The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/11/94 WATER BOARD Mark Salvaggio, Chair Conni Brunni, Vice-Chair Randy Rowles MEETING NOTICE OF THE WATER BOARD OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 1994 AT 4:30P.M. WATER RESOURCES CONFERENCE ROOM 1000 BUENA VISTA ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA AGENDA 1). CALL MEETING TO ORDER. 2), ROLL CALL- BOARD MEMBERS. 3). APPROVE MINUTES OF WATER BOARD MEETING HELD MARCH 16, 1994. 4). PUBLIC STATEMENTS. 5). REPORTS. A. 1994 KERN RIVER YIELD AND WATER SUPPLY 6). DEFERRED BUSINESS. A. LE'VrER FROM RODNEY POWERS CONCERNING VAUGHN MUTUAL WATER COMPANY RATES. 7). NEW BUSINESS. A. AGREEMENT WITH TEXACO, INC AND NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT FOR DISCHARGE OF OIL FIELD WASTEWATER INTO THE BEARDSLEY-LERDO CANAL SYSTEM. B. 1994.1995 AGRICULTURAL WATER PRICE AND SAND SALE SCHEDULE. C. 1994-1995 DOMESTIC WATER RATE SCHEDULES. D. ASSEMBLY BILL 2673 (CORTESE). REFERRALS TO WATER DISTRICTS ON GENERAL PLAN ADOPTION OR AMENDMENTS ON ADEQUACY OF WATER SUPPLIES AND POTENTIAL IMPOSITION OF STATE.MANDATED PROGRAM. - CONTINUED - 1000 BUENA VISTA ROAD · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93311 · (805) 326-3715 WATER BOARD MEETING MAY 11, 1994 PAGE - ! - E. PROPOSED FINANCING PROGRAM FOR AGRICULTURAL/DOMESTIC WATER INTERFACE PROJECT COMPLETION. F. WATER ASSOCIATION OF KERN COUNTY LETTER OF REQUEST FOR CONTRIBUTION TO 1994 WATER AWARENESS CAMPAIGN. G. DOMESTIC WATER MAIN EXTENSION CONTRACT RE-ASSIGNMENTS. H. OLCESE WATER DISTRICT REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL WATER WELLS IN "2.800 ACRES" WITH FIRST PRIORITY USE - MODIFICATION FROM EXISTING AGREEMENT I~ 77-07. I. BAKERSFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR USE OF DOMESTIC WATER PUMP STATION GROUNDS FOR K-9 UNIT TRAINING FACILITY. 8). CLOSED SESSION A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL CONCERNING INITIATION OF LITIGATION PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION (c) OF SECTION 54956.9 (TWO CASES). 9). CLOSED SESSION ACTION. 10). ADJOURNMENT. GE~~OGA~,MANAGER POSTED: May 6, 1994 WATER BOARD - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD WEDNESDAY, MARCH 16, 1994 4:30P.M. The meeting was called to order by Boardmember Salvaggio at 4:41p.m. in the Water Resources Conference Room, 1000 Buena Vista Rd., Bakersfield, CA 93311 Present: Salvaggio, Chair; Brunni, Vice-Chair; Rowles Boardmember Rowles made a motion to approve the minutes of the meeting held January 19, 1994. Motion carried. There were no public statements. Deferred business: a. Mr. Core explained that the Northeast Water Supply Report, Phase II, when completed will provide the basis for construction of a waterworks project for northeast Bakersfield. Two engineering consultants, Mr. Joe Gillick of Kennedy/Jenks Consultants and Mr. Morris Taylor of Ricks, Taylor & Associates will prepare the Phase II report. Mr. Gillick gave a briefing on the details of this phase " of the report. This phase will site the treatment plant and facilities needed for water distribution, furnish a detailed cost estimate, a proposed construction schedule, define the benefitting parties and be a direct lead-in to financing studies. Boardmember Brunni asked of the sections in northeast Bakersfield that are currently serviced and questioned where that water will go, if replaced by this proposed water system. Mr. Core stated this phase of the report will define that concern and the benefitting areas. Potential benefitting parties have indicated their interest in joining financially in the preparation of the Phase II report. Boardmember Brunni motioned to proceed with Phase II and for City to participate in funding the study costs. Motion carried. New Business: a. An agreement with Olcese Water District to provide City Kern, River water for use in Olcese was presented to the Board by Mr. Core. Olcese is seeking a firm Kern River water supply, in order to better plan for growth. This agreement will not preclude any other contract or short any other water deliveries. This agreement places Olcese in higher priority position for City water delivered to lands within the City limits. Motion by Boardmember Brunni to recommend approval to City Council. Motion approved. b. Boardmember Rowies excused himself from the meeting due a conflict of interest on this item. An agreement with Kern Delta Water District concerning operation and maintenance of the portion of the Carrier Canal east of Manor Street was presented by Mr. Bogart. Due to the construction of the Bike Path extension on the south side of the Carrier Canal, Kern Delta did not want to assume liability or responsibility for operations in and around the bike path. This agreement would have City performing normal, daily and routine operations of this reach of the canal and Kern Delta provide the routine maintenance. Major reconstruction and special maintenance will be cost shared by ownership percentage (51% City/49% KDWD). Boardmember Brunni made a motion to approve in concept, subject to final review by City Attorney's office and recommend approval to City Council. Motion approved. Boardmember Rowles rejoined the meeting. c. The Kern County Water Agency Improvement District No. 4 amendment to formation resolution designed to increase treated water price and pump taxes within the District was brought before the Board by Mr. Core. ID4 has been operating financially with rates that were set in the early 1970's. ID4 costs have increased dramatically since inception, but income from pump taxes and treated water sales has · stayed at a steady level. While increases in the treated water price will affect some areas of urban Bakersfield, a proposed 50% increase in groundwater pumping taxes will have a significant effect on the City Domestic Water System rates. The increased tax could add $200,000 to the cost of pumping water in the City's system alone. City staff estimates an increase in City Domestic Water rates of approximately 4% this fall to cover the pump tax and an additional 4% in the spring to cover remaining cost increases. Staff anticipates the other water purveyors affected by the KCWA costs will be asking for substantial rate increases. Boardmember Brunni asked if KCWA prepared a financial statement. Mr. John Stovall of KCWA answered that KCWA prepares its budget and public hearings are held to receive input on the required annual water conditions report that anticipates revenue needs and that is the basis for setting the pump tax rate. The proposed resolution amendment will set the ceiling for the pump tax at $40.00 ($20.00 for agricultural use) with this coming fiscal years needs setting the rate at $30 dollars an acre-foot pumped. Boardmember Rowles asked how much the per household cost increase would be. Mr. Core stated that staff estimates it to be less than $1.00 per month and staff would be coming back with the rate increase and a per household cost effect at a future Water Board meeting. Bogart suggested that a chart be prepared to show, not only the effect of a rate increase on the City Domestic Water Service area, but the entire City. Board information, no action required or taken. d. Mr. Core presented a Domestic Water Mainline Extension Contract for ownership reassignment. Board information, no action required or taken. e. Mr. Bogart presented two Capital Improvement projects before the Board. The Truxtun Lake return pipeline to the Carrier Canal is proposed for 1994-95 and construction is scheduled for this fall. This pipeline will circulate from the Carrier into Truxtun Lakes and return to the Carrier Canal. This helps in regulation of the Carrier Canal and to control moss and algae growth in Truxtun Lakes during the hotter summer months. The Coffee Road Water Transmission Main Extension will extend domestic water service up Coffee Road to Rosedale Highway and across the Friant-Kern canal. This segment will allow domestic water to be moved from the 2800 Acres and to the Riverlakes Ranch area. This project is out to bid and should be under construction in May 1994. This item for Board information and no action required or taken. f. Mr. Core presented a letter from the Kern County Water Agency regarding a first Fun Run/Walk for Water. May is traditionally national water awareness month and this activity, sponsored by KCWA and local water purveyors will be part of the celebrations. The event is to be held May 21, 1994 at Beach Park. The City will be donating $250 for the event. Board information, no action required or taken. Boardmember Brunni inquired of a letter, deferred at last Council meeting to the City Attorney, regarding Vaughn Mutual Water Company rates and asked that the letter be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. In the interim, Boardmember Brunni asked that staff respond to the person. Judy Skousen, Acting City Attorney stated she would write a letter to the person and let him know the matter is being look into by the City. Boardmember Salvaggio motioned to adjourn at 5:30p.m. Motion carried. Mark Salvaggio, Chair City of Bakersfield Water Board Sharon Robison, Secretary City of Bakersfield Water Board ~e, 3, ~).~ KERN RIVER BASIN SNOWPACK ACCUMULATION ci~,o)~B,~r~e~,~ EIGHT SENSOR INDEX '~ ~:," Water Resources 30. ~- - .... ~. - / 25.{ }, - / _ 100% of April 1 Average 20.O / ..-~ ...- -'-'"" _ 1992-1993 ........-"'"' ~ Average 126% A-J .~ ... 15.0 ..... , [ 3 ~?_~_~_I 10.0 ' /' ,. , 5.0- /'"7' \ ,, ......-~/"~ /- '~, 0.0 /' / November December January February March April Snowpack Accumulation Season MEMORANDUM March 23, 1994 TO: CONNI BRUNNI, COUNClLMEMBER FROM: ALAN DALE DANIEL, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, EXT. 3721 SUBJECT: VAUGHN WATER COMPANY RATES COUNCIL REFERRAL RECORD NO. 13031 1. In reference to a letter from Rodney Powers concerning Vaughn Water Company and their rates, the City of Bakersfield has no direct control over Vaughn Water Company or their rates. Vaughn Water Company is independent from the City of Bakersfield, and not subject to rate control by the City. A comparison of Vaughn Water Company rates (flat rates) with that of California Water Service Co. does not reflect any large discrepancy. 2. I have spoken with Mr. Gene Bogart at the City Water Department, and he concurs that the City of Bakersfield has no direct control over Vaughn Water Company or its rates. 3. If a significant number of water users within the Vaughn Water Company District complain to the board about the water rates, the board may take action to reduce the rates. cc: Gene Bogart, Water and Sanitation Manager Judy K. Skousen, Acting City Attorney ADD.' gD ~ THIS MEMO~ IS EXEKPTFROMDISCLO~ AND IS PROTECTED BY THE A%~fO~qEY-CLIENTAND ATTORNEY WO~K-PRODUCT PRMLEGE AGREEMENT FOR DISCHARGE OF OIL FIELD WASTEWATER INTO THE BEARDSLEY-LERDO CANAL SYSTEM BY AND BETWEEN NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT, TEXACO EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION, INC. AND THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD This Agreement is made, entered into and executed in triplicate, any copy of which may be considered and used as the original hereof for all purposes, as of the 1 st day of April 1994, in the State of California, County of Kern, City of Bakersfield. BY AND BETWEEN NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT, a district organized under water storage district law, AND TEXACO EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION, INC., a Delaware corporation, AND CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, a California municipal corporation, WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, North Kern Water Storage District (hereinafter "North Kern") is a water storage district organized under Water Code section 39000 et seq., and is in existence for the purpose of delivering water suitable for irrigation use; and WHEREAS, North Kern is the present owner of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System and certain laterals and appurtenances thereto located in the County of Kern, California; and WHEREAS, Texaco Exploration and Production, Inc. (hereinafter "rexaco") is a public corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware; and WHEREAS, Texaco generates in connection with its oil operations in the Kern River and Poso Creek oil fields, water known as effluent water; and WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfleld (hereinafter "City") is a chartered city organized and existing under and by virtue of the constitution and laws of the State of California and is situated in Kern County; and WI-1F~REAS, the City has a right to use one hundred (100) cubic feet per second of capacity in that portion of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal Systemsouth of Seventh Standard Road and is the owner of certain laterals and appurtenances and does make deliveries of water through such capacity; and WHEREAS, the January 3, 1977 contract by and between Getty Oil Company, predecessor to Texaco, and City has been superseded by the May 1, 1986 Agreement by and between North Kern, Texaco and City, and except to the extent expressly stated in this Agreement, all rights and obligations provided in the January 3, 1977 contract are extinguished, including any claim or right of Texaco to discharge any effluent water into the Beardsley Lerdo Canal System except as expressly authorized by North Kern; and WHEREAS, Texaco has requested the services of North Kern to receive and dilute Texaco's effluent water and North Kern is agreeable to providing the aforementioned services for Texaco, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and with the understanding that this Agreement is entered into by North Kern and the City to assure North Kern and the City that Texaco's effluent water diluted and delivered to the water users of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, their successors and assigns, shall at all times be suitable for use as irrigation water and to assure North Kern and the City that all costs and expenses incurred by North Kern and the City as a consequence of Texaco's effluent water shall be paid for in their entirety by Texaco. WHEREAS, suitable for use as irrigation water means that quality of water which allows the water users of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, their successors and assigns, an equivalent opportunity for agricultural production, with the same variety of crop alternatives, that they would experience if Texaco discharged no effluent water into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. WHEREAS, the parties agree that this Agreement supersedes the May 1, 1986 Agreement, except to the extent expressly stated herein. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE PROMISES AND COVENANTS HEREIN CONTAINED, NORTH KERN, TEXACO AND THE CITY HEREBY AGREE as follows: ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS Unless otherwise specified, the terms defined in this Article I shall, for all purposes of this Agreement, have the meanings herein specified. 1. "Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System" means that canal system commencing at the Beardsley River Weir and including the Beardsley Canal and the Lerdo Canal and all laterals and appurtenances thereto. The Carrier Canal forms no part of the canal system included within the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. 2. '~Delivered water or water delivered" means that water which is diverted from the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System and Ixansported to water users of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. 3. '~Effluent water" means all Texaco's oilfield produced water in excess of Texaco's Kern River and Poso Creek oil field operations other than that water which is disposed of by injection into Texaco's own deep zone wells. 2 4. '~Emergency" means any earthquake, flood, t"tre or other natural disaster or Act of God, precluding the normal operation and maintenance of North Kern's or Texaco's facilities. 5. 'qrrigation demand water" means that water which is flowing in the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System to satisfy the irrigation and project demands of North Kern and the water users of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. 6. ''Management Plan" means that written plan by which Texaco and other dischargers of similar oilfield water into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, follow procedures to monitor effluent and receiving waters to assure that the receiving and effluent water quality standards stated in the applicable NPDES permits are not exceeded. 7. "Monitor or monitoring" means the recording, sampling, testing and reporting of the various constituents within Texaco's effluent water and the receiving water as performed by North Kern. 8. 'q~PDES permit" means the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit issued by the State of California, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, or by any other agency assuming jurisdiction over such discharges into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. 9. '7~roject water" means that water which is a blend of all waters transported in the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System for the purposes of meeting irrigation and project demands of North Kern and the water users of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, including Kern River water, State or Federal Project water, well and local water supplies, but excluding oil field produced waters. 10. '~Receiving water" means that water which is a blend of all oil field effluent water from Texaco, and other dischargers, and Project water flowing in the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, as measured in the Beardsley Canal at the Olive Drive crossing, or as measured at such place as otherwise mutually agreed to by the parties. 11. '~Regional Board" means the Regional Water Quality Conlxol Board, Central Valley Region, State of Caldomia or any other agency assuming jurisdiction over wastewater discharges into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. 12. '%Vater users of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System" means those persons, partnerships, corporations or other legal entities which are delivered water transported through the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System by either North Kern or the City. ARTICLE II PROVISIONS 1. Texaco shall construct and maintain, at its sole expense, all facilities necessary to transport and discharge its effluent water into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. 2. Texaco shall discharge all its effluent water into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System up to 35 cfs (30-day Mean flow) unless such water is delivered to Cawelo Water District according to the Texaco/Cawelo Water District Groundwater Recharge Project. For each acre foot of effluent water discharged by Texaco into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System due to either the cessation or decrease in discharge of effluent water to Cawelo Water District, Texaco shall within the following twelve (12) month period deliver to North Kem an additional and equivalent acre-foot quantity of water into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, according to a schedule provided by North Kem not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the scheduled date of delivery. The effluent water discharged by Texaco into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System or into the Texaco/Cawelo Water District Groundwater Recharge Project shall be of equivalent water quality. The parties recognize there may be periods of time when Texaco must reduce or completely stop the discharge of effluent to the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System due to Texaco's intemal operational constraints or due to the Texaco/Cawelo Water District Groundwater Recharge Project. In the event such a reduction or cessation of discharge is necessary, and unless otherwise mutually agreed to between the parties, Texaco shall provide North Kem seventy-two (72) hours advance written notice of Texaco's intention to terminate or recommence discharging its effluent water into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. However, in the event of an emergency Texaco may commence discharging effluent water into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System provided that, prior to discharge, Texaco shall ensure that all NPDES water quality standards will be satisfied and that adequate canal capacity exists to safely absorb the discharge flow, and notify North Kem and the City of the discharge as soon as possible. When discharging, Texaco shall use its best efforts to maintain a reasonably constant effluent water quality and discharge flow rate throughout each day and from day to day. The parties to this Agreement will maintain daily communications of current activity and estimates of flow rates in an effort to predict flow rates forty-eight (48) hours in advance, thus keeping the parties advised of those matters affecting the receiving water quality and quantity in the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. North Kern and the City shall have the City's dispatcher phone number, 326-3716, and Texaco's dispatcher, phone numbers, 392-2200 (Daily), 392-2286 (Junction Water Plant), 392-2425 (Emergency), to coordinate this data. 3. Texaco agrees to cease all discharges into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System during that period when the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System is closed for maintenance or emergency. North Kern agrees that on the earliest possible date, it shall notify Texaco of the dates during the succeeding year that the Beardsley'-Lerdo Canal System is expected to be closed for scheduled maintenance. North Kern further agrees not to close the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System for more than fifteen (15) consecutive days annually for scheduled maintenance, unless mutually agreed upon by Texaco and North Kern. North Kern also agrees to give Texaco as much advance notice as reasonably possible before closing the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System for emergency. In the event of an emergency, North Kern will use its best efforts to minimize the length of time the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System is out of operation. 4 4. Except as provided for in its NPDES permit, Texaco agrees that it will immediately cease its discharge into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System upon being presented evidence by North Kern that Texaco's effluent water contains any substance which is contained within any of the following definitions or lists, whether as currently drafted or as amended in the future: a. the definition of "extremely hazardous waste," as defined in section 25115 of the California Health and Safety Code; or b. the definition of "hazardous waste," as defined in section 25117 of the California Health and Safety Code; or c. the definition of "hazardous substance," as defined in section 25316 of the Califomia Health and Safety Code; or d. any substance listed in the California Administrative Code, Title 22, Chapter 30, Article 9, Hazardous Wastes and Hazardous Materials, section 66680 and Article II, Criteria For Identification of Hazardous and Extremely Hazardous Wastes, sections 66693-66746; or e. any other definition or list pursuant to any federal, state or local law, regulation or ordinance; and which substances or wastes in the receiving waters are in concentrations that are directly or indirectly deleterious to either plant, animal or human health. 5. Texaco shall obtain and maintain NPDES permit CA0078352, Order No. 92-106 and it shall comply with all its terms. Any increase in the quantity of water discharged or modification of the water quality standards specified in such a permit, shall not be implemented by Texaco unless Texaco has prior written consent of North Kern. 6. Texaco shall at all times operate its facilities so that Texaco's effluent water does not cause the receiving water in the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System to exceed 0.5 MG/1 of boron. Texaco agrees that when there is insufficient Project water in the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System to dilute Texaco's effluent water to 0.5 MG/1 of boron, Texaco shall without hesitation, regardless of time or day, reduce the quantity of flow of its effluent water to a point at which the receiving water in the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System does not exceed 0.5 MG/1 of boron. Texaco's reduction, in relation to other oil field produced water discharges into the Beardsley- Lerdo Canal System, shall be according to the proportional reduction requirements specified in the Management Plan promulgated pursuant to NPDES Order No. 92-106 or as otherwise agreed to in writing by North Kern. 7. Texaco shall comply with each and every other federal, state or local water quality standard or provision pertaining to discharging oil field wastewater into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, whether in existence on the date this Agreement is executed or promulgated at any subsequent time, once such standard or provision becomes f'mal and enforceable by the appropriate governmental agency. 5 8. Texaco and other oil field produced water dischargers, shall pay North Kern the actual cost necessarily incurred by North Kern and/or the City to monitor the constituent level of Texaco's and other oil field produced water discharges, effluent water and receiving water flowing in the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. Texaco's share of the monitoring costs shall be calculated as follows: a) one-quarter of the actual annual monitoring cost multiplied by Texaco's proportional share of the total maximum allowed oilfield discharge specified in the applicable NPDES permits; and b) three-quarters of the actual annual monitoring cost multiplied by Texaco's proportional share of the total quarterly quantity of effluent water discharged into the Beardsley- Lerdo Canal System from all oil field produced water dischargers. North Kem agrees to quarterly reimburse the City a portion of the monitoring charge if the City incurs costs while recording and reporting the Texaco discharge. Upon request, North Kem shall supply Texaco and the City, with copies of all monitoring data. Upon request, City. shall supply Texaco and North Kem, with copies of all monitoring data. North Kern shall provide Texaco with the budgeted amount of the monitoring fee for the following year by December 1 of the current year. Subject to cost adjustments as specified in Article II, Paragraph 10, the monitoring fee shall be based on the 1992 yearly budget amount of $52,000.00. 9. Texaco shall pay North Kem the full cost incurred by North Kem and/or the City for compensating the water users of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, their successors and assigns, for having to add a salt correction material to their soil and/or water to counterbalance the higher salt load contained in Texaco's effluent water. Subject to cost adjustments as specified in Article II, Paragraph 10, the salt correction cost to be paid by Texaco shall be $2.60/Acre foot per 1 lb. of 100% Gypsum per 100 GPM/hour of effluent water that Texaco discharges into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. The gypsum requirements will be calculated on a quarterly basis based on a geochemical analysis of the water. The gypsum requirement and subsequent salt correction cost will be calculated on a monthly basis as follows: a. A geochemical analysis will be performed monthly on the effluent water by the Management Plan Contractor; b. The gypsum requirement (pounds gyp/lO0 GPM-hr) will be calculated for the effluent water using the following equation: Pounds Gyp/100 GPM-Hr = 4.3 * {[(CO3/30)+(HCO3/61)]-[(Ca/20)+(Mg/12)]} where: CO3 = Carbonate in mg/1 HCO3 = Bicarbonate in mg/1 Ca = Calcium in mg/1 Mg = Magnesium in rog/1 c. A running monthly average, based on twelve (12) months of data, will be calculated for each month. The running average is calculated by dividing the sum of the twelve (12) most recent analyses by twelve (12); d. The total discharge flow for each month will then be multiplied by the corresponding gypsum requirement; e. The gypsum requirement will then be multiplied by the $2.60/acre-foot fee and is paid quarterly. North Kern agrees to quarterly reimburse the City and other diveners from the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System a portion of the salt correction charge. Any reimbursements paid to the City or other diveners shall ~ based upon the actual water diverted and used from the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. The reimbursements shall be in proportion to the total Beardsley Canal flow and based upon the quarterly hydrographic records of the flow of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. Upon request, North Kern agrees to provide Texaco a quarterly statement of the reimbursements made to the City and other diveners from the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System concerning the salt correction charge. Upon request, North Kem further agrees to provide to the City and to all diverters clear notice of the nature and source of the reimbursement and the purpose thereof, whether said reimbursement is in the form of a cash payment or other payment in lieu of cash or in the form of reduced water charges. 10. The costs stated in Article II, Paragraphs 8, 9 and 12, are best estimates of the full cost associated with the monitoring and treatment of Texaco's effluent water and are subject to change. Therefore, the aforementioned costs shall be adjusted January 1, each and every year this Agreement is in effect, either upward or downward according to the '~lmplicit Price Deflator for Gross National Product" using the second quarter of the preceding year in relation to the second quarter of 1992, which stood at 120.6 as a base. 1 i. North Kern shall invoice Texaco on a quarterly basis for the costs charged in Article II, Paragraphs 8, 9 and 12. The City shall invoice Texaco for the charges referred to in Paragraph 18(d). Payments not received within sixty (60) days of the date stated on the billing invoice will incur a late charge of 10 percent plus 1 percent per month interest on the outstanding balance. Upon termination of this Agreement under Article II, Paragraph 17, all sums currently owing to North Kern shall be paid within forty-five (45) days of the date of termination. 12. Texaco agrees to pay additional fees based on the constituent level of boron and oil and grease in its effluent discharge water. Subject to cost adjustments as specified in Article II, paragraph 10, the boron and oil and grease fees are as follows: a) the boron fee is $0.50/acre- foot per 0.1 mg/1 boron above 0.5 mg/1 in the discharge; b) the oil and grease fee is $0.15/acre- foot per 1.0 mg/1 free oil and grease above 12.0 mg/1 in the discharge. The boron and oil and grease fees will be based on the monthly averages of boron and oil and grease respectively as monitored and analyzed by the Management Plan Contractor and submitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. These fees will be calculated by North Kem and paid by Texaco on a quarterly basis. 7 13. Texaco agrees to assume all duties and obligations including, but not limited to, the payment of any tax, assessment, penalty or any levy whatsoever, which may be imposed by any federal, state or local governmental agency upon North Kern, the City or the water users of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, pertaining to actual or claimed degradation of groundwater quality due to Texaco's effluent water. Following imposition by a governmental agency of any above-specified levy, the parties shall meet and confer to determine the nature and extent, if any, of Texaco's responsibility for such a levy. Texaco shall not be obligated under this paragraph to make payments to North Kern, the City or the water users of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, if Texaco has previously made direct payment to the governmental agency imposing the levy. 14. The charges specified in Article II, Paragraphs 8, 9, 12 and if applicable 13 represent the parties' best estimate of the foreseeable costs incurred by North Kern, the City and the water users of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System as a consequence of Texaco discharging its effluent water into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. No charge or fee whatsoever, other than those charges above-specified, shall be levied under the terms of this Agreement by North Kern or the City against Texaco in connection with the monitoring, discharge or use of Texaco's effluent water in the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. 15. The failure of any party to enforce against the other a provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of that party's right to enforce such a provision at a later time. 16. Texaco agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless North Kern and the City and their respective officers, agents and employees, and each of them, for any injury, damage, loss, liability, claim or causes of action, including, but not limited to, inverse condemnation, property damage, personal injury, death directly and proximately caused by Texaco discharging its effluent water into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. Provided, however, Texaco shall not be responsible for any injury, damage, loss or liability directly and proximately caused by the negligent or willful misconduct of either North Kern, the City or the water users of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, including but not limited to, any and all injury, damage, loss or liability directly and proximately caused by a water user of the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System failing to add a salt correction material to their soil and/or water to counterbalance the higher salt load contained within Texaco's effluent water. North Kem and/or the City shall tender to Texaco the defense of any claims against them, or either of them, which come within the scope of this paragraph. Should Texaco accept the tender of defense, Texaco shall keep North Kern and/or the City apprised of all developments of any claim and shall confer with North Kern and/or the City prior to settling any claim. The attorneys' and experts' fees to be paid shall not exceed such amount as the court in which the litigation occurs determines to be reasonable. 17. This Agreement shall be in effect until and including December 31, 1998. Provided, however, this Agreement shall be subject to suspension or termination as follows: (a) North Kern may suspend Texaco's discharge of effluent water, with reasonable cause, upon forty- eight (48) hours notice to Texaco as provided in Article II, Paragraph 22, in which case, Texaco shall incur no liability for charges levied according to this Agreement during any such suspension; (b) North Kern may terminate discharge of effluent water at flows exceeding 11.5 c.f.s. (30 day Mean flow) after March 1, 1994, upon sixty (60) days written notice to Texaco; (c) North Kern may terminate this Agreement at any time after March 1, 1995, upon sixty (60) 8 days written notice to Texaco; and (d) Texaco may terminate this Agreement at any time upon sixty (60) days written notice to North Kern. Unless otherwise mutually agreed between the parties, upon termination of this Agreement, Texaco shall cease all discharges and within twelve (12) months thereafter remove all its discharge facilities from North Kern's Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System and right-of-way and restore the premises without damaging existing canal facilities. Texaco shah assume all costs associated with the removal of its facilities and restoration of the premises. In the event state, federal, or local laws or regulations, such as those identified in Article II, Paragraphs 4 and 7, should render Texaco's effluent water unsuitable for discharge into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, all monetary obligations of Texaco to North Kern and the City shall be suspended until that time when discharge can be resumed. 18. This Agreement is intended, in part, to supersede the Agreement dated May 1, 1986, between Texaco, North Kern, and the City. To the extent that rights or obligations claimed under said 1986 Agreement are inconsistent with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, such rights or obligations are extinguished hereby. Notwithstanding the above, this Agreement shall be interpreted as follows: a. The January 3, 1977 contract by and between Getty Oil Company, predecessor to Texaco, and City has been superseded by the May 1, 1986 Agreement by and between North Kern, Texaco and City, and except to the extent expressly stated in this Agreement, all rights and obligations provided in the January 3, 1977 contract are extinguished, including any claim or right of Texaco to discharge any effluent water into the Beardsley Lerdo Canal System except as expressly authorized by North Kern; b. Nothing contained in this Agreement, nor any performance under this Agreement, shall affect or change the existing Kern River water rights or Lake Isabella storage rights held by North Kern or the City; c. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall affect or change Texaco's rights or the City's obligations regarding discharge to the Carrier Canal; d. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall affect or change the rights or obligations regarding charges specified in Paragraph 6 of the January 3, 1977 Agreement; and e. Texaco hereby surrenders all right to discharge any effluent water into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System except as provided in this Agreement. 19. In the event of any litigation between North Kern, Texaco and the City or any two of them, in connection with the interpretation, performance or enforcement of this Agreement, the prevailing party or parties in such litigation shall be entitled to be reimbursed by the other party or parties thereto for aH costs of litigation, including, but not limited to, court costs, time and expense of personnel, attorneys' fees, costs of experts and other costs of litigation. Provided, however, that the attorneys' and experts' fees to be reimbursed shall not exceed such amount as the court determines to be reasonable. 9 20. All parties are equally responsible for authorship of this Agreement and section 1654 of the Civil Code has no application to the interpretation of this Agreement. 21. None of the rights or obligations of the parties under this Agreement shall be assigned or delegated by any party without the prior written consent of the other two parties. 22. All notices hereunder shall be given in writing and shall be sent by certified or registered mail and be effective upon posting in the United States mail. The parties should be addressed as follows: North Kern Water Storage District P. O. Box 1195 Bakersfield, CA 93302 Texaco Exploration and Production, Inc. P. O. Box 5197 X Bakersfield, CA 93388 City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 23. This Agreement shall be binding on the three named parties and their successors and assigns; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that Texaco shall not assign or otherwise transfer this Agreement or any of Texaco's rights hereunder, either voluntarily, involuntarily, or by operation of law, without the prior written consent of North Kern, and any assignment or other transfer or attempted assignment or transfer contrary to the provisions of this Agreement shall be absolutely null and void and of no effect whatever. 24. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties pertaining to the discharge of Texaco's effluent water into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements and understandings, whether written or oral, not specifically referred to herein. 25. None of the provisions of this Agreement are intended to dedicate, nor have they dedicated, any of the water the subject of this Agreement, or any of the facilities of the parties to public use as a public utility or common carrier. 10 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date tn'st above written. NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT TEXACO EXPLORATION AND BY: ¥'- . ~-~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD BY: MAYOR, CITY OF BAKERSFIFLD BY: CHIEF FINANCIAL ADVISOR APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: BY: GENE BOGART Water and Sanitation Manager c :\wI~:~N~MI oc s'~x aco I .agr-skk/lms-jer 11 MEMORANDUM April 26, 1994 TO: Nelson Smith, Accountant II-Supervisor FROM: Florn Core, Water Resources Director SUBJECT: 1994-95 Executive Orders Attached are the 1994-95 Executive Orders for rates and charges associated with Agricultural Water and Domestic Water. The rate schedules for both divisions will be presented to the City Water Board on May 11, 1994 for review and recommendation. AGRICULTURAL WATER - S-72 The water rates, services, temporary pumping and sand sales schedule are reflective of a 44% of normal water year conditions on the Kern River. This is in contrast to last year's 125% of normal yield. The new rates are to be effective on June 1, 1994 and in effect for the 1994 season. DOMESTIC WATER - S-71 The executive order for this division has three schedules attached. The first schedule are the current rates that will remain in effect, past July 1, 1994 through October 1, 1994. The second and third schedules attached are to become effective October 1, 1994 and April 1, 1995 respectively. These additional rate schedules will increase the average residential water user's bill by 3.5% in October, 1994 and by 3.4% in the spring of 1995. If you have questions, please feel free to call. cc: Gene Bogart, Water & Sanitation Manager Gail Waiters, Assistant City Manager Pat Hauptman, Water Supervisor III AGRICULTURAL WATER ENTERPRISE 1994 WATER PRICE AND SAND SALE SCHEDULE The following recommended water prices reflect the current, below-normal water supply conditions occurring throughout the San Joaquin Valley. Of the ten (10) water price categories shown below, items 1 and 2 are established by existing contracts. The water rates for items 3 through 10 are dependent upon supply and would become effective for 1994-95. These water rates would remain in effect until conditions warranted changes or adjustments to these prices. For information and reference, the 1992 and 1993 schedule for surface water rates are shown for comparison (price per acre-foot). Actual 1992 Actual 1993 Effective 1994 Season (39% of Normal (126% of Normal (44% of Normal Type of Water Water Year) Water Year) Water Year) 1) Basic Contract Water .......... $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 2) City "Borrow/Payback" Contract Water ..................... $19.30 $19.70 $19.87 *3) Miscellaneous Kern River Water sold for Domestic use .......... $58.00 $26.00 $62.00 *4) Miscellaneous Kern River Water sold for surface irrigation ................................. $26.00 $20.00 $26.00 *5) Miscellaneous Water that would otherwise be used for groundwater banking ..... $11.05 $11.27 $11.37 *6) City non-Kern River Water sales (oilfield discharge, etc.) ......................................... $18.00 $18.00 $20.80 '7) 2800 Acre "banked' groundwater sold for surface irrigation (downstream of 2800 Acres) ...................... $47.00 $47.00 $52.00 8) 2800 Acre "banked" groundwater sold for surface irrigation (upstream of 2800 Acres) ...................... $52.00 $52.00 $57.00 9) 2800 Acre 'banked" groundwater sold for Domestic use (upstream of 2800 Acres) ....... $58.00 $58.00 $62.00 10) Kern River Canal & Irrigating Co .......................... $18.48 $18.48 $19.15 * To encourage maximum use within the Kern River groundwater basin, water prices in categories numbered 3, 4, 5 and 6 are reduced 50% during periods of mandatory flood control release and/or encroachment into the flood control storage space at Isabella Reservoir. For annual and/or temporary pumping agreements from canal and river facilities, and for sand sales from City-owned river channel properties, the following rates would remain in effect until conditions warranted changes: ITEM PRICE 1) Temporary Pumping Agreements .................................. $ 45.00 per day 2) Annual Pumping Agreements 5 Truck units or less ......................................................... $400.00 (minimum charge) 6 Truck units or more ...................................................... $600.00 (or greater proportionately, depending upon volume) 3) Sand Removal Sales .......................................................... $ 0.50 per cubicyard (plus sales taxwhen applicable) · · MEMORANDUM O April 26, 1994 TO: Nelson Smith, Accountant II-Supervisor FROM: Florn Core, Water Resources Director SUBJECT: 1994-95 Executive Orders Attached are the 1994-95 Executive Orders for rates and charges associated with Agricultural Water and Domestic Water. The rate schedules for both divisions will be presented to the City Water Board on May 11, 1994 for review and recommendation. AGRICULTURAL WATER - S-72 The water rates, services, temporary pumping and sand sales schedule are reflective of a 44% of normal water year conditions on the Kern River. This is in contrast to last year's 125% of normal yield. The new rates are to be effective on June 1, 1994 and in effect for the 1994 season. DOMESTIC WATER - S-71 The executive order for this division has three schedules attached. The first schedule are the current rates that will remain in effect, past July 1, 1994 through October 1, 1994. The second and third schedules attached are to become effective October 1, 1994 and April 1, 1995 respectively. These additional rate schedules will increase the average residential water user's bill by 3.5% in October, 1994 and by 3.4% in the spring of 1995. If you have questions, please feel free to call. cc: Gene Bogart, Water & Sanitation Manager Gail Waiters, Assistant City Manager Pat Hauptman, Water Supervisor III City of Bakersfield Domestic Water Division Ashe, Fairhaven, and Riverlakes Ranch Service Areas Schedule of Rates General Metered Service Within Fairhaven & City Limits Unincorp- orated Areas Quantity Rates: First 300,000 cu. ft./month $0.42 $0.55 (per 100 cu. ft./month) All over 300.000 cu. ft./month $0.37 $0.50 (per 100 cu. ft./month) 5/8" x 3/4" Service $6.20 $8.37 1" Service $9.56 $12.91 1-1/2" Service $14.13 $19.08 2" Service $19.43 $26.23 3" Service $35.83 $48.37 4" Service $51.13 $69.03 6" Service $90.37 $122.00 8" Service $137.97 $186.26 10" Service $187.26 $252.80 1 - 1/2" Connection $5.25 $7.10 2" Connection $7.00 $9.50 3" Connection $10.50 $14.25 4" Connection $14.00 $19.00 6" Connection $21.00 $28.25 8" Connection $28.00 $38.00 10" Connection $35.00 $47.25 12" Connection $42.00 $56.75 Monthly service charge is a readiness-to-serve charge which is applied to all services and any quantity of water used is an additional charge computed at the quantity rate. Conditions of service remain the same. P:\123-DATA~ATCOMP3.WK3 City of Bakersfield Domestic Water Division Ashe, Fairhaven, and Riverlakes Ranch Service Areas Schedule of Rates General Metered Service iiiiiii~iii~ili~i!i~ii!iiii~i§~iiil Within Fairhaven & City Limits Unincorp- orated Areas Quantity Rates: IFirst 300,000 cu. ft./month 0.435 0.565 (per 100 cu. ft./month) All over 300,000 cu. ft./month 0.385 0.515 (per 100 cu. ft./month) 5/8" x 3/4" Service $6.40 $8.57 1" Service $9.81 $13.16 1-1/2" Service $14.51 $19.46 2" Service $19.91 $26.71 3" Service $36.73 $49.27 4" Service $52.63 $70.53 6" Service $93.37! $125.00 8" Service $142.77 $191.06 10" Service ] $194.46! $260.00 1-1/2" Connection $5.55 $7.40 2" Connection $7.40 $9.90 3" Connection $11.10 $14.85 4" Connection $14.80 $19.80 6" Connection $22.20 $29.45__ 8" Connection $29.60 $39.60 10" Connection $37.00 $49.25 12" Connection $44.40 $59.15 Monthly service charge is a readiness-to-serve charge which is applied to all services and any quantity of water used is an additional charge computed at the quantity rate. Conditions of service remain the same. P:\123-DATA~RATCOMP3,WK3 City of Bakersfield Domestic Water Division Ashe, Fairhaven, and Riverlakes Ranch Service Areas Schedule of Rates General Metered Service !??~i?~!iii~i~i~i~i~i i:~i~ii~J~i?:i~ Within Fairhaven & City Limits Unincorp- orated Areas Quantity Rates: I First 300,000 cu. ff./month 0.450 0.580 (per 100 cu. ff./month) All over 300,000 cu. ff./month 0.400 0.530 (per 100 cu. ff./month) 5/8" x 3/4" Service $6.60 $8.77 1" Service $10.06 $13.41 1 - 1/2" Service $14.89 $19.84 2" Service $20.39 $27.19 3" Service $37.63 $50.17 4" Service $54.13 $72.03 6" Service $96.37 $128.00 8" Service $147.57 $195.86 10" Service $201.66 $267.20 1 - 1/2" Connection $5.85 $7.70 2" Connection $7.80 $10.30 3" Connection $11.70 $15.45 4" Connection $15.60 $20.60 6" Connection $23.40 $30.65 8" Connection $31.20 $41.20 10" Connection $39.00 $51.25 12" Connection $46.80 $61.55 Monthly service charge is a readiness-to-serve charge which is applied to all services and any quantity of water used is an additional charge computed at the quantity rate. Conditions of service remain the same. P :\123 - DATA~RATCOMP3,WK3 MEMORANDUM April 21, 1994 TO: GENE BOGART, WATER AND SANITATION MANAGER FROM: ALAN DALE DANIEL, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, EXT. 3721 SUBJECT: AB 2673, LAST AMENDED MARC]{ 17, 1994 Attached for your review is Assembly Bill No. 2673, which amends Government Code sections pertaining to public water systems. ADD: gp cc: Judy K. Skousen, Acting City Attorney Attachment / COR\PUB~KS\AB2673. B0~ ~/'~ / /, ~ THIS MEMORANDUM IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE AND IS PROTECTED BY THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND ATTORNEY WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGE In bill text, brackets have special meaning: [A> <A] contains added text, and [D> <D] contains deleted text. California 1993-94 Regular Session Amended AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 5, 1994 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 17, 1994 ASSEMBLY BILL No. 2673 Introduced by Assembly Member Cortese (Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Campbell) (Principal coauthor: Senator McCorquodale) (Coauthors: Assembly Members Bronshvag [A> , Cannella <A] , Gotch, Hauser, and Isenberg) (Coauthors: Senators Kelley, Petris, and Presley) February 3, 1994 An act to amend [D> Section 65352 <DJ [A> Sections 65302, 65352, and 65352.5 <A] of, and to add Section 65352.6 to, the Government Code, relating to water. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 2673, as amended, Cortese. Local public water systems: service needs: findings of fact. [A> Existing law requires a city or county to prepare and adopt a general plan for its jurisdiction that includes certain mandatory elements, including a land use element. <Al Under existing law, when a city or county proposes to adopt or substantially amend a general plan, a public water system, as defined, must provide the city's or county's planning agency with specified information relating to the availability and use of existing and planned future water supplies. Existing law requires a planning agency to refer the proposed action to several entities, including and 'affected public water system, as specified. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations with respect to the relationship between future growth and water provision. The bill would require [A> that the land use element of the general plan include specified information concerning water supply availability. It would also require <Al a city or county to refer a proposed general plan adoption or amendment to the appropriate public water system, when the area covered by'the proposed action is outside the area in which water service is currently being provided, as specified [A> , before the agency may act on the general plan or amendment <A] . This' bill would add to a public water system's duties IA> with respect to a proposed general plan adoption or amendment proposing new development, <A] by requiring the public water system to make specified findings of fact concerning its ability to provide water service to meet the reasonable needs, consistent with the provisions of the urban water management plan adopted by the public water system, through periods of forecasted drought, of certain customers within and outside the public water system's existing service area. The bill would provide procedures to be followed by the public water system if it finds that it cannot provide water service sufficient to meet these reasonable needs. The bill would also prescribe the duties of the affected city or county with respect to the public water system's findings [A> , and the circumstances under which the~ proposed action on the general plan or amendment may be taken <Al . Because it would require cities and counties to perform new local planning duties under certain circumstances, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to' reimburse locai agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement, including the creation of a State Mandates Claims Fund to pay the costs of mandates which do not exceed $1,000,000 statewide and other procedures for claims whose statewide costs exceed $1,000,000. This bi]] would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that this bill contains cOsts mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to those statutory procedures and, if the statewide cost does not exceed $1,000,000, shall be made from the State Mandates Claims Fund. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: yes. The people .of the State of California do enact as follows: SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares the following: (a) California's overall water delivery system has become less reliable over the last 20 years because demand for water has continued to' grow while supplies available for consumptive uses have diminished. (b) More and more often, California's water agencies are required to impose water rationing on their residential and business customers during this state's frequent and severe periods of drought. (c) Water supply planning to meet future growth needs has become more critical than ever, and will become an increasingly important water utility activity as we approach the 21st century. (d) Because of the diminishing water supplies available to most water agencies today, and a need to meet an ever increasing water demand, all water agencies must plan carefully to ensure that they can meet the needs of their customers through periods of drought with minimal disruption to residential, commercial, and industrial activities within their service areas. (e) Approval and construction of major new Water supply facilities to maintain a reliable water delivery system has become increasingly costly, complex, and requires longer lead times in today's climate. (f) The basic and fundamental decisions concerning growth within a community should be made by cities and counties, the general land use authority at a local level. (g) In order for retail water agencies to do the best possible job in planning for meeting the future water needs associated with the growth plans of their cities and counties, they must closely link their water supply planning process to the city and county's general planning process to clearly understand the projections for growth within and adjacent to the water agencies' existing service area and sphere of influence. (h) In order for cities and counties to properly plan the timing, location, and density of new development within their jurisdiction, they must fully understand the proximate water agency's current ability to meet the water needs of its existing and potential future customers, through periods of drought. (i) In assessing the ability' of water agencies to serve customers through periods of drought, cities and counties must recognize the hierarchy of categories of customers or potential customers along a continuum, with differing degrees of legitimacy to their claim to water service. These categories, ranked from highest degree of legitimacy to lowest degree of legitimacy in their expectation that water service must be provided to them upon demand, are as follows: (1) Existing customers, within the existing service area of retail water agency. (2) Future expected customers associated with new development within an existing service area of a retail water agency. (3) Future expected customers associated with new development outside of the existing service area, but within the sphere of influence, of a retail water agency. (4) Future expected customers associated with new development outside of the sphere of influence of a retail agency. (j) Absent a hierarchy of the degree of legitimacy of claims upon water service, the basic concept of a water agency's service area would be rendered meaningless. In California's current era of water scarcity, if this hierarchy of water claims were not in effect, water agencies would be compelled to .serve the "first development in time" rather than first serving those within their service area. Planned businesses and prospective home buyers within urbanized areas would have absolutely no assurance that they would receive a water hookup when their plant or home is built and ready for occupancy. This kind of uncertainty would devastate the current local planning process upon which proper growth is based. (k) Given each of the above principles, any general planning by cities or counties for growth outside of existing water agency service areas must be conditioned upon findings by the water agency of either adequate existing water supplies or firm future water supplies to meet the water needs through periods of drought of customers in categories (1), (2), and (3) before a growth plan outside of the existing service area, but within the water agency's sphere of influence, is approved. Furthermore, before a growth plan outside of both the existing service area and the water agency's,sphere of influence is approved, the water agency must find that either adequate existing water supplies or firm future water supplies exist to meet the water needs of customers in the categories specified in paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4) of subdivision (i). SEC. 2. [A> Section 65302 of the Government Code is amended to read: <A ] 65302. The general plan shall consist of a statement of development . policies and shall include a diagram or diagrams and text setting forth objectives, principles, standards, and plan proposals. The plan shall include the following elements: (a) A land use element IA> , <Al which iD> designates <D] [A> shall designate <Al the proposed general' distribution and general location and extent of the uses of the land for housing, business, industry, open space, including agriculture, natural resources, recreation, and enjoyment of scenic beauty, education, public buildings and grounds, solid and liquid waste disposal facilities, and other categories of public and private uses of land. The land use element shall include a statement of the standards of population density and building intensity recommended for the various districts and other territory covered by the plan. The land use element shali identify areas covered by the plan which are subject to flooding [A> , <Al and shall be reviewed annually with respect to those areas. The land use element shall designate, in a land use category that provides for timber production, those parcels of real property zoned for timberland production pursuant to the California Timberland Productivity Act of 1982, Chapter 6.7 (commencing with. Section 51100) of Part 1 of Division 1 of Title 5 [A> , and shaLi include 'the information relating to water supply availability provided pursuant to Section 65352.5 <Al . ~ (b) A circulation element [A> , <Al consisting of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the land use element of the plan. (c) A housing element IA> , <Al as provided in Article .10.6 (commencing with Section 65580). (d) A conservation element [A> , <Al for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources including water and its hydraulic force, forests, soils, rivers and other waters, harbors, fisheries, wildlife, minerals, and other natural resources. That portion of the conservation element including waters shall be developed in coordination with any countywide water agency and with all district and city agencies which have developed, served, controlled or conserved water for any purpose for the county or city for which the plan is prepared. The conservation element may also cover: (1) The reclamation of land and waters. (2) Prevention and control of the pollution of streams and other waters. (3) Regulation of the use of land in stream channels and other areas required for the accomplishment of the conservation plan. (4) Prevention, control, and correction of the erosion of soils, beaches, and shores. (5) Protection of watersheds. (6) The location, quantity and quality of the rock, sand and gravel resources. (7) Flood control. The conservation element shall be prepared and adopted no later than December 31, 1973. (e) An open-space element [A> , <Al as provided in Article 10.5 (commencing with Section 65560). (f) A noise element [A> , <Al which shall identify and appraise noise problems in the community. The noise element shall recognize the guidelines established by the Office of Noise Control in the State Department of Health Services.and shall analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable, as determined by the legislative body, current and projected noise levels for all of the following sources: (1) Highways and freeways. (2) Primary arterials and major local streets. (3) Passenger and freight on-line railroad operations and ground rapid transit systems. (4) Commercial, general aviation, heliport, helistop, and military airport operations, aircraft overflights, jet engine test stands, and all other ground facilities and maintenance functions reIated to airport operation. (5) Local' industrial plants, including, but not limited to, railroad classification yards. (6) Other ground stationary noise sources identified by local agencies as contributing to the community noise environment. Noise contours shall be shown for ail of these sources and stated in terms of community noise equivalent level (CNEL) or day-night average level (Ldn). The noise contours shall be prepared on the basis of noise monitoring or foliowing generally accepted noise modeling techniques for the various sources identified in paragraphs (1) to (6), inclusive. The noise contours shall be used as a guide for establishing a pattern of land uses in the land use element that minimizes the exposure of community residents to excessive noise. The noise element shall include implementation measures and possible solutions that address existing and foreseeable noise problems, if any. The adopted noise' element shail serve as a guideline for compliance with the state's noise insulation standards. (g) A safety element [A> , <A] for the protection of the community from any unreasonable risks associated with the effects of seismically induced surface rupture, ground shaking, ground failure, tsunami, seiche, and dam failure; slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides; subsidence, liquefaction and other seismic hazards identified pursuant to Chapter 7.8 (commencing with Section 2690) of the Public Resources Code, and other geologic hazards known to the legislative body; flooding; and wild land and urban fires. The safety element shah include mapping of known seismic and other geologic hazards. It shall aiso address evacuation routes, peak]oad water supply requirements, and minimum road widths and clearances around structures, as those items relate to identified fire and geologic hazards. Prior to the periodic review of its gener~al plan and prior to preparing or revising its safety element, each city and county shall consult the Division of Mines and Geology of the Department of Conservation and the Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of including information known by and available to the department and the office required by this subdivision. To the extent that a county's safety element is sufficiently detailed and contains appropriate policies and programs for adoption by a city, a city may adopt that portion of the county's safety element that pertains to the city's planning area in satisfaction of the requirement imposed bY this subdivision. At least 45 days prior to.adoption or amendment of the safety element, each county and city shall submit to the Division of Mines and Geology of the Department of Conservation one copy of a draft of the safety element or amendment and any technicai studies used for developing the safety element. The division may review drafts submitted to it to determine whether they incorporate known seismic and other geologic hazard information, and report its findings to the planning agency within 30 days of receipt of the draft of the safety element or amendment pursuant to this subdivision. The legislative body shall consider the division's findings prior to final adoption of the safety element or amendment unless the division's findings are not available within the above prescribed time limits or unless the division has indicated to the city or county that the division will not review the safety element. If the division's findings are not available within those prescribed time limits, the legislative body may take the division's findings into consideration at the time it considers future amendments to the safety element. Each county and city shall provide the division with a copy of its adopted safety element or amendments. The division may review adopted safety elements or amendments and report its findings. All findings made by the division shall be advisory to the planning agency and legislative body. [A> SEC. 3. <Al Section 65352 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65352. (a) Prior to action by a legislative body to adopt or substantially amend a general plan, the planning agency shall refer the proposed action to all of the following entities: (1) Any city or county, within or abutting the area covered by the proposal, and any special district which may be significantly affected by the proposed action, as determined by the planning agency. (2) Any elementary, high school, or unified school district within the area covered by the proposed action. (3) The local agency formation commission. (4) Any areawide planning agency whose operations may be significantly affected by the proposed action, as determined by the Planning agency. (5) Any federal agency if its operations or lands within its jurisdiction may be significantly affected by the proposed action, as determined by the planning agency. (6) Any public water system, as defined in Section 4010.1 of the Health and Safety Code, with 3,000 or more service connections, that serves water to customers within the area covered by the proposal. The public water system sl~l! have at ]east 45 days to comment on the proposed plan, in accordance with subdiVision (b), and to proVide the planning agency with the information set forth in Section 65958.1. If the area covered by the proposed genera] plan adoption or amendment is outside the area in which water serVice is currently being provided by any public water system, the city or county shali identify the likely public water system to provide water to this area, and refer the proposed action to that entity for its review, pursuant to Sections 65352.5 and 65352.6. (7) The Bay Area Air Quality Management District for a proposed action within the boundaries of the district. (b) Each entity receiving a proposed general plan or amendment of a general plan pursuant to this section shall have 45 days from the date the referring agency mails it or delivers it in which to comment unless a longer period is specified by the planning agency. (c) (1) [D> This section is <DJ [A> Except with regard to referrals to a public water system, as set forth in paragraph (6) of subdivision (a), the provisions of this section are <Al directory, not mandatory, and the failure to refer a proposed action to the other entities specified in this section does not affect the validity of the action, if adopted. [A> If the public water system does not respond to a referral made pursuant to this section within the 45-day time period set forth in paragraph (6) of subdivision (a), or within any longer period as may be designated by the agency, the referring agency may act on the general plan or amendment. <Al (2) To the extent that the requirements of this section conflict with the requirements of Chapter 4.4 (commencing with Section 65919), the requirements ~f Chapter 4.4 shall prevail. ID> SEC. 3. <DJ [A> SEC. 4. Section 65352.5 of the Government Code is amended to read: <Al 65352.5. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that it is vital that there be close coordination and consultation between California's water supply agencies and CAlifornia's ]and use approval agencies to ensure that proper water supply planning occurs in order to accommodate projects that will result in increased demands on water supplies. (b) It is, therefore, the intent of the Legislature to provide a standardized process for determining the adequacy of existing and planned future water supplies to meet existing and planned future demands on these water supplies. (c) Upon receiving, pursuant to Section 65352, notification of a city's or a county's proposed action to adopt or substantially amend a general plan, [A> or upon receiving a request from a city or county in the process of preparing a genera] plan or genera] plan amendment, <Al a public water system, as defined in Section 4010.1 of the Health and Safety Code, with 3,000 or more service connections, shall provide the planning agency with the following information, as is appropriate and relevant: (1) The current version of its urban water management plan, adopted pursuant to Part 2.6 (commencing with Section 10610) of Division 6 of the Water Code. (2) The current version of its capital improvement program or plan, as reported pursuant to Section 31144.73 or the Water Code. (3) A description of the source or sources of the total water supply currently available to the water supplier by water right or contract, taking into account historical data concerning wet, normal, and dry runoff years. (4) A description of the quantity of surface water that was purveyed by the water supplier in each of the' previous five years. (5) A description of the quantity of gt~oundwater that was purveyed by the water supplier in each of the previous five years. (6) A description of all proposed additional sources of water supplies for the water supplier, including the estimated dates bY which these additional sources should be available and the quantities of additional water supplies that are being proposed. (7) A description of the total number of customers currently served by the water supplier, as identified by the following categories and by the amount of water served to each category: (A) Agricultural users. (B) Commercial users. (C) Industrial users. (D) Residential users. (8) Quantification of the expected reduction in total water demand, identified by each customer category set forth in paragraph (7), associated with future implementation of water use reduction measures identified in the water supplier's urban water management plan. (9) Any additional information that is relevant to determining the adequacy of existing and planned future water supplies to meet existing and planned future demands on these water supplies. [A> SEC. 5. <Al Section'65352.6 is added to the Government Code, to read: 65352.6. (a) If the proposed general plan adoption or amendment proposes new development in areas outside the area in which water service is being provided by any public water system, the public water system shall make findings of fact pursuant to the provisions of Section 65352.5 concerning its ability to provide water service to meet the reasonable needs, consistent with the provisions of the urban water management plan adopted by the public water system, through periods of forecasted drought, of the following types of customers: (1) Existing customers within the existing service area.of the public water system. (2) Forecasted new customers within the existing service area of the Public water system. (3) Forecasted new customers outside the existing service area of the public water system, but within that agency's sphere of influence, including those associated with new development according to the proposed general plan amendments. (4) Forecasted new customers outside the existing service area of the public water system and outside of its sphere of influence, including those associated with the new development, according to the proposed general plan amendment. (b) If the public water system finds that it cannot provide water service sufficient to meet the reasonable needs of all four categories of customers identified in subdivision (a) through periods of forecasted droughts, the public water system shall identify the improvements that would be required to its water system, and the projected timeframe for implementing these improvements, as set forth in Section 65352.5, necessary to meet the water needs of the ID> three <DJ [A> four <Al categories of customers identified in subdivision (a). (c) If the genera] plan adoption or amendment proposes new development outside areas in which water service is currently being provided by any public water system, the city or county shall not adopt or amend its general plan until the findings of fact of the public water system pursuant to subdivision (a) have been transmitted to the city or county and have been made part of the record. If the public water system made findings of fact that it cannot provide water service sufficient to meet the reasonable needs of all four categories of customers identified in subdivision (a) through periods of forecasted drought, the city or county shall not adopt the general plan or its' amendments, [D> unless the <D] [A> unless either of the following occurs: <Al [A> (1) The <Al genera] plan or amendments, including those provisions identifying the location, intensity, and timing of any new development, are consistent with the findings of the public water system. [A> (2) The city or county makes findings, based upon substantial evidence in the record, that a water supply, which is not a part of the commenting public water system's water supply, will be available to service that new development, and the city or county identifies the source of that water supply. <Al [A> (d) A general plan identifying proposed new development outside areas where water service is currently being .provided may be approved ff either the findings made by the public water system, or the general plan itself, pursuant to subdivision (c), identify planned improvements, or other measures, which will result in adequate water supplies to meet the reasonable needs of the four categories of customers identified in subdivision (a). However, if the public water system finds that these improvements and measures have not yet been completed, the general plan shall require that a development project shall not be approved until the water supply improvements and measures are completed. <Al ID> SEC. ~. <DJ [A> SEC. 6. <Al Notwithstanding Section 17610 of the Government Code, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code. If the statewide cost of the claim for reimbursement does not exceed one million dollars ($1,000,000), reimbursement shall be made from the State Mandates Claims Fund. Notwithstanding Section 17580 of the Government Code, unless otherwise specified in this act, the provisions of this act shall become operative on the same date that the act takes effect pursuant to the California Constitution. END OF REPORT MEMORANDUM April 28, 1994 T O: G E NEB O G ARM~ ~WA~TE~R° & SAN IT ATI O N M ANA G E R FROM: FLORN CORE, WATER RESOURCES DIRECTOR SUBJECT: INTERFACE PROJECT FINANCING The purpose of the Agricultural/Domestic Water Interface project is to retrieve, convey and deliver as domestic water, City Kern River water that has been stored as groundwater in the City's "2800 Acres". There are many positive aspects of the project that merit full description, however in the context of this memo, suffic, ient justification exists for completion of the project. The Interface project is a four phase project that currently has two phases completed, one phase in the design stages and dose to bid using 1993-94 budgeted funds, and the fourth and final phase still in the planning period. Phase 1 was the drilling and construction of water wells in the "2800 Acres" (please note the wells have been operated to provide irrigation sales in the interim) and Phase 2 was the construction of 3V2 miles of 36" diameter water transmission main from the "2800 Acres" to a future booster station and storage tank. Phase 3 is the construction of a booster station, needed to get the water moving under pressure into the domestic water system. Phase 4 will be the installation of a regulating storage tank of up to 10 million gallons capacity. Up to this point all financing for construction of the Interface project has come from capital improvement monies, solely from the domestic water enterprise, on a line item basis. This includes the upcoming booster pump station that is ready to be bid. The Phase 4 Regulating Storage Tank will be the single most expensive portion of the project. Preliminary estimates for the tank costs are in the neighborhood of $0.25/gallon or $2,500,000. Trying to budget for this in a single year is beyond the capability of revenues generated by the Domestic Water division. Past practices have allowed the Domestic Water division to pursue an "accumulative funding" in the budget process in order to save the money needed to build the tank. Various budget transfers have taken some money from the accumulated totals, but to date, somewhat over $1,000,000 is available for the tank. It appears that there may be a way to finance the completion of the Interface project through the savings generated by off-peak pumping and avoided Kern County Water Agency pump taxes. The attached memo projects that approximately $220,350 annually could be saved under the Circumstances outlined. Variances could occur if less water was pumped and delivered as projected or if P.G. & E. were to change the time-of-day metering concept. On the other side of the equation, the KCWA pump tax has been authorized to go up an additional $10.00 per acre-foot, to $40.00, if the ID#4 district determines that it needs it. Given that there are potential savings that will annually accrue due to the completion of the Interface project as outlined, it appears that financing a "mortgage" to complete the project is viable. IblTERFACE PROJECT FINANCING Pg2 The projected $220,000 annual savings would translate on a gross basis for a loan, of up to $2,500,000, depending upon interest rate, period of re-payment, and any additional costs that are added to the principal, such as bonding, administrative or overhead costs. An attachment to this memo has been provided to show the various possibilities of a loan or bonding proceeds under various scenarios. It is not to be construed as an absolute, but only for demonstration purposes. This department will inquire to state and federal level agencies on the availability of grants or loans on the basis of water supply or water quality improvements. However, in light of the budgetary distress of the State's and U.S. budgets, I don't hold much hope. Our experiences in the past on the availability of funds has shown that if your application and justification for a loan or grant are accepted, then you are prioritized and listed. Once approved for funding, then in most cases, bonds need to be voter approved to fund (The mood of the voters does not favor much more statewide bonded indebtedness). This process usually consumes 1V2 to 2 years, if approved. The sooner the Interface project is completed, the sooner the savings will occur to the City. By copies of this memo and attachments being provided to the City Finance Department, I am requesting that Finance investigate and report on financing mechanisms available to complete the Interface project. cc: Gall Waiters, Assistant City Manager Greg Klimko, Finance Director Pat Hauptman, Water Supervisor III MEMORANDUM April 19, 1994 TO: Florn Core, Director of Water Resources FROM: Patrick E. Hauptman, Supervisor III ~,~ SUBJECT: Agricultural/Domestic Water Interface Project - Anticipated operating cost savings The purpose of this memo is to estimate the cost savings of operating the 2800 Acre domestic wells (CBK 22, CBK 24, and Olcese #1) versus the normal pumping costs associated with Ashe Water wells within Improvement District No. 4. At this time and until the general area around the 10 million gallon storage facility is fully developed, it is estimated that approximately 5,000 acre-feet will be pumped annually from the 2800 Acres. As the area is developed, the water produced will increase, providing more savings until maximum production is reached. The table below lists the current Pacific Gas & Electric charges under four different rate schedules to demonstrate the potential savings from pumping ground water during off-peak periods into the storage tank. ENERGY CHARGE PER ACRE-FOOT (Schedule) ASSUMPTION Wells are operated during off-peak $53.22 $39.24 $27.12 $25.17 hours only (9:30 PM - 8:30 AM) Wells are operated 24 hours/day. $53.22 $39.24 $39.53 $31.88 For the purposes of comparison, the A-10 rate will be used versus the E-19 rate. Most domestic water wells within the Ashe Water Service Area utilize the A-10 schedule. Therefore the difference between the rates is $14.07/per acre-foot pumped. Assuming the 5,000 acre foot demand, a savings of approximately $70,350 annually could be realized. All water pumped from within Improvement District No. 4 for domestic purposes will cost $30.00/acre-foot effective July 1, 1994. The pump tax will be avoided by utilizing the City's 2800 Acre Groundwater Recharge Facility. Assuming the 5,000 acre foot'demand, a savings of $150,000 annually could be achieved. The total savings from off-peak pumping and avoided I.D. #4 pump taxes could be approximately $220,350 annually. ESTIMATED ANNUAL PAYMENT TO SECURE PRINCIPAL $2,750,000 PRINCIPAL $2,300,000 PRINCIPAL $1,700,000 PRINCIPAL 5.00% INTEREST 5.00% INTEREST 5.00% INTEREST 20 YEARS 15 YEARS 10 YEARS $220,667 ANNUAL PMT $221,587 ANNUAL PMT $220,158 ANNUAL PMT $2,525,000 PRINCIPAL $2,150,000 PRINCIPAL $1,650,000 PRINCIPAL 6.00% INTEREST 6.00% INTEREST 6.00% INTEREST 20 YEARS 15 YEARS 10 YEARS $220,141 ANNUAL PMT $221,370 ANNUAL PMT $224,182 ANNUAL PMT $2,350,000 PRINCIPAL $2,000,000 PRINCIPAL $1,550,000 PRINCIPAL 7.00% INTEREST 7.00% INTEREST 7.00% INTEREST 20 YEARS 15 YEARS 10 YEARS $221,823 ANNUAL PMT $219,589 ANNUAL PMT $220,685 ANNUAL PMT $2,175,000 PRINCIPAL $1,875,000 PRINCIPAL $1,475,000 PRINCIPAL 8.00% INTEREST 8.00% INTEREST 8.00% INTEREST 20 YEARS 15 YEARS 10 YEARS $221,529 ANNUAL PMT $219,055 ANNUAL PMT $219,818 ANNUAL PMT WATER ASSOCIATION ,' of Kern County ~I,L~IL~...'1 'I("g,l,~,~.~; , 2724 "L" Street. Bakersfield, California 93301 CITY OF BAKfz~SFIELL, ' Telephone (805) 324-8440 WATER RESOLIRCF~' March 11, 1994 Mr. Gene Bogart, Manager Dept. Water & Sanitation 1000 Buena Vista Rd. .Bakersfield, CA 93311 Dear Mr. Bogart: The Water Association of Kern County i.n conjunction with the Kern County Water Agency, and Urban Water Purveyors will be sponsoring a major media public awareness campaign for 1994. This campaign will focus attention on the major legislative and regulatory events of 1993 and 94, in relation to our water supply, and the impacts they will have on the economy. It is imperative that the citizens of Kern County be made aware of the consequences of these decisions as they will ultimately affect every homeowner, business owners, and every taxpayer. We need to stress the importance of our ability to maintain our economic, base and what shortages and costs to the average person will.accrue if these environmental decisions are allowed to dictate the future. The Water Association will. team up with Local Water Purveyors and the Water Agency in the 'promotion of Water Awareness in Kern County. Using the resource available and coordinating our efforts we can have the kind of program that will command attention. However, any campaign requires participation from everyone if it is to be successful. The 94 campaign will again use the television media to get the most coverage for the dollars spent. Our program has only been successful because of the excel].ent ~ support we have had from the ag water districts and urban water companies. Therefore, we are requesting a contribution of $].,000 from each district to help support this campaign. We expect to generate additional funding through contact' with genera] business and other sources as well. Of course any contribution is welcome. Our Executive Committee'and staff wi]]. be available to meet with you and your Board of Directors to discuss this matter if you would like. Please call the AssoCiation Office at 324-8440 to make arrangements. Together'we can be successful. We look forward to bearing from you~ President FC:ljh DOMESTIC WATER ENTERPRISE MAINLINE EXTENSION ASSIGNMENT Water Board Meeting - City of Bakersfield Wednesday, May 11, 1994 TRACT or REMAINING REASSIGNED TO PARCEL MAP BALANCE Neptune Investment Co. Tract 4561 $ 46,146.61 13951 North Scottsdale, Suite 116 (83-46 W.B.) Scottsdale, AZ 85254 Neptune Investment Co. Tract 4576* $ 52,232.60 13951 North Scottsdale, Suite 116 (83-38 W.B.) Scottsdale, AZ 85254 REASSIGNED AGAIN TO: Edward T. and Anne S. Fong, Trustees FBO Edward T. Fong and Anne S. Fong UDT 10-1-1984 P. O. Box 22503 Sacramento, CA 95822 N.R. and/or D.P. Rose, Trustees Tract 4612 $ 57,257.05 Norman R. Rose & Dorothy P. Rose (84-03 W.B.) T/D/3/21/86 FBO the Rose Family 1808 Dry Creek Road San Jose, CA 95124-1226 TOTAL AMOUNT ..... $155,636.26 *Reassigned twice. AGENDA ITEM 7(H) VERBAL PRESENTATION BY STAFF BAKERSFIELD POLICE MEMORANDUM April 29, 1994 To: S.E. Brummer, Chief of Police From: R.A. Greagrey, Lieutenant - Planning, Research and Training Subject: Proposed K-9 Training Facility LOCATION: Proposed site to be north of the 5900 block of Truxtun Avenue. Existing city property, currently used by Bakersfield City Water Department. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION: 1) Site is on Bakersfield City property. 2) Site is completely fenced with heavy gauge chainlink fence. 3) Site is currently landscaped with heavy trees and a small grass area. 4) Site is easily accessible for on-duty K-9 personnel, as facility is conveniently located. 5) Site is large enough to handle diverse training. 6) Training areas are compatible with current and future use of the Bakersfield City Water Department. PROPOSED CHANGES: (SEE DIAGRAM) 1) Enlarge existing grass area training field, (to be maintained by Bakersfield City parks and Recreation, concurrent to maintenance of adjoining park area). 2) Establish designated parking area (additional road base or decomposed granite). 3) Develop flexible K-9 obstacle path (obstacles are all temporary in nature). 4) Site for chain-link temporary kennels (approximately eight kennels). 5) Establish a picnic area; covered tables, B.B.Q. and trash receptacles. 6) Establish K-9 search area. Note: Search area is simply comprised of six 4'x4'x4' boxes setting on concrete slabs of 5'x5'. 7) Add two walk through gates with locks to allow training personnel to utilize adjoining Truxtun Lake and Kern River beds. 8) Establish several trash receptacle sites. ~roposal for K-9 Training Facility ~emorandum - Continued RULES FOR BAKERSFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT K-9 TEAMS: 1) Facility is for use only by the B.P.D. K-9 training personnel with at least one handler to be present when facility is being utilized. 2) Any garbage or waste will be handled properly. 3) No K-9's will be left on facility without supervision. 4) All gates will be locked on conclusion of training. 5) Bakersfield City Water usage will have priority over K-9 training usage. 6) All construction will take into consideration the aesthetic surrounding and goals for the Kern River Parkway. Bakersfield Police K-9 Training Facility Kern River Bed Bike Path ~alk thru gete K-9 Obstacle Course Proposed Extension of Grassy Area . . (K-9 Training Field) [] ' . ' Existing Future ' ~ Tank Site , Prepe~ed walk thru ' . , \ [] .Oj. ~a,~e~.~o.~-'' Gravel Parking \ Kennels Truxtun Avenue (5900 Block) CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL CONCERNING INITIATION OF LITIGATION PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION (c) OF SECTION 54956.9 (TWO CASES)