The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/12/2004 B A K E R S F I E. L D Mike Maggard, Chair Harold Hanson Mark Salvaggio Staff: Darnell Haynes SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMR'I'EE of the City Council - City of Bakersfield Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 4:00 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room, Suite 201 Second Floor - City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. ADOPT NOVEMBER 24, 2003 'AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. .NEW BUSINESS A. Staff report and Committee recommendation on Fiscal Year 2004-05 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Home Investment Partnerships (HOME), and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) Annual Spending Plan -Kunz B. Staff report and Committee recommendation regarding Audit Reports for fiscal year ending June 30, 2003 - Klimko · Reportable Conditions Report- Management Letter · Required Communication with Audit Committee - SAS 61 · Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) · Independent Auditors Report - Single Audit Report - Schedule of Federal Expenditures for the City of Bakersfield · Independent Auditors Report - Compliance with Contractual Requirements relative to the Bakersfield Subregional Wastewater Management Plan · Independent Auditors Report on Appropriations Limit Worksheet (GANN Limit) of the City of Bakersfield C. Discussion and Committee approval of 2004 Budget and Finance Committee meeting schedule- Haynes 5. COMMITTEE COMMENTS 6. ADJOURNMENT S:~Damell~.003Bud&FinCom~bf04Feb12agen.doc DF AFT B A K E R S F I E L D Alan Tandy ~ity Manager Harold Hanson Staff: Darnell W. Haynes Mark Salvaggio AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, November 24, 2003 · 4:00 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room - City Hall 1. ROLL CALL Called to Order at 4:10 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Mike Maggard, Chair; and Harold Hanson Absent: Councilmember MarkSalvaggio 2. ADOPT SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Adopted as submitted. 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. Review and Committee recommendation on outstanding issues regarding park development fee Public Works Director Raul Rojas provided an update. When the Budget and Finance Committee voted to recommend the Park Development Fee increase to the City Council, the following three issues were not resolved. The Committee requested staff to meet with the different parties involved and put the issues on a subsequent agenda for further consideration. a. Request from the 'North Bakersfield Recreation and Parks District (NBRPD) to have construction of required developer street improvements apply to the full street next to a park as it does in the City, instead of half the street improvements Assistant to the Public Works Director Georgina Lorenzi explained the difference between how the City and NBRPD acquire park sites. The City normally acquires DJ AFT AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, November 24, 2003 Page - 2 - park siteS through a condition of the subdivision. As a condition of development, the developer puts in the street improvements. Normally, City parks with a few exceptions are built in neighborhoods. In contrast, NBRPD normally acquires park sites by purchasing the land outright and, therefore, the park site is not' part of the subdivision. The City.pays more per acre for park sites than NBRPD because the street improvements are included. In the recent review and adoption of the increased Park Development Fees, the cost to construct the street improvements was not included because the subdivision developer constructs the street improvements. NBRPD has requested Consideration be given to leaving the component of construction of street improvements in the park development fee, because NBRPD does not have a mechanism to require the developer to construct the street improvements on both sides of the street. Staff would recommend amending the ordinance to require developers to put in the adjacent street improvements on local streets; however, this leaves an unresolved issue when the park is located next to a collector or arterial, as it is not equitable to require one developer to construct the entire improvements to a collector/arterial. There was discussion regarding making a change to the ordinance to allow NBRPD to add the cost of street improvements to the appraisal when purchasing park sites adjacent to arterials or collectors. Dav~e'~l~h-~l~N'B-RISDi"ex~'iained when NBRPD' buys the land. it depends on ~he location of the park, but NBRPD is normally dealing with a combination of developers instead of one single developer. Committee Member Hanson 'stated he would like to see some statistical information on dollar amounts with some examples, before recommending a change to the current ordinance. As NBRPD does not have any parkland purchases planned in the near future, the Committee requested staff to work with NBRPD and bring additional information back for further review. NBRPD staff in attendance were in agreement with meeting further with City staff. b. Request from the North Bakersfield Recreation and Parks District (NBRPD) to have fees waived by the City for permits and services Georgina Lorenzi explained NBRPD was requested to provide City staff with an example of City fees paid on a recent park. An example was Liberty Park. The plan check and inspection fees totaled approximately $14,000. DRAFT AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, November 24, 2003 Page - 3 - Another fee for Liberty Park as it is adjacent to an arterial, was the median fee of $20,000 and NBRPD questioned if the City pays these types of fees. The City funds its proportionate share of median island improvements when a median island is constructed. For example, the Development Services Building was charged its share of the'Chester Avenue Streetscape costs. Since the City provides the services typically charged on a permit fee, the City does not charge itself for these fees. Staff did not recommend permit fees be waived for NBRPD because of the precedent it may set for other agencies to make the same type of request. The Committee agreed with staff's recommendation and toOk no further action. (Committee Member Salvaggio absent) c, Request from the Building Industry Association to substitute open space in multi-family projects with four or less units for developer required public parkland and receive park development fee credits (This item heard first.) Planning Director Stan Grady provided background information on the ordinance, which was changed and now requires 20 percent open space in multi-family developments. This required space does not include driveways and front-yard required setbacks. Since the requirement is for more space around the buildings so the units would not look so tight and congested and no park amenities are being required, staff did not recommend-multi-family developments be able to qualify and receive park development fee credit. If a developer builds private recreational facilities, for example tennis courts, tot lots, etc., the developer could put in a request for park development fee credit, which would be considered as part of the project review. Brian Todd, BIA of Kern County, stated their request for park development fee credit was based on the newly enacted ordinance requiring .20 percent open space since fourplex units built with the additional cost of the new open space requirement may not be marketable. Mr. Todd indicated Councilmember Couch had suggested this issue could be reviewed in committee. The Committee determined that the issue of park fee credit is closely related to a park development fee credit issue being discussed in the Planning .and Development Committee. Committee Chair Maggard made a motion to request the park development fee credit for required multi-housing open space be referred to the Planning and Development Committee to provide broader review by considering both issues at the same meeting. The Committee unanimously approved (Committee Member Salvaggio absent). Staff will prepare a report to the City Council. RAFT AGENDA SUMMARY REPOFIT BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, November 24, 2003 Page - 4 - 5. NEW BUSINESS 6. COMMITTEE COMMENTS 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:50 p.m. Attendance: City Manager Alan Tandy; City Attorney Ginny Gennaro; Assistant to the City Manager Darnell Haynes; Public Works Director Raul Rojas; Development Services Director Jack Hardisty; Planning Director Stan Grady; Assistant Finance Director Nelson Smith; Assistant Recreation and Parks Director Allen Abe; Assistant to the Public Works Director Georgina Lorenzi Others: Brian Todd, BIA of Kern County; Dave McArthur and Colon Bywater, North Bakersfield Recreation and Parks District; and Maricela Solorio, KERN Radio - 1410 cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council S:\Damell\03Budget and Finance~bf03nov24summary ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT I MEETING AGENDA SECTION: ConSent Calendar DATE: January 14, 2004 ri'EM: TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council . APPROVED FROM:. Gregory J. Klimko, Finance Director DEPARTMENT HEAD,/(/~ O~ ~ DATE:. December 23, 2003 CITY ATTORNEY. ~ CITY MANAGER ~ SUBJECT: Audit Reports to be Referred to Budget and Finance Committee: 1. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. 2. Independent Auditors Report - Single Audit Report - Schedule of Federal Expenditures for the City of Bakersfield for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. 3. Independent Auditors Report - Compliance with ContraCtual Requirements relative to the Bakersfield Subregional Wastewater Management Plan for the year ended June 30, 2003. 4. Independent Auditors Report on Appropriations Limit Worksheet (GANN Limit) of the City of Bakersfield for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends referral to the Budget and Finance Committee. BACKGROUND: 1. Attached is the City's COmprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), commonly referred to as the City's Annual Audit Report, for the.fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. The CAFR represents the City's financial statements as of June 30, 2003, which are audited by the acCOunting firm of Brown, Armstrong, Paulden, McCown, Hill, Starbuck & Keeter. 2. Attached is the City's Single Audit Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. The Single Audit Report pertains to federal program monies expended by the City during the specified fiscal year. An Independent Audit is performed annually to review intemal control procedures and compliance with federal guidelines in accordance with Office of Management & Budget (OMB) Circular A-133. This annual audit was performed by Brown, Armstrong, Paulden, McCown, Hill, Starbuck & Keeter as part of their contract to provide auditing services to the City of Bakersfield. The current compliance report issued by the outside auditors indicates that the City .complied, in all material respects, with federal grogram guidelines. 3. Contract requirements contained in City of Bakersfield Agreement 76-153 as amended by Agreements 76-153(5), 76-153(4), 77-44, 85-197 and 92-106 apply to operations of the Bakersfield Subregional Wastewater management Plan. The City's compliance with contract requirements is audited on an annual basis. The current Compliance Report, issued by the outside auditors, indicates that the City complied, in all material respects, with the program's guidelines. 1 of 2 SAKimG~Forms & Lables~dmin-Cafr2003.doc January 6. 200~. 3:18PM ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 4. Attached is a letter form the City's independent auditors Brown, Armstrong, Paulden, McCown, Hill, Starbuck & Keeter indicating they have completed their annual review of the Appropriations Limit Worksheet prepared by the City in accordance with Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution (GANN Limit). This annual review is performed by the auditors as part of their contract to provide auditing services to the. City of Bakersfield. The agreed upon review procedures are substantially less in scope than an audit and therefore no audit opinion is expressed regarding the calculation. klg 2 of 2 S:~KimG\Forms & Lables~,dmin--Cafr2003.doc January 6, 2004, 3:18PM Peter C. Brown, CPA Burton H. Armstrong, CPA, MST AndrewJ. Paulden, CPA To the Honorable Mayor and Ha~,ey J. McCown, CPA Members of the City Council City of Bakersfield, California Steven R. Starbuck, CPA Aileen K. Keeter, CPA In planning and performing our audit of the basic financial statements of the City of Bakersfield, California (City) for the year ended June 30, 2003, we considered its internal C~sM. Thomburgh, CPA control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of L~ R. Krausse, CPA, MST expressing our opinion on the basic financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure. Our consideration of the internal control structure would not BradteyM'Hankins'cPA necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control structure that might be material EricH. Yin, CPA weaknesses or reportable conditions under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A material weakness is a condition in which the MetLrtda A. McDaniels, CPA design or operation of one or more of the internal control structure elements does not- Thom~sM.¥o~g,C?^ reduce to a relatively Iow level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that would .. AmandaE. Wilson, CPA be material in relation to the financial statements being audited may occur and not be.. detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their Sharon Jones, CPA, MST assigned functions. However, we noted no matters involving the internal control structure. Ros~lva Flores, CIA and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined above. DebbieA. Rapp, CPA Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention relating to deficiencies in. JulieA. Auvil, CPZ the design or operation of the internal control structure that, in our judgment, could ConnieM. Perez, CPA adversely affect the organization's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the financial statements. However, we noted no matters involving the internal control over financial reporting and its operation that we consider to be reportable conditions: This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Audit Committee, City Council, management, and other authorized regulatory agencies. However, this report is a matter of public record, and its distribution is not limited. BROWN ARMSTRONG PAULDEN · McCOWN STARBUCK & KEETER ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION By: Andr~ Bakersfield, California October 3, 2003 h\...\7934~audit03\CAFR~'eportable conditions report M~MBER of SiC Practice Section of the American Institute o[ Certi[ied Public Accountants CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA SINGLE AUDIT REPORTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2003 (With Auditor's Reports Thereon) CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA SINGLE AUDIT REPORTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Pa.qe Auditor's Report on Compliance and on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards ....................................................... 1 Auditor's Report on Compliance with Requirements Applicable to Each Major Program and Internal Control Over Compliance · in Accordance with OMB Circular A-133 ............................................................................................ 3 Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards .................................................................................... 5 Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards ...................................................................... 7 Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs ..................................................................................... 10 Peter C. Brown, CPA Burton H. Armstrongl CPA, MST AndrewJ. Paulden, CPA AUDITOR'S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE AND ON INTERNAL HarveyJ. McCown, CPA CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE Steven R. Starbuck, CPA WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS Aileen K. Keeter, CPA Chris M. Thornburgh, CPA Lynn R. Krausse, CPA, MST To the Honorable Mayor and Bradley M. Ha~vdns, CPA Members of the City Council City of Bakersfield, California Eric H. )tin, CPA gelinda A. McDaniels, CPA We have audited the financial statements of the City of Bakersfield, California, as of and ThomasM. Young, CPA for the year ended June 30, 2003, and have issued our report thereon dated October 3, Amanda E.W~on, CPA 2003. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted Sharon Jones, CPA, MST in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United Rosalva Flores, CPA States. Debbie A. Rapp, CPA Compliance JulieA. Auvil, CPA As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City of Bakersfield, Connie M. Perez, CPA California's, financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of PatriciaW. Welch, CPA its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of MatthewR. Gilligan, CPA financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those ShawnM. Canaday, CPA provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. Internal Control Ove~' Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City of Bakersfield, California's, internal control over financial reporting in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting. Our consideration of the internal control over financial reporting would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control over financial reporting that might be material weaknesses. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to a relatively Iow level the risk that misstatements in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the internal control over financial reporting and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. I 1 MEMBER of SEC Practice Section of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants This report is intended for the information of the audit committee, management and federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. BROWN ARMSTRONG PAULDEN McCOWN STARBUCK & KEETER ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION Bakersfield, California October 3, 2003 Peter C. Brownl CPA Burton H. Armstrong, CPA, MST I Andrew J. Paulden, CP^ AUDITOR'S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS HarveyJ. McCown, CPA APPLICABLE TO EACH MAJOR PROGRAM AND INTERNAL StevenR. Starbuck, CPA CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH I OMB CIRCULAR A-133 Aileen K. Keeter, CPA I ChrisM. Thornburgh, CPA To the Honorable Mayor and Lynn R. Krausse, CPA, MST Members of the City Council Bradley M. Hankins, CPA City of Bakersfield, California I Eric H. Xin, CPA Melinda A. McDaniels, CPA Compliance We have audited the compliance of the City of Bakersfield, California, with the types of I ThomasM. Young, CPA compliance requirements described in the. U. S. Office of Manaqement and Budqet AmandaE. Wilson, CPA (OMB) Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement that are applicable to each of its major Sharon Jones, CPA, MST federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2003. The City of Bakersfield's major i federal programs, are identified in the summary of auditor's results section of the RosalvaFlores, CPA accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. Compliance with the DebbieA. Rapp, CPA requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants applicable to each of its major JulieA. Auvil, CPA federal programs is the responsibility of the City of Bakersfield's management. Our I responsibility is to express an opinion on the City of Bakersfield's compliance based on Connie M. Perez, CPA our audit. Patricia W. Welch, CPA i We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally MatthewR. Gilligan, CPA accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits ShawnM. Canada)~CPA contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and OMB Circular A-133, "Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non- I Profit Orqanizations." Those standards and OMB Circular A-133 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material I effect on a major federal program occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about the City of Bakersfield, California's compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit does I not provide a legal determination on the City of Bakersfield's compliance with those requirements. i In our opinion, the City of Bakersfield, California, complied, in all material respects, with the requirements referred to above that are applicable to each of its major federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2003. I I · . 3 MEMBER of SEC Practice Section of the American Institute of Certi[ied Public Accountants Internal Control Over Compliance The management of the City of Bakersfield, California, is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants. applicable to federal programs. In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City of Bakersfield's internal control over compliance with requirements that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. Our consideration of the internal control over compliance would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control that might be material weaknesses. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to a relatively Iow level the risk that noncompliance with applicable requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants that would be material in relation to a major federal program being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. However, we noted no matters involving the internal control over compliance and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards We have audited the financial statements of The City of Bakersfield, California, as of and for the year ended June 30, 2003, and have issued our report thereon dated October 3, 2003. Our audit was performed for the purpose of forming an opinion on the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by OMB Circular A-133 and is not a required part of the general purpose financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the general purpose financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. This report is intended for the information of the audit committee, management and federal awarding agencies and Pass-through entities. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. BROWN ARMSTRONG PAULDEN McCOWN STARBUCK & KEETER ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION I Bakersfield, California October 3, 2003 I I I 4 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS JUNE 30, 2003 Federal Program Accrued Financial Disburse- Accrued CFDA or Award Revenue Assistance Other ments/ Revenue Number Amount July 1,2002 Recognized Revenue Expenditures June 30, 2003 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: Direct Program - Community Development Block Grant Entitlement 14.218 $ 6,755,385 $ 168,489 $ 3,156,313 $ 420,746 $ 3,577,059 '$ 131,078 Emergency Shelter Grant 14.231 151,338 112,259 112,259 Home Program 14.239 2,998,486 1,078,809 537,673 1,453,544 105,599 Total Department of Housing and Urban Development 9,905,209 168,489 4,347,381 958,419 5,142,862 236,677 · U.S. Department of Transportation: Passed Through California: Department of Transportation: Surface Transportation Program 20.205 41,691,282 915,811 7,449,495 7,449,495 1,258,192 Transportation Enhancement Act 20.205 212,690 230,216 18,576 18,576 2,865 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program 20.205 3,833,382 652,740 1,611,715 1,611,715 1,564,620 Highway/Bridge Replacement 20.205 121,482 18 302,355 302,355 196,629 Total Department of Transportation 45,858,836 1,798,785 9,382,141 9,382,141 3,022,306 U.S. Department of Justice: Weapons of Mass Destruction Grant 16.006 259,221 259,221 Seized Asset Funds - Federal 16.579 40,453 40,453 Metropolitan Medical Response System 16.610 - 120,000 120,000 Cops More Grant 16.710 - 130,735 130,735 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant 16.710 257,560 257,560 Overtime and Authorized Expense Program 16.207 2,875 2,875 2,875 Total Department of Justice 810,844 810,844 2,875 Total Grants $ 55,764,045 $ 1,967,274 $ 14,540,366 $ 958,419 $ 15,335,847 $ 3,261,858 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 5 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS JUNE 30, 2003 NOTE '1 - GENERAL The accompanying Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance presents the activity of all Federal Financial Assistance programs of the City of Bakersfield, California (City). As defined in Note 1 of the Notes to the City's General Purpose Financial Statements, those financial statements and the accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards presents the government and its component units, entities for which the government is considered to be financially accountable. Blended component units, although legally separate entities, are, in substance, part of the government's and data frOm these units operations so are combined with data of the primary government. Discretely presented component units, on the other hand, are reported in a separate column in the combined financial statements to emphasize that they are legally separate from the Government. Each blended and discretely presented component unit has a June 30 year end. Blended and discretely presented component units are: 1. Discretely Presented Component Unit: The Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency (the Agency) is responsible for the development and financing of projects within (1) the Southeast Bakersfield Project Area, (2) the Old Town Kern-Pioneer Project Area, and (3) the Downtown Bakersfield Project Area. The Agency is governed by a board comprised of members appointed by the City Council. The Agency is reported as a Governmental Fund Type. 2. Blended Component Unit: The Bakersfield Public Financing Authority (the Authority) is a joint exercise of powers authority formed on July 7, 1993 by and between the City of Bakersfield, California (the City), and the Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency (the Agency). The Authority was created to assist the City, the Agency and other local public agencies in financing and refinancing, through the issuance of bonds or other instruments of indebtedness, public capital improvements and working capital pursuant to the Marks- Roos Local Bond Pooling Act of 1985. The Authority is authorized to make and enter into Bond Purchase Agreements and to purchase Obligations of any Local Agency. The Authority is governed by a board consisting of the Mayor and the City Council. The Authority is reported as a Governmental Fund Type. Complete financial statements for each of the individual component units may be obtained at the City's Finance Department. Federal financial assistance received directly from Federal agencies as well as Federal financial assistance passed through other government agencies are included on the schedule. NOTE 2 - BASIS OF ACCOUNTING The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards is presented using the accrual basis of accounting, which is described in Note 1 of the Notes to the City's Basic Financial Statements. NOTE 3 - OTHER REVENUE Amounts reported as other revenue relate primarily to interest income and reimbursements for the year ended June 30, 2003. NOTE 4 - RELATIONSHIP TO FEDERAL FINANCIAL REPORTS Amounts reported in the accompanying schedule agree with the amounts reported in the related periodic Federal financial reports. NOTE 5 - RECONCILIATION TO GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The following is a reconciliation of the amounts listed in the Schedule of Financial Assistance to the City's general purpose financial statements: Federal Grantor/Program Title U.S. Department of Housing and Urban U.S. Department Development of Transportation U.S. Department of Justice Weapon of Metropolitan Overtime and Community Intermodal Surface Mass Medical Local Law Authorized Development Transportation and Destruction Seized Response Cops More01 Enforcement Expense Block Grant Efficiency Act Grant Assets System Grant Grant Block Grant Program Federal Financial Assistance Recognized $ 4,347,381 $ 9,382,142 $ 259,221 $ 40,453 $ 120,000 $ 130,735 $ 257,560 $ 2,875 Other 958,419 - Total $ 5,305,800 $ 9,382,142 $ 259,221 $ 40,453 $ 120,000 $ 130,735 $ 257,560 $ 2,875 Reimbursable Disbursement/Expenditure $ 5,142,862 $ 9,382,142 $ 259,221 $ 40,453 $ 120,000 $ 130,735 $ 257,560 $ 2,875 Total Disbursement/Expenditure $ 5,142,862 $ 9,382,142 $ 259,221 $ 40,453 $ 120,000 $ 130,735 $ 257,560 $ 2,875 Accrued Revenue June 30, 2003 $ 236,677 $ 3,022,307 $ $ $ $ $ - $ 2,875 Due from Federal Government $ 236,677 $ 3,022,307 $ $ $ $ $ - $ 2,875 NOTE 5 - RECONCILIATION TO GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) The following is a reconciliation of the variances between Expenditures and Financial Assistance recognized: Federal Grantor/Program Title U.S. Department of Housing and Urban U.S. Department Development of Transportation U.S. Department of Justice Weapon of Metropolitan Overtime and Community Intermodal Surface Mass Medical Local Law Authorized Development Transportation and Destruction Seized Response Cops More01 Enforcement Expense Block Grant Efficiency Act Grant Assets System Grant Grant Block Grant Program Federal Financial Assistance Recognized $ 4,347,381 $ 9,382,141 $ 259,221 $ 40,453 $ 120,000 $ 130,735 $ 257,560 $ 2,875 Other 958,419 Total $ 5,305,800 $ 9,382,141 $ 259,221 $ 40,453 $ 120,000 $ 130,735 $ 257,560 $ 2,875 TOtal Disbursement/Expenditure $ 5,142,862 $ 9,382,141 $ 259,221 $ 40,453 $ 120,000 $ 130,735 $ 257,560 $ 2,875 Variance of Revenues Recognized Overl(Under) Expenditures $ 162,938 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Surplus of Program Income to Carry Forward $ (162,938) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Total $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD' CALIFORNIA SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS JUNE 30, 2003 I 1. Summary of Audit Results 1. The auditor's report expresses an unqualified opinion on the general purpose financial statements of the City of Bakersfield, California. 2. No reportable conditions were disclosed during the audit of the financial statements. 3. No instances of non-compliance material to the financial statements of the City of Bakersfield, California were disclosed during the audit. 4. No reportable conditions were disclosed during the audit of the major federal award programs. 5. The auditor's report on compliance for the major federal award programs for the City of Bakersfield, California expresses an unqualified opinion on all major federal programs. 6. The audit disclosed no findings relative to the major federal awards programs. 7. The programs tested as major programs included: (1) U.S. Department of Transportation Highway Planning and Construction Grant (CFDA Number 20.205), (2) Department of Justice Weapons. of Mass Destruction Grant (CFDA Number 16.006). 8. The threshold for distinguishing Types A and B programs was $460,075. 9. The City of Bakersfield, California was determined to be a Iow-risk auditee. I 2. Findin.qs Relating to Financial Statements Required Under GAGAS. None. I 3. Findings and Questioned Costs - Maior Federal Award Proqrams Audit i None. 10 Peter C. Brown, CPA Burton H. Armstrong, CPA, MST To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Andrew J. Paulden, CPA City of Bakersfield, California Harvey J. McCown, CPA Steven R. Starbuck, CPA We have applied the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations AileenK. Keeter, CPA Limit Worksheet Six of the City of Bakersfield, California, (the City) for the year ended June 30, 2003. These procedures, which were agreed to by the League of California Cities and presented in their Article XIIIB Appropriations Limitation Uniform Guidelines, Chris M. Thornburgh, CPA were performed solely to assist you in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article L~mR. Erausse, CPA, MST XlllB of the California Constitution. This report is intended for the information of Bradley M. Ha~k~s, CPA management and the City Council. This restriction is not intended to limit the distribution of this report, which is a matter of public record. Eric H. Xin, CPA Me~daA. McDardels, CPA The procedures performed and our findings were as follows: ~omasM. Young, CPA 1. We obtained the City's completed worksheets required to determine that the Amanda E. Wilson, CPA correct annual adjustment factors were adopted by resolution of the City Council. Sharon Jones, CPA, MST 2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet Six, we added line A, last RosalvaFlores, CPA year's limit, to line E, total adjustments, and agreed the resulting amount to line F, DebbieA. Rapp, CPA this year's limit. JulieA. Auvil, CPA 3. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying ConnieM. Perez, CPA Appropriations Limit Worksheet Six to the other worksheets described in t11 above. 4. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet Six to the prior year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council during the prior year. These agreed-upon procedures are substantially less in scope than an audit, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion on the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet Six. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Based on the application of the procedures referred to above, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet six was not computed in accordance with Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. Had we performed, additional procedures or had we made an audit of the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet six and the other completed worksheets described in 1. above, matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. BROWN ARMSTRONG PAULDEN McCOWN STARBUCK & KEETER ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION Bakersfield, California September 18, 2003 gEABER of SEC Practice Section oS the American Institute of Certi[ied Public Accountants CITY OF BAKERSFIELD APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT - WORKSHEET SiX FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2003 A. Lastyear's limit $ 159,150,723 B. Adjustment factors: 1. Population % 103.13% 2. Inflation % 98.73% Total adjustment % 1.82025% C. Annual adjustment 2,896,940 D. Other adjustments Booking fees 878,650 Property tax administration fees 511,700 E. Total adjustments 4,287,290 F. This years limit $ 163,438,013 Peter C. Brown, CPA Burton H. Armstrong, CPA, gSt To the Technical Advisory Committee Andrew J. Paulden, CPA of the Bakersfield Subregional Wastewater HarveyJ. McCown, CPA Management Plan, the City of Bakersfield, California, the Kern Sanitation Authority, StevenR. Starbuck, CPA and the East Niles Community Services District Aileen K. Keeter, CIA We have applied the procedures enumerated below to determine the City of Bakersfield's ChrisM. Thornburgh, CPA compliance with certain provisions of contractual requirements as specified in City of Bakersfield Agreement 76-153, as amended by Agreements 76-153(6), 76-153(5), 76- Ly~n R. Krausse, CPA, MST 153(4), 77-44, 85-197, and 92-106, regarding the Bakersfield Subregional Wastewater BradleyM. Hankins, CPA Management Plan. These procedures, which were agreed to by the Technical Advisory EricH. X~,,Ci~A Committee, were performed solely to assist you in meeting the requirements of City of Bakersfield Agreement 76-153, as amended by Agreements 76-153(6), 76-153(5), 76- MelindaA. McDaniels, CPA 153(4), 77-44, 85-197, and 92-106. This report is intended for the information of the thomasM. Young, CPA Technical Advisory Committee of the Bakersfield Subregional Wastewater Management Plan, management, appropriate regulatory agencies, and the City Council of the City of AmandaE. Wilson, CPA Bakersfield, California. This restriction is not intended to limit the distribution of this report, Sharon Jones, CPA, MST which is a matter of public record. Rosalva Flores, CPA We reviewed and.tested the City of Bakersfield's compliance with certain provisions of DebbieA. Rapp, CPA contractual requirements as specified in City of Bakersfield Agreement 76-153, as amended JulieA. Auvil, C?A by Agreements 76-153(6), 76-153(5), 76-153(4), 77-44, 85-197, and 92-106. These Connie M. Perez, CPA procedures resulted in no current year findings. These agreed-upon procedures are substantially less in scope than an audit, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion on the City of Bakersfield's compliance with certain provisions of contractual requirements as specified in City of Bakersfield Agreement 76- 153, as amended by Agreements 76-153(6), 76-153(5), 76-153(4), 77-44, 85-197, and 92- 106. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Based on the application of the procedures referred to above, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the City of Bakersfield had not complied with certain provisions of contractual requirements as specified in City of Bakersfield Agreement 76- 153, as amended by Agreements 76-153(6), 76-153(5), 76-153(4), 77-44, 85-197, and 92- 106. Had we performed additional procedures or had we made an audit of the City of Bakersfield's compliance with certain provisions of contractual requirements as specified in City of Bakersfield Agreement 76-153, as amended by Agreements 76-153(6), 76-153(5), 76-153(4), 77-44, 85-197, and 92-106, matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. BROWN ARMSTRONG PAULDEN McCOWN STARBUCK & KEETER ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION Bakersfield, California September 17, 2003 /~[J~BER of SEC Practice Section o[ the American Institute o[ Certi[ied Public Accountants Peter C. Brown, CPA Burton H. Armstrong, CPA, MST Andrew J. Paulden, CPA REQUIRED COMMUNICATION WITH AUDIT COMMITTEES HarveyJ. McCown, CPA IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATEMENT ON AUDITING Steven R. Starbuck, CPA STANDARDS NUMBER 61 Aileen K. Keeter, CPA Chris M. Thomburgh, CPA Lynn R. Krausse, CPA, MST Bradley M. Hankins, CPA To the Budget and Finance Committee Edc H. 2, cP^ City of Bakersfield, California Melinda A. McDaniets, CPA ThomasM. Young, CPA We have audited the basic financial statements of the City of Bakersfield for the year ended June 30, 2003, and have issued our report thereon dated October 3, 2003. Amanda E. Wilson, CPA Professional standards require that we provide you with the following information related Sharon Jones, CPA, MST to our audit. Rosalva Flores, CPA Our Responsibility under Generally Accepted Auditin.q Standard~ DebbieA. Rapp, CPA As stated in our engagement letter, our responsibility, as described by professional JulieA. Auvil, CPA standards, is to plan and perform our audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, ConnieM. Perez, CPA assurance that the basic financial statements are free of material misstatement and are · fairly presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Because of PatriciaW. Welch, CPA the concept of reasonable assurance and because we did not perform a detailed Matthew R.C;~§an, CPA examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material errors, fraud, or other illegal acts may exist and not be detected by us. Shawn M. Canaday, CPA As part of our audit, we considered the internal control of the City of Bakersfield. Such considerations were solely for the purpose of determining our audit procedures and not to provide any assurance concerning such internal control. Si.qnificant Accountinq Policies Management has the responsibility for selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. In accordance with the terms of our engagement letter, we will advise management about the appropriateness of accounting policies and their application. The significant accounting policies used by the City of Bakersfield are described in Note 1 to the basic financial statements. There are no new accounting policies were adopted during the fiscal year 2003-2003. We noted no transactions entered into by the City of Bakersfield during the year that were both significant and unusual, and of which, under professional standards, we are required to inform you, or transactions for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. SEC Practice Section o[ the American Institute o[ Certified Public Accounfams Accountinq Estimates Accounting estimates are an integral part of the general purpose financial statements prepared by management and are based on management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the basic financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. There were no sensitive estimates, except for accrued claims and judgments payable in the self insurance internal service fund, affecting the financial statements. Si.qnificant Audit Adjustments For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a significant audit adjustment as a proposed correction of the basic financial statements that, in our judgment, may not have been detected except through our auditing procedures. These adjustments may include those proposed by us but not recorded by the City of Bakersfield that could potentially cause future financial statements to be materially misstated, even though we have concluded that such adjustments are not material to the current financial statements. We proposed no audit adjustments that could, in our judgment, either individually or in the aggregate, have a significant effect on the City of Bakersfield's financial reporting process. Disa.qreements with Mana.qement For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, concerning a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter that could be significant to the general purpose financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit. Consultations with Other Independent Accountant~ In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the governmental unit's general purpose financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor's opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants. Issues Discussed Prior to Retention of Independent Auditor.-. We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City of Bakersfield's auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition for our retention. Difficulties Encountered in Performinq the Audit We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing our audit. This information is intended solely for the use of the City of Bakersfield and management of the City of Bakersfield and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. BROWN ARMSTRONG PAULDEN McCOWN STARBUCK & KEETER ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION Bakersfield, California October 3, 2003 I:\DATA\Word\7934Xaudit03~PSR~SAS61 .doc From: "Michele Ritchie" <michele@mikemaggard.com> To: "Jean Parks" <Jparks @ ci.bakersfield.ca, us> Date: 2/2/2004 4:17:56 PM Subject: Re: Proposed Budget and Finance Committee Calendar thank you ..... Original Message ..... From: "Jean Parks" <Jparks @ ci.bakersfield.ca.us> To: <michele@ m ikemaggard.com> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 1:34 PM Subject: Proposed Budget and Finance Committee Calendar > Attached is a draft Budget and Finance Committee calendar. I circled > the Monday's that are available that do not have another committee or > Redevelopment Agency scheduled. Budget and Finance Committee meetings > do not need to be on Mondays if Mike prefers another day. For Mark > Salvaggio's convenience as he teaches school, the meetings need to be at > 4:00 p.m. or later. Thanks so much for your help. From: George Gonzales To: Jean Parks Date: 2/26/2004 1:02:58 PM Subject: Fwd: CDBG Funding Plan FY 04-05 Here is the final break down of the CDBG action Plan >>> Rhonda Barnhard 2/17/2004 11:32:57 AM >>> See attached as recommended by the Budget & Finance Committee. :~ :~ ~ ,,, , ~ ~ .... ~ ~ .... ~ ~ ,~,~ :~ ~? ....... ,~ ~,~ ~ ............................ CDBG Entitlement for FY 2004-05 - PROPOSED $3,933,000 Program Income Projected for 04-05 $50,000 TOTAL RESOURCES $3,983,000 20% Admin. Cap (not to exceed) $796,600 Long term obligations: Debt Svc. Public Fac.- P & I on $4.1 m $324,997 Debt Svc. Public Fac.- P & I on $800,000 $61,413 TOTAL LONG TERM OBLIGATIONS $386,410 Public Svcs. (not to exceed 15% of ent,& 15% p~ P1=$612,450) Graffiti Removal - City Program/50% Pub. Svcs. 40,000 Bakersfield Senior Center - Admin. Contribution 50,000 S.E. Police Sub-Station 227,000 Fire Protection Se~ices 252,000 Summer Recreation Programs Lowell~ayside 33,000 Sub-total $602,000 Public Facilities: Capacity Building~echnical Assistance 43,500 Sub-total $43,500 Housing and Slum and Blight Activities Graffiti Removal - Private Structures 60,000 Home Access 55,000 Se~ice Delivery for Housing Programs 85,000 Acquisition/Demolition - ED Activities 47,990 Sub-total $247,990 Subtotal Administration, Debt and Programs $2,076,500 Note: Requests for Capital Improvement Projects include project cost and direct deliver: Capital Improvement Projects (Proposed) Public Works/EDCD Downtown Street Improvements - 19th & Eye 135,000 10,000 5,000 Street Reconstruction in HUD Eligible Areas 263,500 0 0 Fire Depa~ment Southeast Bakersfield - Fire Station ¢5-Acq. & Design 250,000 10,000 5,000 Rec & Parks Jefferson Park Pool- Rehab. 1,200,000 20,000 8,000 S:CDBGBudgetProposedUseFY0405 BAKERSFIELD Economic and Community Development Department MEMORANDUM January 29, 2004 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager Donna L. Kunz, Economic Development Director FROM: George Gonzales,~munity Development Coordinator SUBJECT: Intra City Proposals Received for FY 2004/05 CDBG Assistance The deadline for submission of proposals for FY 2004/05 was October 31, 2003. We received 19 proposals totaling about $7.1 million. Below are project descriptions, location, and cost estimates. Projects are listed in order of priority as determined by submitting department. Project Description I Department Ward IEligibility Ranking FIRE STATION IMPROVEMENTS Fire Station #5- New Construction Project - Phase II Fire Priority 1 Acquisition, design, construction of a fire station located at Ward 1 Yes Union Avenue and White Lane. Phase I preliminary acquisition and design is funded in FY 03/04. Estimated total cost is $2.5 million. Estimated cost for Phase II is $820,000. STREET IMPROVEMENTS CDBG Funded Pavement Rehabilitation Pro.qram Public Works Priority 1 The reconstruction & rehabilitation of streets within CDBG Ward 1 $1,020,000 Yes eligible target areas. Wards 1, 2, & 7. Estimated cost Ward 2 $960,000 $2,411,000. Ward 7 $430,000 "P" Street Sewer Improvement Project Public Works Priority 2 Install sewer main & laterals for residential properties on "P" Ward 1 Yes Street between 1st and 3rd streets. Estimated cost $211,000. Chester Avenue Median Improvement Project Public Works Priority 3 Install median improvements on Chester Avenue between Ward 1 Yes Brundage Lane and California Avenue; including landscaping, lighting, and other improvements. Estimated cost $798,800. 19th and Eye Street Streetscape Project EDCD Priority 1 Install street improvements, landscaping, street furniture on 19th Ward 2 Yes Street from "H" and Eye streets and Eye Street from 18th to 19t' streets. Design completed FY 03/04 for $135,000. Estimated cost $135,000. I S:\GEORGE~CIP funding request 0405.doc · Project Description · Department Eligibility ' Ward '.Ranking Baker Street stre etscape Improvements - Phase III EDcD Priority 2 Install street improvements, landscape, and street furniture on Ward 2 Yes Baker Street between railroad right-of-way and East Truxtun Avenue. Phase I completed FY 03/04. Phase II design completed FY 03/04. Estimated cost $250,000. Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard Streetscape Improvement EDCD Priority 3 - Phase II Ward 1 Yes Install street improvements, landscaping and street furniture on MLK Blvd. between Virginia Avenue and Texas Street. Phase I completed FY 02/03. Estimated cost $95,000. Mill Creek Improvement Project EDCD Priority 4 Install hardscape & landscape improvements along the Kern Ward 2 Yes Island canal between California & Golden State avenues. Total cost of multi-phase project is $10 million. $3 million application submitted to State. Estimated CDBG request $250,000. RECREATION AND PARKS Jefferson Park Pool Rehabilitation Project Phase II Ward 2 Priority 1 Rehabilitation of neighborhood pool at 801 Bernard Street. Yes Phase I total funded $1,136,285. Estimated Phase II cost $620,O00. Jefferson Park Playground Retro-fit Improvements Ward 2 Priority 1 Remove and replace existing playground equipment and ADA Yes rubberized surfacing at neighborhood park located at 801 Bernard Street. Estimated cost is $202,000. Jefferson Park Wet Play Area Project Ward 2 Priority 2 Construction of an interactive wet play area at a neighborhood Yes park located at 801 Bernard Street. Estimated cost is $300,000. Dr. Martin Luther King~ Jr. Park Wet Play Area Project Ward 1 Priority 3 Construction of an interactive wet play area at a neighborhood Yes park located at 1000 South Owens Street. Estimated cost is $197,000. Wayside Park Wet Play Area Project Ward 1 Priority 4 Construction of an interactive wet play area at a neighborhood Yes park located at El Toro Street and Ming Avenue. Estimated Cost is $258,000. Pool Improvements - Beale~ Planzr and Wayside Parks Wards 1,2, & 3 Priority 5 Rehabilitation of neighborhood park pools including plumbing, Yes decking, automated chemical systems to bring pools to current health and safety standards. Estimated cost is $186,000. Park Restroom Reconstruction - Lowell~ Dr. Martin Luther Ward 1 Priority 6 King~ Jr.r and Wayside Parks. Rehabilitation of existing park Yes restrooms for ADA accessibility, and to meet health and safety standards. Estimated cost is $162,000. Park Basketball Court Resurfacing Project- Wayside~ Planz Wards 1, 2, & 7 Priority 7 and Jefferson Parks Yes Basketball court resurfacing. Estimated cost is $48,000. Park Basketball Court Resurfacing Project- Lowell and Dr. Ward 1 Priority 8 Martin Luther~ Kinq, Jr. Parks Basketball court resurfacing. Yes Estimated cost is $31,800. S:\GEORGE\CIP funding request 0405.doc Project Description Department Eligibility · ' - * 'Ward Ranking Picnic Site Improvements - Lowell and Dr. Martin Luther Ward 1 Priority 9 King, Jr. Parks Yes New construction of permanent picnic site structures and improvements. Estimated cost is $31,800. PUBLIC SERVICES Graffiti Removal City-wide Priority 1 Removal of graffiti within various Iow-income areas including Public Works Yes education and outreach. Estimated cost is $172,300. S:\GEORGE~CIP funding request 0405.doc BAKERSFIELD Economic and Community Development Department MEMORANDUM 'January 30, 2004 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager .~/Donna Kunz, Economic Development Director FROM: George Gonzale~c'~mmunity Development Coordinator SUBJECT: Non-Profit Applications submitted for FY 2004105 Funding. The deadline for the submission of CDBG, HOME, and ESG applications for FY 2004~05 funding was October 31,2003. This year fourteen (14) applications were submitted from ' non-profit and public entities .totaling over $3.4 million. To date HUD has only provided estimates of FY 04/05 CDBG, HOME, and ESG allocations. Next years estimated allocations are less thah' last year's with CDBG at $3,933,000 (-$70,000), HOME Investment Partnership Program at $1,775,000 (-$11,088) and Emergency Shelter Grant (+$39,000) at $146,000. As part of the HOME Program, next year HUD will be funding another home purchasing program for first-time home buyers called "American Dream" which will provide downpayment assistance for qualified families. The American Dream Program allocation for the City is apprOximately $146,326. The following table summarizes the applications received by this department for FY 2004/05 CDBG, HOME, and. ESG. Applicant Estimated Cost Description & Location City Funds Requested HUD Proposal Name Other Sources Eligible Kern Manufacturing Working capital, equipment, $470,207 Total Cost No Association etc., for a proposed charter high school offering vocation Kern Career Technical education at a 40,000 sq.ft. $235,582 City Training Center commercial building located $ 84,625 donation at 1621 Columbus Street. $150,000 State of California Page 1 of 3 S:~GEORGE~2004-05 funding request.doc Applicant Estimated Cost Description & Location City Funds Requested HUD Proposal Name Other Sources Eligible Ward 3 Has not applied to the County. Bakersfield Rescue Acquisition of two parcels $1,240,000 Total Cost Yes Mission tOtaling 18,730 sq.ft, located at 809 Sumner Street for the Crisis Center for Drug construction of a 9,500 sq.ft., $ 623,000 City and Alcohol Abuse 36-bed non-medical detox $ 616,500 County center to service the homeless population. Has applied to County. Ward 2 Bakersfield Police Construction of a 4,50 sq.ft. $ 264,000 Total Cost Yes Activities League day room to house youth services at the Police Safe Haven Youth Activities facility located at $ 135,500 City Center 301 East 4th Street $ 128,500 County Ward 1 Has applied to County Clinica Sierra Vista Acquisition of two parcels $ 357,000 Total Cost Yes (CSV) totaling 3.3 acres located at Phase 1 101 Brundage Lane for the California Avenue construction of a 9.500 sq.ft. Community Health health care facility to serve $ 307,000 City Center Iow-income clients. $ 50,000 CSV Ward 1 Phase 2 & 3 = $1,675,000 CSV Has not applied to County. Community Action Demolition of an existing $ 167,132 Total Cost Phase 1 Yes Partnership of Kern 3,000 sq.ft, community center building and the rental Friendship House of two modular (1,344 sq.ft.) $ 167,132 City Community Center units during the construction Reconstruction Project. period located at 2424 Phase 2 - Cottonwood Road. Has not applied to County. Ward 1 Neighborhood Construction of 40-2 $7,893,912 Total Cost Yes Empowerment and 'bedroom and 20-1 bedroom Economic Development senior housing. $ 388,000 City West Palms Villa Senior Ward 3 $6,529,289 State Housing $ 651,623 developer $ 325,000 AHP Valley Achievement Acquisition of a 4 bedroom $ 193,750 Total Cost No Center single family unit to house a group home for individuals The Carina Care Home with autism. $ 119,250 City $ 77,500 applicant Ward to be determined Page 2 of 3 S:\GEORGE~2004-05 funding request.doc Applicant Estimated Cost Description & Location City Funds Requested HUD Proposal Name Other Sources Eligible Mildred L. Moore Construction of a four-plex $ 318,000 Total Cost Yes and the rehabilitation of an Moore Residential existing single-family Housing Units dwelling located at 2212 "N" $ 291,000 City Street and 602 East 3rd. $ 72,000 loan $ 30,000 applicant Wards 1 & 2 Habitat for Humanity- Lot acquisition and fee cost $ 692,000 Total Cost Yes Golden Empire for new construction of 10 ~single-family dwellings in' · ~ Habitat for Humanity Iow-income neighborhoods. $ 225,000 City Homes $ 472,000 applicant Ward to be determined Kern Affordable Rehabilitation of an existing $ 315,578 Total Cost Yes Housing, Inc. 16-unit affordable multifamily apartment complex located Park Real Rehabilitation at 414 Real Road. $ 320,578 City Project Ward 1 Kern Affordable Rehabilitation of an existing $ 342,825 Total Cost Yes Housing, Inc. 20-unit affordable multifamily apartment complex located Villa San Dimas at 601 36th Street. $ 347,825 City Rehabilitation Project. Ward 3 Alliance Against Family Fund the operating cost of $1.38 million annual operating Yes Violence and Sexual the Battered Women's budget Assault Shelter including utilities, insurance, maintenance and Battered Women's wages for a counselor. $ 15,000 City Shelter City Wide Bethany Services, Inc. Continue to fund operational $1.16 million annual operating Yes cost of the Bakersfield budget Bakersfield Homeless Homeless Center including Center cost of security maintenance and utilities at 1600 E. $ 75,000 City Truxtun Aveune. City wide Bakersfield Rescue Continue to fund operational $1.53 million annual operating Yes Mission cost of the Bakersfield budget Rescue Mission including Homeless Intervention maintenance, utilities, and Services personnel. $ 65,300 City City Wide Page 3 of 3 S:~GEORGE~2004-05 funding request.doc BAKERSFIELD Economic and Community Development Department M E M'O RAND U M February 6, 2004 TO: Alan TandY, City Manager FROM: · Donna L. Kunz,[~cono Iopment. Director ' ' SUBJECT: City CounCil qu~stions~/" Concerning spray parks using CDBG funds for Police and Fire Services, Street Reconstruction 'and other Public Service Activities currently charged in the General Fund Budget amendments discussed in connection with the closures of Wayside and Planz Pools. Funding for a wet play area at Wayside Park ($300,000 including $50,000 to demolish the pool) has been proposed. At the Council meeting, Councilmembers Salvaggio and Carson also discussed the possibility of finding money for such a wet play area at Planz Park ($250,000 - no demolition). In addition, the Recreation and Parks Department has designed a mobile recreation program that will provide summer recreation activities at Lowell and Wayside Parks and provide transportation to other parks to access swimming for a cost of approximately $33,000. This new program is eligible under CDBG guidelines as a public service. Finally, the possible transfer of $100,000 from the Southeast Business Loan program to Street Resurfacing in Iow income neighborhoods was discussed with Councilmember Carson. Funds can be identified from the following sources: · $300,000 for Wayside spray park (Transfer the proposed funding for a spray park at Martin Luther King, Jr. Park.) · $33,000 recreation program (Transfer from the Lowell Park Trailers project.) · $100,000 street resurfacing (Transfer from Southeast Business Loans, which would be reduced from $377,000 to $277,000.) ' · $250,000 Planz Park spray park (Transfer the balance of the Lowell Park Trailers project- $93,000, and $157,000 from the Southeast Business Loan Program, which would reduce the total to $120,000.) Can we use CDBG funds to pay for Fire personnel, specifically to fund a squad at Station #5? We have received a positive response from HUD that CDBG funds may be used to fund Fire personnel provided all qualifying criteria are met. These criteria require; (1) that the services must be a new or expanded program (not just replacing a funding source for a current activity), (2) serve a qualified Iow and moderate income neighborhood and (3) be classified under the Public Service activity subject to a 15% cap rule. By nature of the location of Station #5, it currently serves Iow to moderate income neighborhoods. There is a special emergency rule that currently exists in the "regulations in which HUD can examine facts presented by a city that support that an emergency has occurred out of their control which has caused a city to have to reduce these services in eligible areas. Usually this kind of emergency situation is interpreted to mean disasters such as floods, or other emergencies. However, staff is posing the question to HUD in writing considering the emergency nature of the city budget as a result of the State's fiscal crisis to determine the eligibility of charging existing fire personnel salaries to CDBG funding resources. Since this is an unusual request to HUD, we have no idea how long it will take to obtain their written approval, but estimate it could take as much as 60-90 days. Given the lengthy time that will be required to determine the answer and if a positive response is received, staff would then need to. publish and conduct a public hearing to amend our current Action Plan. This amendment process typically takes between 30-45 days. What this means is that we may not hear in time from HUD to be able to process the required amendment and other paperwork for this fiscal year's budget. If an answer comes quickly from HUD, our staff will immediately alert the City Council. The result of the inquiry could be pertinent to considering fire services for next fiscal year. Can we use CDBG funds for Police Officers? HUD specifically identifies Police Officers for crime prevention services when they are serving in Iow and moderate income neighborhoods as an eligible CDBG expense. We are currently funding a SE substation in an amount of $85,000. Police services also fall under the Public Services category and are subject to the 15% cap. How do we determine how much we can charge to the Public Service category? To calculate the amount that may be spent on eligible public services programs, HUD allows us to calculate 15% of our annual entitlement and 15% of the prior year program income and establish this amount as the "cap" that may expended for this category. The calculation determined for next fiscal year's "cap" is $612,450. We propose to charge the following programs to the Public Services categOry for FY04/05: Fair Housing- mandated by HUD (City wide program) $ 90,000 ' Graffiti Removal Program 50,000 Recreation Program 33,000 Bakersfield Senior Center Operations 50,000 S.E. Police Substation 85,000 Total $ 308,000 This leaves approximately $304,450 that may be charged next fiscal year (FY 04/05) to this category without exceeding the allowed 15% "cap". Again, any Police or Fire salaries, if allowed by HUD, must fall within the cap. If City Council wishes to fund public safety personnel, and if it is approved by HUD, the recommended source would be the allocation from Fire Station #5. S:~ALAN~CDBG questions 020504.doc Page 2 Do we have current year CDBG funds available in our budget to consider funding additional Public Safety activities for this year? Given the timeframes to obtain HUD approval, agendize and publish, there would be very little time left in this fiscal year, if any. Comments on a spray park at Planz Park for this summer season Staff has reviewed the demographics and service area of Planz Park and deemed that it is eligible to utilize CDBG funds for park improvements and programs. It is not located within a redevelopment project area and is ineligible for RDA funds. Recreation and Parks indicated that a spray park for Planz Park would cost approximately $250,000. Reprogramming any of these funds will require an Action Plan amendment with a 30 day notice and publication timeframe. Funding for this, should the City Council decide to proceed, would be from two sources; the balance in the Lowell Park Trailer account of $93,000 and a transfer of $157,000 from the Southeast Business Loan Program. By taking some of the funds away, the full project is likely to take three years rather than two. Public Safety / Street Reconstruction Alternates The $100,000 for street reconstruction identified above unfortunately pays for very little in the form of street work. As an alternate, the City Council might consider phasing Fire Station #5 over three years rather than two.. The actual amount needed in FY 04/05 is $250,000 for land and design. By phasing Fire Station #5,' the following alternates become available: Fund Public Safety personnel to $304,450 and $245,550 for streets. S:~ALAN~CDBG questions 020504.doc Page 3 $3,933,000 Program Income Projected for 04-05 $50,000 TOTAL RESOURCES $3,983,000 20% Admin. Cap (not to exceed) $796,600 Long term obligations: Debt Svc. Public Fac.- P & I on $4.1 m $324,997 Debt Svc. Public Fac.- P & I on $800,000 $61,413 TOTAL LONG TERM OBLIGATIONS $386,410 Public Svcs. (not to exceed 15% of ont. -- $589,950) Fair Housing (mandated by HUD) City wide 90,000 Graffiti Removal - City Program 50,000 Bakersfield Senior Center - Admin. Contribution 50,000 S.E. Police Sub-Station 85,000 Sub-total $275,000 Public Facilities: Capacity Building - Technical Assistance 47,000 Sub-total $47,000 Housing and Slum and Blight Activities Graffiti Removal - City Program (private structures) 50,000 Home Access 55,000 Service Delivery for Housing Programs 85,000 Acquisition/Demolition - ED Activities 47,990 Sub-total $237,990 Subtotal Administration, Debt and Programs $1,743,000 Note: Requests for Capital Improvement Projects include project cost and direct delivery: Capital Improvement Projects (Proposed) Public Works/EDCD Downtown Street Improvements - 19th & Eye 135,000 10,000 5,000 Fire Department Southeast Bakersfield - Fire Station #5 800,000 20,000 2,000 Rec & Parks Jefferson Park Pool- Rehab. 1,200,000 20,000 8,000 AMOUNT OVER/UNDER NET RESOURCES AVAILABLE $40,000 IS:CDBGBudgetProposedUseFY0405 CDBG Entitlement for FY 2003-04 - PROPOSED $3,933,000 Program Income Projected for 04-05 $50,000 TOTAL RESOURCES $3,983,000 20% Admin. Cap (not to exceed) $796,600 Long term obligations: Debt Svc. Public Fac.- P & I on $4.1 m $324,997 Debt Svc. Public Fac.- P & I on $800,000 $61,413 TOTAL LONG TERM OBLIGATIONS $386,410 Public Svcs. (not to exceed 15% of ent.& 15% pryr P1=$612,450 Fair Housing (mandated by HUD) City wide 90,000 Graffiti Removal - City Program/50% Pub. Svcs. 50,000 Bakersfield Senior Center - Admin. Contribution 50,000 S.E. Police Sub-Station 85,000 Summer Recreation Programs Lowell/Wayside 33,000 Sub-total $308,0001 Public Facilities: iCapacity Building/Technical Assistance 43,500 Sub-total $43,500 Housing and Slum and Blight Activities Graffiti Removal - Private Structures 50,000 Home Access 55,000 Service Delivery for Hous ng Programs 85,000 ~Acquisition/Demolition - ED Activities 47,990 Sub-total $237,990 Subtotal Administration, Debt and Programs $1,772,500 Note: Requests for Capital Improvement Projects include project cost and direct delivery: Capital Improvement Projects (Proposed) Public Works/EDCD Downtown Street Improvements - 19th & Eye 135,000 10,000 5,000 Baker Street - Phase II (1/2 funding fy 03-04) 0 0 0 Fire Department Southeast Bakersfield - Fire Station #5-Acq. & Design 250,000 10,000 5,000 Rec & Parks Jefferson Park Pool - Rehab. 1,200,000 20,000 8,000 AMOUNT OVER/UNDER NET RESOURCES AVAILABLE S:CDBGBud~;etProposedUseFY0405 4-Feb.04 RESOURCES: HOME Entitlement for FY 2004-05 $1,775,000 Program Income Projected 04-05 $275,000 estimate American Dreams - Downpayment Assistance New Program $146,326 PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION - 10% $219,632.60 Single Family Rehab. Loan Program (SFRH) 400,000 New Construction - Housing 930,000 50,000 Service and Delivery for Housing 50,000 American Dreams - Downpayment Assistance 146,326 Dtwn.- Down Payt. Assist. Prog. (total $750,0000 fy's 03-04 & 04-05) 300,000 53,75(} CHDO Set Aside 15%: (HUD mandated) 266,250 Amount over/under net resoumes available $0 EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (ESG) ESG Grant Proposed Funding for FY 2004-05 $146,000 5% Administrative Cap ($7,300) Bakersfield Resuce Mission ($61,850) Bethany Homeless Shelter ($61,850) Alliance Against Family Violence ($15,000) Amount over/under net Resources Available $0