HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991 November 8, 1991
TO: Intergovernmental Relations Committee
FROM: Jake Wager, Economic Development Director ~
Bill Mungar¥, Director
Community Development Program Department
SUBJECT: Fair Housing Program Issues
Monty Hopper, Director of Weights and Measures, has transmitted his
response to' Councilmember Brunni's questions regarding the joint
City/County Fair Housing Program. Under the Memorandum of
Understanding which governs the Program, the City and County
Community Development Departments were given certain oversight
responsibilities for the Program. Therefore, we reviewed .Mr.
Hopper's draft response and made some suggestions which were
incorporated into the final response.
The questions were timely, for as you know, a contract with Coen
and Associates of Oxnard, California was recently executed. The
contract requires the consultant to carry out'an assessment of the
Fair Housing Program and related CDBG-funded activities in the
County, to identify impediments to Fair Housing choice that may
exist and to make recommendations to correct those impediments. We
believe that some of the issues raised by Councilmember Brunni are
recognized in the draft report recommendations.
The consultant is prepared to give a summary of the report to the
Intergovernmental Relations Committee. Attached herewith is the
executive summary.
Having been contacted by Coen and Associates when they were
carrying out the study, and now having had the chance to read their
report, we are impressed by both their method and their analysis.
While we do not agree with every conclusion, the report should.
serve as an excellent basis for making modifications to the
services specified in the Fair Housing Program MOU.
NOV 8 1991
COMh~UNITY DEVELOPMENI~
.I::'._R 0 O R.A ~','! BEP.~RTMENT
November 1, 1991
At the October 2, 1991, Intergovernmental Meeting City Council Member, Conni
Brunni, submitted a list of questions concerning the Fair Housing Program
activities. The following are responses to the questions raised by the
Council Member:
~e~ion #1 The MOU has been amended to: (1) reduce the m'm~er of
presentations made by the Division to c~mmmit¥ groups; (2)
perform an audit ever~ other year instead of annually; (3)
reduce.the amount of literature maile~; and (4) the
Poster/Essay contest with its awards event are handle4 in
part by a co;~ittee of volunteers.
h=wer#1 The workplan included as part of Amendment #4 to the MOU
Agreement #88-126 that the Fair Housing Program be revised
to reflect those items that the existing staff could
reasonably complete within the six month period. The
workplan was developed in conjunction with City and County
Community Development Staff and recommended for Council and
Board action.
~estion #2 The report identifies an 88% overall increase in calls
compared with last year, however, it states "most contacts
were with respect to a landlord/tenant dispute situation"
and therefore are referred to the appropriate entity.
A~er#2 The Annual Fair Housing Report indicated an 88% increase of
telephone calls from the previous year. To reduce the
overall landlord/tenant calls, the Fair Housing Staff has
contacted the "Info Line" Office and will be preparing a
recording asking that all discrimination complaints be
forwarded to the Fair Housing Office. In addition, a second
Info Line Bulletin be prepared that would refer any
landlord/tenant questions to the City orCounty Building
Departments, Health Department, or Greater Bakersfield Legal
Assistance. This would help reduce the overall number of
telephone calls coming to the Fair Housing Division that
need to be referred.
~estion ~ The program has escalated in cost significantly, fro~
$93,990 in FY 87-88 to its present budget of $133,736. Page
3 recou~endation: "Considering the effort that needs to be
expended to achieve a reasonable return rate oncomplaint
packets, the fact that there h-- been a marked increase in
Spanish speaking calls, the need for outreach and the
anticipated population increase, it appears essential to add
a Spanish speaking staff person to the Fair Housing Staff.
The AdvisorM Committee recommends that the County/City
consider increasing the budget .to provide for another staff
person."
Page 2 indicated that subject to HUD approval them have
applied for a VISTA placement in the Division office
already. Considering: (1) the reduction in required
services; (2) the potential that the MIST]% position cOUld be
a second spanish speaker staffer; and (3) the size of the
budget currently compared with the n,-,her of cases need/rig
processing an increase is inappropriate and unnecessarM.
A~sw~r #3 The inCrease to the budget for the Fair Housing Program from
its inception in 1988 to its current funding level
represents a 10.6% annual increase. These increases have
been largely due to cost of living adjustments, increase
costs of printing, and rent utilities or other operational
costs.
The Fair Housing Staff has taken advantage of various
agencies programs that would provide volunteers or paid
personnel to help with implementation of the Fair Housing
Workplan. This effort will continue.
Question ~4 Page 5 Litigation report is inconsistent with page 2. Page
2 is quoted as" . . . 24 required in-depth investigations
to determine the validity of the allegation". "Of these 24
cases, 16 qualified as Federal Title ~III, one as a
violation of the State Civil Rights Act, and 7 as Unruh
Civil Rights Act Violations". "At the end of the year, only
4 cases remain unclassified."
Page 5 reports "Ten' illegal discrimination investigations
were Performe4 bM the Division 4uring the past fiscal year".
"Nine of the 10 cases were investigated and i proved
unsupportable of the allegation made by the complainant".
"Of the 9 remaining cases, 6 were referr~ to an enforcement
agencM and 4 of the 6 referred were to private attorneys".
Ail 4 of the referrals are still Pending disposition. "One
case was referred to DFEH and was dismissed because of lack
of evidence". "One case was referred to GBLA and was won on
behalf of the' client". "The remaining 3 cases were handl~ed
bM the Division."
In addition to being inconsistent, it is unclear. What
enforcement agency were the 6 referred to since only i was
referred to DFEH? How were the 3 cases of litigation
handled bM the division when it does not do any litigation?
Were 9, 10 or 24 investigations conducted?
2
Answer ~ Background: Page 5 litigation report is inconsistent with
page 2. Page 2 is quoted as" . 24 required in-depth
investigations to determine the validity of the allegation."
(The sentence should have read" . 24 would have
but were not acted upon. Of these 24 cases, 16 qualified as
Federal Title VIII, one as a violation of the State Civil
Rights Act, and' 7 as Unruh Civil Rights Act Violations. At
the end of the year, 0nly 4 cases remain unclassified."
Page 5 reports "Ten illegal discrimination investigations
were performed by the division during the past fiscal year.
None of the 10 cases were investigated and 1 proved
insupportable of the allegation made by the complainant".
"Of the 9 remaining cases, 6 were referred to an enforcement
agency and 4 of the 6 referred were to private attorneys.
All 4 of the referrals are still pending disposition. One
case was referred to DFEH and was dismissed because of lack
of evidence. One case was referred to GBLA and was won on
behalf of the client. The remaining 3 cases were handled by
the division."
~e~ion #5 Page 5 coordination: "The division continues to work With
other organizations considered to be a friend of Fair
Housing." 'Who are they?
Answ~ #5 The organizations considered friends of Fair Housing, are
those organizations that are in support.of Fair Housing and
Fair Housing activities which include the City of
Bakersfield 'and the County of Kern by evidence of the
funding of the Fair Housing program. Other organizations
include the Bakersfield Community Resource Board (CHRB), the
Fair Housing Advisory Con~nittee, the Department of Fair
Employment and .Housing, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Golden State Mobile Home League, Kern County
Apartment Association, Mexican American Opportunity
Foundation, National Organization of Colored People, Urban
League, Greater Bakersfield Legal Association, Kern County
Human Relations Commission, and Councils of most of the
unincorporated communities'in Kern County.
~e~ion ~ Following the closing remarks in the statistical activity
description, data reflects the number of Hispanic
individuals receiving Hotline Services dropped 33% compared
with last year yet throughout the precedingportions of the
document it references an increase in the Spanish speaking
calls which seems difficult to explain.
Answ~ ~ Although the number of Hispanic telephone calls have
.decreased, of those Hispanic calls, it is an observation
3
made by the Fair Housing Staff that the preferred language
of those conversations have been Spanish. No statistical
information on this issue has been maintained.
~e~ion #7 What is the National Fair Housing Alliance?
Answer#7 This is the professional organization that Fair Housing
Organizations and advocates belong to. With the rapid
changes occurring in the Fair Housing law it is important to
network with peers and remain informed of changes in Fair
Housing practices.
lm:~G4
FAIR~
CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL
MEETING OF: 03/13/91
REFERRED TO' INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS J STINSON
ITEM: RECORD~ 7687
A Resolution designating the Kern Congestion
Management Agency for Kern County,
ACTION TAKEN BY COUNCIL:
(A) NOTION TO REFER BACK TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL
RELATIONS COMMITTEE. APPROVED, (B) BRUNNI
REQUESTED STAFF (E, SCHULZ) TO PROVIDE A COPY OF
THE TEXT OF THE LAWS AND THE FACTS REGARDING THE
AGENCY,
BACKUP MATERIAL ATTACHED: YES
DATE FORWARDED BY CITY CLERK- 03/15/91
STATUS-
PLEASE ENTER THE STATUS INTO THE PRIME COMPUTER
COUNCIL REFERRAL TRACKING SYSTEM AS PROGRESS IS MADE,
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE KERN CONGESTION MANAG~WENT
AGENCY FOR KERN COUSTI~.
WHEREAS, Government Codes Sections 65088 and 65089 require that every
county that includes an urbanized area, shall designate a Congestion Management
Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Congestion Management Agency is required to develop a
Congestion Management Program that identifies an integrated approach to making
transportation progran~ning decisions; and
WHEREAS, a county with an urbanized area is required to develop a
Congestion Management Program that includes every city and the county; and
WHEREAS, the Congestion Management Agency is required to develop a
uniform data base on traffic impacts' for use in a countywide transportation
computer model and that all models are to be consistent with the methodology and
data base used by the Regional Transportation Planning Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG) is the Regional
Transportation Planning Agency for Kern County and maintains a traffic impacts
data base and countywide transportation cc~puter model; and
WTIEREAS, the Congestion Management Program is to be consistent with
the Regional Transportation Plan and used to develop the Regional Transportation
Improvement Program; 'and
WHEREAS, the Kern Council of Governments develops the Regional
Transportation Plan and the Regional Transportation Improvement Program for Kern
County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Bakersfield as follows:
1. The Agency Board of Directors shall be composed of the
Kern Council of Governments' Board of Directors with the
following weighted vote:
a. Kern County Representatives (2) 40%
b. City of Bakersfield Representative (1) 20%
c. Other City Representatives
(4% per city-total of 40%) (10) 40%
TOTAL 100%
2. The Secretary to the Kern Congestion Management Agency shall be
the Executive Director to the Kern Council of Governments.
3. Kern Congestion Management Agency meetings shall be held in
conjunction with Kern Council of Governments' meetings.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the fore~, oing Resolution was passed and adopted
by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular n~eting thereof held on
, .by the following vote:
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED
MAYOR of the City-of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to fOrm:
CITY ATIIDRNEY of the City of Bakersfield
R-PW91.2 -2-
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
WEIGHTED PERCENTAGES
% of * 40/20/40 * 40/24/36 * 40/26/34
Population Present Proposal
Arvin 1.7 4 4 4
Bakersfield 31.9 20 24 26
California
City 1.1 4 3 3
Delano 4.2 4 4 4
Maricopa 0.2 4 3 3
McFarland 1.2 4 4 3
Ridgecrest 5.2 4 4 4
Shafter 1.6 4 4 3
Taft 1.1 '4 3 3
Tehachapi 1.1 4 3 3
Wasco 2.3 4 4 4
Kern County 48.4 40 40 40
TOTAL 100.0 100 100 - 100
* County/City of Bakersfield/Smaller Cities
CMP
" A RESOLUTION DESIGNATI]~ THE ~ ~~ ~
A~ ~R ~ ~- '
~, ~er~t C~es S~tions 65088 and 65089 r~ire ~at eve~
=o~tV ~at includes ~ ~iz~ ar~, shall designate a Congestion ~ag~nt
Agency; and
~, the ~ncestion ~nac~nt Agency is re~ir~ to develop a
Co~es~ion ~ag~nt Pr~ that identifies ~ int~ra~ apDr~ch to ~king
~ans~tion. Dr~r~. decisions; and ,
~, a ~tV with ~ urb~iz~ ar~ is re~ired to develop a
Congestion ~nag~nt Pr~r~ that includes e~ city ~d ~e co~ty; .and
~,. the Concestion ~nag~t A~ency is re~ir~ to develop a
unifo~ da~ base on ~aff~c ~cts' for use in a ~t~ide ~ans~r~tion
c~Duter ~el and ~ all ~els ~e to ~ consistent with ~e ~th~ol~y and
da~ ~se us~ by ~e R~ional ~ans~r~tion Pla~i~ Agency; ~d
~, ~e Kern Co~cil of ~ver~nts (Kern ~) is ~e R~ional
~ans~r~tion Pla~ing Agency for Kern Cowry ~d ~in~ins a ~affic ~cts
da~ ~ase and co~t~ide ~ans~ation ~puter ~et; ~d
~, the concestion ~na~t ~r~ is to ~ consistent wi~
the R~iona! ~ans~rtation Plan and us~ to develop ~e R~ional ~ans~tion
· ~rov~t Pr~r~; and
~, ~e K~n Co~cil of ~ver~nts develoDs ~e R~ional
~ans~r~tion Plan and ~e R~ional ~ans~r~tion ~rov~nt Pr~r~ for Kern
Co~ty.
~, ~~, BE IT ~OL~ by ~e Co~cil of ~e City of
B~ersfieid as follows:
!. T~[~gen~ B~rd of Directors shall ~ c~s~ of ~e
Kern Cocci! of ~ver~nts' B~rd of Directors with ~e
following ~i~ht~ vote:
a. K~n Co~ty Represen~ti~s (2) 40%
b. City of Bakersfield Representati~ (1) 20%
c. ~er City Represen~ti~s
(4% ~ city-to~! of 40%) (i0) 40%
~ 100%
2. The Secretary. to the Kern Congestion Manacement Agency shall be
the Executive Director to ~due Kern Council of Governments.
R-P~!. t ' ·
Kern Congestion Management Agency meetings shall be held in
con~unct~on with Kern Council of. Governments' meetirms.
I KEREBY CERTIFY that the fore~oing Resolution was passed and adopted
by the Council of tine City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on
, by the following vote:
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVr~D
-- MAYOR of the City of Baxersfieid
APPRO%r~D as to form:
CI~f AI~IIDRNEY~. of the City of Bakersfield
R-.~!. 2 -2-
Meeting Date:
March 27, 1991
Agenda Section:
Reports
Agenda Item:
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS Approved
FROM: J. DALE HAWLEY, CITY MANAGER Department Head
DATE: March 20, 1991 City Attorney
City Manager
SUBJECT: Report No. 1-91 from the Intergovernmental Relations Committee
regarding Congestion Management Plan.
1. A Resolution Designating the Kern Congestion Management Agency for
Kern County.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Motion to accept report and implement recommendations. Group
Vote.
2. Motion to adopt Resolution. Roll Call Vote.
BACKGROUND:
RPT.11
.alb
Definitions
Added: A~ 471: Section 9
Contingent tJpon Voter Approval Of SCA I
65088.1. As used in this chapter the follow'Lng terms have the foLlowing meaninlgi:
(a) Unless the context requires otherwise, "regional agency" means the agency responsible for
preparation of the regional txanstxn~tion imgrovement program.
(b) Unless the context requi~s otherwise, 'agency" means the agency responsible for the
preparation and adoption of the congestion management program. (c) "City" includes a city and county.
(d) "Commin~'ion" means the California Transportation Commission.
(e) "Department" means the Depa~ia~:nt of Transportation.
(f) "Urbanized area" has the ~me meaning aa is defined in the 1990 federal census for
urbanized areas of more'than 50,000 population.
Congestion Management Program
Added: AB 471: Section 9
Contingent ~Jpon Voter Approval Of SCA 1
65089. (a) A congestion management program shall be developed, adopted, and annually
updated for every county that includes an urbanized area, and shall include every city and the
county. The_grogram shall be developed:, in consultation with regional transportation provider~ and
i_n_consul~t~0n with anet w~m me cooperation of the u'ansportarion planning agency, local
govemmen!a,.. . the_ depot, .... and the air. po Llution..control district or the ah'. quality maaagement
~ ~.,,uu~,t~.aaupu:a uy me ~tnty. ooam ot supervi~0ra aaa me city councils ~of a majority of the
cities representing a majorit~ of thc population in the incorporated area of the county. -
-- (b) The program shall contain all of the following elements:
(1) Traffic level of service standards established for specific intensities of land uses including
rural, semirural, suburban, urban, and central business district. Level of service (LOS) shall be
measured by Circular 212, or the method de~-'ribed in the most commonly used version of the
Highway Capacity Manual. In no ca~ shall the standards establi~ed be below the level of service
E or the current level, whichever ia lower.
(2) Standards established for the frequency and routing of public a'ansit, and for the
coordination of transit service provided by separate operators.
(3) A trip reduction and travel demand element th. at promotes alternative transportation
methods, such aa carpool$, vanpool$, transit, bicycles, and park-and-fide lots; improvements in
the balance between jobs and housing; and other strategies, including flexible work hours and
parking management tn-ogram.n.
(4) A program to analyze the impact~ of land use decisions made by local jurisdictions on
regional transportation systerna, including an estimate of th~ costs associated with mitigating those
impacts.
(5) A seven-year capital improvement grogram to maintain or improve the u'affi¢ level of
service and wansit performance standards developed pursuant ua paragraphs (1) and (2), and to
mitigate regional tran~on impacts identified pursuant ua paragraph (4), which conforms to
transportation-related vehicle emissions air quality mitigation measur~
(c) The regional agency shall develop a uniform transportation and traffic computer model and
data base which shall be used throughout the region to determine the quantitative impacts of tra~¢
generated by new development on regional transportation systems. Wher~ the regional agency
jurisdiction over two or more counties, the compute' model and data base shall be al:q~ved by the
majority of the agencies within the region.
'l
- - ..--- ~.r-~ ...... ~, -'4.- .... . ......... '.~ ..... ~_.:_ ........... ~ .... :_. ....................... :_:.__ _.
Ii
3. SESSION 1990 REG. SF, S~ON 89 CHAPTER 16
~ such transfer
~loyer shall be
mployer would
discharge any CHAPTER 16
any employee (Assembly Bffi No. 1791)
~vision of law
h the coverage An act to amend Sections. 65088.1, 65089, 65089.3, and 65089.4 of, and to add
· ? or childbirth Sections 14525.6, 65089.5, and 65089.6 to, the Government Code, relating to
ction 12940. transportation.
.ragraph (2) of
tie VII of the [Approved by Governor March 12, 1990.]
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
~ent Code by AB '1791, Katz. Transportation: congestion management plans.
)fy of, existing (1) Existing law, which will become operative August 1, 1990, if SCA I is
approved by the voters at the June 5, 1990, direct primary election, requires
agencies responsible for the preparation of regional transportation improvement
progrsm.s to develop and annually update a congestion management progr~_m; as
inish the coverage specified, for every county that includes an urbsniT~d area, ss. defined, and to
~ under any other monitor implementation of the program. The Controller is required to withhold
d (3)add_d_ "that speci~ed transportation apportionments to a city or county which is not in
conformance with the adopted congestion management program.
This bill would impose a state-mandated local program by revising the process for
developing and adopting congestion management progrsms and revising the stan-
dards required to be incorporated into those progrsms. For purposes of determining
a city's or county's conformance with an adopted congestion management program,
the bill would prescribe a process for a city or county to designate individual
deficient segments or intersections which do not meet prescribed standards and to
adopt a deficiency plan. The bill would require certain specified factors to be
excluded from the determinstion of conformsnce with prescribed level of service
standards.
The bill. would provide that failure to complete or implement a' COngestion
management program does not give rise to a cause of action a~inst a city or county
for failing to conform to its general plan, unless the congestion management
program is incorporated into the transportation element of the city's or county's
general plan
~, The bill would provide that, with specified exceptions, a proposed' development
specified in a development agreement entered into~prior to July 10, 1989, is not
subject to any .action taken to.comply with provisions of law~ r equirin$ the
development and implementation of congestion management programs.
(2) The bill would require the Auditor General to annually review the allocation
and expenditure of transportation fimds made available by Chapters 105;' 106, and
108 of the Statutes of 1989, and to submit a report on that review to the Governor
and the Legislature by March 1, 1992, and each year thereafter.
(3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local ageacies ~aud
school districts for certain' .costs mandated by~ the state. 'Statutory provisions
establish procedures for m~kin$ that 'reimbursement, including the creation of a
State Mandates Claims Fund to pay the costs of mandates which do not
$1,000,000 statewide and other procedures for claims whose statewide costs exceed
$1,000,000..
This bill would Provide that, if'the Commi.~ion on State Mandates determiues
that this bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs
CHAPTI~ 16 90 1990 RF, G. SESSION
shall be made pursuant to those statutory procedures and, if the statewide cost does
not 'exceed $1,000,000, shall be made from the State Mandates Claim.~ Fund.
The people o£ the State of Califo~ do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 14525.6 is added to the Government Code, to read:
§ 1452.q.6. The Auditor General shall annually conduct a review of allocations
and expenditures at the state level of transportation funds made available by
Chapters 105, 106, and 108 of the Statutes of 1989, to determine, whether the
purposes for which those funds are allocated and expended conform to the
requirements of Chapters 105, 106, and 108 of the Statutes of 1989. Not later than
March 1, 1992, and by March 1 of each year thereafter, the Auditor General shall
submit a report on the results of that review to the Governor and to the
Legislature.
SEC. 2. Section 65088.1 of the Government Code, as added by Section 9 of
Chapter 106 of the' Statutes of 1989, is amended to read:
§ 65088.1. As used in this chapter the following terms have the following
meanings:
(a) Unless the context requires otherwise, "regional agency" means the agency
responsible for preparation of the regional transportation improvement program.
(b) Unles~ the context requires otherwise, "agency" means the agency responsible
for the preparation and adoption of the congestion management program. (c) "City" includes a city and county.
(d) "Commi~ion" means the California Transportation Commi~ion.
(e) "Department" means the Department of Transportation.
(0 "Urbanized area" has the same meaning as is 'defined in the 1990 federal
census for urbanized areas of more than 50,000 population.
(g) "Interregional travel" means trips that have neither origin nor destination
within the boundary of the congestion management program.
SEC. 3. Section 65089 of the Government Code~ as added by Section 9 of
Chapter 106 of. the Statutes of 1989, is amended to read:
§ 65089. (a) A congestion management program shall be developed, adop .t~l,
and annually updated for every county that includes an urbanized area, and shall
include every city and the county. The program shaH be adopted at a noticed public
hearing of the agency. The program shall be developed in consultation' with; and
with the cooperation of, the transportation planning agency, regional transportation
providers, local governments, the department, and. the air pollution control district
or the air quality management district, either by the county transportation comrni.~-
sion, or by another public agency, as designated by resolutions adopted by the
county board of supervisors and the city councils of a majority of the cities
representing a majority of the population in the incorporated area of the county.
Co) The program shall contain all of the following elements:
(1) (A) Traffic level of service standards established for a system of highways and
roadways designated by the agency. The system shall include at a minimum all state
highways and principal arterials. No highway or roadway designated as a part of
the system shall be removed from the system. All new state highways and principal
arterials shall be desj~nated as part of the system. Level of service (LOS)' shall be
measured by Circular 212, (or by the most recent version of the Highway Capacity
Manual), or by a uniform methodology adopted by the agency which is consistent
with the Highway Capacity Manual. The determination as to whether an alternative
method is consistent with the Highway CaPacity Manual shall be made by the
SF, SSI~N
~ide cost does regional ag~cy, exit t~t the' d~mmt s~ ~e t~ de~tion
Fund. ~ (i) the re~o~ agmcy ~ ~ the agmcy, ~ th~ t~ ~e de~
~ion 65088.1, or (fi) the dep~mmt ~ r~ible for prep~g the re~
t~mfion ~prov~ent p~ for the ~ty.
(B) In no ~ s~ the LOS s~& ~b~h~ ~ ~low the l~el of ~ E
~ r~: or the c~mt level, w~chever ~ f~h~t from level of ~ ~ ~x~t wh~e a
of ~tions · ~ ~opt~ puget to ~tion 65089.3.
arable by
whether the (2) S~ ~mb~h~ for the fr~umcy ~d rout~g of pubic trait, ~d for
.fo~ to the the ~r~tion of trait ~ pro~d~ by ~ o~to~.
tot hter th~ (3) A trip r~uction ~d travel d~d el~mt t~t promo~ ~tive
Gme~ sh~ t~s~tion meth~, such ~ ~ v~h, trait,, bicycle, ~d pgk-~d-
~d to the fide 1o~; ~prov~m~ ~ the b~ ~ jo~ ~d ho~g; ~d o~g
stm~, ~clu~g fle~ble work ho~ ~d p~g ~g~t prognm~
(4) A pro~ to ~y~ the ~ of l~d ~ d~iom
S~tion 9 of j~ctiom on re~on~ t~tion sys~s, ~cl~g ~ ~ of the
~~ ~th ~tigat~g tho~ ~. ~ no ~ s~ the pro~ ~cl~e
:he fOHo~g ~ate of the ~ of ~fi~t~g the ~p~ of ~te~on~ travel. ~e pro~
s~ pro,de cr~it for 1~ pubic ~d private ~ntfibutiom to ~prov~
.s the ag~cy re~o~ t~~tion sys~s. Howev~, ~ the ~ of toll ro~ f~ti~ ~t
s~ ~y ~ ~ow~ for 1~ pubic ~d private ~n~bu~om w~ch 'ge ~-
pro~.
:y r~nsible bu~ from toll revmu~ or oth~ s~ or f~ ~.
~. ~c~ ~e ~o~t of the ~t ~ ~ pro~d~.
(5) A ~vm-y~ ~pi~ ~prov~t pro~ to mnin~ or ~prove the t~c
level of ~ ~d t~it ~o~ s~ develo~ p~t to ~p~
(1) ~d (2), ~d to ~ti~te re~on~ t~m~on ~ idm~ p~t
19~ f~e~ q~ty ~ti~tion m~.
r d~tion s~ develop a unifo~ ~ b~ on ~c ~p~ for ~ ~ a ~de
~~fion ~mput~ m~el ~d s~ approve ~m~on ~mpu~ m~
~on 9 of of s~c ~ ~t~ the ~ty- t~t ~ ~ ~ by 1~ j~~ ~ -
dete~ine the q~ti~tive ~P~ of developm~t on ~e c~c~on s~ ~t
~e b~ on the ~t~de m~el ~d s~~ m~e~g ~p~ ~d
~ .~d sh~ o~ ~opt~ by the re~o~ p~g ag~cy. ~e ~ ~ ~ ~ the m~
o~ pubic s~ ~ ~mist~t ~th the ~ b~ ~ by the re~o~ p~g ~cy. ~e
m- ~, ~d ~e re~on~ agmcy ~ j~c~on ov~ ~o or more ~, ~e
:~~on by the ag~cy sh~ ~ ~m~tmt ~th ~e ~ b~ ~ by the re~o~
n~ol ~ct
:ion ~mi~- SEC.~4. ~fion 65089.3 of the ~v~mt ~ ~ ~d~ by ~ '9 of
~p~ by ~e ~pter 1~ of the S~tu~ of 1989, ~ ~d~ to r~: . .' .
~f ~e eiti~ ~ ~. -(a) ~e agmcy s~ mo~r the ~pl~fion of ~ .el~ of
~. ~ty. the ~ng~fion ~g~mt pro~. ~y~ the ~g~cy s~ d~ine ~ the
.i~wa~ ~d but not limit~ to, ~ of the foHo~g:
~ a p~ of pro~d~ ~ su~io~ ~) ~d (c).-
md p~cip~ (2) Adoption ~d ~pl~mm~on of n ~p r~uc~on ~d ~vel-d~d o~-
OS) s~ ~ ~.
/ay ~ty . (3) Adop~on ~d ~pl~fion of a pro~ ~ ~y~ ~e ~ of ~d
n ~t~mative
n~e by the ~) (1) A ci~ or ~y ~y d~i~ ~d~ d~t ~ or ~-
CHAPTER 16 92 1990 REG. SESSION
tions which do not meet the established level of service standards if, prior to the
designation, at a noticed public hearing, the city or county has adopted a deficiency
plan which shall include ail of the following:
(A) An analysis of the causes of the deficiency.
(B) A list of improvements necessary for the deficient segment or intersection to
maintain the minimum level of service otherwise required and the estimated costs of
the improvements.
(C) A list of improvements, programs, or actions, and estim_ntes of costs, that Will
(i) measurably improve the level of service of the system, as defined in subdivision
(b) of Section 65089, and' (ii) contribute to significant improvements in air quality,
such as improved public transit service and facilities, improved nonmotorized
transportation facilities, high occupancy vehicle facilities, and transportation control
measures. The air quality management district or the air pollution control district
shall establish and periodically revise a list of approved improvements, programs,
and actions which meet the scope of this paragraph.' If an improvement, program,
or action is on the approved list and has not yet been fully implemented, it shall be
deemed to contribute to significant improvements in air quality. If an improvement,
program, or action is not. on the approved list, it shall not be implemented unless
approved by the local air quality management district Or air pollution control
district.
(D) An action plan, consistent with the provisions of Chapter 5 (commencing
with Section 66000) of Division I of Title 7, that shall be implemented, consisting
of improvements identified in paragraph (B), or improvements, programs, or actions
identified in paragraph (C), that are found by the agency to be in the interest of the
public's health, safety and welfare. The action plan shall include a specific imple-
mentation schedule.
(2) A city or county shall forward its adopted defici/mcy plan to the agency. The
agency shall hold a noticed public hearing within 60 days of receiving the deficiency
plan. Following the hearing, the agency shall either accept or reject the deficiency
.plan in its entirety, but. the agency may not modify the deficiency plan. If the
agency rejects the plan, it shall notify the city or countyof the reasons for that
rejection.
(c) The agency, after consultation with the regional agency, the department, and
the local air, quality' management district or air pollution control district, shall
exclude from the determination of conformance ~with level of service standards, the
impacts of any of the following:
(1) lnterregional, travel.
(2) Construction, rehabilitation, or maintenance of facilities that impact' the
system. '. · · ..
(3) Freeway ramp metering.
(4) Traffic signal coordination by the sta~e or multijurisdiCtional agencies~
(5) Traffic generated by the provision of low and very low.income housing~
(d) For the purposes of this chapter, the impacts of'a trip which ori~nates in one
county and 'which terminates in another county shall be included in the determina-
tion' of conformance with level of service standards with respect to the ori~nating
county onlY. A roundtrip shall be considered to consist of two individual trips.
SEC. 5. Section 65089..4 of the' Government Code, as added by Section 9 of
.Chapter 106 of the Statutes of 1989, is amended to read:
§ 65089.4. (a) If, pursuant to the annual mOnitoring provided 'for .in Section
65089.3, the agency determines, following a noticed public hearing, that a city or
county is not conforming with .the requirements of the congestion management
program, the agency shall notify the City or county in writing of the specific areas of
nonconformance. If, within 90 days of the receipt of the written notice of nonC°n-,
;. SESSION
~ 1990 REG. SESSION ~ 9:] CHAPTER 16
prior to the formance, th~ city or county has not come into conformance with the congestion
a deficiency management program, the governing body of the agency shall make a finding of
nonconformance and shall submit the finding to the commiSSion and to the
Controller.
~ersection to (b) Upon receiving notice from the agency of nonconformance, the Controller
sted costs of shall withhold apportionments of funds required to be apportioned to that noncon-
forming city or county by Section 2105 of the Streets and Highways Code, until the
;ts, that will Controller is notified by the agency that the city or county is in confOrmance.
subdivision
air quality, SEC. 6. Section 65089.5 is added to the Government Code, to read:
~nmotorized § 6fi089.5. Failure to complete or implement a congestion management program
.tion control shall not give rise to a cause of action against a city or county for failing to
~trol district conform with its general plan, unless the city or county incorporates the congestion
., programs, management program into the transportation element of its generai plan.
it, program,
t, it shall be SEC. 7. Section 65089.6 is added to the Government Code, to read:
~provement, § 6~89.6. A proposed develOpment specified in a development agreement en-
:nted unless .tered into prior to Suly 10, 1989, shall not be subject to any action taken to comply
ion control with this chapter, except actions required to be taken with respect to the trip
reduction and travel demand element of a congestion management program pursu.
ommencing ant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 65089.
., consisting SEC. 7. Sections 6 and 7 of this act shall not become operative unless Senate
., or actions Constitutional Amendment I is approved by the voters at the Sune 5, 1990, direct
erest of the primary election.
cific imple- SEC. 8. Notwithstanding Section 17610 of the GOvernment Code, if the Com-
~gency. The miSSion on State Mandates determines that this act contains costs mandated by the
: deficiency state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be
· . deficiency made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2
:lan. If the of the Oovernment Code. If the statewide cost of the claim for reimbu~ent does
~s for that not exceed one million dollars ($1,000,000), ' reimbursement shall be made from the
state Mandates Claims Fund. Notwithstanding Section 17580 of the Oovernment
tment, and Code, unless otherwise specified in this act, the provisions of this act shall become
:trict, shall operative on the same date that the act takes effect pursuant to the California
ldardS, the Constitution.
EXPLANATORY NOTES ASSEMBLY BILL 1791:
Gov C § 65088. I. Added subd (g).
mpact the Oov C § 65089. (1) Added the second sentence of subd (a); (2) amended the third sentence of subd (a)
by (a) deleting ", in consultation with. regional transportation providers and" after "be developed";
(b) adding the commn~t a~ "col~sultation with" and after "cooperation of"; and (c) adding
"regional transportation providers," af~ "planning agency,"; (3) substituted subd (bXl) for former
.~. subd (b)(l.) which read: "(1) Traffic level of service standards established for specific intensilies of
'rig. land uses including rural, semirural, suburban, urban, and central business district. Level of service
(LOS) - shall be measured by Circular 212, or the method described in the most commonly
ttes'in one version of the Highway Capacity Manual. In no case-shall the standards established be below the
determina-' level of service E or the current level, whichever is lower."; (4) added 'the second through fifth
3ri~nnting sentences of subd COX4); and (5~ substituted subd (c) for former subd (c) which read: "(c) The
~ripS. regional agency shall develop a uniform transportation and traffic computer model and data base
which shall be used throughout the region to determine the quantitative impacts of traffic generated
~=tion 9 of by new development on regional transportation systems. Where the regionnl agency has.jurisdiction
over two or more counties, the computer model and data base shall be oppmved by the majority of
the agencies within the regionY '
in Section Gov C § 6~089.3. O)~Added subdivision designation (a); (2) redmignated former' subds (a)-(c) to be
a city or subds (aXl)-(aX3); and (3) added subds (b)-(d).
magement Gov C § 65089.4. Substituted the section for the former section which read: "(a). If the agency
ic areas of determines that a city or. county is not conforming to elements of the congestion management
program, a finding to that effect shah be made by' the governing body of the agency and submitted
)f noncon- to the commis_*ion and to the Controller... ,~ .
~ 16 114 1990 REG. SESSION
"Co) If the agency, finds that the city or county is not in conformance, the city or coUnty, as the case may
be, may appeal the finding to the California Transportation Commi~ion. However, if the city or
count~ is under the jurisdiction of a multicounty regional agency, the appeal may be made only to
- that ngency.
'e[~lle c, ommi~ion or the multicounty regional agency shall render its decision on the appeal within 90
days after receiving the appeal.
"(c) Upon receiving notice from the comrnlzsion or the multicounty regional agency affirming the finding
by the agency of nonconformance, the Controller shall withhold apportionments of funds required to
be apportioned to that nonconforming city or county by Section 2105 of the Streets and Highwnys
Code, until the Controller is notified by the agency that the city or county is in confol~nnnce."
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Meeting Date:
March 13, 1991
Agenda Section:
New Business
Agenda Item:
10. g.
Approved:
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Public Works Department Department Head
DATE: March 6, 1991 . City Attorney
. City Manager
S~: A resolution designatinq the Kern Congestion Management Agen
for Kern County.
REC~ATION: Motion to adopt resolution. Roll call vote.
BACKGROUND:
California Government Code Section 65089(a) requires that every county that
includes an ur~nized area adopt a Congestion Management Program (CMP). The
CMP shall include every city and the county. California Government Code
Section 65088.1 defines urbanized areas as being over 50,000 in population.
Kern Colmtv meets this definition.
After man]; months of discussing this issue at both policy and staff levels,
the Kern COG Board of Directors' recc~ends that the County of Kern and each
Kern County city adopt a resolution forming the Congestion Management
Agency. This Agency will oversee the congestion Managament ~rogram as
req,~, ired by law. This includes establishment of a transportation network
to monitor performance in relation to the established level of service
standards. If a road is in the CMP network, it is eligible for CMP funding
along with state routes.
The ~ongestion Management Agency governing body will be the Kern COG Board
of Directors and the vote will be weighted, as specified in the resolution.
Because the Congestion Management Program needs to be completed by October
of 1991, action is needed as soon as .possible. Without a Congestion
Manage~nt Program, there could be delays in local gas tax subvention
increases to each city and the county (approximately 60%) and a potential
loss of State Transportation Funds for the next two years (approximatelV
$24 million).
NB. 97 t~/mro
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE KERN CON~FSTION MANAG~qENT
AGENCY FOR KERb] COUNTY.
WHEREAS, C~overnment Codes Sections 65088 and 65089 require that every
county ~aat includes an urbanized area, shall designate a Congestion ~_Venagement
Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Congestion Management Agency is required to develop a
Congestion Management Program that identifies an integrated apDroach to making
transoortation Drogramming decisions: and
W~EREAS, a county with an urbanized area is required to develop a
Congestion ~.~anaqement Program ~that includes every city and the-county; and
WHEREAS~ the. Congestion Management Aqency is recuired to develop a
uniform data base on traffic L~oacts' for use in a count~n¢ide transportation
comDuter .model and that all models are to be consistent with the methodology and
dat~ base used by the Regional Transportation Planning Agency; and
W~EREAS, t~he Kern coUncil of Governments (Kern COG) is the Regional
Transportation Planning Agency for Kern County 'and .maintains a traffic impacts
data ~ase and countywide transportation oomouter model; and
WHEREAS, the Ccngestion Management Program is to be consistent with
the Re~.ional Transoortation Plan and used to develcp the Regional Transportation
Improve~ent Program; and.
~, t~he Kern Council of Governments develops the Regional
Transportation Plan and. the Regional Transportation Z~provement Program for Kern
County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Bakersfield as follows:
The Agency Board of Directors shall be ccm.oosed of the
Kern Council of Governments' Board of Directors with the
following weighted vote:
a. Kern County Representatives ( 2 ) 40%
b. City of Bakersfield Representative (1) 20%
c. -Other City Representatives
(4% .Der city-total of 40%) (i0) 40%
TOTAL '100%
2. The Secretary to the Kern Congestion Manaaement Agency shall be
the Executive Director to the Kern Council of Governments.
R-PWgl .'1 -1-
-3. Kern Congestion Management Agency meetings shall be held in
conjunction with Kern Council of Governments' ~eetings.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was passed and adopted
by the Council of the City of B~ersfield at a regular meeting thereof held 'on
, by the following vote:
CITY CLRRK and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of B~kersfield
_APPROVED
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to form:
CITY ASTORNEY of the City of Bakersfield
R-PWgl. 2 -2- ~
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Meeting Date:
March 27, 1991
Agenda Section:
Reports
Agenda Item:
8. c.
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS Approved
FROM: J. DALE HAWLEY, CITY MANAGER Department Head ~
DATE: March 20, 1991 City Attorney '~A~/
City Manager '(~~~
SUBJECT: Report No. 1-91 from the Intergovernmental Relations Committee
regarding Congestion Management Program.
1. A Resolution Designating the Kern Congestion Management Agency for
Kern County.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Motion to accept report and implement recommendations. Group
Vote.
2. Motion to adopt Resolution. Roll Call Vote.
BACKGROUND:
RPT.11
.alb
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE
REPORT. NO. 1-91
March 27, 1991
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
On March, 13 1991, the Council referred the issue of the congestion
management program to the Intergovernmental Relations Committee for review.
The Committee has reviewed this issue with staff and expressed concerns
regarding the weighted voting' proposed for the Congestion Management Agency.
The Committee feels that it is extremely important that this voting system be
reviewed and modified to reflect the impacts of the Congestion Management Agency
on the City of Bakersfield. The Committee recognizes the importance of time in
responding to the requirements for the development of the Congestion Management
Program. We also recognize the importance of working cooperatively with the
other cities involved in this process and the County of Kern. Therefore, the
Committee has recommended the following amendments to the proposed resolution
designating the Kern Congestion Management Agency for Kern County:
First, that language be added which requires the adoption of the Conges{ion
Management Program by the County Board of Supervisors, and the city councils of
a majority .of the cities representing a majority of the .population in the
incorporated area of the county.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COMMI1-FEE
REPORT NO. 1-91
March 27, 1991
Page -2-
Language should also. be added requiring that the Congestion Management
Agency shall, cease to exist effective December 31, 1991.
It is the intent of the Committee to recommend that the resolution be
adopted with these amendments and with the expectation that during the time
period between now and December 31st that the City of Bakersfield, the other
cities and the County of Kern.work cooperativelY to provide for more fair and
equitable representation in the formation of the Congestion Management Agency.
Therefore, 'the Committee recommends that the City Council adopt the
resolution as amended designating the Kern Congestion Management Agency for Kern
County. We also recommend that the Intergovernmental Relations Committee of the
Council should continue to work with the other cities and Kern County on this
matter.
Respectfully submitted,
Councilmember Patricia Smith, Chair
Councilmember Conni Brunni
Councilmember-Kevin McDermott
.alb ,
RESOLUTION' NO.
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE KERN CONGESTION MANAGEMENT
AGENCY FOR KERN-COUNTY.
~IEREAS, Government Codes Sections 65088 and 65089 require that every
county that includes an urbanized area, shall designate a Congestion Management
AgencM; and
WHEREAS, the Congestion Management Agency is required to develop a
Congestion Management Program that identifies an integrated approach to making
transportation programming decisions; and
WIt~REAS, a county with an urbanized area is required to develop a
Congestion Management Program that includes every city and the county;'and
WlffiREAS, the Congestion Management Agency is required to develop a
uniform data base on traffic impacts for use in a countywide transportation
computer model and all models are to be consistent with the methodology and data
base used by the Regional Transportation Planning Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG) is the Regional
Transportation Planning Agency for Kern County and maintains a traffic impacts
data base and countywide transportation computer model; and
WHEREAS, the Congestion Management Program is to be consistent with
the Regional Transportation Plan and used to develop the Regional Transportation
Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the Kern Council of Governments develops the Regional
Transportation Plan and the Regional Transportation Improvement Program for Kern
County.
NOW, THEREFORE, .BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Bakersfield as follows:
1. The Congestion Management Agency Board of Directors shall be
composed of the Kern Counc.il of Governments'~Board of 'Directors
with the following weighted vote:
a. Kern County Representatives (2) 40%
b. City of Bakersfield Representative (1) 20%
c. Other City Representatives
(4% per city-total of 40%) (10) 40%
TOTAL 100%
2. The Secretary to the Kern Congestion Management Agency shall be
the Executive Director to the Kern Council of Governments.
R-PWgl.1 -1-
3. Upon acceptance and recommendation by the Congestion Management
Agency, the Congestion Management Program shall be adopted by the
County Board of Supervisors and the city council of a majority of
the cities representing a majority of the population~in the
incorporated area of the County.
4. Kern CongeStion Management Agency meetings shall be held in
conjunction with Kern Council of Governments' meetings.
5. The Congestion Management Agency shall cease to exist on
December 31, 1991.
o0o
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution' was passed and adopted
by the Council of'the City of Bakersfield at a regular.meeting thereof held on
, by ~the following vote:
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield.
APPROVED
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to form:
CITY ATTORNEY of the City of Bakersfield
R-PW91.2 -2-
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE
REPORT NO. 1-91
·March 27,~1991
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
On March, 13 1991, the Council referred the issue of the congestion
· management program to the Intergovernmental Relations Committee for review.
The Committee has reviewed this issue with staff and expressed concerns
regarding the weighted voting proposed for the Congestion Management Agency.
The Committee feels that it is extremely important that this voting system be
reviewed and modified to reflect the impacts of the Congestion Management Agency
on the City of Bakersfield. The Committee recognizes the importance of time in
responding to the requirements for the development of the Congestion Management
Program. We also recognize the importance of working cooperatively with the
other cities involved in this process and the County of Kern. Therefore, the
Committee has recommended the following amendments to the proposed resolution
designating the Kern Congestion Management-Agency for Kern County:
First, that language be added which requires the adoption of the Congestion
Management Program by the County Board of Supervisors, and the city councils of'
a majority of the cities representing a majority of the population in the
incorporated area of the county.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE
REPORT NO. 1-91
March 27,' 1991
Page -2-
Language should also be added requiring that the Congestion Management
Agency shall cease to exist effective December 31, 1991.
It .is the intent of the Committee to recommend that the resolution be
adopted with these amendments and with the expectation that during the time
period between now and December 31st that the City of Bakersfield, the other
cities and the County of Kern work cooperatively to provide for more fair and
equitable representation in the formation of the Congestion Management Agency.
Therefore, the Committee recommends that the City Council adopt the
resolution as amended designating the Kern Congestion Management Agency for Kern
County. We also recommend that the Intergovernmental Relations Committee of the
Council should continue to work with the other cities and Kern County on this
matter.
Respectfully submitted,
Councilmember Patricia Smith, Chair
Councilmember Conni Brunni
Councilmember Kevin McDermott
.a~b
RESOLUTION'NO.
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE KERN CONGESTION MANAGEMENT
AGENCY FOR KERN COUNTY.
WHEREAS, Government Codes Sections 65088 and 65089 require that every
county that-includes an urbanized area, shall designate a Congestion Management
Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Congestion Management Agency is required to develop a
Congestion Management Program that identifies an integrated approach to making
transportation programming decisions; and
WHEREAS, a county with an urbanized area is required t° develop a
Congestion Management Program that includes every city and the county; and
WHEREAS, the Congestion Management Agency is required to develop a
uniform data base on traffic impacts for use in a countywide transportation
computer model and ali models are to be consistent with the methodology and data
base used by the Regional Transportation Planning Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG) is the Regional
Transportation Planning Agency for Kern County and maintains a traffic impacts
data base and countywide transportation computer model; and
WHEREAS, the Congestion Management Program is to be consistent with'
the Regional Transportation Plan and used to develop the Regional Transportatiop
Improvement prOgram; and
WHEREAS, the Kern Council of Governments develops the Regional
Tran'sportation Plan and the Regional Transportation Improvement Program for Kern
County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Bakersfield'as follows:
1. The Congestion Management Agency Board of Directors shall be
composed of the Kern qouncil of Governments' Board of Directors
with the following weighted vote:
a. Kern County Representatives (2) 40%
b. City of Bakersfield Representative (1) 20%
c. Other City Representatives
(4% per city-total of 40%) (10) 40%
TOTAL 100%
2. The Secretary to the Kern Congestion Management Agency shall be
the Executive Director to the Kern Council of Governments.
R-PW91.1 -1-
3. Upon acceptance and recommendation by the Congestion Management
Agency, the Congestion Management Program shall be adopted' by the
County Board of Supervisors and the city council of a majority of
the cities representing a majority of the population in the
incorporated area of the County.
4. Kern Congestion Management Agency meetings shall be held in
conjunction.with Kern Council of Governments' meetings.
5. The Congestion Management Agency shall cease to exist on
December 31, 1991.
o0o
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted
by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on
, by the following vote:
CITY CLERK and. Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to form:
CITY ATTORNEY of the City of Bakersfield
R-PWgl 2 -2-
KERN CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY
ALTERNATIVES RECOMMENDED BY THE
TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMIT'FEE
February 12, 1991
ALTERNATIVE NO. 1
As directed by the Joint Powers Committee of Kern COG, the County Administrative
Office and staff have proposed an agency similar to the Kern Motorist Aid Authority. The
CMA would meet in conjunction with Kern COG monthly and the Executive Director of
Kern COG would be the Executive Director of the CMA. Five members of the Kern COG
Board of Directors would serve on the Congestion Management Agency. They are as
follows:
County of Kern 2 members 40 %
City of Bakersfield 1 member 20 %
City Group 1 1 member** 20 %
City Group 2 1 member** 20 %
TOTAL 5 members 100 %
** The 10 Cities would be divided into two groups. Each group would select a
member to serve on the GMA. Members would serve on a rotating basis.
ALTERNATIVE NO.2
The WAG developed an option to Alternative No. 1. This alternative would add two
additional city members to the Board of Directors. The membership of the Board of
Directors would be as follows:
County of Kern 2 members 40 %
City of Bakersfield 1 member 20 %
City Group 1 1 member** 10 %
City Group 2 1 member** 10 %
City Group 3 1 member** 10 %
City Group 4 1 member** 10 %
TOTAL 7 members 100 %
** The 10 cities would be divided into four groups. Each group would select a
member to serve on the GMA. Members would serve on a rotating basis. It was
noted by the TFAG that additional members would allow for a better discussion
~_. of issues.
ALTERNATIVE NO.3
The TI'AC developed an alternative that would allow the County of Kern, 11 dries and
the Golden Empire Transit District to serve on the Board of Directors. The membership
of the Board of Directors is as follows:
County of Kem 2 members 36 %
City of Bakersfield 1 member 20 %
Cities 10 members 40 %
GET 1 member 4 %
TOTAL 14 members 100%
It was noted by the TI'AC that additional members would allow for a better discussion
of issues.
ALTERNATIVE NO. 4
The TTAC developed an option to Alternative No. 2. This alternative would add a
representative of GET to the Board of Directors. The membership of the Board of
Directors would be a§ follows:
County of Kern 2 members 40 %
City of Bakersfield 1 member 20 %
City Group 1 1 member** 10 %
City Group 2 1 member** 10 %
City Group 3 1 member** 10 %
GET 1 member 10 %
TOTAL 7 members 100 %
** The 10 cities would be divided into three groups. Each group would select a
member to serve on the GMA. Members would serve on a rotating basis. It was
noted by the TrAG that additional members would allow for a better discussion
of issues.
Alternatives, Page 2
ALTERNATIVE NO. 5
The TrAC developed an alternative that would reflect a County Transportation
Commission identified in the Government Code. The membership of the Board of
Directors is as follows:
County of Kern 2 members 29 %
Cities 2 members 29 %
GET 2 member 29 %
Rural Transit 1 member 13 %
TOTAL 7 members 100 %
ALTERNATIVE NO. 6
The TrAG was requested to include an alternative with membership of the Board of
Directors based on the annual population. The membership of the Board of Directors is
as follows:
City of Arvin 1 member 1.7 %
City of Bakersfield 1 member 32.2 %
City of California City 1 member 1.1%
City of Delano 1 member 4.2 %
City of Maricopa 1 member 0.2 %
City of McFarland 1 member 1.3 %
City of Pddgecrest 1 member 5.1%
City of Shatter 1 member 1.5 %
City of Taft 1 member 1.1%
City of Tehachapi 1 member 1.1%
City of Wasco 1 member 2.3 %
County of Kern 2 members 48.2 %
TOTAL 13 members 100.0 %
GENERAL COMMENTS
The TrAC was of the opinion that the Golden Empire Transit District, Caltrans and the
Air Pollution Control District should be players in the development and implementation
of the Congestion Management Program. Many of the TrAC members felt that GET
should be a voting member and that Caltrans and the APCD should be ex-officio
i" members.
Alternatives, Page 3
KernCOG
to retain
voting plan
By SCOTT FORTER
Californian staff writer
While acknowledging change is
needed, the Kern Council of Govern-
ments on Thursday decided not to
tamper with its voting structure
Ridgecrest Mayor Pro Tern Kev-
in Corlett, chairman of a committee
~ that analyzed proposed changes,
'- quoted the Greek Philosopher Aris-
'-~ totle when he reported the commit-
tee was not proposing any
shake-ups.
"The worst form of inequality is
to try to make unequal things
equal," he said. "We proved that
paradox to be true. As we' tried to
make the voting Structure more
equal, the more the inequities
grew."
The board is composed of repre-
sentatives of the 11 incorporated
cities tn the county and two county
superg/sors. The agency is responsi.
hie for transportation plann/ng, as-
sists /n manag/ng air quality and #3
oversees land use around airports. ~e
County supervisors have pressed
for greater power on the board
because residents of unincorporated
parts of the county account for 48
percent of the county's population.
About 32 percent of the county's
residents live in Bakersfield. Repre-
sentatives of the small cities have
voiced concerns about whether they
will lose their clout ff the board ties
voting power to population.
The issue arose in August when
KernCOG began organizing a state.
mandated county author/ty to man.
age transportation congestion.
County officials sa/d they d/d not
want the agency designated to over-
see congestion management be-
cause they were unhappy with the
votin& structure.
Intergovernmental Relations Committee --Meeting 'Notes
Thursday March 7, 1991; 12:00 Noon; South wing Conference Room
Due to the lack of a quorum (only Councilmember Brunni was in attendance;
· Councilmember Smith was ill and Councilmember McDermott was out of the State)
updates on the items on the agenda were discussed. No action was recommended or
taken.
Air Quality Joint Powers .Update (Randy Abbott)
Randy Abbott of the County Resource Management Agency updated the group regarding the Valley-
wide Air Quality Authority. He explained that there would be a meetin.q on March 20th at 2~00 p.m. in
Hartford to discuss the issue of the format for selection of City representatives as part of the Authority.
There are several possible forms being discussed ranging from the including selecting specific cities;
selecting a large, medium and small city; rotating membership between cities and various permutations
of these options. (Dale and the Mayor are planning to attend this meeting to represent the City).
The County has requested information re. the City's position on the selection of city representatives.
There was also discussion of the public workshops on developing an indirect source review rule for the
· Unified San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Authority (copy attached). The workshop for. Bakersfield is
scheduled for Thursday March 14 at 7:00 p.m. at the Kern County Public Services Building 2700 'M'
street. There were concerns expressed that public comments made at the workshop would not be
made part of the record of the subsequent public hearings and rule making process of the authority.
Habitat Conservation Plan (Jack Hardisty)
Update on HCP by Jack Hardisty. City and County continuing to work on getting U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Section 10 A permit. It is anticipated that there will be HCP hearings before the City.Council in May and
the Board of Supervisors in June. It is anticipated that the fee will increase from $650 to $1000 per
acre.
Next phase is the implementation of the HCP. This will probably involve a Joint Powers Authority
between City and County to begin HCP land acquisition.
Regional Forum (Joel Heinrichs)
The County is interested in establishing some type of forum to facilitate discussion of regional issues
(see attached report).
County staff will be meeting with the City Managers Association, School Districts and Special Districts.'
Fair Housin_q (George Gonzales/Bill Mungary)
There is currently a reqUest by the Kern County Weights' and Measures Dept., Fair Housing Divi'sion
to add a new position as part of the F,Y. 1991-92 Budget. This is being reviewed by City and County
staff and changes to the MOU are being recommended in lieu of funding the additional Position
pending completion'of the assessment by the Fair Housing Congress. There was some concern
expressed and discussion about the use of t.,he Fair Housing Congress to pedorm the assessment.
Also discussed.was the need to extend the existing MOU for an.additional six months to allow sufficient
time for the assessment to be performed.
Staff also informed the committee of the possibility of utilizing special HUD fair. housing funds for a non-
profit organization to provide fair housing services. This would 'involve a 'Notice of Funding Availability"
(NOFA) to be circulated to potential non-profit groups who would be interested in submitting a proposal
for these funds. The Fair Housing Congress has expressed so.me, interest in this process. There were
some concerns expressed re. the Use of a non-profit to administer the fair housing program.
Ambulance Rates (John Stinson)
The City expressed some concern re, mixed Signals from the County re. ambulance rate regulation by
the county. Fred Drew indicated that it is his intent to present the Board of Supervisors with a proposed
common rate for the Metro Bakersfield area within the next 60-90 days. City Attorney, Larry Lunardini
said the City will litigate if the common rate is intended to included the City of Bakersfield,
Light Rail (Dale Mills)
A short informational light rail video was shown by Kern County public Works.
Next Meeting
The Next Intergovernmental Committee meeting was set for Friday, April 19th, noon (County hOst).
'BAKERS'FIELD
AG,ENDA
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE
CITY/COUNTY
Thursday, March 7.,'1991
12:00 Noon
Southwing Basement Conference Room
1' Air Quality Joint Powers Update (Randy Abbott')
2. Habitat Conservation Plan (Jack Hardist'y)
3. Regional Forum (Joel Heinrichs)
4. Fair Housing (jake Wager/Bill Mungary)
5. Ambulance Rates
6. Light Rail Video (Dale Mills)
NOTICE OF .PUBLIC WORKSHOPS
ON DEVELOPING AN 'INDIRECT SOURCE REVIEW RULE
UNIFIED. SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN AUTHORITY
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a series of pub'lic wOrkshops will be. held to
discuss the~proposed creation of an Indirect Source Review Rule as follows:
20 February 1991 2:00 pm San Joaquin County Public Health Auditorium, .
(Wednesday) 1601 East Hazelton Avenue, Stockton
21 February 1991 .6:00 pm Auditorium,/County Center. Three Court,
(Thursday) northwest corner of Scenic Drive and Oakdale
Road, Modesto.
27 February 1991 10:00 am Room 301, Merced County Administration Building,
(Wednesday') 2222 "M" Street, Merced
28 February 1991 10:00 am Blanche Galloway Room, County Library,
(Thursday). 121 North "G" Street, Madera
6 March 1991 6:00 pm Room 301, .Hall of Records,
(Wednesday) Tulare and "M" Streets, Fresno
7 March 1991 2:00 pm Multi-purpose Room, Administration Building,
(Thursday) Kings County Government Center,
1400 West Lacey Boulevard, Hanford
13 March 1991 1:00 pm Ag Commissioner's Auditorium, County Civic Center,
(Wednesday) 2500 Burrel Avenue, Visalia
14 March' 1991 7:00 pm Public Meeting Room, Kern County Department of
(Thursday) Planning and Development Services,
/ 2700 "M" Street, Suite 100, Bakersfield
The purpose of this proposed rule is to minimize air pollution related tQ
new indirect sources. An indirect source is any facility, building,
structure~ installation, or combination.thereof which attracts motor
vehicles. While the indirect source itself may not be a direct emitter of
air pollutants, the vehicles attracted to that location do emit air ..
pollutants. The rule is directed toward new residential, commercial, and
industrial developments and any significant, expansions thereof.
This rule reduces emissions from automobiles associated with indirect
sources by reducing the vehicle trips and miles traveled, by requiring
mitigation and offsets of both on-site and off-site emissions, and/or
con%truction of local and regional projects funded by the payment of
mitigation fees. Enforcement is accomplished by imposing conditions for
land use approvals, building permits, and/or conditions for authorities to
construct and permits to operate.
This rule can be reviewed at the San Joaquin County Air Pollution Control
District, 2321 West Washington Street Suite 1 Stockton, phone (209.) 468
3470. ' ' -
JO ES
.GEARY TAYLOR
COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
JOEL HEINRICHS
MARY WEDDE~ ·
A~smManl Crmnly ~Itll~ Olhcel ''
& Inle~ern~,nl~ ReI,sI~)H~
ROBERT SEVERS
Em~v
COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
February 12, 1991
Board of Supervisors
Kern County Civic Center
141S Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA '93301
REGIONAL FORUM
The attached discussion paper is presented in response to the Board's referral to the Administrative
Office regarding the need for the County to become 'more proactive with respect to regional.ism and
further, that a meeting of representatives of the Board, cities, school boards, and special distriets
be ~held regarding regionalism and funding. The paper presents background information on current
and projected local government finance issues and the current clixnate/stat-us of regional governance
proposals.
With the State's budget shortfall currently estiznated to be $10 billion, there can be little doubt that
all levels of government will be affected financially and perhaps structurally. What the final i.mpaet
of the State budget will have on the delivery of services is still unpredictable. However, the
Governor's proposed budget appears to demonstrate a recognition .of the difficulties Ideal
government entities are having in meeting theLr service responsibilities. Governor Wilson also
appears much more supportive of existing local governmental structures than many in the
Legislature. Thus, the proposed budget contemplates slfi. fting general state programs to counties
and ~ereby strengthening their role as local regional governments.
A variety of Ideal government organizations have been formed to address regional growth and Ideal
government finance issues, and the corresponding legislation. Some organizations are formal ~,vith
a joint powers agreement in place. Others are ad hoc; meeting only when a specific issue arises
that the organization wishes to address. Throughout jurisdictions, various coman.ittees and advisory
groups composed of r~presentatives of cities, counties and districts meet regularly to discuss items
of mutual interest. Organizations of this type serve to foster communications and service delivery
cooperation between governmental entities with~ specified regions.
Kern County has ,11 cities, 190 special districts, and 47 school districts. An alliance composed of
representatives from each of these entities would be cumbersome, and possibly ineffectual. Thus,
it is recommended that the County Administrative office arrange to meet with representatives of the
cities, school districts and special districts to explore the degree of interest in forming a network,
or alliance, of local government entities. Also on the agenda would be the charge of the
1415 Truxlun ,Avenue. Room #704 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (805) 861-2371
Board of Supervisors
February' 12, i991
Page 2
organization, the subject-matter to be addressed, membership composition, and how such an
organization should be structured, operated and funded.
Therefore, I'F IS RECOMI~IENDED that the Board authorize the County Administrative Office to
arrange to meet with other local government entities to discuss the formation of a local government
alliance and to report back to the Board the result.
~ ~ely~/~/
; M ~¥y ~eddell
^c~ing County Administrative Officer
MW:AK:dmXregion
ce: ALl Departments
Pdehard Ritts
Jim Wise
Februa~ 12, 1991
DISCUSSION I'M'ER
I~EGIONALISM/LOCAL GOVERNMENT AssoCIATIONS
Prepared by
Kern County Administrative Office
The State's budget shortfall for fiscal year 1991/92 is now estimated at $10 billion. The State's
fiscal crisis is attributed to a variety of factors', among them: statutory, cost-of-living-increases
(COLAs), popUlation growth, an economic slow down, and changing population, demographics
which have resulted in an increase in the number of people requiring gtvernment services without
a corresponding growth in revenues.
As the State acts to balance its budget, there can be little doubt that .ail levels of government will
be affected financially, and perhaps structurally. With the fiscal health of counties and school
districts directly linked to the fiscal status of the State, counties and school districts will find it
difficult, if not impossible, to carry out their state and local program responsibilities as they.have
in the past. How the roles of counties as service providers will'changeis unpredictable. However,
the most likely result will be a reduction in county service responsibilities and/or-the realignment
of service responsibilities between the State and counties. Similarly, the specific impact on schools
is difficult to predict,-but continued difficulty in meeting the facility and program' needs of an
expanding student population can be expected. In addition, further realignment in the distribution
of'the available revenues between local government entities, the imposition of booking fees being
an example, is also a likely possibility. Thus, cities and special districts are likely to be directly or
indirectly affected 'by changes in the State's budget.
Local Government Finance -
As previously noted, the fiscal health of counties and school districts is directly linked to that of the
state. Prior to the 1990/91 fiscal year, cities had been fairly well insulated from the recently
tightened State budget. However, cities were suddenly brou~ght into the state/county budget crisis
with the passage of SB 2SS7, which provides for counties to charge jail booking fees and to recover
the cost of property tax administration.
While counties have long advocated for the ability to recover the cost of services provided to other
government entities, from the perspective of cities, school and special districts, SB 2557 was merely
a mechanism for the state to backfill county revenues in response to cuts in the State budget.
Although several pieces of legislation have akeady been introduced to repeal jail booking fees and
· to exempt schoo'l districts from the property tax administrati°n fees, the circumstances surrounding
the implementation of SB 2557 provide strong evidence that all local government entities will
continue to be affected by the State's fiscal problems and joint local government efforts to address
fiscal dilemmas are necessary. Clearly, fiscal issues have a domino effect throughout aH levels of
government, and on all types of services provided to the public.
· ·State and Local Fiscal ~Relationship
Counties have for many years ,proposed changes in' the fiscal relationship between the State and
counties, the goal of which is to restore-the fiscal health of counties th. rough an i~nprovement' in
the State's revenue generating abilities and program realignment. The County' Administrative
· Officers Association, a subgroup of the County Supervisors Association Of California (CSAC), has
formulated, draft proposals for basic smacrural and programmatic'changes for this fiscal year as
follows:
~'~Counties would assume responsibility for mental health programs, in their entirety, along ~
with a shift from the State to the counties of 1/4 cent of the cUrrent sales tax. Current
Shoi't-Doyle funding would cease.
· The State wOuld assume financial responsibility for the general assistance program, .with
counties eont~,nuing program admhxistration.' The cost of administration would be shared
75/25. The statewide general assistance program would be financed either by repealing the
sales' tax exemption of all entertainmen~ 'services or by adjusting the vekiele license fee
depredation' schedule, or-both.
· Establish a State Public Defender Conflicts Office to assist in relievfiqg some county financial
burden. The program is suggested to be financed by repealing a portion.of the capital gains'
exemption on inherited' property. '
· Place a cap on the percentage of a county's general purpose revenues which the county can
be required to spend on State mandated programs so that a county continues to have
suffident discretionary revenues-to fulfill local.government service responsibikifies~
· Also proposed, in addition to the above mentioned revenue generating measures, are: to
increase bank and corporation tax rates from 9.3% to 11.3°2( increase the excise tax on
alcoholic beverages, requi~e business to withhold income tax from independent contractors,
suspend income tax indexing, accelerate world-wide corporations' estimated tax payments,
accelerate sales tax payments, and to change revenue recognition policy for tax revenues.
In addition; a proposal to change the'sales tax allocation from the sims formula to a
,population based formula is contemplated. '
These proposals are obviously not the only possible alternatives, nor are they known to be viable
alternatives for resolving 'the state's and counties' fiscal problems and thus assisting in protecting
other local government entities from the state/county budget crisis. These proposals are, however,
representative of potential solutions that deserve further inquiry, discussion and possible advocacy
action.
On the behalf of cities, the League of California Cities has developed other proposals to gain
independence from the State budget crisis,-among which is the repeal of SB 2557. Included in this
proposal is the replacement of lost-revenue to counties by modifying the vehicle license fee
depreciation schedule. A group of county admi~trative officers and city managers are meeting to
discuss other revenue raising and program realignment proposals.
Governor's 1991/92 Proposed Bodeet
School Districts within Kern County have noted that if the Governor's budget is adopted as
proposed, school distxicts would 'lose $18 million; The specific impacts of the Governor's budget
on the ability of cities and counties to finance local discretionary and state mandated programs is
as yet u~d<nown. Key items within the Governor's proposed budget affecting the State/local fiscal
relationship and school districts are noted below: ·
'Education
· Funding of statutory enrollment growth in K-I2 categorical-programs, adult education and
child development 'and nutrition programs.
· Funding for new program initiatives, including: preschool reform and expansion, a Healthy
Start program, early mental health counseling program, and drug abuse'education programs.
· COLAs for 1991/92 are not budgeted.
· The Mentor Teacher program is proposed to be suspended for one year.
· The suspension of Proposition 98 is proposed, which would result in providing $1.4 billion
less than the minim~ funding level would have otherwise been budgeted.
· An increase in the enrollment fee for community colleges is proposed.
· Local gefieral obligation bonds for the financing of educational facilities would requffe a
simple majority, rather than two-thirds voter approval.
State/Local Rela~onahiit ~ =- · '~~., ' ~~
· ..j_.COunties would assume programmatic responsibility for mental health and eo
,,.' services programs. To replace Short-Doyle and AB 8 funding, counties would receive the
~ revenue resulting from d proposed change to the Vehicle License Fee and an adjustment
· Local general obligation bonds for the financing'of criminal justice facilities would require
a simple majority, rather than two-thirds voter approval.
· The administration has stated their intent to encourage legislation that would change the
current method for distribution of sales tax revenue to a per capita methodology to facilitate
removing fiscal motivations in land use decisions.
· A reduction in open space subvention funds (WilLiamson Act).
· A 4% decrease in county revenue stabili2ation funding.
· Local government is provided with the authority to increase the sales tax by 1/2 cent for
drug enforcement and crime prevention,
3
What the final impact on the delivery of services will be is still unpredictable. However, the
Governors proposed., budget appears to demonstrate a ~recognition of the difficulties' local
government entities are having in meeting theix service res'ponsibJ, lifies.
Many legislators envision regional governmental structUres as viable and necessary tO adequately
respond to the 'issues surroundhag the delivery of local government' services and the equitable
distribution of revenue. Regional government is also proposed as. a means of managing'growth and
its inherent problems, as well as benefits, on a region-wide basis.
During the 1990 legislative session thJxty bills were introduced' relating to growth' management
issues. Four of these bills would have dixecfly affected the governance of Kern County:
AB 4242 (W. Brown)would have created seven regional development and infrastructUre
agencies t6 supersede I.;AFCOs, APCDs, regional water quality control boards, and regional
transportation planning agencies.
SB 1932 (Presley) would have enacted the Subregional Planning Act, allowing local officials
to create new subregional agencies to prepare plans.
SB 1770 (McCorquodale) would have created the San Joaquin Valley Ah' Quality
Management District in place of eight separate ah' pollution control districts.
SB 2391 and SCA 51 (McCorquodale) would have authorized two new regional fiscal
authorities which could levy new taxes and fees to pay for public works projects. In its
original form this bill would not have impacted Kern County, however, the legislature's
committee report recommended that the San Diego area and the eight county San Joaquin
Valley also be authorized to form regional fiscal authorities.
None of these bills were enacted into law during the last session, either dying in committee, fa~ing
house passage,' Or'being vetoed by the Governor. However, two bills have akeady been
reintroduced in the 1991 legislative session: AB 4242 (Brown) has been reintroduced as AB 3; and
SB 1770 (McCorquodale) has been reintroduced as SB 124. Whether the remaining two bills noted
above will be reintroduced this session is not known at this time. However, it is likely that
numerous bi.lis regarding regional growth management/regi?nalism will again be introduced.
The volume of past and anticipated growth management and regional governance legishtion
provides a key to the interest and priority that this 'topic will continue to have in the current and
future Legislatures. State-wide, regional, and subregional planning will continue to be proposed
to address regional quality-of-life issues, fiscal/financing issues associated with infrastructure
requirements due to regional growth and to alleviate the 'fiscalizafion of land use."
While there are many reasons for fiscal stress in counties, among, the major factors that have
contributed are: (1) city incorporation and annexations 'that reduce property and sales tax revenues
available to coUnties, without an equal reduction in the cost of county services; and (2) growth in
redevelopment projects which negatively impact on the revenues 'of counties and other local
government entities: As cities and counties have found themselves in competition for revenue
4.
generating land uses, the comq.icts over annexations, incorporations, and the establishment of
redevelopment agencies have escalated. Thus, land use planning and regional growth issues and
.problems have become .intertwined .with local government finance.'
Stimmnrv
Both 'the fiscal capacity and organization structure of local governments are ]il<ely to ·change in the
1990s. Kern County may' need to form a network of'local governmental entities to develop
consensus on solutions for our region. This network, or alliance, can be structured i~ a variety of
ways and with a wide range of possible tasks.
AK:dmkregion
CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL
MEETING OF: O2/13/91
REFERRED TO: INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS J STINSON
ITEM: RECORD~ 7568
A Resolution of the Council of the City of
Bakersfield supporting the inclusion of cities on
the Board of a Unified Air Pollution Control
District for the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin.
ACTION TAKEN BY COUNCIL:
MOTION TO REFER BACK TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL
RELATIONS COMMITTEE, APPROVED, NS: MS,
ACKUP MATERIAL ATTACHED: YES
DATE FORWARDED BY CITY cLERK: 02/15/91
PLEASE ENTER THE STATUS INTO THE PRIME COMPUTER
COUNCIL REFERRAL TRACKING SYSTEM AS PROGRESS IS MADE.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
~"OF BAKERSFIELD~SUPPORTING~THE~INCLUSION
OF CITIESONTHE BOARD.OF,A UNIFIED AIR
~POLLUTION~,CONTROLDISTRICT~FOR.THE
SAN'.JOAQUIN.VALLEY,AIR.BASIN.
WHEREAS, 'Senate.Bill No..124 ~authorizes the.creation of a
Unified Air Pollution Control District for the San Joaquin Valley
Air Quality Basin to assume all authority, responsibility,
functions and duties of the county air pollution control district
of eight valley counties, including that.of the County of.Kern;
and
WHEREAS, the eight counties.are working to form a unified
air pollution control district to provide a regional approach
toward air.pollution control.in the San Joaquin Valley under a
Joint Powers Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the California Clean Air Act (AB 2595) of 1988
requires an Indirect Source Control Program (ISCP) for air pollu-
tion control districts that have not attained state.air quality
standards; and
WHEREAS, an ISCP will impact.land use decisions made by
cities requiring reductions of emissions attributable to develop-
ment projects; and
WHEREAS, the requirements for emissions reduction has
expanded to include those indirect sources that traditionally have
been subject only to the.policies and development standards of the
City's general plan, .subdivision and zoning ordinances; and
WHEREAS, the Kern County Board of Supervisors.has taken a
position in support of city.participation on the.Board of a Unified
Air Pollution Control District to be formed under a joint.powers
agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, ,BE.IT RESOLVED that the Council ~of the
City of Bakersfield as follows:
1. The Council declares its support for the~inclusion of
cities on the Board of the Unified Air Pollution Control District
for the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin.
2. The Council directs the City Clerk to forward a cer-
tified copy of this resolution to the Chairman of the Board of
Supervisors of Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin,
Stanislaus and Tulare counties, Senator Rogers, .Assemblyman Wyman,
~Assemblyman Harvey and Senator McCorquodale.
,o0o
I.HEREBY.CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was
passed and adopted by the.Council of the City of Bakersfield at.a
regular meeting thereof held on , by
the following vote:
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED
CLARENCE E. MEDDERS
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to form:
LAWRENCE M. LUNARDINI
CITY ATTORNEY of the City of Bakersfield
LML/SG/meg
R RES 5
APCD.1
2/5/91
- 2 -
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Meeting Date:
February 13, 1991
Agenda Section:
New Business
Agenda Item:
11. a.
TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Approved/ ~/
FROM: Development Services - Planning Department H~
City Attorney /~ ~
DATE: February 5, 1991 City Manager ~
SUBJfL~T: A Resolution of the Council of the City of Bakersfield supporting
the inclusion of cities on the Board of a Unified Air Pollution
Control District for the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin.
REC~ATION:
Motion to adopt Resolution. Roll Call Vote.
BACKGROUND:
The eight counties in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin and Senate
Bill No. 124 both propose a valley-wide air pollution control district.
However, they differ on their approach and'board membership. The proposed
resolution supports the participation of cities in the eight counties on the
board of any unified air basin authority.
ld
4:NB.1
MEMORANDUM
FEBRUARY 5 ~ 1991
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE ~I~Y~OUNCIL
FROM: JACK HARDISTY~ PI~ING DIRECTOR/Y~
SUBJECT: PROPOSED INDIRECT SOURCE REVIEW RBLE OF THE UNIFIED SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY
AIR BASIN AUTHORITY /
The Unified Air Basin Authority (UABA) has scheduled an introductory meeting for
the draft Indirect Source Review Rule. The meeting is scheduled for Wednesday,
February 6, 1991, at 10:00 a.m. at the Fresno County Farm Bureau, 1274 West
Hedges in Fresno.
The meeting will provide an opportunity for the cities in the eight counties that
comprise the UABA to comment on the proposed rule. The draft rule appears to be
the same rule prepared by Reynolds Associates for the Kern County Department of
Planning and DeVelopment Services. Stanley Grady, from my department,
participated on the task force that reviewed the document which was prepared on
a very quick time line. Written comments were submitted to the County.
The rule was submitted to the U~BA on December 13, 1990 without discussion. The
rule is being proposed for adoption by the eight counties of the UABA. This
meeting is the first opportunity that I am aware of where public testimony will
be taken on the rule.
Previous .comments have centered around several issues. They are as follows:
rationale for a mitigation fee, lack of identification of land use practices that
Could serve to reduce emissions from indirect sources, link between emission
reductions and control measures, relationship between credits and their air
quality benefit, no credit given for transportation control measures as
mitigation. Also, the relationship between land use, circulation and their
impact on vehicle movement has not been addressed.
The proposed indirect' source rule will have a major impact on development
activities throughout the valley. Because of this it is imperative that cities
take an active role in the process of development, adoption, implementation and
enforcement of rules designed to reduce emissions from development projects.
%~e California Clean Air Act has brought City Planning and Development authority
into the emissions reduction arena without mandating city participation on the
board of decision makers. This failure could result in mitigation that is
soundly based in accepted emission reduction models but provides no meaningful
methods for changing the land development practices that may contribute to the
degradationof the air in the valley.
SG:kl
a/source
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF BAKERSFIELD SUPPORTING THE INCLUSION
OF CITIES ON THE BOARD OF A UNIFIED AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT FOR THE
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN.
WHEREAS, Senate Bill No. 124 authorizes the creation of a
Unified Air Pollution Control District for the San Joaquin Valley
Air Quality Basin to assume all authority, responsibility,
functions and duties of the county air pollution control district
of eight valley counties, including that of the County of Kern;
and
WHEREAS, the eight counties are working to fOrm a unified
air pollution control district to provide a regional approach
toward air pollution control in the San Joaquin Valley under a
Joint Powers Agreement; and
WHEREAS,. the California Clean Air Act (AB 2595) of 1988
requires an Indirect Source Control Program (ISCP) for air pollu-
tion control districts that have not attained s~ate air quality
standards; and.
WHEREAS, an ISCP will impact land use decisions made by
cities, requiring reductions of emissions attributable to develop-
ment projects; and
WHEREAS, the requirements for emissions reduction has
expanded to include those indirect sources that traditionally have
been subject only to the policies and development standards of the
Ciny's general plan, subdivision and zoning ordinances; and
WHEREAS, 'the Kern County.Board of Supervisors has taken a
position in support of city participation on the Board of a Unified
Air Pollution Control Distr~ct to be formed under a joint powers
agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the
City of Bakersfield as follows:
1. The Council declares its support for the inclusion of
cities on the Board of the Unified Air Pollution Control District
for the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin.
2. The Council directs'the City Clerk to~ forward a cer-
tified copy of this resolution to the Chairman of the Boar'd of
Supervisors of Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin,
Stanislaus and Tulare counties, Senator Rogers, Assemblyman Wyman,
Assemblyman Harvey and Senator McCorquodale.
-o0o
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing ResOlution was
passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a
regular meeting thereof held on , by
the following vote:
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of th~
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED
CLARENCE E. MEDDERS
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to form:
LAWRENCE M. LUNARDINI
CITY ATTORNEY of the City of Bakersfield
LML/SG/meg-
R RES 5
APCD.1 ~
2/5/.91
- 2 -
FROM: NIKKI STOKOE, DEPUTY CLERK, CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Attached are the original City Clerk referral(s) ([) from the
Council Meeting of I~"'~l
that
require
attention.
+.2, ~/' CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL
? MEETING OF: 01/09/91
REFERRED TO: INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS J STINSON
ITEM: RECORD# 7418
Air Quality in the San Joaquin Valley.
(McDermott)
ACTION TAKEN BY COUNCIL:
MOTION TO REFER THE ISSUE TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL
RELATIONS COMMITTEE, APPROVED.
BACKUP HATERIAL ATTACHED: NO
DATE FORWARDED BY CItY CLERK: 01/11/91
STATUS:
PLEASE ENTER THE STATUS INTO THE PRIME COMPUTER
COUNCIL REFERRAL TRACKING SYSTEM AS PROGRESS IS MADE.
COEN AND ASSOCIATES
Hous~g and Development Services
EXECUTIVE SUMI~,RY
FAIR HOUSING ~SSESSMENT
The Fair Housing Assessment has been Conducted to affirmatively
further fair housing in the private and public housing sectors. It
will be performed in two phases. Phase I deals with CDBG funded
public and private housing activities and evaluates the
effectiveness of the Fair Housing Program. Phase II of the
Assessment will analyze the impediments to fair housing choice in
private housing activities. The report is presented in five
sections.
SECTION I
The first Section consists of this Executive Summary.
SECTION II
The second contains "An Analysis of the Residential Distribution of
Whites and Minorities in Kern County". 1990 Census data from the
publication KERNDATA, obtained from KERNCOG, is the source of most
information used. Since major concentrations along ethnic or
racial lines occur predominantly among White, Hispanic, Black and
Asian people, this report does not focus on other ethnic.groups.
Demographic Analysis
Hispanic
Twenty-four percent (24.1%) of the County's residents are Hispanic.
Communities with concentrations at or above 50% have been
determined to be "impacted" and include Arvin (75.0%), Delano
(62.7%), McFarland (83.0%), Shafter (49.7%), Buttonwillow (52.5%),
Lamont (76.6%), Lost Hills (93.6%) and Weedpatch (85.6%).
Census tracts in Metropolitan Bakersfield with predominantly
Hispanic populations are also specified in the document.
Black
Five percent (5.0%) of the County residents are Black. Communities
with concentrations at or above 10% include Bakersfield (10.5%),
California City (11.3%) and Buttonwillow (9.8%). Census Tracts in
Metropolitan Bakersfield with more than a 10% Black population are
also specified.
White
Countywide the White population is 66.9% of the total. Communities
showing a predominance of White inhabitants (above 80%) include 22
of the Census Tracts in Greater Metropolitan Bakersfield. Most of
the Census Designated Places have White populations exceeding 80%.
167 Lambert Street, Suite 116 · Oxnard, CA 93030 · (805) 981-9544
Asians
The Countywide average of Asians is 2.7%. parts of Bakersfield have
major Asian concentrations above 18%.
Extent of Patterns of Segregation
There are areas in the County and the Bakersfield Area which show
patterns of segregation. They are defined as areas of Black
concentrations (above 10%); Hispanic concentrations above 50%
coupled with 'very few White inhabitants (66.9% of County).
Communities with "segregation" patterns are Arvin (75% Hispanic),
Delano (62.7% Hispanic), McFarland (83% Hispanic), and Buttonwillow
(11.3% Black). The majority of Census Designated Places in the
County not only show evidence of a preponderance of White residents
but contain few Hispanics and Blacks.
Suggested Target Areas
Suggested target areas for the Fair Housing Program outreach
efforts outside of greater Metropolitan Bakersfield are: Arvin and
Delano, (Hispanic); ~ Buttonwillow and Bakersfield (Black), and
Delano (Asian).
SECTION III
The third part of the Assessment is the "Fair Housing Services and
Practices Report" discussing services and practices of CDBG funded
public and private entities in Kern County. It reviews fair
housing education and promotion strategies within the City and
County. Interviews were· held with public and private staff
participating in, or providing services to, the Kern County Fair
Housing Program. The Consultants contacted as many public and
private entities as possible to obtain descriptions of services and
practices relevant to fair housing choice, regardless of their
funding sources.
The existing Fair Housing Program conducts the following
activities: a Hotline Service; Testing; Mediation; Litigation
Referral; Audits; Coordination; and an Education Program, all aimed
at furthering fair housing choices in the County.
The affect of CDBG funded programs on fair housing issues was
assessed. The CDBG funded rehabilitation and neighborhood
improvement programs impact fair housing choice by helping to
maintain the City and County stock of affordable housing. By
funding such efforts as the Bakersfield Homeless Center, Kern
Linkage, the Alliance Against Family Violence, and the Kern County
Food Bank, the City and County improve overall services to specific
protected groups and have access to them as a means of educating nd
promoting Fair Housing services. CDBG financial assistance to the
development community via land write-down and off-site
improvements, add affordable units to the housing stock which
· The Consultants have prepared additional findings and
recommendations dealing specifically with the need to improve
outreach efforts.
SECTION IV
The fourth section analyzes specific "Impediments to Fair Housing".
Coen and Associates interviewed planning officials from each CDBG
city involved to discuss housing policies and to assess any
potential impediments to fair housing which may exist.
The following individuals were interviewed in each community:
Arvin - Howard Phillips, City Planner
Bakersfield -Stan Grady, Assistant Planning Director
California~City - Ron Brazill, City Engineer/Planner
Delano - Ken Cott, Planning Director Economic Development
McFarland - Michael O'Haver, City Planner Transit Manager
Shafter - Laurence Tomasello, Planning Director
Tehachapi - Christopher Grimes, City Planner
Kern County - Randy Abbott, Resource Management Director
There were no specific policy impediments identified for the site
approval process other than CEQA reviews; minimum site and building
size requirements; and miscellaneous zoning restrictions.
The Consultants have identified the following specific impediments
to the maximum effectiveness of the Fair HoUsing Program.
Impediment No. 1. - Isolation of Program
Recommendation
Set-up a "committee'' or work'unit consisting of key County and City
community development staff and the Program Administrator to assist
in coordinating the activities of the Program.
Impediment No. 2 - Perceived Lack of Adequate Number of Staff
Recommendation
Restructure Program goals, objectives and tasks. Decide upon
priorities with specific dates for completion and a method for
evaluating Program Performance; If a clear set of objectives and
tasks is identified and prioritized, existing staff time can be
allocated to implement specific expectations.
Impediment No. 3 - Too Much Emphasis on Landlord/Tenant Calls
Recommendation
Accept the need to answer calls and make referrals on issues which
are not strictly defined'as discrimination complaints. Minimize
reporting used in the past to justify the need to take all incoming
calls.
Impediment No. 4 - Inconsistently Performed Audits and Lack of
Follow-up
Recommendation
Suspend auditing from the work program.
Impediment No'. 5 - Lack of Referral to HUD and DFEH
Re-evaluate the Program's current system of referring cases for
adjudication to encourage more referrals to enforcement agencies.
Impediment No. 6 - Inadequate Outreach Component
Recommendation
Restructure an EduCation and Coordination work plan to implement
the Consultants recommendations.
Impediment No. 7 - Unequal City/County Outreach
Recommendation
Focus most outreach efforts outside the City for one year.
Impediment No. 8 - Target Groups Not Being Reached
Recommendation
Establish specific target census tracts for outreach activities
based on the percentage of multi-family housing units, percentage
of renters, and ethnic/racial populations.
Impediment No. 9 - Inadequate Interface With Other CDBG Funded
Organizations
Recommendation
Provide training on fair housing to other CDBG funded program
administrators.
Impediment No. 10 - Inconsistent Housing Element Fair Housing
~oals, Objectives and Program Statements
Recommendation
Update Housing Elements to contain language describing
participation in the existing Fair Housing Program.
SECTION V
The final section includes the Appendices.
CONCLUSION
It is the Consultant,s opinion that the Fair Housing Program is
doing an effective job operating the Hotline Service (complaint in-
take/record keeping) and mediation. The Program Administrator,s
dedication and commitment to fair housing issues is apparent. A
harmonious spirit of cooperation exists among Advisory Committee
Members. The Program staff has a comprehensive knowledge of. fair
housing laws and cares about what it is doing. The City of
Bakersfield and County of Kern have taken equal responsibility for
operation of the Program and are committed to furthering "Fair
Housing Choice" in the County.
Outreach efforts of the Program need to be improved. There is
little evidence that promotional materials have been disseminated
outside of the Greater Bakersfield area. Of the organizations and
individuals interviewed, only a few actually used the Program or
knew enough about it to assess its effectiveness. A great deal of
coordination and education needs to occur among governmental
agencies and organizations funded by the public in order to
affirmatively further fair housing in the County of Kern and City
of Bakersfield.