HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/16/83
,~ .. Œ- tÞ~å~ - (!); ø./V .'
,- 'Ì)~
AGE N D A
------
WATER BOARD - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1983
12:00 P.M.
Call meeting to order.
Roll call - Board Members: Barton, Chairman; Payne, Ratty,
Kelmar, Oberholzer
1. Approve minutes of special meeting held on January 20, 1983.
2. Correspondence: a) Letter from George Nickel, Jr. to
James J. Barton, Water Board Chairman,
dated February 1, 1983.
3. Proposed Buena Vista and James Canal relocation agreement
and amendment between City of Bakersfield, North Kern W.S.D.,
Kern Delta W.D., Tenneco-West, Inc. and Tenneco Realty
Development Corp. - FOR BOARD ACTION.
4. Review of Ashe Water Rate Schedule - proposed recommendation
to City Council that 10% rate increase adopted July 1982
become effective on April 1, 1983. - FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION.
S. Executive Session - Water matters concerning potential
'" lit;igation.
6. Public Comments to the Board.
7. Staff Comments.
8. Board Comments.
9. Adjournment.
-'-'-
i':' - ,~
i " 0 i
MINUTES
------_.
SPECIAL MEETING
WATER BOARD - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
THURSDAY, JANUARY 20, 1983
4:00 P.M.
,~ The meeting was called to order by Chairman Barton in the
Department of Water Conference Room.
The secretary called the roll as follows:
Present: Barton (Chairman), Ratty, Kelmar, Oberholzer
Absent: Payne
The minutes from the meeting of November 24, 1982, were
approved as presented.
Mr. George Nickel, Jr. presented before the Board a letter
regarding proposed further importation of surplus Friant-
Kern Canal w3ter to the City's 2800 acre spreading area by
the Agency or other entities. The question was raised by
Chairman Barton as to whether the Agency wants to enter
into an agreement with the City. Mr. Paul Dow said that
he had not been contacted by the Agency as yet. After dis-
cussion, Mr. Oberholzer made the motion that the Board re-
ceive and place on file the letter from Mr. Nickel. The
motion was passed.
There were no scheduled public statements or correspondence.
Appointment of Delegate and Alternate as City representatives
to Improvement District No.4 advisory committee of the Kern
County Water Agency. Mr. Dow recommended, for the next year,
that Mr. Core be the Delegate and Mr. Bogart be the alternate.
Dr. Ratty made the motion for these appointments. The motion
was passed.
Appointment of Delegate and Alternate as City representatives
to Cross-Valley Canal Advisory Committee of the Kern County
Water Agency. Motion made by Mr. Oberholzer to appoint Mr.
Bogart as Delegate and Mr. Core as Alternate. The motion was
passed.
Proposed Buena Vista and James Canal relocation agreement
between City of Bakersfie~d, North Kern W.S.D. Kern Delta W.D.,
Tenneco-West, Inc., and Tenneco Realty Development Corporation.
Mr. Oberholzer made the motion to approve, subject to certain
conditions of approval by Mr. Hatch. The motion was passed.
City of Bakersfield/California Regional Water Quality Control
Board contract for groundwater quality investigation of City's
2800 Acre recharge area: Sixth Quarterly Report. This was for
Board information only.
-- Mainline Extension Agreements for various new tracts and parcel
maps within the Ashe Water System. Dr. Ratty made the motion to
approve these agreements. The motion was passed.
Review of Ashe Water Rate Schedule. This item was pulled from
the agenda.
~- -- -~. -, -. .
.
'_n",.......". "'.'-_."- ,'.. '.""."
-~, ~..
Î
î'
. Proposed letter agreement to Rosedale Rio Bravo W.S.D.
clarifying the language in Agreement 76-80 pertaining to the
use and sale of Miscellaneous Quantity Water. Mr. Oberholzer
made the motion to authorize the Chairman to execute this
letter agreement clarifying Agreement 76-80. The motion was
passed.
-- Adjourned to Executive Session.
There being no further business to come before the Board.
Chairman Barton adjourned the meeting at 5:55 P.M.
1
Board
carq~n ~afc~y
City of Bakersfield Water Board
-2-
- - - ----
--- u -.- -
.' " ~. .
George W. Nickel, Jr.
6200 Lake Ming Road
Star Route 4, Box 801
Bakersfleld, CA 93306
Telephone 805/872-5050
February 1, 1983
Mr. Curly Barton
Chairman - City of Bakersfield Water Board
1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93301
Dear Curly:
Attached you will find what I have ent i tl ed "Memorandum of Meet i ng of Representat ives
of the Kern County Water Agency-and the Kern River Interests at the Rodeway on
January 31, 198311. I think you will agree with me that this was basically a
constructive meeting. I believe that Gene Lundquist will follow up to see to
it that the Agency staff and:its attorney representative, Roy Gargano,get together
and work toward an agreement with the Kern River Interests along the lines of
the Kern River Watermaster letter draft of January 31st addressed to Stu Pyle.
From the standpoint of the City, I believe that paragraph #3 on page 3 of that
letter is of great importance. As the desi'gnated representative of the Olcese
Water District, I represent 14,000 acres of the City that is made up of the
Rio Bravo Annexation to the City. I think you will agree with my statement that
this annexation to the City is a most exciting one and will absorb much of the
City's growth in the coming years. The water supply for this annexation is
directly related to the ëffectiveness of the Olcese Water District spreading
program in the City's 2800 acre spreading area. For that program to be fully
effective, it is of great importance that the Olcese District can extract,for
use within the Cit~water that has been spread in the City's 2800 acre spreading
area. I go on to note that th i s is also of real importance to other portions
of the City that are likewise benefitted by the spreading and potential recovery
of City/Kern River water that was acquired from Tenneco. I believe that we
now have the opportunity to get the Agency to fully underwrite these water
recovery programs by the Agency agreeing to handle with its spread water any
successful legal challenge to the total amount of water that may be recovered
from':the City's spreading area. This is what I understand paragraph #3 on page
3 of Chuck's January 31st letter is setting forth.
Now, you wi 11 recall that at the City Water Board meeting on January 20th, I
did suggest working out a program of this type between the City and the Agency.
However, I was informed that this was already spelled out in a May 19, 1982
draft of both a spreading and an extraction agreement between the City and
the Agency. I was told that copies of these draft agreements would be made
available for me to look at, which I have done. In reviewing these agreements,
I have observed that they are very complete in many respects; however, they
do not directly deal with any obl igation of the Agency to handle, with its water,
any successful legal challenge there may be to total recovery of water spread
in the City's spreading area. If a provision can be added to the draft of
Extraction Agreement to set forth that the Agency spread water will be reduced
to cover any successful legal challenge,on the amount of total recoverable water,
-------- --, ---
- ----- '~--
" , .
,.
Mr. Curly Barton
Page 2.
February 1, 1983
I believe that the City and all lands within it, including the 14,000 acre-
Rio Bravo annexation, will have a more secure position.
I am sending a copy of this note to you to Stan Hatch as I am sure you will
want his opinion.on this suggestion of mine. I would weltome Stanis
participation in getting this accomplished. I personally feel a very keen
responsibility in protecting the water supply position of the'14,000 acre
Rio Bravo annexation to the City. I do hope that you will concur:with me
on that thinking.
s~.
George w.~
GWN:rjp
c- Stan Hatch
John Chafin
Gene Bogart
Ref. Fil e: #1430-s-a
#1200-b
. , -- --.- u
~
,.
January 31, 1983
MEMORANDUM OF MEETING OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY AND
THE KERN RIVER INTERESTS AT THE RODEWAY ON JANUARY 31, 1983.
On behalf of the Agency, this meeting was attended by Gene Lundquist,
Stu Pyle, Bob Bellue and Gary Bucher. On behalf of the Kern River Interests
the meeting was attended by Kern River Watermaster Chuck Williams and
representing North Kern was Milo Hall and Lloyd Phillips; representing Kern
Delta was Gil Castle; representing the City were Curly Barton, Gene Bogart,
and Paul Dow; representing Henry Miller and the Tulare Lake Interests was
Tom Hurlbutt; representing Buena Vista was Harold Russell; representing
Hacienda and Olcese was George Nickel.
Chuck Williams opened up the meeting to state that it was being held
to work out a cooperative effort between Kern River Interests and the Agency
on the water prqgram in Kern County not only in 1983, but in following
- years. Chuck passed out an Agenda, a copy of which is attached. . Chuck
also noted that he had earlier conveyed to the Agency his draft of a letter
of January 26th to Stu Pyle, a copy of that letter 1s attached. Finally,
Chuck passedoùt his Kern River Watermaster letter of January 31st to Stu
Pyle entitled,IIRela.tionships of Kern River Interests with Kern County Water
Agencyll. In doing 'so Chuck noted that the letter has not yet been formally
. ,
approved by the Kern'River Interests and may be subject to some changes. A
copy of this letter is also attached.
--" Gene Bogart noted that as of January '31st, there was apþroximately 290~000
acre feet stored in Isabella with the concurrence and approval of the Army
Engineers. This storage exceed~ the theoretical storage limitations of
245,000 acre feet at this time of the year; however, the Army Engineers do
not' feel that there is any present problem with 290,000 acre feet of Isabella
sto'rage particularly when this has occured primarily to accommodate flood. .'.
flows of the Tule and Kaweah Rivers that are being pumped by the Tulare Lake
Interests into the Friant-Kern Canal in order to give some relief to flood
problems in Tulare Lake. On that subject, Tom Hurlbutt noted that in the
bottom of Tulare Lake there is already some 20,000 acre feet of flood water
from stream inflow that could not be contained elsewhere. Tom Hulbutt and
George Nickel also both observed that the Tulare Lake Interests have temporarily
stored substantial water south of the Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage District,
in the south of the Wilbur area and on the Hacienda Ranch.
Lloyd Phillips reported that the Kern River Intertie to the Aqueduct
is still closed in order to accommodate stream flood water originating in the West-.
lands District; however, Lloyd reported that these flows have subsided and
the Kern River Interie may be re-opened to handle Friant-Kern Canal inflows
later today. Harold Russell noted that for the last several days, 200 to 400
cfs of this water has been passing over the concrete Weir and into the Flood
Çhanne 1. Some of this water was passing Highway 46 on January 30th. George
Nickel and Tom Hurlbuttböth reported that ~iver West and/or others who have
put illegal and improper obstructions in the Kern River Floodway north of
Highway 46 have been opening up to some degree some of the cross levees that
were improperly built in the Floodway. George Nickel reported flying over the
area to make this observation and to further observe that the openings being
inserted in the improper cross levees are very inadequate to accommodate any
~ .
Page 2.
.'.
amount of water~ There are 11 of these obstructions in the Kern River Floodway between
Highway 46 and the Hacienda Ranch.
Because the Kern River Floodway is under the jurisdiction of the State
Reclamation Board and the Agency has assumed some responsibilities in at
least that portion of the Kern River Floodway extending from Highway 46
to the Kern-Kings County line, Stu Pyle reported that the Agency has notified
the Reclamation Board staff that there are obstructions through this area
that should be dealt with. Gary Bucher stated that he believed Reclamation
Board representatives were to have looked at and gone over this area last
week; however, Gary noted that no report has been made to the Agency as
yet. Stu and Gary indicated that an effort would be made to make further
contact with the Reclamation Board in order to have a positive program to
reach the 2500 cfs capacity that the Kern River Floodway is supposed to have
north of Highway 46. It was indicated that Stu and Gary would report
their findings to Chuck Williams and other Kern River Interests.
í - It was at this point that Chuck Williams quite properly pointed out
that 1983 was indicated to be an abundant water year and that to make the
most of it for water importantion and conservation, there should be maximum
cooperation between the Kern River Interes-ts and the Agency. Chuck noted
that measurement of: the snow pillows on the Kern River Water Shed presently
show an indication of a water year of 175% on the Kern River. Reference was
made to Chuck's January 31st draft of letter to Stu Pyle and the Agency.
The indicated reacticn of the Agency representatives to the contents of the
letter were positive. There was some substantial discussion on item #3 on
,.- --.-.. . - page 3 which deals with water recovery programs. All present agreed and
- recognized that it,willbe far less expensive for the Agency to bring in
available surplus Friant-Kern Canal water to the City's spreading area than
to consider importation of surplùs Aqueduct water via the Cross Valley
Canal to the City's spreading area. The further observation was made that
even if the Agency, on behalf of its Member Units, is only permitted to
recover 50% of the imported spread water, the end product will be far less
expensive than bringing in Aqueduct water even if 100% should be recoverable.
On the matter of recovery, Gene Lundquist noted that the Agency has been
having some discussion with Rosedale. Gene stated that Rosedale now seems
more reasonable regarding a recovery program than it did at an earlier date.
At this point, Stu indicated that the Agency-Rosedale negotiations cannot be
property disclosed without the approval of Rosedale. There was some surprise
indicated by the Kern River Interests as it seems unlikely that a Rosedale-
Agency program can be concluded or implemented without participation by the
Kern River Interests. Gene Lundquist seemed to be in agreement with this
contention but asked for the opportunity to get Rosedale's authorization
to make the negotiations known to the Kern River Interests. It was noted
by the Kern River Interests that if a program can be agreed to between the
Agency and the Kern River Interests as is outlined in Chuck's January 31st
draft of letter to Stu Pyle, that the Kern River Interests would have
considerably less interest in separate programs that may be negotiated between
the Agency and Rosedale. General agreement was reached to have involved
entities give full consideration to the contents of Chuck's January 31st
1 etter. It was agreed that the findings and conclusions of all Kern River
Interests and the Agency should be discussed at the next meeting to be held
~ ~ ~ ,-~ --
.
Page 3.
,
;'
between the Agency and Kern River representatives on Monday, February 14th
at 7:00 a.m. at-the Rodeway.
Other items discussed in the January 31st meeting will be enumerated
below.
1. Regarding the Berrenda Mesa land spreading .program by the Agency,
it was agreed that there has been some confusion between ~heAgency operating
personnel and the City. There was definite indication of a greater effort
for cooperation in the future by both Bob Bellue and Gene Bogart.. Bob indicated
that the program set forth in Chuck Williams letter of January 26th toStu
Pyle will be followed. It was indicated that the Agency will soon be making
some form of report to show the net amount of water spread on the Berrenda
Mesa land supported by measurements taken.
2. In ad~ition to the extraction program under negotiation between the
-- Agency .and Rosedale, Stu Pyle noted that Rosedale wants to work with the
Agency on spreading more water within Rosedale. It is indicated that the
Agency wi 11 make more information available to the Kern River Interests on
the projected further spreading programs. 'Harold Russell noted that he thought
it was most important that the Kern River Interests be brought up to date on
whatever negot i at i o"ns there may be betweep the Agency and Rosedal e.
3. Further regarding the Berrenda Mesa land program, Chuck Williams noted
the concern of Kern "River Interests with the Appl icationthat the Berrenda
" -- ~ ~ Mesa Water District has to appropriate Kern River water for diversion onto-
the Berrenda Mesa land. Chuck went on to note that the.original announced
program of the Berrenda Mesa District was to spread surplus Berrenda Mesa
Aqueduct water conveyed through the Cross Valley Canal for subsequent recovery.
Chuck noted that the Berrenda Mesa program has greatly expanded and does
constitute a threat to the interests of Kern River entities. On this point,
George Nickel suggested that if there is an overall program worked out
between the Agency and the Kern River Interests as is set forth in Chuck1s
January 31st letter, that Berrenda Mesa might be inclined to withdraw its
Application to Appropriate Kern River water.
4. It was pointed out by the Kern River Interests in general, and
George Nickel in particular that, in an overall program with the Agency,
the problems encountered with the Agency in 1982 on water spreading capacity
in the City's 2800 acre area would be dismissed and forgotten. Gene Lundquist
noted that he thought this was very constructive. He noted that Bob
McCarthy would be particularly pleased with such an understanding.
5. Gene Lundquist noted that the Agency has no plans whatever to
interfere with water storage programs in Isabella. Gene noted that he felt
the Kern River Interests were doing a good job working with the Army on
Isabella storage. It was also agreed that maximizing Isabella storage does
indeed make it more feasible to bring Friant~Kern Canal water into Kern County.
6. Regarding communications with the news media, general agreement
was,reached that the Agency and the Kern River Interests, through Chuck
Williams, should work together on news releases involving water matters.
I~ -. .
. Page 4.
.;
All present agreed that it was highly desirable to let the public and our
State Legislators know that every effort is being made in Kern County to
import and conserve water.
6. Gene Lundquist noted that he thought the Agency staff would be
requested to work with Attorney Roy Gargano on an agreement along the lines
of Chuckls January 31st letter and be prepared for review and discussion
at the meeting now scheduled for February 14th.
GWN:rjp
~ ~ 4k,r
- )l
...
;
'--... .
-~ -"---
Prepared 2-9-83
.,
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
DOMESTIC WATER ENTERPRISE
PROPOSED CAPITAL OUTLAY PROGRAM
FISCAL YEAR 1982-83
Wi th 10%
Adopted W/O 10% Effective
FY 1982-1983 FY 1982-1983 4-1-83/6-30-83
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Capital Improvement Reserves (Depr.) $ 219,000 $ 220,000 $ 220,000
Net Operating Income 248,500 76,500 126,500
Loan Repayment from Fairhaven Div. -0- -0- -0-
$ 467,500 $ 296,500 $ 346,500
PROPOSED APPLICATION OF FUNDS
Additional Water Mains
Stockdale Highway, El Rio Dr.
to Tract 4503 7,500 7,500 7,500
Two Mi Ilion Gallon Storage System
at Mohawk & Truxtun Avenue 180,000 180 ~,'OOO 180,000
(Special Facility Payments)
Water Meters & Appurtenances 46,000 46,000 46,000
Pumping Station Improvements
1. Bui lding at Station 12 in
Tract 4188 20,000 20,000 20,000
2. Replace switchboard at
Station 1 on Ashe Road &
Clubview Drive 16,000 16,000 16,000
3. Telemetering system at
Station 1 on Ashe Road &
Clubview Drive 13,000 13,000 13,000
Additional Well and Pumping Plant
1. Station 14 around Ming &
Old River ($220,000 @ 63% =
$135,000) 17,000 17,000 17,000
2. Station 15 west of Gosford
Road near Pacheco Road Well
plus main $265,000 @ 63% =
$168,000 21,000 21,000 21 ,000
TOTAL $ 320,500 $ 320,500 $ 320,500
Balance $ 147,000 ($ 24,000) $ 26,000
--
Prepared 2-9-83
"
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
DOMESTIC WATER ENTERPRISE
ASHE DIVISION
ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENSES BUDGET
FISCAL YEAR 1982-83
Projected Exp.
Adopted Projected Exp. w/10%,increase"
Budget FY 1982-1983 4-1-83/6-30-83
REVENUES.
Domestic Water Sales $1,954,000 $1,783,000 $1,830,000
Construction Water Sales 16,000 58,000 60,000
Interest Income 75,000 60,000 60,000
TOTAL REVENUES $2 ,045 ,000 $1 ,90 1 ,000 $1,950,000
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Field Expense:
0 & M Charges from Calif. Water 437,000 447,000 447,000
Power for Pumping 365,000 390,000 390,000
Other Maintenance 120,000 120,000 120,000
TOTAL FIELD EXPENSES $ 922,000 $ 957,000 $ 957,000
Admi nisfratlive Expenses:
Salaries and Fringe Benefits 72 ,000 75,000 75,000
Charges from Other City Departments 24,000 24,000 24,000
Management Fee from Cali. Water 35,000 46,000 46,000
Consultant Charge (Engineer,
Attorney, etc.) 55,000 30,000 30,000
Insurance Expenses 17,000 17,000 17,000
Property and Pumping Taxes 175,500 175,000 175,000
Misc. General Expenses 16,500 16,500 16,900
TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES $ 394,000 $ 383,500 $ 383,500
NET OPERATING INCOME:
Before Depreciation 729,000 560,000 609,500
Depreciation (219,000) (220,000) (220,000)
TOTAL $ 510,000 $ 340,000 $ 389,500
NON-OPERATING EXPENSE:
Mainline Extension Refunds . (83,000) ,(85,000) (85,000)
Net Operating Income before
Capital Outlay Program 427,000 255,000 304,500
BOND PAYMENT (178,500) (178,500) (178,500)
TRANSFER TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET 248,500 76,500 126,500
\
-,.
-~ ~ ~
, ;~
1i
. . ';}
,~
~¡
;.. .
CANAL RELOCATION AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1983, by and
between TENNECO REALTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, hereinafter
referr~d to as "Tenneco Realty", TENNECO WEST, INC., a Delaware corporation, here-
inafter referred to as "Tenneco West", the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, a California municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as the "City", the NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE
DISTRICT, a California water storage district, organized and existing under and by
virtue of the California Water Storage District Law, acting for and on behalf of the
James-Pioneer Improvement District, hereinrtfter referred to as "North Kern", and KERN
DELTA WATER DISTRICT, a California water district, hereinafter referred to as "Kern
De 1 t a" ,
WITNESSETH THAT:
WHEREAS, Tenneco Real ty is the owner of certain lands in Sect ions 5, '6, 7 and 8,
Township 30 South, Range 27 East, M.D.M., Kern County, California, delineated in red on
the map attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, Tenneco West is the owner of the remainder of said Sections 6 & 7 and
also certain lands in Sections 1 and 12, Township 30 South, Range 26 East, M.D.M., Kern
County, California, lying southerly of the River Canal right of way; and
WHEREAS, the City and Kern Delta are the owners and operators of the canals and
easements therefor, shown in their approximate location by delineation in green on said
Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, North Kern is the owner and operator of the canal and easement therefor,
shown in its approximate location by delineation in blue on said Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, Tenneco Realty desires to relocate said canals from their existing
locations to the ali~nments shown in brown on said Exhibit A to provide for more
efficient urban development of the adjacent properties; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do hereby mutually agree as follows:
1. Tenneco West, the City, North Kern and Kern Delta each agree as to its
respective interest aforesaid, that Tenneco Realty shall have the right, subject to the
terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, to relocate the said canals to an alignment
in the approximate location of each as delineated in brown on said Exhibit A.
2. Tenneco Realty agrees:
2.1 that all cas ts and expenses required to be paid for engineering
and construction of the new alignment of said canals, as well as the costs
to eradicate the present alignment thereof, shall be paid by Tenneco
Real ty.
2.2 to provide each of the parties with a complete set or sets, as
may be required, of construction plans and specifications.
3. The parties agree, each as to their respective interests in the lands affected
by this Agreement:
t':'
.:. .
."
~ - ~
. ~.
,t I
'~.'>
¡ . \1!1-
~,.;.
", I
"
3.1 that within thirty (30) days following receipt of said plans and
specifications to acknowledge, 1n writing to Tenneco Realty, approval
thereof or statin~ what specific objections or corrections must be made
thereto. Approval thereof shall not be unreasonably withheld.
3.2 Except as provided in the Plans titled "Buena Vista Canal
Relocation" dated April 1, 1981, Tenneco Realty shall not be required to
provide facilities 1n the new alignments 1n excess of those currently
existing in their respective locations. If any modifications are requested
or required by any party which are deemed to be in excess of the facilities
currently used, then in such event, the party requesting such modification
or addition, shall pay to Tenneco Realty all costs therefor, including
costs associated with engineering and preparation of plans and specifi-
cations therefore; or, the party requestin~ modification may have the work
performed by itself or another contractor other than Tenneco Realty, but in
such event the work shall be coordinated wi th Tenneco Real ty and Tenneco
Realty shall cooporate with said party 1n the coordination and accom-
plishment of the modification.
3.3 Upon approval of said plans and specifications, Tenneco Realty
shall be entitled to commence construction and such relocation, provided
that such work shall be done at a time or times that will not interfere
with the flow or distribution of water.
3.4 Upon completion of relocation of said canals to the alignments
proposed by this Agreement, each "arty shall execute the necessary
documentation to eliminate the easements for the present alignments.
Concurrently therewith (1) Tenneco Realty and Tenneco West, collectively,
shall convey to the City, an easement for that portion of the relocated
Buena Vista Canal from its interconnection with the River Canal, southerly
and easterly from Engineer's Station No. 0+58.21 to Engineers Station No.
1+00.00, as shown on Exhibit A¡ and (2) Tenneco Realty and Tenneco West,
collectively, shall convey to Kern Delta, an easement for that portion of
the relocated Buena Vista Canal, easterly and southerly from said En-
gineer's Station No. 1+00.00 to the southerly terminus thereof at or near
the corner common to Sections 7, 8, 17 and 18, Township 30 South, Range 27
East, M.D.M.; and (3) Tenneco West shall convey to North Kern, an
easeme nt for the re located port ion of the Jame s Canal as de lineated on
Exhibit A southerly from its headgate connection with the River Canal. In
addition, North Kern and Kern Delta hereby agree that, except for the
easement area of the Buena Vista Canal conveyed to the City, the City shall
not have nor thereafter acquire any interest in or responsibility for the
operat ion and maintenance of said canals, 'southerly from their respect ive
turnout connections with the River Canal. North Kern and Kern Delta
shall have no claim of ownership or ri~h ts in the River Canal and struc-
tures therein other than as set forth in existing agreement~. and understanding.
3.5 That the relocation and modification of the facilities herein
contemplated, shall never be construed as modifying any of the parties
rights to water suppl ies from whatever source. Provided, however, that
should the carrying capacity of said canal( s) be increased pursuant to
ArticLe 3.2 hereof, such action shall not modify any existin~ ri~hts to
diversion of water from the Kern River.
-2-
~:::'
':~
."" Ã ,~þ~
~¡~
- . t/.'
.' ~
';'
.,
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed in five
(5) original counterparts, as of the day and year first above written.
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD TENNECO REALTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
By By 2]/.~ #~
- - -- ~ - vice Pres ident
and by ---- and by h1'0-<'~ 7/'. .I..~'-O (~-----
~stant Secretary
"City" "Tenneco Realty"
NORTH KERNt~TE~ST71:DISTRICT TENNECO WEST, IN~, , '
BY /!(;/¿. '-:,..: ," ,.1;(; (. By '~7 1.. i {~~-r~ .
I V1ce Pres1dent
and by t'..L'Æ1//?(."/ ¥-É'C'/ and by j],.:.f ;¡;;? ~~,:r:.,,~
.' Assistant Secretary
"North Kern" "Tenneco West"
::ilDEtTt w~ ~~~
~~~-
and by .
"Kern Delta"
-3-
-------
-~--
'~-
- ~
. ,,'
~ I
;
-, "'" ,.. - ._-, " " ':;-;- "::::;':~:':~~":"::'~--_':::.::.:-;;::::::..:~Jk:.":~..:.. -- " ..
C¡'a
"'111'
CII...
>"~
..:1110
ZG.oui
1110 "'Ii "
J, , ...' ¡III! CO
" ::J' III.."
'. or, 0 ....",
1= ~, ~~!~
.. ! .. 4 C¡O
I U~2
, OC¡ Z
~zaœ
" W4Z111
œu..~
l':',' ~,- '~Ir: , ' ..,:, ,
" ", i :-'
"~","'I,,~""";,,"" ~I
' = ..
..' , " j < ", " "1 i ~ '
., ,;, ,,;: 1 : ~;:
. ¡ IIIZ
, I j CI~
~ - - \.'\. I Z
, , ' 'CW:Þ ~ þ: .. CO
¡' 1 "'~ 40 I ~I--
'\ 0 ZI-':.!!?
, , \.\. OZr III ~ I III>
, ~ ,¡;:cra;!8Io ~~Z I,
I, , , 7 ' ;~~~' ¡;:~~~~~ ~o~8 II
, , ' , ", " " ... - > ..J J'
"' I,' ',,' ", 'OCIIl-cr g ",IIIUZ I
:' ','- 'y' ,& œ.......~ ~ 01-"
, ..-."", ,"'" ~1IIa:ZZ"Z ....111
'. :'JI.',t:""'-"'¡':"""" .,.~ ...~""-IIIZ" ": zlI:l-..1
i:':_:-:~,"....'.. '~:,;:". ,,:--,':';:, i , ,',"'~" ü':¡!;~~~:'" ~ :~!!?..
r!""""""""""";""~I.' "'~",..,-" , ' ,-~..~--.,~ j' , ~O>III l
11'" ,':,';' ",',' ,,: ',",'" :", " ", ; r"'"": --- \""'~-"~' ...,. ... ,-~,~" , = :""¡;¡;"', ," ;"i,¡CC;¡",'. ,"'..,.
1~,¡:~",:(.:;¡:.i;:J:~:,."~tC}:...,:.'". \} ~~l\ - \i"" §:¡~i:
~1."r,1"'" -- """."""",., ,~\ \" IIIO:ZIII I CWO)
:t":;c",-:,,:.;t";'i>,,,::,,:,:::,_::r'H:" ',y" ",~,:, \:~;¡::o f -
IIL;"';":"':d"",,":"""',"',"'~"':""" \\"~ \' ,'" -'02ü...,
~..'""......,;""":"".;",~::"".",....,,, '\,,\ ,1 ..J"i:!i \\ ¡
",""'""'¡""<,":,""',"'\,\"""" '," \"'" .,~... \ "
t " ','" ., . ' '1 ")0" I
,'I,,> j . """"""" "', "'" ClO..JO, " ,','
" 1" ' \ ' . ' , ' ~ UIoI""C' \ '
':':,:",:","!o...':~",'.:".::.:"'" ",,/ :, ,,' CIII-ÜZ; \ i
,>",.,," 0""'" 1,\ ""'UC I
- " -.......:.._-, ....:-:..!!!!'......!ion!.. i.. ' : \", , II: )0 Z '
,.:"":":,,,, ,1..:,'\, .. ',' '}~-'-'~'-".."""'-"'~' 0\\':\, : --.~,.- -;\~-~~~o~H{ , -\'t --.., - ~
"",.' '\'::."""""1':1"'"., '\'~ '-.,' i\'~"'~~:Z: \
I', ",', " , '{" ' \' " ' :' 1-"'-"""
" ,", " , , .' " ! 3:! ~
~". ',-,'I",.~ ' r gozlIJi
~, ' , i ..JC-~
" ',' ,.' " " , . ¡ " "'IIJ C .. >-
I'",..~ .1", . .Ii \, ,.n..
:, '~'r}:: >; . ' ¡' Ii '
. - - '¡i'"
. . ' "
~ ~--~---
=> '"
-
,
, ¡.
ADDENDUM TO
CANAL RELOCATION AGREEMENT
DATED , 1983
This Agreement is made and entered into this day
of , 1983, by and between TENNECO REALTY DE-
VELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation hereinafter referred
to as "Tenneco Realty", TENNECO WEST, INC., a Delaware Corporation
hereinafter referred to as "Tenneco West", the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD,
a California Municipal Corporation hereinafter referred to as the
"City", the NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT, a California Water
Storage District, organized, existing under and by virtue of the
California Water Storage District law, acting for and on the be-
half of the James-Pioneer Improvement District, hereinafter re-
ferred to as "North Kern", and KERN DELTA WATER DISTRICT, a Cali-
fornia Water District, hereinafter referred to as "Kern Delta".
This Agreement is an addendum to the CANAL RELOCATION
AGREEMENT dated the day of , 1983,
entered into between these same Parties, which is hereinafter re-
ferred to as the "Canal Relocation Agreement".
THE PARTIES MUTUALLY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Notwithstanding the provisions of Paragraph 3.4 of
the Canal Relocation Agreement, Kern Delta agrees to transfer,
concurrently with the other documentation provided for in said
Paragraph 3.4, to the City the right to use the relocated Buena
vista Canal, easterly and southerly from Engineer's Station No.
1+00.00 to the southerly terminus thereof, at or near the corner
-~ ..
- -' ~ '
; -~.
common to Section 7, 8, 17 and 18, Township 30 south, range 27
east, M.D.M., for the transportation of City's water. Said right
shall permit the City to use the conveyance capacity in the Bue~a
Vista Canal from time-to-time as such capacity is available, sub-
I ject only to Kern Delta's prior right of use and the City's pay-
I
.
rnent of a reasonable rental value with reasonable terms and con-
ditions.
2. Notwithstanding the provisions of Paragraph 3.4 of
The Canal Relocation Agreement, North Kern agrees to transfer,
coilcurrently with the other documentation provided for in said
Paragraph 3.4, to the City the right to use the James Canal southerly
from its headgate connection with the River Canal for the transpor-
tation of the City's water. Said right shall permit the City to
use the conveyance capacity in the James Canal from time-to-time as
suc\ capacity is available, subject only to North Kern's prior
right of use and the City's payment of a reasonable I-ental value
with reasonable terms and conditions.
3. Nothing contained in this Addendum shall require the
City to assume any responsibility for the operation and maintenance
of either the Buena Vista or the James Canals southerly from their
respective turnout connections with the River Canal.
4. The City shall have full operational control of the
measuring stations on both the James and Buena Vista Canals.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agree-
ment to be executed in five (5) original counterparts, as of
the date and year first above-written.
- 2 -
n____-
..- . - ,Þ-
.-- r
-; .. .
"
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
By
and by "City"
NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
By
and by "North Kern"
KERN DELTA WATER DISTRICT
By
and by
"Kern Delta"
TENNECO REALTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
By
Vice President
and by
Assistant Secretary
"Tenneco Realty"
TENNECO WEST, INC.
By
Vice President
and by
Assistant Secretary
"Tenneco West"
-3-
I 1C::~d C::"" '"";1-"";>
, ~"
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
DOMESTIC WATER ENTERPRISE
PROPOSED CAPITAL OUTLAY PROGRAM
FISCAL YEAR 1982-83
With 10%
Adopted W/O 10% Effective
FY 1982-1983 FY 1982-1983 4-1-83/6-30-83
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Capital Improvement Reserves (Depr.) $ 219,000 $ 220,000 $ 220,000
Net Operating Income 248,500 76,500 126,500
Loan Repayment from Fairhaven Div. -0- -0- -0-
$ 467,500 $ 296,500 $ 346,500
PROPOSED APPLICATION OF FUNDS
Additional Water Mains
Stockdale Highway, El Rio Dr.
to Tract 4503 7,500 7,500 7,500
I Two Mi llion Gallon Storage System
at Mohawk & Truxtun Avenue 180,000 180,000 180,000
(Special Facility Payments)
Water Meters & Appurtenances 46,000 46,000 46 ,000
Pumping Station Improvements
1. Building at Station 12 in
Tract 4188 20,000 20,000 20,000
2. Replace switchboard at
Station 1 on Ashe Road &
Clubview Drive 16,000 16,000 16,000
3. Telemetering system at
Station 1 on Ashe Road &
Clubview Drive 13,000 13,000 1 3 ,000
Additional Well and Pumping Plant
1. Station 14 around Ming &
Old River ($220,000 @ 63% =
$135,000) 17 ,000 17,000 17,000
2. Station 15 west of Gosford
Road near Pacheco Road Well
plus main $265,000 @ 63% =
$168,000 21,000 21 ,000 21,000
TOTAL $ 320,500 $ 320,500 $ 320,500
Balance $ ]47,000 ($ 24,000) $ 26,000
Prepared 2-9-83
" .. ~
<"
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
DOMESTI C WATER ENTERPR IS E
ASHE DIVISION
ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENSES BUDGET
FISCAL YEAR 1982-83
Proj ected Exp.
Adopted Proj ec ted Exp. w/10% increase
Budget FY 1982-1983 4-1-83/6-30-83
REVENUES
Domestic Water Sales $1,954,000 $1,783,000 $1,830,000
Construction Water Sa1es 16,000 58,000 60,000
Interest Income 75,000 60,000 60,000
TOTAL REVENUES $2,045,000 $ 1 ,90 1 ,000 $1,950,000
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Field Expense:
0 & M Cha rges .from Ca 1 if. Water 437,000 447,000 447,000
Power for Pumpi ng 365,000 390,000 390,000
Other Maintenance 120,000 120,000 120,000
TOTAL FIELD EXPENSES $ 922,000 $ 957,000 $ 957,000
Administratiive Expenses:
Salaries and Fringe Benefits 72 ,000 75,000 75,000
Charges from Other City Departments 24,000 24,000 24,000
Management Fee from Cali. Water 35,000 46,000 46,000
Consu1tant Charge (Engineer,
Attorney, etc.) 55,000 30,000 30,000
Insurance Expenses 17,000 17,000 17,000
Property and Pumping Taxes 175,500 ' 175,000 175,000
Misc. Genera1 Expenses 16,500 16,500 16 , 5'00
TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES $ 394,000 $ 383,500 $ 383,500
NET OPERATING INCOME:
Before Depreciation 729,000 560,000 609,500
Depreciation (219,000) (220,000) (220,000)
TOTAL $ 510,000 $ 340,000 $ 389,500
NON-OPERATING EXPENSE:
Mainline Extension Refunds (83,000) (85,000) (85,000)
Net Operating Income before
Capital Outlay Program 427,000 255,000 304,500
BOND PAYMENT ( 1 78 , 500) (1]8,500) (178,500)
TRANSFER TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET 248,500 76,500 126,500