Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/17/00 BAKERSFIELD CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM November 17, 2000 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY CO~l~ FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER /f SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. There will be a press release by SMG about arena football next Monday at 11:00 am at the Centennial Garden. You are invited to attend if your schedule allows. Pads and helmet are not necessary - for now! 2. As you may have seen in the media, we had a neighborhood meeting for the "City Center" property owners to explain appraisal processes, relocation benefits etc. It was surprising that while there is obviously great interest, there was no outright opposition. They would like to know what Will happen, of course, and the uncertainty seemed to be the greatest concern along with issues pertaining to property values. It went quite well and other sessions will be held in the future. 3. The Moroccans were interesting to have here. They had never-ending questions! 4. We won the regional American Public Works Association Project of the Year award '- for the Amtrak Station! You will all get certificates at the next Council meeting. 5. The railroad crossing improvements at East California Avenue have been completed. This crossing can now be traversed at the posted speed limit of 40 mph. 6. The Recreation and Parks Department has completed the tree survey. The count is 24,841 trees in the parks, streetscapes and City-owned properties. 7. A response from CalTrans is enclosed,regarding the inquiry about a soundwall at State Route 99 and the White Lane interchange. They will not fund it. 8. Public Works has provided an update on the project at State Route 178 at Comanche Drive and Alfred Harrell Highway. 9. Public Works has also supplied an update on the Bakersfield Landfill Closure Project. 10. A memo from Development Services regarding the preservation of hills and bluffs in the northeast is attached. 11. City staff attended the November 9 meeting of the San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee at the request of Council member DeMond. The Public Works Department has provided a report on that meeting. Honorable Mayor and City Council November 17, 2000 Page 2 12. Responses to Council requests area as follows: Councilmember Couch · Review of"Amber Alert" Program · Land use concerns related to the power plant at Coffee and Rosedale · Contact of citizen by staff regarding bike lanes on Brimhall Road · Kern River bottom concerns · Monthly Investment Report Councilmember Maggard · Status of work program for planning in Northeast Bakersfield, and the Southeast and Pioneer Redevelopment Project Areas Councilmember Salvaggio · Safety issues and semi-trucks parking at Wible and Berkshire Roads AT:al cc: Mayor-Elect Hall Council members-Elect Benham and Hanson Department Heads Pamela McCarthy, City Clerk Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst : RECEIVED .~ B A K E R S F IE L D - -- :~ iCITY M · = .... ANAGER S O~ ,'ICE[ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, City Manager FROM: RAUL ROJAS, Public Works Director DATE: November 15, 2000 SUBJECT: East California Avenue Crossing of the San Joaquin Valley Railroad FYI, the above railroad crossing improvement was just completed and opened late yesterday. This crossing is a joint City/County/San Joaquin Valley Railroad project, and both the City Engineering and Streets Divisions worked closely with the County and the Railroad to complete the project. As you may recall, this was a terribly bumpy crossing that if traversed at more than the posted speed of 10 miles per hour, resulted in a "Dukes of Hazzard" vehicle stunt. This crossing can now be traversed at the speed limit for the street of 40 miles per hour. cc: Jacques R. LaRochelle, Engineering Services Manager tdw:S:\TED~2000memo\l 11500al.wpd From: Ed Lazaroti ~ To: Stan Ford Date: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 12:57:18 PM Subject: Tree inventory David Schwartz completed the tree inventory. The count is 24,841 trees in the parks, streetscapes and city owned properties. S~ATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GRAY DAVIS, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1352 WEST OLIVE AVENUE P. O. BOX 12616 FRESNO, CA 93778-2616 TDD (559) 488-4066 OFFICE (559) 488-4057 FAX (559)488-4195 : EC !VED October 31,2000 Cl~ aANAGER'S OF~CE Mr. Alan Tandy City Manager City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun-Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Dear ~~ay: I am writing in response to your letter of August 25, 2000, inquiring about a soundwall at State Route 99 and the White Lane interchange area in Bakersfield. It has taken a while to pull together the. latest information about the proposed soundwall as it relates to the City project to widen Whi~e Lane through the interchange area. yoUr sPecific request' iS in regards to the proposed soundwall along the:nodhbound Off, ramp t0 White Lane: adjacent'to the Smoketree Mobile Home Park. A Noise Barrier. Scop~ Summaw Repo~ (NBSSR) is required'for this project to be programmed'fOr State Highway Account funding. City engineering staff has requested they produce the NBSSR and have been working on it over the past couple of years. In 1997, Senate Bill 45 was signed into law by Governor Wilson. The provisions of SB 45 separated the State Transpo~ation Improvement Program (STIP) such that Caltrans receives authority to program 25% of the funds and regional agencies, such as the Kern Council of Governments, 75% of the funds. Among the implementing guidelines of the California Transpodation Commission is--the provision that-soundwalls-, other than noise- mitigation for new highWay projects, and the responsibility of the, respective regional agencies to fund. The practical effect is that Caltrans has no fund source for the White Lane soundwall and, therefore, it must be funded from other fund sources such as local funds or Regional Improvement Program funds allocated to the Kern Council of Governments. Caltrans met with City engineering staff on August 30, 2000, to discuss several projects including the White Lane project and the implications to the soundwall project. The implications of widening White Lane include necessaw reloCation and reconstruction of the freeway on and off-ramps including the'ramp adjacent to the Smoketree Mobile Home Park. If the soUndwall~'W~re built before the White Lane project most of the sOundwall would have to be demolished and rebuilt when the ramp work was done in conjunction with the White Lane widening project. Mr. Alan Tandy October 31,2000 Page 2 It has been jointly agreed by City and Caltrans staff that it would be most prudent to construct the soundwall in conjunction with the White Lane widening and ramp reconstruction project. Our understanding of the City's current schedule shows that the environmental document and project report will be completed next summer. The design work can begin at that time with construction expected to start in the summer or fall of 2002. As you suggested in your letter of August 25, 2000, we have met with City staff and I believe the information I have provided addresses your concerns. If you should require any additional information, please contact Alan McCuen, District Division Chief, Planning, at (559) 488-4115. ' - Sincerely, District Director District 6 c: Councilmember Mark Salvaggio Raul Rojas, Public Works Director Jacques R. LaRochelle, Engineering Services Manager Ted Wright, Design Engineer ;ECEIVED I BAKERSFIELD j ~TY MANAGEr'S 0,: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, City Manager FROM: RAUL ROJAS, pUblic Works Director ~_~ .~..~..~ DATE: November 14, 2000 SUBJECT: State Route 178 at Comanche Drive/Alfred Harrell Highway - T9K015 Staff just received Caltrans approval of the environmental documents and studies for the realignment of Comanche Road with Alfred Harrell Highway and the installation of a traffic signal at the Alfred Harrell Highway/Comanche Drive/State Route 178 intersection. As you may recall, our efforts to gain environmental approval for this project have taken quite some time (initial environmental documents were submitted to Caltrans last February). The plans and specifications for this project are about 85% complete, and staff anticipates submitting to Caltrans the week after Thanksgiving the necessary plans and paperwork for permitting, funding approval, and the completion of a cooperative agreement between the City and Caltrans for the project. Dependent upon Caltrans' review time schedules for these items, this project should be out to bid early next year. cc: Jacques R. LaRochelle, Engineering Services Manager tdw:S:\TED~000memo\l 11400at.wpd PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director~/~ f.__ DATE: November 8, 2000 SUBJECT: Bakersfield Landfill Closure Project Update Staff has recently submitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Board a proposed work plan for this project's test pad. Many weeks ago, it was hinted by RWQCB staff that a dual test pad may be required. However, subsequent meetings with them did not provide anything definitive, so we have proceeded with the less costly option. Due to the changing of RWQCB members at the end of their terms this month, it is likely that approval of the work plan will be delayed until next spring. In the meantime, the landfill is being maintained properly. KB S:\BAK_LANDF1LL~Vlemos~BSL_UPDATE 110800.wpd MEMORANDUM NOV 13 2000 i November 2, 2000 .-.,.... -?v, MANAGER'S .... ~ :.--, .'-,:¢'...-..'- ~ TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER -" / / FROM: JACK HARDISTY, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOI~,~_~~¢'/~ / SUBJECT: PRESERVATION OF HILLS AND BLUFFS /" / Councilman Maggard and you have asked how we would proceed to preserve the hills and bluffs in the northeast. In addition, as an outcrop of hearings on City in the Hills, quite a bit of public concern has been expressed over the future of the hills and bluffs. For the city to play a significant role in the preservation of the hills and bluffs, it would need to adopt policies and plans for the preservation of that open space and how it would be accomplished. This would establish the foundation for budgeting, staff involvement and cooperative ventures. Here are the steps to go forward: 1. Agenda for City Council consideration "Initiation of General Plan Amendments to Preserve Hills and Bluffs in the Northeast." This is when and how staff is directed to prepare draft policies, plans and implementation for review and possible adoption. 2. Staff would draft the policies and plans while working with the property owners, community groups and area residents. 3. The Planning Commission conducts public hearings on proposed policies and plans which conclude with a recommendation to the City Council. 4. The City Council conducts its public hearing of the recommendation and adopts as recommended or modified or it may choose not to adopt. 5. Various city departments and civic groups and property owners begin work within the general plan's framework to implement the plan. This is related to a broader referral concerning planning for the Northeast, Central and Southeast areas of the city. Stanley Grady has prepared a draft response to that referral which will need to be reviewed and approved by you because of its budget implications. That response goes into greater detail. JH:pjt cc: Stanley Grady, Planning Director 2:mat11-2 B A K E R S F I E L D CltY~A~GE~,S~-i,,- Public Works Department Memorandum To: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER From: RAUL ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ~ Date: NOVEMBER 15, 2000 Subject: NOVEMBER 9, 2000 MEETING OF THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY RAIL COMMITTEE Councilmernber Patricia J. DeMond, Ward 2 City staff attended the November 9 meeting of the San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee at the request of Councilmember DeMond. The following is staff's report of that meeting. A quorum of voting members was not present so no actions were taken. The meeting then consisted only of discussions. Agenda Item 3.A,1, Resolution on direct service from Bakersfield to Los Angeles A letter will be written based on the action that was taken at the past meeting in Martinez. Agenda Item 3.A.2, Future action and report on High Speed Rail The Committee discussed who is on the High Speed Rail Citizen Advisory Committee (HSRCAC) and which members are regularly attending the High Speed Rail Authority's meetings. It was noted that two or three members of the SJVRC are also members of the HSRCAC but only one of them has been attending the Authority's meetings. The Committee discussed the importance of interconnecting high speed rail service with other existing rail service and the need to increase the speed on those existing rail lines. Agenda Item 3.A.3, Subcommittee report on the formation of Joint Powers Authority There was no report on this item. Agenda Item 3.A.4, Sixth train to/from Sacramento upon receipt of addition consist from southern California The sixth train is in the state budget. Due to the recent train accident in southern California, service would probably start in late 2001. A more complete report will be presented at the January meeting. S:~PROJECTS~ARNOLD/SJVRC 11_09_00.wpd Page 1 of 2 Pages Agenda Item 4.A, Amtrak West Report On time performance is at 69.3 percent for the year to date. This is improving. Agenda Item 4. B, Amtrak 20-year plan Parsons-Brinkerhoff was hired by Amtrak to do a study on how to improve numbers of passengers, increase number of commuters and to add light freight to the Amtrak trains. Amtrak's five year plan has been completed (we have requested a copy of it). That plan established a goal of 105 mph train speed on the San Joaquin Corridor. Amtrak has established a model of the existing system that will allow them to study how improvements to existing routes and new routes will affect the system. They plan on having the final plan ready for the public review in January 2001. Currently, train speeds of 90 mph are possible with the installation of Automatic Train Stop (ATS) equipment on the trains. This must be approved by the Federal Railroad Authority before it can be implemented. The freight trains must also be equipped with the ATS improvements. The Committee requested the Amtrak and Caltrans Rail Program consider extending the sixth daily on the San Joaquin to Redding to provide improved passenger rail service into northern California. Agenda Item 5.A, Ridership/Revenue The report for August and September was distributed and reviewed. A copy is attached. Agenda Item 5.B, Track Improvements Caltrans Rail Program reported that a $6.0 million agreement has been entered into with BNSF for the design of track improvements between Stockton and Sacramento and between Port Chicago and Martinez. The new Martinez Station project is now up to a total project cost of $30 million. The majority of this cost has been spent on rail improvements and environmental issues. The station building should be completed and opened by end of this calendar year. Agenda Item 6.A, Fresno Station The City of Fresno is now starting another study to refurbish the existing station. Amtrak is spending $600,000 for this project. Agenda Item 6.B, Capitol Corridor Ridership on the Capitol Corridor has increased dramatically. This is primarily due to business commuters riding daily between Sacramento and San Francisco. Agenda Item $.C, Central Coast The Central Coast train should start service in October 2001. This will provide passenger rail service between Los Angeles and San Francisco, which will be a ten-hour trip. The Committee discussed the importance of calling our Congressional Representatives immediately to ask them to support the high speed rail investment bills that are being considered in these final weeks of the 2000 calendar year. S:~PROJECTS~ARNOLD~SJVRC 11_09_00.wpd Page 2 of 2 Pages REPRESENTING COUNTIES ALONG THE ROUTE OF THE SAN JOAOUINS Agenda Thursday, November 9, 2000 KINGS COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER Administration Building #1 1400 West Lacey Boulevard Hartford, California 93230 (directions attached) 12:30 P.M. -- 4:30 P.M. (Transportation between the train station and the Government Center will meet Trains 712 and 717) Train Times: Train #713 from Bakersfield arrives 11:04 A.M. (Southern California bus connection) Train #712 from San Francisco Bay Area arrives 12:10 P.M. (Sacramento/Stockton bus connection) Train #717 to San Francisco Bay Area departs 5:05 P.M. (Sacramento/Stockton bus connection) Train #716 to Bakersfield departs 5:41 P.M. (Southern Califomia bus connection) Item 1. Call to Order and other preliminary matters Chair Stan Thurston A. Welcome by Kings County B. Introductions C. Remarks by Chair D. Minutes of September 14 meeting in Merced ACTION Item 2. Public comment On non-agenda items only (Speakers can address specific agenda items at time of presentation.) Item 3. Consideration of major policy issues A. Discussion and possible action: 1. Resolution on direct service fi.om Bakersfield to Los Angeles Paul Bartlett 2. Future action and report on High Speed Rail 3. Subcommittee report on formation of JPA George Gaekle 4. Sixth train to/fi.om Sacramento upon receipt of additional consist fi.om southern California Arthur Lloyd B. Committee concerns Supervisor Vern Moss Item 4. Amtrak West report Jay Commer A. Reservations; on-time performance; equipment availability B. Amtrak 20-year plan Elizabeth O Donoghue Item 5. Caltrans Rail Program reports A. Ridership/Revenue Steve Zimrick B. Track improvements Stockton/Sacramento Port Chicago/Martinez Steve Zimrick C. CTC report Warren Weber D. Marketing/Advertising/Operations Eric Schatmeier Dennis Winger/Steve Miller Item 6. Other reports A. Fresno station Paul Bartlett B. Capitol Corridor, Pacific Surfliner Gene Skoropowski/ Steve Zimrick/ C. Central Coast, ACE, Caltrain Arthur Lloyd Item 7. Committee member concerns/reports Item 8. New business Item 9. Next meetings January 11 Bakersfield March 8 Fresno (Annual Meeting) Item 10. Adjournment of meeting (in memory of San Joaquin County Supervisor Bob Cabral) .~ 10/24/00 11:09 FAX 209 585 8047 KlngsCoA&0DAdmln ~002 Directions to Hartford FrOm South · Traveling on ]-lighway 99 NOrth, take the SR. 198 West exit to Hartford. · Travel West on SR 198 into Hanford and take the 12'h Avenue Exit. · Turn right onto 12t~ Avenue. · Travel North until you reach Lacey Boulevard (Second Stoplight) and turn right. · Travel East on Lacey Boulevard (stay in left lane) · You will see the entrmace to the Kings County Govenunent Cellterjtut past the stoplight located at Mall Drive/Kings County D~ve. Directions to Hartford from North · Travel on Freeway 99 South to Selma and take the Hwy 43 - I-hnford/Corcoran exit. · Travel Hwy ~,3 South and take the SP,. 198 West entrance to Hartford · Travel West on SR. 198 into Hartford and take thc 12th Avenue Exit. · Turn right onto 12u~ Avenue. · Travel North m~til you reach Lacey Boulev'ard (Second Stoplight) and turn fight. · Travel East on Lacey Boulevard (stay in left lane) · You will see thc entrance to the Kings County Government Center just past the stoplight located at Mall Drive/Kiugs County Drive. San Joaquin Ridership and Revenue Summary August 2000 Total Ridership -3.6% vs. FY99; -4.5% vs. Plan Ticket Revenue +15.3% vs. FY99; +13.3% vs. Plan What's Hot? · The average trip length reached an all-time high of 167 miles, which is nearly 6% above FY99 levels as we continue to attract more lucrative long-distance passengers. · Ticket revenue was an all-time record for the service and was the result of the longer trip lengths and higher yields. · Ridership on trains 702 and 703 (Sacramento-Bakersfield) continued to show improvement increasing 3.6% and 8.0%, respectively. · Interactive bookings (Intemet and VRU) increased 93.4% and accounted for 10% of total bookings compared to just 6% in FY99. · Average daily ridership on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays increased more than 8% for each day. · Ridership between Emeryville and Stockton increased for the third consecutive month (+8.0%) after being down for most of the year. · Ridership between Emeryville and Bakersfield increased 27.6% while revenue increased 33.0%. What' s Not? · Declines in ridership were seen on a number of trains with the largest losses on 711 (-15.4%), 716 (-8.4%) and 715 (-6.6%). · On-time performance continued to deteriorate falling to just 35.8%. · Ridership between Fresno and Hanford, which was the third largest city pair in terms of ridership in FY99, declined 58.8%. · Average daily ridership between Monday and Thursday continues to decline with the largest losses seen on Wednesday (-12.5%) and Thursday (-22.9%). · Fresno continues to under perform compared to the route as a whole with ridership down 15.0% (-5.2% without Hanford results). San Joaquin Ridership and Revenue Summary September 2000 Total Ridership +9.3% vs. FY99; -4.4% vs. Plan Ticket Revenue +15.9% vs. FY99: -1.0% vs. Plan What's Hot? · Best Performance of the year for both ridership and revenue. · September ridership was a record for the month at 51,752, and marked the first time that more than 50,000 passengers were carried in the month. · Ridership on trains 702 and 703 (Sacramento-Bakersfield) had the best performance increasing 27.9% and 26.4%, respectively. · Strong gains were also seen on trains 712 and 717, up 13.1% and 17.7%, respectively, following the trends seen since the unstaffed stations were added with the May timetable change. · Ridership in all top city pairs experienced double-digit increases. · Ridership between Emeryville and Stockton increased 9.3%, the fourth consecutive month of increases. · Intemet bookings increased more than 130%. What' s Not? · Ridership on train 711 declined 9.6% with the losses driven by steep drops in ridership Monday-Thursday. · Ridership between Fresno and Hanford, which was the third largest city pair in terms ofridership in FY99, declined 48.1%. · On-time performance improved significantly over August but still fell well below FY99 levels and plan at 71.3%. · Passengers using multi-ride tickets declined 35.1 °/3 and was driven by a large drop in Fresno-Hanford business. · Weekday ridership, especially Wednesdays and Thursdays, remains weak. SAN JOAQUIN ROUTE RIDERSHIP AND REVENUE TRENDS Passengers Revenue 99/00-00/01 99/00-00/01 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 % Chan~le 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 % Chan~le Jul. 69,611 Ji/ 67,777 ~' 70,714 4.3°/° $ 1,678,635 $~1,~5,660 $~2,005,036 6.3% Aug 71,756~ 69,342 ~/ 66,843 -3.6% $ 1,694,434 $~'1,782,509. $~2,044,576 '14.7°/~ Sep 48,933 47~348 /j~ 51~752 9.3% $ 1,169,452 $-~',1,298,797 Oct 51,874 '-- 51~522 $ 1~190,488 $/p 1,274,844 Nov 55,463 '~ 56,813 $ 1,407,478 $'~1,596,657 Dec 53~751 --. 53~612 $ 1~518,062 $~1,639,691 Jan 41,668 ,~, 38,099 $ 1,079,159 $,/~1,104,358 Feb 41~264 ~ 41~963 $ 941,041 $'~1~061,434 Mar 58~543 ~ 51~713 $ 1~178~574 $~1~348~141 Apr 61,586 ,~ 65,817 $ 1,464,864 $~,1,723,438 May 64,383 ~ 64,207 $ 1,508,723 $ ~1~557,864 June 61,855 ,~, 63,082 $ 1,665,547 $1~1,788,119 Total thru Aug 141,367 137,11§ 137,557 0.3% $ 3,373,069 $ 3,668,169 $ 4,049,612 10.4% Totalthru Sep 190,300 184,467 189,309 2.6% ~ ii FY Total 680,687 671,295 I ~ ...... ~ ~'~ ' ~, $ 16,496,457 $ 18,061,512 I~ San Joaquin Route Ridership 80,000 ~~ ............ ~ --[ ..... ~-,~ ............ -~-~ .......... 60 0~- - -~ ........... ' ...... ~ ..... ~ ........ ~- .... ~ ..... "~ / 40,000 ~ ............................... ................ 30,000 ~ : Jul. Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June San Joaquin Route Revenue $2,200,000 :- .......................................................... $2,000,000 ~ ................................................... $1,800,000 ? .............................................. $1,6OO,0OO $1,4OO,0OO $1,200,000 $1,000,000 ~- .............................................. $800,000 Jul. Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June i--e-- 199899 Chart S J-B2 LFH 10/30/00 SAN JOAQUIN ROUTE RIDERSHIP AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE COMPARISON (Includes Trains and Connecting Buses) STATE FISCAL YEARS 1999-00 AND 2000-01 Rldership Revenue Expense [] Farebox Ratio Month 1999-00 2000-01 % Chg. 1999-00 2000-01 % Chg. 1999-00 2000-01 % Chg. 1999-00 2000-01 % Chg. July 67,777 70,714 4.3% $1,885,660 $2,005,036 6.3% $3,725,561 $3,635,276 -2.4% 50.6% 55.2% 9.0% August 69,342 66,843 -3.6% $1,782,509 $2,044,576 14.7% $3,168,093 $3,472,343 9.6% 56.3% 58.9% 4.7% September 47,348 51,752 9.3% $1,298,797 $3,866,619 33.6% October 51,522 $1,274,844 $3,335,977 38.2% November 56,813 $1,596,657 $3,487,872 45.8% December 53,612 $1,639,691 $3,788,676 43.3% January 38,099 $1,104,358 $3,323,281 33.2% February 41,963 $1,061,434 $3,329,388 31.9% March 51,713 $1,348,141 $3,446,977 39.1% ~ April 65,817 $1,723,438 $3,244,494 53.1% May 64,207 $1,557,864 $3,567,953 43.7% June 63,082 $1,788,119 $3,506,891 51.0% Fiscal Year thru August 137,119 137,557 0.3% $3,668,169 $4,049,612 10.4% $6,893,654 $7,107,619 3.1% 53.2% 57.0% 7.1% Monthly Average 68,560 68,779 0.3% $1,834,085 $2,024,806 10.4% $3,446,827 $3,553,810 3.1% 53.2% 57.0% 7.1% Fiscal Year thru '~' ~ ~' ~ · ~ .... ~ ~ September 184,467 189,309 2.6% Monthly Average 61,489 63,103 2.6% , ~ Complete ~ ~ ~ ~:~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Year Total 671,295 ~ :~ ~ /~ ~ $18,061,512 ~ ~ ~ $41,791,782 ~ ~:~ - 43.2~ ~ , ~; $1,505,126 $3 482 649 ~ ........... ~ =~;~ 43 2Yo ~ ~ ,~ ~, ~ -Train operation expense does not include equipment capital costs (D&I) Chart S J-A1 LFH 10/30/00 BAKERSFIELD CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM October 20, 2000 TO: Councilmember Couch FROM: John W. Stinso~'~istant City Manager SUBJECT: Referrals dated 10/25/00 The following are staff responses to the referrals made by you on 10/25/00: #1 Question: Forward magazine article "This is an Amber Alert" to Police Department. Response: This was referred to the Police Department per your request, a response regarding the program is attached. #2 Question: Request that staff prepare correspondence to railroad companies regarding developing a railroad crossing maintenance program for your signature. Response: This item was referred to the City Attorney's office to contact you. The City Attorney has prepared a memo regarding this issue, which is being provided under separate cover. #3 Question: Message from Mr. Frank Echenique regarding land use concerns related to the power plant purchased by North American Power Group at Coffee Road and Rosedale Highway. Response: The Planning Department will be contacting Mr. Echenique and will respond to his concerns regarding the new owner of the power plant and their plans for development of the site. They will provide you information regarding his concerns when they become available. #4 Question: Message from Mr. Alvin Horn regarding the need for bike lanes on Brimhall Road. Response: The Traffic Engineer has contacted Mr. Horn and prepared a response to his concerns which is attached. Councilmember Couch October 20, 2000 Page 2 #5 Question: Message from Mr. Joe Appleton regarding work being done in the river bed of the Kern River Response: Staff from the Water Resources department contacted Mr. Appleton regarding his concerns they have prepared a memo explaining the conversation with Mr. Appleton regarding the work in the river which is attached. #6 Question: Channel 23 editorial regarding shopping carts. Response: Per your request the City Attorney has contacted you regarding this issue. #7 Question: Has the City received a response from the County regarding the letter sent to the Board of Supervisors by Planning Director Stanley Grady regarding the draft EIR for approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the Herschel Moore Dairy? Response: Development Services Director Jack Hardisty indicates the city has not received any response to the letter. #8 Question: Various questions regarding city investment policies. Response: Finance Department staff has prepared responses to your questions which are attached #9 Question: Phone message from Mr. Frank Cantelmi. Response: I contacted Mr. Cantelmi, who said he had some concerns regarding a recent request for qualifications for air conditioning work requested by the city. He was interested in why local contractors did not receive a preference for this type of work. I explained the process to him and restrictions placed on the city by state law in this regard. I also explained that I could set up a meeting with public works staff and him to discuss the review process so he would have a better understanding of it and could share his concerns with staff. He declined, and said it was not necessary, and that he appreciated me contacting him. JWS:RKS Enclosures RECEIVED C~TY MANAGER'S BAKERSFIELD POLICE MEMO NDUM November 15, 2000 To: Alan Tandy, City Manager Honorable Mayor Price and Council Members From: W.R. Rector, Assistant Chief of Police For Eric W. Matlock, Chief of Police Subject: Response to Council Referral "Amber Alert" Council Member Couch Meeting of October 25, 2000 "Couch requests that Chief Matlock review the "This is an Amber Alert" Program and respond regarding the merits of program for City of Bakersfield requesting a response by 4:00, Wednesday 1~/~5 .... " The police department's news media relations representative, Sgt. Bob Bivens, was assigned to review and research the "Amber Alert Program". Staff will discuss the feasibility of this program with local media at the next task force meeting in January of 2001. I will provide an update to council following the January meeting. Please refer to the attached memorandum by Sgt. Bivens for complete details. Vrf attachment: "Amber Alert System"memorandum by Sgt. Bob Bivens dated 11/15/00 November 15, 2000 To: Eric W. Matlock, Chief of Police ~ .~' ~ From: Bob Bivens, Sergeant Subject: Amber Alert System The "Amber Alert" system is utilized by Dallas-Fort Worth law enforcement agencies when a child abduction occurs. Local radio stations are notified by police, via fax, when a child abduction takes place. The radio stations send out a loud alarm tone, followed by an announcement, "This is an Amber Alert." A description of the suspect, the suspect vehicle, and a description of the victim is broadcast. The "Amber Alert" is sent out every 15 minutes over the airwaves by the radio stations. The intent of the "Amber Alert" is to inform the motoring public of the abduction, in hopes of receiving a cellular telephone call from a citizen who spots the suspect vehicle on the road. To ensure the "Amber Alert" system would not be diluted with misuse or false reports, law enforcement established strict criteria for issuing the alert. The child has to be under 15 years of age, have a mental or physical disability, and the police need to have reason to believe the child is in danger of serious harm or death. Runaway juveniles and children taken during custody disputes do not normally qualify. The Bakersfield Police Department currently uses the Kern County Broadcasters Association (KCBA) as a means of notifying the public through the media about dangerous or hazardous situations. Bakersfield Police Officers can utilize the KCBA paging system 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The system notifies all subscribers, which includes radio, television and print media sources. The KCBA system is used by media companies, law enforcement agencies and emergency .medical systems to ensure notification of any major incident in Kern County. This allows Bakersfield Police Officers the ability to make one telephone call to notify the media of an abduction for immediate release to the public. The Bakersfield Police Department has a child abduction protocol that outlines the responsibilities of first responders to a witnessed or non-witnessed child abduction. Much like the "Amber Alert" system, our officers conduct a preliminary investigation to determine the facts surrounding the incident. Once the suspect information has been developed, a Page I broadcast is sent statewide and countywide. Additionally, notifications are made to the F.B.I., Department of Justice, California Office of Emergency Services and Center for Missing/Exploited Children. The Current KCBA system does not guarantee that a radio or television station will broadcast the information every 15 minutes. As the public information officer, I have found local radio and television managers to be very supportive of law enforcement requests for help from their listeners and viewers. I believe the current system works well. However, I would like to propose this idea at the next media task force meeting and get some feedback from the local media companies. If an : agreement could be reached with the local stations, the "Amber Alert" system could be another tool for the Bakersfield Police Department to utilize. The next media task force meeting is scheduled for January 2001. Page 2 RECEIVED · ?TY MANAGER'S OFF~CE B A K E R S F I E L D -'-----~ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: November 14, 2000 SUBJECT: BIKE LANES ON BRIMHALL Council Referral No. WF0018680/001 (Ward 4) Councilmember Couch requested that staff contact Alvin Horn, 324-4756 regarding the need for bike lanes on Brimhall Road. Request a copy of response by 4:00 p.m., Wednesday 11/15. The Traffic Engineer contacted Mr. Horn and discussed bike lane needs in the area of Brimhall and Calloway. Brimhall is not designated in the 2010 General Plan to receive bike lanes and is not widened for bike lanes. It may be possible, once the road is fully built out, to stripe a minimal width bike lane from Coffee to Calloway. Mr. Horn was told that the Traffic Engineer will consider striping a bike lane once the road is completed to its ultimate width with curbs. Mr. Horn was pleased this would be considered and required no additional response. cc: Traffic Engineering file: Brimhall S:\WP\CC_REFS\WF0018680.BikeLanes~Brimhall,ref. wpd City ot Ba~ersIield WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REQ/JOB: WF0018680 / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: llZ13~00 REQUEST DATE: 10/25/00 CREW: TIME PRINTED: 11:20:07 SCHEDULE DATES LOCATION: S'r~'r: ~u~25~00 LOCATION ID: ZIP CODE: COMPLETION: 11/15/00 GEN. LOC: FACILITY NODES FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: COUNCILMEMBER COUCH ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL USER ID: DSULLIVAN WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: BIKE LANES ON BRIMHALL CONTACT ALVIN HORN Phone 1phone 2 661-_ 3244756 / Bakersfield, CA 93301 REQUEST COMMENTS ***REFERRAL TO PUBLIC WORKS, TRAFFIC ENG. *** COUCH REQUESTS THAT STAFF CONTACT ALVIN HORN REGARDING THE NEED FOR BIKE LANES ON BRIMHALL RD. REQUEST A COPY OF RESPONSE BY 4:00, WEDNESDAY 11/15. COPY OF CORRESPONDENCE AVAILABLE AT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE FRONT COUNTER. Job Order Description: BIKE LANES ON BRIMHALL Cat~gory: PUBLIC WORKS Task: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL Assigned Department: PUBLIC WORKS START DATE __/ / COMPLETION DATE / / Sent By: CITY CLERKS OFF[CE; 661 323 3780; 0ct-16-00 16:39; Page 1/1 To: DAVID COUCH At: 3279417 ,u; u~v~u ~uu~.n r~4~ az/-9417 ~ FROM: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE ' B A K E R S F [ E L D Office-325-376'7 Fax-661323-3780 · · OF PHONE ~ ~OS~L~ MESSAGE :' CA~O ' .SEEYOU SIGNED ....... RECEIVED MEMORANDUM [' .ov, moo ~~~v4 November 14, 2000 TO: Gene Bogart, Water Resources Manhg~- FROM: Maurice Randall, Business Manager. SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL - WF0018681 CONCERNING RIVER BOTTOM This memorandum is in response to Councilmember David Couch's referral of October 25, 2000 regarding Joe Appleton's concerns about the river bottom. On Monday, November 13, 20001 contacted Joe Appleton to discuss his concerns regarding the Kern River bottom. Mr. Appleton stated that he was concerned about the amount of heavy equipment in the river bottom and level of activity near Golden State Highway. I informed Mr. Appleton that the work underway was part of the City' s ongoing river maintenance program and also there was some repair work underway to secure some exposed phone lines and correct some erosion around the northern piers to the Golden State Highway/204 Bridge. The work in that area should be completed within 45 days and is being coordinated between the City, CALTRANS, Pacific Bell and Union Pacific Railroad, Mr. Appleton stated that he was just a concerned citizen and thanked me for the information. MR:sr j '~? City of Bakersfield *REPRINT* . WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REQ/JOB: WF0018681 / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 11~13~00 REQUEST DATE: 10/25/00 CREW: TIME PRINTED: 16:20:55 SCHEDULE DATES LOCATION: S%'~': ±0~25~00 LOCATION ID: ZIP CODE: COMPLETION: 11/15/00 GEN. LOC: FACILITY NODES FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: COUNCILMEMBER COUCH ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL USER ID: DSULLIVAN WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: RIVER BOTTOM CONTACT JOE APPLETON Phone 1 661 - 5895277 ( ) Phone 2 661 - 7478951 ( ) Bakersfield, CA 93301 REQUEST COMMENTS ***REFERRAL TO G.BOGART,WATER RESOURCES MANAGER*** COUCH REQUESTS THAT STAFF CONTACT JOE APPLETON REGARDING HIS CONCERNS ABOUT THE RIVER BOTTOM. RESPOND BACK TO COUCH BY 4:00, WEDNESDAY 11/15. COPY OF CORRESPONDENCE AVAILABLE AT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE FRONT COUNTER. Job Order Description: RIVER BOTTOM Category: WATER RESOURCES DEPT Task: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL Assigned Department: WATER RESOURCES DEPT START DATE / / COMPLETION DATE / / RECEIVED MEMORANDUM , NOV I 5~ iCITY MANAGER'S TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: William C. Descary, City Treasurer DATE: November 15, 2000 SUBJECT: Monthly Investment Report This is in response to Councilmember Couch's questions concerning City investments. Question: Which of these funds is for a project/s which is scheduled 3 - 10 years out? Response: All the City's cash is pooled for investment purposes. Under the pooled concept, funds are not identified for specific projects. The City's five year Capital Improvement Budget is factored into cash flow analysis to determine the term of investments. As you know, California Government Code limits investment term to a maximum of five years unless the City Council authorizes specific investments for specific terms longer than five years. Question: Can we use the increment earned in those pools/funds over what is being-earned for something other than those projects? Response: Interest earned on pooled cash is allocated in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), which requires that the cash balance in each fund be the basis for allocating interest. GAAP requires that interest follow the principal. For example, interest earnings on the Equipment Fund cannot be allocated to the Park Improvement Fund. Similarly, Federal and State grants normally require that any interest earnings on grant money must be used on projects for which the .grant money was received. Cash can be loaned from one fund to another fund by the City Council authorizing an inter-fund loan at a market rate of interest. Question: How can we restructure this portfolio to increase cash flow? Response: The portfolio was structured under the provisions of California Government (Code) and City Investment Policy. As stated in the policy, the primary consideration in making investment decisions will be safety, liquidity, and S:\Darrin\BillXaMemo - Tandycouncilreferral Alan Tandy Page 2 yield. The policy also states that the portfolio will be administered by the prudent investor rule. Generally, the Code limits investment term to a maximum of five years and limits investment options to certain securities. In some cases there are further limitations that only a percentage of the portfolio can be invested in certain securities. The Code is intentionally restrictive. Numerous California cities have lost large amounts of taxpayer money through inappropriate investments or where short term money was invested long term to enhance yield. When liquidity was needed, the investments were sold at significant loses ($60 million) which was the case in the City of San Jose in 1983. The City of Camarillo lost a large percentage of its portfolio ($20 million) through inappropriate investments in 1986. Numerous cities joined the Orange County Pool to enhance yields. They seemed to lose sight of the risk vs reward concept. When Orange County filed for bankruptcy in 1994, many cities that were part of the pool also lost large amounts of money. Consequently, the Code has been amended to be more restrictive over the years in an attempt to prevent these loses of taxpayer money. Restructuring a portfolio to enhance yield is a challenge under the best of circumstances. Provision for some restructuring was provided in the recent revision to the City Investment Policy which extended investment term from three to five years as allowed in State Code. Additionally, restructuring was attempted several months ago when, as provided by Government Code, the City Council authorized a staff request to invest 10 percent of the portfolio or a maximum of $10 million in triple A rated federal agency securities for a term of ten years at 8 percent interest. Since this authorization, interest rates have drifted lower and the 8 percent rate has not been available. Currently, ten year agency bonds are being issued at a 7 percent coupon with various call provisions. Staff feels that in order to potentially invest money for ten years the rate should be at least 8 percent. However, five year bonds with a 7 percent coupon and various call provisions are now being issued. The call provisions of these five year bonds are being evaluated and selectively purchased. Staff will continue to be cognizant of restructuring opportunities to enhance yield within the parameters of California Government Code and City Investment Policy. cc: Gregory Klimko, Finance Director S:~Darrin\Bill\Memo - Tandycouncilreferral City oi Bakersfield ~ WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REQ/JOB: WF0018683 / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: ll~13Z00 REQUEST DATE: 10/25/00 CREW: TIME PRINTED: 11:45:29 ~ SCHEDULE DATES LOCATION: ~'rAKT: ±U~25~00 LOCATION ID: ZIP CODE: COMPLETION: 11~15/00 GEN. LOC: FACILITY NODES FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: REQ DEPT: CITY .COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: COUNCILMEMBER COUCH ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL USER ID: DSULLIVAN WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT REQUEST COMMENTS ***REFERRAL TO GREG KLIMKO. FINANCE DIRECTOR*** COUCH REQUESTS A RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: 1) WHICH OF THESE FUNDS IS FOR A PROJECT/S WHICH IS SCHEDULED 3 - 10 YEARS OUT? 2) CAN WE USE THE INCREMENT EARNED IN THOSE POOLS/ FUNDS OVER WHAT IS BEING EARNED FOR SOMETHING OTHER THAN THOSE PROJECTS? 3) HOW CAN WE RESTRUCTURE THIS PORTFOLIO TO INCREASE CASH FLOW? RESPOND BACK TO COUCH BY 4:00, WEDNESDAY 11/15. COPY OF CORRESPONDENCE AVAILABLE AT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE FRONT COUNTER. Job Order Description: MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT Cat~gory: FINANCE Task: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL Assigned Department: FINANCIAL SERVICES START DATE / / COMPLETION DATE / / FOR 0004 (2199) COUNCIL MEMBER COUCH MEMORANDUM 00 SEP 25 P~. 2:26 8AKERSF)ELD C)F¥ CLERK TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: William C. Descary, Treasurer [t~ DATE: September 22, 2000 SUBJECT: MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT Attached are Monthly Investment and Transaction Reports dated August 31, 2000. These reports are submitted to you in accordance with Government Code Sections 53607 and 53646. City Investment Pool: Exhibit A: Investment Report - Summary Exhibit A-1: Investment Report - Detail Exhibit A-2: Explanation of Terms Exhibit A-3: Transactions during the month Fire Department Relief and Pension Fund: Exhibit B: Investment Report - Detail Exhibit B-1: Explanation of Terms Exhibit B-2: Transactions during the month Attachment CC: City Manager Finance Director CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT - SUMMARY 08-31-00 PERCENT OF INVESTMENT CATEGORY AMOUNT PORTFOLIO A BANKERS ACCEPTANCE $ 5,330,539 3.975 B FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 19,998,125 14.913 B FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 17,000,000 12.678 B FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORP. 15,998,976. 11.931 B FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSN. 16,000,000 11.932 C MONEY MARKET FUNDS 24,430,281 18.219 D STATE INVESTMENT POOL (LAIF) 12,300,000 9.173 E TIME CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT 11,033,306 8.228 F U.S. TREASURY NOTES 12,003,420 8.951 TOTAL $ 134,094,647 100.000 A City Investment Policy limits maturity to 270 days and limits investment to 40% of the portfolio. B Federal agency coupon triple A rated securities are purchased at par or discount. Securities are normally held to maturity. Hence, no losses or gains are reported in the City financial statement which supports its desirable Aa3 Moody's bond rating. Agency securities represent longer term funds which enhance portfolio yield. City Investment Policy limits maturity to a maximum of five years and limits investment to 20% of the portfolio per agency at time of purchase. C Assessment district bond proceeds are invested in money market mutual funds which meet the requirements of Government Code Section 53601 (k). Money market funds efficiently meet 1986 Federal Tax Act requirements of competitive bidding and facilitate federally required annual arbitrage reporting. Arbitrage is interest earnings in excess of bond yield which must be paid to the federal government. D LAIF has daily liquidity. City Investment Policy limits LAIF to 40% of the portfolio. E City Investment Policy limits maturity to a maximum of five years and limits investment at time of purchase to 10% of the portfolio per institution and 40% of the portfolio in this category. F City Investment Policy limits maturity to a maximum of five years with no other limits. EXHIBIT A CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT - DETAIL 08-31-00 TYPE OF DATE OF MARKET INSTITUTION / ISSUER INVESTMENT MATURITY YIELD VALUE AMOUNT TOTAL STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOCAL AGENCY LAIF-A DAILY 6.505 5,500,000 5,500,000 INVESTMENT FUND LAIF-B DAILY 6.505 2,600,000 2,600,000 LAIF-C DALLY 6.505 4,200,000 4,200,000 12,300,000 FIDELITY CALIFORNIA MONEY MARKET FUND MMF DALLY 6.320 23,500,654 23,500,654 FRANKLIN GOVERNMENT MONEY MARKET FUND MMF DALLY 6.048 929,627 929,627 BANK OF AMERICA BANK OF AMERICA BKACPT 09-15-00 6.334 997,608 970,958 BANK OF AMERICA BKACPT 09-22-00 6.341 996,431 969,933 FNMA NOTE 12-14-00 5.070 995,400 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 12-15-00 5.070 995,211 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 07-05-01 5.920 993,434 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 07-17-01 6.000 993,887 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 07-20-01 6.000 993 515 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 10-26-01 5.250 983.957 1,000,000 FFCB NOTE 11-16-01 5.440 985.381 1,000,000 FHLB BOND 01-30-02 5.500 983.566 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 02-19-02 5.500 983 020 1,000,000 FFCB NOTE 02-22-02 5.450 982 592 1,000,000 FFCB NOTE 03-08-02 5.620 984 451 1,000,000 FFCB NOTE 03-08-02 5.790 986 753 998,125 FHLB BOND 04-09-02 5.480 981 265 1,000,000 FFCB NOTE 05-13-02 5.625 982 688 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 06°04-02 6.000 987,111 1,000,000 FHLB BOND 06-07-02 5.930 986,297 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 06-12-03 8.000 1,004,000 1,000,000 18,939,016 EXHIBIT A-1 1 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT - DETAIL 08-31-00 TYPE OF DATE OF MARKET INSTITUTION / ISSUER INVESTMENT MATURITY YIELD VALUE AMOUNT TOTAL UNION BANK OF CA-A UNION BANK CA BKACPT 09-01-00 6.701 1,126,778 1,106,389 FFCB BOND 09-01-00 6.125 3,000,000 3,000,000 FNMA NOTE 07-13-01 5.860 990.000 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 10-26-01 5.000 977~500 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 10-29-01 5.000 977 500 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 11-02-01 5.000 977.340 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 11-09-01 5.210 979 370 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 11-13-01 5.070 977 660 1,000,000 FHLB NOTE 11-16-01 5.500 982 340 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 12-05-0'1 7.700 1,000 000 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 01-07-02 5.550 981 250 1,000,000 FFCB NOTE 01-28-02 6.250 992 190 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 01-28-02 5.400 981 980 1,000,000 FHLB BOND 01-28-02 6.130 989 060 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 03-15-02 5.800 982 810 1,000,000 FFCB NOTE 03-26-02 5.500 981 430 1,000,000 18,106,389 ZIONS BANK FFCB NOTE 06-11-01 5.180 988,600 1,000,000 FHLMC NOTE 08-03-01 5.895 993,438 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 08-17-01 5.420 987,500 1,000,000 FHLB NOTE 08-24-01 5.800 990,625 1,000,000 FHLB DEB 10-15-01 5.330 984,375 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 10-29-01 5.040 980,625 1,000,000 FFCB NOTE 11-05-01 5.125 982,000 1,000,000 FHLB NOTE 11-23-01 5.520 985,000 1,000,000 FFCB NOTE 12-11-01 5.170 980,900 1,000,000 FFCB NOTE 12-17-01 5.100 979,800 1,000,000 FHLB NOTE 12-28-01 5.315 981,563 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 01-14-02 5.570 984,063 1,000,000 FHLB BOND 01-22-02 5.500 983,125 1,000,000 FHLB BOND 01-28-02 5.515 982,813 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 03-15-02 5.750 985,000 1,000,000 15,000,000 EXHIBIT A-1 2 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT - DETAIL 08-31-00 TYPE OF DATE OF MARKET INSTITUTION / ISSUER INVESTMENT MATURITY YIELD VALUE AMOUNT TOTAL UNION BANK OF CA- B: A.G. EDWARDS FHLB BOND 09-06-02 7.180 1,007,140 1,000,000 FHLB BOND 01-03-03 7.250 997,970 1,000,000 FHLB BOND 04-17-03 7.200 1,001,090 1,000,000 3,000,000 LPL FINANCIAL FHLB BOND 09-06-02 7.250 1,008,060 1,000,000 FHLB BOND 10-25-02 7.020 996,560 1,000,000 FHLMC BOND 05-23-03 7.500 997,810 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 06-26-03 7.250 998,910 1,000,000 4,000,000 MERRILL LYNCH U.S. TREASURY NOTE 04-30-01 5.018 991,090 999,670 U.S. TREASURY NOTE 05-31-01 5.263 991,560 997,500 U.S. TREASURY NOTE 06-30-01 5.743 9,945,300 10,006,250 12,003,420 MORGAN STANLEY FFCB BOND 10-02-00 6.250 999,530 1,000,000 FFCB BOND 10-02-00 6.600 999,840 1,000,000 FFCB BOND 11-01-00 6.340 999,220 1,000,000 FFCB BOND 12-01-00 6.850 999,530 1,000,000 FHLB BOND 09-09-02 7.200 998,750 1,000,000 5,000,000 PAINE WEBBER FIRST UNION BANK BKACPT 09-11-00 6.314 2,340,123 2,283,259 FHLB BOND 08-28-02 7.220 999,060 1,000,000 FFCB BOND 09-27-02 7.000 994,690 1,000,000 FFCB BOND 10-25-02 7.110 995,620 1,000,000 FHLMC DEB 10-28-02 7.046 997,390 998,976 FHLMC NOTE 04-07-03 .7.300 999,600 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 05-02-03 7.250 994,690 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 07-10-03 7.375 996,410 1,000,000 FNMA NOTE 07-24-03 7.300 995,470 1,000,000 10,282,235 EXHIBIT A-1 3 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT - DETAIL 08-31-00 TYPE OF DATE OF MARKET INSTITUTION / ISSUER INVESTMENT MATURITY YIELD VALUE AMOUNT TOTAL MISSION BANK TCD 02-09-01 6.350 1,000,000 1,000,000 SANWA BANK CALIF. TCD 09-18-00 5.650 1,000,000 1,000,000 TCD 12-13-00 5.500 33,306 33,306 , TCD 06-08-01 6.450 1,000,O00 1,000,000 TOD 07-12-01 6.610 1,000,000 1,000,000 3,033,306 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK TOD 12-08-00 6.000 1,000,000 1,000,000 TOD 02-02-01 6.350 1,000,000 1,000,000 TOD 02-16-01 6.350 1,000,000 1,000,000 TOD 03-02-01 6.400 1,000,000 1,000,000 TCD 03-08-01 5.350 1,000,000 1,000,000 TCD 03-16-01 5.920 1,000,000 1,000,000 TCD 05-11-01 7.010 1,000,000 1,000,000 7,000,000 TOTAL 134,094,647 ISSUER, TYPE OF INVESTMENT AND COMMENTS ARE ON THE NEXT PAGE. P:MIR MD EXHIBIT A-1 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT EXPLANATION OF TERMS 08-31-00 ISSUERS: FFCB - FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FHLB - FEDERA,L HOME LOAN BANK FHLMC - FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION FNMA - FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION TYPE OF INVESTMENT: LA, IF - LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND - FUNDS CAN BE DEPOSITED OR WITHDRAWN DAILY IN MULTIPLES OF $1,000 AND THE MINIMUM TRANSACTION AMOUNT IS $5,000. MMF - MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUND - FUNDS CAN BE DEPOSITED OR WITHDRAWN DAILY WITH NO MINIMUM TRANSACTION AMOUNTS.' USED FOR THE INVESTMENT OF BOND PROCEEDS ONLY. REPO - REPURCHASE AGREEMENT BKACPT - BANKERS ACCEPTANCE CP - COMMERCIAL PAPER DEB - DEBENTURE TCD - TIME CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT COMMENTS: MARKET VALUES ARE FROM MONTHLY STATEMENTS PROVIDED BY UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA, BANK OF AMERICA, AND ZIONS BANK. THE ABOVE INVESTMENTS ARE IN COMPLIANCE 'WITH THE CITY'S INVESTMENT POLICY. THE IMMEDIATE AVAILABILITY OF MONIES IN LAIF, INVESTMENT MATURITIES AND REVENUE WILL ALLOW THE CITY TO MEET ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS. EXHIBIT A-2 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Portfolio Management Investment Activity By Type August 1, 2000 through August 31, 2000 Beginning Stated Transaction Purchases Sales/Maturities Ending Investment # Issuer Balance Rate Date or Deposits or Withdrawals Balance Investment Funds (Monthly Summary) 1LAIF A LAIF - City 6.505 5,600,000.00 300,000.00 1LAIF B LAIF - Redevelopment 6.505 2,200,000.00 1.000,000.00 1LAIF C LAIF Public Financing Auth. 6.505 3,600,000.00 0.00 Subtotal 2,200,000.00 11,400,000.00 1,300,000.00 12,300,000.00 Acceptances 3198 Bank of America 6.600 08/21/2000 0.00 1.967,733.33 3401 Paine Webber 6.120 08/04/2000 0.00 1,372,786.46 Subtotal 8,671,059.25 0.00 3,340,519.79 5,330,539.46 Deposit - Bank 45591 Bank of the West 5.150 08/16/2000 0.00 100,000.00 Subtotal 4,133,306.00 0.00 100,000.00 4,033,306.00 Deposit - S & L 59002 Washington Mututal Bank, FA 5.550 08/30/2000 0.00 7,741.52 Subtotal 7,007,741.52 0.00 7,741.52 7,000,000.00 Acc0un~s' (M°~i-hly 62532 Fidelity Money Market Fnd 6.320 2.61 0.00 62533 Fidelity Money Markel Fnd 6.320 1,897.14 0.00 62542 Fidelity Money Market Fnd 6.320 1,172.29 0.00 62543 Fidelity Money Market Fnd 6,320 2,944.24 0.00 62552 Fidelity Money Market Fnd 6.320 3.40 0.00 62553 Fidelity Money Market Fnd 6.320 835.34 0.00 62555 Fidelity Money Market Fnd 6.320 1,231.65 0.00 62562 Fidelity Money Markel Fnd 6.320 896.36 0.00 62565 Fidelity Money Market Fnd 6.320 28,638.50 0.00 62572 Fidelity Money Market Fed 6.320 18,034.50 0.00 62582 Fidelity Money Market Fnd 6.320 4,786.89 0.00 62592 Fidelity Money Market Fnd 6.320 2,555.96 0.00 62595 Fidelity Money Mad(et Fnd 6.320 29,508.28 0.00 625992 Fidelity Money Mad(et Fnd 6.320 11,090.03 0.00 625995 Fidelity Money Mad(et Fnd 6.320 9,283.34 0.00 62761 Franklin Govt Money Mkt 6.048 459.01 0.00 62764 Franklin Govt Money MM 6.048 957.00 0.00 Portfolio CITY CP PM (PRF_PM3) SymRept V5.01 Report Var. 5.00 EXHIBIT A-3 ! CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Portfolio Management Investment Activity By Type August 1, 2000 through August 31, 2000 Beginning Stated Transaction Purchases Sales/Maturities Ending CUSIP Investment # Issuer Balance Rate Date or Deposits or Withdrawals Balance Money Market Accounts (Monthly Summary) 62765 Franklin Govt Money Mkt 6.048 991.58 0.00 62766 Franklin Govt Money Mkt 6.048 2,350.85 0.00 Subtotal 24,312,642.25 117,638.97' 0.00 24,430,281.22 Treasury Securities - Coupon ~ 7581 Merrill Lynch 6.000 08/15/2000 0.00 999,687.50 ** Subtotal 13,003,107.50 0.00 999,687.50 12,003,420.00 'Fede;~al Ag-~;~-~ is-s-ues~, co~pon- ................................................................................................................................................... Subtotal 68,997,101.00 68,997,101.00 Commercial Paper. Discount 210006 Bank of America 6.600 08/14/2000 0.00 . 1,201,907.17 21005 Bank of Amedca 6.550 08107/2000 0.00 998,726.39 21007 Bank of America 6.550 08/1812000 0.00 1,993,450.00 Subtotal 4,194,083.56 0.00 4,194,083.56 0.00 Total 132,519,041.08 1'1,517,638.97 9,942,032.37 134,094,647.68 ,t,.., Hw o~r~plele recording of matudty redemption. Portfolio CITY CP . ',='.',~.:, 1.'LS! PM (PRF_PM3) SymRept V5.0t EXHIBIT A-3 2 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF AND PENSION FUND MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT - DETAIL 08-31-00 TYPE OF DATE OF MARKET INSTITUTION ISSUER INVESTMENT MATURITY YIELD VALUE AMOUNT TOTAL STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND LAIF DAILY 6.505 222,525 222,525 CITY TRUST ACCOUNT TRUST DAILY 6.990 9,299 9,299 UNION BANK OF CA- B: MERRILL LYNCH FHLMC NOTE 09-21-00 6.070 299,859 300,000 FNMA NOTE 01-16-02 6.375 99,516 100,000 FNMA NOTE 01-24-02 6.700 99,312 100,000 FNMA NOTE 02-19-04 6.000 288,609 300,000 FNMA NOTE 03-01-04 6.000 94,422 100,000 FHLB BOND 03-15-04 6.000 193,282 200,000 FHLB BOND 06-28-04 6.805 196,782 200,000 FHLB BOND 06-30-04 6.595 293,907 300,000 FHLB BOND 08-13-04 6.293 319,261 322,804 1,922,804 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCE TCD 11-27-01 6.000 97,000 97,000 MERRILL LYNCH BANK & TRUST TCD 12-04-01 6.000 97,000 97,000 194,000 U.S. TREASURY NOTE 02-28-02 6.309 79,962 79,800 79,800 TOTAL 2,428,428 ISSUER, TYPE OF INVESTMENT AND COMMENTS ARE ON THE NEXT PAGE. EXHIBIT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF AND PENSION FUND MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT EXPLANATION OF TERMS 08-31-00 ISSUER: FFCB - FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FHLB - FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK FHLMC - FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION FNMA - FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION TYPE OF INVESTMENT: LAIF - LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND - FUNDS CAN BE DEPOSITED OR WITHDRAWN DAILY IN MULTIPLES OF $1,000 AND THE MINIMUM TRANSACTION AMOUNT IS $5,000. TCD - TIME CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT TRUST - SERVES AS DEPOSITORY ACCOUNT FOR INTEREST PAYMENTS. COMMENTS: MARKET VALUES ARE FROM UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (TRUSTEE) MONTHLY STATEMENT. THE ABOVE INVESTMENTS ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S INVESTMENT POLICY. THE IMMEDIATE AVAILABILITY OF MONIES IN LAIF, TRUST ACCOUNT, INVESTMENT MATURITIES AND INTEREST EARNINGS WILL ALLOW THE FUND TO MEET ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS. EXHIBIT B-! FDRF Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary August 31, 2000 Par Market Book % of Days to YTM 360 YTM 365 Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity Equiv. Equiv. Local Agency Inves{ment Funds 222,525.36 222,525.36 222,525.36 9.20 1 1 6.416 6.505 Certificates of Deposit - S 8, L 194,000.00 194,000.00 194,000.00 8.02 1.826 456 5.918 6.000 Treasury Securities - Coupon 80.000.00 81,224.00 79,800.00 3.30 1,826 545 6.223 6.309 Federal Agency Issues - Coupon 1,925,000.00 1,917,095.68 1,922,803.68 79.48 1,816 1,059 6.226 6.313 Total Investments and Averages 2,421,525.36 2,414,845.04 2,419,129.04 100.00% 1,651 897' 6.219 6.305 Cash Passbook/Checking 9,298.50 9,298.50 9,298.50 1 1 6.894 6.990 (nol included in yield calculations) Total Cash and Investments 2,430,823.86 2,424,143.54 2,428,427.54 1,651 897 6.219 6.305 Total Earnings August 31 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Current Year 12,849.31 25,558.53 Average Daily Balance 2,424,753.22 2,424,006.18 Effective Rate of Return 6.24% 6.21% GREGORY J KLIMKO Date FINANCE DIRECTOR Portlolio FDRF CP · ..... I', '~;' I'M (I'HI I'MI ) .~yn~l~pt V5 01 EXHIBIT B-2 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD CASH BALANCE BY FUND AUGUST 31, 2000 GENERAL FUNDS $12,652,172.90 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 1,391,550.27 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS 13,009,149.02 REDEVELOPMENT FUNDS 1,202,529.94 PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY FUNDS 1,673,515.46 ENTERPRISE FUNDS: SEWER FUNDS 29,299,280.36 REFUSE FUNDS 1,709,260.99 WATER FUNDS 6,493,769.84 OTHER ENTERPRISE FUNDS 1,104,015.75 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT FUND 13,897,482.87 SELF INSURANCE FUND 4,037,184.93 TRUST FUNDS: GENERAL TRUST FUNDS 13,171,749.40 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FUNDS 32,532,931.86 INVESTMENT POOL 819,632.96 CHECKS ISSUED AND OUTSTANDING 1,100.420.45 * POOLED CASH INVESTED $134,094.647.00 *Invested checking account "float" FUND TITLES General' Funds: General Development Services Cash Basis Reserve Special Revenue Funds: HUD - CDBG Entitlements HUD - Home Program Intermodal Surface Transportation Equity Act State Transportation (TDA) Bikeway/Pedestrian Pathway State Gas Tax - 2106 & 2107 Parkland Bond Act 1988 Traffic Safety Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Transient Occupancy Tax CapitalProject Funds: Capital Outlay Convention Center Expansion Park Improvement Transportation Development Calloway Bridge Coffee Road Overcrossing Amtrak Railway Redevelopment Agency Funds: CDDA - Debt Service CDDA - Operating CDDA - Housing Set Aside CDDA - Convention Center Expansion Public Financing Authority Funds: PFA - Debt Service PFA - Operating Enterprise Funds: Sewer Funds - Sewer Service - Plant #2 Sewer Service - Plant #3 Sewer Service -Conn Fees Refuse Collection Fund Water Funds - Agriculture Water _, Domestic Water Other Enterprises Funds - General Aviation I Offstreet Parking Page i i)f2 FUND TITLES Internal Service Funds: Equipment Management Self Insurance Trust Funds: General Trust Funds - Special Deposit Trust Police - Drug Trust Planning Habitat Trust Police FED Grant Trust Payroll Revolving Trust Assessment District Funds - A. D. 81-1 Fairview (sewer/water/storm) A. D. 82-1 Stockdale (sewer trunkline) A. D. 86-1 panorama Highlands (sewer/water/street) A. D. 86-2A Buena Vista I (sewer trunkline) A. D. 86-2B Laborde (sewer/water/streets) A. D. 86-2C Laborde (public utilities) A. D. 86-2D Laborde (sewer/water/streets) A. D. 86-5 Annexation (sewer) A. D. 87-1 So. Jenkins Road to Buena Vista Road (interceptor sewer) A. D. 87-2 Gateway Industrial Park (sewer) A. D. 87-3 Jewetta (sewer mainlines) A. D. 90-1 Jewetta (sewer trunkline) A. D. 91-1 Hosking (sewer trunkline) A. D. 93-1A Northeast (sewer trunkline) A. D. 93-1B Northeast (gasline) A. D. %-_ Stine/Harris (sewer/water/storrn/street) A. D. 93-3 California/Oak (street/utilities) A. D. 94-1 Renfro/Hughes (sewer/utilities/street) A. D. 94-2 Gosford/White (sewer/water/storm/street) A. D. 94-3 Silver Creek/Brimhall North/Seven Oaks/South Laurelglen (sewer/water/storm/street) A. D, 96-1 Brimhall II/Spring Meadows/Fairways/Campus Park (sewer/storm/streets) A. D. 96-2 Allen Road (sewer trunkline) A. D. 97-1 Spring Meadows II/Stockdale Highway Commercial (sewer/water/storm/street) A. D. 98-1 Brimhall IV/Stockdale Hwy. Commercial/Gosford Industrial (sewer/water/storm/street) Investment Pool May 18, 19(~9 (9:32AM) S:\Darrin\Bill;Nolcs - Fund Descriptions.'d, il'D MEMORANDUM RECEIVED November 8, 2000 NOV 13 2000 L':,!¥Y MANAGER'S OFF~CE TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: ~STANLEY C, GRADY, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: COUNCIL REFERRAL #WF0018525 FROM COUNClLMEMBER MAGGARD CONCERNING WORK PROGRAM FOR PLANNING IN NORTHEAST BAKERSFIELD AND THE SOUTHEAST AND PIONEER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS. Development activity in these three areas is governed by the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and Title 17 of the Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance). The northeast is experiencing renewed interest and has a general plan amendment pending for 694 acres east of Morning Drive and north of Highway 178. Sewer service was made available in 1994 and a water treatment plant will be completed in 2003 bringing water service to the area east of Morning Drive. Considerations for choosing a planning approach include the type of built environment desired, existence of any unique land features to promote or protect, and identification of issues unique to the planning area. The general plan has addressed some of these considerations through the Kern River Plan Element, the recently adopted Hillside ordinance, and the Nichols Property Specific Trails Plan (Between Rancheria Road and Alfred Harrell Highway north of 178 and south of the Kern River) which provide policies and regulations for development projects that impact unique land features in the area. The Southeast and Bakersfield and Old Town Kern Redevelopment ProJect areas were approved in June 1999 making tax increment financing available to support development activity in these areas. Redevelopment law requires the development of an implementation plan. The requirements for the implementation plan are contained in Section 33490 of the Health and Safety Code. In addition to the goals and objectives of an implementation plan, specific programs and potential projects are required to be included. Planning activity that goes beyond the general plan can be generally placed into four categories; specific plans, implementation plans, strategic plans, programs or projects. Examples of a specific plan are Riverlakes Ranch, Casa Loma and Pacificana. They take the general plan as a guide and develop policies, goals, objectives and standards that reflect a more heavily regulated development program to be applied to a project area. An implementation plan can flow from any plan document. It simply says how we are going to achieve something we said we wanted to achieve. It is usually prepared as a supplement to another planning document such as a general plan, specific plan, or redevelopment plan. It can be as simple as a listing of available options to achieve goals and objectives, or a more complex road map to accomplish individual objectives. ^ strategic plan usually has an endpoint that is known at the outset or developed through a review and evaluation of current issues. It sets direction, allocates resources and examines alternative courses of action with the purpose of focusing activity towards achieving a stated objective. An example would be a product marketing plan. ^ program planning effort is usually directed towards a single objective such as neighborhood revitalization, park development, impact mitigation, etc. This is the method to be used to address citywide, project area or neighborhood issues that can be easily defined. ^ project planning effort has a function similar to that for programs. Where they differ is the project effort is development or activity oriented, the program effort is usually policy or issue oriented. The reason for presenting these concepts is because it is not clear which approach the Council is interested in pursuing. They may be more interested in a program or project rather than producing another policy document. A work program can be prepared for either approach. The most comprehensive would be a specific plan which is attached to this memorandum. All of the other approaches would be more focused and not as involved. However, it would be premature to select the specific plan process as the preferred process for the three areas. One reason is the requirement within redevelopment law for the preparation of an implementation plan for both redevelopment project areas. While not currently due, any work done should proceed with the intent of using it to satisfy the requirements of the law. Otherwise we will be spending money later to accomplish similar tasks. The other reason is we should know what the issues are before we proceed with preparation of a plan. The process of identifying issues will provide information needed to set the course for whatever planning effort we intend to pursue. I have prepared the following attachments for review: a. Specific Plan Work Program Outline b. Preliminary Project Schedule c. Preliminary Project Cost Estimate d. Consultant Cost Estimate cc: Jack Hardisty, Development Services Director C:\MyFiles\templates\MEMO2.wpd SPECIFIC PLAN WORK PROGRAM OUTLINE TASK 1. Identify responsible departments, individuals and outside services a. Determine required consulting services b. CondUct interdepartmental and agency coordinating meetings c. Determine project funding d. Prepare project budget TASK 2. Identify and evaluate planning issues a. Incompatible land use b. Potential development projects known, anticipated or desired C. Existing public policy, standards, requiremems and restrictions on land use development d. Evaluate inventory of existing residential, retail and office commercial and industrial uses e. Physically and economically stable land uses, districts, and neighborhoods f. Key landmark development and activity centers g. Areas characterized by unique opportunity to induce change h. Significant amenities to protect, promote, or enhance i. Conditions of blight such as dilapidated or economically underutilized sites and structures j. Deficient public services k. Public participation I. City Council/Planning Commission Workshops m. Prepare summary report TASK 3. Prepare base map and planning area boundary map a. Determine the distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan. b. Determine the proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan. c. Identify the relationship of the specific plan to the general plan. TASK 4. Environmental review The California Environmental Quality Act' establishes the requirements for completing an environmental review. An initial study is prepared to determine which type of document should be prepared. Staff prepares notices, coordinates requests for proposals, consultant selection process, contract management, Page 1 of 3 SPWP distribution of documents, prepares required resolutions and receives and responds to conditions and comments from other departments, agencies and the public. a. Review existing environmental documents b. Prepare initial study and make environmental determination c. Initiate preparation of the appropriate environmental document d. Prepare public notices e. Conduct public hearings TASK 5. Formulate preliminary goals a. Review/select relevant goals from the 2010 General Plan b. Identify new goals for the planning effort c. Public participation d. City Council/Planning Commission Workshops TASK 6. Collect and analyze data a. Evaluate data from planning issues b. Evaluate relevant data on economic conditions c. Review relevant data from 2010 General Plan d. Review existing plans, reports, studies, and maps e. Prepare studies to fill gaps in available technical information f. Prepare summary report TASK 7. Revise goals and determine objectives a. Develop specific conditions to achieve goals b. Refine goals based on planning issues and data analysis c. Public participation d. City Council/Planning Commission Workshops TASK 8. Develop the standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable. a. Conduct Public participation b. City Council/Planning Commission Workshops c. 'Review and evaluate existing development standards d. Prepare summary report TASK 9. Develop a program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out the plan. a. Develop implementation actions b. Review 2010 general plan implementation measures c. Develop a monitoring program Page 2 of 3 SPWP d. Select development programs or projects to be implemented e. Public participation f. City Council/Planning Commission Workshops g. Prepare summary report TASK 10. Prepare draft plan a. Prepare staff report b. Publish public notices c. Conduct public heatings d. Prepare copies for distribution TASK 11. Prepare final plan a. Prepare staff report b. Prepare public notices c. Conduct public heatings d. Prepare copies for distribution Page 3 of 3 SPWP Preliminary Project Schedule: Specific Plan Preparation TASKissuesoutsidedepartments/individualsldentltyldentlty and services responsible evaluate planning and ~.~~~ 90 days 120 days 150 days ~~' i 300 days 330 days 360days 'Frepare Duse map and planning ~ area boundary map ..~_ Prepare environmental review ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Formulate preliminary goals ~ ~ Collect and analyze data ~ ~ F, evise goals an(~ cletermine objectives . L)evelop tr~e stanclarcls an(] criteria by which development will )roceed, and standards for the . conservation, development, and · utilization of natural resources, where applicable. Develop a program ot implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out the plan. Prepare draft plan i I ~~~ Erepare final plan Preliminary Cost Estimate: Specific Plan Preparation Principle ] Staff ] Graphics I Clerical IT°talH°ursJ I ] ] Sub C~)n~ultants Notices ] Printing Total Costs 1 Identify responsible departments, individuals and outside servi(;:~ 8 8 16 2 Identify and evaluate planning issues (b.c.d.e) 4 16 20 40 3 Prepare base map and planning area 4 4 boundary m~p .. 4 Environmental review (a,h) 4 8 15 4 4 35 5 Formulate preliminary goals (b,c,d) 4 8 4 4 20 6 Collect and analyze data (e) ........... ._16 ...... 8 4 ...4 32 . 7 Revise goals and determine objectives 4 4 8 4 20 8 ueve~op the stanoards anti criteria for development. (b,c,d) 4 8 10 4 26 9 uevelop a program ot implementation measures. (b,c,d) 4 8 10 22 10 Prepare draft plan (f,g) 4 8 10 4 4 30 .6000 11 Preparet final plan (f,g) 4 8 10 4 4 30 6000 a. Environmental Review Technical Studies 1. Traffic 2 8 10 2 22 20000 2. Air Quality 2 8 10i 2 22 10000 3. Noise 2 8 10 2 22 10000 4. Archiology/Biology 2 8 10 2 22 5000 b. Publi~ Meetings (4) 8 12 12 8 8 48 400 c. City Council Review Meetings (6) 12 12 8 32 600 d. Planning Commission Review Meetings (6) 12 12 8 18 50 600 e. Summary Reports (3) 300 f- Staff Reports (2) 200 g. Public Hearings (2) 200 h. Property Owners List & Labels 8 0 8 i. Draft EIR (see note 1) - J. Final EIR (see note 1) k. Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hours 80 160 171 32 58 501 0 0 0 0 Cost $5,920.00 $8,800.00 $7,695.00 $1,184.q0 $1,566.00 $25,165.00 $45,000.00 $2,300.00 $12,000.00 $84,465.00 Contengency ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~ 16,893.00 Total Cost ~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ 101,358.00 Notes: 1 Sub-consultant costs are base on past experience with projects that have required these type of studies. 2 If it is determined that an Environmental Impact Report is needed sub-consultant costs ,~" will increase depending on the type of planning project selected. 3 Total cost adds a 20% contengency to the cost 1 Consultant Cost Estimate' Specific Plan Preparation Project Senior I ....... ' I Word Sub Processing.. Total Hours Consultants! Total Costs Manager Planner ~Staff Planner ] Graphics .... , '~ ~ ~ I Project Orientation 8 8 16 2 Identify and evaluate planning issues (b,c,d,e) 4 16 20 40 3 Prepare base map and planning area boundary map 8 8 4 Environmental review (a,h) 4 '"~ 15 4 4 35 5 Formulate preliminary goals (b,c,d) 4 8 4 4 20 6 Collect and analyze data (el 16 8 4 4 32 7 Revise goals and determine nbjoctives 4 4 8 4 20 (b,c;d} 8 L~evelop tRe staneares an(~ criteria tor development. (b,c,d) 4 8 10 4 26 9 uevelop a program ot ~mplementat~on measures. (b,c,d) 4 8 10 22 10 Prepare draft plan (f,g) 4 8 10 4 4 30 11 Preparet final plan (f,g) 4 8 10 4 4 30 a. Environmental Review Technical Studies ... 1. Traffic 2 8 10 2 22 20000 2. Air Qua!ity 21 8 10 2 22 10000 3. Noise 2 8 10 2 22 10000 4. Archiology/Biology 2 8 10 2 22 5000 b. Public Meetings (4) 8: 8 16 c. City Council Review Meetings (6) 12 12 d. Planning Commission Review Meetings (6) 12' 18 30 e. Summary Reports (3) f. Meetings with Staff (2) g. Public Hearings (2) i. Draft EIR (see note 1) J. Final EIR (see note 1) k Other (pdnting, mileage, fax, mail) 12,000.00 Total Hours 80 124 135 28 58 425 0 Cost $7,600.00 $9,300.00 $8,775.00 $1,540.00 $2,610.00 $29,825.00 $45,000.00 86,825 Staff Cost Contengency ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 26,048 Total Cost~ ~ ~~~~ 112,873 Notes: I Sub-consultant costs are base on past experience with projects that have required these type of studies. 2 Ifitisdeterm~edthatanEnvironmenta//mpactReportisneededsub-consu/tantcosts will increase depending on the type of planning project selected. 3 Total cost includes 30% contengency for staff costs November 13, 2000 To: Alan Tandy, City Manager Honorable Mayor Price and Council Members From: Eric W. Matlock, Chief of Police Subject: Referral Response "Semi-Truck Parking" Council Member Salvaggio October 25, 2000 "Salvaggio referred an e-mail to Chief Matlock regarding safety issues and semi- trucks parking around a neighborhood located at Wible Road and Berkshire Road." Traffic personnel were assigned to monitor the area during various daylight and nighttime hours. Additionally, City Code Enforcement Officer Shane Denton surveyed the area during evening hours. No violations have been observed, however we will continue to monitor the area and provide enforcement as needed. ALZ/vrf