyetables to drop-
off sites and the city and county respond with a variety of recycling events that collect
hazardous and hard to dispose of items. Everyday we see more individuals signing up for
the blue carts but the pace is slow. In order for the program to be successful, the numbers
of participants need to increase. In order for participation rates to increase, some
important changes need to occur; the community can do it if only given a better chance.
We feel that curbside recycling needs a positive boost from you, the City Council, if we
are to remain on track with the state mandate of AB939, which requires landfill waste to
be reduced by 50% by 2000. We identified lhe following support that would expand
curbside recycling in Bakersfield.
Increase the publicity surrounding curbside recycling.
Extend incentives to the participants in curbside recycling.
® Increase education on recycling and also the harmful effect to our
environment of not recycling in our community.
The committee is well aware that the economic times are hard and that curbside recycling
is expensive and out of reach for many citizens but we do realize that the program has to
pay for itself. We would like to propose some additional steps that could be taken that
would reduce the cost and increase the usage of the blue carts.
Provide the community with additional awareness by advertising more,
and by creating promotions to foster sign-ups. An example might be to
give a subscriber a month off their service if they get a neighbor to
sign-up for thc service.
Provide parity between the cost of a second tan cart and the cost of the
blue cart. Currently it is either free or it costs $47.40 for the second tan
cart compared to $80.00 for a blue can. (Residents can keep their green
cart and second tan for $47.40 or residents can turn in their green cart
and get the second tan free). This encourages excess waste and
discourages recycling. Proposal, have both carts cost the same.
· Provide neighborhoods with high percentages of recyclers at a reduced
rate as the cost of the service in those areas declines. As participation is
the key to reducing cost, reward those neighborhoods where
participation is high with a lower per household charge.
· Increase education of recycling at cvcnts and schools. Promote minimal cost
recycling programs (such as bluc carts at fairs and concerts) and encouragc thc
use of Keep Bakersfield Beautiful volunteers and staff to spread the KAB "Waste
In Place" message to our schools.
Tl~ank you so much for your support of Keep Bakersfield Beautiful and for the city's
curbside recycling program. It is making a difference in our community and the
environment. Help us to heighten everyone's awareness and participation so we can all
continue to KEEP BAKERSFIELD BBAUT~UL.
Sincerely,
Sandy Garrigan, Recycliug Subcommittee Chair
Keep Bakersfield Beautiful Committee
Endorsed,
John Em'iquez, Chairperson
Keep Bakersfield Beautiful Committee
MEMORANDUM
ClTY A TTORNEY'S OFFICE
February 17, 2005
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER.
FROM: VIRGINIA GENNARO, CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: MUNICIPAL CODEVlOLATIONS
COUNCIL REFERRAL NO. 1043
Vice-Mayor Maggard requested City Attorney research whether the City's legal staff
could prosecute vandals.
The City Attorney's office may prosecute all violations of the Bakersfield
Municipal Code, which includes infractions and misdemeanors. With the consent of the
Kern County District Attorney, our office may also prosecute state penal code violations.
Historically, the Kern County District Attorney's office has handled City infractions
and misdemeanors on our behalf. Several years ago, when staffing at the District
Attorney's office was reduced, it was orally agreed that the District Attorney's staff of
attorneys would appear at all matters involving City citations, through the pre-trial. If a
matter could not be resolved by that stage, then the City Attorney's office would step-in.
In recent years, I am only aware of only two matters (both code enforcement issues)
which necessitated involvement of the City Attorney's office.
Some time ago, the District Attorney requested that the City Attorney's office
(lend) a Deputy City Attorney to the District Attorney's office for support in handling the
infraction/misdemeanor calendar. The concept was that such an individual could
handle the misdemeanor calendar and provide an additional resource to an otherwise
shrinking staff.
As City Council is aware, the Adhoc Taskforce formed by Councilmember
Benham to address downtown security issues, recommended that a "City Prosecutor"
program be developed. This recommendation was also supported by Council as a
group. Such a concept has obvious advantages. Primarily, such an individual (and
supporting staff) can concentrate on prosecution of City infractions and misdemeanors
that concern "quality of life" issues, such as graffiti, code enforcement, and those penal
code matters associated with the downtown area that require a tremendous amount of
resources from the Police Department.
Council Referral- Maggard
Municipal Code Violations
February 17, 2005
Page 2
Currently, our office is exploring a vadety of optiOns as how best to provide the
services of a community prosecutor. There are several cities throughout the State that
have a City prosecution staff as a function of the City Attorney's office that we can. look
to for models. While a fully functioning city prosecution team may take substantial time
to develop, we feel confident that a City prosecutor will be identified and onboard within'
the next 30 days to at least prosecute graffiti offences.
VG:do
S:\COUNClL\Referrals\04-05 Referrals\Municipal Code Violations - Maggard.doc
BAKERSFIELD POLICE
MEMORANDUM
RECEIVED
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FEB 1 8 2005
FROM: W.R. RECTOR, CHIEF OF POLICE
DATE: February 18, 2005 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
SUBJECT: Sexually ViOlent Predators
Council Referral No. 1027 (VVard 3)
Vice-Mayor Maggard requested the City Attorney's staff formulate a policy for the release of
sexually violent predators in the community, and provided an article from California Cities
Magazine dealing with the issue.
The attached memorandum by Juvenile Sex Crimes Sergeant Mike Payne outlines the Police
Department's procedures for handling potentially violent sex offenders should one be released in our
community.
Please call if you have any questions.
WRR/vrf
Attachment: Memo "City Council Inquiry into Sex Reqistrant Notifications" by 8gr. M. Payne
BAKERSFIELD POLICE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Assistant Chief Lynn
FROM: Sgt. M. Payne, Juvenile Sex Crimes Detail
RE: City Council Inquiry into Sex Registrant Notifications
The Bakersfield Police Department is committed to providing the community with accurate and
timely information regarding sex offenders that pose a threat to the community or an individual
within the confines of law. The Bakersfield Police Department also shares in maintaining a list of
High Risk Sex Offenders with the Kern County Sheriff's Department via the City of
Bakersfield's website. The Bakersfield Police Department has a policy regarding the notification
of persons who may be at risk or likely to encounter sex offenders. In addition the Bakersfield
Police Department routinely confirms the whereabouts and tracks sex offenders registered within
our city.
When a sex registrant is released from custody to our jurisdiction, moves within our jurisdiction,
or is placed within our jurisdiction by a state entity, that registrant is required to register in Kern
County as a sex offender within five days of arrival.
It is important to know that the California Department of Justice (D.O.J.) classifies sex offenders
within three classifications. They are as folloWs:
· High Risk Offender - The criteria used by D.O.J. in categorizing a registrant as
"High Risk" is very complex and lengthy. Some criteria include those who have
committed three or more violent sex offenses, and at least two have been tried
separately. Other criteria includes offenders who have been convicted of two violent
sex offenses, and one violent non-sex offense in which at least two of the offenses
were charged and tried separately; or the offender has been convicted of one violent
sex offense, and two or more violent non-sex offenses, again at least two of whiCh
were charged and tried separately.
· Serious Offender - A registrant convicted of a felony sex offense (except those
listed in the "other" category) or of misdemeanor child molestation.
· Other Offenders - All other sex offenders not classified as above (e.g. persons
convicted of pornography, exhibitionism, spousal rape, misdemeanor sexual
battery...)
The laws governing the release of information pertaining to sex offenders by Law Enforcement
is found within Califomia Penal Code Section 290. The laws are complex and very specific and
relate to the specific classification in which the D.O.J. has placed the offender.
Pursuant to Penal Code Section 290(n), high risk sex offender notification may be released to
an entire community. The notification may only be as broad as is necessary for the protection of
the public and following an individualized assessment of the risk posed by the sex offender in
question. It is not necessary to apply the same test required in serious sex offender notifications
which require an additional showing of "likely to encounter" and "at risk."
Information/notification regarding serious sex offenders can only be released ifa peace officer
reasonably suspects that a person may be at risk. This information may be provided to persons,
agencies, or organizations the offender is likely to encounter.
No information may be released or notifications made regarding sex registrants classified within
the "Other Offender" category.
Laws governing the disclosure of specified sex offender information via the Megan's Law
Website are outlined in Penal Code Section 290.46. The Website is maintained and operated by
the D.O.J.
Concern has been expressed regarding the release of"predators" within our community. It is
important to understand the definition of a "predator" within the law as a subjective
understanding of the term may not be correct and incite undue concern.
The D.O.J. does classify certain sex registrants as "Sexually Violent Predators," which is
codified with Penal Code Section 290 and Welfare and Institutions Code Section 6600 (a)(1).
There are no sexually violent predators residing within the iurisdiction of the Bakersfield
Police Department at this time.
A sexually violent predator is defined as;
"A person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense against two or more
victims and who has a diagnosed mental disorder that makes the person a danger to the
health and safety of others in that it is likely that he or she will engage in sexually violent
criminal behavior."
There are common misconceptions that all sex registrants are predators when, in fact, most fall
well outside the above definition of a "sexually violent predator."
Welfare and Institution Code Section 6600-6609 outlines specific criteria regarding the release
and placement of Sexually Violent Predators. Generally, they are released to their county of
domicile unless extenuating circumstances exist. An example would be a request from the
victim, family member of the victim, or witness.
In the event a Sexually Violent Predator is released within our community, the Bakersfield
Police Department will make a public notification to the community using all resources
available, (e.g. print and broadcast media, notification bulletins, community meetings, public
access/local cable television dissemination). In the event a Sexually Violent Predator whose city
of domicile is not Bakersfield is released within our community, the Bakersfield Police
Department will aggressively make every attempt to preclude the release. This can be
accomplished through various means such as contact with State Parole, letter writing, contact
with political officials etc.
The Department of Justice operates a "Sexual Predator Apprehension Team." They can be
utilized for monitoring and tracking Sexually Violent Predators released to a community when
there is a likelihood of the Sexually Violent Predators re-offending.
State Parole can utilize "electronic monitoring" within their departments guidelines.
Monitoring of Sex Registrants
The Bakersfield Police Department receives notification of sex registrants who have moved or
relocated to our jurisdiction from various sources such as The Department of Justice, Department
of Corrections, Kern County Sheriff's Department, D.M.V., and other outside agencies.
The Bakersfield Police Department physically confirms the sex registrant's address every six
months, or as required based on an individual assessment to confirm registration information is
correct; holding registrants accountable assures compliance. In the event inaccurate registration
information was given or a registrant is found to be out of compliance with Penal Code Section
290, they are subject to arrest. Mitigating factors regarding registration are taken into
consideration. The following factors are considered when deciding to pursue compliance versus
enforcement:
· Underlying sex conviction is greater than 10 years old
· No new law violations since underlying sex conviction
· Short time period of non-compliance (less than six months)
· Possible confusion by defendant as to registration requirements
· Homeless
· Low I.Q. or mentally ill
· Has been faithful in registering in the past
· Evidentiary problems
If the following factor(s) are present, the Bakersfield Police Department will pursue criminal
charges or arrest: . ·
· Underlying sex conviction is less than 10 years old
· Other law violations since the underlying sex conviction
· A lengthy time of non-compliance (greater than six months)
· Defendant has tried to hide from law enforcement
· Defendant is or has lived in homes with young children and has not informed their
custodian of his/her sex offender status
3
· Parole absconder
· Nature of underlying sex conviction involved force
Sex registrant information from the Megan's Law data base has been available to the public for
almost a decade. The median for gathering the information within the data base began by
visiting your local sheriff or police agency to view the information via the Megan's Law
ROM. Several years later the California Department of Justice went to an internet based site
which was also accessed at the local sheriff or police agency. In 2005, the California
Department of Justice went to intemet web based site accessible from any location with internet
access. The simple accessibility to sex registrant information has now prompted many inquiries
to local agencies throughout California from individuals concerned about sex registrants living
near their homes and schools.
It is important to understand that once a sex registrant has been convicted of a sex crime, served
their sentence, and successfully completed the terms and conditions of probation or parole, and
are subsequently released from the same, there are no restrictions on their freedom. The sex
registrant must continue to register as a sex offender for life. No information obtained from the
Megan's Law website or a police agency notification may be used to commit a crime against a
registered sex offender or to engage in illegal discrimination or harassment against a registered
sex offender. A person is authorized to use this information only to protect themselves or a child
at risk. Penalties for illegal use of this information are listed in Califomia Penal Code Section
290.4.
MWP/rr
2/07/05
B A K E R S F I E L D
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
February 17, 2005
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager
FROM: Alan Christensen, Assistant City Manage?--/~/
SUBJECT: Annexation Packets- Olive Drive Area
Council Referral #001041
Councilmember Couch requested that staff finalize the annexation informational
packets (FAQ and Tax Comparisons) for distribution to the Olive Drive area
neighborhood.
The FAQ's and tax comparison information is attached and was forwarded to the
neighborhood representative on Thursday, February 17th.
B A K E R S F I E L D
MOST COMMONLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT ANNEXATION
WHAT IS ANNEXATION?
Annexation is the process that enables a boundary change which increases the jurisdictional area
of a City. This enables areas to benefit from a full range of community services provided by the
City. The process takes about a year to complete with a public. hearing at the end of the process
by the Kern County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) board.
WILL MY PROPERTY TAXES INCREASE?
NO. State Law restricts property, tax increases in or outside the City limits. If annexed, your
current property taxes, which goes to the local government, will 'be split between the City
and the County. Annexation would not result in re-assessment of your property or
change the amount you are taxed. The city relies on the Kern County Assessor's Office to
perform the assessment duties. Therefore, if annexed to the City the County Assessor's
Office will continue to assess the 'property.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO POLICE PROTECTION IF ANNEXED?
The County areas receive protection from the California Highway Patrol (CHP) for traffic accidents
and traffic violations and from the Kern County Sheriff's Department for criminal violations. If
annexed, all law enforcement and protection would be from the Bakersfield Police Department.
The city maintains 1.3 officers per thousand population within the City limits.
WHAT COMMUNITY SERVICES WOULD BE PROVIDED IF ANNEX. ED TO THE CITY?
The City provides street lighting, street sweeping, school crossing guards, leaf collection along
residential neighborhoods, and any additional fire hydrants as needed at no additional cost.
WHAT ABOUT G. E.T. BUS SERVICE?
The G. E. T. bus service provides community bus service in the metropolitan area and will remain
if annexation takes place. The bus district is in charge of routes, rates, schedules and stops.
WHAT DOES THE CITY GET OUT OF THE ANNEXATION?
Of course, the City may or may not get a portion of the property tax that now goes to the County
depending on negotiations with the County. The City gets Federal and State monies which is-
based on the population of the city. The City gets sales tax monies from commercial transactions
within the City boundaries. The use of tax dollars would be more efficiently spent, examples
would be for police protection and road maintenance of uniform/logical areas.
WHAT ABOUT MY GARBAGE COLLECTION?
If annexed, your collection would be to the City standard (once per week for normal waste and
once per week for green recycled'waste) and you would pay the City-wide rate, which is currently
$154.90 per year for a single family home. Senior citizens are eligible for a fifty percent (50%)
rebate. Seniors must submit documentation to receive the rebate.
DO WE HAVE TO BEGIN RECYLING IF ANNEXED TO THE CITY?
NO. The City has begun a.Recycling Program which is voluntary. The program is to collect
aluminum cans, newspaper/magazines/junk mail, cardboard and plastic containers. Thers
is a cost of $80 per year for this service.
WOULD ANNEX-ATION AFFECT WHERE CHILDREN ATTEND SCHOOL?
NO. The school districts are a separate agency and have separate boundaries than the City.
The school districts also have attendance areas and are not affected by City annexations.
Your school district will not change due to annexation.
WOULD ANNEXATION RESULT IN MY .NEIGHBORHOOD BECOMING A PRIVATE-GATED
COMMUNITY?
NO. Becoming a-private-gated community is a separate process that begins by submitting a
written application to the City's Public Works Department. In general, the process requires
that a legal entity, such as a Homeowners Association, be formed and CC&Rs
(Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions) drafted. The CC&Rs must be signed by all
property owners of the proposed gated community and recorded. The CC&Rs must
include language providing that the property owners will be financially responsible for all
maintenance and repairs of the streets within their community, as well as financially
responsible for the facilities within the streets, such as street lights, drainage facilities, .fire
hydrants, curb, gutter, and sidewalk. For a more detailed explanation for what is required
to become a private-gated community, please contact either the City Attorney's Office or
the Public Works Department.
WHAT ABOUT BUILDING PERMITS?
Prior to and during the annexation process, if you receive a building permit from the Kern County
Building Department, it would be honored by the City. All inspections shall continue through the
County until completion of construction. Upon annexation, all permits will be received from the
City. To clarifY; if a property owner receives a County building permit and maintains .the permit
according to the Uniform Building Code prior to the completion of the annexation, .then that
building permit and all County inspections will be maintained and done by the County until the
completion of the development.
DO'I NEED A BUSINESS LICENSE FOR ,MY BUSINESS?
The City requires any business within the City limits to have a business license. The business
license fee is as follows:
$ 0.30 per $1,000 gross receipts from $1 $ 1,000,000.
$ 0.15 per $1,000 gross receipts from $ 1,000,001 $ 10,000,000.
$ 0.05 per $1,000 gross receipts from $ 10,000,001 $100,000,000.
$ 0.01 per $ t ,000 gross receipts of $100,000,001 or more.
With a minimum of $ 25.00 for a business license.
Note: A business License and Home Occupation Permit is required for any business in the home.
WHATABOUT SEWER CONNECTION?
Sewer service may or may not be available in your neighborhood. If dry sewer lines exist and
they are connected to the City's system, you are NOT required to connect. If you choose to
connect, the total cost is approximately $5,000.
3
Tax Comparison Information for the Olive Drive Area
TAXING AGENCY COUNTY CITY
BILL BILL
GEN LOCAL GOVT $1,067.55 $i ,067.55
CSA 10.6 SEP (Septic Monitoring) $6.22 N/A
CSA 10 (Drainage) $21.22 N/A
CSA 71 $10.22 N/A
CSA 71.5 (Street Sweeping) $10.22 N/A
KMVCD VECTOR ASM $2.00 $2.00
(Kern Mosquito Vector Control District Assessment)
KCSWMP LAND USE $66.00 $66.00
(Kern County Landfill use fee)
KCWA IMP#4 Debt $7.32 $7.32
(Kern County Water Agency)
KCWA ZN 7 DEBT $29.15 $29.15
(Kern County Water Agency)
KCWA ZN 17 DEBT $16.34 $16.34
(Kern County Water Agency)
KCWA ZN 19 DEBT $22.46 $22.46
(Kern County Water Agency)
Kern High Refunding 96-A $22.00 $22.00
KCCD SRID $12.59 $12.59
KCCD ASSESSMENT DIST $9.90 $9.90
Solid Waste REFUSE $159.84 $154.90 '
Sub-Total for Flat Fees $1,463.03 $1,410.21
Reduction in cost if annexed to the City $52.62
Connection Fee to City Sewer After Annexation (Optional) $3,322.81
If you have questions about this information,
please contact the City Manager's office at 326-3751.
B A K E R S F I E L D RECEiVEO
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FEB 1 4
MEMORANDUM
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager
FROM' Raul Rojas, Public Works Director
DATE: February 14, 2005
SUBJECT: MT. VISTA AND WHITE LANE WALL
Referral No. 1040 (Meeting: 2/09/05)
COUNCILMEMBER HANSON REQUESTED STAFF PROVIDE AN UPDATE AS TO
WHEN THE REPAIRED WALL AT MT. VISTA AND WHITE LANE WILL BE PAINTED.
General Services applied the initial scratch coat of plaster on February 7th and completed the
application of the color coat on February 11th.
G:\GROUPDA~Referrals\2005\02-09\Re~1040- Steve H.doc
B A K E 'R S F I E L D
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
MEMORANDUM
February 17, 2005
TO: (~ ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROMt i,~RAuL~i..V M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
ti
SUBJECT: CITY OF BAKERSFIELD BIOSOLIDS MANAGEMENT
Councilmember Scrivner requested information on the City's current practices on
the treatment and handling of biosolids.
This memo has been prepared by the staff of the Wastewater Division of the Public Works
Department for the purpose of informing the Mayor and City Council regarding the issue of
biosolid. Both of the City wastewater treatment plants produce biosolid materials which are
used as a soil amendment on the City Farm. Following is a narrative of our biosolids practices
and procedures
BIOSOLIDS
The City of Bakersfield operates two wastewater treatment plants that treat a total daily flow of
approximately 31 million gallons of wastewater. During the processing of this wastewater, the
solid material that is removed from the water is digested and dried. This digested and dried
sludge is what we call "biosolids". It is an organic soil amendment, rich in nutrients and
beneficial for the improvement of marginal soil.
WHAT IS BIOSOLID?
One of the things done to clean up the wastewater is the removal of solids from the water.
These solids are removed and sent to a process unit called a digester. A digester is a sealed
concrete tank. The raw sludge is pumped to this tank and treated for 15-20 days at a
temperature of 98 degrees Fahrenheit. Though it is called sludge, it is more like very dirty (and
smelly) water. The sludge going to the digester is only 5% solids; the rest is water. Inside the
digester the environment is oxygen deficient. The bacteria li~)ing in the digester attack and
consume anything coming in that can be used for food and oxygen. Thus, during the digestion
process, most of the volatile pollutants and organic matter in the sludge is broken down. As the
C:~DOCUME~I~Iskinner~LOCALS~ l\Temp~Biosolids Memo.doc
organic compounds are broken down, one byproduct is methane gas. This digester gas is
used to fuel power generators at the treatment plants.
After 15-20 days, the digestion is nearly complete. The digested sludge flows out of the tank
and into a sludge drying bed. This bed is about 3 feet deep. The sludge slurry fills the bed
and the solids settle to the bottom while the water rises to the top and is decanted off for
additional treatment. Once the bed is full of solids, it is left to dry. After about two months in
the Bakersfield summer sun, the digested material has been reduced to about 50% moisture. It
looks like black topsoil. This material is what we call biosolids and is utilized on the City farm
as nitrogen fertilizer and a soil conditioner.
There are two kinds of biosolids, Class A-Exceptional Quality (EQ) and Class B-EQ. Class A-
EQ biosolids have been digested at temperatures above 120 degrees or composted to reduce
the level of pathogens in the material. Class B-EQ biosolid is similar in quality to Class A but it
has not been heated high enough to kill all the pathogens. The County Biosolids Ordinance
restricts the land application of biosolids to Class A-EQ only. Class B-EQ biosolids can still be
land applied, but only within the city limits of incorporated areas.
WHY THE CONCERN OVER BIOSOLIDS?
Each year the City of Bakersfield typically land applies approximately 6,000 dry tons of biosolids
on its 5700 acre City Farm. This quantity is one year production from our two treatment plants.
Typically the application rate is about 10 tons per acres so only about 600 acres of farmland
receives biosolid land application each year. The City applies it as fertilizer. We never use
the same land in successive years for application so a typical field at the City farm will receive a
biosolids application about once a decade.
By comparison, In 2003, approximately 70,000 dry tons of Class A-EQ biosolids was land
applied on the City of Los Angeles farm near Taft Highway and I-5. This farm is only 4700
acres in size and the operator has to double crop each year to take up all the nitrogen that is
being applied. Compare this to the 6,000 dry tons applied annually on the City of Bakersfield
farm and you can see why it causes some concern. The Los Angeles farm is located adjacent
to several water banking operations along the Kern River Bed. The City of Bakersfield's 2800
acre water bank is only about 3 miles from the Los Angeles Farm. There is much concern on
the part of the water banking agencies, that these land applications in such close proximity to
the water bank could impact the water table and degrade the quality of the water that has been
stored underground
CITY PRACTICES
The biosolids applications on the City Farm are done in strict conformance with State and
Federal law. The California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) regulates the
processing of sewage sludge into biosolids at the treatment plants. Each wastewater treatment
plant has its own biosolids management plan which has been reviewed and approved by the
CRWQCB. The biosolids are utilized beneficially as a soil amendment at rates commensurate
with crop needs and in conformance with Federal EPA regulations. Each year the City files a
report with EPA addressing our land application practices. The City has an extensive
groundwater monitoring system on the City Farm to monitor the groundwater quality. The City
has been disposing of its biosolids on the City Farm in this manner for over 40 years and to date
has seen nothing to indicate that the practice is effecting the groundwater.
C:\DOCUME~ l~lskinner~LOCALS- l\Temp~Biosolids Memo.doc
The City of Bakersfield disposes of its biosolids responsibly, on our own land, within our own
city limits. If all communities handled their biosolids applications in this manner there would be
very little controversy. Much of the concern regarding biosolids land application arises from the
huge quantities being hauled in to Kern County from Southern California. The City of Los
Angeles and Orange County Sanitation each have intense farming operations located in Kern
County run specifically for the disposal of imported biosolids. We support the efforts by the
Kern County Board of Supervisors to reduce or stop these practices.
C:\DOCUME~l~lskinner~LOCALS- l\Temp\Biosolids Memo.doc