HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPR - JUNE 1970Bakersfield, California, April 6, 1970
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Council of the
City of Bakersfield, California,
the City Hall at eight o'clock P.
The meeting was called
by the Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation by the Reverend
Lanier of the Riverview Baptist Church.
The City Clerk called the roll as follows:
Present: Mayor Hart.
held in the Council Chambers of
M., April 6, 1970.
to order by Mayor Hart followed
Jim
Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker,
Stiern, Vetter, Whittemore
Absent: None
Minutes of the regular meeting of March 30,
approved as presented.
a Service
1970 were
Service Pin Award.
At the request of Mayor Hart, the City Clerk presented
Pin to Robert S. Paddock, Chief of the Fire Department,
who completed thirty year's service with the City of Bakersfield
on April 5, 1970.
Scheduled Public Statements.
Mr. Kenneth Young, operator of the American Cab Company,
requested permission to address the Council Re: Taxicabs and the
right to free enterprise in Bakersfield, stating that he has re-
quested an impartial hearing before the Public Utilities Commission
of California as his intrastate rights are being violated in this
City. He is licensed by the State of California and the County of
Kern and when his taxicabs cross the City line he is subject to
arrest by City Policemen.
City Attorney Hoagland commented that the Public Utilities
Commission has no jurisdiction over the City's licensing of taxicabs.
Mr. Young's application to operate a taxicab service in the City has
been denied by the City Manager's Office in accordance with the
Ordinance. He is entitled to a hearing before the City Council to
appeal the denial and if he so requests, the Council can set a date
for a hearing on his appeal.
Bakersfield, California, April 6, 1970 - Page 2
Mr. Young stated that was not the reason for his
ance before the Council, he has never applied for a permit
operate a taxicab service in
make a request for a hearing
intends to make a request to
appear-
to
the City, his wife has, and she will
to the Council at this meeting. He
the Public Utilities Commission of
California, as telephone contacts are involved, and telephones
are public utilities. He asked the City Council to request the
Police Department to refrain from stopping his cabs from entering
the City until a hearing has been held before the Public Utilities
Commission.
Mr. Hoagland pointed out that Mr. Young has an attorney
and if he feels the arrests are unjustified, he can obtain a Writ
of Prohibition to prevent the City from making arrests to enforce
its Ordinances.
Mayor Hart told Mr. Young that the City Council has no
desire to work a hardship on him, he has been advised by the City
Attorney to proceed in a fashion which is legal, and unless Mrs.
Young can add something that would change the mind of the Council,
he suggested that she did not speak this evening, as she has not
been placed on the Agenda of the meeting.
Mr. Bob Brunet, addressed the Council, stating he works
for the Human Resources Department and was appearing on behalf of
Mr. Frank Espinosa who was unable to be present at the meeting.
He stated that staff members are promoting a fund raising activity
in the form of a basketball game and they are seeking the Council's
participation to form a five member team to play against the KAFY
Clowns and the Board of Supervisors. Seriously, it would be
appreciated if the Council would make an appearance at the game.
Mayor Hart stated he would contact the Council individually and
give Mr. Bruner an answer at a later date.
Bakersfield, California, April 6, 1970 - Page 3
Correspondence.
The City Clerk read a communication from Mr. Robert
Hamilton, President of the South Bakersfield Lions Club, who
advised that the Board of Directors had voted unanimously to
support the Mayor and the Bakersfield City Council in their
courageous stand againsf adult dope pushers.
Council Statements.
Councilman Stiern called attention to the old Harrell
residence on the corner of California and Oleander Avenue, which
has been damaged by fire twice within the last couple of months
and is deemed a hazard by the residents of the neighborhood.
Because he is concerned, he has talked to Chief Paddock of the
Fire Department, to City Attorney Hoagland and to the Building
Director, and as a result of these talks, notices have been issued
to demolish the dangerous buildings and clear the land.
The same thing has happened in other parts of the City
and he feels that people who own property in various stages of
disrepair have a responsibility to the adjacent property owners
to either clear the property or provide appropriate surveillance
to prevent fires and vandalism. He called the attention of the
Council and the City Manager to the action taken by the Building
Director and stated that if the order is not obeyed, he will be
discussing the problem with the Council again.
Councilman Rucker thanked the City Manager and the
Traffic Authority for placing stop signs at certain intersections
in his Ward, which will eliminate the hazardous conditions in that
particular area.
Councilman Bleecker stated that last Monday the Council
passed a Resolution calling for life imprisonment or the death
penalty without possibility of parole, for those adults who make
their living selling narcotics to minors and who were convicted
twice for this offense. He has received numerous telephone calls
and letters and much favorable comment on the Council's action.
There has been very little unfavorable comment.
Bakersfield, California, April 6, 1970 -- Page 4
Councilman Bleecker asked that remarks made by State
Senator George Deukmejian during an interview with a reporter of
the News Bulletin when visiting Bakersfield recently, be made
part of the record. Senator Deukmejian seeks the Republican
nomination for Attorney General of the State of California and in
the past has shown some interest in the prevention and apprehension
of purveyors of narcotics. Councilman Bleecker quoted the article,
as follows:
Bakersfield's recenfly passed "get tough" resolution
on narco peddlers appears headed for an early demise,
at least in the thinking of Republican Attorney
General aspirant Senator George Deukmejian of Long
Beach. Deukmejian, a strong anti-drug proponent,
feels the local action which asks death or mandatory
life imprisonment for those adults convicted a second
time of selling dope to juveniles stands little
chance of legislative favors. The candidate believes
present narcotic laws, which contain reasonably strin-
gent penalties, must be enforced to the letter before
any rougher proposals are considered.
He agreed in principle with Bakersfield City Council-
man Ray Rees's contention that juries would probably
balk at convicting defendants if it meant a verdict
of death. Rees was the sole opponent of the local
resolution introduced by Councilman Bleecker. Even
in murder cases, Deukmejian explained, it is difficult
to get the death penalty. Most jurors would be even
more reluctant in the case of narcotics.
He added, in sympathy, he well feels the frustration
of the Bakersfield Council and government bodies
throughout the State concerned at the rising nar-
cotics abuse rate. Too many deals by judges and
district attorneys, the candidate asserts, are
being made allowing second and third offense
violators to be treated as first offenders, thus
receiving lighter sentences. It is a common
practice, Deukmejian contends. While the candidate
is willing to separate the user from the seller, he
is not ready to write off the former as totally
guiltless.
Late this week Deukmejian proposed legislation that
would tie educational requirements to probation,
etc. He says I don't think its sufficient to just
find someone guilty, a penalty should be imposed,
but other techniques are also necessary.
Councilman Bleecker asked how Senator Deukmejian is
going to rehabilitate the pusher before he is convicted. It would
appear to him that this State Senator is trying to play both ends
against the middle as far as the narcotics problem :is concerned.
He appears to want to do something, but he has no solutions in
Bakersfield, California, April 6, 1970 - Page
the statements that
concrete to suggest,
Councilman Bleecker stated that he doesn't believe this
is frustrated. It has taken an action that it feels is
It has spoken on an issue that is important to everyone
he made to the News Bulletin, he has nothing
except that other techniques are necessary.
Council
necessary.
in the City
and the whole nation. He believes that Senator Deukmejian has
missed the entire point when he states that the jurors of this
State or City would not convict a pusher selling narcotics to a
minor. The narcotics problem is one that local government and all
government should take cognizance of and do something about instead
of passing it off onto somebody else.
Councilman Stiern commented that he did not interpret
the statement of Senator Deukmejian, who is a very able attorney
and a very capable candidate for Attorney General, in that way.
In his opinion, Senator Deukmejian was only expressing the state-
are not necessary~ if the present laws
ment that additional laws
on narcotics are enforced.
Reports.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Vetter,
the Council went on record as opposing AB 30 (Powers), which is
proposed legislation now before the Committee on Public Employment
and Retirement which would require governmental employers whose
employees are members of the Public Employee's Retirement System
to credit each employee with one day of sick leave for every two
days of earned sick leave he has accumulated at the time of his
retirement. The employer would then be required either to pay
cash for this sick leave or else allow an equivalent early
retirement.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Heisey, the
Council went on record as opposing AB 1090 (Quimby) which would
shuffle the present four-year terms of office of the Commissioners
serving on the Local Agency Formation Commission. It would elimin-
ate the City Selection Committee and provide that each City in a
County selects its own representatives who would serve "sequentially"
for two-year terms, and would change the present method of selecting
representatives, which would do nothing more than weaken or destroy
the City's representation in the Commission.
Bakersfield, California, April 6, 1970 -- Page 6
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Vetter,
the Council went on record as opposing SB 601 (Short) which would
mandate a 2% at age 50 retirement program for safety employees in
the Public Employees Retirement System.
City Manager Bergen had previously presented each member'
of the Council with a copy of the Municipal Transit Report and
read the following conclusions as set out in the Report:
The City of Bakersfield has operated the Transit
System since 1957 at an annual loss. This deficit
amounted to $90,519 during the 1968-69 Fiscal Year.
Substantial service, approximately 37.1% (36.1
miles out of a total 97.2 miles) of actual route
miles, is within the unincorporated County area.
More than 40% of the weekday route passengers
originate from the unincorporated County area.
The costs attributable to unincorporated County
area passengers during the 1968-69 Fiscal Year
amounted to an estimated $36,000 City to unin-
corporated County area subsidy.
The 1965 Bakersfield Metropolitan Area Trans-
portation Study demonstrated that 13% (7,370
out of a total of 56,610) of all occupied
housing units in the urban Bakersfield area
had no vehicles.
The 1967 Stanford Research Institute Report
pointed out that the Municipal Transit passen-
gers can be placed in four basic groups - (a)
workers, (b) shoppers, (c) students, and (d)
the elderly, most of whom have no other means
of transportation. The total number of these
passengers during 1969 was almost 1,365,000.
The 1965 Bakersfield Metropolitan Area Trans-
portation Study demonstrated that approximately
24% of the average weekday municipal passenger
trips were for the purpose of earning a living
and only approximately 8% was for shopping pur-
poses. The remaining two-thirds of the trips
were for other purposes, mostly students. Also,
a substantial number of elderly passengers used
the Municipal Transit System.
Because of the irregular city boundaries, it is
impractical to restrict bus service to the City
Limits only, nor can the frequency of service be
reduced without perverting the reason for the
existence of a Municipal Bus Transportation
System in Bakersfield.
The general condition of the buses is poor. The
newest coaches are 1960 models. The buses have
been driven an average of over 600,000 miles
since they were manufactured or purchased by the
City of Bakersfield. The net value of all
operating equipment is $56,102. Mechanical
maintenance costs have gone up at the rate of
41% over the last four years.
Bakersfield, California, April 6, 1970 - Page ?
In order for the City of Bakersfield to maintain the
present policy and level o£ service~ certain recommendations are
made in the Report. The City has operated on the assumption that
any progressive community desirous of attracting growth and in-
dustry should be far-sighted enough to have a low cost public
transportation system. Up until now the City of Bakersfield has
furnished this service for the entire Bakersfield metropolitan
area at a considerable cost to the City taxpayers. Looking forward
to the future, the following objectives need to be accomplished:
1. Find a method whereby all of the Bakersfield
metropolitan area residents who receive the
benefits, both direct and indirect, of having
a transit service, pay for their fair share.
2. Work toward the creation of an integrated
urban mass transportation system for the
entire Bakersfield metropolitan area. With
this joing system, economies of operation
could reduce or even eliminate present
operating losses.
3. Or, re-evaluate the basic assumption that
a public bus system is needed.
Councilman Vetter asked how the community can initiate
a District to furnish transportation to the Greater Bakersfield
Metropolitan Area, to take it completely out of the hands of any
governmental body.
Mr. Bergen replied that from a practical standpoint, it
would seem to him that City residents who wish to form a District
would petition the Board of Supervisors to do so.
Councilman Stiern stated he thinks it would be appro-
priate for the City Manager to address a letter to the Board of
Supervisors and ask for an early consideration and conclusion as
to the formation of the Areawide Planning Organization in Kern
County. Mr. Bergen commented that it might be more appropriate
for Mayor Hart to direct a letter to the Board of Supervisors
for some action.
Bakers£ield, California, April 6, 1970 - Page 8
Councilman Heisey stated that in his opinion a Metro-
politan Transit System would solve the needs o£ all the people
and the cost of the system would be spread over the entire area
instead of being subsidized by the City of Bakersfield. Until
such time as the City sets a date for going out of the bus business~
the rest of the metropolitan area will be unwilling to vote for a
District.
Councilman Whittemore pointed out that a meeting of
KERPAC i~ being held tomorrow night and perhaps an answer will
be received from the Board of Supervisors at that time. If not,
the other cities may vote to go ahead and fund a separate staf~
because many of them have made application for funds £or urgently
needed programs, which are being held in abeyance pending a
decision regarding the Regional Planning Commission Sta££.
Councilman Bleecker stated the City is going to have
to decide very soon whether or not it is going to stay in the
bus business. If a District is £ormed, and the City stays in
the bus business, it might be wise to look into purchasing mini
buses, which wouldn't be as expensive to operate.
Mr. Bergen stated they have investigated the possibility
o£ using smaller buses~ but found it would not be practical as
they would not £urnish the service needed during peak periods.
This is explained in the report. Mr. Bergen urged the Council to
read the report, although it is quite extensive, and perhaps a
committee meeting can be held to discuss it at a later date.
Councilman Rucker asked the City Manager regarding the
present status o£ the City's application for £unds to purchase
buses. Mr. Bergen stated it is somewhere between San Francisco
and Washington, D. C. He thinks there is an excellent chance o£
getting the funds requested, if the Board o£ Supervisors sets up
an independent staf£ for KERPAC and agrees to budget it. Council-
man Rucker pointed out that there are citizens in some parts o£
the City who rely on the buses for transportation and would su~fer
if buses were eliminated entirely in the City o£ Bakersfield.
Bakersfield, California, April 6, 1970 - Page 9
Mr. Bergen stated that at the request of Councilman
Rucker, the Traffic Authority had investigated the hazardous
condition of the intersection at Chico and Owens Streets and as a
result of the investigation, have found that stop signs were
justified not only at Chico and Owens Streets but also at King
and Gage Streets, and signs have been installed at these locations.
Allowance of Claims.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, Vouchers Nos. 3450
to 3493 inclusive, in amount of $113,336.77, as audited by the
Voucher Approval Committee, were allowed, and authorization was
granted for payment of same.
Claim for damages from Jimmy Louis
Stewart referred to the City Attorney.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, claim for damages
from Jimmy Louis Stewart was referred to the City Attorney.
First reading of an Ordinance amending
a paragraph of Section 17.56.100 (Auto-
mobile Parking Regulations) of the
Municipal Code of the City of Bakers-
field.
The Ordinance as presently written would prohibit the
parking of all vehicles in the front and side yard areas. The
Planning Commission recommended amending a Paragraph of Section
17.56.100 as follows:
"Neither the area of a required side yard abutting
a street nor of a front yard shall be used for
off-street parking required by this Chapter. Such
provisions shall not apply in the "P" Zone."
Councilman Bleecker asked the City Attorney what the
p~oposed wording of the amendment meant. Mr. Hoagland replied
that it permits parking in the front driveway. Councilman Bleecker
asked if the wording could not be changed so that it said parking
was permitted in the front driveway. After some further discussion,
Mr. Hoagland stated that he would change the wording to clarify
the intenI before the Ordinance is submitted to the Council for
adoption.
Bakersfield, California, April 6, 1970 - Page l0
City Attorney instructed to prepare
Ordinance to change the name of 42nd
Street between Union Avenue and Chester
Avenue to West Columbus Street.
Upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore, the City Attorney
was instructed to prepare an Ordinance to change the name of 42nd
Street between Union Avenue and Chester Avenue to West Columbus
Street.
Action on request from Doris Gallatin
for an Encroachment Permit deferred
for one week.
Councilman Vetter made a motion to grant request from
Doris Gallatin for an Encroachment Permit to construct a three to
four foot high split rail fence adjacent to the existing sidewalk
at 1609 Wilson Road.
Councilman Whittemore said he thought there is a deed
restriction on this property which would prohibit the construction
of this fence. Mr. Hoagland stated the encroachment could be
granted and it would not nulify the deed restriction. Ordinarily,
the Planning Commission and the Council do not like to get into
areas of deed restrictions.
After some discussion, Councilman Vetter withdrew his
motion and action was deferred for one week to permit Councilman
Whittemore to investigate the matter.
Acceptance of certain easements from
various property owners along proposed
42nd Street between Chester Avenue and
Union Avenue.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, easements were
accepted from the following owners for the widening and improving
of 42nd Street between Chester Avenue and Union Avenue:
P. G. & E.
Wayne Peacock
Joseph M. Gannon, Tr.
Jas. T. & Mary M. Wattenbarger
Kern Mosquito Abatement District
Robert W. & Carolyn Mae Lynn
R. Wayne and Barbara L. Nunes
Eugene A. & Virginia F.
Sultze
Wayne's Dairy
Robert D. & Jane Williams
William P. & Edna Boles
Glendole L. & Jean Brown
Stockdale Development Corp.
Acceptance of Easement from John Deeter
for sewer line located at the northwest
corner of Oak Street and 24th Street.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, easement from
John Deeter or sewer line located at the northwest corner of Oak
Street and 24th Street, was accepted.
Bakersfield, California, April 6, 1970 - Page ll
Adoption of Resolution No. 25-70 of
the Council approving a Certification
of the Right of Way within the City
of Bakersfield for widening and im-
proving Brundage Lane between Union
Avenue and 1200 feet east of Lakeview
Avenue.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Resolution No. 25-70
of the Council approving a Certification of the Right of Way within
the City of Bakersfield for widening and improving Brundage Lane
between Union Avenue and 1200 feet east of Lakeview Avenue was
adopted by the following vote and the Mayor was authorized to
execute the Certification of the Right of Way:
Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern,
Vetter, Whittemore
None
None
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Acceptance of Work and Mayor authorized
to execute Notice of Completion for
Contract No. 76-69 for construction of
the Water Pollution Control Facility
for Southwest Bakersfield.
Upon a motion by Councilman Heisey, the Work was accepted,
and the Mayor was authorized to execute the Notice of Completion
for Contract No~ 76-69 for construction of the Water Pollution
Control FaCility for Southwest Bakersfield.
Hearings.
This is the time set for public hearing before the Council
on Resolution of Intention No. 853 of the Council of the City of
Bakersfield declaring its intention to order the vacation of portie, ns
of various streets in Blocks 657, 688 and 658,
field.
This hearing has been duly posted
have been filed in the City Clerk's Office.
vacation was made by the Kern County Land Company and J.
barger.
in the City of Bakers-
and no written protests
Request for this
C. Watten-
Bakersfield, California, April 6, 1970 -- Page 12
Mayor Hart declared the hearing open for public partici-
pation. A representative of the Stockdale Development Corporation
stated he would answer any questions from the Council relative to
the vacation. No protests or objections having been received, the
Mayor closed the public hearing for Council deliberation.
Public Works Director Jing stated that two requests had
been received for vacations of streets in this area, which were
included in one Resolution for consideration by the Council;
however, the requests were heard separately and unanimously
approved by the Planning Commission.
Councilman Heisey commented that if this was
decision of the Planning Staff, he would move to adopt
No. 26-70 ordering the vacation of portions of various streets in
Blocks 657, 688 and 658, in the City of Bakersfield. This motion
carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern,
Vetter, Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
Councilman Bleecker commented that he had voted in the
affirmative on this vacation, but in the future he would ask that
requests from separate entities be considered independently by
the Planning Commission and the Council at separate hearings.
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the
Council, upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, ~he meeting was
MAYO of y of Bakersfield,
ATTEST:
CI' .3~' K and Ex-~fficio ~lerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
the unanimous
Resolution
Bakersfield, California, April 13, 1970
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Council of the
City of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of
the City Hall at eight o'clock P. M., April 13, 1970.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation by the Reverend Don
Swain of the Westminster Presbyterian Church.
The City Clerk called the roll as follows:
Present: Mayor Hart. Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker,
Stiern, Vetter, Whittemore
Absent: None
Minutes of the regular meeting of April 6, 1970 were
approved as presented.
Scheduled Public Statements.
Mr. Bill Dearer, representing Mr. Bill Rea, Chairman of
the Kern County Bicentennial Commission, extended an invitation to
the Council to attend a luncheon to be held in the Civic Auditorium
on April 22, 1970, to welcome members of the California Bicentennial
Commission, and to hear an address by Lt. Governor Ed Reinecke, who
is Chairman of the Commission.
Mayor Hart commented that he has been negotiating with
North American Rockwell Company who has promised to deliver a
space capsule to be displayed in Bakersfield during Bicentennial
Week.
Mr. Joe Rivas, President of the Native Sons of the Golden
West, Bakersfield Parlor 42, read a letter addressed to the Mayor
and the City Council, stating that this organization has voted
unanimously to respectfully request the Bakersfield City Council
to declare and proclaim that each year July 4th and September 9th,
Admission Day, shall be recognized as official holidays. Upon a
motion by Councilman Heisey, the letter was received and placed on
file and referred to the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel
Committee for study.
Bakersfield, California, April 13, 1970 - Page 2
Correspondence.
City Attorney Hoagland stated that the City Selection
Committee has been requested by the Chairman of LAFCO to nominate
two city members to fill expired terms on the Commission. The Mayor
is one of the voting members on this Committee, and since Bakers-
field is the largest City in Kern County, it is important that it
be represented on this Commission. Councilman Heisey has indicated
that he would be willing to serve and Mayor Hart thanked him for
offering his services for this purpose.
Council Statements.
Councilman Bleecker read an open letter to the people of
Bakersfield as follows:
In recent weeks there has been much discussion
and some misunderstanding about a resolution
passed by the City Council which calls for
legislation that would provide a penalty of
death or life imprisonment for an adult criminal
purveyor of narcotics twice convicted of selling
to a minor.
Some critics have chosen to speak of the death
penalty provision only and have completely over-
looked the life imprisonment alternative in
either an intentional or misguided attempt to
play upon the compassion of the everday citizen.
Other critics have put the whole blame on judges
and district attorneys and have called upon them
to get tough as a solution to the narcotics
problem.
A few critics have objected to the harshness
of the resolution on the grounds that jurors
would not convict; therefore, tough legislation
would be useless and they have criticized the
finality of the death penalty and life imprison-
ment without parole as it applies to pushers.
But can you tell me anything more final than:
A juvenile who takes his own life while under
the influence of LSD.
Or a juvenile who kills his own parent while
under the influence of heroin.
Or a juvenile who steals a car while under the
influence of marijuana and who kills a pedes-
trian while running away from the police.
Or the sadness and anxiety in a family whose
child becomes completely withdrawn from every-
thing worthwhile because some punk purveyor
got him started on the so-called minor drugs?
Bakersfield, California, April 13, 1970 - Page 3
Ideally, each district attorney and each judge charged
with the enforcement of law and the administration of
justice would act according to his conscience and his
oath of office. The district attorney would see to it
that narcotics laws are enforced and prosecuted vigor-
ously and the judge would see to it that convicted
narcotics law violators (particularly sellers to
juveniles) are given sentences under existing laws
appropriate to the crime. If district attorneys and
judges do not perform to our liking, we may criticize
them but we may not lay the whole blame upon them,
because they do not make the laws and there is reserved
for them certain leeway under the law where at their
discretion they may show leniency.
Even in the interpretation of the law by the highest
court in the land, there are wide divergences of
opinion between say, Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Chief
Justice Berger - Mr. Douglas being a liberal and Mr.
Berger, a conservative. So you see the political
philosophy of the jurist has much to do with the
application of the law in both criminal and civil
proceedings. This is the way it is and it does
provide a certain necessary balance.
However, if, through the ultimate wisdom of the every-
day American~ laws were written through his elected
representatives - laws that were not ambiguous - tough
laws - laws that would say what they mean and laws
which would not provide for leniency beyond a certain
point, if this were done, judges would be denied the
leeway they now sometimes have and offenders would
suffer the strength and harshness of the law as a
deterrent to their continued criminal activities.
I believe that this is what the people want and I
know that they are not getting it.
In this country we have a rule of law - laws enacted
by the people, either directly or through the various
legislative bodies who are first elected by the people.
Hopefully, this will never change because it provides
the rules and checks and balances to keep government
in the hands of the people.
The everyday citizen has more power and more say-so
than he might believe if he will only use it.
If the people really want to stop the illicit
trafficking in narcotics, if they fear for the well-
being of their children, if they care more for that
person offended than for the offender, let them
start doing something about it. Let them say to
government through the ballot box.
I support those candidates for public office who
will support wholeheartedly the legitimate efforts
of local law enforcement.
I am tired of seeing confirmed criminals set loose
to prey upon the law abiding citizen and I will
support tough laws and candidates who believe that
the safety of the people comes first.
If we can do these things - if we can convince
government that the people will not stand for less -
then we will have performed a service for ourselves
and for those among us who are less fortunate in
their ability to search out to effectively secure
these same ends.
Bakersfield, California, April 13, 1970 - Page 4
Allowance of Claims.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, Vouchers Nos.
3493 to 3594 inclusive, in amount of $154,805.74, as audited by
the Voucher Approval Committee were allowed, and authorization
was granted for payment.
Encroachment Permit granted Doris
Gallatin, 1609 Wilson Road.
Action had been deferred for one week on request by
Doris Gallatin, 1609 Wilson Road, for an Encroachment Permit to
construct a three to four foot high split rail fence adjacent to
the existing sidewalk.
Public Works Director Jing reported that some of the
deeds for property in the area had restrictions relative to the
construction of fences, but there was none on this property.
Neighbors to the east and west have indicated that they have no
objection to the construction of the ornamental fencing. Mr.
Jing stated he would recommend that this Permit be granted as it
is consistent with what has been done in the past.
Stating that since the neighbors do not object, Council-
man Whittemore moved that the Encroachment Permit be granted.
This motion carried unanimously.
Adoption of Ordinance No. 1855 New
Series of the Council of the City of
Bakersfield amending Section 17.56.100
of the Municipal Code of the City of
Bakersfield pertaining to Automobile
Parking Requirements.
Action on a proposed Ordinance of the Council of the
City of Bakersfield amending Section 17.56.100 of the Municipal
Code of the City of Bakersfield pertaining to Automobile Parking
Requirements was deferred at last Council meeting and the City
Attorney was directed to clarify wording of the amendment. Mr.
Hoagland commented that basically the proposed amendment merely
states that a garage structure cannot be built in the front or
side yard, and this amendment would allow parking in the driveways.
When this amendment is read in context with the other sections of
the Ordinance, it is very clear and simple.
Bakersfield, California, April 13, 1970 - Page 5
Councilman Whittemore asked the City Attorney to explain
what relationship this would have to the hearing on camper and
trailer parking scheduled to be held before the Planning Commission
on Wednesday evening. Mr. Hoagland replied that the hearing before
the Planning Commission will be held for the purpose of determining
if the Ordinance should be changed to prohibit the parking of
recreation vehicles in the front yard.
Councilman Bleecker asked if this Ordinance would also
permit the parking of these vehicles in front of the house at the
curb, and Mr. Hoagland stated that was correct.
Councilman Stiern commented that he was not concerned
with what people parked in their driveways but what they parked
out at the curb in front of their houses or in front of their
neighbor's houses. Mr. Hoagland stated that was part of the over-
all problem. Councilman Stiern asked what was going to be done
about the parking of large vacation vehicles at curbs on narrow
streets, and what was going to be done about parking them at
intersections or close to stop signs.
Mr. Hoagland stated they had talked to the League of
California Cities about this and they feel the modification by the
State Legislature should be in connection with the posting. As
has been explained previously to the Council, the posting of every
intersection would result in a prohibitive cost. They are going
to bring it up to the League and attempt to get support, either
state-wide, or individually, by cities.
Councilman Vetter asked the City Attorney if there was a
possibility that the problem of curb parking of large recreation
vehicles would be discussed at the special hearing before the
Planning Commission on Wednesday evening. Mr. Hoagland stated he
would think so, it is a part of the problem. Councilman Vetter
suggested that it be included in the discussion because the people
who own this type of vehicle will attend the meeting and they
should be given an opportunity to air their views on the matter.
1;;2
Bakersfield, Californ±a, April 13, 1970 - Page 6
After further discussion~ upon a motion byCouncilman
Rees, Ordinance No. 1855 New Series of the City of Bakersfield
amending Section 17.56.100 of the Municipal Code of the City of
Bakersfield pertaining to Automobile Parking requirements, was
adopted by the following vote:
Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern,
Vetter, Whittemore
Ayes:
Noes: None
Absent: None
Adoption of Ordinance No. 1856 New
Series of the Council of the City
of Bakersfield changing the name of
42nd Street between Union Avenue
and Chester Avenue to West Columbus
Street.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, Ordinance No.
1856 New Series of the Council of the City of Bakersfield changing
the name of 42nd Street between Union Avenue and Chester Avenue
to West Columbus Street, was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees,
Vetter, Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
Rucker, Stiern,
Re-appointment of two members of the
Planning Commission.
Councilman Heisey nominated Mr. Albert C.
Lum and
Councilman Vetter nominated Mr. Dean A. Gay for re-appointment
as members of the Planning Commission for a four year term expiring
April 17, 1974. Vote was taken on the motions, which carried
Approval of Map of Tract No. 3199 and
Mayor authorized to execute Contract
and Specifications for public improve-
ments therein.
unanimously.
*
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, it is ordered that
the Map of Tract No. 3199 be and the same is hereby approved,
that streets and courts shown upon said map and therein offered
for dedication, be and the same are hereby accepted for the
purposes for which the same are offered for dedication. Pursuant
* Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, Street Right of Way
Easement from Stockdale Development Corporation on the north and
east sides of Centennial Park was accepted.
Bakersfield, California, April 13, 1970 - Page ?
to the provisions of Section 11587 of the Business and Professions
Code, the Council of the City of Bakersfield hereby waives the
requirement of signatures of the following:
Donald L. Lord, Owner of mineral rights below
a depth of 500', with no right of surface entry
The Clerk of this Council is directed to endorse upon the
face of said map a copy of this order authenticated by the Seal of
the City Council of the City of Bakersfield, and the Mayor was
authorized to execute the Contract and Specifications providing
for the public improvements in said Tract.
Approval of Joint Exercise of Power
Agreement between the City of Bakers-
field and the County o£ Kern for
construction of Traffic Signal System
at East California Avenue and Baker
Street intersection.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Rucker,
the Joint Exercise of Power Agreement between the City of Bakers-
field and the County of Kern for construction of Traffic Signal
System at East California Avenue and Baker Street intersection,
was approved, and the Mayor was authorized to execute same.
Councilman Heisey asked the Engineering Department to
review with the Traffic Authority the traffic problem existing
because of the angle that Alpine Street intersects with East
California Avenue, and report back to the Council.
Hearings.
This is the time set for public hearing before the Council
on appeal by H. H. Costerisan to the decision of the Board of Zoning
Adjustment granting the application by Stockdale Development Corpora-
tion for a Variance and a Conditional Use Permit of an "A" (Agri-
culture) Zone to permit the construction, operation and maintenance
of a Cemetery, Mausoleum, Chapel and Mortuary on that certain
property located on the northwest corner of Fraser Road and Stine
Road.
Bakersfield, California, April 13, 1970- Page 8
This hearing has been duly advertised and posted. At a
public hearing held March 10, 1970, the Board of Zoning Adjustment
considered this application which was approved, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Curb, gutter and sidewalk to be constructed
along the entire Stine Road and Fraser Road
frontage.
2. Landscape plan to be approved by the Planning
Staff and installed along Stine Road and
Fraser Road before final building inspection.
The applicant has requested that the mausoleum be
deleted from said application.
Councilman Vetter asked to be excused from participating
in this hearing and the one following as he and his wife have a
very minor interest in a similar business in Bakersfield) and
although the City Attorney has advised him that there is no legal
conflict of interest, he £eels that there could be a possible
moral conflict or an impairment in his judgment in voting on the
application.
Mayor Hart opened the hearing for public participation
and asked if there were persons present who wished to speak in
opposition to this request. Mr. Lawrence N. Baker, Attorney at
Law, representing Mr. Costerisan in this matter, addressed the
Council stating that his client's sole reason for filing the appeal
is that he is interested in the next hearing, it is his feeling
there shouldn't be two cemeteries one-half mile apart, and ii only
one is granted, it should be granted to him.
No one else wishing to speak in opposition, Mayor Hart
asked that those persons who were in favor of the application
address the Council. Mr. Mel Jans, Manager of Stockdale Develop-
ment Corporation, stated they were the applicants for the Conditional
Use Permit that was heard before the Board of Zoning Adjustment on
March 10, 1970, at which time the permit was granted. At that
hearing there was no opposition to his application and it was
approved by the Board. They are not adjacent to any residential
area, although they are planning for residential redevelopment to
take place in the surrounding area. He stated he would answer any
questions of the Council.
Bakersfield, California, April 13, 1970 - Page 9
Mayor Hart closed the public portion of the hearing for
Council deliberation and action. Councilman Whittemore pointed
out that this is a very unusual situation to hold two hearings on
two applications for the same thing. He stated he does not know
whether these hearings should have been held jointly, but before
he can arrive at an intelligent decision, he would like to hear the
other application on the agenda. Councilman Bleecker agreed, stating
that it would be difficult for him to arrive at a decision until he
has heard the facts on both applications.
Mayor Hart stated that he felt it was an acceptable
practice to withhold an
has had the opportunity
At this point,
opinion or a conclusion until the Council
to discuss both hearings.
Mayor Hart declared a recess and read a
news bulletin relative to the problem being experienced by Apollo 13,
which is attempting to land on the Moon. He asked that everyone
stand and repeat a silent prayer for the safety of the men out in
space.
The Council went on to hear the appeal by John Morosa
et al to the decision of the Board of Zoning Adjustment granting
the application of R. K. Flint for a Variance together with a
Conditional Use Permit of an "A" (Agriculture) Zone and an M-1
(Light Manufacturing) Zone to permit the construction, operation
and maintenance of a Mortuary and Cemetery on that certain property
located on the east side of Stine Road, 1000 feet south of White
Lane.
This hearing has been duly advertised and posted. The
Board of Zoning Adjustment considered this application at a continued
hearing held on March 10, 1970, and recommended approval of said
use subject to the following conditions:
1.Curb, gutter and sidewalk to be constructed
along the entire Stine Road frontage.
2. Landscaping to be approved by the Planning
Staff and installed along Stine Road before
final inspection.
It should be noted that the State of California Cemetery
Board regulates the economical need for cemeteries after approval
has been granted by the local governing bodies.
Bakers£ield, California, April 13, 1970 - Page 10
Mayor Hart declared the hearing open for public partici-
pation. Mr. Lawrence N. Baker, Attorney at Law, stated he
represented Mr. Flint, Mr. Costerisan and Mr. Karpe, the owners
o£ the property involved. These gentlemen filed their application
before the Board of Zoning Adjustment first and had no idea that
the other application was being considered until they had been
working on their own request £or quite some time. He stated thai
this hearing has been continued because at the first meeting there
were only two members of the Board of Zoning Adjustment present,
and everyone thought it would be wise to continue it until a full
board was present. He submitted a petition containing around 1200
signatures of residents who are in favor of granting the application
of Mr. Flint.
Mr. Roland Woodru££ addressed the Council, stating that
he represented John and Joe Morosa who own property abutting the
subject property on the south, and also that he was speaking for
most o£ the property owners in the area including the Southern
Paci£ic Company~ which has a rail line running along the southerly
boundary of the parcel. He stated that he is speaking in opposition
to the Flint application £or several reasons. They feel that the
use applied £or is definitely contrary to the Master Plan for the
area. The property in question lies immediately east o£ the
industrial park and the intended use was £or industrial purposes.
He read a letter £rom the Southern Paci£ic Company
stating that this company feels the use o£ this property as a
cemetery would be directly opposed to the use of their rail facili-
ties. At the present time the tracks are used £or the transport
of different commodities raised in this area and at the unseasonable
time there are two trains per day, which increases to six or eight
during the peak seasons, that pass this area. State regulations
require that train whistles be sounded commencing oae-fourth mile
prior to arrival at crossings~ which would be disrupting to funeral
services being conducted on the premises.
Bakersfield, California, April 13, 1970 - Page 11
He presented a petition containing the signatures of 180
residents who own property immediately adjacent to the proposed
cemetery and stated that these people believe a cemetery would be
detrimental to their property. They feel that there would be a
depressing influence on their property even though it has been
pointed out that lhis will be an attractive park. When this property
is developed as an industrial area, it will add greatly to the City's
tax revenue~ but if it is used as a cemetery, it will gradually be
removed from the tax rolls. For these reasons, his clients feel
that this application should not be granted.
Although it has been stated that this question will
ultimately be decided by the State, he does not feel that the
Council should shun this responsibility~ that it should listen to
the voice of the people in this area and make a decision between
the two applications for a cemetery.
Other persons speaking in opposition to the granting of
this application were Mr. Fred L. Thompson and Mrs. Banducci~ who
own property adjacent to the proposed cemetery. Many people in
the audience indicated that they were opposed to the Flint application.
Mayor Hart closed the public portion of the hearing for
Council deliberation and action. Councilman Whittemore stated he
was inclined personally to vote against both of the applications.
There is development in the area of a low cost housing project and
expansion for industrial sites. He feels that cemeteries should be
operated away from any established development of residential pro-
perties, so that anyone building a home in the area would know
exactly where a cemetery is located.
both of these sites.
Councilman Rucker pointed
problem
Therefore, he is opposed to
out that it has always been a
to establish a cemetery and mortuary in an area unless it
is specifically zoned for that particular purpose. However, it
seems to him that at the present time people are building nice
homes adjacent to cemeteries, because they serve to enhance the
area. He feels that a cemetery is needed in the southwest part of
the community, and he will vote for both of the applications.
Bakersf±eld, Cal±fornia, Apr±l 1:3, 1970 - Page
Councilman Stiern stated that he did not know the proper
parliamentary procedure to take action on one or the other of
these hearings. He has some ~eelings about both of them, and
very frankly, he thinks one should be approved and the other
denied, he does not think they both should be either denied or
granted~ or that the Council should pass it on for the State to
make a decision. He feels that there is a need for a facility
of this type in the southwest. Of the two parcels~ the one that
merits the consideration of the Council is the larger one and the
one around which development can be planned by an adjacent property
owner who has an interest. To put a cemetery into the middle of a
concept where there is already industrial development is not the
thing to do. He therefore moved that Zoning Resolution No. 226
granting application o£ Stockdale Development Corporation for a
variance and Conditional Use Permit o£ the Land Use Zoning Ordinance
of the City of Bakersfield a££ecting that certain property as here-
inafter described and zoned as an "A" (Agriculture) Zone to permit
the construction, operation and maintenance of a Mortuary and
cemetery on that certain property locited on the northwest corner
of Fraser Road and Stine Road, be adopted.
Councilman Heisey commented that in view of the fact that
only one of these pieces o~ property will probably be approved by
the State for development as a cemetery, it is incumbent on the
Council to decide which one it should be, and reluctantly, he is
inclined to agree with Dr. Stiern, although his sentiments are
with the private individuals who wish to develop their property~
rather than with a large corporation.
Councilman Rucker stated that he felt that the Council
should be equally fair to both applicants although 'they are in
close proximity to each other, and that both applications should
be granted.
Councilman Bleecker stated that he did not feel there
should be two cemeteries in the same area~ the area does, however~
need a mortuary and cemetery. In view of the fact that the largest
opposition has been to the Flint Mortuary application, he would be
in favor of voting to grant the permit to the Stockdale Development
Corporation.
Bakersfield, California, April 13, 197~0 - Page 13
Councilman Rucker offered a substitute motion to grant
both applications. Councilman Heisey commented that he would
support Councilman Rucker's motion. Roll call vote was taken on
the substitute motion as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker
Noes: Councilmen Bleecker, Stiern, Whittemore
Abstaining: Councilman Vetter
Absent: None
Pursuant to Section 14 of the Charter, which, states
that the Mayor shall have the right to vote on all matters when
the vote of the Council results in a tie, Mayor Hart voted in the
negative on the substitute motion, which thus failed to carry.
Vote was then taken on Councilman Stiern's motion to
grant the application of the Stockdale Development Corporation
for a Variance and Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction,
operation and maintenance of a Cemetery, Mausoleum, Chapel and
Mortuary on that certain property located on the northwest corner
of Fraser Road and Stine Road, which carried by the following
roll call vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern
Noes: Councilman Whittemore
Abstaining: Councilman Vetter
Absent: None
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, Zoning Resolution
No. 227 denying request of R. K. Flint for a Variance and Conditional
Use Permit of the Land Use Zoning Ordinance of the City of Bakers-
field affecting that certain property as hereinafter described and
zoned as an "A" (Agriculture) Zone and M-1 (Light Manufacturing)
Zone to permit the construction, operation and maintenance of a
Mortuary and Cemetery on that certain property located on the east
i4i)
Bakersfield, California, April 13, 1970 - Page 14
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstaining:
Absent: None
side of Stine Road 1000 feet south of White Lane, was adopted by
the following vote:
Councilmen Bleecker, Rees, Stiern, Whittemore
Councilmen Heisey, Rucker
Councilman Vetter
There being no
Council, upon a motion by Councilman Rucker,
adjourned at 10:00 P. M.
Adjournment.
further business to come before the
the meeting was
/
MAYOR oI/tMe/C~ of Bakersfield~ Calif
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK and E~-Offi6io Clerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Council of the
City of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of
the City Hall at eight o'clock P. M., April 20, 1970.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart, followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation by the Reverend L. Paul
Lehman of the Mennonite Brethren Church.
The City Clerk called the roll as follows:
Present: Mayor Hart. Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker,
Stiern, Vetter, Whittemore
Absent: None
Councilman Heisey stated that this is Bicentennial Week
throughout Kern County and introduced Mrs. Rosalie Bollinger,
Chairman of the Kern County Centennial Cook Book Committee, Mr.
Karl Thurber, and Miss Marge Fredenburg, Queen of Bicentennial
Week. He read Resolution No. 29-70 of the Council of the City of
Bakersfield proclaiming the week of April 20th Bicentennial Week
in the City of Bakersfield and moved for its adoption, which
carried as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen
Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker,Stiern,
Vetter, Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
Minutes of the regular meeting of April 13, 1970 were
approved as presented.
Scheduled Public Statements.
Mr. Norlan Black, representative of Freeway 65 Associa-
tion of the Greater Bakersfield Chamber of Commerce, stated that
a meeting of this Association will be held in Bakersfield on
Wednesday, April 29th, at 8 P. M., and he invited the Council as
guests of the Chamber of Commerce, to attend the meeting at the
Pyrennes Restaurant.
Correspondence.
The City Clerk read a communication from Richard Carpenter,
Executive Director and General Counsel of the League of California
Cities, acknowledging receipt of two certified copies of Resolution
No. 24-70 calling for the death penalty or life imprisonment for
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page 2
any adult twice convicted of selling narcotics to minors, which
will be presented to the Resolutions Committee of the Mayors' and
Councilmen's Department at the Annual Conference ot! the League of
California Cities on October 26th. If approved by the Department,
it will be referred to the General Resolutions Committee, and i~
approved by the General Resolutions Committee, will. go before the
delegates at the Business Sessions on October 28th.
Councilman Bleecker pointed out that the Board of Super-
visors had adopted a similar Resolution and asked i~ a representa-
tive of the City of Bakersfield should appear at the Committee of
the Mayors' and Councilmen's Department to speak in behalf of the
Resolution.
Councilman Stiern stated he felt the Resolution would
have much more impact and support if it came out of the South San
Joaquin Division of the League of California Cities as well as
being presented by the City of Bakersfield. Someone should be
present at the Resolutions Committee to speak for the Resolution,
because otherwise, it could be ignored or changed, and if it
survives, Councilman Bleecker or some other representative of the
City should be prepared to support it before the General Assembly
of the League of California Cities.
Councilman Heisey commented that he feels the Resolution
will receive support from the smaller cities in rural California.
Councilman Stiern stated that it is very important to get the
Resolution through the Resolutions Committee because that it where
it will encounter the most opposition.
A communication was read from Paul F. Romberg, President
of the California State College, Bakersfield, thanking the Council
for the Resolution from the City of Bakersfield presented to the
college by Mayor Don Hart for the Cornerstone Ceremony on April
4th.
A communication was read from Bryan J. Coleman, thanking
the City for the cooperation received for its professional staffs
during the development of the Urner's Chrysler-Plymouth Agency on
California Avenue.
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page 3
however,
study has
equipment
study.
Council Statements.
Mayor Hart stated that he would like to request the
Council to initiate a serious study of the possibility of con-
verting the cars and trucks in the City's vehicle pool to a natural
gas fuel as an anti-pollution measure. The conversion cost will
be somewhere around $450 per unit for use of natural gas, and the
vehicle would also be able to operate with gasoline by turning a
valve. Natural gas fuel would cut pollutants by vehicles exhaust
about 90%. It would result in increased mileage and with all
factors involved, result in an approximate 50% reduction in the
annual gasoline bill. The City has 287 pieces of equipment which
would be affected, and the Mayor stated that a move in this direction
must be made sooner or later.
Councilman Heisey commented that in his opinion, this
is a good suggestion and undoubtedly, the Budget Committee and
the Traffic Authority will want to join in the study and offer a
recommendation on the cost and how it can be financed. He suggested
that if it is too costly for one budget year, the City should
consider phasing out the gasoline burning equipment over a period
of several years.
Councilman Whittemore stated that the cost would have a
bearing on it, however, he would like to know if the adaptors are
transferable to new equipment as the old equipment is replaced.
Mayor Hart stated he has been led to believe this is possible,
it will be an important part of the study. A very detailed
been made by another community on this conversion of
and he is prepared to submit it to a committee for its
Councilman Rees commented that he had no objection to
such a study being made.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, the proposal by Mayor
Hart relative to converting City equipment to a natural gas fuel
was referred to the Budget Review and Finance Committee for study
and recommendation back to the Council.
Mayor Hart reminded the Council of the meeting of the
Association of Kern County Cities to be held in Shafter on Thursday'
evening, April 23rd.
144
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page 4
Councilman Whittemore reminded the members of the Council
that on February 9, 1970, he had asked the City Manager and the
Director of Finance to furnish the Council with a report on the
lending policies of the local banks in connection with loans to
bolster the local economy and put more money into circulation in
Bakersfield. He stated that this matter is important enough that
it should be investigated, and he asked the City Manager what the
status of the report is atlthe present time.
Mr. Bergen replied that a very extensive study has been
made by the Finance Director with the cooperation of a number of
the local banks. The report has been prepared and the draft copy
is ready for typing for submission to the Council by the next
Council Meeting.
Councilman Whittemore commented that when the report is
received, he feels that a committee should be set up to analyze
the City's investment policy, to determine if funds are being
used to the best advantage.
Councilman Heisey remarked that in 1920 the Council of
the City of Bakersfield adopted the Maman Cochet Rose as the
official flower of the City. He went to considerable trouble to
obtain several bushes of this species which were planted in the
Rose Garden of the City Hall, and frankly, he is disappointed,
this rose leaves much to be desired. It may have been a good
choice in 1920, but so many new varieties have been developed
since that time, that he feels a change should be made. He asked
that the City Attorney prepare an appropriate Resolution for next
Monday, changing the name of the official flower of the City to a
"Rose" rather than the Maman Cochet Rose. This would be appropriate
in view of the fact that the County of Kern has named the Rose as
the official flower of Kern County, and Kern County is considered
the Rose Capitol of the world.
Councilman Bleecker referred back to Councilman Whittemore's
statement relative to the City's policy of investing its funds.
One of the reasons the survey was requested was that it was the
opinion of several members of the Council that the money should be
invested in banks which are really doing business with people of
the City of Bakersfield and Kern County. A bank that is interested
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page 5
in the community ought to have more invested here than what their
deposits are. He stated he would like to receive a copy of the
report on Thursday prior to the Council Meeting so that he will
have a chance to study it carefully.
Mr. Bergen pointed out that this report covers only
present practices o~ the City in investing its funds and would be
the base for evaluation by the Council. The report ~overs the
amount the banks lend in this County versus their deposits~ and
contains a great deal o~ background information for the Council.
Councilman Stiern commented that he concurs with Council-
man Heisey that some thought should be given to designating an
official flower for the City. He feels that it would be more
appropriate to designate the "Rose" rather than a particular
species of the rose to be the o~ficial £1ower of the City of
Bakersfield. There are other flowers that grow remarkably well
in Bakersfield; the Camelia for instance, and perhaps some thought
should be given to designating the Camelia, or some other flower,
as the official flower of the City.
Councilman Vetter asked if the Council members who had
questioned the report submitted on March 30~ 1970 by the Budget
Review and Finance Committee on the acquisition of a Fire Station
Site at the intersection of California Avenue and Stockdale Highway
had discussed it with the Chief of the Fire Department or reviewed
the maps in his o£fice. He stated that he feels the site purchase
for the station should be pursued as a substantial amount of time
will elapse between the time the site is purchased and the station
is built and sta£fed. This area is building up quite rapidly and
the people there are entitled to the Fire protection that the City
of Bakersfield o££ers to other residents.
Councilman Heisey stated that he has looked at the maps
in the Fire Chief's office and has inspected the proposed site and
he is ready to vote favorably £or the new site~ as it is something
that should be given serious consideration.
146
Bakersfield~ Cali£ornia~ April 20~ 1970 - Page 6
Councilman Bleecker stated he had been contacted by the
Fire Chief and it is his intention to go to his office and look
over the maps; but in the meantime, he made it a point to drive
from the freeway on California Avenue to the County Fire Station
across from Stockdale Country Club, and it takes exactly 3 minutes
and 20 seconds driving at legal speed limits, to reach any area on
the extension of California Avenue. Therefore~ he would not like
to see the City increase any duplication of services if it were
found~ through survey and negotiation~ that an arrangement could
be made with the County to service that area for a fee. He is
not opposed to constructing a new Fire Station when there is a
need for it, but he thinks in this instance it would behoove the
Council to undertake a study to see if the County Fire Station
across from Stockdale Country Club could not serve this area since
it is only three minutes away.
Councilman Whittemore stated he was contacted by Chief
Paddock to come to his office and review the maps, and he would
like to have any action deferred until he is able to get down
there this week, as he realizes the importance of giving this
matter every consideration.
Councilman Stiern commented that he had not attended the
Council Meeting when this matter was brought up, however, he would
have been prepared to support the suggestion that the Council
purchase this site. That area of the City is growing very rapidly
and deserves adequate, modern fire protection. He does not think
it is incumbent on the City to wait while the County makes up its
mind to abandon unnecessary Fire Stations. It is incumbent on the
County to make that decision~ and suggest that the City take over
fire service in those areas. The City Manager has made this same
suggestion for several years, but has nol received
reaction from the County. The City Council should
~eet while property values in that area increase.
all~ if the County wants the City to take over the
in that area~ it is up to them to say so and agree
City
a favorable
not drag its
Once and for
fire protection
to sell the
the existing facility in the area at a reasonable cost. If
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page ?
that cooperation is not forthcoming, he feels that the City must
go ahead, purchase the land and build a modern, sensible Fire
Station and provide the modern service that the area requires.
Councilman Vetter asked what committee is going to study
the fire problem. The Fire Chief is the expert and he and the A.I.A.,
the Fire Rating Bureau, etc., have made a study and say that a
Station is needed within this particular radius. It is necessary
to have this Station to qualify for a Class-2 City. To qualify
for a Class-2, there must be a certain response area. The Council
must rely on the Fire Chief and his expertise, because he knows
his business and his views should be given consideration by the
Council. The people that annex to the City are entitled to a Class-2
rate, if the fire service is down-graded by not putting in the
stations required, it will certainly kill any future annexation
and penalize every person in the City on their insurance rates.
Councilman Bleecker commented that he is not certain
that the City needs to maintain a Class-2 rating. It would be his
intention to accomplish fire protection for the people that live
in the area the cheapest possible way. What he is concerned with
is whether in his own mind the City has sufficient Fire Departments
to put out the fires.
Councilman Vetter again stressed the importance of those
Councilmen who have not already done so, going to the Fire Chief's
office and looking at the response maps and have him explain what
it takes to maintain a Class-2 rating.
Councilman Rucker asked Mr. Bergen if the Council had
not requested him to contact the Board of Supervisors and work out
some sort of a contract £or fire service in that area. Mr. Bergen
replied that the matter had been referred to the Governmental
Efficiency and Personnel Committee and the staff to discuss the
possibility of entering into contracts with the County for fire
protection. He did not understand that the acquisition of the
site was tied into contracts with the County.
Councilman Vetter reiterated that the people who live in
the City of Bakersfield are entitled to a Class-2 Fire Department
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page 8
and the only way a Class-2 Fire Department can be maintained for
this particular area, is to put a Fire Station where the Fire
Chief says it should be. He asked the City Manager if an appraisal
had been made on this property.
negative, he suggested that an
before next Monday.
When Mr. Bergen replied in the
appraisal be made on this property
Councilman Whittemore stated that he did not object to
appraisals if the Council was ready to purchase the property. The
seller must have a sales price on the property and regardless of
what amount the property is appraised for, it probably will not be
sold for less than the market price. He feels that the City
should look at other property which would satisfy the underwriting
requirements, in that area, so that alternate sites could be con-
sidered. Councilman Vetter remarked that he thinks the purchase
price has already been determined. Mr. Bergen stated that they
have indicated they will sell the property to the City for less
than the market value of commercial property in the vicinity. He
does not think there would be any problem regarding an appraisal
because once the Council decides to purchase the site, it would
be very simple to have the property appraised.
Councilman Vetter stated that if the staff thinks that
an appraisal is not necessary at this time, he has no objections,
he just doesn't want to delay purchasing the property at a later
date because an appraisal is required.
Councilman Stiern commented that it would be very simple
for Mr. Bergen to call the members of the Board of Supervisors and
ask them if they are interested in selling their station to the
City in order to eliminate the duplication. Mr. Bergen stated
the matter is considerably more complicated than just calling the
Board of Supervisors and asking what they want to do about the
station. The first thing the Supervisors will do is ask their
Fire Chief for a recommendation. There are problems of water
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page 9
supply and the type of equipment needed, the City and County Fire
Chiefs should sit down and discuss certain technical data so that
certain recommendations can be made to the Council, who in turn
can then make specific proposals to the Board of Supervisors. To
enter into a contract with the Board of Supervisors to protect the,
City area could jeopardize the insurance rates f0r the entire City.
Councilman Bleecker stated he doesn't think it is a good
idea to advertise publicly or privately ahead of time that there
is a particular piece of property that the City is interested in,
whether it is for a Fire Station or for any other purpose, until
the Council has made a decision to purchase a certain piece of
property in a given area.
Councilman Whittemore stated that it has been rumored
that the Bakersfield Cable TV Company may approach the Council
for a rate increase, as Kern Cable TV has already approached the
Board of Supervisors. He suggested that a joint committee might
be appointed by the Council and the Board of Supervisors to make
a thorough study of the problems involved with the cable companies
and to protect the service areas, also to determine jointly whether
or not a rate increase is indicated.
Councilman Vetter agreed that it is important to make a
determination jointly,
the City area that has
for the county service,
in fact Kern Cable TV now services some of
been annexed since the franchise was granted
and it affects both the County and the City.
Mr. Bergen pointed out that a formal request has not been
made by Bakersfield Cable TV Company for a rate increase. Council--
man Stiern stated this consideration would then be premature,
because a request may not be received for some time. Mr. Bergen
stated that however, since there are enough City residents serviced
by Kern Cable who would be affected by an increased rate as submitted
to the Board of Supervisors, that a joint committee could be appointed
for an evaluation, even without a formal request from Bakersfield
Cable TV Company.
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page l0
Mayor Hart commented that as he recalled it, the Board
of Supervisors had stated they would wait and see what happened
at the City level before they acted on the request from the Kern
Cable Company.
Reports.
Councilman Rucker, Chairman of the Council Auditorium-
Recreation Committee, read a report of a meeting held to review
the proposed Recreation Division Budget for the Fiscal Year 1970-?1.
This budget is submitted prior to the regular budget hearings so
plans and preparations may proceed for the City's summer recreation
program. The Council's Auditorium-Recreation Committee is satis-
fied that the recreation program and budget as presented provides
for well-balanced recreational activities for the residents of
Bakersfield and recommended its approval and adoption.
Councilman Heisey stated he would like to have time to
review the proposed budget before any action is taken on it.
Councilman Vetter asked if some of the pools could be opened
earlier if the weather permits, he feels that with the tremendous
amount of capital expenditure for these pools, they should be
opened and used as soon and as often as possible. Mr. Graviss,
Auditorium-Recreation Manager, replied that they can't open the
pools until they have a staff, and most of their summer employees
are still in college. He stated they have found that the program
doesn't warrant opening the pools early unless the weather does
become very hot. It has been tried before and it hasn't been
profitable, however~ he will check into it and make a report on
the cost to the Council.
It was decided to defer action on the report until next
meeting for review by the Council.
Councilman Rucker read a letter addressed to the Board
of Supervisors from ~he Auditorium-Recreation Committee, as follows;:
The City of Bakersfield has recently received
official notice from the Department of Housing
and Urban Development regarding the City's
request for federal funds to finance recreation
facilities to be located at the California
Avenue Park.
Bakersfield~ California, April 20, 1970 - Page 11
The Committee wishes to meet with appropriate
representatives from the Board of Supervisors to
discuss alternate methods of financing this
project. This request is made in view of the fact
that many of the potential users of the California
Avenue facility live outside of the city limits.
We would appreciate a meeting at your earliest
convenience in the hope that the City can respond
to HUD before the grant offer expires.
Please respond to this request at your earliest
convenience.
Councilman Vetter presented a Legislative Report on 1970
Legislation. Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, the Council went
on record as opposing AB 1261 (Barnes) which amends the Public
Employees Retirement System by lowering the retirement age for public
safety members to age 50 and increases their retirment allowance.
All contracting agencies, including the City of Bakersfield, would
have until July 1, 1972, to voluntarily adopt these new retirement
benefits; thereafter, this option would expire and these new provi-
sions would automatically be included in the agency's contract.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, the
Council went on record as opposing AB 350 (Brown) which would establish
the California Lease-Purchase Commission to provide for statewide
regulation of lease-purchase agreements entered into by local agencies.
It specifies membership, powers and duties of the Commission and
provides that any lease-purchase agreement made by a local agency
which is not approved by this Commission is contrary to public policy'
and void. The Commission would consist of the Attorney General, the
Director of Finance, the Superintendent of Bank and two other members
appointed by the Governor.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, the Council went on
record as supporting AB 984 (Barnes) which would extend to industrial
disability retirement allowances of policemen and firemen the same
earnings test now applicable to the disability retirement allowances
of all other employees. The earnings test was applicable to all
such retirments until 1961 when the provision was removed for
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page 12
indusfrial disability retirements (applicable only to policemen and
firemen.) The bill would remove the present inequity, reduce the
number of abuses, and result in substantial savings to cities faced
with a continually increasing incidence of industrial disability
retirement. The bill is supported by the League, PERS and the
administration, but strongly opposed by PORAC and other police and
fire employees representatives.
Allowance of Claims.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, Vouchers Nos. 3595 to
3739, inclusive, in amount of $83,744.96, as audited by the Voucher
Approval Committee, were allowed, and authorization was granted for
payment.
Action on Bids.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, bid of Zellerbach Paper
Company for annual Contract for Office Paper was accepted, all other
bids were rejected, and the Mayor was authorized to execute the
contract.
In response to a question from Councilman Whittemore, the
Finance Director stated that annual contracts are staggered and that
is the reason these contracts are submitted on arbitrary dates
throughout the year.
The purchasing division recommended that bid for Annual
Contract for Office Supplies be awarded to the Valley Office Supply
Company, as this vendor is both a retail and wholesale distributor
and as a result received an additional discount from many manufacturers.
Councilman Bleecker questioned the advisability ofawarding contracts
when only a single bid is received. He pointed out that there are
approximately 12 vendors of office supplies listed in the telephone
book and asked if the bid procedure could be changed so that more
vendors can participate in the bidding. He suggested that when there
is only one vendor who can comply with the bid specifications, that
the purchasing division seek out other bidders in other cities to
make absolutely sure that the prices the City is receiving are
competitive in the market.
of the
of the
City of Bakersfield and the County
ing vote:
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page 13
Mr. Bergen commented that he does not believe it is a ques.-
tion of other vendors being able to comply, but being able to compete.
They can bid and meet specifications, but they seem to have difficulty
in competing costwise.
Mr. Don King of the Purchasing Division, explained that
this supplier is able to stock 10% of the City's estimated annual
requirements, and many of the other vendors are unable to do this.
He has contacted at least six office suppliers and some of them had
informed him they would bid this year, but when contacted, they
stated they did not think it was practical to bid because their
costs were in many cases 10% more than those of Valley Office, and
the 10% stocking requirement was a drawvack.
After additional discussion, upon a motion by Councilman
Stiern, bid of Valley Office Supply Company for annual Contract for
Office Supplies was accepted and the Mayor was authorized to execute
the contract. Councilman Bleecker voted in the negative on this motion.
Approval of Agreement between the City
of Bakersfield and Sam Polios.
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, Agreement between the
City of Bakersfield and Sam Polios for renewal of an existing
agreement for the operation of the concession stand in Beale Park
was approved, and the Mayor was authorized to execute the contract.
Adoption of Joint Resolution No. 27-70
of the Council of the City of Bakersfield
and the Board of Supervisors of the County
of Kern proclaiming May 1, 1970 as LAW DAY
USA in the City of Bakersfield and the
County of Kern.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, Joint Resolution No. 27-70
Council of the City of Bakersfield and the Board of Supervisors
County of Kern proclaiming May 1, 1970 as LAW DAY USA in the
of Kern, was adopted by the follow-
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
None
None
154
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page
Claim for damages from Jon Alan Reimers
referred to the City Attorney.
Upon
Jon Alan Reimers was referred to the City Attorney.
Acceptance of Work and Notice of
Completion for Contract No. 2-70 for
Construction of Columbus Streef and
Auburn Street Drainage Connection to
6-Kern-178 Freeway Out£all.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, the Work was accepted
the Mayor was authorized fo execute the Notice of Complefion for
Contract No. 2-70 for Construction of Columbus Streef and Auburn
Street Drainage Connection to 6-Kern-178 Freeway Outfall.
Adoption of Resolution No. 28-70 of
Intent to expend funds allocated to
the City of Bakersfield for a "TOPICS"
Program.
of
"TOPICS"
Ayes:
a motion by Councilman Heisey, Claim for damages from
Noes:
Absent:
and
Upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore, Resolution No. 28-70
Intent to expend funds allocated to the City of Bakersfield for a
Program was adopted by the following vote:
Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey~ Rees, Rucker,
Whittemore
None
None
Stiern, Vetter,
Approval of Construction Change Order No. 1
for Contract No. 120-69, Installafion ef
Traffic Signal and Highway Lighting System
at intersection of South Chester Avenue and
Planz Road.
Councilman Whitfemore asked Director of Public Works Jing
if normally the City does not have its set back lines predetermined
and asked if the City was paying for the additional right' of way to
relocate the electrical service point and inductive loop detector
for the Traffic Signal and Highway Lighting System at intersection
of South Chester Avenue and Planz Road, due to a food market being
located at this intersection. Total increase in project cost due to
the relocation will be $693.00.
Mr. Jing replied that the additional right of way was grant-
ed to the City at no cost. The fgod market in question was designed
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page 15
after the original plans were approved and the contract had been
awarded.
Councilman Whittemore asked whether or not at the time
this area was zoned a setback was required, and Mr. Jing replied
that apparently there was not. The signal was to be constructed
on the right of way line that existed at that time. The City is
moving it back for the convenience of traffic. In the future this
street will have to be widened, but
present time. Mr. Bergen explained
assume the full width of the street,
there is no program for it at the
that the original design did not
the original design was for a
traffic intersection with one detector pad toward the center lane,
and it is now necessary to add another detector pad for the addi-
tional lane of traffic.
After additional discussion,
that the Construction Change Order No.
Councilman Whittemore moved
1 for Contract No. 120-69,
installation of Traffic Signal and Highway Lighting System at the
intersection of South Chester Avenue and Planz Road be approved,
and the Mayor authorized to execute same.
Hearings.
This is the time set for public hearing before the Council
on an application by James T. W~ttenbarger to amend the zoning
boundaries from an R-3-D (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling -
Architectural Design) Zone and from a C-O-D (Professional Office -
Architectural Design) Zone to an R-3-MH-D (Limited Multiple Family
Dwelling - Mobile Home Park - Architectural Design) Zone, or more
restrictive, Zone, of that certain property located north of 42nd
Street and east of the extension of "O" Street in the Sam Dimas
No. 3 Annexation.
This hearing has been duly posted and advertised and no
written protests have been filed in the City Clerk's office. The
applicant wishes to add 4.20 acres along the east side of existing
MH zoning which contains 13.163 acres. It was the opinion of the
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page 16
Planning Commission that this proposed zone change would be compatible
to the surrounding area; and, accordingly, recommend approval of the
application.
Mayor Hart opened the hearing for public participation. Ne
protests or objections having been received,
closed for Council deliberation and action.
man Bleecker, Ordinance No. 1857 New Series
the public hearing was
Upon a motion by Council-
amending Title Seventeen
of the Municipal Code of the City of Bakersfield by changing the lan(]
use zoning of that certain property in the City of Bakersfield located
north of 42nd Street and east of the extension of "O" Street in the
San Dimas No. 3 Annexation was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
This is the time set for public hearing before the Council
on an application by Dominick Corsaro to amend the Zoning Boundaries
from an R-1 (Single Family Dwelling) Zone to an R-3-D (Limited Multiple
Family Dwelling - Architectural Design) or more restrictive, Zone,
affecting that certain property located west of Boise Street, east
of Wenatchee Street and north of Panorama Drive and that certain
property known as Parcel No. 1 of Panoramic Heights No. 3 Annexation.
This hearing has been duly posted and advertised and no
written protests have been filed in the City Clerk's office. The
applicant wishes to rezone this 5.14 acre parcel from R-1 to R-3-D.
The Planning Commission was of the opinion that a design controlled
low-density multiple family development of subject property would
not be detrimental to the surrounding R-1 Area; and accordingly,
recommends approval of said application.
'i 57
Bakersfield, California, April 20, 1970 - Page 17
Mayor Hart opened the hearing for public participation.
No protests or objections having been received, the hearing was
closed for Council participation and action. After Council discussion,
upon a motion by Councilman Rees, Ordinance No. 1858 New Series
amending Title Seventeen of the Municipal Code of the City of Bakers.-
field by changing the Land Use Zoning of that certain property in
the City of Bakersfield located north of Panorama Drive, west of
Boise Street and East of Wenatchee Street and that certain property
known as Parcel No. 1 of Panoramic Heights No. 3 Annexation, was
adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey,
Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
There
upon a motion
10:10 P.M.
Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Adjournment.
being no further business to come before the Council.
by Councilman Bleecker, the meeting was adjourned at
MAYOR o£~he City of Bakersfield, Calif.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK and ex-Officio clerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Council of the
City of Bakersfield, Cali£ornia, held in the Council Chambers of
the City Hall at eight o'clock P. M., April 27, 1970.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart followed
by the Invocation by Councilman Walter F. Heisey.
The City Clerk called the roll as follows:
Present: Mayor Hart. Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker,
Stiern, Vetter, Whitfemore
None
Minutes of
Absent:
the regular meeting of April 20, 1970 were
approved as presented.
Scheduled Public Statements.
Mr. Milton Miller, Supervisor of the Fifth Districl, in
response to a communication from the Auditorium and Recreation
Committee of the City of Bakersfield advising of its desire to
meet with representation from the Board of Supervisors for the
purpose of discussing alternate methods of financing recreational
facilities to be located at the California Avenue Park, in order
that the City might respond to the Department of Housing and Urban
Development concerning its request for federal funds for said
project before the grant offer expires, addressed the Council,
stating that in order to facilitate this matter, he had been
appointed as the representative of the County, by Minute Order,
to discuss this matter with the City Council and report back to
the Board of Supervisors, as he understood that this grant was to
expire on June 1st. He filed the Minute Order with the City Clerk.
He stated that he had advised the Board of the importance
of this facility, that it should be built even if the Supervisors
had to offer a contribution towards its construction. It is for
the benefit of all the people in the southeast area, it is some-
thing that he felt is very necessary, and since the federal funds
are offered to the City without any strings attached, he feels
that the County and the City should discuss this matter thoroughly,
and come up with the matching funds.
Bakers£ield, California, April 2?, 1970 - Page 2
He stated that he is willing and able to negotiate, at
least to find out what it is that the Council wants, and how much
the Council wants the County to contribute, so that time will not
be wasted. Possibly, Wednesday afternoon, he will be able to
meet with the Auditorium-Recreation Committee to discuss this
important matter~ which is really necessary, as it will provide
communication and understanding of all the people, and will reduce
crime and bring culture into the southeast area. Also, it will
increase the assessed valuation and will be a real boom to the
southeast area.
City Manager Bergen stated that he wanted to clarify the
deadline date for this project. Actually, it is contemplated that
the Council will make a final decision during its budget sessions
which are presently scheduled for the week of June 8th. A letter
dated April 8, 1970, received from the Department of Housing and
Urban Development stated that the reservation of capital grant
funds in the sum of $322,434 will expire four months from the date
of the letter unless an acceptable Part II, Application for Neighbor-
hood Facilities Grant, has been submitted, which will make the
expiration date approximately August 8th. If the Council has been
informed by the first of June of the contribution which the County
will make for this project, then during budget sessions the Council
can make its final determination for proceeding with the project,
and preparing an acceptable Parr II Application for this grant,
which will take around 30 to 45 days to complete.
Mr. Miller stated the County has not budgeted funds for
this project, and it will be necessary for the Board of Supervisors
to know what the City expects the County to contribute in order to
include this amount in its upcoming budget by June first.
Councilman Heisey thanked Mr. Miller for coming before
the Council~ stating that the Council had sometime ago gone on
record as recognizing the need for this recreational facility in
this area and had requested the federal funds for the establish-
ment of the neighborhood facility. A date has been set for a
committee meeting on Wednesday when this matter can be discussed.
Bakersfield, California~ April 2?, 1970 - Page 3
Councilman Rucker commented that he is very happy that
the County is considering an agreement and contribution for this
project. He is the Chairman of the Auditorium-Recreation Committee
and he suggested that Mr. Miller contact Mr. Bergen in order to
set up a time for the meeting.
Councilman Whittemore thanked Mr. Miller for appearing
before the Council and offering to meet with the Committee to
find a solution to establish this facility.
Mr. Miller commented that the Board of Supervisors is
evidently willing to work out
project, or he would not have
Council.
a joint powers agreement for this
been sent to discuss it with the
Councilman Stiern stated that he and the other members
of the Council have expressed it several times, that they think
this project is very worthwhile. The Council is in favor of it,
they do not need to be told of its benefits, its effect on the
crime rate, but the Council is at the point where it wants to know
how much the County is willing to contribute toward this facility.
In the interim between now and the Committee meeting on Wednesday,
Mr. Miller can report to the Board and it can discuss the extent
of the participation the City can expect. He personally thinks
that the County should participate
2/3's contribution from the County,
benefitted.
to the extent of 50%, or even
in view of the area to be
Mr. Don Hoffman, Executive Secretary of tlhe Kern County
and Bakersfield Firefighters' Unions, and Area Representative of
the Federated Firefighters of California, stated he is appearing
before the Council to discuss statements made by members of the
Council regarding the Bakersfield and Kern County Fire Departments
at a recent Council meeting. He was not present when the alleged
statements were made and his remarks are based upon the reporting
on the meeting by the local news media. His primary concern is
over the reported statements as printed in the Bakersfield Califor--
nian and from KUZZ Radio Station as they pertain to the Kern County
Fire Department and he stated as follows:
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 4
I take particular issue with the statements made by Mr.
Stiern regarding the equipment and fire fighting methods of the
Kern County Fire Department in which he cited a recent residential
fire in Park Stockdale. For your information, Mr. Stiern, those
tank trucks which you refer to as being a cheap way to fight fire,s,
cost over $38,500. They carry 1,500 gallons of water with a 1250
gallon a minute pump, plus all the necessary equipment required to
fight any and all types of structural fires. They also carry 50
gallons of foam for airport fires. These trucks have been highly
rated by the American Insurance Association to perform any type
fire suppression, or task assigned. The only basic difference
between them and the City Fire Department engine is the amount of
water carried.
The County Fire Department has used them for years very
successfully. As to where they may respond, or the trucks and
engines may respond from various stations while other engine
companies move up, is a standard operating procedure of all Fire
Departments including Bakersfield City, in fire suppression. I
do not know which fire in Stockdale area you may be referring to,
Mr. Stiern, but I know of only two residenlial fires within the
last year of any consequences. In both cases, the personnel
involved were highly commended for the excellent fire suppression
job, and at no time, and at no time, I repeat, was there a scarcity
of water. As strange as it may appear to you, Mr. Stiern, the
residents of that area have commended our department many times,
have never complained about the fire service available, I have
never heard of anyone referring to the Kern County Fire Department
methods as cheap. I should also like to state that at no time has
the Kern County Fire Department indicated that they intend to
abandon the Stockdale Station, nor do they consider it as unnecessary.
In regards to the rating schedule of Bakersfield, let me
say, that
that goes,
downgrade
to contract for services from the County, or as far as
from any other governmental agency, would in no way
or jeopardize the City Fire Department rating of Class-2~.
Bakers£ield~ California, April 27, 1970 - Page 5
or the insurance rates.
would merely specify what
to maintain their rating,
If this City desired to contract, they
services, what was required for services~
and if the County wished to furnish
those services~ they would do so by an agreed upon price.
I might add, also, that Councilman Bleecker is correct
in stating that the present City Fire Department rating of Class-2
may not be in the best interests o£ a City of this size.
be interested to know that a No. 2 rating is
cantile and industrial areas. A residential
from this rating or their insurance premiums.
difference between a rating of 5 and 2 is so
economically worthwhile to the average homeowner. Most of unin-
corporated Bakersfield is now 5, and within a year I predict all
of it will be rated a Class 5. It will be of interest to the
citizens of this area to know that if the Kern Coun'ty Fire Depart-
ment and the City Fire Department were functionally consolidated
into one Fire Department, it would save untold fax dollars a year
in the elimination of duplication o£ services which now exists.
The two Fire£ighters Unions have information to prove that it can
and should be done. If any City or County of£icial desires to
know about the feasibility and the savings of functional consolida-
tion of the two departments~ we would be happy fo make our
in£ormation available.
In regards to the City Fire Department, gentlemen, it
appears to me that some members of this Council are hypocritical
in their evaluation o£ the City Fire Department. On the one hand
they say how good the City Fire Department is, but on the other
hand they have downgraded it with pay disparity. The County
government in turn has shown how proud they are of the Kern County
Fire Department and have proven this by at least maintaining the
parity between Police and Fire.
You may
primarily for mer-
area gains very little
In fact~ the
little that it is not
~)
Bakersfield~ California, April 2?, 1970 - Page 6
In conclusion, gentlemen, I want to make it clear thai
I am in no way downgrading the City Fire Department, as it is an
excellent department with very fine men, I know, I represent them.
But it is common knowledge that the problems that exist in the
City Fire Department is the morale of the men, which is very low.
This having been caused by the disparity and other problems that
exist. I am in hopes thai some of these problems are being taken
care of.
Councilman Stiern stated he had a comment:
Last Friday morning I was listening to the news and I
was surprised to hear Mr. Laffoon mention that Mr. Hoffman was
going to come down before the Bakersfield City Council on Monday
night and set Councilman Stiern straight as to some remarks he had
made about the County Fire Department. I'm a little surprised that:
Mr. Hoffman, who is the agent for the County Fire Department, their
Firefighters Union, would go to the trouble of issuing such a press
release that he was coming to the Council meeting tonight, because
he went to considerable trouble to write, and have typed and deliver
this comment to the news media. My reaction to it when I heard it
Friday morning was, "who is he trying to impress?"
It would seem to me that perhaps Mr. Hoffman is trying to.
get himself off the hook with his members for having proposed the
recent 10% salary hike which fell rather flat, so maybe he can
divert people's attention to some other issue. Neither Mr. Hoffman,
or any member of his union attended the Council meeting last Monday
night, didn't hear the comments that were made, I don't think he
has listened to the tape of the meeting which is available. If he
had, he wouldn't have taken the remarks of the City Council out of
context, because Mr. Hoffman, in my lifetime I have never said that
the Kern County Fire Department was cheap. A perusal of the County
budget will tell any interested taxpayer and citizen that this is
not the fact. What I said was, "If you're going to fight a residential
fire, you don't fight it with a tanker, you fight it with a fire
alarm system, you fight it with adequate water mains and water
164
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 7
pressure, you fight it with modern pumpers, and you fight it with
equipment intended to fight a municipal fire. I have seen fhe
County tankers roll, they try to do an adequate job, they move
very, very slowly, because of the extreme weight o£ the equipment
and they are rather slow getting to a fire.
I'd like you to know, Mr. Hoffman~ that I've seen other
efforts of your union in political form. I think that you and
your union have been deeply interested in political issues, as a
pressure group, you've gotten yourselves involved in City referen-
dum issues. You've gotten yourself involved in annexation issues,
you've gotten involved in City Council and Supervisor races. It's
no secret to me that campaigns are waged and political signs have
been prepared and painted in fire stations~ in Bakersfield, on
duty time. I've seen instances when as many as six firefighters
worked in a single precinct, in one precinct during a recent City
Council election. I would like to suggest to Union Secretary
Hoffman that rather than coming before the Council to instruct me
in my job, that he take his case directly to the people and the
taxpayers and that he be open and candid and truthful with the
people as to the political aspirations of his union. Surely, the
taxpayers have every right to hear the political plans of the
Firefighters Union, just as we do.
For example, the Bakersfield Firefighters' Union 844~
1970-71 wages and working conditions survey states on Page 8 -
"We will not accept the concept of disparity between the Fire and
Police Personnel. It is our goal that a Council composed of a
majority of members with new thinking and understanding will
correct this bad situation."
In other words~ one Firefighter's Union intends to elect
its own City Council which will raise Firemen's wages when told to
do so and otherwise act according to the instructions of this
small, special interest group.
Bakersfield, California, April 2?, 1970 - Page 8
Another example, from the December, 1968 issue of the
Kern County Firemen's Union Bulletin, "Maltese Cross", I have a
page of it here. President's message, (incidentally the President
was Don C. Ho£fman) "I want to state now that the Firefighters
supported Mr. Miller in his campaign and extend their unqualified
support to him as our new Supervisor and have the utmost faith in
his ability. Incidentially, I also understand that the City lost
another annexation election when Plaza No. 1 failed to be annexed
by 500 votes. The one lesson which I hope our opposition has
learned is not to underestimate the Kern County Firefighters'
Union."
Hopefully, the public and other media will note these
and other statements from Mr. Hoffman's union and hopefully the
public will not underestimate the Firefighters' Union.
For Mr. Hoffman's information, I don't represent him,
or his union, and I never will. I try to represent City employees
as I would any Bakersfield citizen, and not as members of some
special interest group. I have at all times attempted to represent
all the people of Bakersfield and will continue to do so. So don't
threaten me, Mr. Hoffman, threaten the voters and taxpayers of our
City who will pay the bill
ful with them, Mr. Hoffman,
power you, and your union,
for your political successes. Be truth--
and tell them what an important political
have become locally. Tell them how you
intend to control the City Council as well as the Board of Super-
visors. Interested taxpayers can attend the City budget sessions
this June and determine for themselves the degree of political
activity of your unions, and whether or not individual COuncilmen
are impressed by your brand of political threats and coercion.
Thank you, your honor.
Councilman Vetter stated that he disagrees with the
statement that Mr. Bleecker made a week ago, and he didn't quite
understand whether Mr. Hoffman agreed with it or not, that the
City probably should not continue the Class-2 Fire Department. He
has said it twice before that these areas that annex to the City
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 9
are entitled to the very same fire protection that the present
City has. The a£fect on the fire insurance rates is felt by ali
the residents of the City of Bakersfield. The particular station
that the Council has been talking about on California and Stockdale
Highway is directly a£fected by the heavy commercial area that is
developing on California Avenue. So it is quite important that
this station be started, that the property be purchased. He
questions very strongly, that there is a possibility that Bakers-
field does not need to maintain a Class-2 City. He assumes the
comment of the Council being hypocritical is directed at him, since
he made the effort to have the property purchased for the Bakers-
field Fire Department so that Class-2 protection can be provided
this new area. He hasn't voiced any support to do away with what
Mr. Hoffman calls "disparity"
and Fire jobs are comparable,
that there are other areas in
because he has never :felt that Police
or should be compared. He thinks
the State that have different pay
schedules, so he doesn't think Bakersfield is alone.
Councilman Stiern stated that the thing that should be
on record is that the entire discussion of last week centered
around the need for a new Fire Station for the City of Bakersfield
and the Stockdale area. Everything .that he said last Monday night
was to support the contention that the City needs to buy that
property and buy it now. He wishes they had moved ahead last
Monday night and purchased the property, the
get any cheaper. The Fire Department cannot
area without an adequate station, located as
not surprised that Mr. Hoffman is opposed to
land is not going to
fight fires in that
it should be. He is
the City's'expansion
to the southwest, it is the avowed state-wide purpose and aim of
Mr. Hoffman's union to oppose any and all annexations to cities
and to consolidate City and County Fire Departments. That's no
secret. They publicly say this. If Mr. Hoffman or any member of
the Council thinks that consolidation of the County and the City
Fire Departments would lead to more adequate or better methods of
Bakers£ield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page l0
£ighting City type fires, there would have to be something wrong
with this thinking. It might be a good viewpoint politically, it
might be a good way to increase the size of a County department
that is too big already, but it isn't going to better fight the
fires of the City of Bakersfield.
Don Hoffman responded as follows:
I don't intend to get into a debate here with Mr. Stiern
regarding all the remarks he made or even discuss the 10% raise or
anything like that. But there is one point here that I would like
to bring to his attention, and I think it is a Very serious charge.
He mentioned political firefighters making political signs in Fire
Stations~ I think a charge such as this should be substantiated.
Stiern: I think I can substantiate that charge.
Hoffman: I certainly wish you would. I do not have any
knowledge of this~ the Chief of the Department has no knowledge of
it, and if he hasn!t and I haven't, I would appreciate having this
knowledge.
Stiern: The Chief of your department.
Hoffman: That's right. The Chief of our department,
and neither do I.
Stiern: If I chose to substantiate this claim, it would
probably require a Civil Service investigation.
Hoffman: Well, you have made a statement and you are nol~
substantiating it
Stiern: You are not going to believe this statement
unless I press the charges and have a Civil Service hearing?
Hoffman: I can't believe it.
Stiern: I have reason to believe that it won't be done
again and I think thai is a better way of solving it.
Hoffman: It has never been done -
Stiern: To your knowledge
Hoffman: Mr. Verier, I was not taking issue with you on
the purchase of the property and I am not taking issue with you as
lo whether Bakersfield City should be a Class-2. I merely agreed
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 11
with Mr. Bleecker in regard to whether it was or not. My state-
ment about being hypocritical, which is directed at you, is in
regard to the pay disparity.
Vetter: You say it is directed at me?
Hoffman: Well, it is not directed at you, but
people who have voted for this disparity.
Vetter:
Hoffman:
Vetter:
Heisey:
Hoffman:
I didn't vote
The original
I didn't vote
to the
We weren't even on the Council at that time.
Well, I mean those who supported it. This is
what my remarks were directed to. And also the problems which now
exist in the Bakersfield Fire Department. They are not being
solved. Some of them seems to be an attempt to be solved, but I
am constantly over here representing the City Firefighfers, and
they are not being solved in the manner, or the speed with which
we feel they should be solved. And when I say speed, I am talking
about one particular problem which I don't wish to go into here.
It has been a problem for nearly a year, and it still is not being
solved. And these are the things that we are concerned about, not
only the pay. And when I tell you that the morale of this depart-
ment is low, I'm stating a fact which can
Vetter: You know, I have heard
any union member or officer, comes before
the morale is low, the morale is low, etc.
be substantiated.
this every time, you or
the Council and says
We are not losing fire
personnel. They are staying with us. The fellows do not want to
leave the department, they do an excellent job, we have a good
department. I said during the'budget sessions, and I will say it
again, that there is a morale problem that was caused by the union.
And I am going to make that as a flat statement.
Hoffman: Well, I think that we have brought problems to
their attention, that they didn't know about, I think that is our
job. I think that they are worth bringing them to your attention,
for the pay disparity.
pay disparity.
for the original pay disparity.
l t,.)
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 12
because in many instances they have been cohered. One of the
reasons that the City Firefighters approached me to represent
them was because of this coercion, which has existed in the City
Fire Department for years and still exists to a certain degree,
and they approached me to represent them for this purpose, because
they know that I can't be touched. Coercion and intimidation. Now
this is implied intimidation. There are all types of intimidation.
They have reached the point where they are scared to represent
themselves.
Vetter:
Hoffman:
government.
Vetter:
intimidated, in what
Hoffman:
In what respect?
Before this Council and before this City
Hoffman: Not in a public meeting.
Vetter: Where?
Stiern: Just like they say, if they elect their own
Council, they won't have that problem.
Vetter: This just really disturbs me, when there is
continual haranguing about the morale of the Fire Department. I
think the morale is good. We have an excellent department. And
if you are saying that because of things you brought to their
to do this, and there is
could do the same thing.
Let's
Vetter:
and when were they
Hoffman:
really no reason for them doing this, they
have instances. When were they coerced
intimidated?
Mr. Vetter;
very difficult thing to prove.
when we get into this; this is a
And the way they got around it,
they just
Vetter: When did
instance when a Bakersfield
in front of this Council or
hired me to do the job for them.
it happen? I am asking for a particular
Firefighter was
by this Council.
intimidated or coerced
I don't believe that.
No sir.
The Bakersfield Fire Department was coerced and
respect?
In many ways. First of all they pay me a salary
Bakersfield,
California, April 27,
1970 - Page 13
attention, now they are unhappy, then I am saying that you are the
cause of this morale problem, if there is one.
Hoffman: Well, you have forced me to call something to
the attention ~of the Council and then I am going to drop this
little bomb. into your lap. Gentlemen: Here I have in front of me
the questions and the answers, I want to repeat that, the questions
and the answers to the entrance examination of the City of Bakers-
field Fire Department. This was sent to one of the members of
this department in the mail, he brought it to my attention, I
immediately, when it was proved to me without the shadow of a
doubt that they had the questions and the answers, had it notarized
by one of the attorneys here in town, which he did. Now, we
brought this to the attention of this City through a meeting which
was not only unsatisfactory, but was so insulting that at one time
I had to get up and leave the meeting with the attorney that was
present because he was boo-hooed. "So what, you found the answers.
Big deal." This is the very foundation of the Civil Service
examinations in this City, and anywhere. And the very idea that
the answers to an examination would be floating around for people
to use by those persons who are unknown to us, so it certainly is
the responsibility of this so-called Civil Service Commission.
And the responsibility rests with this City and with the City
Council and that Commission and regardless of the excuses that can
be given~ there is no excuse.
We have attempted time after time to have that examina-
tion rectified to the satisfaction of all, we have written letters,
we have held meetings, I have been in and out of the City ~anager's
Office many times. Nothing, yet, has been to our satisfaction.
We have appeared before the Civil Service Commission, we have been
insulted, everything has been done to keep us from doing anything
about this.
Stiern: This is a fairly rotten charge, your honor, why
don't we investigate it.
Hoffman: I think it is very rotten. I would propose
that you investigate it.
171
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 14
sir.
job
Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Hoffman, I am sure that we will,
Hoffman: All right, Mr. Vetter, I wasn't aware of any
intimidations. The President of the Local 844 says January,
1969, a derogatory letter was attached to the Union President's
evaluation report and it took two months to have the letter removed
from his file, and I was one of those who worked on having this
letter removed. Another type of intimidation - 1968 when the City
Fire Chief and some other officials of this Council, with their
full knowledge, permitted a City car with two City Firemen to go
from station to station to get a petition signed that the City
Fire Chief would represent the Fire Department and not the Union.
That is nothing more than an attempt to intimidate that Union.
It might be of interest for this Council to know too,
that in view of these examinations, these intimidations, that
there has not been a black man hired on the City Fire Department
in the last ten years. Now there are other charges which I can
make but which I can't prove. There has been a case in which a
man, an officer in the City Fire Department, went from station to
station after we got these answers and made statements derogatory
to the minority'races in this town. That if they were going to be
controlled, they had better not let the examinations get out of
the City Fire Department. Now if I have to, I will parade the
witnesses who heard this man say this, before you. They came to
me with it, they asked me not to mention their names for the same
reason that I just mentioned here, intimidation.
Now whether you think intimidation exists in this City
or not, is a matter of opinion. But it does exist. The very fact
that I'm standing here tonight is a good example that it exists,
or I wouldn't be standing here. You don't think the City Fire-
fighters enjoy paying me money when they could be representing
themselves.
have to have
Vetter.
We don't have this problem in the County. Why do we
it here? Now I'm sorry I had to bring this out, Mr.
172
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970
Page 15
Vetter: It's been brought out
This matter of the tests, it was about a
meeting in here. I think that's old hat.
Hoffman: Well, it may be old hat, but
taken care of yet.
Vetter:
before, Mr. Hoffman.
year ago when we had the
it hasn't been
Have you had any complaints about any of the
subsequent examinations.
Hoffman: The President of this local, or one of his
members is in my office approximately two to three times a week,
saying "Don, when are~ we going to do something about these examina-
tions. They still haven't done anything."
I go to the City Manager's Office, we talk about it, we
have the Chief in there, we've done everything, we have gone
before the Civil Service Commission. And some of the things that
they have said is very insulting. I have never run into anything
like this in my life.
Vetter: It is surprising to me, we have a morale problem,
we have examination problems, we have intimidation problems, all
kinds of problems, we have a Class-1 Fire Department. If we get
all those things solved, we ought to have an excellent one.
Heisey: It appears to me, Mr. Hoffman's having a tough
time justifying his existence representing fire unions. I think
these last charges he brought out here, are over a year old, as
Mr. Vetter pointed out, I am sure the Civil Service Board has
given them fair and adequate hearing, in fact, I know they have.
The fact that they may not have ruled in the way Mr. Hoffman thinks
they should, he says nothing is being done. They have been ade-
quately heard and simply because he doesn't agree with what the
decisions are, is immaterial, we are sorry you don't agree, but
you should learn to comply with what ever the current situation
is, instead of butting your head against a brick wall.
Hoffman: I am well aware, Mr. Heisey, of how you feel
about the unions, you called us mutineers once, and I presume that
Bakersfield, California, April 27,
1970 - Page 16
this is Unamerican, we probably should be tried before a court and
administered the punishment in accordance with mutineers.
Mayor: Mr. Hoffman, please, let us not go into a debate,
of name calling over a period of years. We want to hear you out,
but I would prefer that we kept this on a level where it would be
a fair exchange.
Stiern: We have heard some wild charges tonight. I
think that a high school graduate going to work for the Bakersfield
Fire Department or the Kern County Fire Department makes a pretty
good salary. Makes a heck of a lot better salary than Elementary
School Teachers, for example, who spend four or five years in
college. I don't know whether it occurs to anyone, but if it is
just an impossible situation that they just can't live with, they
can do something else. As Mr. Vetter has pointed out, they are
not quitting and leaving the Fire Department in droves. You boast
that you elect Supervisors, why don't you elect a City Council that
will do what you want them to do. The Council we have now tries to
do the people's business, and fighting fires and providing fire
protection for the City of Bakersfield is part of that business.
If we're doing it wrong, Mr. Hoffman, and the Firefighters' Union
don't like the way we're doing it, then I suggest that you elect
a City Council, like I said in my statement, that will do what you
want done. You won't have any grievances to come be£ore them with:,
you can just tell them what you want.
Hoffman: What I would like to do, Mr. Stiern, is get you
on a panel discussion and show you how democracy works, so there
wouldn't be this between us.
Stiern: I'm glad you know and I don't.
Rucker: Mr. Mayor. Of course, dramatic charges have
been brought here through Mr. Hoffman pertaining to the Firemen
of our City, one thai he has called to our attention, because it
has been called to my attention, that for some reason, no black
Firemen has been hired for quite an extended time. As to why, I
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 17
didn't know, the examination was possibly circulating around to
other employees' who were able to get these examinations and able
to pass them with a score much better than that of the Negro
applicant. ~£ these charges are true, I don't think the City of
Bakersfield should ignore them. If Mr. Hoffman has gone into the
City Manager with them, he should certainly try t~o rectify the
situation that exists and I think this is the proper place, the
City Council, if the City Manager cannot rectify this, to try to
straighten out any problem that exists. I have heard before that
no Negro has been hired in that department for many years, and I
think some Negro should qualify.
Bleecker: There's been two or three things said here
tonight, they don't upset me, they are part of politics. However,
I think that the problem that the Council has, per:se, the Fire-
fighters Union~ is one that looks on the Council as management and
they look upon themselves as labor. We could sit here all night
and make charges and countercharges against each other, about what
has happened in the past, and what may happen in the future. Hope-
fully, these issues should and could be and certainly will be,
worked out, in a matter of time, because I don't think this Council
is too used to dealing with unions, as such. They are an integral
part of this society. They do have the right and the duty to speak
for their members. This Council has the right and the duty, if we
are management, to try to do the best job we can for the people of
the City of Bakersfield as far as their taxes are concerned, in
this particular instance as far as their firefighting equipment
and protection under the law is concerned.
I would think that there would be some better way to
solve these issues than public confrontations and bickering back
and forth. One thing that Councilman Stiern mentioned is certainly
very true. I have talked to Mr. Hoffman about it and some other
members of the union, about the union wants to be a representative
of its members on one side, but there's no doubt in my mind that
they want to be a political entity at the same time, to try to
Bakersfield,
California, April
27, 1970 - Page 18
elect those who are more in line with their way of thinking. As
long as they do this individually, without a great deal of concerted
leadership from the Union itself, there isn't anything the matter
with it. It's a matter of public knowledge, I think, in my own
campaign, running for the City Council, where I spoke before the
union twice, and the union decided to support one of my opponents
in a run-off. I knew this, it didn't bother me a whole lot, because
I felt that if this is the man that the union wanted, fine. But I
was hoping that they would not want him just because he belonged
to a labor union. I recall telling the union, "win or lose, whether
I have your support or not, that I would try to be fair with you,
in any and all issues that might be coming before lhe City Council,"
and I believe I recall telling the union that I would be elected.
And I was elected. I don't see how the union can hope in the long
run, to play both ends against the middle as a admitted, hardworking,
political force, and as an admitted, hardworking, employee of the
City of Bakersfield. Ultimately, this situation cannot work out,
because its very difficult,
to be very candid with you,
he is politically elected,
I think, for a Councilman to understand,
why he should make every effort, since
to see that all fairness takes place at
all times in negotiations with the union representatives, or with
the union itself, when the union admittedly makes every effort to
see that this Councilman or this candidate does not get re-elected
for an elected office.
Now, I am being very candid. It may be very unusual in
a political forum like this, to be this candid. But, personally,
I don't owe anything to anybody. I don't have any business
interests in this City, except my house and the lot it sits on.
I'm not. one of the old timers around here. I would think, Mr.
Hoffman, that the issues you bring before this Council, and you
brought some good ones, I think, the one that you brought about
the examination. I think I talked to you about that almost a year
ago. At the time that we talked about it I brought up the fact
Bakersfield, Cali£ornia, April 27, 1970 - Page 19
that the letter that went along with the copy of the test was not
signed by anybody. That a Fireman had come to you'and said that
he received this test and he thought it was unfair that this test
should be circulating out of the Fire Department. But this letter
was not signed by anybody. I think you may recall, this, Mr.
Ho££man. It is just an example of charges and countercharges
between the Council and your representatives, where if there
really are solid things that the union feels are not negotiable,
that they are by the board, that it is too long £or them to be
reconciled in your minds, and in the minds of the Council and the
City Manager, that these things should be brought out formally in
some other way. Because, Mr. Ho£fman, I really believe that the
present structure of this Council, in the role of management,
makes a sincere effort, not only to represent the 'people of the
City of Bakersfield, but also to see that the people who work for
the City df Bakersfield get a very fair shake in their everyday
existence in their jobs and the salaries that they receive. I
know that it is my intention to do so. And I hate to see some
antipathy arise between yourself and a member, or two or three
members on the CoUncil, to create a situation in which there is
no more chance for negotiation. I want you to know that I
appreciate your coming here tonight and hopefully, in the future,
these things can be worked out, not necessarily to your benefit.
I can't agree to something ahead of time. I mean, aot necessarily
always the way you think it should come out, but for a certain
amount of fairness for the employee, which in this case is the
Fireman, and on the other side the taxpayers of the City of
Bakersfield.
Hof£man: I would like to respond to that, Mr. Mayor.
First of all Mr. Bleecker, I thank you very much. I am well
aware of your campaign and having been one of those who did oppose
you and even one of those who really raked you over the coals in
the interview which was public at our union meeting, I want to say
that you have been more than fair with the Firefighters o£ this
City. We appreciate it, and the statement you have made here now,
although I am not in full agreement, it is the right road to where
we can start.
17T
Bakersfield, California~ April 27, 1970 - Page 20
The statements that you have made here tonight are com-
mendable of a local legislator, and I commend you.
Vetter: I would just like to remind the Council again
that these "bombshell charges" that Mr. Hoffman brings to light,
are not new to myself or other members of the Council. The charge,
about the test is over and done with, I think the Civil Service
Board has corrected any inequities, if there were any. As far as
a letter in a Fireman's personnel file, I think that is up to the
Chief. That has nothing to do with the City Council. If that is
intimidation, I see no intimidation on behalf of the Council. If
the letter was later changed for whatever reason, it would be hard
for me to understand how you could have a bad report one time and
lhen change it later. But that has no bearing on the Council, Mr.
Hoffman, that doesn't mean that the Council is intimidating or
coercing anyone in the Fire Department.
The last thing I would say, I've said this before, I have
run into the same thing with the Bakersfield Employees' representa-
tives, where they continually make critical remarks about the Fire
Civil Service Commission. I am going to say again that if you
have a complaint about the Civil Service Commission, go to them.
These people have been appointed by the Council, they are not con-
trolled by the Council, the only way that Commission can be removed,
is by a vote of the people of the City of Bakersfield. If you haw~
a complaint, as I told the representative of the Employees'Associa.-
tion, call the Chairman of the Civil Service Board, and go see him..
I think to my knowledge, in the last year, at least, this Commission
has worked as hard, or harder, than any Commission they have had
in the past. They have regular meetings now, which was one of the
principal complaints of the Employees' Association, and I assume,
of the union as well. This has been changed and you have the
opportunity to talk to these people at these meetings, and I just
do not agree with you coming before the Council and criticizing
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 21
another public body, which is the' Fire Civil Servi~e Board. I
feel personally, that they are doing an excellent job and if you
have a particular grievance about something these people are not
doing, go to them and stay after them and see that it is corrected.
Stiern: I think it might be appropriate for both Mr.
Harless or Mr. Hoffman to attend out Council meeting, and I say
this sincerely, Mr. Hoffman, you are very welcome to come, and I
wish that you would. I would like you to get your informafion
first hand in the context that it is intended to be. Please come
any Monday night thai you would like to come.
Hoffman: Thank you, Mr. Stiern, we have been neglectful
in this. I accept the responsibility, this has been discussed
and we will attempt to do so. I tried to get the transcript of
the last meeting, because the only thing I had was the news media.
But when I attempted to do so, I found that I would have to make
advance reservations, and I was unable to get this transcript, I
was unable to buy it, even.
Stiern: You can get a transcript of any of our meetings,
but I doubt if the City Clerk is going to drop everything and run
you a transcript immediately, you may have to wait a few days to
get one.
Hoffman:
He'isey:
of
it and he has done it previously. I'have gone
ask Firemen what the morale situation was, and
a Fireman who is unhappy with the Fire Station,
any reason they shouldn't level with me. I'm a person who is
pretty frank myself and I expect other people to be the same.
regards to the Civil Service Commission, it has been somewhat
maligned here. I think you will find thai the makeup of thai
I attempted to do so today.
I just wanted to say in regards to the morale
the Fire Department. Mr. Hoffman has made quite an issue of
out of my way to
I have yet to find
and I don't know
In
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 22
Commission is above reproach, in fact we can be very proud of the
calibre of men who are willing to give of their time to serve on
that non-paid Commission. I know you are going to get a fair and
honest hearing on any issue that is brought before that body of
men.
Correspondence.
A communication was read from Kent H. Stacey, Assemblyman,
Twenty-Eighth District, thanking the Council for keeping him in-
formed of the position of the Bakersfield City Council on various
legislative matters.
A letter was read from the Central California Air Pollu-
tion Conference Officials, stating that the California Air Resources
Board and the Fresno Community Council will hold a conference on
Wednesday, May 20th, at Fresno which will run from 10:00 A. M. to
4:00 P. M., with an evening meeting at 7:30 P. M. A registration
blank and complete program will be sent at a later date.
Council Statements.
Councilman Rees called the attention of the Council to
the development in his Ward of an educational complex, which in-
cludes an elementary school, a junior high school and a high school,
partically back to back. The high school is due to open this fall.
He expressed concern regarding the traffic as there will be only
one single access road to the three schools. He has talked to
parents, administrators and teachers, and he feesl that it is time
the City indicates what plans it has to handle the traffic which
will be generated when all three schools are functioning. Close
cooperation is essential between the City, the County and the two
school district involved. He asked Mr. Bergen to comment on the
City's plans for the access road to this complex.
Mr. Bergen stated that a lot of interest has been shown
by the parents and pointed out on a map the location of the schools.
The City's first reaction was to open another access road to the
north into the complex, which would be preferable, rather than
having all the access on Auburn Street. But in evaluating the
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 23
area, ii was found the only other logical street would be University
Avenue, and there are several problems involved with using this
street. First o£ all, it is undeveloped, and in a tract where
there is a hilly area~ it is very dif£icult to determine the grade
of the street, so it was deemed impractical and uneconomical to
extend University; also~ the developers stated there was no fore-
seeable development on University within the next two or three
years. They therefore felt all attention should be focused on
Auburn Street as the only access to the schools. However, there
is a peripheral street around the educational complex into Eissler
Street. Funds will be proposed in this year's budget to provide
a lour lane £acility on Auburn Street lrom Oswell to Eissler
Street.
The City will grade its property and construct curb,
gutter and sidewalks~ to provide pedestrian access to the schools
lot use in inclement weather. An immediate problem is that a
traf£ic signal will be needed at the intersection ot Oswell Street,
which is the major o£f-ramp £or the ~reeway which will open up
probably the middle of next month. The City is proposing to
construct this signal and to be sure that it is completed prior
to September lst~ plans and specifications will be submitted next
week £or Council approval for this signal. The additional road
work that needs to be done will be in the Capital Improvement
Budget lor next year. It is important ~or parents and residents
o£ this particular area to know that the City is aware o£ the
problem and is attempting to take care o~ it.
Councilman Heisey asked Mr. Bergen if there will be an
access road constructed to the north before another year rolls
around. Mr. Bergen replied that it depends on the development,
unless there is some development to determine the grade and
elevation in University Avenue, there is no other street for at
least a hal£ mile to provide access. It would be very desirable
to have two way access~ but the developer is going to h~ve to
control any other access to the school.
Bakers£ield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 24
Councilman Rucker pointed out that the residents of his
Ward have had a tremendous problem in connection with forming
improvement districts, and in most cases the citizens have paid
for curbs, gutters and sidewalks. He stated that in the area of
DeWolf and South Haley in front of the Pleasant View Baptist Church
where the City owns a sump, no effort has been made by the City to
improve it, and he feels that if the City is planning on constructing
curbs, gutters and sidewalks in one area, it should do the same thing
for other areas.
Mr. Bergen explained that where the City owns property
and the adjacent owner will construct curb, gutters and sidewalks,
the City will improve its property, and since there is no improve-
ment planned by property owners in the area referred to by Council-
man Rucker, the City's policy of not constructing curb, gutters and
sidewalks is consistent regardless of the area. In fact the City
has probably done more of this type of work in the southeast area
than in any other area of the City.
Councilman Heisey commented that he wanted to give an
accolade-to KAFY Radio for its editorial which was continuously
broadcast to the youth of the area on "Earth Day."
Councilman Vetter stated that many problems arise in a
neighborhood when it is bisected by a freeway, especially when the
freeway has not yet been built. He referred to an area south of
Brundage Lane where a number of properties have been purchased by
the State for right of way and the dwellings have been removed
leaving refuse and piles of rubbish, etc., for the view of the
neighbors. He feels it is entirely unfair for the State to allow
this to happen, and he asked Mr. Jing, Public Works Director, to
contact the State Division of Highways and request that they enforce
the specifications required when a contractor removes a dwelling
from a lot. He feels that it
State or the City to see that
buildings are removed.
is the responsibility of either the
these lots are kept clean after the
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 Page 25
Councilman Vetter stated he would like to know what has
to be done this evening to proceed with the purchase of the Fire
Station site at California Avenue near Stockdale Highway. The
report submitted by the Budget Review and Finance Committee
indicated that it should be purchased in this area, and he would
like to have the authorization~to proceed as soon as possible.
Regardless of whether the Council negotiates with the County, as
far as protection for this particular area is concerned, it still
does not change the fact that the station is needed in the location
the Fire Chief has designated to protect the commercial areas and
the residential areas in California Avenue extension.
Councilman Rucker asked if it was necessary to take
action tonight and suggested thai the matter be deferred for
another week. Councilman Vetter pointed out that it had already
been delayed for three weeks and he feels the time has come to
act on it.
Councilman Stiern stated that he represents this area
and he believes that there is a pressing need for fire protection
in the area, it is growing and already has an outstanding assessed
valuation. The site has merit and it had been demonstrated to
him by the Fire Chief that a facility is needed in this location.
Adequate time has been given to all Councilmen to discuss this
with the Chief and to inspect the response maps in his office.
Councilman Vetter then made a motion that the Council
adopt the report of the Budget Review and Finance Committee and
authorize the administrative staff to proceed with plans to acquire
the Fire Station site near the intersection of California Avenue
and Stockdale Highway.
Councilman Bleecker commented that since he has been on
the Council there has been a lot of discussion about duplication
of services between the City and County, he has not had the
opportunity to inspect the maps of the Fire Chief, he is not
prepared to vote on the motion to acquire the site tonight, and
he offered a substitute motion to delay action on this issue for
two weeks.
Bakersfield, California, April 27~ 1970 - Page 26
Councilman Whittemore commented that he has heard the
City Fire Department was going to need either new or additional
training facilities in the very near future~ and he asked the
City Manager if it were planned to use this piece of property for
these facilities, if it was large enough to accomodate them, and
if not, perhaps that area should be explored before buying this
site. Mr. Bergen stated that to his knowledge there had been no
discussion regarding the acquisition of a new training site.
Councilman Bleecker stated that he felt the City should
make a firm offer to the Board of Supervisors to buy the County's
Stockdale Fire Station instead of waiting for the Board to come to
the Council with an offer. He pointed out that the City is committed
to serve the new State College with fire protection, and he feels
that the City should negotiate with the County to buy its existing
facility at Stockdale.
Vote was then taken on Councilman Bleecker's substitute
motion, which failed to carry by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker~ Rucker, Whittemore
Noes: Councilmen Heisey~ Rees, Stiern, Vetter
Absent: None
Councilman Vetter's motion to adopt the report and
authorize the staff to proceed with plans to acquire the Fire
Station site, carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Stiern, Vetter
Noes: Councilmen Bleecker, Rucker~ Whittemore
Absent: None
Councilman Stiern commented that he does not agree with
Councilman Bleecker that the proposal to purchase this Fire Station
site would result in a duplication of services~ b~t there is some
validity in his concern as to whether or not a facility that has
become unusable is available for sale. He can see no harm in the
City Manager approaching the Board of Supervisors and discussing
the purchase of the County's Fire Station on Stockdale Highway.
Bakersfield, Cali£ornia, April 27, 1970 - Page 27
Councilman Heisey remarked that since the Council is on
the subject o£ Fire Stations this evening, he would like to offer
a motion that the City make an offer to the County of Kern to
contract with the City to serve the LaCresta area with fire pro-
tection~ in view of the fact that the City has two Fire Stations
which adequately and successfully could serve this area, thus
saving many dollars in taxpayers money. Vote was taken on the
motion which carried unanimously.
City Manager Bergen commented that Councilman Vetter's
motion to adopt the Report of the Budget Review and Finance Com-
mittee would permit the administrative staff to proceed with plans
to acquire the Fire Station site near the intersection of California
Avenue and Stockdale Highway, which action would not be final as
far as the Council actually purchasing the property; the staff
would obtain an appraisal of the property and come back to the
Council with a deed for acceptance. This would preclude discussing
the purchasing of the County's Stockdale Fire Station under this
motion.
Councilman Vetter insisted that the City's Fire Chief
is the fire protection expert and he has stated that the County
Fire Station is not close enough to adequately protect'the com-
mercial area on California Avenue and still maintain a Class 2
fire rating for the City. Councilman Bleecker questioned the fact
that the proposed site will adequately serve the new State College
with fire protection. City Manager Bergen explained that the
California Avenue site would serve the college until there is
substantial development west and south of the college site. When
this development occurs, the City will find it necessary to build
another station.
Councilman Bleecker felt that the Fire Chief should bring
his maps tO the Council Chambers and explain his reasons to the
Council for proposing the purchase of this particular site, rather
than expecting the Councilmen to come to his office. Councilman
Vetter disagreed~ however, after discussion, Councilman Heisey
asked Mr. Bergen to arrange with Chief Paddock to bring his
response maps to the Council Chambers to be explained at the next
Council meeting~ since so much comment and interest has been
generated on this issue.
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 28
Councilman Bleecker commended the efforts of the Kern
County Union High School District, the Delano Joint Union High
School District and the Wasco Union High School District in estab-
lishing a Regional Occupational Center which will train high school
students with job-entry skills upon graduation from High School.
Reports.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Vetter,
the Council went on record as opposing Senate Bill 695, which
provides for hours paid training every two years for each Police-
man and declares the intent of the Legislature to make annual
appropriations for cities and counties to defray the cost involved,
and Senate Bill 941, which establishes a workday of 8 hours and a
work week of 40 hours; provides for time and one-half pay for over-
time and holidays with a 10 percent bonus for night work~ and re-
quires a minimum paid vacation of 15 working days.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Vetter,
the Council went on record as opposing AB 1320 which is intended
to replace the Federal Excise Tax on telephone service, if and
when it is repealed, by enacting a 10% State Tax.
Allowance of Claims.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker,
to 3796 inclusive,
Approval Committee,
payment.
Action on Bids.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees,
for Printed Forms was awarded on a item by
Printing Company and Hoven & Company, and
to execute the contracts.
Vouchers Nos. 3740
in amount of $40,672.43, as audited by the Voucher
were allowed, and authorization was granted for
bid on Annual Contract
item bid basis to Kern
the Mayor was authorized
lsd;
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 29
Approval and adoption of Report of
Council Auditorium-Recreation Com-
mittee submitting Proposed Recreation
Division Budget for Fiscal Year 1970-71.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Report of the Council
Auditorium-Recreation Committee submitting the Proposed Recreation
Division Budget for the Fiscal Year 1970-71, was approved and
adopted.
First reading of an Ordinance of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
amending Section 11.04.620 of the
Municipal Code of the City of Bakers-
field pertaining to One-Way Streets
and Alleys.
At this time first reading was considered given to an
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Bakersfield amending
Section 11.04..620 of the Municipal Code of the City of Bakersfield
pertaining to One-Way Streets and Alleys.
Approval of Plans and Specifications
for installation of Traffic Signal
and Highway Lighting System at the
intersection of Wible Road and Wilson
Road.
Upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore, the plans and
specifications were approved, and the Finance Director was authori-
zed to advertise for bids for the installation of a traffic signal
lighting system at the intersection of Wible Road and
Approval of Cooperative Agreement be-
tween the City and the State of Calif-
ornia for installation of a Traffic
Signal System at the intersection of
Fourth Street and Union Avenue.
and highway
Wilson Road.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Cooperative Agree-
ment between the City and the State of California for installation
of a Traffic Signal System at the intersection of Fourth Street
and Union Avenue was approved, and the Mayor was authorized to
execute same. City Manager Bergen requested that the record show
that the City's share which is estimated at $9,200 is not a
budgeted item and will be included in the budget for the 1970-71
Fiscal Year.
Hearings.
This is the time set for public hearing before the Council
on an application by Douglas Oil Company of California to amend the
zoning boundaries from an R-1 ~ingle Family Dwelling) Zone to a C-1
Bakersfield, California, April 27, 1970 - Page 30
(Limited Commercial) or more restrictive, Zone, of that certain
property located at the southeast corner of Belle Terrace and South
"H" Street.
This hearing has been duly advertised and posted~ and no
written protests have been received in the City Clerk's office.
The zone change has been requested in order to allow a service
station at this site. The parcel is triangular in shape with 80
feet along Belle Terrace and 175 feet along South "H" Street. Due
to the irregular shape and proximity to the canal, this parcel wou]Ld
not be usable for residential purposes.
The Planning Commission recommends approval of the zone
the addition of the "D" Overlay for the following
change with
reasons:
1.
To protect traffic circulation to and from
this site.
2. To protect the residential homes to the north
and east.
Mayor Hart declared the hearing open for public partici-
pation. No protests or objections being received~ the Mayor declared
the public hearing closed for Council deliberation and action. In
the absence of any opposition, upon a motion by Councilman Vetter~
Ordinance No. 1859 New Series amending Title Seventeen of the
Municipal Code of the City of Bakersfield by changing the Land Use
Zoning of that certain property in the City of Bakersfield located
on the southeast corner of Belle Terrace and South "H" Street, was
adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the Council,
upon motion by Councilman Rucker, the mee /as a~
10:25 P.M. ~ .
ATTEST:
.
CITY CLERK and Ex~-Offic~Io Clerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970
Minutes of the regular meeting o£ the Council of the
City of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of
the City Hall at eight o'clock P. M., May 4, 1970.
Vice-Mayor Stiern acted as presiding of£icer during the
absence of Mayor Hart, and called the meeting to order followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation by the Reverend Gordon
Gilbert of the University Baptist Church.
The City Clerk called~the roll as follows:
Present: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey~ Rees, Rucker, Stiern~
Vetter, Whittemore
Absent: Mayor Hart
Minutes of May 4, 1970 were approved as presented, subject
to review of the tape by Councilman Vetter.
Scheduled Public Statements.
Miss Nancy Summer, advance Publicity ~gent~ presented
each member of the Council with passes for opening night of the
Ice Capades in the Civic Auditorium.
Correspondence.
The City Clerk read a letter from Jim Wallace, Super-
visor of the Work Incentive Program (Win) expressing appreciation
and thanks to the City Council members who participated in the
fund-raising All-Star Basketball Game. A net profit of $85.85 was
raised for WIN's Emergency Fund and provided a delightful evening
of entertainment as well.
Council Statements.
Councilman Whittemore stated that for the last few weeks
a great deal of publicity has been given to a proposal by the Kern
County Board of Supervisors to sell the Formosa Airport and Drag
Strip to private enterprise. He did not realize that there was so
much concern about this, but after several telephone calls to him
and an investigation on his part, he discovered that a great many
people are opposed to this sale, not only because of its use for
National Drag Races but also because it is used as a recreational
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 2
facility for testing rebuilt cars, hot rods and motorcycles.
He discussed this with Chief of Police Towle~ who told
him that he felt if this drag strip was not maintained, it would
result in young people and adults testing their vehicles on County
highways or City streets, which would be dangerous to themselves
and the community.
Councilman Whittemore feels that instead o£ selling this
facility, it could be developed to a great extent. He asked for
the support of the Council in recommending to the Board of Super-
visors that this drag strip be retained and developed as an enter-
tainment and recreation facility.
Councilman Heisey commented that if this is not a matter
of emergency, he would suggest that it be referred to the Auditorium-
Recreation Committee for study and recommendation.
Councilman Bleecker stated that he feels Councilman
Whittemore's suggestion is a very sound one, he has raced on this
drag strip and he knows that every Sunday young people take their
vehicles to this facility for time trials, etc. This sport is
supervised and is a safe way to test a car.
After some additional discussion, Councilman Heisey
moved that the matter be referred to the Auditorium-Recreation
Committee for study and recommendation back to the Council. This
motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Vetter asked Mr. Bergen i£ it would in any
way violate the "meet and confer" provisions i£ the Government
Efficienty and Personnel Committee met with a committee of the
Board of Supervisors to discuss City-County actions on salaries
that may take place during budget sessions. He pointed out that
each year after budget sessions, remarks have been made by the
Council that it should have met with the Board of Supervisors for
this purpose, because what the County does directly a££ects the
City's salary increases and provisions.
Mr. Bergen stated he thinks the two committees could
talk with each other, he does not believe there would be any
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 3
conflict, however, both committees would be required to meet and
confer with employees' organizations.
Councilman Stiern suggested that either the City Manager
or Councilman Whittemore, Chairman of the Governmental Efficiency
and Personnel Committee, direct a letter to the Chairman of the
Board o£ Supervisors, and ask that such a meeting be arranged. Mr.
Bergen commented that it was his £eeling that the Chairman of the
Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee should request
this meeting. He also pointed out that the committees should not
arrive at any decision, they are not discussing this matter as two
legislative bodies, but rather as a committee to come back with
recommendations to the Council and the Board o£ Supervisors.
Councilman Whittemore £elt it was an excellent suggestion,
that something good could come out o£ the two committees discussing
the recommendations and problems of the employee groups, it in no
way would be binding on anyone, it would be a very healt~ situation.
He stated he would like to have a short committee meeting, and
then send a letter to the Board o£ Supervisors.
Councilman Rucker was surprised at the suggestion, stating
that in his opinion the public or even the City employees, could
very easily get the idea that the City and County were agreeing
to establish the same salary £or certain positions. He feels that
the City and County should make separate decisions on salaries for
employees.
Councilman Heisey stated that as a member of the Govern-
mental E£ficiency and Personnel Committee, he would be very happy
to talk with a committee £rom the County. However, he feels the
same as Councilman Rucker~ that no decision will be made on salaries,
but if they only discuss some general procedures and common pro-
blems £or a couple of hours, it can be very bene£icial to each
entity.
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 4
Councilman Heisey commented that last week there was
considerable discussion in connection with the proposed location
of a Fire Station in the southwest area~ and because of so much
interest in this issue, he had asked that the Fire Chief be invited
to attend this Council meeting with his maps and briefly explain
his reasons for proposing that a Fire Station be built at this
location.
Fire Chief Paddock stated that the question was "do we
need a Fire Station in the southwest area, or don't we?" He then
read the following report:
A study has been made to determine the proper
location for the proposed Fire Station No. 9
in the Southwest area of Bakersfield. The study
takes into consideration, not only the matter of
providing the best and most practical coverage
of the area, but also the advisability of so
locating the station as to avoid any possible
penalties in the insurance grading classifica-
tion in the future surveys by the American
Insurance Association.
The location recommended is approximately 550
feet north of Stockdale Highway on the east
side of California Avenue on the northeast
corner of the proposed street extending east
from California Avenue. This location recom-
mendation is made due to a study of the pre-
liminary plans of the proposed shopping center
submitted by Coldwell and Banker at California
Avenue and Chester Lane.
The proposed site was discussed with the Engineers
of the American Insurance Association in San
Francisco on October 1.4, 1969, by Deputy Chief
Haggard and myself. The suggested location is
within one and one-half miles of the proposed
shopping center to be constructed across the
street and west of the Three Way Chevrolet
Company at Chester Lane and California Avenue.
Locating the station to avoid any penalties in
the grading classification involves several
factors. It must necessarily be placed in proper
location to existing stations and within specified
running distances of the structural development -
mercantile, industrial, institutional and resi-
dential - which the fire companies housed in the
proposed station are responsible for protecting.
The allowable running distances specified by the
Standard Grading Schedule are adjusted up or ,
down according to the character of the districts
protected and the fire flow estimated to be
needed in various areas; fire flow being the
amount of water needed to control such a fire
as may reasonably be expected.
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 5
The specified running distances for engine and ladder
companies are as follows:
Type of Structural
Development
Fire Flow in
GPM or other
Criterion
Maximum Response Distance
for First Due Co. Miles
Engine Ladder
High value, such as
Under 4500 i 1/2
2
Mercantile, Industrial 4500 - 9000 i
1 1/4
Institutional
Over 9000 3/4
Residential Average 2
3
Over 2000 GPM 1 1/2
2
High Life
Hazard 1
1 1/4
For areas
with 100'
Spacing be-
tween
Buildings
4 4
The major controlling development in this instance
is the proposed shopping area by Coldwell and
Banker on the 33 acre site of California Avenue
and Chester Lane; plus the existing mercantile
establishments now along California Avenue, such
as Three Way Chevrolet - 73,442 square feet;
Urner's Chrysler Plymouth - 31,000 square feet;
large apartment complexes - approximately 200
units; Zellerbach Paper Co. - 10,000 square feet,
and preliminary plans submitted for two, five
and seven story motels.
The last survey by the American Insurance Associa-
tion in November, 1968, indicated the fire flow
for the Valley Plaza Shopping Center to be 4500
GPM. We estimate that the American Insurance
Association's requirements for fire flow for a
shopping center of the proposed type to be under
4500 GPM, which fixes the maximum lravel distance
at one and one-half miles.
The shopping district lies within this radius
of the recommended location. Also, any fore-
seeable extension of the development would
likewise be adequately covered. Existing mer-
cantile establishments in the area were mapped
along with schools and other multi-storied
buildings, which might be considered to possess
a life hazard greater than normal. The proposed
station permits travel distances within the
limits specified by the American Insurance
Association Grading Schedule. Ordinarily, the
grading engineers will apply these running
distance requirements in a practical fashion,
and we believe there is sufficient leeway there
to avoid any deficiency points in the grading.
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 6
Consideration also has to be made for multiple
alarm response to the mercantile center. For
a required fire flow of 4000 gallons per minute,
the second due engine company should be within
2½ miles and third due engine company within 3
miles. These companies are available at Station
No. 7 and Station No. 3, respectively. Response
of only one ladder company is needed, and this
will be provided by the ladder company at Station
No. 7.
The land plotted for the proposed Fire Station
location consists of approximately .6 of an
acre excluding the future street right of way
at the south. This land is offered by the
Stockdale Development Corporation on a nego-
tiated sale basis, in lieu of condemnation, at
$.551 per square foot on an as is basis. The
approximate sale price is $14,463.75.
From a response map which had been placed on the wall,
Chief Paddock explained the distances involved to and from the
proposed site and the areas to be serviced, and discussed the
plans for future development to substantiate locating a station
in this southwest area.
Councilman Bleecker commented that he was not trying to
be critical of the need for a station in that part of the City,
but he wondered whether or not the City can continue to afford
the increased cost of maintaining a Class 2 system compared to a
Class 3 or 4. He has done some research along these lines and
quoted figures which he had obtained relative to increases in
taxes and fire insurance rates if the City changes its fire rating
or continues to acquire new Fire Stations as the City grows. He
stated that the figures would indicate to him that the American
Insurance Association did not think that their risk is that much
greater if the Fire Department did not maintain the highest rate.
Councilman Whittemore asked the Fire Chief if a ladder
truck would not be required, since preliminary plans indicate the
construction of high rise buildings in this area. Chief Paddock
stated that the ladder truck at Station No. 7 would adequately
cover the new commercial area in the necessary response time.
Councilman Whittemore asked if new training facilities were going
to be needed for the Fire Department. Chief Paddock replied that
Bakersfield, Cali£ornia, May 4, 1970 - Page ?
was definitely so, it has been placed in the Capital Improvement
Program for the next two or three years. However, in his opinion~
a training ground can be set up at one of the City's Sewage Treat-
ment Plants where the City already owns the land.
Councilman Heisey commented that the Council is proud of
the present Class 2 rating of its excellent Fire Department, but
for at least two years the staf£ and the Council have been studying
the feasibility of maintaining the Class 2 rating. He would en-
courage the Budget Review and Finance Committee to continue to
study this matter to be sure it
to maintain a high fire rating,
it is fair to everyone.
is feasible cost-wise, to continue
as he wants to evaluate it so that
Councilman Stiern stated this station happens to be in
the Fifth Ward, it is an area which is growing more rapidly than
any other area and it shows more promise of future growth than any
other area in the City. He has felt from the beginning that this
recommendation has been sound, it has been made by experienced
people who have studied it and it is with the complete concurrence
of the staff. He can't see why one area of the City should have
less fire protection than another, or less availability of equip-
ment than another. As far as the land cost is concerned, there is
every reason to believe that it will increase the longer the City
delays the project. If, in the future, a sound recommendation is
made to reduce the City's present rating~ he will be interested.
But for the time being~ people who annex to the City expect fine
available fire service and as iow an insurance rate as possible.
He feels that the City should move ahead with the purchase of the
site and the construction of the Fire Station, in order to afford
the same protection to the people in that area that the City
affords in every other area.
Councilman Vetter stated that he has always contended
that the response area outlined by the Fire Chief is the same as
serves the rest of the City~ and if this area could be served by
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 8
the County's Stockdale Fire Station, he would be in favor of it,
but it does not come within the response area, and therefore, a
new station is needed within the general location specified by the
Fire Chief. As far as a Class 2 versus a Class 3, he just can't
support any idea that the City should change the rating without a
complete, thorough study by the sta££, the Fire Chief and the A.I.A.
He cannot believe that it would be to the advantage of the citizens
of Bakersfield to change the rating without a thorough study.
Reports.
Councilman Walter Heisey, Chairman of the Water and City
Growth Committee, read the following report:
On February 16~ 1970, the City Council approved the
concept of a joint-use canal contained in the Stetson Report.
Since that time, further refinements have been made to the plan as
proposed by Stetson, by the Kern County Water Agency. The modified
plan is contained in the report from the Agency entitled "A Report
On An Optimal Comprehensive Water Plan" dated April 17, 19.70. This
modified plan embraces the concepts contained in the Stetson plan
and there is hereby offered a Resolution by which the concept con-
tained in the modified plan is approved. The Water Committee recom-
mends approval of the Resolution.
Councilman Heisey read the'Resolution in its entirety
and moved the adoption of the report and of Resolution No. 33-70
of the Council reiterating its approval of the concept of the Cross--
Valley, Joint-Use Canal contained in the April 17, 1970 Report of
the Kern County Water Agency. This motion carried by the following
roll call vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstaining: Councilman Bleecker
Councilman Bleecker stated that because he is a land
owner in the Buena Vista Water Storage District, he is in the
cotton business in the Buttonwillow area that this district serves
and has many customers in that area, there could possibly be a
conflict of interest, so he therefore abstained from voting on
this issue.
The City Clerk was instructed to forward a copy of this
Resolution to the K~ ~9~Y water Agency. ~9~ .~ igformation.
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 9
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter~ the Council went on
record as opposing AB 698 (Schabarum) which narrows the degree of
regulation under the Subdivision Map Act in that the required
improvements shall not be greater than those serving adjacent
developed parcels o£ land unless the improvements are solely
necessary for the development of parcels within the division of
land.
Councilman Vetter read a reply from Senator Walter W.
Stiern to a letter £rom Assistant City Attorney Don Davis asking
for an explanation of Senator Stiern's authorship of SB 3?5.
Senator Stiern stated this this bill was introduced at the request
of Bakersfield Attorney Oran Palmer, in behalf of numerous water
districts~ irrigation districts and water storage districts due to
problems these agencies encounter as the result of road and high-
way alterations in cities and counties. These alterations occur
after the a£orementioned organizations have already complied with
the law.
There are two sides to this issue and the bill was used
asa vehicle to bring the problem before the Senate Committee on
Transportation. It seemed that some resolve had to be made in a
legislative determination. The Transportation Committee heard the
bill, listened to witnesses on both sides of the ±ssue and decided
to hold the bill in committee. This is a gentle way of saying
that the bill was defeated. In so doing~ the determination is
established that it is the legislative intent to leave the law the
way it currently stands.
Councilman Vetter, Chairman of the Budget Review and
Finance Committee, read a report on the conversion of the City's
Neighborhood Development Program (NDP) Application to a Survey
and Planning ( S & P) Application.
The City of Bakersfield was recently noti£ied that ifs
request for a Neighborhood Development Program (NDP) Grant has not
been funded for this Fiscal Year. Only 85 out of 300 cities which
have submitted NDP Applications for grants during this coming
Fiscal Year have been approved at this time. HUD criteria for NDP
Grants give preference to those applications which involve
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 10
197
employment opportunities or low-cost housing facilities to minority-
member groups.
After learning that the NDP Application had not been
approved, the City was represented at a conference with HUD officials
in San Francisco on March 31, 1970, at which time it was suggested
that the City convert its NDP Application to a Survey and Planning
( S & P ) Application by June 30, 1970, in order to retain the
original filing date of the NDP Application of September, 1969.
The staff and consultants concur that this is the best approach
for the City at this time. Mr. Eugene Jacobs, Consulting Attorney,
and Mr. John Gray, Consulting Economist, estimate that the cost of
converting the application will be less than $5,000, as follows:
Outside costs Eugene Jacobs and John Gray $3,000
Inside costs Staff time of the Planning
Department $2,000
Cost of reproducing 25 copies of the application
It is estimated that the conversion will take approximately
5 to 6 weeks to prepare. Sufficient funds are available within the
Planning Department's Professional and Consulting Account to pay
for this conversion.
It is the recommendation of the Budget Review and Finance
Committee that the Council approve the conversion of its NDP Appli-
cation to an S & P Application, and that the Consulting Attorney
and Consulting Economist be authorized to handle this conversion
and prepare and coordinate all necessary reports and presentations.
During discussion, Councilman Heisey stated he had
attended the Community Needs Conference and sat in on the Redevelop-
ment of Downtown Session, and it was concluded that the City should
convert its application. He questioned that it would cost as much
as $5,000 to accomplish this conversion. All the basic background
work has been done and he asked that any action on this report be
deferred until next week and that a breakdown and explanation of
the costs be made to the Council.
Bakers£ield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 11
City Manager Bergen stated that a number of things is
involved in converting this NDP Application to an S & P Applica-
tion, and that the figures quoted represent maximum amounts.
Councilman Whittemore stated he agreed With Councilman
Heisey, inasmuch as he Cannot see that the facts have materially
changed, however, he will reserve his opinion until a report is
made next week. He asked i~ the Redevelopment Agency and the
Empire Square Associates will still be involved when the applica-
tion is changed. Councilman Vetter stated it is his understanding
that the Redevelopment Agency actually makes the application, but
does not prepare it. He pointed out that the most :important point
to understand is that the City will retain the original filing
date if the S & P Application is made by June 30, 1970.
After £urther discussion, action was deferred on this
matter until next week's meeting for a report from the City Manager.
City Manager Bergen pointed out that the administration
is going to recommend that the Council adopt a Uniform Fire Code,
and that an Ordinance be adopted establishing the Uniform Fire
Code as the Fire Prevention Ordinance of the City of Bakersfield
and that Ordinance No. 705 be repealed. This has been discussed
with the Chief Building Inspector Justus Olsson and the City
Attorney. They feel that this is a step in the right direction,
as this Fire Code is used throughout the State and will be used
in conjunction with the Uniform Building Code that the City is
presently using. They do not anticipate any problems from adopting
this Uniform ~ire Code, but do want publicity that the City is
contemplating its adoption as the Fire Prevention Ordinance of
the City.
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 12
Allowance of Claims.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker,
to 3854 inclusive, in amount of $26,927.96, as
Voucher Approval Committee,
Vouchers Nos. 3797
audited by the
were allowed and authorization was
granted for payment of same.
Councilman Bleecker also moved
of $900.00 from Fund 11-510-6100 to Fund
to approve Budget Transfer
11-530-4200 to provide
funds for an independent appraisal of 52 of the 108 parcels of
land owned by the City of Bakersfield; and Journal Transfer in
amount of $200.00 from Fund No. 11 to Fund No. 61, to provide
funds for remaining expenses of Mrs. Lila Little as Consultant to
the Redevelopment Agency for preparation of NDP Application.
Adoption of Ordinance No. 1860 New
Series of the Council of the City
of Bakersfield amending Section
11.04.620 of the Municipal Code of
the City of Bakersfield pertaining
to One-Way Streets and Alleys.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Vetter,
Ordinance No. 1860 New Series of the Council of the City of Bakers-
field amending Section 11.04.620 of the Municipal Code of the City
of Bakersfield pertaining to One-Way Streets and Alleys, was adopted
by the following vote:
Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern,
Vetter, Whittemore
None
None
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
of the
Notice
Adoption of Resolution No. 30-70 of
the City of Bakersfield acknowledging
the receipt of a copy of Notice of
Intention to Circulate Petition for
the annexation of territory designa-
ted as "Terrace Way No. l", and an
affidavit of Publication thereof, and
approving the circulation of the
Petition.
Upon
City of
of Intention to Circulate Petition for the annexation
a motion by Councilman Vetter, Resolution No. 30-70
Bakersfield acknowledging the receipt of a copy of
of
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 13
territory designated as "Terrace Way No. l" and an A£fidavit of
Publication thereof, and approving the circulation of the Petition,
was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees,
Vetter, Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
Rucker, Stiern,
Approval of Agreement with Mrs. Naomi
Barrow for the operation of a Con-
cession Stand in Jastro Park.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, Agreement
between
the City of Bakersfield and Mrs. Naomi Barrow for tile operation of
/he Concession Stand in Jastro Park was approved and the Mayor was
authorized to execute same.
Adoption of Resolution No. 31-70 of
the Council of the City of Bakersfield
opposing any change in the State Con-
stitution which would permit the
diversion of Gas Tax Monies from
Highway Construction.
The State Legislature is proposing a referendum amend-
ment to Article XXVI of the California Constitution permitting
diversion of Gas Tax Monies to finance smog control research and
rapid transit developments in the larger metropolitan areas.
Mr. Norlan Black, as a member of the Kern County Citizens
for Freeway and Highway Committee, which is an organization
sponsored by the California State Chamber of Commerce, addressed
the Council urging the adoption of a Resolution in support of
Article XXVI of the California Constitution which protects gasoline
tax funds against diversion to other than highway purposes. This
Resolution has been adopted by the Kern County Board of Supervisors
and by the Arvin City Council and has been presented to the
Tehachapi City Council and the Freeway 65 Association for adoption.
The Freeway System as adopted in 1959 is not quite 50% completed
and it is the feeling of his organization that Gas Tax Monies
should not be diverted for any other purposes than the freeway
and highway construction.
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 14
The City Clerk was requested to read the Resolution and
upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, Resolution No. 31-70 of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield opposing any change in the State
Constitution which would permit the diversion of Gas Tax Monies
from Highway Construction was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern,
Vetter, Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
Upon a motion
by Councilman Stiern, the City Manager was
instructed to write a letter to the legislative representative of
the League of California Cities, conveying the Council's opposition
to diversion of Gasoline Tax Monies to other than freeway and high-
way purposes, and urging the League to oppose any referendum amend-
ment to Article XXVI of the California Constitution permitting
diversion of Gas Tax Monies to finance smog control research and
rapid transit development in the larger metropolitan areas. A
certified copy of the Resolution was to be sent with the City
Manager's letter to the League of California Cities.
Approval of Plans and Specifications
for installation of Traffic Signal
and Highway Lighting System at the
intersection of Auburn Street and
Oswell Street.
The staff reported that funds have not been allocated
for the proposed installation of Traffic Signal and Highway Lighting
System at the intersection of Auburn Street and Oswell Street and
at the time of contract award, determination will need to be made
relative to funding by transfer or project allocation for the
1970-71 Budget. Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, the plans and
specifications for this project were approved and the Finance
Director was authorized to advertise for bids.
Councilman Rees commented that this is a very sorely
needed project and Mr. Jing stated that this will move the traffic
at the intersection of Auburn Street and Oswell Street. Councilman
Heisey stated this is the barest minimum of what needs to be done,
it is a step to facilitate the flow of traffic into these three
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 15
schools, but he is convinced that there will be a tremendous bottle
neck in this area when the schools are opened. The only way this
can be improved is to open another access street in that area.
However,
tim e.
the staff has stated this i.t
Councilman Whittemore asked
is not practical at this
how the Contingency Fund was
holding up, if there were sufficient funds for all the contemplated
projects. Mr. Bergen said yes there were sufficient funds~ but
he did not have the exact figures and would get them for the
Council.
Councilman Rees asked Mr. Jing to explain, for the
benefit of the news media so that word can get back to the parents
in the area, why the City feels that opening University Street into
the three school complex in his Ward is not a feasible project and
what the future plans are.
Mr. Jing stated that they have talked with the owners of
the property adjacent to what would be University Street and they
have indicated that they are not at this time ready for developing
their property. A large part of this land lies outside the City
boundaries so that the City would not be in a position to acquire
the right of way for the street even if the owners were ready to
develop. There will be four full lanes developed on Auburn Street
between Oswell and Eissler Streets. There will be circulation
streets around the three schools into Eissler and there is an
unnamed street that does into Highland High, north and south, that
ties into Auburn Street.
Councilman Stiern asked if there would be any streets
connecting with the unincorporated area to the south, the area
of the Country Club, and Mr. Jing replied that there would not be.
Councilman Rees asked Mr. Jing if the Council can be
assured that the widening of Auburn Street will be completed by
the opening of the schools in the fall. Mr. Jing replied that
this project will be completed if the Capital Improvement Budget
is approved.
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 16 "~-f°"
Adoption of Resolution No. 32-70
authorizing the District Office of
the State Division of Highways to
act as Coordinating Agent on all
TOPICS Projects.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Resolution No. 32-70
authorizing the District Office of the State Division of Highways
to act as Coordinating Agent on all TOPICS Projects, was adopted
by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern,
Vetter, Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
City Manager Bergen informed the Council that at the
beginning of the budget year the balance in the Council Contingency
Fund was $180,000. At the present time there is a balance in this
Fund of $54,679.56, which includes the $900.00 that was transferred
tonight. Up to this point $125,320.00 has been transferred out of
the Contingency Account. There is a balance in the Capital Improve--
ment Fund of $59,000 and in addition to this a balance in the Gas
Tax Fund of $27~000.
Approval of Plans and Specifications
for the improvement of California
Avenue from King Street to Williams
Street.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Plans and Specifica-
tions ~or improvement of California Avenue from King Street to
Williams Street were approved and the Finance Director was authorized
to advertise for bids.
Action deferred for one week on Plans
and Specifications for construction
of Storm Drains in Cypress Street,
Verde Street, South "K" Street and
Lakeview Avenue at Cali£ornia Avenue.
The staff reported that funds have been budgeted for
construction of Storm Drains in Cypress Street, Verde Street and
South "K" Street. Authorization was requested to divert the
necessary funds ~rom the allocated storm drain at Della Street
between the existing sump in Tract 2400 and the Southgate Drainfield
in order to construct storm drain at Lakeview Avenue and California
Avenue. The Della Street drain cannot be constructed at this time
due to right of way dif£iculties.
Bakersfield, California, May 4, 1970 - Page 17
Councilman Rucker moved that the plans and specifications
£or construction of these storm drains be approved and the Finance
Director authorized to advertise for bids.
Councilman Verier stated that he had previously discussed
the possibility of entering into a joint project with the County
for the construction of a storm drain in Cypress Street which
would take care of a portion of Olive Street south of Verde Street
where a problem exists. Mr. Jing stated that this has been dis-
cussed with the County and they are not interested :in a project
on Olive Street, which is not in the City.
After further discussion, Councilman Rucker withdrew his
motion and action was deferred for one week to permit Councilman
Vetter to examine the plans for this project.
Approval of Plans and Specifications
for Construction of Automatic Sprinkler
System for the drainage sump between
Tracts 3096, 2667 and 3269.
Mr. Jing advised that each subdivider has paid his pro-
portionate share for the construction of Automatic Sprinkler System
for the drainage sump between Tracts 3096, 2667 and 3269, and
after discussion~ upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore, the plans
and specifications were approved and the Finance Director was
authorized to advertise for bids for the construction of the Auto-
matic Sprinkler System for the drainage sump between Tracts 3096,
2667 and 3269.
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the Council,
upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, the meeting was adjourned at
lo:l P.M. ,,
VICE-MAYOR of the City of ~ke;sfield, Calix.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK and Ex-O~ficio'-Clerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, May 11, 1970
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Council of the City
of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of the
City Hall at eight o'clock P. M., May ll, 1970.
In the absence of Mayor Hart, Vice-Mayor Stiern acted as
presiding officer, and called the meeting to order followed by the
Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation
the Church of the Brethren.
Present:
Absent:
by Dr. Edward K. Zeigler of
The City Clerk called the roll as follows:
Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern,
Whittemore
Mayor Hart. Councilman Bleecker
Minutes of the regular meeting of May 4,
Vetter,
1970 were
approved as presented.
Vice-Mayor Stiern announced that the Mayor of the City
of Bakersfield had proclaimed the llth day of May, 1970, to be
"Boys and Girls State Day in Bakersfield" in recognition of the
worthwhile objectives of the citizenship program of the Kern County
Council of the American Legion and as a salute to the outstanding
high school boys and girls chosen to participate in the activities
of this day.
Dr. Mark Thompson, Commander of the Kern County Council
of the American Legion, introduced the Committee and the auxiliary
units representing the American Legion; also, the teachers who
accompanied the students to the Council meeting. Miss Lois Raney,
Chairman of the American Legion Unit 26 Girls State Program, and
Dr. Thompson, introduced the young people who participated for an
hour in the functions of City Government.
Scheduled Public Statements.
Mr. Bob King, representing Bakersfield Cable TV, Inc.,
addressed the Council concerning the possibilities of a re-evalua-
tion of the rates for cable television in the City of Bakersfield.
He stated that he had presented copies of a comprehensive study
regarding tariff changes to the City Manager and asked that the
City Council study the report. The original franchise was granted
Bakersfield, California, May il, 1970 Page 2
to Bakersfield Cable TV, Inc., approximately five years ago, and
due to inflation it has become necessary to request that the $4.85
per month rate established five years ago be increased to $5.75
per month. He suggested that after review of the report, which
is somewhat technical in nature, by the Council and the adminis-
trative staff, a hearing date be set on the requested rate increase.
Councilman Heisey commented that it will take consider-
able time to review this report and moved that it be referred to
the Budget Review and Finance Committee for study. He also
requested that the staff, especially
an in-depth study to the request, as
as far as the public is concerned and
the Finance Director~ give
it is a very important issue
all the facts should be
evaluated before any action is taken on it. Councilman Stiern
agreed that it is an important issue and it is going to have to
be justified to the public before any increase can be granted.
Coucilman Whittemore asked Finance Director Haynes if
the City audited the books of the Cable TV Company upon receipt
of franchise payments to the City or did his office accept the
figures submitted by the Company. Mr. Haynes replied that the
City receives a report from this company when the franchise pay-
ment is made, however, although it has the right to do so under
the Ordinance, the City has not as yet made an audit of the
company's books. Councilman Whittemore commented that in his
opinion an audit of the books should be made in order to assist
the Council Committee and the staff to review this matter and make
a recommendation as to what action to take on this rate increase.
Mr. Haynes stated his department will make this audit.
Councilman Vetter pointed out that the Council will be
engaged in budget sessions as well as meetings with employee
groups and the City staff~ in June, so any action on this request
must be postponed possibly until July 1st.
Bakersfield, California, May ll, 1970 - Page 3 ~{)7
Mr. King stated that he recognizes the Council will have
a number of other things to consider at this time, however, the
Cable TV Company representatives will make themselves available
whenever it is convenient to the Council to discuss this proposal.
Councilman Vetter suggested that instead of referring
the matter to the Budget Review and Finance Committee, the Council
devote the next week to study of the proposal and refer it to the
appropriate Committee at the next Council meeting.
Councilman Heisey withdrew his motion and Councilman
Stiern moved that the Council as a whole study the report for a
week and that it be referred to the appropriate committee for study'
and recommendation at the next Council meeting. This motion carried
unanimously.
Correspondence.
The City Clerk read a notice of a meeting of the South
San Joaquin Division of the League of California Cities to be held
in Sanger on Friday, May 22, 1970.
Council Statements.
Councilman Heisey pointed out that with the cooperation
of the Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District, trees and
shrubs have been planted in the median island on East Truxtun Avenue
for a distance of two blocks on Baker Street. He stated that the
residents of East Bakersfield appreciate the completion of this
project.
Councilman Heisey commented that last week he had parti-
cipated with all the Kiwanis Clubs of California in a flight to
Sacramento for the prupose of encouraging the State's Legislators
to enact legislation for more forceful law enforcement in the
control of narcotics and campus unrest. All three of the City's
Legislators were available to attend a luncheon as guests of the
City's Kiwanis Club, the entire day was spent visiting the differen~
legislative committees, and he felt that much was accomplished. He
stated that he hoped the other civic clubs would adopt a program
to contact their legislators regularly and encourage them to do the
job which the public is entitled to and wants.
Bakersfield, California, May 11, 1970 - Page 4
Councilman Vetter asked Public Works Director Jing if
the State Division of Highways had indicated that some action
would be taken in connection with cleaning of the lots on Highway
57 Freeway south of Brundage Lane. Mr. Jing stated he had con-
tacted the Right Of Way Department and they had agreed to come
down to Bakers£ield and examine the lots, however, he will check
into it and report back to the Council.
Councilman Vetter commented that several months ago he
had asked Mr. Jing to request the Santa Fe Railroad to repair the
crossings at "F", "G" and "H" Streets. "F" Street was improved
at that time~ but is again in need of repair; "H" Street is in
very bad shape, and he asked what control the City ihad over this
situation.
Mr. Jing stated that the railroad company is required
to maintain two feet outside o£ the rails, beyond that it is the
City's responsibility. He has contacted the new agent in Bakers-
field and he had said this work mould be done. City Manager Bergen
suggested that a letter be directed to the Superintendent in Fresno
and i£ no action is taken, it might be necessary for the City to
go in and fix the crossing and bill the railroad. Councilman
Vetter suggested that all the intersections be surveyed before
this letter is written and a request be made for immediate action,
specifically on "H" Street. He asked that he be furnished with a
copy of this letter.
Reports.
Mr. Robert Ramey, new District Engineer for the Division
of Highways in Fresno~ District VI, introduced himself to the
Council and stated that the Division of Highways is ready to begin
studies on alternate locations of Freeway 178 between M Street and
Interstate 5 and Freeway 58 between Freeway 99 and Interstate 5.
He asked Mr. L. S. Voorhis, Assistant District Engineer, to indicate
on maps in the Council Chambers, the results of the State's studies
which took ~our years to complete.
Bakersfield, California, May 11, 1970 - Page
Mr. Van Voorhis stated that he is here tonight in response
to a Resolution passed by the Council on December 15, 1969, to
officially announce that studies have begun for the alternate
routes of Freeway 178 between M Street to Highway 99 and Route 58
from Highway 99 to new Interstate 5 to the west of the City. He
explained the predicted traffic for the existing Freeway 58 and
Route 43. He stated that they have come here with no preconceived
ideas. The City's Resolution was referred to the Technical Co-
ordinating Committee which is made up of representatives from the
City's staff, the County's staff and the Division of Highways, for
study, and three meetings of this committee have been held. He
submitted a map indicating the composite of ideas which were
suggested by the committee. He suggested that the Council, in
coordination with the Board of Supervisors, because both juris-
dictions are involved, appoint a citizens committee to work with
the Division of Highways on this study, as they are very anxious
to have all the local participation possible. It is expected that
this process will take between four to five months, and meetings
can be held with the citizens committee, the City's Planning Com-
mission and/or the Council.
This presentation will be made to the Board of Supervisors
tomorrow and they are going to ask the Board to appoint a citizens
committee from the unincorporated area to offer suggestions and
become involved in this study.
Councilman Vetter asked if it was the general feeling of
the Division of Highways that there would be two arteries to Inter-
state 5. Mr. Van Voorhis replied that based on very meager infor-
mation and a little intuition, he is of the opinion that there will
be two freeways west of Freeway 99 for short distances, but he does
not believe there will be two routes going all the way to Interstate
5. There are at least six flexible combinations to be considered
and probably adjustments when the traffic assignment is worked out.
The State conducted origin and destination studies and
they are predicting that when Interstate 5 is opened all the way,
which is programmed for late 1971 or early 1972, there may be about
Bakersfield, California, May ll, 1970 - Page 6
7,000 cars using it to begin with, however, this is very difficult
to predict at the present time.
Councilman Vetter asked when the Brundage Freeway is
programmed for actual construction. Mr. Van Voorhis replied that
they have just completed a unit east of Weedpatch Highway, the
next unit extends the Freeway westerly to Cottonwood Road; the
following unit will take it to Freeway 99. In the current approved
planning program, the first unit is programmed for 1972-73, but
indications are that it might be advanced a year and if that is
done, the construction from Weedpatch to Cottonwood Road will
commence next year, with the next unit programmed to follow in
the succeeding fiscal year. Therefore, the final unit could be
under construction in two years.
They have had a staff meeting with the City and County
about a month ago on the proposed interchange at Freeway 99 south
of Brundage Lane and they now have a design which would permit the
Freeway to be extended due west from Brundage Lane, or construct
a "tee" intersection, which would keep the options open and permit
going either way. In response to a question from Councilman
Vetter, Mr. Van Voorhis stated they do not anticipate holding any
hearings on the location of the interchange itself, but they will
review the matter with the Council at its convenience, as the
location is tentatively set right now and has been agreed upon by
the City and County staffs. He will furnish Mr. Jing with a copy
of the map of the proposed interchange. Councilman Vetter stated
he would look at the map and if he has any questions, will bring
them up to the Division of Highways.
Councilman Heisey asked if the maps displayed were to
become the property of
will send copies to Mr.
the next day or so.
the City and Mr. Van Voorhis stated they
Jing when they return to Fresno within
Councilman Heisey asked Mr. Van Voorhis when he would
like to have the citizens committee appointed, and Mr. Van Voorhis
replied that it should be as soon as possible, as there is a lot
of background data to be absorbed. The citizens committee should
Bakersfield, California, May 11, 1970 - Page 7
stay with the study until a route is finally selected and adopted
by the California Highway Commission, which would probably take
about two years. The time element is determined by how much dis-
cussion is generated and how much difference of opinion is created.
Vice-Mayor Stiern thanked Mr. Van Voorhis and his staff
for appearing before the Council with the status report and proposal.
Allowance of Claims.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Vouchers Nos. 3855
to 3910 inclusive, in amount of $15,575.65, as audited by the
Voucher Approval Committee, were allowed, and authorization was
granted for payment.
Deferred Business.
Public Works Director Jing reported that they have taken
samples from the material offered by all three bidders for Annual
Contract for Select Road Materials, and not one met the City's
specifications. He recommended that all bids be rejected and
authorization granted to re-advertise for bids. Upon a motion by
Councilman Rucker, all bids were rejected as not meeting specifi-
cations, and authorization was granted to the Finance Director to
re-advertise for bids for this material.
Upon request of Councilman Vetter, action was deferred
for one week on Plans and Specifications for construction of Storm
Drains in Cypress Street, Verde Street, South "K" Street and Lake-
view Avenue at California Avenue.
Councilman Vetter stated that the Council had been
furnished with additional information by the City Manager as to the
breakdown of the cost of converting the NDP Application to an S & P
Application, and he moved that the Council adopt the report of the
Budget Review and Finance Committee on the subject of Conversion
of Neighborhood Development Program (NDP) Application to a Survey
and Planning (S & P) Application. This motion carried unanimously.
Bakersfield, California, May ll, 1970 - Page 8
Approval of Contract with Musicians' :
Local 263 for Summer Concerts.
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, Contract with Musi-
cians' Local 263 for Summer Concerts to be held at Beale Park from
June 14, 1970 through July 26, 1970, was approved, and the Mayor
was authorized to execute.
Approval of Agreement with the Bakers-
field Swim Club for use of Swimming
Pool at Central Park.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Agreement with the
Bakersfield Swim Club for use o£ the swimming pool at Central Park
from June 1, 1970 to August 31, 1970, was approved, and the Mayor
was authorized to execute.
Approval of Contract with Robert
Wolfersberger to act as Band In-
structor for Summer Band Classes.
Upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore, Contract with
Robert Wolfersberger to act as Band Instructor for summer band
classes held as part of the summer recreation program was approved,
and the Mayor was authorized to execute.
Reception of Report from Planning
Commission Re Parking and Storage
of Recreational Vehicles at the
Curb and within the front and side
street setback areas.
In accordance with the Council's request, the Planning
Commission for the past several months has studied the subject of
parking and storage of recreational vehicles at the curb or within
the front and side street setback areas. On April ].5, 1970, the
Commission held a public hearing for the purpose of hearing any
evidence concerning the issue of whether or not the parking or
storage of recreational vehicles should be prohibited or regulated
in the front and sideyard setback areas and at the curb. The
hearing was widely publicized by the news media and brought over-
whelming response from people owning this type of vehicle who were
opposed to any prohibiting of parking these vehicles within the
Bakersfield, California, May ll, 1970 - Page 9
213
front and sideyard setback areas. Most people speaking felt there
should be regulations controlling the parking of all such vehicles
at the curb. Only one resident spoke in favor of prohibiting the
parking of recreational vehicles in the yard setback area and
recommended that the City and County provide fenced, well lighted
and patrolled centralized storage lots at a minimum cost to the
owners.
The majority of the residents felt that such a regulation
would be an encroachment on their individual property rights and
gave the following reasons for their objections:
1. Many areas of town are without alleys or
secondary means of access.
2. Lack of facilities to store recreational
vehicles.
Cost of storing if such space were available.
The majority felt there was enough costs in
the purchase and licensing of such vehicles
without adding additional costs for storage.
4. Vandalism of vehicles without close supervision.
5.~ Inconvenience of using recreational vehicles
if stored other than the residence.
Many residences are more unsightly than those
with recreational equipment stored in the
yard due to lack of maintenance of yards and
property and in the storage of inoperative
and dismantled vehicles.
Based on the facts developed by the evidence taken at
the public hearing, several study sessions by the Planning Com-
mission Committee, and review and discussion by the entire Com-
mission, the Planning Commission recommends that parking and storage
of said recreational vehicles be allowed at the curb and within
the front and street side yard setback areas subject to the following
conditions:
1. PARKING AT CURBS
(a)
Parking of motorized vehicles, i. e.,
automobiles, jeeps, pickup truck with
campers, motorized coaches, etc. be
allowed to park at the curb for 72
continuous hours as permitted by present
Ordinance.
(b)
Any unmotorized recreational vehicle,
i. e., house trailers, camping trailers,
tent trailers, boats, etc., should be
allowed no more than 24 continuous hours
within any one 72 hour period.
214
Bakersfield, California, May 11, 1970 - Page l0
2. PARKING IN FRONT AND SIDEYARD SETBACK AREAS
(a)
All vehicles, including automobiles,
to be licensed and in an operative
condition.
(b)
All portions of any vehicle to be
parked within private property and
no part of said vehicle to be en-
croaching within City right of way.
(c)
Any vehicle over six feet in height
to be parked at least five feet from
any adjacent side property line.
(d)
Prohibit the repair of automobiles
and said recreational vehicles and
construction of same within the front
and side yard setback areas.
3. REQUIRED OFF-STREET PARKING
(a)
That two off-street parking spaces be
provided for each new single family
home.
(b)
That one and a third spaces per dwelling
be required for two family dwelling
units or two detached dwelling units
on the same lot.
4. SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS
(a)
Require alleys in new R-1 and R-2 sub-
divisions where topography permits
full utilization of an alley.
(b)
In all new R-1 and R-2 subdivisions
require access to required off-street
parking area from an alley or require
a 12-foot side yard setback on one
side of all interior lots to allow
vehicular access to the rear yard area.
This could be accomplished by requiring
developers to file deed restrictions
with the City prior to the recording
of final subdivision map.
The Planning Commission will schedule public hearings on
the above mentioned Ordinance changes and will make final recom-
mendations on each proposed change to the Council at the conclusion
of the hearings.
Councilman Whittemore commended the Planning Commission
for its excellent report and stated that he would recommend that
considerable thought be given to parking campers and trailers at
intersections which create a traffic hazard. Councilman Stiern
agreed, stating that he does not think the Council can wait until
Bakersfield, Cali£ornia, May 11, 1970 - Page 11
a State law is passed, it could be ten years before this is accom-
plished. He complimented the members of the Planning Commission
on the report, stating that they have permitted the public every
opportunity to be heard before making any recommendations.
City Attorney Hoagland pointed out that a very serious
problem would be encountered in connection with the prohibiting o£
parking adjacent to intersections, in that it would require posting
which would be very expensive. Councilman Heisey slated that he
was under the impression a request had been made to the State
Legislature to change the Motor Vehicle Code to take care of parking
a£ intersections. Mr. Hoagland replied that the State Legisla£ure
is aware o£ it, but nothing has been done. In talking with the
League representatives, they expressed some opposition on the basis
that the City would be giving up its rights under home rule.
Possibly the City should control it by Ordinance, but the problem
facing them right now is the cost o£ posting intersections. Per-
haps they could start out on a selective basis, just post certain
intersections, but to post all o£ them would be very expensive.
Councilman Heisey stated he agreed with Councilman
Whittemore lhat the Planning Commission should be asked to make a
study and recommendation on this problem. He stated that the
Planning Commission has done a £ine job on this study, and moved
that the report be received and ordered placed on £ile. This
motion carried unanimously.
Adoption o£ Resolution No. 34-70 authori-
zing the Filing o£ an Application with
the State Water Pollution Control Agency
for a Grant under the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act, as amended (33 U. S. C.
466 et seq.)
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Resolution No. 34-?0
authorizing the Filing o£ an Application with the State Water
Pollution Control Agency £or a Grant under the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act, as amended (33 U. S. C. 466 et seq.) and
authorizing the Mayor to sign Assurance o£ Compliance of Civil
Bakersfield, California, May 11, 1970 - Page 12
Rights Act
Ayes:
of 1964, was adopted by the following roll call
Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
vote:
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Bleecker
Approval of Plans and Specifications
for Construction of Restroom Building
at Wayside Park and Construction of
Storage Building at Jefferson Park
Swimming Pool.
Upon a motion by Councilman Heisey, the Plans and Speci-
fications were approved and the Finance Director was authorized
to advertise for bids for the construction of Restroom Building at
Wayside Park and Construction of Storage Building at Jefferson
Park Swimming Pool.
Hearings.
This is the time set for public hearing on report on
Assessments for demolition of dangerous buildings in the City of
Bakersfield, California, as provided by Chapter 8 of the Dangerous
Building Code, Volume IV of the Uniform Building Code, and pursuant
to the order of J. A. Olsson, Building Director. This hearing has
been duly advertised and notices have been sent to the property
owners.
Mr. Jing stated that bids were received for the removal
and demolishing of four buildings at a cost of $1935. The work
has been done and accepted. These were abandoned residences, some
of which had been burned. The locations are 142 Clifton Street,
214 Clyde Street, 114 "P" Street and 1006 - East 21st Street. The
Council allocated $3,000 to do this work to be recovered either by
payment or to be applied to the tax roll as an assessment against
the property and be collected with the taxes.
The Mayor declared the hearing open for presenting any
protests to the report on assessments for the demolition of these
properties. No protests or objections were received and the public
hearing was closed.
Bakersfield, California, May ll, 1970 - Page 13
the
to prepare the necessary Resolution for adoption at nexl week's
meeting.
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the
Council, upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, the meeting was
adjourned at 9:35 P. M.
VICE-MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield, Calif.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Heisey,
assessment was confirmed and the City Attorney was instructed
ATTEST:
Ex-Officio Clerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, May 18, 1970
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Council of the
City of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of
the City Hall at eight o'clock P. M., May 18, 1970.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance and
Hiddleson
Present:
Absent:
of the Oildale Church
The City Clerk called
Mayor Hart.
Invocation by the Reverend Bill
of God.
the roll as follows:
Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker,
Stiern, Vetter
Councilman Whittemore
Minutes of the regular meeting of May 11,
approved as presented.
Equipment
the City of Bakersfield on May 14, 1970.
Correspondence.
A communication was read from
1970 were
Service Pin Award.
Mayor Hart presented a service pin to Robert Cooper,
Operator III, who completed 30 years of service with
the Kern County Taxpayers
Association asking that recognition be given to the precept that
"in the establishment of compensation for public employees, the
compensation shall be at least equal to that which is locally
prevailing for the same quality of service under similar condi-
tions of employment." Councilman Stiern stated that; he appreciated
the interest shown by this group and that
stated.
on file.
detail
their request was well
be received and placed
He moved that this communication
This motion carried unanimously.
Council Statements.
Mayor Hart commented that he was prepared to report in
on the speech he made in Japanese at Wakayama, Japan, how-
ever, he had decided to keep it on file in his office if anyone
cares to stop by and read it~ He stated that his recent trip to
Japan was exciting and rewarding and that the City of Bakersfield
was well represented by the group who visited Bakersfield's Sister
City.
Bakersfield, California, May 18, 1970 - Page 2
Councilman Heisey
for its fine work in constructing the storm
and Pacific Streets. This intersection was
and filled with stagnant water. The people
commended the Public Works Department
drain at Sacramento
formerly very rough
in the neighborhood
have called him and expressed their thanks for this improvement.
Councilman Bleecker presented a petition in the form of
a resolution that was signed by 47 residents, property owners and
users of Jastro Park who expressed complaints regarding a permit
issued by the City for a gathering of a large number of young peop3Le
in Jastro Park on May 2, 1970. The petition states that these
young people proceeded to disrupt the neighborhood with loud and
noisy electronic sound equipment that could be heard for several
blocks, raced cars and motorcycles in the streets and alleys around
the park, upset garbage cans, tossed beer cans on lawns and in the
park. The police were called and patrolled the area in automobiles
which helped to the extent of curbing some of the more objectionable
activities only as long as the police were in sight.
The petitions requested that no further permits be granted
to use Jastro Park for such activities and that legislation be
enacted to prohibit the use of electronic sound equipment which can
be heard beyond the confines of the park. Also, that some sort of
legislation be passed to require a bond to be posted to insure the
responsibility for property damage or bodily injury that might be
suffered directly or indirectly, and to provide for the cleaning
up of the park and the adjoining streets and properties, and to
defray the expense of having police surveillance on hand.
Councilman Stiern stated that in recent discussions with
the County regarding the intended use of certain parks, it was
pointed out that Beach Park is a County Regional Park, which is
not adjacent to residential areas, .a-~d would be suitable for this
type of activity.
Bakersfield, California, May 18, 1970 - Page 3
City Manager Bergen commented that at staff level the
possibility of prohibiting loud speakers in parks had been dis-
cussed, but the City Attorney pointed out that legally this could
not be done. However, they are exploring the possibility of
amending the existing Ordinance to regulate uses in parks and
require the posting of a bond to cover any damages or cleaning
up of litter. The staff is aware of the need for this type of
Ordinance, but the City is limited on what it can propose in an
Ordinance.
Councilman Bleecker questioned issuing a permit for use
of the park when it was known that an activity of this nature
would result.
Mr. Bergen suggested that the City might restrict the
use of sound equipment in a neighborhood park as being unapporpriate,
and that large gatherings, such as political rallies, etc.~ could
be confined to a park such as Central Park, which is not surrounded
by residential areas.
Mayor Hart commented that the people who live in the
outer perimeters of the parks who pay taxes to maintain the parks
for all the citizens to enjoy, should be given consideration,
instead of worrying about complaints from members of the legal
profession who spend their time attempting to destroy what semblance
of order remains in society. He suggested that the petition be
referred to the administrative staff to prepare an Ordinance regu-
lating certain uses in city parks~ so that there would be some
regard for law and order.
After additional discussion, upon a motion by Councilman
Heisey, the petition was referred to the City Attorney to use as a
guideline in drafting an Ordinance to regulate the use of parks.
This motion carried unanimously.
Bakersfield, California, May 18, 1970 - Page 4
Reports.
Councilman Vetter requested approval of sending the
following letter to the Board of Supervisors:
The Bakersfield City Council wishes to go on record
in support of the request from the City of Delano
for a study by the County of the results of the
Williamson Act in Kern County.
We feel that the large amount of land already
sheltered by the Williamson Act will have a signi-
ficant effect upon the tax base of the entire
County, and that cities and school districts will
be better equipped to make sound financial pro-
jections if the County conducts the requested study.
We feel a progress report in which the goals and
achievements to date of the Williamson Act are
analyzed, would be of great value to each City
and school district in the County of Kern.
Please feel free to call upon the City of Bakers-
field if there is any way in which we may be of
assistance to you on this request.
Councilman Vetter quoted from an article in the Fresno
Bee which set out County by County, the acreages put into preserves,
the assessed valuation losses, and tax revenue losses estimated by
County officials, which had been attached to copies of the letter,
for the information of the Council.
Councilman Heisey commented that this was the first time
he had seen this article, and asked if the City was taking a
position for or against the Williamson Act. He stated he was not
prepared to make a decision on it at the present time.
Vetter stated that it was not the
position on the Williamson Act, he
as to where the City stands now in
its position will be next year, or
on it.
stating
true.
Councilman
intent of the letter to take a
was merely asking for information
relation to the Act and where
five years from now.
Councilman Bleecker commented that he would like to have
the Council look into this thoroughly before recommending any action
He took exception to the article attached to the letter,
that he wasn't sure that all the facts and figures were
Councilman Vetter pointed out that it was not planned to
send this article to the Board of Supervisors, it was merely included
to inform the Council regarding the tax revenue losses resulting
Bakersfield, California, May 18, 1970 -Page 5
from the shifting of the tax burden from agriculture to non-
agricultural property under the open space conversion program.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker,
approval was granted to send Councilman Vetter's letter to the
Board of Supervisors without an aitachment.
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, the Council went on
record as opposing Assembly Bill 6?8 and Senate Bill 969, which
concern the creation of public improvement districts which are
used extensively to finance special neighborhood improvements.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, the Council went on
record as opposing Senate Bill 874 which proposes to extend the
"Public Meeting Doctrine" of the Ralph M. Brown Act to the com-
mittees and subcommittees of all legislative bodies in the State,
excepting the State Legislature.
City Manager Bergen pointed out that Bakersfield City
Employees Association does not represent all City employees~
particularly the Police Department, therefore, the figures published
in the newspaper recently do not include the total salary package
for all City employees. Based on Mr. Dallimore's reasoning, the
total requested for salary increases for 1970-71 would amount to
$705,100. This does not include supplemental benefits and would
not include the additional retirement cost. The retirement cost
itself for the Police and Fire Departments would amount to about
14% of the total payroll.
Allowance of Claims.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, Vouchers Nos. 3911
to 4068 inclusive, in amount of $134,689.35, as audited by the
Voucher Approval Committee were allowed, and authorization was
granted £or payment.
Deferred Business.
Action on plans and specifications for the construction
of Storm Drains in Cypress Street, Verde Street, South "K" Street
and Lakeview Avenue at California had been deferred upon the
request of Councilman Vetter.
Bakersfield, California, May 18, 1970 - Page 6
Councilman Vetter stated that he had asked for this
delay in order to discuss the possibility of jointly constructing
a storm drain on Olive Street with the County of Kern. However,
he has learned that the County is not interested in constructing
this storm drain, and he considers it unfortunate that the two
agencies cannot work together to provide the proper drainage for
the benefit of both the County and City residents on this street.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, the plans and specifi-
cations were approved and the Finance Director was authorized to
advertise for bids for the construction of storm drains in Cypress
Street, Verde Street, South "K" Street and Lakeview Avenue at
California Avenue.
Upon a motion by Councilman Heisey, request from Bakers-
field Cable TV, Inc. for permission to increase its rates in the
City was referred to the Budget Review and Finance Committee for
study and recommendation.
Action on Bids.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker,
Iow bid of Leo V. Jones Construction Company for the grading of
42nd Street between Jewett Avenue and Union Avenue was accepted,
all other bids were rejected, and the Mayor was authorized to
execute the contract.
Adoption of Resolution No. 35-70 con-
firming the Assessment of certain
properties located in the City of
Bakersfield upon which Dangerous
Buildings have been demolished and
removed.
Upon a motion by Councilman Heisey, Resolution No. 35-70
confirming the Assessment of certain properties located in the City
of Bakersfield upon which Dangerous Buildings have been demolished
and removed, was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Whittemore
Bakersfield, California, May 18, 1970 - Page 7
First reading of an Ordinance altering
the Boundaries of the Third and Fifth
Wards of the City of Bakersfield, Calif-
ornia.
First reading was considered given an Ordinance altering
the Boundaries of the Third and Fifth Wards of the City of Bakers-
field, California.
Approval of Agreement between the City
of Bakersfield and Stockdale Develop-
ment Corporation for construction of a
Storm Drain along Sundale Avenue.
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, Agreement between
the City of Bakersfield and Stockdale Development Corporation for
the construction of a Storm Drain along Sundale Avenue was approved,
and the Mayor was authorized to execute the Agreement.
Approval of Cooperative Agreement between
the City of Bakersfield and the County of
Kern for operation and maintenance of a
storm drain pipeline, pump station and
appurtenances along Sundale Avenue.
Upon a motion by Councilman Heisey, Cooperative Agree-
ment between the City of Bakersfield and the County of Kern for
operation and maintenance of a storm drain pipeline, pump station
and appurtenances was approved, and the Mayor was authorized to
execute the agreement.
This storm drain will be constructed by the developer
along Sundale Avenue to serve a portion of City area and also a
portion of the unincorporated area. The entire cost of construct-
ing the storm drain facility is being assumed by the developer and
the completed facilities will be maintained by the County with the
City paying 18% of the total cost of operation and maintenance.
Approval of Cooperative Agreements between
the City of Bakersfield and the County of
Kern for the Improvement of "P" Street
between Ming Avenue and Belle Terrace.
City Manager Bergen pointed out that this project will
be paid for from Gas Tax Funds and it will be necessary to include
it in next year's budget. After discussion, upon a motion by
Councilman Vetter, Cooperative Agreement between the City of
Bakersfield and the County of Kern for the Improvement of "P"
Street between Ming Avenue and Belle Terrace was approved, and the
Mayor was authorized to execute same.
Bakersfield, California, May 18, 1970 - Page 8
Approval of Construction Change Order
No. 1 for Contract No. 31-69 with
Griffith Co., £or construction of
White Lane and Hughes Lane, under
Public Improvement District No. 801-A.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, Construction
Change Order No. 1 for Contract No. 31-69 with Griffith Co., con-
struction of White Lane and Hughes Lane under Public Improvement
District No. 801-A, in amount of $284.00, was approved and the
Mayor was authorized to execute same.
Approval of Map of Tract No. 3364 and
Mayor authorized to execute Contract
and Specifications for improvements
therein.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, it is ordered that
the Map of Tract No. 3364 be, and the same is hereby approved.
That all the easements, streets, drives, lanes, roads and avenues
shown upon said map, therein offered for dedication be, and the
same are hereby accepted for the purpose for which the same are
offered for dedication.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 11587 of the
Business and Professions Code, the Council of the City of Bakers-
field hereby waives the requirement of signatures of the following:
NAME
NATURE OF INTEREST
Kern Island Water Company
Easement for Canal purposes as
conveyed by deed recorded May
12, 1970 in Book 4397, Page 92,
O. R., County of Kern.
Kern County Land Company
Mineral rights below a depth of
500 feet with no right of surface
entry.
Kern County Land Company
The right to pass over and across
said land for ingress to and
egress for any lands of Kern
County Land Company, which are
not accessible from any public
road, highway, or over other
lands of said Company as excepted
and reserved in that deed recorded
May 27, 1960 in Book 3271 at Page
26, O. R., County of Kern and in
that deed recorded July 20, 1961:,
in Book 3398 at Page 137, O. R.
County of Kern.
Bakersfield, California, May 18, 1970 - Page 9
No final Soil Report has been submitted. No Building
Permit on any lot within this Tract shall be issued or be valid
until the final Soil Report for this Tract has been filed with
the Chief Building Inspector of the City of Bakersfield and the
City Engineer of the City of Bakersfield and a final Soil Report
Certificate, signed and issued by the City Engineer, has been
recorded with Recorder of the County of Kern.
The Clerk of this Council is directed to endorse upon
the face of said Map a copy of this order authenticated by the
Seal of the Council of the City of Bakersfield, and the Mayor was
authorized to execute the Contract and Specifications covering
the improvements in said Tract.
Councilman Rucker asked the Director of Public Works to
check on a sump at the intersection of DeWolf and South Haley
Street as the stagnent water has become a problem to the people
residing in this area.
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the
Council, upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker the meeting was
adjourned at 9:30 P. M.
MAYOR df he it e "
field, Calif.
ATTEST:
CITY'CLERK and Ex-O/"l'lcio Clerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 '£-- ~
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Council of the
City of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of
the City Hall at eight o'clock P. M., May 25, 1970.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart, followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation by the Reverend Norman
Callaway of the Wesley United Methodist Church.
The City Clerk called the roll as follows:
Present: Mayor Hart. Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker,
Stiern, Vetter, Whittemore
Absent: None
Minutes of the regular meeting of May 18, 1970 were
approved as presented.
Scheduled Public Statements.
Gary Jones, a Bakersfield High School Junior,
the Council, stating that he
call the Council's attention
the nation today, and that is
to endorse a Resolution to encourage people to stem the tide of
population growth by having only two children, as more than two
children will help to destroy the American quality of life.
Councilman Vetter complimented Mr. Jones on his presenta-
tion. Councilman Stiern commented that he felt the presentation
was very sensible, and he expressed his appreciation for Mr. Jones
appearing before the Council
motion that the Council take
study and appropriate action.
addressed
had come to the meeting tonight to
to the greatest problem confronting
overpopulation. He urged the Council
Nancy Sharp, a Junior at West High School, addressed the
Council, stating that she was representing a few "ding-a-lings",
or so they had been referred to by Mayor Hart, who were attempting
to start a youth newspaper in Bakersfield. She stated that she
wanted to talk about what actually happened at the concert held in
Jastro Park on May 2nd, to discuss the petition-resolution which
was filed with the Council on May 18th complaining about certain
to discuss this matter. He made a
the Resolution under advisement for
This motion carried unanimously.
Bakersfield~ California, May 25, 1970 - Page 2
activities at the park and to refute the charges contained in the
Resolution as being misleading and unfair. She asked why an in-
vestigation had not been made of the alleged charges and stated
that there are adequate laws on the City's books to handle any
misconduct cited in the Resolution.
She explained that the group had applied to the City
Manager's Office for a sound permit and reserved the park for
their event. They discussed the matter with the Police Department
and were informed of their responsibilities to stage an event at
Jastro Park. They recognized that the park is situated in a
neighborhood area which is entitled to peace and quiet. When
complaints were received, they asked the bands to stop playing
and shut off the music and endeavored at all times to be coopera-
tive and responsive. At 5:15 P. M. the park was cleared, the
group assumed clean-up duties and she personally made sure that
the park was immaculately clean before they left.
Regarding accusations of immoral behavior, obvious
intoxication, speeding in the area and property damage, she
questioned that this was true, as no arrests were made by the
Police Department and no complaints of this nature registered at
the Police Department. She personally did not see any activities
to justify these accusations. A few parents and teachers who
observed the activities had told her that they could see nothing
objectionable happening in the park, that the event was peaceful
and without incident. She stated that they respectfully asked if
there had been an investigation concerning the groups' misconduct
or misuse of the park facilities.
Mayor Hart stated that no action had actually been taken
the Council. A petition was brought to the Council by one of
members and it was referred to the City Attorney to make an
by
its
investigation and bring a recommendation back to the Council.
Miss Sharp went on to say that the petition was obviously
misleading and unfair and she felt an investigation should have
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 - Page 3
been made. She pointed out that apparently no one knew that the
participating group was trying to start a newspaper in Bakersfield
and she felt that the City should have been aware of the purpose
of the event.
Mayor Hart commented that obviously the statement he
had made ~.~t'he last meeting about "ding-a-lings" could not have
referred in any way to Miss Sharp's group because as she has said,
the charges made at the last meeting didn't happen. He stated
that until such time as they have been proved to a conclusion and
someone has pressed charges, he wished to apologize to Miss Sharp.
His remarks still stand relative to the average run of "ding-a-lings"
who do not care about the other person's property rights. He asked
Miss Sharp what newspaper she was sponsoring.
She replied that it was a student newspaper and the name
of it will be F.A.C.E. The reason for holding the concert in
Jastro Park was to collect donations for the purpose of starting
the newspaper.
Councilman Stiern commented that Miss Sharp must have
concluded from something she read in a newspaper that the Council~
without any investigation~ was about to adopt restrictive laws
affecting the use of the parks. Nothing could be further from
the truth. A group of citizens presented a Resolution to a Council-
man, it was not a Council Resolution~ and he brought it to the
Council for consideration. The Council has not taken any action
to adopt any oppressive Ordinances, it is in the process of
investigating the complaints in the citizens' Resolution. He
stated he had great confidence in the ability of the Police Depart-
ment to enforce the existing adequate laws covering behavior in
and around parks.
Councilman Vetter stated he agrees with Dr. Stiern's
comments. He would be very hesitant to adopt Ordinances which
would restrict the parks to any segment of the community. However,
he is not in favor of infringing on the rights of others to use
the parks. He has discussed the event at Jastro Park on May 2nd
with the Police Department, and basically, they have supported
Miss Sharp's statements, that they did not find it necessary to
arrest anyone for misconduct or misuse of the park.
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 - Page 4
Councilman Bleecker commented that he was the Councilman
who had presented the petition to the Council last Monday. He also
pointed out that it was not a Council Resolution, ii; was prepared
by a group of citizens who felt very strongly about certain hap-
penings at the park. Whether or not their allegations in the
petitions are true, it is a matter which has to be investigated
and determined by the Council. He referred to an editorial which
appeared in the Bakersfield Californian recently which stated that
Councilman Bleecker was proposing restricting park use in the wake
of citizen's complaints that young people's assemblies in Jastro
Park have disturbed adjacent residents and that such activities
could best be limited to regional and out of town parks. He stated
that he had said none of these things and that facts were misquoted.
He then read the following statement:
In last Saturday's Californian, there was an editorial
entitled "Park Restriction - Bad Idea." The editorial
assigned certain statements which are false. I made no
mention of relegating certain recreational activities
to Lake Woollomes or Hart Park, or any other specific
area. The editorial writer ought to get his facts
straightened out and be more careful not to misquote
Councilmen and use misinformation as a basis for an
editorial.
I did, however, at the request of one of my constit-
uents in the Fourth Ward, read a petition to this
Council, signed by 47 citizens, and threw the issue
open to discussion.
I want the Californian to know, and the people of
Bakersfield to know, that I will always bring issues
of importance to this Council. The petition criti-
~c~zed.the use of Jastro Park for purposes not
harmonious with a family-type park and suggested that
the Council look into the matter.
After the petition was read, a discussion followed,
including Mayor Hart, Vice-Mayor Stiern and Council-
man Heisey, who moved that the petition be handed over
to the City Attorney for consideration. Councilman
Heisey's motion passed unanimously.
Now, since the Californian has felt this issue is
important enough to write about, I will make the
following statement which I hope will be reported
accurately, without editorial omissions or additions.
Jastro Park is a family park and I will do everything
I can as a Councilman to see that it stays that way.
A place where children can play safely and where all
citizens can gather in a decent atmosphere for the
purposes harmonious to the neighborhood. And if
legislation should appear necessary to achieve these
ends, I will vote for any Ordinance which is reasonable
and sound. And the way I vote will in no way be
determined by any editorial writer who misinforms the
public through innuendo and whose factual protestations
cannot stand the test.
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 - Page 5
Mayor Hart declared a brief recess at this time.
Mr. Vernon Strong addressed the Council, stating that he
was appearing here tonight on behalf of the interested citizens in
southeast Bakersfield regarding the proposed multi-purpose center
which the Council had referred to the Auditorium-Recreation Com-
mittee for. study about a month ago. They are aware that the Council
cannot take any formal action on the matter until current budget
hearings, but they are asking that the Council go on record tonight
to assign this project the highest priority in the 1970-71 Budget.
He asked thai the Council make a favorable committment tonight,
some kind of informal resolution which would sustain the optimism
of the people in the southeast area.
Councilman Rucker, Chairman of the Auditorium-Recreation
Committee read the following report of that Committee:
As you will recall, Supervisor Milton Miller appeared
before the City Council on Monday, April 27th, stating
that he was an official representative of the Board of
Supervisors and was ready, willing and able to nego-
tiate to find out what the City wanted from the County
in the way of a contribution to the California Avenue
Park Project.
Two days later, April 29th, the Committee met with
Supervisor Miller and lined out the City's proposal.
On May 1st, a letter was sent to Mr. Miller informing
him that the total cost for this project was $483,000,
of which the Federal Government will provide $322,000,
with the local share set at $161,000. We further
informed Mr. Miller that since the City was equipping
this facility at a cost of $35,000 and staffing and
maintaining the building at an annual cost of $45,000,
we felt it only fair that the County provide at least
75% of the local contribution. This would amount to
approximately $121,000.
We are pressed for time on this project and must know
by June 1st whether the County intends to participate
financially with us on this worthwhile Community Center.
Tomorrow is the last day that the Board of Supervisors
will meet and be able to inform us of their intentions
before June 1st.
An early reply was requested from the Board, but to
date no answer has been received. We realize that
the Board cannot legally obligate funds at this time,
but we must have a yes or no answer expressing its
intentions in financially supporting this Center.
At this late date we have no other alternative but
to inform the Board of Supervisors that if we do not
receive an answer from them immediately, we must take
it for granted that they are not willing to cooperate
with us in developing this Community Center.
Bakersfield, Cali£ornia, May 25, 1970 - Page 6
Councilman Rucker went on to say that this multi-purpose
building is for the benefit of all the people in the area and in
order not to lose the contribution from the Federal Government, he
is request'i'ng 'that the Council give this building the highest
priority in the budget, even though the County does not participate
with the City. He then made a motion urging the members of
Council to assign this project first priority in the budget for
1970-71.
Councilman Heisey offered a substitute motion to receive
the report of the Auditorium-Recreation Committee and place ii on
file and that the Board of Supervisors be informed at its meeting
tomorrow of the Council's strong feeling in regard io County par-
ticipate financially with the City. He suggested that Mr. Strong
attend the Board's meeting and urge that a contribution be made
toward this project as he cannot see any other way for it to go
without the Board's participation.
Councilman Stiern commented that ii has been more than a
month since Supervisor Miller appeared before the City Council as
an official representative of the BOard of Supervisors and as he
recalls, he expressed great concern that the Federal Funds available
would be lost if this Community Center is not developed by the City
and the County. It was explained to him that the Council was very
anxious to have this multi-purpose building constructed, and was
interested to have the County join with the City in a joint venture
and to state the amount the County intends to contribute, because
it will be used both by citizens of the City and the County.
He is anxious, and the rest of the Council is anxious,
to know whether or not the County is going to offer'support with
money, not just lip service. It is all well and good to say how
nice the building will be and how much it is needed, everyone
recognizes that, but it is cash that is going to make this projecl
possible, and the Council would like to know at this time how much
the County is going to contribute toward the local share of
$161,000, which is needed for the project. He stated thai the
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 - Page
time is growing short, and envoys from the City should appear
before the Board tomorrow and ask them pointblank, are they still
interested in participating in this project jointly with the City.
If the County is not willing, then he would imagine that if this
center is going to be built, the City is going to have to do it
alone. He hopes the City does not have to do this.
Councilman Bleecker remarked that as a result of Mr.
Miller's sincere plea to the Council, he had felt that something
would be done, and he is very disappointed that the Board has not
indicated at this point the amount it intends to contribute. The
Federal Funds are available and since the City will be equipping
and staffing and maintaining this facility~ he feels it is a
legitimate request to expect the County to contribute toward the
construction. He urged Mr. Strong to attend the meeting tomorrow
and make a request for a contribution to the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Bergen pointed out that the Council must make the
£inal determination because it will be the agency entering into
the agreement with HUD. The Board o£ Supervisors can vote on
whether they intend to help the City with the building as requested
and with that expression from the Board, the City Council can pro-
ceed to make its plans. It is critical that the Council have a
reply from the Board tomorrow, expressing its intentions relative
to financially supporting the Center. We realize thai the Board
cannot legally obligate funds at this time, but the Council needs
an answer as to the Board's intention before the budget hearings
which are two weeks from tonight. The City has a very tight dead-
line after budget hearings to complete the second phase in order
to meet the final date.
Councilman Bleecker commented that regardless of whether
or not the Board of Supervisors contributes toward this building,
he is interested in seeing the Council assist the citizens in
this area and use the funds which have been provided by the govern-
ment.
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 - Page 8
Councilman Whittemore encouraged Mr. Strong'to appear
before the Board of Supervisors and ask for support for this
building because two of the members of the Board represent the
people in th~s area. If support is offered, perhaps the Council
can then go ahead and develop this center.
Councilman Stiern stated that he feels it is important
that certain people be designated to appear before the Board at
its meeting tomorrow. He feels that Councilman Rucker, Auditorium
Manager Graviss and some representative from the City Manager's
Office should be present. Vote was then taken on Councilman
Heisey's substitute motion, which carried unanimous].y.
Correspondence.
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, communication from
Mr. George C. Palmer, Associate Superintendent of Bakersfield City
School District, enclosing copy of a Resolution adopted by the
Board of Education expressing its concern relative to road condi-
tions around the school complex on Auburn Street, was received
and ordered placed on file.
Councilman St±ern commented that the Council is doing
all that it can to Correct the situation around the schools and
Councilman Rees'is keeping close watch on the operations.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, communication from
R. H. Ramey, District Engineer, District VI, Division of Highways,
re establishment of the freeway location for the portions of State
Highway Routes 58 and 178 in Kern County be/ween~Route 5 and "M"
Street, was received and ordered placed on file.
Councilman Vetter remarked that there was some comment
when Mr. Ramey and Mr. Van Voorhis appeared before the Council two
weeks ago about the appointment of a citizens committee to assist
in a study and recommendations to the Highway Department relative
to these freeway routes~ He asked if anything had been done on
this. Councilman Heisey commented that the Council could act as
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 - Page 9
such a committee, and he would consider serving on it. Councilman
Vetter asked the City Attorney if the Council could do this, and
Mr. Hoagland replied that it would not present a problem.
Director of Public Works Jing stated that a large 8 x 10
map of the proposed five or six alternate routes to be studied, is
in his office, if the Council wishes to come in and look at it.
Mayor Hart pointed out that he had received a communication
from a local broadcasting company commending the conduct and com-
passion of officers of the Fire Department and Police Department in
connection with aid rendered to strangers passing through the City.
Council Statements.
Councilman Vetter pointed out to the Council that several
weeks ago he had inquired relative to the condition of lots and
buildings that were owned by the State south of Brundage Lane.
Some work has been done on one building since his last inquiry,
but the condition of the lots is very bad. He referred to one
particular lot located on
Avenue and Richland Drive,
asked what the Council, as
the southeast corner of South Chester
which is in very poor condition, and
the local governing body, can do to see
that the State cleans up the lots.
City Attorney Hoagland commented that ordinarily the
building codes, zoning and police powers are not applicable to
the State. However, it could be declared a nuisance and he will
look into to it to see if the City can take any action. He pointed
out that many times freeway routes are approved ten years in advance
of actual construction, and although properties are acquired for
the right of way, no building is done for several years.
Councilman Vetter commented that in his opinion these
people were being treated very unfairly by the State and he feels
something should be done about it.
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 - Page 10
Mr. Hoagland remarked that' possibly persuasion 'is the
best thing t6 use with the Division of Highways, as the City is
presently getting along better with the State Highway Department
than it has for a number of years.
Mr~ Jing agreed to call the Right Of Way Engineer and
obtain a date for clearing these lots and report back to the
Council at the next meeting.
Councilman Heisey stated that in his opinion something
can be done when freeway agreements are drawn up with the State
and certain procedures set out in the agreement for the cleaning
up of an area after it has been condemned for right of way purposes.
He feels that with the cooperation of the press and some appro-
priate pictures~ the State could be influenced to do something
about
subject
record as
Lane, as they are
governmental agencies.
the present situation south of Brundage
to'public pressures the same as other
Reports.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, the Council went on
opposing AB 1335 (Townsend) .which redefines the term
"Public Works" to include all work undertaken by or on behalf of
any City whether chartered or not, and would require that the
prevailing wage rate be applicable not only to public work done
under contract, but also that work done by City employees.
Councilman Whittemore, Chairman of the Governmental
Efficiency and Personnel Committee, read a report of that Com-
mittee on the subject of Public Works Department Reorganization.
During the last year, certain reorganization,
have occurred in the Public Works Department.
These reorganizations did not involve reclassi-
fications or additional positions and did not
require the prior approval ~of the City Council.
Due to the retirement of the Tree Maintenanc:e
Supervisor, the Right Of Way Maintenance Section
was transferred from the Streets and Waste Water
Division to the Sanitation Division for reasons
of efficiency and economy.
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 -Page ll
The recent retirement~of the Assistant Director
of Public Works - Field, will permit additional
reorganizations which require City Council
approval for two positions reclassifications
and the transfer of a third position. This re-
organization includes a transfer of the Surveying
and Inspection function from the Engineering
Division to the Street Division. Combining these
two work details allows better correlation of
work.
A major change in the present reorganization is
the transfer of the Mechanical Maintenance function
involving the Civic Auditorium and City Hall from
the Auditorium Department to the Public Works De-
partment. This new section, called Plant Mainten-
ance and Construction, will include Electrical,
Mechanical (formerly Auditorium) and Plant Main-
tenance (formerly Equipment Maintenance).
To implement this reorganization, the following
changes require City Council approval:
Transfer the Service Technician from the
Auditorium Department to the Public Works
Department. This action involves no title
or salary change.
Replace the vacant Assistant Director of
Public Works -:Field, position (Salary
Range 60) with the new classification of
Street Engineer (Salary Range 53). This
change represents a decrease in salary of
17.5%.
Authorize reclassification of the Electrical
Superintendent position (Salary Range 46) to
Plant Superintendent (Salary:Range 49). This
amounts to a 7.5% increase for one employee
to recognize the increased responsibilities
for Mechanical and Plant Maintenance in addi-
tion to his present responsibility for
Electrical Maintenance· ..~
The Committee has thoroughly reviewed this reorganization
and recommends implementation of these requests and asks that the
City Attorney be instructed to prepare the necessary Ordinances
insure this reorganization prior to the budget hearings.
Upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore, the Report and
Recommendations contained therein, were adopted.
Councilman Heisey commented that when the Division of
Highways made its presentation to the Board of Supervisors, they
recommended that there be a committee of ten appointed to study
the proposed freeway routes. He asked that the Council keep this
in mind when it takes action on appointing a committee for this
purpose.
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 - Page 12
Councilman Bleecker commented that there is a great
deal of interest shown in his Ward on freeways and.he thinks
there should be citizens serving on this committee. He asked
the Council to think about this before next Monday and give con-
sideration to the appointment of this committee at that time.
Mayor Hart announced that Councilman Rucker has agreed
to serve as the City's representative on the Kern County Economic
Opportunity Corporation Committee.
Allowance of. Claims.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, Vouchers Nos. 4069
to 4119 inclusive, in amount of
Voucher Approval Committee were
granted for payment.
$30,291.00, as audited by the
allowed, and authorization was
Adoption of Ordinance No. 1862 New
Series altering the boundaries of
the Third and Fifth Wards of the
City of Bakersfield, California.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, seconded by Council-
man Stiern, Ordinance No. 1862 New Series, altering the Boundaries
of the Third and Fifth Wards of the City of Bakersfield, California,
was adopted by the following vote:
Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern,
Vetter, Whittemore
None
None
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Adoption of Resolution No. 36-70
fixing the time of Meetings of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
during the months of June, July and
August, 1970.
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, Resolution
fixing the time of meetings of the Council of the City
field during the months of June, July and August, 1970,
adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker,
Vetter, Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
No. 36-70
of Bakers-
Stiern,
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 - Page 13
Action deferred for one week on request
for Council approval of 65' high Sign
for Holiday Inn.
Councilman Rucker moved that 65' high Sign for Holiday
Inn be approved. Councilman Vetter asked if this sign had been
reviewed by the Planning Commission. Mr. Sceales stated that it
had been reviewed only by the Building Department and the Planning
Department. After discussion, Councilman Rucker withdrew his
motion, and upon a motion by Councilman Vetter action was delayed
for one week to permit him to inspect this sign. Councilman Whitte-
more abstained from voting on this motion.
Request from Gregory Bill Christy
to connect property located on Stine
Road approximately ~ mile south of
Panama Lane to Stine Road Sewer
referred to the Planning Commission
for study and recommendation.
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, request from Gregory
Bill Christy to connect property located on Stine Road approximately
~ mile south of Panama Lane to Stine Road Sewer Line was referred to
the Planning Commission for study and recommendation.
Council goes on record for develop-
ment of area along Panorama Drive
adjacent to Sanitary Landfill if
developers contribute $100,000 for
this purpose.
The Council had referred a request to landscape an area
along Panorama Drive adjacent to the Sanitary Landfill to the
Planning Commission for study and recommendation. It was the
opinion of the Commission that a small landscaped area or park
would be desirable and of benefit to the area but felt existing
undeveloped park site in the City should have priority for develop-
ment. The Commission recommended that any immediate development
of this area be accomplished by private funds.
Councilman Stiern commented that it would be a very
attractive area if it were landscaped but he feels that there are
other projects which should have priority over the development of
this area. There is a park at 4th and "P" Streets which should
have a swimming pool and any available funds should be expended
for that purpose. Other Councilmen can probably add to this list
of needed facilities.
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 - Page 14
Councilman Heisey remarked that he understands the
developers in the area have offered private funds for the develop-
ment of this park and in talking with the Public Works Department,
he was told that if $100,000 was available, the City could
successfully develop this.park without burdening the community.
Councilman Heisey then moved that if the developers contribute
$100,000, the City go on record for the development of this pro-
ject. The City would maintain the park, which is tile entry to
the Sanitary Landfill.
During discussion, Councilman Bleecker stated he would
be in favor of accepting $100,000 to develop the park if this
offer is made to the City, but he would like to know the cost of
maintaining it with City forces. Mr. Jing stated he would come
back to the Council with the per acre cost and the cost per annum
on a park of this type. He pointed out
been made as yet by the developers. It
funds be made available and the Council
that the offer has not
is suggested that private
can review it on what it
will cost
the offer.
specified
to maintain it and whether or not the City will accept
Councilman Heisey commented that the developers
any amount, the Council is only suggesting what
have not
amount
north of Parker Avenue.
This hearing has
written protests have been
been duly advertised and posted and no
filed in the City Clerk's Office.
will be considered for this purpose.
After additional discussion, vote was then taken on
Councilman Heisey's motion, which carried unanimously.
Hearings.
This is the time set for public hearing before the
Council on the initiated action by the Planning Commission to
amend the Zoning Boundaries from an R-1 (Single Family D%velling)
Zone to an R-3-D (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling - Architectural
Design) or more restrictive, Zone, and to a C-O-D (Professional
Office - Architectural Design) or more restrictive, Zone, of that
certain property located between Akers Road and Stine Road and
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 -Page 15
This proposed zone change has been initiated by the
Planning C~mmission at the request of the City Council. The zone
change from R-1 to R-3-D and C-O-D is designed to buffer the C-2-D
zoning for the Zody's commercial complex from the existing single
family homes.
There are 5.8 acres of proposed R-3-D, 2 acres of which
will be used for a drainage sump, and 6.3 acres of proposed C-O-D
zoning. The Planning Commission recommends approval of said zone
change as presenled.
Mayor Hart declared the hearing open for public partici-
pation. No one present offered any objections to the proposed
rezoning. Mr. Bob Karpe, the developer, stated that to his know-
ledge, there was no opposition to this plan, which was proposed
after consultation with some of the people living in the area.
Plans have been submitted to the Planning Commission for two story,
three bedroom, apartments to be constructed on the northeast portion
of the property.
Councilman Bleecker stated he wanted to be absolutely
sure that the agreements made when all the residents of the area
attending a previous zoning hearing were being observed, that there
have been no changes of any kind, and that construction will be
done as previously agreed to by Mr. Karpe.
Mr. Sceales stated that Mr. Karpe had presented a tenta-
tive map subject to zoning, for fourplex apartments to be built in
four different stages, four in each stage, a total of 16 units.
This is the only thing that has been presented to the Commission
in the way of construction al this time. The actual zoning will
be dependent upon the Council's decision tonight and the first
plan will cover the construction of only one unit of four units
proposed.
Councilman Vetter commented that he had attended a
meeting with people from the area, Mr. Karpe and Mr. Sceales, and
it was the consensus of the people at the meeting that this would
be the best way to buffer Zody's from the residents in the Meadowood
Tract who originally objected to the proposed zoning. From all
Bakersfield, California, May 25~ 1970 - ~age 16
appearances, the plan appears to be acceptable fo the residents
in the area, and will buffer Zody's as well as possible. He stated
that it would appear that what Mr. Karpe is proposing is living
up to the Spirit of the agreement at fhe previous hearing.
Upon request of Councilman Stiern, Mr. Sceales outlined
specifically the chang~which are contemplated and requested by
Mr. Karpe.
Councilman Whittemore commented that the' people in the
area are still interested in what acfion will be taken by the
Council on this, because he had several calls this evening. These
people have the attitude thaf the Council will not listen to them
so no one appeared at this hearing. They have told him that they
are not happy with the proposed plan, especially the C-O-D com-
mercial zoning, as they feel they are not sufficiently protected
with C-O zoning surrounded by R-3 Zoning.
Mr. Karpe stated that they are talking about professional
offices as opposed to commercial, and it is felt by many of the
people down there that if professional offices are built, it will
be the best thing that can happen, because there are presently
apartments~ there will be more apartments, and essentially apart-
ments create more congestion. Professional offices would level
this off and create more balance for off-street parking. If C-O-D
zoning is not granted in a compound type of plan~ the C-O zone
will permit apartments, it will not permit a commercial use.
Councilman Heisey commented that the fact that no one
is objecting to this proposal or showed up at the hearing would
convince him that the people in the area are satisfied with the
plan. From the presentation by Mr. Sceales~ it looks to him as
though it would be a reasonable project.
Councilman Vetter stated that the people in the area
basically object to Zody's, and he has voted against it before,
however, it is now in and the City must do the best that'if can.
Bakersfield~ California, May 25, 1970 - Page 17
Mr. Karpe pointed out that this plan was not the one
his company preferred but it is a plan acceptable to him, a com-
promise plan, after discussion with the residents of the area.
A resident of the Meadowood Tract addressed the Council
stating that there a number of people in the area who do not approve
of this particular type of zoning, however~ the ones he had talked
with feel that this is something they can live with. The main
opposition was the Zody's development. His concern, personally,
is the proposal to build only the first four of 16 units. Mr.
Karpe stated that construction would be started on one this year
and he feels that the construction of one unit is not carrying
out the intent of the Council that Mr. Karpe build a complete row
of apartments to act as a buffer. What the residents in the area
hope is that Mr. Karpe will speed up his building plans.
Mayor Hart closed the public portion of the hearing for
Council comment and deliberation. Councilman Stiern commented that
this proposal is not what he had in mind the night of the previous
hearing, but it is a sensible compromise which, as the gentleman
from the Meadowood Tract has stated, the residents can live with.
It was his feeling at the night of the hearing that it was intended
by the developer that the row of apartment buildings which would
act as a buffer, would be constructed very soon~ and he thinks
that they should be.
Councilman Vetter stated that he is aware there is no
way the Council can stop the development of Zody's. Mr. Karpe is
proposing to build four units of three bedrooms and two stories
in height. It seems to him that it would be better to encourage
Mr. Karpe to build fewer units initially and have them well built,
and well landscaped, that would set the tone of the rest of the
apartments, than to insist that he build many units hastily that
would be a detriment to the neighborhood. It would be most im-
portant for the Planning Commission when they review the D-Overlay~
on this project, to carefully consider it and look at it extremely
Bakersfield, California, May 25,~ 1970 - Page 18
critically, to see that the units are ones that would be compatible
with the neighborhood, and that they would screen and buffer Zody's
from the Meadowood Tract development.
After additional discussion, upon a motion by Councilman
Vetter, Ordinance No. 1861 New Series amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code of the City of Bakersfield by changing the Land
Use Zoning of that certain property in the City Of Bakersfield
located between Akers Road and Stine Road and north of Parker
Avenue, was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees~ Rucker, Stiern,
Vetter, Whittemore (with reservations)
Noes: None
Absent: None
Councilman Vetter then moved that the Council direct a
letter to the Planning Commission indicating its concern regarding
the proposed development so that in the review of the D-Overlay
on the apartment units they consider the type of construction,
the landscaping, the height and all aspects of the development so
that it will most carefully screen and buffer the Meadowood Tract
from the Zody's development. He accepted Councilman Stiern's
amendment that the letter be included in the minutes of the Council
meeting so that it becomes a permanent record of the City of
Bakersfield. After discussion, vote was taken on the motion, which
carried. Councilman Heisey voted in the negative on the motion.
The letter to the Planning Commission reads as follows:
The City Council on May 25, 1970, adopted an
Ordinance changing the zoning on property located
south of the proposed Zody's Department Store
complex from R-1 to R-3-D and C-O-D as recom-
mended by your Commission.
The City Council requests your Commission to
take particular care in reviewing and approving
all proposed developments within this archi-
tectural design Overlay area in order~to assure
the most compatible development of the area and
to provide the best possible buffer between the
Zody's commercial comples and the adjacent single
family homes.
Your careful consideration will be appreciated.
(s) Ken Vetter
Councilman - Sixth Ward
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 - Page 19
Approval and adoption of revised
specifications for certain positions.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, revised specifications
for the following positions were approved and adopted:
Auditorium - Recreation Manager 002
Assistant Auditorium - Recreation Manager 004
Assistant Planner 102
Associate Planner 104
Approval of Plans and Specifications
for the improvement of Auburn Street
between Oswell Street and 400' east
of Eissler Street.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Rees,
Plans and Specifications for the improvement of Auburn Street
between Oswell Street and 400' east of Eissler Street were approved,
and the Finance Director was authorized to advertise for bids.
Approval of Plans and Specifications
for construction of Stockdale Estates
Interceptor Sewer.
After discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Stiern,
Plans and Specifications for construction of Stockdale Estates
Interceptor Sewer were approved and the Finance Director was
authorized to advertise for bids.
Approval of Cooperative Agreement
between the City and the State of
California for Modification of
Traffic Signals at Intersections
of Niles Street and Monterey Street
with Baker Street.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Cooperative Agree-
ment between the City and the State of California for Modification
of Traffic Signals at intersections of Niles Street and Monterey
Street with Baker Street were approved, and the Mayor was authorized
to execute the agreement.
First reading of an Ordinance of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
amending Bakersfield Municipal Code
Section 3.18.180 (a) changing month
of Holiday designation from December
to June.
First reading was given an Ordinance of the Council of
the City of Bakersfield amending Bakersfield Municipal Code Section
3.18.180 (a) changing month of Holiday designation from December
to June.
Bakersfield, California, May 25, 1970 -Page 20
Action on Bids.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, low bid of Steiny &
Company for installation of Traffic Signal and Highway Lighting
System at the intersection of Wible Road and Wilson Road was
accepted, all other bids were rejected, and the Mayor was
zed to execute the contract.
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the
Council, upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, the meeting was
adjourned at 10:45 P. M.
/
MAWR ~rf/ {h~ Ci~ ~- Ba{ersfield, Calif.
authori-
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK and Ex-O'fficio Clerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, June l, 1970
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Council of the
City of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of
the City Hall at eight o'clock P. M.~ June 1, 1970.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart, followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation by the Reverend Tom
Toler of the First Christian Church.
The City Clerk called the roll as follows:
Present:
Mayor Hart.
Absent: None
Minutes of the regular meeting
approved as presented.
Councilmen Bleecker~ Heisey, Rees~ Rucker~
Stiern, Vetter, Whittemore
of May 25, 1970, were
Reports.
Councilman Stiern submitted a verbal report from the
Budget Review and Finance Committee, stating that it is time to
contract for the annual outside audit, and the Committee is recom-
mending that the same firm which has been conducting the audit
for the past few years be awarded the contract for this service.
After discussion~ he moved that the firm of Elmer Fox and Company,
formerly Speer, Chavez, Ruggenberg & Wright, be awarded the con-
tract to audit the books and accounts of the City for the sum of
$9,250.00, and the Mayor be authorized to execute same. This
motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Rucker reported that he and members of the
staff and some of the residents of the southeast area, had appeared
before the Board of Supervisors and were successful in getting the
Board to commit itself to contributing approximately 75% of the
funds needed for the initial phase of the multi-purpose building
in California Avenue Park.
Allowance of Claims.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, Vouchers Nos. 4120
to 4179 inclusive, in amount of $27,340.89, as audited by the
Voucher Approval Committee~ were allowed and authorization was
granted for payment. Transfer in amount of $75.00 from Account
No. 11-530-3200 to Account No. 11-616-1100, to provide funds for a
minor modification of the air conditioning in the Finance Department,
was also approved.
Bakersfield, California, June 1, 1970 - Page 2
Action on Bids.
Upon a motion by Councilman Heisey, seconded by Council-
man Rucker, low bid of Hartman Concrete Materials Company for the
improvement of California Avenue from King Street to Williams
Street was accepted, all other bids were rejected, and the Mayor
was authorized to execute the contract.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, low bid of D. K. Moran
Construction Company for the construction of Storm Drains in New
Stine Road was accepted, all other bids were rejected, and the
Mayor was authorized to execute the contract.
It was moved by Councilman Rees, that low bid of Safety
Electric Company for installation of Traffic Signal and Highway
Lighting System at the intersection of Auburn Street and Oswell
Street be accepted, all other bids rejected, and the Mayor authori-
zed to execute the contract.
Councilman Heisey questioned awarding this bid to an
out-of-town firm stating that since there was only $800.00 difference
between this bid and the next low bid submitted, he feels that the
5% sales tax alone would make enough difference to accept the bid
of the local contractor.
tax amounts to 1%, not 5%~
is labor, not materials.
Councilman Stiern commented that he
the motion~ there are frequent instances when
Mr. Bergen pointed out that the sales
and a substantial portion of the project
would like to support
the City Council
becomes aware that bids are very close and a little
He doesn't know of any way to change this except to
accept a low bid from a firm that
connection with bidding.
Vote was then taken on the motion which carried unanimously.
City Manager Bergen asked that the record show this was
not a budgeted item, but funds are being provided from Gas Tax
Monies, due to the saving from the project for the improvement of
California Avenue from King Street to Williams Street.
bit too high.
occasionally
hasn't reached any agreement in
Bakersfield, California, June 1, 1970 - Page 3
Deferred Business.
Upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore~ Ordinance No.
1863 New Series of the Council of the City of Bakersfield amending
Bakersfield Municipal Code Section
Holiday Designation from December to
following vote:
Ayes:
Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey,
Vetter,
Noes: None
Absent: None
Upon
Inn to erect a
abstained from
3.18. 180 (a)
June, was
Changing Month of
adopted by the
Upon
Rees, Rucker, Stiern,
Whittemore
a motion by Councilman Rucker, request from Holiday
65' high Sign was approved. Councilman Whittemore
voting on this request.
Adoption of Ordinance No. 1864 New
Series of the City of Bakersfield
amending Section 3.18.060 by re-
classification of certain positions
in the Public Works Department and
Building Department.
a motion by Councilman Whittemore, Ordinance No.
1864 New Series of the City of
by reclassification of certain
ment and
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees,
Vetter, Whittemore
Bakersfield amending Section 3.18.060
positions in the Public Works Depart-
the Building Department, was adopted by the following vote:
Rucker, Stiern,
Noes: None
Absent: None
Approval of Contract between the City
of Bakersfield and the Panama School
District.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, Contract between the
City of Bakersfield and the Panama School District for recreational
services in the Panama School District, providing the County of
Kern provides matching monies, was approved, and the Mayor was
authorized to execute the contract.
Bakersfield, California, June 1, 1970 - Page 4
Approval of Annual Agreement with
Bakersfield City School District to
transport pupils attending day camp
to Camp Okihi.
Upon a motion by Councilman
with Bakersfield City School District
day camp to Camp Okihi, was approved, and the Mayor was authorized
to execute same.
Acceptance of Work and Mayor authorized
to execute Notice of Completion for
Contract No. 19-70 for Construction of
Storm Drains in University, Freemont,
Stockton and Pacific Streets.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, the Work was accepted
and the Mayor was authorized to execute the Notice of Completion
for Contract No. 19-70 for Construction of Storm Drains in Univer-
sity, Fremont~ Stockton and Pacific Streets.
Acceptance of Work and Mayor authorized
to execute Notice of Completion for
Contract No. 85-69 for Construction of
the Stine Road - McCutcheon Road Inter-
ceptor Sewer.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees~ the Work was accepted
and the Mayor was authorized to execute Notice of Completion for
Contract No. 85-69 for Construction of the Stine Road - McCutcheon
Road Interceptor Sewer.
Acceptance of Work and Mayor authorized
to execute Notice of Completion for
Contract No. 120-69 for Construction of
Traffic Signals and Lighting System at
the intersection of South Chester Avenue
and Planz Road.
Upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore, the Work was
accepted and the Mayor was authorized to execute Notice of Com-
pletion for Contract No. 120-69 for Construction of Traffic Signals
and Lighting System at the intersection of South Chester Avenue
and Planz Road.
Stiern, Annual Agreement
to transport pupils attending
Bakersfield, California, June 1, 1970 - Page 5
Correspondence.
Councilman Vetter stated he would like to acknowledge a
letter from Les Herndon, J.B.A. Director, inviting the Council to
be present at the Annual Junior Baseball Association Grand Opening
at 11:00 A. M., June 13, 1970, on the J.B.A. diamonds behind Sam
Lynn Park in Bakersfield. He stated he has had the pleasure of
participating in these opening ceremonies for several years, and
he urged the members of the Council and Mayor Hart to attend.
Hearings.
This is the time set for public hearing on Phase I of
the 1970 Weed Abatement Program. Mayor Hart declared the hearing
open for public participation.
Director of Public Works Jing reported that 380 lots had
been posted and Notice to Destroy Weeds sent to the property owners
on May 4 and 21, 1970. In checking today, he found that there are
180 compliances and 200 non-compliances. He stated that normally
the Council instructed the Department of Public Works to mail out
notices by registered mail, so that out-of-town owners will receive
notices.
No protests or objections being received, the public
hearing was closed, and upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, the
report was received and placed on file and the City Attorney was
instructed to prepare the necessary Resolution finding the weeds
to be a public nuisance.
Councilman Bleecker asked if the Council had adopted a
Resolution prohibiting the burning of weeds. Councilman Vetter
replied that as he recalled it, the last contract was awarded
requiring that the lots be cleared without burning. However, the
property owner can continue to burn the weeds.
Mr. Bergen commented that the Kern County Air Pollution
District exercises control of burning and at the present time,
permits are granted for this purpose. However, it was the Council's
feeling that if the City was responsible for the removal of weeds,
it should be done by discing rather than burning.
Bakersfield, California, June 1~ 1970 - Page 6
Councilman Bleecker asked if it would be within the
prerogative of the City Council to adopt an Ordinance prohibiting
burning inside the City Limits. Mr. Bergen stated it would be
within the City's prerogative but he doesn't think it would be
appropriate now that there is a Kern County Air Pollution Control
District. He does think the Council's feelings on this should be
made known to the Air Pollution Control District so that they will
have a uniform standard for the metropolitan area, even if they
do not have one for the agricultural area.
City Attorney Hoagland commented that he is working on
the Uniform Fire Code at the present time and the matter of any
type of burning can be taken up at the time it is submitted to
the Council. The final jurisdiction still lies with the Kern
County Air Pollution Control District, however, the City could
pass an Ordinance prohibiting burning within the City Limits.
Councilman Stiern stated he thinks it is incumbent on
the City to point the way in this matter and take some positive
action to control air pollution from burning in the City. He
complimented Supervisor Milton Miller on the action taken by the
Board of Supervisors to discontinue open burning at the County
Dumps.
Mr. Bergen advised that the Kern County Air Pollution
Control District has scheduled a hearing for June 24, 1970, to
consider the up-dating of its specifications for burning. Council-
man Vetter asked that a letter be drafted and sent to the Air
Pollution Control District setting out the feelings of the Council
relative to burning~ and also suggested that a representative of
the City be present at this hearing. He feels that the City should
delay any action until after the hearing is held to see what
controls the Air Pollution Control District adopts and that the
City should cooperate with the District in every way' possible to
eliminate air pollution.
Bakersfield, California, June 1, 1970 - Page 7
Councilman Heisey asked to comment regarding the action
taken by the Council earlier in the meeting to award a contract
to a firm in Fresno for the installation of Traffic Signals and
Highway Lighting System at the intersection of Auburn Street and
Oswell Street, because this bid was $800.00 less than that of the
second bidder, who is a local contractor. He asked the City
Manager to request the Finance Director to prepare a written
analysis of this bid. He would like to know what the Sales Tax
would amount to; also, the amount of the Business License paid to
the City by the local firm the amount of this firm's property taxes
and payroll in the City of Bakersfield. These are all relevant
factors in giving business to local contractors. The Council is
not bound to accept the low bid, but to award a bid which would be
in the best interest of the City. He asked that this report be
prepared and submitted to the Council at its next meeting.
Councilman Stiern supported Councilman Heisey's request
and asked that an in-depth report be made to include information
regarding past bids that were submitted to the City and rejected
as being exorbitant and also, what was saved or lost through re-
advertising the projects.
Mr. Bergen invited the Council to attend a special
meeting of the Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency which will be held
on Wednesday, June 3, 1970, at 7:30 P. M., in the Council Chambers,
to discuss the status of the Neighborhood Development Program and
the conversion to a Survey and Planning Application.
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the
Council, upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore, the meeting was
adjourned at 8:47 P. M.
MA¥O~'t~e Cit~ of Bakersfield, Calif.
ATTEST:
¢,-,~-~--~.~ .
CITY CLERK and ~Ex-OI~icio Clerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, June 8, 1970
Minutes of
the City of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council
of the City Hall at seven o'clock P. M., June 8, 1970.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart,
by the Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation
Heisey.
Present:
Absent:
the Budget Hearing meeting of the Council of
Chambers
followed
by Councilman Walter
The City Clerk called the roll as follows:
Mayor Hart. Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker,
Stiern, Vetter, Whittemore
None
Mr.
Bergen submitted the following information to assist
the City Council in conducting its Budget Hearings for 1970-71
The Governmental Efficiency and Personnel
Committee recommendations as stated in their
report to the City Council, if implemented,
will cost:
Fiscal Year:
1.
Salaries $431,066
Benefits 63,895
$494,961
The recommended decrease in budgeted positions
and
reduction in additional personnel requested will amount to a
savings of $101,825.
2. The administrative staff and department heads recom-
mended that all City employees be paid bi-weekly starting July 2,
1970, to create more uniformpayroll procedures. This recommenda-
tion will improve the scheduling of work within the Data Processing
Division, as well as create greater uniformity in our Cost
Accounting System.
This matter has been discussed with the recognized
employee organizations in compliance with the "meet and confer"
sections of SB 1228.
At the present time, the employees at the Corporation
Yard are paid bi-weekly or twenty-six times a year. The other
employees are paid semi-monthly or twenty-four times a year. This
change, if implemented, will enable the Finance Department to
schedule its work load more evenly. This change has been dis-
cussed briefly with the members of the Governmental Efficiency
and Personnel and Budget Review and Finance Committees.
Bakersfield, California, June 8, 1970 - Page
Councilman Whittemore reported that the Governmental
Efficiency and Personnel Committee's recommendations to the Bakers-
£ield City Council for the 1970-71 Fiscal Year are hereby submitted
for consideration.
This Committee has reviewed the request from the Bakers-
field City Employees' Association, the Bake?sfield Firefighters
Association, Local 844~ and the American Federation of State, County
and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 1078, and has complied with
the "meet and confer" provisions of Senate Bill 1228.
The recommendations contained within this report are
based upon the recommendations of the City Manager and Department
Heads~ with particular emphasis being given to local labor market
conditions wherever practical. This report contained sections
regarding salary adjustments, employee benefits, and requests for
additional personnel and reclassification of positions. Personnel
and related areas represent approximately 70% of the 1970-71 Budget
and bear a direct relationship to the quality and level of service
to be provided during 1970-71. The budget for this next year
reflects reorganizations which have recently been implemented in
the Public Works, Building and Fire Departments. Departmental
reorganizations have been used by the City in recent years to more
efficiently adjust to changing trends and conditions within the
City.
We feel that it is extremely important that this Committee
and the City Council take a serious look at the level of service to
be provided to City residents in future years. It is equally
obvious that City expenditures and revenues must have a realistic
relationship if the City is to remain solvent and £inancially
sound. This can only be done by objectively and thoroughly com-
paring the level of service of each department with the needs and
interests of the community.
A total o£ twenty-nine additional positions was requested
by the various departments, of which seven are recommended by this
Committee for approval.
Bakersfield, California, June 8, 1970 - Page 3
Our recommendations for Department Heads and other key
employees are rather conservative in comparison with those being
discussed by the County of Kern and other public agencies and,
therefore, it is recommended that we be prepared to adjust the
salaries of our key employees during the 1970-71 Fiscal Year if
circumstances warrant.
The Bakersfield City Employees' Association had requested
certain employee benefits and the following action was recommended
by the Governmental
Request No. l:
Recommendation:
Comment:
Suggested Action:
Request No. 2:
Recommendation:
Request No. 3:
Recommendation:
Request No. 4:
Recommendation:
Request No. 5:
Recommendation:
Request No. 6:
Recommendation:
Efficiency and Personnel Committee:
Payment for unused sickleave at retirement
or termination if laid off.
Disapprove
This request, if granted, would cost the
City between $25,000 and $30,000 a year.
The Kern County Sick Leave Program presently
permits sick leave to be used for illness
in the family of the employee.
We feel that the present sick leave program
should be expanded to permit employees to
use sick leave when a member of the employee's
immediate family is ill. This expansion
would apply in the event that the spouse
or children of the employee, living at home,
are ill or in need of attention.
Twenty days vacation after fifteen years
service.
Disapprove
More Holidays for City Employees.
Disapprove
Updating of the Retirement Program 1957
Survivor Benefit.
Approve
Uniform allowances
Disapprove
The Bakersfield Firefighters
requested certain benefits
and action was recommended
5% Night Shift Differential
Disapprove
Association,
Local 844 had
for employees of the Fire Department
by the Committee as follows:
Bakersfield, California, June 8, 1970 - Page 4 ?-~
Request No. l:
Recommendation:
Comment:
Request No. 2:
Recommendation:
Request No. 3:
Recommendation:
Request No. 4:
Recommendation:
Request No. 5:
Recommendation:
Request No. 6:
Recommendation:
Request No. 7:
Recommendation:
Request No. 8:
Recommendation:
Request:
Work reduction
Disapprove
It is the recommendation of this Committee
that the City modify its holiday policy for
Fire Suppression personnel by granting four
duty shifts off each year in lieu of holidays.
This counter proposal, if implemented~ will
result in a savings of approximately $38,000
to the City during 1970-71, as well as re-
ducing the number of duty shifts for Fire
Suppression personnel.
Medical insurance contribution
Disapprove
Uniform Allowance
Disapprove
Longevity Pay
Disapprove
Punishment for using sick leave
None
Pay for unused sick leave
Disapprove
Pension benefits
Disapprove
Bid System
None
Police Department
The Chief.of Police has requested that members
of the Police Department who hold Advanced or
Intermediate Certificates from the Police
Officers Standards and Training Commission be
compensated by an additional 5.0% per month.
Such additional compensation is expected to
serve as an incentive for Police Officers to
continue their formal education. Granting of
additional compensation to Police Officers
with Imtermediate or Advanced P.O.S.T. Certifi-
cates is becoming more common throughout
California.
Recommendation: Approve
Bakersfield, California, June 8, 1970 Page 5
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL
DEPARTMENT - FINANCE
1 Keypunch Operator
1 Data Processing Programmer -
Console Operator
Disapprove
DEPARTMENT - POLICE
6 Traffic Officers
Approve addition of 2 Traffic Officers
1 Police Sergeant
Approve
1 Clerk-Typist
Approve
DEPARTMENT - FIRE
14 Firef ighters
Disapprove
DEPARTMENT - PUBLIC WORKS
1 - Motor Sweeper Operator
Disapprove
1 - Waste Water Treatment Plant Operator III
1 - Waste Water Treatment Plant Lab Tech-
nician and Operator
Approve
1 - Sanitation Route Foreman
Modify to Sanitation Route Inspector
1 - Park Maintenanceman
Disapprove
REQUESTS FOR RECLASSIFICATIONS
DEPARTMENT FINANCE
Chief Accountant tolAssistant Finance
Director
Approve
Storeskeeper to Buy, r-Trainee
Disapprove
Bakersfield, California, June 8, 1970 - Page 6
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
DEPARTMENT - POLICE
Building Maintenanceman I to Building
Maintenanceman II
Disapprove
Police Patrolman to Lab Technician
Approve
Police Lieutenant to Police Captain
Approve
DEPARTMENT - FIRE
3 Firefighters to Fire Inspectors
Reclassify 1Firefighter to Fire
Inspector
3 Fire Engineers to Fire Captains
Disapprove
6 Firefighters to Fire Engineers
Disapprove
3 Fire Alarm Operators to 4 Firefighters
Replace 3 Fire Alarm Operators with 2
Firefighters
Fire Alarm Operator Supervisor to
Office Clerk
Approve
Secretary to Administrative Secretary
Disapprove
Fire Captain to Assistant Fire Chief
Fire Engineer to Fire Captain
Firefighter to Fire Engineer
Disapprove
DEPARTMENT - PUBLIC WORKS
2 Engineering Draftsmen to Engineering
Technicians I
Approve
Maintenanceman I to Maintenanceman II
Disapprove
Engineer II to Engineering Technician II
Approve
Bakers£ield, California, June 8, 1970 - Page 7
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
Request:
Recommendation:
DEPARTMENT - PUBLIC WORKS
2 Engineering Aides to Engineering Aides
Approve
Equipment Operator II to Tree Foreman
Approve reclassi£ication to Equipment
Operator III
Auto Serviceman I to Auto Serviceman II
Approve
Waste Water Treatment Plant Operator III
to Waste Water Treatment Plant Foreman
Approve
II
Councilman Vetter commented that after the Committee
meeting, he had discussed with the Fire Chief his request to re-
classify three Fire Engineers to Fire Captain which the Committee
had recommended be disapproved. The Fire Chief pointed out the
three Fire Engineers in question have been acting as Fire Captains
for the past six months. There£ore, Councilman Vetter asked that
either the Committee, or the Council as a whole, reconsider
granting this request. Councilman Heisey stated that he had also
checked into it and had learned that approval will not increase
the costs~ as these men are already drawing the salary of Acting
Fire Captains. All members of the Governmental Ef£iciency and
Personnel Committee supported the recommendation to approve the
request to reclassify Three Fire Engineers to Fire Captain.
Mayor Hart then opened the meeting to public comment.
Mr. Howard Dallimore, General Manager of the Kern County Employees
Association, stated he was here tonight representing the Bakers-
field City Employees Association and wished to make a few co~Lments
before any action is taken by the Council on the GEPC Report. A
great deal of thought and hard work has gone into the recommenda-
tions made by the Bakersfield City Employees Association and he
asked that the Council consider accepting its requests relative to
increases for the clerical, secretarial and most of the blue
collar workers. He also pointed out that the Committee had
disapproved its recommendations for employee bene£its and urged
Bakersfield, California, June 8, 1970 - Page
the Council to seriously reconsider, especially the request to
grant twenty days vacation after fifteen years service, and to
provide for a 5% night shift differential.
Mayor Hart closed the public portion of the meeting for
Council comment and discussion. Councilman Rees asked to return
to Request No. 2 of the Fire Department for a Medical Insurance
Contribution from the City, which had been disapproved by the
Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee. He stated that
the Fire Department had submitted information prepared by insurance
specialists to him for his study indicating that the Federated
Firefighters Medical Plan is a superior plan to the one provided
by the City for all its employees and that the plan would result
in a reduction of contributions by the City of $3,000 per year.
He stated that he hasn't reached any conclusion but asked if further
consideration could not be given to permitting the members of the
Fire Department who desired to do so, to participate in the Federated
Firefighters Medical Plan, with the City paying the premium.
Councilman Rucker agreed, stating that if this plan would
reduce the cost to the City, he cannot see any reason for not
accepting the recommendation of the Firefighters.
City Manager Bergen stated that no insurance plan is
static,
of any
healthier the
it can change from year to year. One of the principles
insurance company is that the larger the group and the
employees, the more economical overall rate which
can be quoted to the group.
the City Insurance Program,
cost to the other employees.
If the Firefighters are deleted from
in the long run it will increase the
Ultimately, other groups will ask
to join another plan and the City will wind up with the group with
the highest accident rate which will be paying a higher premium.
After discussion with their insurance agent, the insurance
committee, which includes representatives from every department of
the City, has recommended the existing insurance plan as being the
best plan for all City employees.
Bakersfield, California, June 8, 1970 - Page 9
Councilman Heisey added that it was only about a year
ago a citizens committee of insurance groups specifically studied
this issue and came back with a recommendation that it not be
split up into several insurance groups but maintain the integrity
of the employees' organization and insure the employees as one
group. All of these matters are subject to continuous review,
but the committee unanimously felt that the Council was acting in
the best interests of the employees at the time.
Councilman Stiern stated that the insurance committee
felt that such deletion would weaken the entire insurance program
and increase the costs to the other City employees.
After discussion, Councilman Vetter commented that he
would certainly have no objections to an indepth-study of the
insurance plans, however, if this was done, the decision could not
be made tonight. After the budget hearings, he will be willing to
meet with the representatives from the Firefighters Union and the
employees insurance committee and go over the entire matter again.
At the request of Councilman Rees, C. E. Harless, Presi-
dent of the Bakersfield Firefighters Association was permitted to
address the Council and agreed with Mr. Vetter that an indepth-
study should be made into the insurance program, because they had
an acturial study which showed the plan to be approximately 30%
better than the present City plan. He stated he would be glad to
contact the other cities that have this plan in effect and ask
them if it has affected the other employees' rates in anyway. He
asked that the Council defer any action until this study can be
made.
Councilman Vetter then made a motion that Request No. 2
from the Firefighters Association, Local 844, as shown on Page 12
of the Report, be deleted, for further consideration by the
Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee at a later date.
Bakersfield, California, June 8, 1970 - Page l0 ~ ')
In response to a request from Councilman Rucker, City
Manager Bergen compared the number of holidays received by the
employees of the City of Bakersfield with the number granted by
the County of Kern to its employees.
Councilman Bleecker moved that the word "adjust" appearing
in Line 4 of the second paragraph on Page 6 o£ the Report, be
changed to "discuss", and this motion carried unanimously.
After discussion, it was moved by Councilman Bleecker
that the phraseology of the suggested action on Request No. 1 of
the Bakersfield City Employees' Association be changed to read as
follows:
"This expansion would apply in the event that
the spouse or children of the employee, living
at home, are ill, and in need of attention."
Councilman Vetter moved that the Council adopt the Report;
as amended by Councilman Bleecker's motions, approving the reclassi-
fication of three Engineers to Fire Captains, and deleting the
disapproval of the request by the Firefighters Local for medical
insurance contribution by the City. This motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Bergen pointed out that with the adoption of the
report the proper action would be to instruct the City Attorney to
prepare the necessary salary and sick leave, etc. ordinances for
consideration of the Council at the next meeting.
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the
Council at this time, upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, the
meeting was adjourned at 8:35 P. M.
MAYO~ O. ,- C~J~y/~ ersfiel.d, Calif.
ATTEST:
~ .
~ITY ~L~RK and ~-Ogf~o Clerk of tho CouncS1
of ghe C~gy o~ Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970
Minutes of the Budget Hearing of the Council of the
City of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of
the City Hall at seven o'clock P. M., June 9, 1970.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation by Councilman Walter
Heisey.
The City Clerk called the roll as
Mayor Hart. Councilmen Bleecker,
Present:
Stiern,
Absent: None
follows:
Heisey, Rees, Rucker,
Vetter, Whittemore
the changes from the City Manager's recom-
mendations as adopted in the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel
Committee Report last night by the Council. The GEPC reduced the
budget by $109,353 for salary purposes. The Budget Review and
Finance Committee has recommended that cuts be made in the operating
budget in the amount of $24,835. The two reductions amount to
$134,188, which allows the Council to maintain the tax rate this
next year. The Council should be aware that this is very close
budgeting~
The Water and City Growth Committee plans to make a
report on the Transit System and its recommendations could result
in additional savings. However, Mr. Bergen recommended that any
additional funds be placed in the reserve of the City which is
getting low and will be needed next year. There could be sub-
stantial expenses involved in securing supplemental water supplies
City Manager Bergen stated that the 5% Service User
Charge that has been recommended and on which the budget is predi-
cated, will become effective August 1, 1970. This will result in
the Ordinance being in effect for eleven months and perhaps of
revenue collections of only nine or ten months for the Fiscal
Year ending June 30, 1971. The original estimate oi $750,000 was
based on twelve months, but it was a conservative estimate, as it
is very difficult to make an accurate estimate for something of
this nature. If, and when, the State increases the Sales Tax to
6%, they will recommend that the service user charge be increased
to 6%.
He summarized
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 - Page
for the Urban area and he would encourage the Council to maintain
its reserve so that there would be adequate funds to cover any
charges~ as he would not like to see the City in the position where
it was necessary to take some action and not have the funds to do
it.
Finance Director's Report on Revenue
and Summary of Balances, Revenues and
Budgets by Funds 1970-71.
Finance Director D. L. Haynes proceeded to make a report
on all revenues, reviewed budget summaries and explained the £unds
under the direction of the Finance Director. He pointed out that
the sta££ of the Finance Department has made estimates based upon
unknown balances of June 30, 1970. The £inal budget document will
be prepared after the tax rate is set in August. They do have to
make many estimates and the picture can change after the books are
closed. He answered questions posed by the Councilmen and explained
budget carry-overs and reserve appropriations.
Adoption o£ Budget Review and Finance
Committee Report/Operating Budget.
Councilman Kenneth Vetter, Chairman of the Budget Review
and Finance Committee, read a report o£ the members of the Budget
Review and Finance Committee, stating that this Committee is pleased
to report that there will not be a need to increase the property
tax rate in order to balance the 1970-?1 budget. Credit for this
accomplishment should be given to the Governmental Efficiency and
Personnel Committee £or their cooperation in achieving this result.
The departmental budget requests~ as originally submitted,
totaled approximately $1,370,000 more than our anticipated revenues.
The departmental requests were reduced by the City Manager by
approximately $490,000, leaving a difference of $880,000 between
departmental requests and anticipated revenues. To close this gap
and to have a balanced budget, a 5% Utility Tax and a 10~ Property
Tax increase were recommended by the City Manager. It is our recom-
mendation that a 5% Utility Tax be initiated effective July 1, 1970.
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 - Page 3
This Utility Tax, being a
cities and is expected to
The 10~ Property Tax rate
"user-pay" tax, may be adopted by chartered
yield approximately $?50,000 during 1970--71.
increase that was originally recommended
would have raised the remaining $130,000. An additional $130,000
has been pared as a result of further reductions by the GEPC and
Budget Review and Finance Committees, which eliminated the need £or
a tax increase this year.
This Committee is responsible for reviewing the operating
portion of the budget. The total operating budget amounts to
approximately $2.2 million or 18% o~ the total $12.8 million budget
and deals with the day-to-day operations of the various department~.
The total operating budget, as it now stands, is approximately
$200,000 less than the 1969-70 operating budget now in effect.
This is especially impressive in view of the City's growth.
This Committee has considered many services and programs
furnished by the City and has also taken into consideration the
taxpayers who pay £or these services. It should be remembered
that this Committee not only considers increases in taxes, but
has also been instrumental in reducing taxes whenew~r justified.
Some of the recent actions taken by the City Council and this
Committee are as follows:
1. Business Taxes
The City Council has revised the tax structure
for businesses twice within the last two years~
and has resulted in a decrease of Business Tax
Revenues of approximately $100,000 a year from
the 1967-68 level.
2. Parking Meters
This past year the City Council has reduced the
number of parking meters by one-third and ini-
tiated a "free parking" program on Saturdays in
the downtown area for the purpose of stimulating
business in that area. This program has resulted
in a reduction of revenue of approximately $?0,000
for the 1969-70 Fiscal Year in reduced parking
meter and traffic enforcement revenues.
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 - Page 4 ~(;7
3. Municipal Transit System
A thorough study of the Municipal Transit System
was completed during the current Fiscal Year
which, among other things~ resulted in bus fares
being increased in an attempt to reduce the
losses associated with providing this service.
The operation of the City Transit System serves
the entire Greater Bakersfield Area and repre-
sents a $90,000 a year subsidy to noncity resi-
dents. The City has lost money on the Transit
System each year since its acquisition in 1957.
In an attempt to more equitably handle this
problem, the Water and City Growth Committee
is making a study on this matter and plans to
submit a report to the Council in the near
future.
4. Fees for Brush Pickup
Fees for Brush Pickup were instituted last fall
on a "user-pay" basis. In order to make this
program more self-sufficient, the following
recommendations are made:
(a)
Increase the fee to $7.50 for the first
truckload and $5.00 for the second truck-
load.
(b) Eliminate two Equipment Operator I positions.
(c) Purchase two brush trailers at a total cost
o£ $7,000.
5. Employee Retirement Programs
Last year the City Council considered adoption
of the California Highway Patrol Retirement
Plan for the safety employees of the Police and
Fire Departments. Preliminary cost estimates
were given the Cify by the Public Employees'
Retirement System, and based upon these pre-
liminary figures, the Council gave consideration
to adopting this program. Later much higher
figures were furnished by the PERS which made
it apparent that this plan would be prohibitively
expensive for the City without permanent financial
assistance from the State. It was realized that
the City is not able to implement the CHP Plan
without increasing the Property Tax rate by a
very substantial amount.
6. ..City-County Equities
The Cities of Kern County and the Board of Super-
visors have been holding public meetings recently
for the purpose of resolving City-County equity
issues. A progress report from Dr. Stier~ the
City's representafives at these equity meetings,
is forthcoming. These issues~ such as the County
Parks and Recreation Program, will all have a
financial implication which affects the City of
Bakersfield.
Bakersfield, California~ June 9, 1970 - Page
The level of service provided our residents for most
services is above average and related directly to the number of
employees. The Budget Review and Finance Committee will report
periodically to the City Council regarding those areas where
changing the level of service is in the public interest.
Councilman Vetter then proceeded to review the Operating
Budget by departments, stopping for Council discussion and requests
for explanation.
City Manager - 520
Object No. 4100 for Professional and Consulting Services
is increased by $1,400 due to the increased cost of pre-employment
physicals. Councilman Bleecker asked if'the increased cost was due
to an increase in the doctor's fees, and Mr. Bergen explained that
prospective employees are required to have a physical examination
before going to work, and this examination, especially the back-
classification for positions at the Corporation Yard, is quite
expensive. They have been evaluating the possibility of entering
into a contract with the Kern General Hospital so that a periodic
examination program can be started whereby all employees are
required to take an examination periodically, however, no recom-
mendations are included in this budget. It was brought out that
the total cost of a pre-employment physical is approximately
$85.00.
Insurance and Nondepartmental Expenses - 563
$10,000 is budgeted to pay the County for tax collection
charges. The County is allowed to waive this fee, but such action
is only permissive and not mandatory.
Mr. Bergen was asked if the County had waived this fee.
He said no, but in his opinion, it would be in order for the
Council to send a letter requesting that the County take this
action, and Councilman Heisey moved that this be done. Councilman
Vetter asked that it be handled at Committee level, and Councilman
Stiern, as Chairman of the City-County Cooperation Committee, said
Bakersfield~ California, June 9, 1970 - Page 6 -~'~
he would like to give it some thought. Councilman Heisey then
withdrew his motion stating that this matter could be considered
later at a Council meeting.
Refuse Collection - 675
Account No. 4200 provides $64,750 for private collectors
to service recently annexed areas. Councilman Heisey asked if
these contracts were entered into on a year-to-year basis. Mr.
Bergen replied that they have had these agreements for several
years and there has not been a rate increase, however, the contract
provides for termination on one year's notice. They have received
a request for an increase and it will be in order for the Council
to negotiate with these private collectors. A Committee will need
to review it and make specific recommendations to the Council.
Councilman Stiern stated the function of government is
to provide those services that people cannot provide for themselves.
The City has always felt that one of these services was refuse
collection. In contracting with private collectors for collection
in annexed areas, the City has found that they are doing an adequate
job. He is of the opinion that the City Manager should take a
continuing and long range look at this service now being provided
by the City, with an eye to possibly retiring it to the realm of
private enterprise and letting private refuse collectors handle
it.
Mr. Bergen stated that Councilman Whittemore, Chairman
of the GEPC, made a specific recommendation last year, that the
staff evaluate the possibility o~ contracting out the City's col-
lection service to private contractors. They have had meetings
with them and have £ound that it is more economical for the City
to collect the refuse, because the City doesn't pay taxes or operate
for a profit and this gives the City an edge in operating the
service. He agrees that this is a continuing fiscal problem and
they will continue to study the problem.
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 - Page ?
Councilman Stiern stated that the area of refuse col-
lection is one that has met with increasing problems nationally.
He believes that it is an area that might in the future be coped
with best by contracting with a private collector who can then
not be hamstrung by a tax rate, but by the level of service desired
by his customers, and can set his rates for collection accordingly.
If it is going to be a labor-management area, an areas of unionism,
he thinks it should be met by private enterprise rather than by
City Government.
Councilman Bleecker asked why it was contracted out, if
it is cheaper for the City to do it. Mr. Bergen stated that the
second most active group in opposing annexation to the City~ was
the refuse collectors, and it was his thought that a contract with
them in newly annexed areas, would be beneficial to both parties.
Also, since that time, the State Legislature has adopted statutes
which require the City to enter into agreements with refuse col-
lectors in the unincorporated area which has been annexed to the
City, for a period of three years.
Councilman Rucker commented that to contract with private.
refuse collectors would not eliminate any problems, and he feels
that a better job is done for the citizens by the City staying in
the refuse collection business. He would not be in favor of
eliminating the refuse employees of the City.
Mayor Hart asked Councilman Vetter to read the following
communication from the Greater Bakersfield Chamber of Commerce
into the record:
"This is the period of the year in which you are
preparing the preliminary budget, we would like
to formally request continuance of the Chamber's
contracts with the City. We believe it can be
shown that the Chamber is doing an effective job
in promoting both conventions and new industry
and commercial business.
We note that the year 1969 saw the largest group
of conventions ever booked into our community;
and with the rebuilding of the Bakersfield Inn
and other new hotel developments, this trend will
continue.
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 - Page
Industrially, we are continuing our program of
personal contacts, both with staff and with
volunteers; and we have just completed our $7,000
brochure, to be used in this effort. At the
present time, although there is very little
movement of industry in the Central Valley of
California, we are servicing an increasing
number of contacts. We believe that this effort
should not be allowed to diminish in any way,
and we intend to increase rather than decrease
the program.
The participation of the City in these promo-
tional activities has enabled us to keep full-
time staff in the field, and we solicit the
City's continued support."
Councilman Vetter stated that a letter had been received
from the East Bakersfield Progressive Club requesting that an
agreement be entered into regarding financial assistance on the
Christmas decorations on Baker Street for the year 1970. Mr.
Bergen had replied to this letter indicating that the City was not
budgeting for any financial assistance for Christmas decorations
this year.
Councilman Vetter stated he would like to make a couple
of general comments and asked that these remarks be recorded in
the minutes:
We are all very pleased that we did not have to raise
the Property Tax rate, but we still have to face the fact that we
are picking up $750,000 in a new tax which the community is going
to have to bear. It seems to me that the time for us to start
worrying about next year is now, and there are two or three items
that were mentioned in my report having to do with other committees,
principally, the Transit System, that is going to be a major factor
a year from now.
The thing that concerns me is that we have used the addi-
tional $750,000 to balance the budget. I look ahead and it seems
to me that from what Denny says, and from what Harold says, it is
going to be a tight budget, that we are not going to have the carry--
overs that we had last year and it's already showing up this year.
I say to myself, "What in the world are we going to use next year
to pick up another $750,000 to balance the budget again. I don't
care what we do in the Budget Review and Finance Committee, there
is no way that we're going to be able to keep cutting down and
27
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 - Page 9
meeting the additional demands of increased salaries, now that's
just plain and simple, that's it. Last year, if I'm not mistaken,
the increase was close to $500,000. The year before that was
$600,000. It appears to me that we were reasonably "fat", for
the lack of a better word, the last two years, to where we were
able to grant these salary increases and not increase the Property
Tax. This year we didn't increase the Property Tax again, but
we're going to have to stop and realize we did increase the taxes
to the people of Bakersfield through the Utility Tax, and I don't
think next year we are going to be able to find an area like this
just to pick this up. This is going to be the year that this
Council is going to have to stop and take a real hard look, as
Mr. Bergen has said before, as to what level of service we want
to maintain and what the public wants. If the public wants the
level of service that we are providing now, which without a doubt
is a very high level of service, all departments are doing an
excellent job. I'm surprised personally, I look out here tonight
and we are talking about increasing the taxes to people, and
whether it is the Property Tax or Users Tax or Vehicle Tax, it is
still a tax that the people are going to pay, I'm surprised that
there isn't somebody out there to object. I don't know whether
people have confidence in us or just don't realize that it is
another three-quarters of a million dollars that they are going
to be paying in taxes.
My point is, that a year from now we are going to be
faced with this very same situation, we are going to be faced with
the Firefighters Union, with other unions, and with the employees
associations, all making demands upon this Council. Salary in-
creases that I am certain will be no less than what we granted
this year. I'm saying this now, where is another half a million
dollars going to come from to pick this up next year. These people
are going to expect it, we've done it in the last three years, and
I'm certain we have done it in prior years to that. That's going
to have to be settled, there are going to have to be some decisions
made from this time until next budget time as to what level of
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 - Page 10
services are going to have to be provided to meet demands. I don't
think that we're going to be able to do it without substantial in-
creases in the Property Tax next year to maintain the level of
service~ because we do not have additional tax revenues that are
going to come out of places like the Utility Tax.
Councilman Stiern stated that it is hard to say anything
after Councilman Vetter's statement, but he would like to comment
on a few thoughts he had. "I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea,
a novel and interesting and a fresh new approach, to consider the
budget and turn it around, and consider the operating budget and
capital improvement budget and when we get all through, then talk
about doing the right thing for our employees. It should be quite
obvious to the taxpayers, that in order to be fair to our employees,
we're just about creating a new £und to attain that £airness, we're
putting an obvious tax on the utilities that our taxpayers will buy
in order to do the right thing by our employees."
Councilman Vetter commented that the thing that concerns
him is that the Council develops this additional tax revenue this
year and there's no reason to think that it is not going to be
asked for and perhaps in fairness, may have to grant additional
increases next year. When the Finance Director talks about the
tight budget and the small amount of carryover that probably will
be next year, the time to start thinking about it is now, and not
the first week in June next year.
Councilman Heisey commented that the Council has been very
generous with employees' raises the last two years in particular.
It will not be necessary to raise the tax rate this year, and he
is not planning on raising the tax rate next year. He stated they
put off decisions on getting out o£ the Transit business and have
delayed longer than they should,
Also~ the City is going to have
people for some of the services
as the loss will continue to rise.
to charge a realistic fee to the
they have been receiving.
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 -iPage 11
After additional discussion, Councilman Vetter made a
motion approving the Governmental
Report and the Operating Budget.
The Council
Capital
The Council
Efficiency and Personnel Committee's
This motion carried unanimously.
recessed at this time.
Improvement Program 1970-71.
reconvened and the City Manager.reviewed
Fund 33, .Proposed Gas Tax Projects, 1970-71, in the Capital Improve-
ment Program, consisting of twent.y different projects amounting
to a total of $794,000, answered questions and explained the City's;
plans for accomplishing these improvements.
Mr. Bergen stated that the Sewer Bond Projects are not
included in the budget because they are funded with Bond monies.
The following represents the City's share of these projects:
Sewage Treatment Plant No. 3 $800,000
Stockdale Estates Interceptor Sewer 76,000
Acquisition of a portion of Section
33, T 30 S, R 27 E, M.D.M. (Land
for Waste Water Disposal) 425,000
Total $1,301,000
Mr. Bergen reviewed the two proposed Capital Outlay Tax
Projects 1970-71, which do not qualify for Gas Tax Funds and will
be done in conjunction with freeway construction.
The Storm Drainage System along Ming Avenue and Akers
Road does not qualify for Gas Tax Funds but needs to be built at
the time the street improvement is done. This amount is the City's
the balance will be shared with the property owners in
share and
this area.
Councilman Bleecker asked if the $10,000 budgeted for
Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk Repairs would be applicable to the older
part of the City. Mr. Bergen stated this is the amount which the
City has been budgeting in the past, and is a balanced amount
against city labor. City forces are used for a portion of the
work, and under an annual contract, a contractor comes in and
pours the sidewalk and curb and gutter on a prepared base. The
$10,000 is used only for the contract and any labor done by the
City employees is not included in that amount.
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 - Page 12
Councilman Bleecker asked Mr. Bergen if it were possible
to keep streets and gutters in good condition by budgeting only
$10,000 for this purpose. Mr. Bergen replied that at the present
time the City's policy is adequate for the people that call in.
There have been a number of people who have requested, that these
repairs be made, they are reviewed on the basis of urgency, and
then handled by the City.
After some further discussion, Councilman Bleecker moved
that the amount of $10,000 budgeted for Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk
Repairs, be increased to $30,000.
Councilman Vetter opposed the motion, stating that there
is just not enough money to increase the budget at this time.
Councilman Rees stated that he also opposed the motion, as the staf:f
has promised to research this and report to the Council, and to him,
that is the direction the Council should move, rather than altering
the budget at this time.
Vote was then taken on Councilman Bleecker's motion which
failed to carry by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Councilman Bleecker
Noes: Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
Absent: None
Mr. Bergen stated that they are recommending that the
$10,000 budgeted for Major Street Improvements be used for land-
scaping and sprinkler systems only.
$22,000 is proposed for the development of International
Square, Sumner Street and Baker Street. Councilman Whittemore
commented that this is one area where the Council can save some
money.
Councilman Heisey stated that an agreement has been received
from the Southern Pacific Company for ratification by the Council
at Monday night's meeting, and they are all ready to go on this.
The railroad is in complete agreement and they have spent a great
deal of time working out negotiations to everyone's satisfaction.
Councilman Rees concurred with Councilman Heisey on this, stating
that the item should be retained in the budget, as he has been working
on this as a businessman from the area, and he is aware of the con-
cern of the people that this project be accomplished.
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 -iPage 13
Councilman Stiern stated he wanted to support this pro-
ject, as the people in this area have been affected.by many problem, s
and this park will be an asset and an improvement to the property
on Baker Street, increase the assessed valuation and upgrade the
neighborhood.
Mr. Bergen stated there are three additional Capital
Outlay Tax Projects which are sufficiently important to budget
and proceeded to discuss these projects with
funds for this year,
the Council.
Councilman
Vetter stated that as he understands it, the
Council has committed itself to budgeting the $40,300 for the
Community Center Building in California Avenue Park. Also, he
felt that the money should be budgeted to build the restroom
building in Centennial Park. Councilman Stiern agreed that a
park in that growing area should be equipped with a restroom.
Mr. Bergen stated that some funds should be contributed
toward the new Fire Station, at least money for the plans, as
obviously there are not sufficient funds in the budget to build
it this year. He recommended that the Council budget the $40;300
toward the Community Center Building.
Councilman Vetter then made a motion that the Council
budget $40,300 to the Community Center Building, and $15,000 to
the restroom building at Centennial Park. Councilman Stiern
spoke in favor of the motion. He also pointed out that Lowell
Park was in need of a swimming pool and that this project should
be placed on future capital outlay plans as this is a logical
development.
Councilman Bleecker offered an amendment to Councilman
Vetter's motion to budget the $40,300 for the Community Center
Building contingent upon the County budgeting its share of $120,900
for this building.
Councilman Vetter commented that this is already con-
tingent upon the County budgeting its share. The City is not
going to spend the money unless the County's share is forthcoming.
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 - Page 14
277
Councilman Heisey asked for a division of the motion, as
he would like to oppose the motion to budget $15,000 for construc-
tion of a restroom building in Centennial Park. He does not think,
that until this park is developed to a greater extent, there is
any great need for a restroom facility.
Councilman Whittemore stated that he thinks it is con-
tingent upon the County budgeting its share, and he would suggest
that if the money is not budgeted by the City, the project will be
killed at this point. As far as the restroom is concerned, the City
can afford $15,000 for this facility, if some of the other projects
are delayed until June of next year.
Mr. Bergen pointed out that the Council's approval of the
budget would not in any way constitute a commitment to the Federal
Government. The City Council would be required to take overt
action by submitting Phase II of the Plan to HUD before the Council
would obligate itself to constructing the building.
Councilman Vetter offered a substitute motion that the
Council appropriate $40,300 out of the $78,500 unapplied appro-
priations available, in the manner which was described in the
Auditorium-Recreation Report, and that $15,000 .of the balance be
budgeted for construction of a restroom building in Centennial Park.
Mayor Hart asked for a division of the motion. Vote was
taken on the budgeting of the funds for the Community Center Building,
which carried unanimously. Vote was taken on the allocation of
$15,000 for the construction of a restroom building in Centennial
Park, which carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter, Whittemore
Noes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey
Absent: None
Councilman Heisey asked if any funds had been set aside
for drawing the plans for the new Fire Station. Mr. Bergen replied
that the staff can come to the Council early next year, assuming
there are contingency funds available, and request the necessary
funds for the plans.
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 - Page 15
If the plans were ready, the building could be started
as the No. 1 project for next year after the budget was approved,
and they could move into the building possibly by January 1, 1972.
Councilman Stiern asked if it were a safe schedule to follow, and
Mr. Bergen replied that he could not say, but it is a prudent move,
considering the level of services and the fiscal picture of the
City.
Councilman Whittemore asked if the Council was going to
be presented with a report on the new Police Building at next
Monday's meeting. He asked if this would be a straight bond issue
or are they going to have funds to budget for architectural fees,
etc. Mr. Bergen said yes~ he is assuming that the Council has
$100,000 in its Contingency Fund, and other savings, such as the
Transit System, etc.
Councilman Vetter stated that perhaps the Council should
institute the practice of having the Finance Director submit a
quarterly statement so that it will know how the financial picture
stands on different surpluses, on the Contingency Account~ and the
Capital Improvement Contingency Account. This is something that
hasn't been done in the past, and he feels that the Council should
receive a quarterly estimate and readjust its thinking at that
time. Mr. Bergen stated it was their intent to make a report
either at the first of the year or the third quarter at the very
latest, so that the Council would be aware of how it stood
financially.
He encouraged the Council to contact the staff regarding
any capital improvement needs during the year, so that various
projects can be considered at the next budget year.
and costs can be prepared~ so that the Council can
ment on facts.
Explanations
base its judg-
Bakersfield, California, June 9, 1970 - Page 16
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, Resolution No. 37-70
of the City Council of the City of Bakersfield, California, approving
and adopting the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1970-71 was adopted by
the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern,
Vetter, Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: None
Councilman Stiern commented that he wanted Mr. Bergen to
consider his remarks about Lowell Park as being very serious, and
he wants this to be a formal application for a swimming pool for
that park to be placed in next year's Capital Outlay' Budget.
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the
Council, upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, the meeting was
adjourned at 10:30 P. M.
/
~YOR ~/t41ezCi~y of Bakersfield, Calif.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK and Ex~-Offi~io Clerk of the Council
~)f the City of Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Council of the
City of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of
the City Hall at eight o'clock P. M., June 15, 1970.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart
the Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation by the Reverend
of Greenacres Southern Baptist Church.
Present:
Absent:
followed by
John Tygart
The City Clerk called the roll as follows:
Mayor Hart. Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern,
Vetter, Whittemore
Councilman Bleecker
Minutes of the regular meeting of June 1, 1970 and
Bicentennial Celebration,
and ends in Oakland on
riders will retrace the
nearly five hundred miles that comprise the E1 Camino Viejo.
Mr. Fred Ward, representing the Bakersfield City Employees
Association, requested the Council to refer back to the Government
Efficiency and Personnel Committee for review, two items that
were approved at the budget hearing of June 8, 1970, regarding
the phasing out of three Fire Alarm Operators by January 1, 1971,
and the reclassification of the Fire Alarm Superviser with a 2½%
reduction in salary. He pointed out that this action is unfair
to long-time employees and is in conflict with previous statements
of the Fire Chief that these employees will be replaced on the
basis of attrition.
He stated that they feel there may be a violation of the
State Fair Employment Practices requirements in this matter because
there is some evidence of discrimination on the basis of the sex
of the operators. These matters are going to be explored as
quickly as possible.
Camino Commemorative Ride, part of the
which begins in San Pedro on June 26th
July 4th. Several thousand horses and
budget hearings of June 8 and 9, 1970 were approved as presented.
Scheduled Public Statements.
Miss Terry Sue Tarrance, representing the Bakersfield
Gymnkana Association, addressed the Council, relative to the E1
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 2
Mr. Bergen commented that the Governmental Efficiency
and Personnel Committee in its report to the Council stated "That
this Committee would like to point out
will be laid off at this time." There
would not be adjustments in the future.
that no Fire Alarm Operators;
was no inference that there
A position has been provided
for the operator with nineteen years in the Fire Department and
provisions are being discussed for positions for the other girls.
He does not believe that it is necessary for the Council to formally
refer the matter back to the GEPC. A meeting is being held on it
tomorrow and if additional information is developed, there is
sufficient time for the Committee to refer it back to the Council
with a recommendation.
Councilman Vetter asked what the objection was to referring
the matter back to the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Com-
mittee, and Mr. Bergen replied that there was sufficient time to
discuss it without going back to that point. Councilman Vetter
stated that he had some serious questions at the time it was pro-
posed and had discussed it with the Fire Chief at length. The Fire
Chief felt quite strongly that this was the best way to handle the
matter, principally because it gives additional man power to the
department. Councilman Vetter stated that he had reservations
about moving Fire Alarm Operators with many year's experience on
the job and training new personnel for this purpose, as he felt
the present operators would be more efficient and do a better job
for the City.
He took exception to Mr. Ward's charges that the City
would be in violation of the Fair Employment Practices Code. Mr.
Ward stated that he did not care to go into it at this time, but
he would discuss it later with the Governmental Efficiency and
Personnel Committee. Councilman Verier stated he would be most
happy to have the matter reviewed by the members of the Committee.
Councilman Whittemore commented that he feels this matter
should be reviewed again by the GEPC, along with another action by
the Council in creating three Captain positions, which brings up
the problem of Hosemen acting as Engineers, and these Engineer
positions were not created. He thinks it will be necessary for the
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 3
Committee to hold another meeting in the near future to correct
some of the Council's previous actions. There is no tremendous
urgency but it should not be permitted to go on indefinitely.
Correspondence.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, Notice regarding
proposed exclusion and/or inclusion of land from agricultural
preserves pursuant to the Williamson Act was received and ordered
placed on file.
Upon a motion by Councilman Heisey, communication from
David E. Urner regarding the placement of signs was received and
referred to the Planning Commission for study and recommendation.
A communication was read from the Kern High School
District enclosing a Resolution passed from the Board of Trustees
urging immediate action for the completion of proposed work in
the Eissler Elementary School, Chipman Junior High School and
Highland High School areas and consideration to the development
of road access to connect the district's property from the north
with the extension of an existing thoroughfare.
Councilman Stiern moved that the communication be receiw~d
and ordered placed on file, which carried unanimously. He pointed
out that the City will award a contract tonight for the improve-
ment of Auburn Street between Oswell Street and 400 feet east of
Eissler Street which will culminate in approximately $100,000 in
street development work done by the City to bring about access to
the new school complex. There is some work yet to he done by the
School District itself which will provide for circulation around
the school and connect with the street improvements made by the
City.
Apparently a misunderstanding exists and in order to
provide better traffic flow and reduce potential safety hazards
next fall, he stated he feels it would be appropriate for the City
Manager to notify the School Board of the extent of the street
access work that has been done and will be done by the City, and
to recommend to the School Board that it evaluate tile matter to
provide the proper circulation around the school, as this is within
the province of the Board itself. He then moved that the City
Manager be instructed to communicate with the School Board and
discuss the situation as outlined above.
Bakersfield~ California~ June 15, 1970 - Page 4
Councilman Rees agreed that the City is doing its share
to reduce the potential hazards and increase traffic flow. As
Councilman for the Third Ward~ he has inspected this campus many
times and he has come to the conclusion that there has been a lack
of coordination between the Elementary School District, the High
School Districts the Cify and the County. He stated that he would
be glad to arrange an appointment for Mr. Bergen to discuss this
matter with Dr. Harry Ward, as he feels that they are dealing with
reasonable people and the situation probably has arisen because of
lack of communication between the agencies involved.
Councilman Stiern stated he is concerned with access to
the school and the best possible circulation for the students and
parents. He does not believe it is necessary to send the Council
any more Resolutions~ that Mr. Bergen can handle the matter very
effectively. Mr. Bergen commented that he would take care of it
in the morning. Vote was then taken on the motion which carried
unanimously.
A communication from a visitor from Florida traveling
through the City complimenting a motorcycle o£ficer of the Police
Department for his courtesy and also commending the City for its
Police Department, was read.
A communication from Mr. Norman A. McNamee, County
Administrative Office, stating that the next scheduled meeting on
a County proposal to finance Kern County Parks would be held on
July 8, 1970~ was read.
Council Statements.
Councilman Heisey commented on an incident which occurred
over the week end when a young man was injured while playing in the
E1Tejon Hotel building which is being dismantled and demolished.
He stated this is an attractive nuisance and asked the City Attorney
what the City's requirements are when a building is :in the stages of
being torn down. Mr. Hoagland stated it is the sole responsibility
of the contractor, and to all intents and purposes the building was
secured and is under the jurisdiction of the contractor who is
engaged in demolishing it.
Bakersfield~ California, June 15, 1970 - Page 5
Councilman Stiern commented that he enjoyed attending
the first band concert of the season which was held in Beale Park
on Sunday night. It was a fine summer's evening entertainment~
very professionally done, and everyone enjoyed it.
Reports.
Councilman Heisey read a report of the Water and City
Growth Committee as follows:
This Committee feels sincerely that a Transit System is
needed to serve the Greater Bakersfield Area and has discussed
various methods of providing this essential service. This Com-
mittee has come to the conclusion that it is not £easible for the
City to continue providing a transportation service for the entire
metropolitan area.
As a result of our strong sentiments to keep a bus
service for the community, and in an attempt to £urther explore
other alternatives, this Committee held a meeting on June 8th
with Supervisors Miller and Fairbairn. During this meeting, it
was brought out that the City has been providing a Transit System
for the Greater Bakersfield Area since 1957 and has lost money
each year. It is estimated that we will lose approximately $90,000
for the Fiscal Year about to end. This situation is getting pro-
gressively worse in view of the declining conditions of our Transit
Fleet and increasing operating losses. The losses could very well
amount to $150,000 £or the 1970-71 Fiscal Year.
We £eel that there is a definite need £or a Transit
System in the Metropolitan Bakersfield Area and that it must be
financed and operated with routes, rates, and level of service to
be determined by the area served.
In view of the foregoing reasons~ it is our recommendation
that (1) the City discontinue the Transit System effective March
1, 1971; (2) the City Council cooperate with the Board of Super-
visors in the establishment o£ a Transit System which will include
the entire Metropolitan Bakersfield Area; (3) the City transfer
its pending application for federal funds for new buses to what-
ever public agency comes into existence; (4) our existing Transit
Bakersfield~ California, June 15, 1970 - Page 6
Fleet should be trans£erred to whatever public agency provides this
service in the future; and (5) if it would be of service, we will
be willing to lease out present transit facilities at 3101 16th
Street for a reasonable fee.
We have prepared a suggested letter to the Board o£
Supervisors which reflects the sentiments of the City on this
matter. With the City
presented to the Board
1970.
Council's approval, this letter will be
of Supervisors at its meeting of June 16,
Councilman Heisey stated that the County's Committee
expressed its willingness to cooperate in the formation of a
Metropolitan Transit District, however, that does not commit the
entire Board of Supervisors.
He then moved that the report be adopted and that the
suggested letter to the Board of Supervisors be signed by the
Mayor and he will personally take the letter to the Board meeting
on Tuesday.
Councilman Rucker asked if any efforts had been made to
serve the people of Bakersfield in the event the Board of Super-
visors or any other agency did not take over the present transit
facilities. Councilman Heisey stated he had high hopes that it
would not be necessary to discontinue transit service, but if the
Metropolitan Transit District is not formed it will be submitted
to the electorate in November £or a decision o£ the voters.
Councilman Stiern stated that the community definitely
needs a transportation system which will service the entire Bakers-
field area and the City will be willing to fund its share of such
a system. The question is, is it economical to continue with a
system which has lost money each year. He believes that the matter
should be placed on the ballot and not decided by the City Council.
It is not within the province of the Council to abruptly discontinue
a transportation system, it should be submitted to the people of
the City with the alternative that an areawide district type of
service could replace it.
Bakersfield~ California, June 15,
1970 - Page 7
Councilman Heisey commented that if the Supervisors act
on the Council's request, it will preclude the necessity of
holding an election. He then read the draft of the proposed
letter to be signed by the Mayor and submitted to the Board at
the meeting on Tuesday.
After additional discussion, vote was taken on the
motion which carried unanimously.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, Report of the Citizens
Committee for a new Police Building and new expansion of City
Hall was received and referred to the Budget Review and Finance
Committee for study and recommendation. This motion carried
unanimously.
Councilman Rees stated that the Citizens Committee
completed a worthwhile project and he feels that it should be
commended for a fine job.
Allowance of Claims.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Vouchers Nos. 4180
to 4325 inclusive, in amount of $133,165.00, as audited by the
Voucher Approval Committee were allowed, and authorization was
granted for payment of same.
Action on Bids.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, low bid of Blake,
Mo£fit and Towne for Annual Contract Janitorial Paper Supplies
was accepted, all other bids were rejected, and the Mayor was
authorized to execute the contract.
Upon a motion by Councilman Heisey, the only bid received[,
from Continental Service Company for sale of surplus property at
the northwest corner of Monterey and.King Streets, was accepted,
and the Mayor was authorized to execute the Quitclaim Deed for
the property. The City Attorney was instructed to place the
property in escrow.
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, low bid of Robert
Lee Farmer for construction of Stockdale Estates Interceptor Sewer
was accepted, all other bids were rejected, and the Mayor was
authorized to execute the contract.
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 8
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, low bid of W. M.
Lyles Company for construction of Storm Drain in Cypress Street,
Verde Street, South "K" Street, Lakeview Avenue and California
Avenue was accepted, all other bids were rejected, and the Mayor
was authorized to execute the contract.
Upon a motion by Councilman Heisey~ low bid of Frank
Terry for construction of Restroom Building at Wayside Park and
for Storage Building at Jefferson Park Swimming Pool, was accepted,
all other bids were rejected, and the Mayor was authorized to
execute the contract.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, low bid of Griffith
Co. for improvement of Auburn Street between Oswell Street and
400 feet east of Eissler Street was accepted, all other bids were
rejected, and the Mayor was authorized to execute the contract.
Approval of Lease Agreement between
Southern Pacific Transportation Com-
pany and the City of Bakersfield for
use of property located at the north-.
west corner of Sumner Street and
Baker Street.
At this time Council consideration was given to entering
into a Lease Agreement between the Southern Pacific Transportation
Company and the City of Bakersfield for the use of property located
at the northwest corner of Sumner Street
developed for beautification and related
pointed out that this is a 30 day lease~
and Baker Street to be
purposes. Mr. Bergen
it is not anticipated
that its
tenancy.
term will be only 30 days, but it is a month to month
Councilman Heisey stated that he was pleased to make a
motion to approve this lease and authorize the Mayor to execute
same, as a great deal of time and negotiation had gone into the
accomplishment of what some months ago had seemed almost impossible.
It will be a major improvement in East Bakersfield and has received
the support of the citizens and the railroad.
Councilman Rees asked the general terms of the lease and
the amount to be expended. Mr. Bergen stated that the estimated
B~kersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 9
amount is $22,000 with one of the major expenditures being the
fence which is located both north and south of the tracks. Rental
charged will cover the railroad's annual land taxes levied on this
property during the life of the lease, plus 9% of any improvements
installed by the railroad company. Required improvements are curb,
gutter and sidewalk which will amount to approximately $100.00 per
year.
Councilman Whittemore questioned investing $22,000 in an
improvement covered by a short term lease. Councilman Heisey stated
the railroad or its tenant will pick up the cost for any improve-
ments if at any time the lease is cancelled.
Vote was then taken on
carried unanimously.
Mr. Bergen stated that
Councilman Heisey's motion, which
copies of the next four Ordinances
were given to the Bakersfield Employees Association and to the
Firefighters Local on Friday, June 12, 1960. These Ordinances are
not Emergency Ordinances, but are retroactive to July 1, 1970.
Adoption of Ordinance No. 1865 New
Series of the Council of the City of
Bakersfield amending provisions of
Holidays and Annual Leave contained
in the Municipal Code.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Ordinance No. 1865
New Series of the Council of the City of Bakersfield amending
provisions for Holidays and Annual Leave contained :in the Municipal
Code, was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Bleecker
Adoption of Ordinance No. 1866 New
Series amending Section 3.18.050 of
the Municipal Code of the City of
Bakersfield and repealing Section
3..18.050.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Ordinance No. 1866
New Series amending Section 3.18.050 of the Municipal Code of the
City of Bakersfield and repealing Section 3.18.050, was adopted
by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Councilmen Heisey, Rees,
Whittemore
None
Councilman Bleecker
Rucker, Stiern,
Vetter,
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page l0
Adoption of Ordinance No. 1867 New
Series of the Council of the City of
Bakersfield amending Section 3.18.060
(Salary Schedule) and Section 3.18.070
(Temporary Positions) of the Municipal
Code of the City of Bakersfield.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, Ordinance No. 1867
New Series of the City of Bakersfield amending Section 3.18.060
(Salary Schedule) and Section 3.18.070 (Temporary Positions) of
the Municipal Code of the City of Bakersfield, was adopted by the
following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, W~tter,
Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Bleecker
Adoption of Ordinance No. 1868 New
Series of the Council of the City of
Bakersfield amending Chapter 3.18 by
adding Section 3.18.095.
Upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore, Ordinance No. 1868
New Series of the Council of the City of Bakersfield amending
Chapter 3.18 by adding Section 3.18.095 (Incentive Pay) was adopted
by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Bleecker
First reading of an Ordinance of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
amending Title 6 of the Municipal Code
by the addition of Chapter 6.60.
This was the time set for first reading of an Ordinance
of the Council of the City of Bakersfield amending Title 6 of the
Municipal Code by the addition of Chapter 6.60. This is a Service
Users Tax Ordinance for a five percent tax on users of Water, Gas,
Electricity, Telephone and Cable Television.
Mr. Robert King, appearing as an Attorney representing
the Bakersfield Cable Television Company, addressed the Council
relative to the proposed City Utility Service Tax. He stated that
this proposed legislation would place a five percent Users Tax on
one selected non-utility, cable television service, and this Utility
Tax is not applicable to a non-utility company. Cable Television
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 11
service is a non-essential, luxury service and not used by the
entire population as are electricity, gas, water and telephones.
Unlike a true utility, the rate of return on invested
capital is not protected or guaranteed and the cable television
company can be forced out of business at any such time as it
ceases to operate profitably. It does not enjoy a monopoly
position, but is subject to intense competition from off-the-air
signals that are available through roof-top antennas. The tax-
payer to express his dissatisfaction with this new tax cannot
disconnect his electricity, or his water or gas~ or his telephone,
as these are essential services, but he can and will express his
dissatisfaction by disconnecting his non-essential service~ such
as cable television. He stated that his company is opposed to the
imposing of this Utility Tax on a non-utility such as the cable
television company~ and he requested that in the Council's con-
sideration of this Ordinance, it delete those provisions relative
to cable television because it is simply not in the same category
as those other public utilities on which the Council is considering
levying a tax.
Mrs. Lucile Wake addressed the Council, stating that she
was here to protest the proposed 5% Utility Tax, as the proposed
Utility Tax is regressive and will cause those people with iow or
moderate means to pay a much higher percentage of their total
income in taxes than those people of greater income..
She asked what fee will be charged the City by utility
companies for the service of computing and collecting the money
for this tax, also~ who is going to enforce the collection and
what is the estimated cost of the enforcement. Is this proposed
tax on utilities an income tax deductible item? She urged the
Council to use the Property Tax, the most honest and fairest tax
of all, if additional income is needed. If the Council feels that
public pressure is so strong that it cannot increase the Property
Tax, she suggested that it turn this regressive tax into a pro-
gressive tax by assigning varying tax rates.
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 12
Councilman Stiern commented that he is not in favor of
any tax, and he does not like to be part and parcel of imposing
a tax. The Utility Tax will raise the amount required to meet the
deficit in the City's Budget. It would require 50~ on the Property
Tax rate to raise the amount which the Service Users Tax will bring
into the City. This tax is analogous to a Sales Tax, it has some
advantages in thai it is a broad tax, it does not just impose
penalties on those people who own property, it taxes every one as
equitably as a tax can. He does not think the Council is prepared
to raise the tax rate 50~; property owners in the City would not
want that. This tax is required to meet budget requirements, such
as the payroll. In order to be reasonable and fair with City
employeesr the Council has had to contemplate this utility type
tax which will be across the board for all residents, and more
fair than the Property Tax.
Councilman Verier pointed out that there will be entifies
that have not paid taxes in the past, such as churches, schools,
the Federal Government, etc., who are entitled to service, and by
the use of utilities these entities will be paying a portion of
the City's expense for services, and if any tax is necessary, he
strongly supports the Utility Tax.
Councilman Whittemore commented that this proposed Ordi-
received quite a lot of publicity and has created con-
interest, as he has had several people talk to him about
nance has
siderable
it. He stated that he is not sure that the Council has been
furnished with enough detailed information as to the method of
computing this tax and what it will actually cost the average
homeowner. He feels that a closer look should be taken at this
Utility Tax, as he does not know what the property owner would pay
in Utility Taxes compared with what he would pay on the average
ad valorem tax. If this is something that is going to be a wind-
fall to the large property owner and the small homeowner winds up
subsidizing the large property owner, he would be opposed to it.
If this is a regressive tax, he would like to take another look
at it. He stated he would like to have more information from the
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 13
City Manager regarding his method £or compiling these figures and
would like to have him give the Council some definite comparisons.
Also~ he wants to know exactly what the Council is getting into
and how it will affect the average homeowner.
Councilman Heisey asked the staff to answer Mr. King's
letter point by point~ with a copy to be sent out in the Council's
packet on Thursday. He would like to go over the staff's answers
to the points raised by Mr. King. He is opposed to taxes and it
was with a great deal of reluctance that he agreed 'to vote for an
increase in a tax in Bakersfield. There are two good reasons why
this Utility Tax is a very necessary tax. In the £irst place~ the
employees would not have received
ones that are reaping most of the
if the City does not levy the tax,
a raise this year, they are the
benefits from the tax. Secondly,.
the public will be taxed anyway..
It is his understanding that it is only a matter of months before
the State of California will levy this tax statewide. As a Charter
City~ if the City of Bakersfield is already collecting this tax~
hopefully, the City will be able to keep it as City revenue. If
the City did not have it, the State would take it. He does not
think there will be any problem in collecting it, as he has been
collecting a 5% Sales Tax for years, portions of which go to the
City and County~ and it is the responsibility of the business fo
collect it, or pay it themselves. It isn't going to be just fhe
little property owner that will pay the tax, it is the major con-
cerns in the City, who consume large quantities of power, gas and
water~ and who will bear a substantial part of the burden. This
is far more equitable than a 50~ increase in the Property Taxes
and he heartily supports it.
Mr. Richard Newman~ proprietor of Sparkle Laundry and
Dry Cleaners and owner of three laundromats~ stated thai the people
in the service industries will suffer if this Utility Tax is put
into effect. Currently he is paying Property Taxes at the rate
of $2,500 a year, but this tax will raise his taxes to $1,500, as
his utility bill last year were in excess of $29,000. He ~eels
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 14
that the Council is being un£air with people in his industry be-
cause they are large users of utilities which are necessary to
provide service they must give to the public.
Mrs. Mary Ming, who resides at 2119 Ming Avenue, addressed
the Council, stating that she is a small businesswoman and operates
four laundromats. She feels that this is an unfair tax to her and
to those people in her industry. She uses utilities as a commodity
and at the present time pays utility bills amounting to $14,000 a
year. With the 5% added to the already high utility bills, she is
sure they will not be able to operate at all~ let alone at a profit.
She thinks the tax is fair to the homeowners~ that each one will
then pay their fair share. But when the laundromats are taxe~,
it is unfair, because very few homeowners use $14,000 of utilities
a year. She pointed out that laundromat owners operating outside
the City Limits have an un£air advantage. Her laundromats are
located in shopping centers inside the City and she thinks this is
a high price to pay for having annexed to the City.
Mayor Hart commented that this is the £irst reading of
the Ordinance and a special meeting will be held Monday, June 22,
1970, for adoption of the Ordinance.
Claim for damages from Patrick A. House,
2304 Holden Way, referred to the City
Attorney.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, claim for damages
from Patrick A. House~ 2304 Holden Way, was referred to the City
Attorney.
Acceptance of resignation of John Pryor
as member of the Police Civil Service
Commission e~fective June 19, 1970.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, the resignation of
Mr. John Pryor as member of the Police Civil Service Commission
effective June 19, 1970 was accepted, and the Mayor was requested
to sent Mr. Pryor a letter of commendation for the excellent
services rendered to the City.
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 15
Authorization granted the Finance
Director to write off the current
books certain delinquent and un-
collectible Accounts Receivable.
The Finance Director requested authorization to write
off the current books certain delinquent accounts receivable
totaling $1,678.84. Normal collection ef£orfs to this point have
been fruitless and due to the age of most of these accounts, it is
requested that the Finance Director be authorized to write these
off the books and turn them over to a collection agency or initiate
such other collection steps as may be appropriate in each case.
Councilman Whittemore stated that on the delinquent sewer
rental agreements, he would like the matter taken a step further,
and that none of these people be permitted to enter into another
sewer rental agreement while these delinquences are still existing,
and that they be required fo reimburse the City for the charges of
collection of the delinquent account. He then moved that the
Finance Director be granted authorization to take the action
requested and that further sewer rental agreements be denied to
the people whose present sewer rental agreements are delinquent,
until they are paid up in full, and that they be required to pay
whatever charges are assessed to the City for the collection of
these delinquent accounts.
Mr. Haynes, Finance Director, addressed the Council,
stating that each of these delinquent accounts receivable has had
individual review and there are different circumstances attached
to each of them. What he is asking is that they be allowed to
write them off as current accounts and pursue the collection as
individual cases; some in small claims court, some with the
collection agency, others in a different way, with special attention,
depending upon each case. He stated this is the first time they
have come to the Council with a centralized accounts receivable
collection, so that they can begin this type of action. Mr.
Hoagland commented that what the Finance Director i~ asking is to
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 16
clear them off the current accounts and they will continue to
pursue whatever methods are available to the City to collect them.
Some problems do exist and confuse the issues.
City Manager Bergen stated that in order 'to comply with
Councilman Whittemore's request, a complete report will be made so
that the Council will be aware of the final disposition of these
delinquent accounts. It might take two or three months but an
individual report will be made on each one. After some further
discussion, vote was taken on Councilman Whittemore's motion,
which carried unanimously.
Adoption of Resolution No. 38-70 of
the Council designating certain days
as Holidays for all employees of the
City of Bakersfield during Fiscal
Year 1970-71.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rees, Resolution No. 38-70
of the Council designating certain days as Holidays for all employees
of the City of Bakersfield during Fiscal Year 1970-71, was adopted
by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Bleecker
Approval of Freeway Maintenance Agree-
ment between the Division of Highways
and the City of Bakersfield for the
City to resume control and maintenance
of certain streets.
Upon a motion by Councilman Heisey, Freeway Maintenance
Agreement between the Division of Highways and the City of Bakers-
field for the City to resume control and maintenance of the Mt.
Vernon and Oswell Street Roadway sections that are within the
limits of State Highway Route 178, was approved, and the Mayor was
authorized to execute same.
Acceptance of Work and Mayor authorized
to execute Notice of Completion of
Public Improvement District No. 801-A.
Upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore, the Work was
accepted and the Mayor was authorized to execute the Notice of
Completion of Public Improvement District No. 801-A.
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page
Acceptance o£ Work and Mayor authorized
to execute Notice of Completion for Con-
tract No. 73-69 for Construction of
Southwest Bakersfield Sewer, Phase Iii,
HUD Project No. WS-6-05-0301.
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, the Work was accepted
and the Mayor was authorized to execute the Notice of Completion
for Contract No. 73-69 for Construction of Southwest Bakersfield
Sewer, Phase II, HUD Project No. WS-6-05-0301.
Approval of Contract Change Order No.
1. to Contract No. 26-70 for Alterations
and Additions at the Beale Park Outdoor
Theater.
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, Contract Change
Order No. I to Contract No. 26-70 for Alterations and Additions
at Beale Park Outdoor Theater was approved and the Mayor was
authorized to execute same.
Adoption of Resolution No. 39-70 finding
that certain Weeds growing on property
in the City of Bakersfield constitute a
public nuisance and directing the Super-
intendent of Streets to destroy said
Weeds.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, seconded by Council-
man Heisey, Resolution No. 39-70 finding that certain Weeds growing
on property in the City of Bakersfield constitute a Public Nuisance
and directing the Superintendent of Streets to destroy said weeds
was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Bleecker
Adoption of Resolution No. 40-70 of
Intent to expend funds allocated to
the City of Bakersfield for a TOPICS
Program.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Resolution No. 40-70
of Intent to expend Funds allocated to the City of Bakersfield for
a TOPICS Program, was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Bleecker
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 18
Approval of Agreement between the City
of Bakersfield, County of Kern and
State of California for TOPICS Program.
Upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, Agreement between
the City of Bakersfield, County of Kern and State of California
for TOPICS Program was approved, and the Mayor was authorized to
execute same.
Reception of petition from residents
along Ralston Street, Murdock Street
and Virginia Avenue between Owens
Street and Lakeview Avenue for Public
Improvement District.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, petition from resi-
dents along Ralston Street, Murdock Street and Virginia Avenue
between Owens Street and Lakeview Avenue requesting the Council
to form a Public Improvement District for the construction of curbs;,
gutters and sidewalks was received and placed on file, the City
Engineer's Certificate of Sufficiency was filed, and the City
Attorney was instructed to prepare the necessary documents to
commence proceedings.
Encroachment Permit granted Pacific
Telephone and Telegraph Company to
install four ground rods adjacent
to their property located at 1917
"M" Street.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, Encroachment Permit
was granted to Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company to install
four ground rods adjacent to their property located at 1917 "M"
Street.
Request of E. C. Morris to annex property
and connect to the City Sewer System
approved and referred to the Plannins;
Commission.
Upon a motion by Councilman Whittemore, request of E. C.
Morris to annex property at the northwest corner of Oak Street and
Brundage Lane was referred to the Planning Commission for study
and recommendation, and request to connect said property to the
City Sewer System was approved subject to the following conditions:
(1) Submit plan for review and approval (2) Work to City specifica-
tions (3) Sign the required sewer rental agreement.
Encroachment Permit granted J. D. Turner
to install chain link fence along back
of existing sidewalk at 3418 Kaibab Avenue.
Upon a motion by Councilman Heisey, Encroachment Permit
was granted J. D. Turner to install a four foot high chain link
fence along back of existing sidewalk at 3418 Kaibab Avenue.
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 19
Hearings.
This is the time set for public hearing on Appeal by
Barbara Wagner to the decision of the Board of Zoning Adjustment
denying the application of Timothy L. Belyeu for a modification
of an R-1 (Single Family Dwelling) Zone to permit the elimination
of the required Off-Street Parking Space at lll2 Beryl Drive.
This hearing has been duly advertised and the property
posted and no protests were filed in the City Clerk's Office. The
Board of Zoning Adjustment did not find reason to justify approval
of this request and felt the granting of a modification to the
off-street parking requirements in residential zones would add to
the existing parking problem in this specific zone.
Mayor Hart declared the hearing open for public partici-
pation. No one spoke in opposition to the request for the modifi-
cation. Mr. John Kelly, Attorney representing the applicant
Barbara Wagner, addressed the Council~ stating that this is a
residential structure, built about 1950 shortly a£ter the area
was annexed to the City. Some time after the residence was built,
the owners converted a garage into a den area. In ].955 the owner-
ship of the property changed hands and in 1962 Mrs. Wagner purchased
the home. She is attempting to sell the property and obtain FHA
financing and is unable to get approval for the financing without
a variance relative to off-street parking. She obtained the
signatures of the two owners adjacent to her property and of the
owner of the property across the street, and they were all in
accord with her request to obtain the variance for the purposes of
off-street parking.
Mr. Sceales, Director of Planning, stated that this type
of thing has happened quite frequently, where the property owner
converts a building without applying for a permit to do so at the
Building Department. The FHA won't approve it unless the City
approves it for the off-street parking, and secondly', they won't
approve it unless they have obtained a Building Permit for the
part that has been converted.
Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1970 - Page 20
Councilman Vetter commented that
that the present owner should be penalized for the
former owner. Mrs~ Wagner evidently purchased the
good faith~ this is done often~ converting garages
it doesn't seem fair
action of a
property in
into enclosed
rooms~ and if there is 38 feet of space available for parking, he
cannot see where it is going to create any parking problem. He
stated he would be in favor of granting the request.
Councilman Whittemore stated this is a well built house
and the job of converting the garage was neatly done. There is
plenty of space in front for parking. He knows Mrs. Wagner has a
problem and he would not oppose the granting of the request.
Mayor Hart closed the public portion of tile hearing for
Council discussion and deliberation. Councilman Heisey stated he
felt that if the City granted the application, it would open the
door to parking boats~ trailers, etc. on the street with the City's
blessing.
Councilman Whittemore stated this is one of the most
frustrating things to property owners~ who assume a loan, buy a
piece of property and when they attempt to sell the property, find
they can't do so because the previous owner had converted the
property without a Building Permit. He therefore moved to grant
the application.
Councilman Vetter stated he would support the motion with
the comment that this was done several years ago, and he does not
feel the present owner should be penalized. However, he would make
it clear that if it presents parking problems, it should be looked
at specifically at that time. Since it would work a hardship on
the present owner~ he would support the motion.
After discussion, vote was taken on the motion to adopt
Zoning Ordinance No. 228 granting Modification of the Land Use
Zoning Ordinance of the City of Bakersfield to permit the elimina-
tion of the required Off-Street Parking on that certain property
commonly known as 1112 Beryl Drive, which carried by the following
roll call vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Councilmen Rees~ Rucker,
Councilman Heisey
Councilman Bleecker
Stiern, Vetter,
Whittemore
Bakersfield, California, June l§, 1970 - Page 21
6.60 (Utility Tax),
meeting.
Mayor Hart announced that a special meeting of the
Council will be held Monday, June 22, 1970, at 12:05 P.M., to
adopt an Ordinance of the Council of the City of Bakersfield
amending Title 6 of the Municipal Code by the addition of Chapter
which was given first reading a-t tonight's
Council,
adjourned at 10:45 P. M.
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the
upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, the meeting was
Calif.
ATTEST:
CITY'CLF. RK and Et-OffiCio Clerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, June 22, 1970
Minutes of a special meeting of the Council of the City
of Bakersfield, California, held in the Council Chambers of the
City Hall at 12:05 P. M., June 22, 1970.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance.
Present:
Absent:
The City Clerk called the roll as follows:
Mayor Hart. Councilmen Bleecker, Heisey, Rees,
Stiern, Vetter
Councilman Whittemore
Correspondence.
The City Clerk read a communication
Rucker,
from Kenneth E. Secor,
Dean for Administration, California State College, Bakersfield,
requesting thai the scheduling of bus service to the College Campus
be given consideration by the City at an early date:, with imple-
mentation hopefully set no later than October 1, 1970. Councilman
Stiern asked the City Manager if the Council's decision relative
to the bus system in any way violated agreements with the College
to furnish bus service.
Mr. Bergen stated no, that the agreement requires the
City to provide the College with the same level of bus service
that it provides to other areas of the City. If the City goes
out of the Transit business on March 1st, then the level of service
is zero. Hopefully, the County will form a service district to
take over the system and the District could provide bus service
to the College. In the meantime, the City plans to furnish bus
service to the College on the same basis as service is furnished
2o other areas of the City.
Upon a motion by Councilman Stiern, the communication was
received and ordered placed on file.
Mayor Hart asked Mr. Bergen 2o inform Mr. Secor of the
Council's action and Mr. Bergen stated he would do this and arrange
a meeting with Mr. Secor and the Transit Superintendent.
Bakersfield, California, June 22, 1970 - Page 2
Scheduled Public Statements.
Mr. John Calvetti, Vice-President and General Manager of
Kern Cable TV, addressed the Council relative to the proposed 5%
Utility Tax, stating that his company was awarded a franchise to
serve the County area in 1965 and subsequent to that date, due to
annexations of various portions of the County area to the City,
they now find themselves serving a number of ,customers residing
inside the City Limits. For this reason he is appearing before
the Council to express objections to the 5% Service Users Tax as
it applies to Cable Television.
He pointed out that the same reasons for opposing this
tax as stated by Attorney Robert King, representing the Bakers-
field Cable TV Company who appeared before the Council last week,
apply for the Kern Cable TV. Cable service is a luxury and not a
necessity. His company would anticipate some amount of decrease
in the number of subscribers regardless of how small the increase
in the amount
the customers can
a hundred percent
a public utility.
charged on the bill, as
do without. Unless
guaranteed monoply,
this is one service that
a cable company is granted
it should not be treated as
He stated that it is his understanding that a user of
any utility service may refuse to pay this 5% levy and it is not
the obligation of the utility company to enforce the collection.
Under state law, the utility company may not curtail service being
delivered to a subscriber because of a failure to pay this type
tax. However, the utility company would be required to furnish
the City with a list of the unpaid subscribers and it would be up
to the City to take whatever action necessary to collect the tax.
He stated he hoped the Council had thoroughly investigated the
problem of collecting the Users Tax as sometimes the collection
of small amounts is not economically feasible.
Councilman Rees asked Mr. Calvetti how marly subscribers
his company had in the City Limits, and he stated they estimated
approximately 500 subscribers out of a total of 15,000 throughout
the metropolitan area.
Bakersfield, California, June 22, 1970 - Page 3
Mr. Calvetti pointed out that it would add about $1700
to the operating expense of his company due to the increase in
their power bill, it would cost approximately $2000 to have their
data processing billing system changed over to include the compu-
tation and addition of the tax to the bill to the customer, and
about $3000 a year in physical collection fees. He therefore
requested that all mention of taxing Cable Television Service be
deleted from fhe proposed Ordinance.
Councilman Vetter agreed with Mr. Calvetti's remarks.
He stated that the company does not receive a guaranteed return on
its investment and that taxing the cable television companies along
with the other utilities does not seem right to him.
Councilman Heisey remarked that he does not think the
Council should change the Ordinance by granting exemptions to it;
the fewer exemptions, the fairer it will be to everyone. It can
get to the point where anyone who is not exempted will consider
himself treated unfairly.
Councilman Vetter commented that any time you slart
raising taxes, call it a Property Tax, a Utility Tax, or anything
else, it is an increase in the cost to the public. He is not certain
that the Utility Tax is the answer to the City's problems but it
is the only answer that is available right now. He would like to
point out that the City should be thinking about next year. Per-
haps they should consider imposing this tax on a short term basis
and evaluate it a year from now with the idea in mind of operating
without it next year.
Councilman Bleecker asked the City Attorney if the State
imposed the Utility Tax, would a chartered city be preempted from
this £ield. Mr. Hoagland replied that they really don't know what
form it will take. This year's Bill contemplated that the State
would levy a User's Tax and those cities fhat were already imposing
the tax would be permitted to keep the funds collected. However,
he does not know what will happen next year, hopefully, the City
will be able to retain the funds.
Councilman Rees commented that there is no such thing as
a comfortable tax, a tax which does not hurt some group or individual.
In some facets o£ government it is thought that taxing luxuries is
Bakers£ield~ California~ June 22~ 1970 - Page 4
the ideal way to tax, such as the Sales Tax which is not imposed
on food or medicines, but on almost everything else.
Adoption of Ordinance No. 1869 New
Series of the Council of the City of
Bakersfield amending Title 6 of the
Municipal Code by the addition of
Chapter 6.60.
Vice-Mayor Stiern, who had been conducting the meeting
for Mayor Hart who had asked to be excused from participating in
this portion of the meeting, announced that this was the time for
Council consideration of proposed Ordinance No. 1869 New Series of
the Council of the City of Bakersfield amending Title 6 of the
Municipal Code by the addition of Chapter 6.60.
Mr. Richard Newman, Manager and Owner o£ Sparkle Laundry
and Cleaners in Bakersfield, stated that he understood that the
City is trying to raise money to support its budget and is trying
to use a form other than ad valorem taxes to do this. He recog-
nizes that the Council has a problem. However, his industry believes
they are being taxed to pay a larger share of the increase than
most other businesses, as they have larger utility bills. He is
not even sure that the citizens of Bakersfield are aware that this
5% tax is going to be added to their utility bills, and he thinks
that the Council has a duty to inform its constituents that this
is an "add-on" tax.. He concluded by saying that his industry
believes they are being overcharged on this Utility Tax and if
there is any way they can be exempted from the Ordinance, they
would like this to be done.
Councilman Stiern stated that in reply to Mr. Newman's
observation that the citizens of Bakersfield were not aware of this
tax, he did not know of any way to bring it to their attention, it
has already been publicized by the news media and discussed by the
Council. Perhaps Councilman Vetter's suggestion to impose it for
a year is the answer, and at the end of that time, the Council can
take the attitude that if it is not acceptable, it will be abolished,
and it will be then necessary to either raise the Property Tax or
find some other source of income. After trying it for a year,
the Council could appraise whether it is a fair, sensible tax, and
Bakersfield, California, June 22, 1970 - Page 5
if it
located.
Councilman Vetter pointed out that if
adopted for an established term, such as a year,
technical problem if the State imposes the tax,
matically take over the City's share.
Councilman Stiern commented that
specify any period of time, just adopt
year, evaluate it on the basis that it
Councilman Rucker stated that
take a good look at this tax and if
it would be repealed.
Councilman Bleecker asked
is not, then it can be repealed and other sources of income
it is actually
there might be a
as it would auto-
it isn't necessary to
it, and at the end of a
is an interim measure.
any future Council would
at any time it :is not needed,
the City Manager what his
thoughts were on charging a tax on a maximum dollar amount per
year based on the gross dollar of business. Mr. Be~?gen stated
that no consideration has been given to this. The City of Bakers-
field's Ordinance is patterned after those adopted by a number of
other chartered cities. Also, it is very difficult to write in
exclusions without a standard to go by.
Councilman Bleecker stated that the people who are large
users of the utilities might be seriously hurt by this 5% tax and
he feels that some provision should be made for an appeal to the
Council. Mr. Bergen stated that there is no clause of this nature
in the Ordinance. Any time a tax is applied, it will hit one person
harder than it does another.
Councilman Bleecker stated that there may be cases where
the imposition of this tax would put people out of business, he
does not say that this will happen, but he feels there should be a
safeguard in the Ordinance in case this does happen. During this
next year he will make every effort to see if the City cannot cut
expenses so that the Council will not be faced with imposing addi-
tional taxes for the next budget. He is going to push the idea
that the next year the Council consider capital improvements first,
machinery and equipment next, and if there is anything remaining,
then consider increases in salaries for the employees.
· Bakersfield, California, June 22, 1970 - Page 6
Councilman Heisey stated the Council would support him
all the way.
Councilman Stiern commented that perhaps the Council
should reconsider the budget now and do it that way.
Councilman Rees stated that the Council leans heavily
on the staff for recommendations and information. The budget has
been adopted, but a tax rate has not been set~ He asked what
would happen if the Council failed to adopt theOrdinance imposing
the 5% Utility Tax.
Mr. Bergen answered that when the Council establishes
the tax rate in August with up-to-date estimates, this tax would
not be included, and the Council would be required to levy the
additional amount required to balance the budget as a Property
Tax, or some other type of tax~
Councilman Rees commented that the alternative is still
open to the Council, if it wishes to take it, to have a higher
Property Tax and no Utility Tax.
Councilman Stiern stated that he feels the Council has
to look sensibly at its alternatives. When they gel: down to the
economics of. it, they are coping with fixed increases of commodities.
It will be necessary to either raise.the Property Tax rate or not,
either grant salary increases or not. The Board of Supervisors
has apparently decided to increase the Property Tax rate about
69~ because the employees have put the pressure o~ them to do it.
He does not think the Council can reasonably do this~ The 5%
Utility Tax is broad enough and fair enough, that property owners
will not be faced with an increase in the tax rate. HoWever, he
has stated he will be perfectly willing to go back'into budget
sessions, in order to do the fair thing by the people of the City.
Councilman Rucker commented that the big users of
utilities will probably pass the tax down to their customers, so
Bakersfield, California, June 22~ 1970 - Page ?
the taxpayers will ultimately find themselves absorbing any increase.
Councilman Bleecker stated that he is not talking about
the big users in a big business, he is talking about the big users
in a small business, and he will not support the Ordinance unless
a safeguard is written into the Ordinance for some type of appeal
by persons in that category.
Councilman Vetter commented that he did not know how the
Ordinance could be written to provide for an appeal by people being
put o~ business, as the Council would probably spend most of its
time listening to these appeals. In order to provi,~e £or the
City's budget and the raises given to its employees~ it is necessary
to adopt this 5% Utility Tax. However, he is still opposed to the
Cable Television being included in the Ordinance, and when it is
time for the vote he would like to have the question divided.
Mr. Bergen reminded the Council that the operating budget
was down $200,000 this year. The entire budget was up less than
3% which is less than the salary increases granted. It has been
mentioned several times by the Council that the entire 5% Utility
Tax is to be used for salary increases. He feels that is a little
un£air to the City employees when the reason for additional funds
this year is due to less carry-overs than in previous years. This
year's Sales Tax revenues and other revenues which have increased
constantly over the past four or five years~ actually were less
than estimated. The City Council controls the level, of service
provided by the City and inasmuch as approximately 70% of the budget
is salaries, the area that substantial economies can be realized
is in operating with fewer personnel. The City Council exercises
control over this and hopefully, during this year with timely
reports to the Council, reductions can be accomplished.
Mrs. Ming addressed the Council~ stated that she had
explained her situation previously to the Council at the meeting
of June 15th. She operates four coin-operated laundromats and
her utility bill last year was $14,000, which will mean that she
will be paying $700 more due to the 5% Utility Tax. ~er competitors
Bakersfield, California, June 22~ 1970 - Page 8
operate in the County and will not be required to pay this tax,
therefore~ she cannot raise her price to her customers to absorb
the tax without losing business to her competitors. She believes
this tax is very unfair to her industry and asked that they be
exempted from the Ordinance.
Mr. Gary Hokenson~ General Manager of Bakersfield Cable
TV Company, stated his company did not object to the Utility Tax~
but questioned being taxed as a public utility.
Councilman Heisey asked City Attorney Hoagland to reply
to some of the statements made by Attorney Robert King in his
previous presentation'to the Council. Mr.Hoagland staled he would
reply only to the legal questions. Whether it is called a Public
Utility Users Tax or a Users Tax is immaterial. As far as they
are concerned, cable TV is a utility. It is a utilily by virtue
of the City's franchise regardless of whether it is. not listed as
a utility, under the Public Utilities Code or the Constitution.
The only reason it is not included in the Constitution is because
it was not in existence at the time the Constitution was adopted.
A utility is something that is obligated by government to serve
the public when asked for under certain conditions.
Cable TV is engaged in interstate commerce, and they
feel that this Users Tax is not an undue burden on state commerce.
The local regulations on Cable TV have been approved by the United
States Supreme Court as late as this year. The entire issue may
become moot depending on what happens in Fresno~ as that City is
undergoing a law suit to invalid its Utility Tax Ordinance. He
was curious as to why Los Angeles did not include Cable TV in its
particular Ordinance because there are several companies operating
Cable TV in the Los Angeles area, and when he asked he was told
they were in the process of amending the Ordinance to include it.
Councilman Vetter stated he is in favor oi adopting the
Ordinance but would like to delete the section covering Cable
Television. He then moved that Ordinance No. 1869 New Series of
the Council of the City of Bakersfield amending Title 6 of the
Municipal Code by the addition of Chapter 6.60 be adopted,
deleting
Bakersfield, California, June 22, 1970 - Page 9
Section 6.60.060 - Cable Television Users Tax.
to carry by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
This motion failed
Councilmen Bleecker, Vetter
Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern
Councilman Whittemore
Councilman Heisey then moved to adopt Ordinance No.
1869
New Series. Councilman Bleecker offered an amendme:nt to the motion
to include in the Ordinance some safeguard to protect the small
businesses which use a large amount of utilities.
Councilman Stiern commented that he would hope future
Council would be sympathetic enough to grant relief to any citizen
who appeared before it and stated he was being forced out of
business because of this particular tax. He does not think it is
necessary to write any escape clause into the Ordinance.
After some further discussion, Councilman Heisey stated
that Councilman Bleecker's amendment to his motion was not acceptable
to him. Vote was then taken on Councilman Heisey's motion to
adopt the Service Users Tax Ordinance, which carried by the following
roll call vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Heisey, Rees, Rucker, Stiern, Vetter
Noes: Councilman Bleecker
Absent: Councilman Whittemore
Councilman Stiern qualified his vote that he thinks it
should be tried for one year as an alternative to raising the
Property Tax.
Councilman Vetter qualified his vote by saying that he
thinks it is a better tax than to raise the Property Tax, and that
he believes
there should be an exception made for Cable Television.
Approval and adoption of New and
revised Job Specifications.
revised job specifications were approved and adopted:
Street Engineer (092) - new
Plant Superintendent (904) new
Senior Building Inspector (108) - new
Sewer Maintenanceman (554) - Revised
Waste Water Treatment Plant Foreman (562)
Engineering Technician I - Option I (136)
Engineering Technician I - Option 2 (136)
- Title Change
- Title Change
- new
Upon a motion by Councilman Verier, the following new and
Bakersfield, California, June 22, 1970 - Page l0
Leave of Absence without pay granted
Police Mechanic Jesse E. Harris.
Upon a motion by Councilman Rucker, additional 30-day
Leave of Absence without pay was granted Jesse E. Harris, Police
Mechanic for medical reasons.
Allowance of Claims.
Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, Vouehers Nos. 4326
to 4458 inclusive, in amount of $81,311.36, as audited by the
Voucher Approval Committee, were allowed, and authorization was
granted for payment of same. Transfer of $900.00 from Fund No.
11-510-6100 to Fund No. 11-510-4100, to provide funds for payment
of services of the City's Water Consultant, Thomas Stetson, was
approved.
Councilman Vetter stated that before a Governmental
Efficiency and Personnel Committee meeting is held on Wednesday,
he would like to have some information regarding an anonymous
letter which all members of the Council received in reference
to the Fire Alarm Operators. It is a typed mimeographed sheet of
paper, mailed in an City Fire Department return address envelope,
with no identification regarding the sender.
Councilman Rees commented that one of the Fire Alarm
Operators delivered his letter to him at his place of business.
Councilman Vetter commented that since Councilman Rees
has informed him where the letter came from, he would like to know
(1) Is this official city stationery? (2) Was it mailed at the
City's expense?
Councilman Bleecker stated that he had not received a
letter but if and when it is determined that this letter was mailed
at City expense to support some desire of a City employee, he
thinks this employee should be seriously reprimanded for doing so.
Adjournment.
There being no further business to come before the Council,
/
upon a motion by Councilman Vetter, the meeting w~s adjourned at
MA ~/{~e~Fi t Y' o~ B~k~e r s fie 1 d, Calif.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK and Ex-Olkficio ~lerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
Bakersfield, California, June 23, 1970
Minutes of a special joint meeting of the City Council,
Redevelopment Agency and the Planning Commission held in the Council
Chambers of the City Hall at 7:30 P. M., June 23, 1970.
In the absence of Mayor Hart, Vice-Mayor Stiern called tlhe
meeting to order and asked the City Clerk to call the roll:
COUNCIL
Present: Councilmen Bleecker~ Rees, Stiern, Whittemore
Absent: Mayor Hart. Councilmen Heisey, Rucker, Vetter
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Present: Vincent Casper - Vice-Chairman
Gerald Clifford
Mrs. Margaret Ghezzi
Theron Taber
Absent: Robert King
Bill Lee
Dr. Glenn Puder
PLANNING COMMISSION
Present: H. Alston Thomas, Chairman
C. Robert Frapwell
Burr Baldwin
Joe H. Davis
Dr. James L. Fredrickson
Albert C. Lum
Dean A. Gay
Absent: None
Vice-Mayor Stiern asked Mr. Gene Jacobs, the City's Con-
sultant, to explain to the members of the various agencies present,
the purpose of tonight's meeting. Mr. Jacobs stated that the
meeting was being held for the purpose of converting the Neighbor-
hood Development Program (NDP) application to a Survey and Planning
( S & P) application.
Originally the City was requesting a $13,000,000 grant
which was the only way to get into the pipeline with. the Federal
Government. This application was denied, along with a hundred
other applications throughout the country. Now, the City has been
told that if it modifies its NDP application and converts it to an
S & P application for a loan and grant contract before June 30, 1970,
it will have the same priority in date as it would have had last
September for the NDP application. HUD officials no longer wish to
Bakersfield, California, June 23, 1970 - Page 2
grant funds for a large amount such as the $13,000,000 requested
in the City's NDP application, but the modified application con-
verted to Survey and Planning will run in the neighborhood of
$5,000,000.
Mr. Jacobs pointed out that the acquisition of property
along Chester Avenue is very expensive and in moving the boundaries
of the project area to the east to extend the boundary from "M"
Street to "N" Street, the value of the land dropped dramatically.
This permitted bringing the grant requested from the Federal
Government down to the sum of $5,000,000.
Copies of an S & P application which he has prepared
pursuant to Federal Government requirements have been distributed
to all agencies. It provides for a program using tile strength on
Chester Avenue, hoping it will either rehabilitate itself or cer-
tain aids might be available for the rehabilitation. There is no
way of telling whether or not the Federal Government will be willing
to go for this kind of project, but it is reasonable to think that
the S & P application is in a position where the Federal Govern-
ment will grant the funds.
Mr. Jacobs explained that there is one other problem
involved in the Federal Government approach, and that is the
problem of national goals. By referring back to the original
date, the statement has been made in the S & P application that
the City feels it should be granted national goals. He pointed
out a number of typographical errors in the application which will
be corrected before it is forwarded to HUD officials.
If the City desires to file the S & P application in
place of the NDP application dated September 22, 1969~ which was
rejected by HUD, it will be necessary for the Redevelopment Agency
and the City Council to adopt the resolutions contained in the
application. It can then be filed on Friday, June 26, 1970, which
will be in adequate time to meet the final filing date of June 30,
1970.
Bakersfield, Cali£ornia, June 23, 1970 - Page 3
Mr. Jacobs stated that it is necessary for the Redevelop-
ment Agency to adopt the resolution as it is the body which will
ultimately enter into a contract with the Federal Government. This
resolution approves the undertaking of surveys and plans £or an
Urban Renewal Project and the filing of an application. The area
proposed as an Urban Renewal Area, situated in the City of Bakers-
field, County of Kern, and State of California, is described as
follows:
Bounded by Twenty-third Street on the
north~ Chester Avenue on the west,
Truxtun Avenue on the south and "N"
Street on the east.
Councilman Rees asked how this application would relate
to the plans o£ Empire Square Associates. Mr. Jacobs replied that
the ultimate goals in terms of bringing about a revitalization of
downtown with a retail shopping center, would be fairly close.
However~ the procedures and processes o£ accomplishing these goals
differ substantially. The project is substantially less in cost
because of changing the boundaries and taking considerably less
expensive land, it will arrive at about the same amount of square
£ootage of land available, but it will not touch the basic portion
of the Chester Avenue properties which are the most expensive. It
would be a slightly smaller retail center as now contemplated, but
that could increase or decrease depending on the market. It relies;
partially on the development o£ the Bank of America building, or
at least some development on that corner; it proposes the idea o£
a parking garage in the neighborhood of 500 to 700 stalls. These
things are not necessarily in the actual application to be shown
at this time, but they are assumptions to be made in order to
proceed with an orderly development.
There is nothing that would preclude Empire Square from
coming back in and seeking to be the developer on this at an earlier
date, there's nothing that requires that since the contract with
Empire Square ran out in January, 1970. The City's status with
Empire Square is zero except for the fact that the contract is
developed on the basis that if the City gets the money and attempts
to move forward on projects substantially similar to Empire Square's
there would be some repayment. There is a possibility that there
Bakersfield~ California, June 23, 1970 - Page 4
could be a settlement of that at an early date. He has been
looking into it, there is still an open issue, but he is not
prepared to recommend tonight what direction the City should go.
Councilman Bleecker commented that the City is planning
on discontinuing the Transit System and proposing that a Metro-
politan Transit District be formed in cooperation with the Board
of Supervisors. If the City did not have a transportation system
to serve certain areas, what effect would this have on the S & P
application? Mr. Jacobs replied that they have not developed it
on the basis of a high class and efficient transportation system,
it is based primarily on the fact that the people to be transported[
are really not too far away from their destination. If in the
future it developed that no transportation system would be running
into this area, it would hurt the application with tIUD. Before
they would let the City go forward, HUD would have to be satisfied
that there would be an adequate system to come into town.
Mr. Clifford, a member of the Redevelopment Agency,
commented that it would seem to him that if the Agency moved to
adopt the resolution, it would be obligating itself to nothing
except asking the Federal Government for $89,980 to conduct a
survey and to give an answer as to whether it will be practicable
or not, and any questions, such as Mr. Bleecker's regarding the
transportation system, would be answered at the time the survey
is made. Mr. Jacobs stated that the $89,980 is an advance from
the Federal Government, and is not repayable if they decide not
to move forward and is repayable out of project funds, if they
do move forward with the project.
Mr. Vincent Casper, as Vice-Chairman of the Redevelopment
Agency, took charge of the meeting. Mr. Clifford moved to adopt
Resolution No. RA 1-70 of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Bakersfield, California, approving undertaking of surveys and
plans for an Urban Renewal Project and filing of an application,
which carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Casper, Clifford,
Noes: None
Absent: King, Lee, Puder
Ghezzi, Taber
Bakersfield, California~ June 23~ 1970 Page 5
Vice-Mayor Stiern commented that possibly the next action
would be for the Council to adopt a similar resolution. He asked
Mr. Jacobs what the situation is as far as a potential future
developer in relation to the type of application being made now.
Mr. Jacobs stated the Federal Government by and large gives the
Agency the money to go out and buy the eleven blocks in question,
tear them down and put the land on the market. In a couple of
years when the City is certain of owning 100% of the land, at that
stage they can go out and seek a developer and enter into a contract.
The Federal Government is now leaning more to the idea of having a
committed developer before spending large amounts of money. A
developer is not essential at this point, but part of the $89,000
should be spent toward finding an appropriate developer; making
sure of the stores~ and that sort of thing.
After some further questions by the Council and answers
by Mr. Jacobs, Councilman Bleecker moved to adopt Resolution No.
41-70 of the City Council of the City of Bakersfield, California,
approving undertaking of surveys and plans for an Urban Renewal
Project and filing of an application. This motion carried by the
following roll call vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Bleecker, Rees, Stiern, Whittemore
Noes: None
Absent: Councilmen Heisey, Rucker, Vetter
Mr. Dean Gay, a member of the Planning Commission, asked
for permission to speak and inquired about the cost of the 35-acre
portion of downtown Bakersfield to be developed. Mr. Jacobs stated
this would amount to about $1.25 per square foot resale price,
however, they hoped to get more. Mr. John Gray answered all questions
posed by Mr. Gay relative to the developing of this area after the
grant of $5,000,000 has been received from the Federal Government.
Bakersfield, California, June 23, 1970 - Page 6
Mr. Gay commented that one of the problems that has
confronted him in the last year and a half has been that downtown
properties have had a shadow over them of the proposed revitali-
zation program, which has not been able to get off the ground.
They have had opportunities to lease properties downtown but were
unable to find tenants because of the uncertainty regarding what
was going to happen. If this project is going to go, the property
owners should be told how long their property can be encumbered.
Mr. Jacobs stated that how soon it will go at this stage
depends on how soon the Federal Government acts on the application.
The day the Federal Government acts on the application, a fairly
definitive schedule can be set up relative to exactly what they
will be dealing with~ which properties will be bought and on which
dates, and what action will be taken on the balance.
Adjournment.
There being no £urther business~ upon a motion by
Councilman Bleecker~ the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 P. M.
~VICE-MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
VICE-CHAIRMAN o£ the Redevelopment Agency
CHAIRMAN of the Planning Commission
ATTEST:
CITY' CLERK and Ek-Off~-cio Clerk of the Council
of the City of Bakersfield, California
Assistant Secretary to Redevelopment Agency