Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/01/05 B A K E R S F I E L D CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM April 1,2005 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Alan Tandy, City Manager /~Tb.,./ SUBJECT: General Information 1. The Streets Division is gearing up for this year's road resurfacing projects. A list of Phase One projects is enclosed; a list of Phase Two locations will be formulated next fall. 2. An update is enclosed from Chief Rector regarding the implementation of the Department of Justice recommendations on issues related to the use of force by officers. 3. The California State Transportation Commission recently presented some sobering information to a State Budget sub-committee regarding the effects of the continual diversion of Proposition 42 funds from transportation projects. Some of the key points from the CSTC testimony are enclosed. 4. With the Governor's proposed employee pension reforms at the forefront lately, the attached article from the March 30th Sacramento Bee conveys some ominous information that many of the state's largest school districts have amassed about $17 billion (!) in unfunded health benefit liabilities for retired teachers and school employees, present and future. It seems likely that the districts will look to the State for assistance in solving their financial problem. 5. I will be out of the office next Thursday and Friday morning, April 7th and 8th, to attend a California Redevelopment Agency board meeting in San Jose and may be out of the office on Friday afternoon. John Stinson will be in charge, and my staff can reach me, if necessary. AT:rs cc: Department Heads Pamela McCarthy, City Clerk 'I!~,R~honda S~.~__~,..~rniI~e~¥~,-?~d:~,..~STREET RESURFACING LIS %?~ase One ........ ~lS~g~;J~J From: Alan Tandy To: Rhonda Smiley Date: 3/28/2005 8:32:53 AM Subject: Fwd: STREET RESURFAClNG LIST - Phase One >>> Raul Rojas 3/28/05 8:30:27 AM >>> Attached is our 2005 residential street resurfacing list ( inch overlay) - Phase One. In approximately September 2005, our Streets Division will start to put together the Street Resurfacing List - Phase 2. STREET DIVISION 2005 RESIDENTIAL STREET RESURFACING LIST PHASE ONE STREET NAME AREA DISCRIPTION WARD 1. River Crossing Wy. - ........................River Mist Ave. to Rushing River Ct. 5 2. Rushing River Ct. - .......................... Shower Springs Ct. to the east end 5 3. Cold Creek Ct. - ............................. Silver Crossing St. to the north end 5 4. Cold Spray Ct. - .............................. Silver Crossing St. to the north end 5 5. Cold Springs Ct. - ........................... Silver Crossing St. to the north end 5 6. River Mist Ave. - ............................. River Crossing Wy. to the west end · 5 7. Shower Springs St. - .......................... Rushing River Ct. to Tule Creek Ct. 5 8. Moss Crossing Ave. - ........................Shower Springs St. to Silver Crossing St. 5 9. Silver Crossing St. - ......................... Cold Springs Ct. to River Mist Ave. 5 10. Wild Bend Ln. - ............................... Silver Crossing St. to Spring Creek Loop 5 11. Lake Side St. - ................................ Silver Crossing St. to Spring Creek Loop 5 12. Actis St. - ..................................... Beechwood St. to Planz Rd. 6 13. Krollwood St. - ............................... Actis Rd. to Dovewood St. 6 14. Dovewood St. - ............................... Krollwood st. to Beechwood St. 6 15. Wrenwood St. - ............................... Oceanwood St. to Blackwood St. 6 16. Blackwood St. - ............................... Wrenwood St. to Robinwood St. 6 17. Robinwood St. - ............................... Planz Rd. to Oceanwood St. 6 18. Oceanwood St. - ............................... Robinwood St. to Dovewood St. 6 19. Meadow Vista St. - ........................... Panorama Dr. to Charger Ave. 3 20. Charger Ave. - ................................. Meadow Vista St., east approximately 1,500 ft. 3 21. Royal Scotts Wy. - ........................... Claymore St. to 5208 Royals Scotts Wy. 3 22. Tartan Pl. (reconstruct) ..................... Claymore St. to Auburn St. 3 23. Claymore St. - ................................ Royal Scot-ts Wy. to Piper Wy. 3 24. Piper Wy. - .................................... Claymore St. to Auburn St. 3 ~-~ont. 2005 Residential Street Resurfacing List - PHASE ONE Page 2 of 3 STREET NAME AREA DISCRIPTION WARD 25. Height St. - .................................... Mount-Vernon Ave. to Haley St. 3 26. Sunny Ln. - .................................... Columbus St. to Height St. 3 27. M St. - ......................................... California Ave. to 10th St. 1 28. N St. - .......................................... California Ave. to l0th St. 1 29. O St. - ........................................... California Ave. to l0th St. 1 30. 11th St. ' P St. to M St. 1 31.10th St. - ......................................... P St. to M St. 1 32. Northrup St. - ................................... E, l0th to E. 11th 1 33. E. 11th ........................................... Northrup St. to So. Robinson St. 1 34. So. Robinson St. - ............................. California Ave. to E. 11th St. 1 35. Clyde St. - ...................................... E. 11th St. to E. l0th St. 1 36. E. 11th St. - ..................................... Clyde St. to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. 1 37. E. 10th ........................................... So. Robinson St. to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. 1 38. Truxtun Ave. south and north frontage roads - V St. to Union Ave. and Union Ave. to Sonora St. 2 39. Eureka St. - .................................... Union Ave. to Sonora St. 2 40. 22nd St. - ........................................ Golden State Hwy. to the west end 2 41. 20th St. - ......................................... Union Ave. to the west end 2 42. V St. Golden State Hwy. to Truxmn Ave. 2 43. U St. - ............................................ Tmxtun Ave. to the south end 2 44. V St. - ............................................. Tmxtun Ave. to the south end 2 45. Golden State, west frontage roads. - ......... F St. to 30th St. and Garces Cir. To the north City limit. 2 46. Golden State, east frontage road .............. Garces Cir., north to H St. 2 47. K St. - .............................................. 24th St. to 27th St. 2 48. Beech St. - ......................................... 24th St. to Spruce St. 2 49. San Lorenzo Ave. - ............................. Hughes Ln. to E1 Alisal St. (FDG) 7 50. San Romon Ct. - ................................ E1 Alisal St. to the west end (RS) 7 Con. 2005 Residential Street Resurfacing List - PHASE ONE Page 3 of 3 STREET NAME AREA DISCRIPTION WARD 51. E1 Alisal St. - ..................................... Teal St. to Julian Ave. (FDG) 7 52. McCurry St. - ..................................... Teal St. to Julian Ave. (FDG) 7 Julian Ave. to Planz Rd. (RS) 53. Argent St. - ........................................ Julian St. to Teal St. (FDG) 7 54. Canadian St. - ..................................... Julian St. to Vincent Ave. (RS) 7 55. Mallard Ct. - ...................................... Teal St. to the east end (RS) 7 56. Vincent Ct. - ............................... , ...... Viencent Ave. to the north end (RS) 7 57. Viencent Ave. - ................................... Viencent Ct. to Canadian Wy. (RS) · 7 Canadian Wy. to Teal St. (FDG) 58. Teal Ave. - ........................................ Julian Ave. to Hughes Ln. 7 59. Julian Ave. - ....................................... Teal St. to McCurry St. (FDG) 7 McCurry St. to the west end (RS) 60. Bea Ct. - ............................................ Hughes Ln. to the west end (FDG) 7 61. Tricia Ct. - .......................................... Hughes Ln. to the west end (FDG) 7 62. Patti Ct. - ............................................ Hughes Ln. to the west end (FDG) 7 63. Thistlewood Ct. - .................................. Windsong St. to the west end 4 64. Win&reek Ct. - .................................... Windsong St. to the west end 4 65. Windsong St. - ................................... Thistlewood Ct. to approx. 100 ft. south of Win&reek Ct. 4 66. Willow Spring Ct. - ............................... Sand Creek to the east end 4 67. Northcreek Ct. - .................................. White Rock Dr. to the north end 4 68. Sun Stream Wy. - .................................. Harvest Creek Rd. to Sand Creek Dr. 4 69. Sand Creek Dr. - ................................... River Spring Ct. to the north end 4 70. White Rock Dr. - ................................... Sand Creek Dr. to River Ranch Dr. 4 71. River Ranch Dr. - .................................... White Rock Dr. to Brimhall Rd. 4 BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUI March 22, 2005 To: Alan E. Tandy, City Manager and Council Members From: W.R. Rector, Chief of Police Subject: Update on Department of Justice Investigation It has been approximately one year since the Police Department received the Department of Justice Technical Assistance Letter which offered recommendations regarding the use of force, force reporting, and the shooting policy of the Bakersfield Police Department. This memorandum will provide a brief update on actions taken by the Police Department in response to the recommendations by the Department of Justice. Many of the DOJ recommendations addressed the use of force by officers and the reporting of that force and subsequent documentation by supervisors. Many of these issues were policy format issues as opposed to policy content issues and we have worked closely with DOJ in rewriting nearly all our use of force policies. Policies in this new format have recently been issued to every Bakersfield Police Officer and our current in-service training contains a block of instruction on these policies. Through the police department's Records Management System, we are now able to track all uses of force. We have also modified our policy and are requiring that supervisors respond to and document all uses of force. The shooting policy of the Department has been modified and mandates that officers not place themselves in the path of a moving vehicle if that is the sole justification for using deadly force. We are in communication with representatives from DOJ regularly and continue to work with them toward closure of this investigation. From: AdmMgr To: Rhonda Smiley Date: 3/30/2005 10:07:01 AM Subject: Fwd: Projects Face Cancellation >>> Transportation California <transportation.ca@ issuesmanagement.com> 03/28/05 1:01 PM >>> TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS FACE CANCELLATION The California Senate's Budget Sub-committee dealing with transportation recently heard some sobering testimony from the California Transportation Commission regarding the impact of Proposition 42 diversions on the State's transportation programs. Transportation California Executive Director Mike Lawson calls the CTC testimony "sobering" and "clear evidence that we have to stop the hemorrhaging of Proposition 42 monies and get a significant transfusion to restore the viability of key transportation accounts." According to the CTC, in its March 16 testimony: In the 2006 STIP, "we not only face the real prospect, not only of further delays, but of deleting as many as half of the projects now programmed." *** California's annualized transportation need is in the range of $16 billion, but current law provides for only slightly more than a quarter of that amount. ***The Commission has not been able to fund a single new capacity project without borrowing from future federal funds since June 2003. ***The CT(; has not funded a Traffic Congestion Relief Program project since December 2002. ***In 2004-05, CTC is only able to fund half of the $1.8 billion slated for State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP). ***In the 2004 STIP, no new projects were added and $5.4 billion in existing projects were delayed by two years or more. ***If the current Budget proposal is enacted, half of the amount planned for STIP and SHOPP for 2005-06, will not be available The Commission testimony said that the Governor's proposal to firewall Proposition 42 dollars for 2007-08 and beyond "goes a long way toward reestablishing a stable and reliable funding source for transportation." But the CTC also warned that proposals to suspend Proposition 42 in the 2005-06 and 2006-07 budgets and repay past loans over a 15-year period would "exacerbate an already untenable situation." Complete CTC testimony is online at: http://www.catc.ca.qov/Testimon¥.pdf Visit Transportation California's website at: www.transportationca.com Pete. r. Schrag: School health benefits: A disaster in the making - The Sacramento Bee Page 1 of 2 This story is taken from Opinion at sacbee.com. Peter $chrag: School health benefits: A disaster in the making By Peter $chrag -- Bee Columnist Published 2:15 am PST Wednesday, Afarch 30, 2005 While the governor and other pension privatizers are warning ominously that California's retirees are about to eat up the state budget, a related but larger and more imminent fiscal hazard is looming over many of California's largest school districts. Put most simply, those districts have collectively piled up an estimated $17 billion in unfunded health benefit liabilities for retired teachers and other school employees, present and future. Many districts try hard not to even think about it. Some may not know how deep they're in the hole. In the coming years, those liabilities are likely to consume an increasing share of the funding for regular school programs - forcing up class size, and forcing further cuts in counselors, libraries, arts, music and other offerings. Thomas Henry, the executive director of FCMAT, the state's Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, which was created to help the growing roster of California's financially troubled school systems, calls it the most serious fiscal problem he's seen in 30 years: "the tomato that ate New York." The official champion on the list is the Los Angeles Unified School District with some $5 billion in unfunded liabilities - essentially the amount that would be required in a fund that would pay the lifetime health benefits that the district is currently committed to. That $5 billion is the equivalent of about 80 percent of the district's annual operating budget. To properly fund it, said Paul Warren at the Legislative Analyst's Office, the district ought to be setting aside a half-billion dollars a year. But Los Angeles is hardly alone. According to Henry, some 80 large districts are committed to lifetime benefits for retirees and, in some cases, for their spouses, among them San Francisco, West Contra Costa County, Sacramento ($345 million) and the fiscally troubled Fresno Unified School District, whose unfunded liability runs to a whopping $1.2 billion. In addition, there are countless other districts that have contractual obligations to retirees until they reach age 65 or 70. Some districts, in order to attract staff in economically lean times, promised new employees with Iongtime service elsewhere full health benefits after their first year in the new system. The actuarial and legal history here is complicated. Until the mid-1980s, health benefits, even gold-plated ones like Sacramento's that included cosmetic surgery (a benefit since dropped) and no copays, weren't a huge issue since average per-capita health benefits seemed manageable. But with escalating health costs and new accounting rules, it's becoming harder to avoid. Nor is it hard to explain how districts made those commitments. With the straitened budgets in the years after passage of Proposition 13, school districts, like other California government agencies, negotiated http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/v-print/story/12644754p- 13498383c.html ' 3/30/2005 Peter Schrag: School health benefits: A disaster in the making - The Sacramento Bee Page 2 of 2 generous long-term benefits in lieu of increased pay schedules that they felt they couldn't afford Few . suspected that the cost of those health benefits, which seemed modest at the time, would balloon in the coming decades. Most probably wouldn't have cared if they had suspected it. Some districts, Elk Grove among them, have created funds to cover retiree health benefits. A few, which have such funds, have since raided them to cover other costs. Most have simply been paying the premiums out of their current operating budgets. But as costs continue to climb, both because of escalating health care expenses and the growing rolls of retirees - retirees who live longer - those costs, as Sacramento County Superintendent Dave Gordon points out, will consume more and more of the money that had been going to the regular school program. For the 400 California school districts - 40 percent of all districts - whose enrollment and state revenues are declining, that's going to be a particularly severe problem. Warren calls it a disaster in the making. The only way to resolve the crisis, says Henry, is for districts to "stop the hemorrhaging" - meaning to renegotiate contracts so at least prospective employees don't get the full lifetime coverage that current employees (and current retirees) are getting. At the moment no one at the state level - or in many cases even at the district level - even knows how large the liability really is. Both FCMAT and the legislative analyst are issuing pointed warnings and advice. "The size of retiree health benefit liabilities," says the LAO in its analysis of the governor's budget, "is so large that unless steps are soon taken to address the issue, it seems likely that districts will eventually seek financial assistance from the state." New accounting rules imposed by GASB, the private but powerful Governmental Accounting Standards Board, that will be phased in beginning in 2006-07 will require districts to record the full cost of funding post- retirement health benefits as part of current expenditures. But beyond the obvious need for better accounting and reporting, there's a more immediate and depressing prospect: No matter what happens, schooling for millions of California kids in the coming years is likely to get leaner, not richer. About the writer: · Peter Schrag can be reached at Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852-0779 or at pschrag@sacbee.com. This article is protected by copyright and should not be printed or distributed for anything except personal use. The Sacramento Bee, 2100 Q St., P.O. Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852 Phone: (916) 321-1000 Copyriqht © The Sacramento Bee http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/v-print/story/12644754p- 13498383 c.html 3/30/2005