The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAD 03-3 Continuing Disclosure 2-15-06MCINTOSH ~ ASSOCIATES City of Bakersfield Public Works 1501 Truxtun Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 . _. ~ ~ f... ~a ~ ~ ,~, ~~ Attention: Marian Shaw February 15, 2006 Reference: Assessment District 03-3 Continuing Disclosure ~.,, ~ Mc #6800.48 (03-3) ~s Dear Marian: ~~~~~~ '' ~~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ ` ~~' ~~ ~ '~ ~~` Please find attached the revised "Ac uisition Schedule" for the abov r f q e e erenced assessment district. Following is a summary of construction status through June 30, 2005: The following 03-3 project is complete. and an Application and Certificate for Payment has been filed for reimbursement: . ~, ~ ~.~ ~~~~ Tract 6185 Traffic Signal and a ortion of the Fees p The following 03-3 projects are under construction and/or nearing completion: r~. ^ The remaining Fees for Tract 6185 (73 lots) ^ White Lane -North Side (Tract 6223 Frontage) }~ ~;=~ ~ ~~=~~.. ,'~~~~; ~~<<*~~~..f;~ , Allen Road -East Side (Chamber Blvd. to White Lane) Char~ibcr BI~~~u. - dull U'Jiuitl-r (vest boundary of r-tact 604 to AIIer~ Rd.) ~,:. ~ ~; , ~~;~~, ,; ~, Chamber Blvd. -South Side (Windermere St. to west boundary of ~~~ ~~ Tract 6045) Please let me know if you have any questions or require additional information. ~Cii"ncerely, M & 661.834.4814 Fax 661 •834.0972 Roger~lGlcln os RCE 33322 2001 Wheelan Court RAM: jk Bakersfield, CA 93309 cc: Scott Blunck Laura Whitaker www.mcintoshassoc,com Ed Wilson/Dejan Pavic Q:IPROJECTS16800481PAYMENT103-31ContinuingDisclosure03-3.doc mcengr@mcintoshassoc,com a m W r1 y ~ O O O O O ~ 3 ~ c0 c~ d' OO N O O f~ ~ ~ f~ 0 ~- ~ O y w w ~(~ON w ~ w O y 3 N N N n w w ~ ~ 0 ' ~ a~ c~ ~ ~ 0 a •~• o ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ a~~ 0 O M ~ ~ • = ~ ~ p A\ 0 0 N (~ O r w w ti O O to '~ w 07 w 0~ w ~~ ~ W ~ N y n 00! ~ N 001 00 O O .~ p NNN r ~ t0 0 M ~ y ~ 6F? {~} f~} ~ M ~ WWQ O - V ~ s 0 ~ L RS ~ ~ ~, ~' a a ._ o N o ~ _ _ .~ - - _ C = ~ ~- N ^c~ N >y y ~ ~ C ` t0 J ~- > p ~ 0. .N ~ p,~ ~ 0 ,-. •- *~ ~ ~ -~ C o ~ ~ o~>=~ ~~~ s N y V Q ~- ~ > ~ 0 r o c ~ O ~ N c0 y 0 .-. o0 N ~ .L a c ~°~o ~~ ~~~ ~ y coy ~ m d ~ ->m 0Nm ~ ~.~ '~`'' Z C ~ ''pr ,~ ~ *, (~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~t0 ~ ~~ ~ ~ t6 ~ ~-~'0 ~ L ~ ~ O ~ ti ~,- r '~ Qoo~V~ C (~ ~ N a~L . ~ ~ ~ ~~Q ~ ~= o ~ ~m _ L~ -~ ~~r~ ~ y ZW > > t~O N ~ ' °° m °' c~ c ~ 0 Z J -a a~ ~ a~ ~ o 0 z ~ . .~ ~ ~QU U mF- ~ ~ *~ co co 0 0 '~ ~ ~, Q as d as as ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 WV ~ ~ O O v ~ ~ O ~ ~ d N ~ ~ ~ ~. N y '+ L V p ~ O O ~ 0 ~ ( N ' ~ ~ w ~ Q O 0 w M 0~ a '~ p. L W ~. a 0 H 0 N N ~~ Raul Rojas -Paladino Water Pa a 1. From: Marian Shaw To: Jack LaRochelle; Raul Rojas Date: Friday, March 14, 2003 3:43:32 PM Subject: Paladino Water Still working on that letter to the Paladino folks. Recap -City staff can do the base map for CalWater. Residents must pay deposit to CalWater for design, but they can get that back after sale of bonds. Residents must get new petition to the City -need as close to 100% as possible -~ 60% is not good enough. Residents must also pay for an appraisal of their property to make sure that the 3:1 value to lien ratio can be met -otherwise, no district. We didn't really discuss this, but I assume that we will not regruie them to front the cost for Wilson or our time? Essentially, the City is willing to work on this project, but we need a definite commitment from the residents in the form of the deposit money and appraisals. Right? Marian ;-~ ~~~1~ P~~ MEMORANDUM T0: Greg Klimko Mike McMasters Marian Shaw Nelson Smith John Stinson DATE: January 7, 2004 FROM: Ed Wilson SUBJECT: Cosmo Area Deposit Status re: City of Bakersfield Assessment District No. 03-3 RE: Our No. 29-630 I offer the following in response to Terry Chiles' question "...can we get our $73,.000 cash contribution refunded out of ..." the proceeds from the sale of the Cal Water Refund agreement? This question was presented in his email of January 1, 2004 to Marian Shaw. I called Mike McMasters, Cal Water, today and asked about the potential amount and timing of the availability of the Cal Water Refund for sale to a private investor. Mike's response was that the full amount of their project cost maybe eligible for refund and that the refund is paid over 40 years (2.5% fixed amount annually). The basis for the refund is that Cal Water has been given the facilities and their rate payers refund the eligible system costs over the 40 year depreciable life of the those facilities. It is common practice, especially by subdividers, to sell their refund agreement to investors and that there are several companies specializing in purchasing Cal Water Refund Agreements. The contract purchase prices are generally at 20% to 25% of the total refund amount (the discounted present value of the 40 payment stream). The Cal Water project construction cost estimate (including connection fees) is $365,000. If that cost is confirmed as 100% eligible for the Cal Water 40 year refund, the annual refund payment to the assessment district would be about $9,000. Based on a discounted sales value of 25% of the refund total, that agreement could be sold for an estimated $91,000 before sales costs. However, according to Mike the amount eligible for refund will not be confirmed by Cal Water until after all of the proj ect costs have been paid, the proj ect records submitted to their accounting division, and based on~ their review a determination made as to the actual cost eligible for refund. Mike said that since Cal Water will be constructing the improvements, it will take only about 60 days from the date that the completed project records are sent to their accounting division to get. the final refund amount released. Based on Mike's comments, it appears that the refund eligibility will not be confirmed until after the Cosmo Area water improvements will have been constructed and all costs paid. Therefore, the 1 refund agreement would not be available for sale to an investor until after the project is completed and all costs paid. Accordingly, the Cosmo Area cash contribution (estimated at $106,000) will still be needed as a source of funds for the construction of the improvements. The contribution will be accounted for in the assessment as follows: i) the project total improvement and proceeding costs will be spread based on benefit; ii) the amount contributed by each owner would then be applied as a credit to reduce the estimated net improvement and proceedings cost to tax exempt bond financing; iii) the estimated bond issuance costs would then be calculated and spread based on those net amounts. No cash would be refunded under this approach. If the refund agreement is ultimately sold to an investor, those proceeds would go to the assessment district and their final disposition determined by the City Finance Department. The concept of refunding the $35,000 assessment expense deposit that is also referred to in the Terry Chiles email to Marian entered the project financing discussion at the October meeting with the Cosmo Area project proponents. At that time their construction cost estimate was $260,000 and that total could be supported as tax exempt financing by the developer improvement costs without a need for any contribution to reduce the Cosmo Area construction cost. Therefore, it would have been possible to include the $35,000 assessment expense in the total assessment and reimburse the individuals that paid the deposit. However, the latest Cal Water estimate is $365,000, a $105,000 increase that cannot be supported for tax exempt bond financing by the cost of the developer improvement costs. Therefore, the $35,000 assessment expense (plus the costs for design, etc. that Cal Water will have to be paid before the assessment is confirmed) cannot be reimbursed to the individuals that paid the deposit, because those funds will have to be paid back to the district construction account from bond sale proceeds. 2 ?E 31 f k~~4 i ~ i', ,. ~ ~i r' ~~ ~ { ,~~~ a a .~ '~ ~ a~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ,r `~ 'i -------_ .._.._ .. , _.. _ ._._,__~~~---.._.M ._,___ _...._. _ _. ___ .. __._._.__ .__._.._ ~. _~... _ .._. ~.. _.. _~~.... _._~ ...__.._...__.__.__.._..w _ ._.._. ~__ ._ -_---~.__.__ ...._ . _..._.. _ . _ ._ . ___. _ _.v._...__...____._..., _._ _ .... . ~r~ {1 ~ (~h ~: ~5~~~-~'~ ~_ ~-tit/! ~ ~~~ ..._._ ..~__.__..__w ...... _.__ . _..~..._.. ..v.._,_.__ .u .__._r~~,~-..._._...---_._..._---~._~ .__._....._~ ....__..__. _._ .._.._ .._.~.__ .__.._ ..._ ___.___..__.__ __._.._ .~,_._.__..~..___.._..._..__~._~ __ ._._..._., ._._ .. „~ ~ 4 t ~~, _ .. .. @{ .___. ~~.__....__ ___~c~_.. ,___ ._ ___.. __. _. _~. _._ ._..,..._~ .....__..____..~__ _. ~~:~ ~~ ,~ .~ k~! $sg~ ~ ~,~ 1 k ;y .~,~.~ ~ ' ~~ ~a ~~ ~. ~ t ~ ~- ~ _..._ ._. _____. ,__ .. _ _ _ ._ ___ _ ~ ~ __._ _. _ _.. ___~___ _ _ ._ _ _ .__ _.. _ _ _ _ ._ . __ __ . ~ ___ ~._.,, _ __.._ _ ._.. _ _ . . _ __~_ _ ____.. __ . __...____. __. __ . _ .w__._._ .~__ _ __ __ .. __ __ __.._ .. .. __ ~. y. 3 ~~, ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ 3 ~ h~~ __~__..______________. _ __ _ _. ~ , _______.___ ___..____ __r .__ _~_ _ .._._ ._~ ____~ ._ __ ____ __ ~~_~..._w~__ .__~___ _ __ _...___ _.._ _ __ __.___,_ ~_._.....__ ___ .. _______._ _ __._~_____ _ __ , . __~ . _ _, _._.~ _ _~_... __,__ _ . __ __ ___ _ ____ _ _._._ _ _ ._. ~ ___ _.._~,. _.w.__ _ _ __~_._. _.__._._._ _____ _ ~._..~___ ~_.~...__ __ ._.__ . . __. _. _ .. _ __ . _ . _ . ___. _ _ _ . _ _._. _ _ .. _ _. _ _ _~ .. w ~~ _ e~J a ~~ ...- - a~ i ~ ~ cv ~ ~ _ _.~__ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ._ . ~Cc fit. v+` _ ~ _ __~. _ _ __ _. ~-~ _ '~. ~ _ _ _`~~_ . _ ... _ . ___ ._~_ ~.,_ __ ,_~______ .__ ~._, .w M..__ ,.._.._ __ _ . _ _.... _ _,._ 4 7 4 ___._~ _.___..._.... _ _____ ._._ ._._ :._ __. _.....__~_.__, _ ., _ ~.... ~_ _ ..~1.~. ~ ~._. ._._ . ~. .~ ~ z~ ,~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ a~ ~~ r__.._ . ._~~ ~_..__. _.__ __._ _ ._ .__~.. __.. _ _ _.._ _ _... .~ x ~'x '~ `~ R~ +~~ ~ ,a. ~. ~_..__ .. ...___,.......... _.. __.... ._.,_.., ... 1y t ,,,.~ y e ~,..,,..~ 1 MM''~~ ~~~ ~'~p/! 1 ~~ ~ 7 .; ~ ~ ~ ~~=I. i 5II _ yf"{ :;~,~ i id; YN p 1 ~ .. , .. .. .. ... ...,.~ ......,:aw»....:..c,.... ~;' :~~ ~ . 3~ ~ __ ~Stlma ted Cos# Wq TF ~ s of Wate R S~ M {from ~ r Syste a1VVater's m ~ Maxim ~°nstr ~~ verbal estim um bondin - Sep,, a~ ate) 9 amount M ice rges ainlin°~onneCtion # ~or~ ~ Fees °f knit _ n~~n Charge s ~nrt Co ClgCax {~2.7~ st Scr gal ° °f Con amounts necton C 8 1 $ O~'ead { 12 % harges~ 2 , 540 300, 000 _ ,mate ~> >> 400 12 d cost 8 ,000 °f c0nstr ~~ 350 2, pp co action , C 0 Add st 4f distri al Water 1,800 ct formatio 3, 53 n{fr0ms 3 2 Su #~ ~-c~tal . total o chedule b 28, 332 4st °f wat el°w) 39,40 er system 3 0 Less Estimate t0 grope 6T ? o f Maxi ~ °wners Est. of ota! qss mum to mt Ce 0 6°nd vy 5~0 o f Subtotal ~ rot CC' ~udki a! oUt o f ns {6,63 pocket c 0, Opp x 50 less 1n i tial d ash requir ~0) epos~t re ed o f pro qu-red t° perty owner Estimated Re proceed s . ,malnder°f private act~vrtY bo cash pa nd~n9 re , Ydown re qu~remen# qurred t° m s for tax ex eet g empt issue 732 124,.418 492 149 331,800 16p~~9.-~ n~~ r ~~ ~,ooo Esti ~ matesofq 9~T,~9 ddJt10na! . costs {not r Initial Deposit Re4ui~ elated t Amount to City- ed ° COnstruc Lion) Assessment Engines Appraisal r Total Initial peAo amounts sit to Cif Amount to Cal Water Estirna#ed Initial depos• ~#s requir ed ASSESSMENT DISTRlC Assessm T ~~STS , ent Engineer Est-mat Appraisal a of C°sm Cepos it to Cal Water ° p0~~0n BOnd Counsel Disclosure Counsel AD g3-1 Payoff Ten percent {10%) resew Est. 2 mo. Ca • ~ e requireme ~ prtal-zed interest o nt °n bon nderwriter discount ~ 7~ { $3 '~ amours Boy 31,500 x o t { $331,15 d Printing 7/ X 2I1 0 x 1p% F-scal q en 2) ~ 9 t Total. Estimated costs of • drs#nct for To matr°n #al Estima#ed cos# of wa ter SYste m #o cOSm° S:INELS4N1 res~den#s CosmoCosts.xlsf { 367,T3Z f all cost T?x,300 25,000 ~~>000 35,000 8, 000 a ~,ooo 25,000 10=000 8040 .14,OOp 2000 27,5p0 33,15p 3, 868 4, ~ 00 700 $ 100 124:418 Paladino -Cosmo Water AD CalWater needs deposit of $8,000 to prepare engineering plans and get an accurate estimate. Based on the assessment district cost information we have from the other areas, the cost limit (bond amount) for Paladino -Cosmo would be approximately $331,500 to remain within the 5% maximum for anon-taxable issue. The rou h estimate from CalWater plus the bond proceeding costs exceeds this dollar amount by a considerable amount (N $161,000). To remain in the district, the Paladino/Cosmo residents would have to make up the difference in the construction cost to insure that the cost to bond does not exceed the 5%. The City needs a deposit of $35,000 and CalWater needs their $8,000 deposit to remain on track. While there was a question of whether or not the Paladino/Cosmo area would be able to remain within the district, the deposit to CalWater to start the engineering and finalize the rou h estimate was put on hold. With the deposit the City will require an agreement from property owners to make the difference in the cash payment period. Because of the requirements of State Law governing assessment districts, all parcels that will benefit from the installation of the facility must be assessed. There are 3 large parcels (one 40 acre parcel to the northeast, one 40 acre parcel to the south and one 80 acre parcel to the south) that could be served from this line and so will benefit from this facility. Including these parcels increases the assessment area by about 160%, which would decrease the per acre assessment by about 60%. These 3 parcel owners have never been contacted by the City regarding this possibility. They may not be happy to be included. The one way around assessing these parcels is to have 100% of the remaining property owners agree to pay more than their fair share and promise not to protest at the hearing. (The "charter city" option) The money from the potential sale of the 40~year reimbursement contract with CalWater is not available to refund the property owners making the cash deposit. It must be used to pay down the bonds. .. ,. ~ ._ ,. ,,._.-.. -._ . as , a ~~ <. • .x ,u x .. +. , x .v.. ,r r , .v „ ... ... ~,,,... ,., as ,w:' •,~.:'. , ~ .' :::,~~ a~,•~. ~, ..a.. Gc • z az:... ~ ,.:;:.,.:. ~: as u. ,.x~. ,,, .a r , ~ , .~ ~a :.z. ,za ,~ti ~ .. , a tt: ?.~ .,;•.... ~,• ,~ ,. ,~ .: ,.. :Marian Shaw -Fwd: Re: cosmo Pale 1 • • rx, .. ~x ~ ~ Mania aaa~ "mtiha\'iv ~Y•1i.`i1~"*>~cZ~~`ab\ ~. ux•3 ~~a .; y:Yx ;i:, „'i..x:\ ,. a ~~~.~:a~>: :'vt\•,:~ ~a \a". ~•\~~ v ~ ~.~,.~, x. :~"~2u•: :\~A,\ a~: b".~4` \ ~.a'~'~, "., r a. ,;, ,,,.@~'•ca~~;'ti'tL`.:\,~; KZ T. >a •irYa.\ ~?a~ 3.:^u' ..:G~\; d. i ldl~s.i@.1, : :~x~z,. .~a)<~_~i... ..~.-.~ -.a... _.,_ ~k ~..:a,~\~,~. ~.:~ From: Nelson Smith To: Greg Klimko; Marian Shaw; Robert Sherfy Date: 11512004 3:00:17 PM Subject: Fwd: Re: cosmo I think this should be referred to our legal experts, but my initial reaction is that the City should be dealing with the "applicant", whoever that is ... any accounting or calculation of "who owes what" or who is entitled to such and such of a reimbursement should be handled by the applicant .... I think it would be fine if the applicant handed us 15 or 20 checks made payable to :City of Bakersfield ... but I don't think we will be issuing 15 or 20 reimbursement checks to individuals other than the applicant unless we have some legal basis for such a disbursement. Gregory is out sick today, but he may have some additional comments on this subject . »> Marian Shaw 01105104 01:59PM »> Any thoughts? Marian ;-) »> "Terry Chiles" <chiles a~.2000energy.com> 12131/2003 4:26:21 PM »> Well Marion, we got committments for the construction difference just from the residents, but hope to spread that around a little with the vacant landowners, and they'll pay deposit to. The $35,000 deposit for assess costs will be easier to spread over all people as getting it back is very attractive to them... Don Galey, who owns 114 of the entire assessment district property, has committed to funding his share of the construction offset and assessment deposit, so that is the kicker. So, our answer is yes, we want to go ahead....., Please find a way for each of us to send in money to the two funds. Hhaving the city collecting it is preferable to us, especially me, as I don't wnt to be responsible..... thank you, and have a fine new year..,. terry From: Marian Shaw To: chilesna.2000energy.com Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 4:37 PM Subject: Re: email address change Terry -John has been out all week -have you been able to pull together your funding? Unfortunately, I'll be out tomorrow, but you can call either John or I on Monday... Marian ;-) »> "Terry Chiles" <chiles(~2000energy.com> 121301200312:14:10 PM »> Hello my effort yesterday to to send out my new email addresswas a dismal failure, here it is......terrychiles(a~,direcway. com. I will be adding all your addresses into my new email program. I wish you all the best in the new year... regards, Terry .. , .. ,. ,.. > , u 'r: , _-.. _,.....w--. _-"~- a.~,..:',d-'~"~..__ .-._.. ,. :~_... . aa:LAaa.:.. ~, „aaaa..,R :at~c v .:. , , ~:r a , a.. ., , ,, . ....... ., .. .. ~. ,. ,. . e - .. .. ~~"~ ~.,^ ,,,~.;. :~..~~.„~ ~a3'a;,.~o...~ =C'4, ., k;, mac,:.. ~ a„i>~ Laix..,~,.F.:. • Z~.. aka. Ua,a., ~ .., : ',?..,., a ;'F : \~wa ~..:.«~ .5,,, s. ., ., ,... .v ~ v Marian Shaw Fwd: Re: cosmo Pa e .. ... ., ., . ~.r .,.,,,.. ~ , h, : , ~...,~n~,a,,. ,., ~ `~ _. ~.~a~,~n~~•~~•~ ~„ ~_.~ __~; ~~.~ , ~~•.~ ,,~ . ;~ r. ,..~ ~h.. ,...~..., ..xr ~a~ z ~ u,„~:.~ ~~~.......r;..<, ~ <,~•~...~~~..~:;hz ~, ~, ;0., \ .ti z~1* :i~\;at~~~. ~,J,.. rwY~ [ a.,.~`a~::'f~, , ~s c'x`.r Z acs. ,.: .W..`a `~.aiuaL.:'."a`a~\'S, ,..;~:"~ ...sa. a. ,~a 4~ . ..e.~. ,.1';:.: *, __ _.__...-__. .. _. _~. CCe John A. Stinson e a,, •,'•a3, \'\a.:~Y»:e,:::.a ,a~dxa `.: p,.x.\Fa n"w:ss'va~" ,x,,.:,.. ~;;;;,;:~r :8ttiati. .a ~.. a .~ Fm\'n`t w.,, ,a„ ~x .,,., eti,>.e. ~.. .... ,. .ra, ,..,.. .._.. \ , - Marian Shaw Re: Fwd: Cosmo Water assessment district a ~fi.:;ce~a:,r\,::£.,'F.a"c~.;\""\1. Y:%~~.~..~a~~n~~. ,,.~, ~, .:v\.,'.`T :n \\~\"d`: ~~, ~~. \h,.,,\.,~a?L: _... \a~ fi~,~iil~., 2 aoyt .~AZ',~\ ~ v i , „ \~r e ._..., .-.,, ~ ~..::,._._"+Z.',\`*: a2s \ w,. -~.-_ From: Nelson Smith To: Ed Wilson; Greg Klimko; Marian Shaw Date: 1/512004 2:48:40 PM Subject: Re: Fwd: Cosmo Water assessment district Marian , I don't know what he is talking about when he refers to "cal water's obligation to buy our system" ... isn't it cal water's system ? As far as the $73,000 is concerned, assuming the decision is for them to buy down to get below the 5% private activity threshhold (which is only one of the options discussed in our most recent meeting) ,the $73,000 basically becomes construction proceeds upon completion of the district ;the money is spent on construction -there is no refund .The whole point of them paying the $73,000 is that the costs are not to be funded by issuing bonds, so if we go that route, there is no money to pay them back. »> Marian Shaw 01/05104 02:02PM »> I am not really sure what he is asking. He wants his cash contribution back? Does this sound feasible? Marian ;-) »> Terry Chiles <terrychiles~a.direcwaY com> 1111200412:12:53 PM »> Hello Marian, I hope you had a nice new year's eve. 5% of entire $369K district (Castle and Cooke, McJunkin, and Cosmo area) is all that can be borrowed for our area by federal law. This is $296K. We must contribute $73K cash to reduce Cosmo construction costs of $369K down to $296K. One aspect of the assessment district that slipped my mind for awhile was the sale of Cal Water's obligation to buy our system with a 5% payment every year. Mike McMasters told us at that big meeting with assessment engineer Ed Wilson that this obligation can be sold to underwriters at 22%-24% on the dollar, rather than Cal Water giving us 5% back each year. The sale of Cal Water's obligation at 22% of $369K would bring in $81 K. Can we get our $73,000 cash contribution refunded out of this $81,000. The assessment expense deposit of $35,000 added to this $73,000 construction buy is $108,000. This is a considerable amount, which would be made more palatable by a full refund..... Please try to get a quick answer, as I think it may well be "yes", which would greatly aid our efforts to collect money. Right now it is a hodgepodge, with some people willing to pay their full construction costs, some willing to pay their pro rata share of the construction buy, and some not responding. But, the $73K is covered by total of these commitments. It would be more fair if we could get everyone to contribute their pro rata share and this would be easy if all money could be refundable...... Thank you Marian regards, Terry .. ,,.,. .... ., . ..,.....,~, •, x ~Ca ~,. l ' v,\mkaF.\u ~:~.\x':. •~ ~ ?k . r ak,. : ; w>.x. \. a~~ M.it,,.~•V a~ ....`•~`~ a\.~ a, .:,aa.. R., .,x :~.:. .: nra .~ <.,uu .u ~c z ~ ,... ~, .. ~..~ ..... m, .,... • . .. ,..., G.\. ]:•. ?x, • :ftn_ \~J.~ .c.. 2A\bv .`.A\x..~\ ro.e. M . n :...:ii.~S Z. CH ~ pv .\~.& 2. T uv 'ar, r:, ..: n... .. o Marian Shaw -Cosmo Water assessment district Pa e 1 .... F.•`:;, :•,.., ~:a~ku'~..~,a...:...~: "9.\..a....,..: ~ ..., ., ••~< s 1 Z. ~.~ yr\ , ~e.•z,, t 3: 'et, y~..,y _.. ~..._ a. rY¢~[ „v.::v... ~ \~ Z~rCk~.. • \\.. k`C,~ra~X~•.~Y •^'~\?\~.~.. a:. 'ak, .-.,~~\`1.~~,,k\\'C`14z...•.,x~.rkMY,er..;.1.`., ~api ka':.:.,a~t,•:x. . i c\:~'sfr,..: Z~?•:\"',3C~ a \~ .:,\~ w'\7\\z2 ~\ k ~r~ ~ \Ci~.a\ LR. ~ ~ ~ L\L~ .__ From: Terry Chiles <terrychiles@direcway.com> To: <mshaw@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> Date: 11.11200412:17:39 PM Subject: Cosmo Water assessment district Hello Marian, I hope you had a nice new year's eve. 5% of entire $369K district (Castle and Cooke, McJunkin, and Cosmo area} is all that can be borrowed for our area by federal law. This is $296K. We must contribute $73K cash to reduce Cosmo construction costs of $369K down to $296K. One aspect of the assessment district that slipped my mind for awhile was the sale of Cal Water's obligation to buy our system with a 5% payment every year. Mike McMasters told us at that big meeting with assessment engineer Ed Wilson that this obligation can be sold to underwriters at 22%-24% on the dollar, rather than Cal Water giving us 5% back each year. The sale of Cal Water's obligation at 22% of $369K would bring in $81 K. Can we get our $73,000 cash contribution refunded out of this $81,000. The assessment expense deposit of $35,000 added to this $73,000 construction buy is $108,000. This is a considerable amount, which would be made more palatable by a full refund..... Please try to get a quick answer, as_ I think it may well be "yes", which would greatly aid our efforts to collect money. Right now it is a hodgepodge, with some people willing to pay their full construction costs, some willing to pay their pro rata share of the construction buy, and some not responding. But, the $73K is covered by total of these commitments. It would be more fair if we could get everyone to contribute their pro rata share and this would be easy if all money could be refundable...,.. Thank you Marian regards, Terry CC: <mike@mikemaggard.com> ., . \ a`. r'c\e' ~ .~ti ~.4a~,~.a>aa„., ..5. ..~.~:,.S:~S'-'--.- :.. \W:?,~:. n i:`,Sa\`Z,iu.:.i'pia'C\~'iw\".:Gak.\\`5,.;~e,~v~\\\\.\\a"as\\\R.:.aaa:::aZ.\\\X~.`.L.,c. :.e ;~\\ 3\ .,33a.s\~,.:a;~,~.. ' , , r a c:Z •a\,:....v .\. ~L K ~: «~ ~ \.. '`Z .,,.\~iGU.~ .. ~ ...;.::,., ., y da\ 9S V `,x:..\.a \.' ,aaila.., ,::.., a Y ,, „ ::. h\a... ao: 3, .,\,,.. ,, ;:a r •:~ .,, .r , , Re email address chan a Pa e 1 .Marian Shaw - . , , , ,.., .\ , , ~ ` ., ,a\, ...,,.,... ~ _..> ._ a•,.,\y. '.. •'a..a .e\ ~1a\:L,K\.~..~~~'~~a\\\\\~~,.~.\\ ...~\ SB,SaO a,~', „"c.:. \\a& ~a,.:..,.»~\0e.+~~.~e\\fi..~a3. ;.:~\q\r \iZ.:\~„^~II\~ 5a`. flK.C ~`\`"?\..:.: ~\\', ~. W...AiA.1\~~..~H:;:XEa.a:\\~~Ci\,\k:kx,~."\.".`N,k\\,\`k'~Y.Z>C~•\`\`~Z\1:1.ru`... .fit.\D'~.~:~~\~:., a.'~:rT`E..t ..... La\YC'\~~\\K !\\~"'\~^n"ia~'t 3'\\\1 5~~.\°N~`\`@\aa~Ci\~A~\\tiiJ~\\\\j ,\+S\\.YL`\"i\. \ From: "Terry Chiles" <chiles@2000energy.com> To: "Marian Shaw" <Mshaw@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> Date: 12131/2003 4:25:28 PM Subject: Re: email address change Well Marion, we got committments for the construction difference just from the residents, but hope to spread that around a little with the vacant landowners, and they'll pay deposit to. The $35,000 deposit for assess costs will be easier to spread over all people as getting it back is very attractive to them... Don Galey, who owns 114 of the entire assessment district property, has committed to funding his share of the construction offset and assessment deposit, so that is the kicker. So, our answer is yes, we want to go ahead,..... Please find a way for each of us to send in money to the two funds. Hhaving the city collecting it is preferable to us, especially me, as I don't wnt to be responsiblz..... thank you, and have a fine new year.... terry From: Marian Shaw To: chiles@2000energy.com Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 4:37 PM Subject: Re: email address change Terry -John has been out all week -have you been able to pull together your funding? Unfortunately, I'll be out tomorrow, but you can call either John or I on Monday... Marian ;-) »> "Terry Chiles" <chiles@2000energy.com> 121301200312:14:10 PM »> Hello my effort yesterday to to send out my new email addresswas a dismal failure, here it is......terrychiles@direcway.com. I will be adding all your addresses into my new email program. I wish you all the best in the new year... regards, Terry ..~.'~.:,,"~\~;x~~::,:a.,,.Zsa.,,\~~:?,S:`s.,.~~s ~.;~;.ala`F. ~i..,.i~\'.:h 'ia\a.~~.T:..i^...~~lZ,;a,,: r,`ax k:~aa.,R\b. ..4`, u,",ate ,, ~:r,u. \...> ~~r,~, ,, ~.-,..... a. ~.x\~:.M\'r,,a~vas'a~c<',.~..i,. .ai `ac~.wsvaN,a, ~...,...,. ..,~. ..,. .,.., .... ....... _. Pa e 1 z~ _ s :,~ haw 29630CosmoMem06Jan04.doc s ~, ~ . , ~,: ~ . Marian S ,\~~ a ~~~:.a~r~~.;aM~.\~ ~ ~ ~.~ \~\:~~~,~~~z~k ~\~.~~.~~~.~~,,...~~~ ~..,,~.r. y„\.~~.~b~.~,~\ ,,,~.a~~,~rw~,.. .~ :.\..~a,.\:, a,. x. ~',~. ~`~ \\'~v., \'. M.,`a ~..\ba, \:., ~,";C~~~`.1.~i..\.r.\. a`"~,J~\.S.\. t\f\\".~lY.\" ~~~:.~~C~, ~Ak`\v.. ~A~ W:J..\\ "N: ,\~~ Y,. `\\\"" Y ._._ -_ MEMORANDUM T0: Greg Klimko Mike McMasters Marian Shaw Nelson Smith John Stinson DATVE: January 6, 2004 FROM: Ed Wilson SUBJECT: Cosmo Area Deposit Status re: City of Bakersfield Assessment District No. 03-3 RE: Our No. 29-630 I offer the following in response to Terry Chiles' question "...can we get our $73,000 cash contribution refunded out of ..." the proceeds from the sale of the Cal Water Refund agreement? This question was presented in his email of January 1, 2004 to Marian Shaw. I called Mike McMasters, Cal Water, today and asked about the potential amount and timing of the availability of the Cal Water Refund for sale to a private investor. Mike's response was that the full amount of their project cost maybe eligible for refund and that the refund is paid over 40 years (2.5% fixed amount annually). The basis for the refund is that Cal Water has been given the facilities and their rate payers refund the eligible system costs over the 40 year depreciable life of the those facilities. It is common practice, especially by subdividers, to sell their refund agreement to investors and that there are several companies specializing in purchasing Cal Water Refund Agreements. The contract purchase prices are generally at 20% to 25% of the total refund amount (the discounted present value of the 40 payment stream). The Cal Water project construction cost estimate (including connection fees) is $365,000. If that cost is confirmed as 100% eligible for the Cal Water 40 year refund, the annual refund payment to the assessment district would be about $9,000. Based on a discounted sales value of 25% of the refund total, that agreement could be sold for an estimated $91,000 before sales costs. However, according to Mike the amount eligible for refund will not be confirmed by Cal Water until after all of the project costs have been paid, the project records submitted to their accounting division, and based on their review a determination made as to the actual cost eligible for refund. Mike said that since Cal Water will be constructing the improvements, it will take only about 60 days from the date that the completed project records are sent to their accounting division to get the final refund amount released. Based on Mike's comments, it appears that the refund eligibility will not be confirmed until after the Cosmo Area water improvements will have been constructed and all costs paid. Therefore, the refund agreement would not be available for sale to an investor until after the project is completed and all costs paid. Accordingly, the Cosmo Area cash contribution (estimated at $106,000) will still be needed as a source of funds for the construction of the improvements. The ..._. a ,~.,...~ . r~:~~ ~,•,i :ti\~4'o.,~ .o'fia S~,Y,. „w +a 1aA;:x: ~,,.,~a~„~;,*ao,.x~a,.,. Z.~~ .: Y,. ,.•aa.::Zi'. ,1 `:. "~.A~~\a e,a~:n, ,.•,.,a.,\ai~r w.::r.d,~^.;.~:~.,o\: x..r:l0 .~~. ., J,..~q•.sa5.:);. S~ .,h ,.x. .,,.,,, ...... .. .... .. ..,,. , Marian Shaw - 29630CosmoMem06Jan04 doc Pa e 2 ,. ,,,.„, ,....,r,.-,. ~?: a• ?~Aa ~.~~: \Q~)~`,.,_n._.hS~i,:\`^~ ~-_'~-.....~\\\:: mt\~Y,~°.. ~~:;2k ~a2 :~\~r A\~~a@~a;~)Y~~.aZZ\`.a~\~.. ,. i'\~. `'~~Y ~xi:'\,~:i: Y3 \:, Y~ v3,@ . ~ ~AW.aux,.:..~. `~2x; : C~ ~~,.a. \)2. ,C..,~ `?, k"~: ~ ~? "@3~•~ ; a •:,,.\v~. \ „:a \r\Ax~i ..~ ,~ ~.y ,x .,. "`a`Z~ "ar[:~.,..~ r • 3?OL .~ ~~.~\a 3,` , , ~zF~x a.. \:.....•1..,. _..~..w._.-___ contribution will be accounted for in the assessment as follows: i) the project total improvement and proceeding costs will be spread based on benefit; ii) the amount contributed by each owner would then be applied as a credit to reduce the estimated net improvement and proceedings cost to tax exempt bond financing; iii) the estimated bond issuance costs would then be calculated and spread based on those net amounts. No cash would be refunded under this approach. If the refund agreement is ultimately sold to an investor, those proceeds would go to the assessment district and their final disposition determined by the City Finance Department. The concept of refunding the $35,000 assessment expense deposit that is also referred to in the Terry .Chiles email to Marian entered the project financing discussion at the October meeting with the Cosmo Area project proponents. At that time their construction cost estimate was $260,000 and that total could be supported as tax exempt financing by the developer improvement costs without a need for any contribution to reduce the Cosmo Area construction cost. Therefore, it would have been possible to include the $35,000 assessment expense in the total assessment and reimburse the individuals that paid the deposit. However, the latest Cal Water estimate is $365,000, a $105,000 increase that cannot be supported for tax exempt bond financing by the cost of the developer improvement costs. Therefore, the $35,000 assessment expense (plus the costs for design, etc. that Cal Water will have to be paid before the assessment is confirmed) cannot be reimbursed to the individuals that paid the deposit, because those funds will have to be paid back to the district construction account from bond sale proceeds. 2 Page 1 of 1 Marian Shaw -Terry Chiles and Paladino Cosmo Water From: Marian Shaw To: Raul Rojas Date: 12/23/2003 2:52 PM Subject: Terry Chiles and Paladino Cosmo Water Reply Requested: By 12/24/2003 John and I need to talk to you about the cash that Terry Chiles has to come up with to be in the assessment district. He wants to defer the CalWater service charges and connection fees. He has said that if he gets these fees deferred that he can come up with enough money for the required cash contribution to get the amount below the 5% maximum. McMasters is okay with deferring this i the City requests it in writing. If the City does request that in writing, then the City is ultimately on the hook for those fees (a total of $2,850 per house) if any of the 8 connecting residents renege. So, what do you think? Do we have enough trust in these folks to go forward with this request? Do we have anough of a hammer over them to feel warm and fuzzy? Marian ;-) file://C:1Documents%20and%20SettingslmshawlLocal%20SettingslTemplGW}00002.HTM 1/6/2004 ,; n, ~~ ~ ' `R. a ~ ~~Z.;ar ~ ~A. Caa~ e. aTC 1~~~ . Z. ? :rS. ,: i5~'0. o..w :~ . -. ~.:a as ..u 5.,...:.e, ~...a,., • . . >:......~ .,.v..,a,~~ ..\:aa>R ~ ~ ~ . ` ue . .b`k>\ '.'\Ly .....u !~a~.0' .V. ~ 1 z. ;. N ..ate. • •~a a,~' ' oa~..:~• ,.~' aar::~~ : ~.. .ti' ~ . ~.sa'.s0'~,a ;. R~& , ~' .. ~:La,. ,~ e. ;i w.; ~'. ~ .>.,a a~ ' a~ ; .,.a •,.a .. Pa e 1 h w - FW: Panorama Well Association -Water Line Pro ect r . ~. ~ ~..r.~~.~~...az:.h~~..~~. . ,.~:~`~,.~ .,.,~ ~ . -.,~~.~. ~.a ~..~~~~:~..~ ~~ u....:., Marian S a ~, ~.,a,~..h ~ ,~:.. ~ ~ ~.aY,~ .a , ...~.~~ ,~~ •~-~~. .~, ~;mc ~Z Z": Lek Z a~ ~a"4n~a ~ ,~..w C\ *~,a:fi~;~.6 ~~. i.'\i1 a• ~: ~: ~~q~.•L\•~u •. From: "Michael Maggard" <mike@mikemaggard.com> To: "Alan Tandy" <atandy@ci.bakersfield.ca.us>, "Marion Shaw" <mshaw@ci.bakersfield.ca.us>, "Jacque Larochelle" <jlaroche@ci.bakersfield.ca.us>, "Raul Rojas" <rrojas@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> Date: 118120041:46:07 PM Subject: FW: Panorama Well Association -Water Line Project As you can see, many unresolved issues remain. Please be prepared to respond to all of these concerns, as well as Mr. Chiles, during our meeting tomorrow. Thanks...MM -----Original Message----- From: Dcrlcr@aol.com [mailto:Dcrlcr@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 08, 20041:02 PM To: Mike@MikeMaggard.com Subject: Panorama Well Association -Water Line Project Mr. Maggard: Please see the attached letter regarding some of my concerns regarding our new water system, I will be mailing you the original along with attachments this afternoon. If you have any questions or would like to meet with us, please advise. Thank you in advance for your help with this matter. Sincerely, Lori Russell CC: "Terry Chiles" <TerryChiles@direcway.com>, <Dcrlcr@aol.com> Mr. Mike Maggard, Councilman January 8, 2004 5001 California Avenue, Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93309 Dear Mr. Maggard: This letter is in response to our telephone conversation of December 8, 2003. Briefly, nineteen (19) homeowners, known as Panorama Well Association (PWA), have been negotiating with California Water Service (CWS) and the City of Bakersfield (COB), both of whom have been developing plans and specifications for the development of a new pipeline to PWA homeowners, to replace their independent water system. Initially, when PWA homeowners began negotiating with CWS and COB, we were told that we could not tie into the future City in the Hills project. Therefore, plans were drawn and approved by CWS, COB, and PWA, to construct an 8" PVC system to serve PWA homeowners only. Now, the whole project has been delayed and changed to include City in the Hills, requiring a new set of plans at PWA's cost of $16,464. PWA accepts the changes and is in agreement with the new design, plans and specifications of the Paladino/Masterson (PM) system and has deposited $66,509 as required by CWS's letter and Rule 15-C Extension Detailed Cost Estimate of November 4, 2003 (attached). However, we disagree with CWS's method of calculating PWA's proportional cost of the project. Specifically, we are diametrically opposed to CWS's basis of reimbursing PWA for its cost to oversize a 2032' segment of the project. Originally, PWAwas told that the segment would be 8" PVC C-900 (PVC) and that such was sufficient to meet PWA's need and that of the fire department flow requirements. Though we understand CWS's need to oversize the segment to 30" Ductile Pipe (D.I.P.) to meet future demands, to use the cost of a 12" D.I.P. rather than the lesser cost of 8" PVC to determine CWS's reimbursement to PWA, is totally, unacceptable. PWA has recently signed a contract with Becka Construction to install the 4782' (±) PaladinolMasterson system according to the plans and specifications received from CWS and submitted to Becka by PWA. Becka has also furnished PWA with costs to install a 12" x 2032' (±) D.I.P. segment, the cost of which CWS would use to calculate the oversize reimbursement. CWS's unilateral decision to substitute 12" D.I.P. cost for that of lesser 8" PVC cost would increase PWA's proportional project cost approximately $83,000 (±). Accordingly, PWA's share of the PM system would increase from approximately $203,000(±) to $286,000(±}, a 41 % increase. Another significant issue is the timing of CWS's reimbursement for oversized construction cost. Why isn't the over- sizing cost paid to PWA as the cost is incurred or when billed by Becka? It is unfair for PWA to subsidized CWS's portion of PM system? It is our desire to resolve these issues as soon as possible and would greatly appreciate your assistance. Hopefully, you understand our concerns and we are available to discuss these matters with whomever. If PWA's issues cannot be resolved soon, we will be forced to retain legal council to determine an equitable solution. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Sincerely, Mrs. Lori Russell 10901 Pitts Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93306 Home: 661-872-4827, Work: 661-393-2892, Cell: 661-201-2992 cc: Mike McMasters Florn Core Henry Gallegos Steve Phillips 0 c~ a 0 0 U I .~ a N N ~ ~~ O 0 N 0 01 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ .. .. ~ ~ ~; °' .. ~ ;~ wNA~ .~ ~~ ~ ~ o ~ a~ ~ ~~ ,~ ' °~ ~•~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o~'~~ ~ M 0 ~ ~ ~~ ~ Pd ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b A ~ ^' +~ H ,~ ~ O ~ ~ U 0 0 U ~ ~ ~ ~ 'gyp ~ ON ~~ rUn ~ O .~ ~ ~ .~ >,b~} ~ p ~ O ~ ~' r..~ ~ 0 ~ , ~ ~ 3~ a~ ~°' ° ~~a o~~o~d N ~ * S 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '' '"d , 0 ~ , . U ~ + UO U ~ ~ ~ U . [~~ ~ ~ U p O ~ ,,,_, ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ bA '~ .~ ~ ~ U N U ~ ~ ~~ U ~ ~ ~~° ~ c~ ~' . ; o ~~~~~ '~ °o ;~ U ~ `" ~ ~ ~ ~a~°~ ~ ° ~,~ ~~ U ~ . ~a~~~° ~~ ~4'~, ~ o ~° ~ • ~~~~ ~ ~o ~ .~ ~o~~~o ~ U U~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ •~ ~ ~ 0 ~ cC3 O ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ 0 U '~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p 0 ~ ~ '= ~ O ~ ~ U ~ U ~ ,~,,, NO ~ ~ U ~,~~ U ' U O U ~ '~ ~ *? 0 ~ 0 l~ 0 ~ ~ • ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U N cC3 ~ 4~ ~~''~ •~~ ~~VO'd ~0 . ~ '"~ ~ ~ ~, ~ '~ O ' b~A '~~' ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~~o '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~°' ~; ~~ ~ U~'~oa~n U °o U r'' ~ ''"' ,--~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~' ~ ~.o ~~~ o U ~ U ~ U ~ .-~ ~' U ~~° H° z~°.~~ ~ ~ Ho .~ .~ M O N N ~ nU.:. \..~ \,.ZU .a ~\.'.k~..Ab' '... i:iu. 1':x.x ~\ rc., 1:~\tU.sU't~UAC;. > ~::\U, ~~` W ,\\~A~i~ \\..~ "W .x1~.L,Lh Z ~Q.. \:i~..,'~a~u~\~, .\\va:: #~,xQ~.~,(.A~d,.b~ ~ ,qA Z. ~,u .:: \0:: vl.A .,.. Y:.~hn '.,?~'H .\~t v~, ~ ~..:..... \ u~ Y~C3M: ¢.. v.,...,. ..~iv\f, .~.. ,.v.\. Z..a .Z 1, Z,,.v .... ~7v... ~ r\ a a ., i. • v ?2 . Pa e 1 nt Di tri t 3-3 De osits w-A m s c 0 h sse e Marian S a ss g. , . , ... .,.. ,. ~ a.~ ...aa , .. ., .,~ .u ... ,_ , ... .. ~ a w ~.: `A Y, , .~xC . ' , .. \ ., Z 3 Y~.; ~x, ... h . u,.. ;aZ. \ ,\.\\~..: \\i s ....xa i~\g. ~ . F~.Y'n ~:.3.~ ~. x eufi ~c.\.~~C'e„'~\.•t\.\\~";\r\:ai~,:\o$.`.. \V.2 .\: :.:'~'0.~@A\: :'i~'::.• 3\u... i;o.~~.~~ ..x".~:~1; .°.R`. ;, Z~F9S`a `~Yi`Cv~\~, i~'RJ `.. ~lx£.,\`~i,~ 1r1t o, F~. . ... \: ^. :en~J ,. ,.::.\\rx it ~. ~.a \¢..z. d. ~. ~\~;r @\':'~~\„a~... .. .. ., ... \..~ .%.. ,\Cl ~. >t _. 1..~ \ .. i..__~_ From: John A. Stinson To: Shaw, Marian Date: 11118/2003 2:00:00 PM Subject: Assessment District 03-3 Deposits The following deposits are required to start the assessment district process. A letter will be drafted requesting the amounts listed below. Castle & Cooke $119,405.00 Judkins $ 14,729.00 Cosmo Area $ 8,866.00 B A K E R S F I E L D CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM November 18, 2003 T0: Alan Tandy City Manager FROM: Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Cosmo Paladino Assessment District for Water We just received verbal confirmation that Cal Water's estimate for the water system is $365,000. Our original estimate was $260,000. The limit for the non-taxable bonds for this current assessment district is $296,000 (5% of the construction portion of the district cost). The biggest difference between our estimate and Cal Water's estimate is primarily in the CIAC (Contribution In Advance of Construction) tax, which adds 32% to the construction cost. This is a State and federally mandated tax. Neither Mr. Terry Chiles, who represents the residents, nor Mr. Mike Maggard have been informed of this yet. The options at this point are either to drop out of this assessment district and wait for one that has a $7~.3 million construction cost, including the Paladino Water project, or have the property owners make a cash contribution to lower the dollar amount in the district to the 5%. This cash , contribution would be about $68,500, or about $550 an acre of assessed land. cc: Reading File Project File Nelson Smith, Assistant. Finance Director 1111 Y~ G:IGROUPDAT1Memo120031Paladino Cosmo Water Assessment.doc r.ti.. ~ COSMO'~VATER PROJECT 1VIEETING PROPOSED AGENDA OCTOBER 14, 2003 -l. Scope of Improvements and Improvement Costs/Cal Water Requirements f A. CaI Water Improvements B. ~n-lot water service ~ ~ ' ' C. Existing wells status after proj ect complete / 2. The assessment proceedings ~ 3. AD 93-1 Payoffs ~ 4. Spread -Equal per parcel or 1 unit per 2.5 acres - Reimbursement - Future subdivision costs ~5. Taxable/Tax Exempt Bonds ~/ 6. Valuations -Appraisal or assessor's (not enough if spread is per EDU) 7. Schedule ' ' n cost estimate ~' A. Design completion and constructlo B. Cal Water construction bid C. Construction D. Next meeting 29630Agenda0ctl4.wpd 10113/2003 ~~~ ~ ~ AGENDA DISTRICT FORMATION MEETING PROPOSED NEW CITY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (Seven Oaks West IIUBrighton Place IUFairway Oaks South/Cosmo) 1. Proposed District Description (Wilson) A. Proponents: Castle & Cooke - Don Judkins - Cosmo Water - $4.9 Million improvements 0.6 Million improvements 0.4 Million improvements $5.9 Million 2. Schedule of Assessment Proceedings - Last Available Council meeting to approve List of Unpaid Assessments June 9, 2004 (To get first billing to 2004 Property Tax) - End 30-day assessment cash payment May 20, 2004 - Record assessment Apri120, 200 - Hearing/Count Ballots/Confirm Assessment April 14, 2004 - Last date to record boundary map March 30, 2004 - Last date to record tract maps March 2004 ~ ~ - Last date to approve tract maps March 10, 2a0 Preliminary Approval of Assessment February 25, 2004 - Appraisal data tables ready January 30, 2004 - Distribute draft spread January 21, 2004 - Transmit ACAD 14 tract maps to Wilson December 11, 200 - First Council action to start assessment proceedings December 10, 2003 - File documents with City Attorney for December 10 Council November 21, 2003 ~~,b~~~- Barg ~, C~~ 2~~ Zoo3 ~ ~ rots to Discuss Requested assessment approval date if different from Apri114 Parcels or areas within proposed assessment district that are not to be assessed Update of development areas and product types in district from information in applications Recording dates for tracts in assessment Lot sales closing dates Assessment payoffs in existing districts Deposits to City for district's expenses Talk do ;~ ~' lnl~5 ,-"",~- CUSMU WATER PRUJECT MEETING PR~PUSED AGENDA OCTUBER 14, .2003 l . Scope of Improvements and Improvement CostslCal Water Requirements A. Cal Water Improvements ., B. 0n-lot water service C. Existing wells status after project complete 2. The assessment proceedings 3. AD 93-1 Payoffs 4. Spread -Equal per parcel or 1 unit per 2.5 acres - Reimbursement - Future subdivision costs 5. Taxable/Tax Exempt Bonds 6. Valuations -Appraisal or assessor's knot enough if spread is per EDU} 7. Schedule A. Design completion and construction cost estimate B. Cal Water construction bid C. Construction D. Next meeting 29630Agenda0ctl4.wpd 10/13/2003 s; .... ,,,~ ,. \ \x, , ~>, a ct~V~., ~ ,k ~~,:s.:¢~Sa~..a,; -:,.\ Sx .v~'a ~~C.,r¢~ a, .:. r,.:..~ . \~~tiu:..~. ,a 3~i i\ , „ .~,\\ . ,3,•.,,..:aaw .;.\,.::,'~ti -_ _ ~. ..1•\, LwL,,. ¢, .., _. i~kn,a R ., ... ., ,~a .x~a, ., « ¢,. \~\\DA ~iMU~,., ;.\\ \a,:\\\ "~~~?; a~x~'Aur¢,z a,\vC.;~.•aS e~. .>~~;aa ~:,i3,.~1a¢\Z.. :,i .~a\~..:..a;:...:;~,.,~:~.e3\..~.~~\:¢:,.'xia~,`lU.~., 2G. Re: Fwd. Cosmo Area Water Connection Pale 1~ ¢ John A. Stinson - Z ` ~.. ~ ~. t.;, .:~~r. a. ~'°a\ya~.;x~: \y,::~~ 3:.~r .. , ,. ~., 3 '1 .a\w.oa 0~ ~l a..~TH z .,.a, s..,., 2: ~~\ aA~.\~~:\t.~ 0. a: \ ~ \r\7 \\~¢:\.G... aa\r~ 1: \\ Z\~`~`Z ..'r~~~a. inn From: Marian Shaw To: John A. Stinson Date: 1017103 2:09PM Subject: Re: Fwd: Cosmo Area Water Connection Is there a preliminary schedule? Marian ;-l »> John A. Stinson 1010710311:51 AM »> California Water Service is requiring the same information that was supplied to them for the Paladino water service area. This included survey information, plot plan with property lateral and water line locations and easements for the water linese All applications have been received to date and sent copies to Wilson and Associates for review. A meeting is being put together for Tuesday October 14, 2003 to meet with C&C and Judkins between 10:00 AM and Noon and between 1:30 and 5:00 PM with property owners and California Water Service. »> Marian Shaw 10107103 08:40AM »> Please review attached and discuss with me. I thought the basic problem was CalWater was being increasingly demanding about what they expect from PaladinolCosmo. And that Ralph's people were being redirected from this particular project. Marian ; ---, ,: ,.,......... ,. a x C: .,\: \II'..,';.:aw;. ,w::,UZ~.r. ,\\\.. .ar,..'J ~~: Ukvn:~ L \am: .. a', ..Cvv\2.\\.,~. \sa.,~ ~"CC`,;~ i~'~n^\t. ~i rr4:a . ,~.,.>~... ..,•;\\ri..... ~ti.. o..,~. r.. ~a~X, J.A. \,w\\ ,,va ... A ., ~~,k a. \ ., ''aa Z v ].., ,x.>. nvo r.. .,~,~.\Q; n, ~ \~r. ... aa\\., ~ ~.ne.. F,,.\V P 1 ae John A. Stinson - Mime.822 ~. . ,,., . \. .,\ . , . i ~ ~ ' n . ~ z ' \ L z Y r.. ~: J \ - ~". ', \" ~ X.. . . • J4..,~.a, a. ,,.:..,T \`..~x. '`\\~.~. A\ ....... c:a:.r... .,, , ..<.. ... a,, .., .., t, ., ~ Z ., ~ ...,:0' < w. i, ,. ~", F. va„h.. .,.r,r..\` . Return-path: <mike@mikemaggard.com> Received: from hormel.ci.bakersfield.ca.us [10.1.10.88] by Huckleberry.ci.bakersfield.ca.us; Mon, 06 Oct 200315:04:31-0700 Received: from mikemaggard.com (unverified [209.155.88.3]} by hormel.ci.bakersfield.ca.us (Vircom SMTPRS 1.4.233) with ESMTP id <B0000918984@hormel.ci.bakersfield.ca.us>; Mon, 6 Oct 200314:56:10 -0700 Received: from MMCDF1V4921 [66.162.158.221] by mikemaggard.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-8.03) id AF92B50148; Mon, 06 Oct 200312:16:34 -0700 Reply-To: <mike@mikemaggard.com> From: "Michael Maggard" <mike@mikemaggard.com> To: "Alan Tandy" <atandy@ci.bakersfield.ca.us>, "John Stinson" <jwstinson@ci.bakersfield.ca.us>, "Raul Rojas" <rrojas@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> Cc: "Terry Chiles" <chiles@2000energy.com> Subject: Cosmo Area Water Connection Date: Mon, 6 Oct 200312:16:02 -0700 Message-ID: <LKEEKINFBHGAKANGALJHIEGMCFAA.mike@mikemaggard.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: textlplain; charset="iso-8859-1 " Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMaiI-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 I met this morning with Terry Chile who has very effectively represented his neighborhood regarding connecting his area to Cal Water. He has accomplished receiving 100% support form all of his affected neighbors. He tells me that a window of opportunity, within which he can "attach" their assessment district to another project by Castle and Cooke, may soon be closing. I do not know of all the implications or dates, but can we make CERTAIN that we have done everything possible to facilitate the progress and completion of their project. Mr. Chiles said he will transmit two phone numbers he "owes" us. He also tells me the City can help facilitate the following: 1. city complete a survey of the area 2. city supply necessary signatures to complete a "Public Utility Easement" I may not have this exactly correct, but the bottom line is to wrap this thing up and move one. Can you let me know when we can complete and keep me posted as to progress? Thanks, MM Paladino Water Assessment District July 30, 2003 To Marian Shaw and John Stinson Public Works Department City of Bakersfield Dear Marian and John Recent conversations with John have revealed that 100% of proposed assessment district participants may be required to sign petitions in order to qualify for tax-exempt bonding. In light of that, we propose that two lots be removed from our proposed boundaries. David and Michelle Williams, owners of lots 386-210-OS and 386-210-06, were sent a petition, and David accepted delivery and signed the registered mail delivery receipt. The petition was accompanied by a self addressed stamped envelope for return of signed petition, and a letter asking to provide objections if not in favor of the petition. They did not reply, and live in Fresno with no listed phone numbers. It is also unlikely that they will pay their appraisal fees. Please remove them from our proposed assessment district. Their lots are on the western edge of the proposed district, so they will not reap the benefits of our proposed water assessment district. Attached you will find a copy of the registered mail delivery receipt, a copy of the original proposed water assessment district, and copies of all the signed petitions (originals were given to Marian's Administrative Assistant several weeks ago). Thank you for your .help. Sincerely, ~~~ Terry Chiles Work 663 3155 Cell 303 3325 T _ ~_ __..._ -• ~lJ \c.;t. u Z ,~v„Y> .n \ :~~\::':,: ,,:~'S. a\. ?~ r ~ C ~ r;. R. "ha ,~~. )$:. A.. `\, t ~ ~ 3 A'. iiv.,.u'.v ,t: k\~, a•\\\~atit?`\a:,~:>;Z.Z\,~\31n~0 \ • ~. :~ :\ .. \+;.. b\\\: 0i C>: A a.. ,...~~ Y'.,,:5 \ ~ 2.• ....rv k3. , vec '.:<. ~, . _ 3,J.. C , Page a1 ;Marian Shaw -Fwd: RE: Cosmo water assessment ist ~, .. ... ... . . ... .... ,,. ,,.,,, .. , ~,r c ~ \ •:~1 „ [a.. .,, ~.t~y; 1.:~'i 3\\\ \rZ \\ ; \\ S '~ ::~ . _....~.... ~. ~ ._.. ~C1 ': > mi....-_..,..... _._.._...._..- . ~,~1:v~ ~ y., ., ~ Z $~ \~ \,.:.~u )i\\\\.\:~~.:). "~~.`Y~.'\`~~\,x."a:\0.'..5§~.Z'\Z.."\,\\,f`yS.~c:xCS .,. ,v;:\k.~1~\4v ~.... ,.•:3~ \~~x, \\"~~`A^o•:. .:~\.,.., ~,. ,.\„nip':.:\o : `,~'1\...i~. .C ,\._21,3 _.__.. From: Robert Sherfy To: Shaw, Marian Date: 611110311:04AM Subject: Fwd: RE: Cosmo water assessment dirt ** Confidential ** This a-mail responds to Mr, Chiles and Councilmember Maggard's questions regarding the formation of an assessment district for water service. Since the. passage of Prop. 218, City policy has been that we require 100% of the land owners sign a petition in order to initiate the assessment district process. Also, City policy on assessment districts (both pre and post 218} requires a minimum of $1 million to be funded by the district. Additionally, no more than 10% of the bond issuance can fund a private utility (per state law) in order for the bonds to be non-taxable. Consequently, any assessment district formed would have to piggy back off another project. Concerning appraisals, each parcel must meet the minimum 3 to 1 value to lien ratio for inclusion in an assessment district. The value to lien ratio for the entire district must be a minimum of 4 to 1. Lastly, the .process for the median improvements along Panorama was different. That area was included in the consolidated maintenance district, not an assessment district. »> Marian Shaw 06105/03 04:04PM »> Can you review the attached and get back to me? I would appreciate it. Marian ;-) CC: Raul Rojas ?,\' `a .'. k \: ,a.. , a, .~,. .. ?G` ~\\ , , a.::;\ xa. \ aa.. \~ .J.'?.'~ ~.v;.Y:ix 3 \ . ' a: ;~:;a a .~,., ~ \,.~.. x ..>~, .Lx..,\.a ..... a ' ..:`\a`o ,\ \ L\.\0 ;T. GuS , ..:3h\Y.\~, .\ \ ;\ \e.... ~.~L, \\~:,`~rix, a . \\ `~i~~ \ r ro .. D r ~. \ ~. : a., ~. a . , ' . \1: \ n ., a I Z' Marian Shaw - FW: Cosmo water assessment list Pa e 1 .,, ,,,... ,M,.., ., .. .. ~, ~ . ,.., . , .~ .. , n . . . x. r ~. ~ o....... F..:M , " : •. • : ~ o. h a. a. \c.. , • ,x. ' :~ ., ~, h: .. .\: \. ~'""Z r \x 0:.:.'."t : '~,\ \ f \:\.. a x Z k<..• ..,, ~'. \`,.. ,.'hrr.a •.p,~...~ x~:.x ~.~`k~~ \; :t':~u'~`IQrJ. :f•\ Ce\.1~~:`p}.%\A L`,az. r., t ~\?~'~a~C~. G'• ay..,~:~,i~,~,t xa \~~~,..,~>, ~:,,,i,:a.F'~...\\\\. :..~.\~C\~o»...., •:3, a....,,a~`.:a.: ~s...a. v\~~, a.. a\ .~ .\\`f .. .....\\, Rte. ,..~ :. :~.~..\.. _3.,.i.__.._. \ ... ~5\ x1 \~ .\\L. `a~ ,. a. \. ~ i Z From: "Michael Maggard" <mike@mikemaggard.com> To: "Marion Shaw" <mshaw@ci.bakersfield.ca.us>, "Raul Rojas" <rrojas@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> Date: 6/1710310:34AM Subject: FW: Cosmo water assessment list Two questions: 1. Is 78% sufficient for moving forward? 2. Might we be able to help them with this apprasial issue? Can you let me know of your thoughts to help them help themselves. Their dedication is certainly admirable. Thanks. MM -----Original Message----- From:Terry Chiles [mailto:chiles@2000energy.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:32 AM To: mike@mikemaggard.com Subject: Re: Cosmo water assessment list Hello Mike, We are at 78% on signed petitions. The other 22% represent 3 owners. We sent (with signed return receipts as proof) petitions along with stamped return envelope. Accompanying letter asked that if they objected, to please sent petition back with "rejected" scrawled across it, along with their concerns. These 3 have not elected to return petition or note explaining any concerns, so I doubt that we will begetting anything from them. Hopefully this will satisfy city.... The other concern voiced by several people was the apprasial necessary (from each lot} to prove that land is worth 3 times cost of the water improvement expense. Is it possible that we can get a general apprasial for minimum appraised cost of undeveloped land in our area??????? With last couple of sales at $15,000 per acres on 5 acre parcels, improvement costs are at 1/7 of value. I am sure some, people (including the three who didn't sign petition) will refuse to pay for an assessment. You are getting good press for your efforts Mike, and I think we are lucky to have such an astute and effective facilitator as our councilman..... See you Friday.... regards, Terry -----Original Message ----- From: Michael Maggard To: Terry Chiles Cc: Alan Tandy ;Marion Shaw ;Raul Rojas Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 2:20 PM Subject: RE: Cosmo water assessment list Good questions. My understanding was that it required more than 213, but I may very well be wrong. I think that is what we needed to create an u~i„S ': .. ii4, vai. \r..,. a. v<, .~ a ,a:. , a r .....a, ~,\.a. \,\i.~...,a ~ a Z na.• \~~ Y,~a ..:,. w.`l`, v.W:..a. :x . 5~+.., ,:, a`c, .,.SY x\¢W. (..~5'.~_, ....e, 5?c. :. L ..: ~a Z ,:\ 1,,.. a:,. ,\,... • .~J',c . \, "4.1.~i, ~F \ \:, Z. ). \. vk \\, \ r U \ .. . ~ ~L, .. ,. 1. .> „ a :, r t. .., ... ,. n ., .kao :a\ x',. t,\::..,, , _\,. ,i.. ~, ).Y, ..1~ \@'3; \:. m \°vi4 .: Marian Shaw - FW: Cosmo water assessment list ., , . r ~ ~ ~ ~ .. ~ r, ~. rr .,,.,, . Pa e 2 ,....a.. ,.. x.\~.n..,,..~.a .w., ~`:~t.bN,'a o. x.R„Y,. .v ..\@.aas. ., ,\. "a .x Y,.,W.~.r:~.aar.~k,., 1t,~n'C a,\~5,*~..a 3,. :r .. \\~~i :, •:. r., :~~s.... ti. \:~~. i.raa •i1x~. si \, \ .. a... e~i.\„a,1co'... .5£S\ ,,,ua\a: ;a:'a,..x .., i ,.: \. ~\. .~a~. .\Y",~\~:1.,;., .\:k.. ..,~, 4.,~~h __..~~".;~?._y. _ _:x s\•~ .~Z \.a.:::u5 ~W ____... ~:\.,,.:. 3a '.\xY,k~\`cxaz~';"Y; xeir assessment district for median improvements along Panorama, after which the approval of the council was required. I will ask staff (via this e-.mail) to clarify both questions for us, and then get their response back to you. If you haven't hard from me or them by mid-next week, please let me know. MM -----Original Message----- From:Terry Chiles [mailto:chiles@2000energy.com] Sent: Thursday, June 05, 200310:41 AM To: Mike Maggard Subject: Cosmo water assessment list hello Mike, I hope you are doing well... Marion Shaw provided a petition and an explanation of what was required. It seems pretty attractive and reasonable to me, but it is difficult when dealing with 20 other people The problems encountered: 1. she says 100% of assessment district land owners must sign petition, which will never happen unless we concoct a new checkerboard district. I think we are at more than 70% returned .petitions now. Is this 100% a legitimate demand????? 2. All owners must provide recent assessment to prove land is worth 3 times improvement cost. Her estimate is about $2000 acre for water, and last sale of property was $15,000 acre for 5 acres. Requirement is for federal non-taxable bond financing. Anyone who opposes water district will not provide apprasial....with raw land values at $30,000 per acre now, is it possible we can meet this requirement w/o 21 apprasials???? regards, Terry CC: "Terry Chiles" <chiles@2000energy.com>, "Alan Tandy" <atandy@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> _ ..."..... ~•. 1 h'<4i~C. .ax~v\~a.;. .J+\..\A \~n\ ...~s:. A'. \?a a..Vr . ... way? ~.~ a.......~ a\..u\,.. v. 83.:4.0 .. \ 2.. vIU~A. ..Y ~.\II.3 a.. a\.b\ a ..'a;.axa a~,~;.:..: ., .~"<,.C",\~aT,.., . v.~,~~ a a •a~~..~t°;. , o. ..:.nN s ~<.: o:. a .~ , y\\zz.i..,.:. ,.tetra . ..>:.a1>.~.. '~ ,. ~ . ., s . . Pa e 1 Marian Shaw - FW: Cosmo water assessment list ~ . ~~,~. \ ~. ... ~,V.? `K. i\'0.:: ~,.. ~S~ 4. i,;.. ..: ~: .... ~~. .-x.. ~__..._ __.. :.a¢ a ~~K: ,.;.;`.nD"^, ~i ., r. ~h \ .ems. ~~~\ J. ~. t, ic,D ;~~ :..\'<u a., \.~ «::.a~.,~ :~..- a 1 :~. ..~. ; ~~ \ .~a.z~~' .~, z..... ~c..>a.:.. .... .._,- a \ ..-...__..___..--_ ;;$kx?~£aie\ ~~.. ^:~<~. .:A`~ .~@. r, ra ..an\x:~.`xCY iia r::. ~~. From: "Michael Maggard" <mike@mikemaggard.com> To: "Marion Shaw" <mshaw@ci.bakersfield.ca.us>, "Raul Rojas" <rrojas@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> Date: 611710310:34AM Subject: FW: Cosmo water assessment list Two questions: 1. Is 78% sufficient for moving forward? 2. Might we be able to help them with this apprasial issue? Can you let me know of your thoughts to help them help themselves. Their dedication is certainly admirable. Thanks. MM -----Original Message----- From: Terry Chiles [mailto:chiles@2000energy.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:32 AM To: mike@mikemaggard.com Subject: Re: Cosmo water assessment list Hello Mike, We are at 78% on signed petitions. The other 22% represent 3 owners. We sent (with signed return receipts as proof) petitions along with stamped return envelope. Accompanying letter asked that if they objected, to please sent petition back with "rejected" scrawled across it, along with their concerns. These 3 have not elected to return petition or note explaining any concerns, so I doubt that we will begetting anything from them. Hopefully this will satisfy city..,. The other concern voiced by several people was the apprasial necessary (from each lot) to prove that land is worth 3 times cost of the water improvement expense. Is it possible that we can get a general apprasial for minimum appraised cost of undeveloped land in our area??????? With last couple of sales at $15,000 per acres on 5 acre parcels, .improvement costs are at 117 of value. I am sure some people (including the three who didn't sign petition) will refuse to pay for an assessment. You are getting good press for your efforts Mike, and I think we are lucky to have such an astute and effective facilitator as our councilman..... See you Friday.... regards, Terry -----Original Message ----- From:Michael Maggard To: Terry Chiles Cc: Alan Tandy ;Marion Shaw ;Raul Rojas Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 2:20 PM Subject: RE: Cosmo water assessment list Good questions. My understanding was that it required more than 213, but I may very well be wrong. I think that is what we needed to create an ,a _,\ _..e--.._ .y. ..a.., v __ Fg€i .,..•,.aaa~_' ,-._'-. _. s,....,~~\~.\.`r>.'..x..>aaa,s_ _ ,._ :.?: Ye~o.~ - a~ .\\t.,:.S ,...a r,:, ~. ,.,, ~. .:s\,.~,n`.~..:: ~.~: ~ ., .;zv\.- T :~a\~:.m~.Z~,a .~r~,\ .,.~a t°.. ~,.a ...:~aa\.;.\a~~~ a~5.\;.,.::~.v.;~a„ ., .. , v. ., -- .,, a. ., ,., (M'~ , ' n Shaw - RE: Cosmo water assessment list Pa e 1 Maria r ~ X:., it ~i\., ~~~, ,c:e .x ~ r e,:.. ~..` ~ Ra. ~~....\vt .a:. ~;u~"a...::~.y ~;L ,.. A\\ ~a`~.a \."`~ ~: A, : ~..,\La ~~'\2~m: ~.,..~n ., a ~ .,~... i,~ :'..~ W :: \ a„~z <«\ ~..:;\.: .,_ -. J...... _..- From: "Michael Maggard" <mike@mikemaggard.com> To: "Terry Chiles" <chiles@2000energy.com> Date: 615103 2:24PM Subject: RE: Cosmo water assessment list Good questions. My understanding was that it required more than 213, but I may very well be wrong. I think that is what we needed to create an assessment district for median improvements along Panorama, after which the approval of the council was required. I will ask staff (via this a-mail) to clarify both questions for us, and then get their response back to you. If you haven't hard from me or them by mid-next week, please let me know. MM -----Original Message----- From: Terry Chiles [mailto:chiles@2000energy.com] Sent: Thursday, June 05, 200310:41 AM To: Mike Maggard Subject: Cosmo water assessment list hello Mike, I hope you are doing well... Marion Shaw provided a petition and an explanation of~what was required. It seems pretty attractive and reasonable to me, but it is difficult when dealing with 20 other people The problems encountered: 1. she says 100% of assessment district land owners must sign petition, which will never happen unless we concoct a new checkerboard district. I think we are at more than 70% returned petitions now. Is this 100% a legitimate demand????? 2. All owners must provide recent assessment to prove land is worth 3 times improvement cost. Her estimate is about $2000 acre for water, and last sale of property was $15,000 acre for 5 acres. Requirement is for federal non-taxable bond financing. Anyone who opposes water district will not provide apprasial...:With raw land values at $30,000 per acre now, is it possible we can meet this requirement wlo~ 21 apprasials???? regards, Terry CC: "Alan Tandy" <atandy@ci.bakersfield.ca.us>, "Marion Shaw" <mshaw@ci.bakersfield.ca.us>, "Raul Rojas" <rrojas@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> _ . . > >.. ~, a 1 , m i.::•:, .J r. ~M: • ,~a~`a, a~`m°zC~F a,.. ~..:'a., 3:a ~;~,.t s:~,$ ~.. .,:~?a,..,. __-,~s..w , a.:,..avi.a ~;. yaa.`,. ~a .a;~.aa a \ , ... Z6„C :.:aw ~a, Z 1`~ ;z.xC4s,. „ a:' >;~R:L , a .,, ,k. W: :1 ,>. fiA,a„ a ~,r >' _, ~>.v ~,s~~--,; u„~a aux.,, _;ex, .~ ~av. ,. ~.....,~„ ~ r,, r.., ,,, .. , .... ,u. n.,, ~ ti .:, :, , ~ , Pa 2 A e - m nt dist ess e w ter ass a ..Marian Shaw FW Cosmo ... ,<,..,,,, ..._. .,,, , .: ~.: x c a c: , ..;, ~.y, za:, „wa~.::a\av~ ~~.~. _c~,.,, _.. ,1 ,.. ya ,,.,. .:, _.. ~ ~> ~`>.. 1x. ~~k"~'~ ,,\ ;:tea .. \°....`::h., h;«... ~ti\a'a.a.~ ~~~a;;..,,::_~.~ ~.,,..,~,s. ~:~~, ~. '.; ., ~.:..:~; a. \~.r?*:*?v;`„x.:n s~ a~.. ;:,. x, ~..~1n\..~..\:~:. z\~br _.. -_ ,\z\. ,.~aaa ~~~~~: _.=„u 3.... _.._. _.. _.---"-m-`--- ~~ .~? _ assessment district for median improvements along Panorama, after which the approval of the council was required. I will ask staff (via this a-mails to clarify both questions for us, and then get their response back to you. If you haven't hard from me or them by mid-next week, please let me know. MM -----Original Message----- From: Terry Chiles [mailto:chiles@2000energy.com] Sent: Thursday, June 05, 200310:41 AM To: Mike Maggard Subject: Cosmo water assessment list hello Mike, I hope you are doing well... Marion Shaw provided a petition and an .explanation of what was required. It seems pretty attractive and reasonable to me, but it is difficult when dealing with 20 other people The problems encountered: 1. she says 100% of assessment district land owners must sign petition, which will never happen unless we concoct a new checkerboard district. I think we are at more than 70% returned petitions now. Is this 100% a legitimate demand????? 2. All owners must provide recent assessment to prove land is worth 3 times improvement cost. Her estimate is about $2000 acre for water, and last sale of property was $15,000 acre for 5 acres. Requirement is for federal non-taxable bond financing. Anyone who opposes water district will not provide apprasial....With raw land values at $30,000 per acre now, is it possible we can meet this requirement wlo 21 apprasials???? regards, Terry CCe "Terry Chiles" <chiles@2000energy.com>, "Alan Tandy" <atandy@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> ~~x>,o>a~,J\w~. ,ax>\ , ..x.,..rc,b...;,wba .s.,~a.Zx,l.o, ~kt.,....~ a..,., w a .., i4 ~`3u:.,. aw, x,. ;A~.~,w,a..no.. ,..,L„uo ,i .'a.wa....,a:,, u,.. r,..a, ,:C.z ..A ..,~.,>. Z~~ , aw...,,,:.;.~wai.,..a.a ,. ;. ~. . kr A` ..,\....,v. ~~,",- xx., , ,...wh , ,.. ,..`;..,..a. ,?,. a, ,, . \ .,, . „M,. ,,. .,.o:: a..., ,,,,,~,u.=. ~,...a,~x.~, :a w„;.a ,.ax. aa. Y.:a :Marian Shaw - Re: Fwd: FW: Cosmo water assessment list Pa e 1 ~. ~,~,., ~a~.~.z..,~,~.,~,tt.~~.. ...~z .,:~.>.~„~z,ax ,,,r;x~x.,,..:aza.,z,, ~~aaa;~,..u„a.,. ,r r, ..a ,.: a„>.ax~.~.s. .~G~..btiw~a,...,. .xaz~,.~x,,. .,=.,z~, ,a,., .~~za.~a8?..x..,~~.~~,,,a.a,~.=,,---- ,. a,„ ~.a r ~.. ,,.a,,,,:~=.au~.. ~,>,.~ .. From: Robert Sherfy To: Shaw, Marian Date: 61171031:11 PM Subject: Re: Fwd: FW: Cosmo water assessment list ** Confidential ** Accepting less than 100% is a plicy issue, not a legal issues I don't understand the question about the appraisal. »> Marian Shaw 0611 7103 1 1:07AM »> Can you comment on the attached? Marian ; • B A K E R S F I E L D PU]~LIC ~V®RKS DEPARTMENT 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (bb 1) 326-3724 ~'" ~'' a~ ~'' ~ .. ' r~` 4 L~,, _~ ' ~'; ~` t`t~ d=, n 6 ~' n. R1 ~ r ~ 1~ ~`~ : ~~~' i ~ .': i ~ ~~ a } 1 ,1 ~ ~~; a'~- C ,~~ ,_ ~. -- `~ _ ;'s RAUL M. ROJAS, DIRECTOR • CITY ENGIl~IEER March 25, 2003 Terry Chiles Millennium Energy, LLC 10000 Stockdale Highway, Suite 100 Bakersfield, California 93311 Subject: Potential Assessment District for Paladino/Cosmo Water System. Dear Mr. Chiles: On February 25, 2003, City staff and a California Water Service (Calwater) representative, Mike McMasters, met with you and Ross Sweet as representatives of the property owners for the Paladino/Cosmo area. At the meeting, we discussed potential costs and requirements to form an assessment district in order to supply water to your neighborhood. Subsequent to that meeting, staff has discussed this potential assessment district with the City Attorney's Office and the Public Work's Director. To briefly recap these requirements, and to add additional important information, the following is offered: 1. As assessment district can be formed to pay, for water system improvements, but the cost of the water system can be no more than 5% of the total cost of the assessment district ~ improvements. This is according to federal requirements for non-taxable bonds, which requires no more than 5% of the bond issuance be for private utility systems -CalWater is considered a private utility system. The last estimate for the system was $260,000, which will require a district value of at least $5,200,000. 2. The value to lien ratio for each parcel must be at least 3:1. The parcel valuation is established by an appraisal, which can be no older than six ~mo~xths at. the time the bonds are issu+~d. The cost of the water impr. c~vel~ents to be charged to any parcel cannot exceed 113 of the value of that parcel. This may be difficult to achieve on some of the undeveloped parcels. 3. The water system plans should be complete and the cost of the system finalized prior to the submission of the Engineer's Report for the Assessment District to the City. The date of this submission is estimated to be August 2003. 4. The water plans must be prepared by CalWater. In order to proceed with the water plans, CalWater needs a deposit of $2000 and a base map showing topographical information, easements, existing utilities and proposed fire hydrant locations. S:ILETTERS120031Paladino Cosmo AD.doc 5. New petitions for this district would have to be submitted to the City. In the past, the City has required petitions from at least 60% of the property owners to proceed with a district. However, recent legislation has forced the City to change this requirement to 100%. 6. All parcels that directly benefit from the water line should, ideally, be included in the boundary of the district. Neither the City nor CalWater has any way to reimburse the property owners within the district should someone outside the district choose to receive water service after the district is formed and the water line constructed. ' 7. Normally, a deposit is required to form an assessment district. This deposit is intended to cover costs prior to issuance of bonds, and includes the cost of the engineering report, the property appraisal, and staff time up to the issuance of the bonds. The cost of the engineering design of the improvement is normally paid for by the district proponent and is not a part of the required deposit. With an estimated value of $260,000 for the improvements, the typical deposit would be at least $40,000. You requested that the City front the deposit to Cal Water for the property owners. This will not be possible. However, in lieu of the typical deposit required of district proponents as outlined in 7. above, the property owners can instead provide current appraisals of their property and the Cal Water payment. City staff will be able to prepare the base map for ~ Cal Water. The City will require the petition signed by the owners of 100% of the property within the area as soon as possible. Please return the signed petition to the Public Works Department, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301, to the attention of Marian Shaw. The appraisals may be sent to the same address. If you have any questions or need additional petitions please call John Stinson at {661) 326-3.592. Very truly yours, RAUL R4JAS Public Works Director By: MARIAN P. SHAW Civil Engineer IV -Subdivisions Cc~ l W 4-~ ~f l S A~~~j~~s `~4$e cc: Reading File Project File Lauren Dimberg, Engineer II John A. Stinson, Engineering Technician I S:ILETTERS120431Paladino Cosmo AD.doc B A K E R S F I E L D PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1501 TRUXTUN AVENt3E BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA 93301 (661) 326-3724 RAUL M. ROJAS, DIRECTOR ~ CTTY ENGINEER July 11, 2002 Ms. Lynn Espericueta 100 Baker Street Bakersfield, California 93305 Subject: Potential Assessment District for Paladino/Cosmo Dear Ms. Espericueto: Thank you for your recent inquiry concerning water for your neighborhood. Construction of. a water system for your neighborhood is usually accomplished through the .formation of an assessment district. An assessment district is a procedure b which Y bonds are sold to finance improvements. In this case, proceeds from the bonds would a . pY for the water. main and a lateral to the front property line of each property. The cost of connection of each property to the lateral is a separate charge, set forth below, and is not financed through the assessment district proceedings. The assessment rocedure must be ... p initiated by the property owners In the area. we have enclosed two copies of a petition, for your use, for the formation of an assessment district to construct water mains and laterals within the area shown on the attached ma marked "Exhibit A". You ma . .. p. . y circulate this petition to your neighbors for their review and signature. This petition should be signed by the owners of 140% of the property within the area. The petition must be signed by the property owner (not a tenant). If the property is owned by more than one person, such as husband and wife, only one person needs to sign the petition. The street address and date must also be included with the signature. Since several petitions may be circulating in this area, signing mare than one petition will not invalidate the petition. ~~`, In addition, during the assessment proceedings each property owner will be provided a ballot which will indicate either support of or opposition to the assessment proposed to be levied on the property. The City would like to see 100% of the vote in support of the assessments before proceeding .further; if there is a significant opposition to the assessments, the proceedings will stop and this type of financing will not be able to be used for your water prof ect. S:ILETTERS120021Paladino Cosmo Petition Letter.doc The estimated total cost of the district, including improvements and administrative costs, is $235,000. The City of Bakersfield will contribute by providing the engineering and inspection. The estimated cost for each homeowner for a water main in the street and a lateral to the front property line is approximately $2,44 per acre. This cost can be paid in cash or be spread over a 15-20 year period. and added..:.:: to your property tax bill. Connection to the water line will not be mandatory; however; all property owners within the district will be assessed their share of the district cost. In addition, the cost of the connection from the lateral to the house will be the responsibility of each property owner, as will the payment of the water connection fee. This fee is due and payable only upon connection and is $1.,300 per household. As we discussed, since the City will not form an assessment district for an amount lower than $1,000,000, the Paladino/Cosmo water project will have to wait until it can "piggy- back"with another developer's project in the City. Please return the signed petition to the Public Works Department, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301, to the attention of Marian Shaw. If you have any questions or need additional petitions please call Lauren Dimberg at (b61} 326-3585: Very truly yours, RAUL RAJAS Public Works Director '~ ,.~° ~.~ .f By: MARIAN P. SHAW Civil Engineer IV -Subdivisions cc: Reading File Project File Lauren Dimberg, Engineer II John A. Stinson, Engineering Technician I ~'~ S:ILETTERS120021Paladinno Cosmo Petition Letter.doc ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE PALIDINO WATER LINE TOGETHER W/PAVING Prepared by: Phil Powell Date: 12/18/01 DEVELOPER FUNDS Item No. Estimated Quanti Unit Measure Item Unit Price Extension Price 1 0 EA Street Li hts $2,000.00 . $0.00 2 17,423 SQFT ADD'L R/W $2.00 $34,846.00 3 0 SQFT Minor Concrete Sidewalk/walkwa & Drivewa Tie-ins) $3.50 $0.00 4 3 EA 8"X 8"X 8" PVC TEES $50.00 $150.00 5 7 EA 8"- 90 DEGREE ELLS $50.00 $350.00 6 1,027 CY A e ate Base Class 2) $21.00 $21,567.00 7 1,005 TONS As halt Concrete T e'A') $32.00 $32,160.00 8 4,331 LF 8" PVC WATER LINE $21.00 $90,951.00 9 16 EA METER W/BOX $166.00 $2,656.00 10 3 EA WHARF HEADS $200.00 $600.00 11 16 EA 1" SERVICE $660.00 $10,560.00 12 1 EA TIE-IN $600.00 $600.00 Total: $194,440.00 5% Contingency: $9,722.00 Engineers Estimate: $204,162,.00 s: I projects l philllake st phase Ill engrs-est ~Z d ~•.aia. , > ,\\ ¢ ..- . •t~ ~ . •: Z : Wu ..'• .w\a '~.. ' a. , b. •v:R1:a .\' ~ .`.:i ~~ :.. ~ i a\ a`.\. \ ~! \.`eY~••,`a ~'&a"", Fo•;\~.`•\,.'., y. .c~\ tae.: •. a~`~... Z • :. k :... : r.. '~.\ .. .. •;,`b~ H ~d, r ~`~\Y,%@\~`\\\a~~@YtaQ~'n~\~\~Zuolt"`,u.G:~:.;aq.\Z.v~2 K.a\~asa~.~ea\Ybe~vay.\\~a~~a.,a~~•'.w~~\aw~.aa~eeuw•era :mx~;~eaeav`a~:aaxti ~n~,.<Aa Re: Paladino Water Marian Shaw - e .~' \~...• ,~.:~ .~~, , ,~.'~ ~.:. ~ .~ . '.. ~~.~~ ,~.. ~ • . ~."' .~~ '~3\~..:~~ •~~~~'., ~~ Pad, ~1 :`\`l,`\ a \l•'~`• ~i '~' \ ~ .' "d,`•`, \\ :iat• yx\~;..~~.~ ~. .~ \.. . \~•. vb\ [~e : ~\~ \~ `i~`~i1~: `a•Gtii'~: \\ C4..~' \a \~' ..~,..a• r. •\ ~ From: Nelson Smith To: Marian Shaw Date: 12/281019:51 AM Subject: Re: Paladino Water In order to service a debt of $235,000 over 20 years ; based on a 6% interest rate ; it would require an annual assessment on the properties of about $20,300. This is a rough estimate and is subject to fluctuation based on the actual size of the bond issue , cost of engineering ,market rate fluctuations ,etc. Corey will be back next week if you have any additional questions. »> Marian Shaw 12126/0103:08PM »> Thakns for helping out with a debt service schedule. I have attached the QuattroPro worksheet, should you need it. The parcel list is on sheet 2. Marian ; CC: Corey Turner ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE PALIDINO WATER LINE TOGETHER WIPAVING Prepared by: Phil Powell Date: 12/26/01 DEVELOPER FUNDS Item No. Estimated Quanti Unit Measure Item Unit Price Extension Price 1 0 EA Street Li hts $2,000.00 $0.00 2 17,423 SQFT ADD'L R/W $0.00 $0.00 3 0 SQFT Minor Concrete Sidewalk/Walkwa & Drivewa Tie-ins) $3.50 $0.00 4 3 EA 8"X 8"X 8" PVC TEES $50.00 $150.00 5 7 EA 8"- 90 DEGREE ELLS $50.00 $350.00 6 1,027 CY A e ate Base (Class 2) $21.00 $21,567.00 7 1,005 TONS As halt Concrete T e'A') $32.00 $32,160.00 8 4,331 LF 8" PVC WATER LINE $21.00 $90,951.00 9 16 EA METER W/BOX $166.00 $2,656.00 10 3 EA WHARF HEADS $200.00 $600.00 11 16 EA 1" SERVICE $660.00 $10,560.00 12 1 EA TIE-IN $600.00 $600.00 Total: $159,594.00 5% Contingency: $7,979.70 Engineers Estimate: $167,573.70 ~~R, 5~~1. ~9b 2~-~ a z-~ ~,`b8d~~a s: I projectslphilllake st phase Ill mgrs-est PaladinolCosmo Area Per Parcel Share of Improvement Costs 386 21 10 5.57 $24, 750.47 386 21 9 6.97 $30,971.41 386 21 27 9.99 $44,390.87 386 21 11 12.88 $57,232.68 386 21 13 2.49 $11,064.39 386 21 14 2.49 $11,064.39 386 21 15 2.49 $11,064.39 386 21 16 2.49 $11,064.39 386 21 17 4.99 $22,173.22 386 21 ~ 22 4.99 $22,173.22 386 4 17 5 $22,217.65 386 21 18 2.5 $11,108.83 38.6 21 19 2.5 $11,108.83 386 21 23 4.99 $22,173.22 386 21 20 4.99 $22,173.22 386 21 24 4.99 $22,173.22 386 21 21 4.2 $18, 662.83 386 21 25 4.2 $18,662.83 88.72 $394,230.06 Project Capital Cost = $271,882.80 District Cost = 45.00% $394,230.06 Cost per Acre = $4,443.53 • B A K E R S F I E L D PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93341 (661) 326-3724 RAUL M. ROJAS, DIRECPOR ~ CTTY ENGINEER July 11, 2002 Ms. Lynn Espericueta 100 Baker Street Bakersfield, California 93305 Subject: Potential Assessment District for Paladino/Cosmo Dear Ms. Espericueto: Thank you for your recent inquiry concerning water for your neighborhood. Construction of a water system for your neighborhood is usually accomplished through the formation of an assessment district. An assessment district is a procedure by which bonds are sold to finance improvements. In this case, proceeds from the bonds would pay for the water main and a lateral to the front property line of each property. The cost of connection of each property to the lateral is a separate charge, set forth below, and is not financed through the assessment district proceedings. The assessment procedure must be initiated by the property owners in the area. VVe have enclosed two copies of a petition, for your use, for the formation of an assessment district to construct water mains and laterals within the area shown on the attached map marked "Exhibit A". You may circulate this petition to your neighbors for their review and signature. This petition should be signed by the owners of 100% of the property within the area. The petition must be signed by the property owner (not a tenant). If the property is owned by more than one person, such as husband and wife, only one person needs to sign the petition. The street address and date must also be included with the signature. Since several petitions may be circulating in this area, signing more than one petition will not invalidate the petition. In addition, during the assessment proceedings each property owner will be provided a ballot which will indicate either support of or opposition to the assessment proposed to be levied on the property. The City would like to see 100% of the vote in support of the assessments before proceeding .further; if there is a significant opposition to the assessments, the proceedings will stop and this type of financing will not be able to be used for your water project. S:\LETTERS120021Paladino Cosmo Petition Letter.doc The estimated total cost of the district, including improvements and a~strative costs, is $235,000. The City of Bakersfield will contribute by providing the engineering and ins ection. The estimated cost for each homeowner for a water main in the street and a p lateral to the front property line is approximately $2,44 per acre. This cost can be paid in cash or be spread over a 15-20 year period and added to your property tax bill. Connection to the water line will not be mandatory; however, all property owners within the district will be assessed their share of the district cost. In addition, the cost of the connection from the lateral to the house will be the responsibility of each property owner, as will the payment of the water connection .fee. This fee is due and payable only upon connection and is $1,300 per household. As we discussed, since the City will not form an assessment district for an amount lower than $1,000,000, the Paladino/Cosmo Water project will have to wait until it can "piggy- back"with another developer's project in the City. Please return the signed petition to the Public Works Department,1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301, to the attention of Marian Shaw. If you have any questions or need additional petitions please call Lauren Dimberg at (d61} 326-3585. Very truly yours, RAUL ROJAS Public Works Director ,,,r'~ j f~ ,.•~ ~~ ` '` :~ ~ _ . ~,,' ` , 1J ~ ~ j ~~ By: MARIAN P. SHAW Civil Engineer IV -Subdivisions cc: Reading File Project File Lauren Dimberg, Engineer II John A. Stinson, Engineering Technician I S:ILETTERS120021Paladino Cosmo Petition Letter.doc * V M h- _~ J 0 u e"~ w c~ N ~~ ~~ ct? cU n LL 4 ~. W J C~.1 ~ V ,V n~n L~ ~... Q N X O N X O O (0 ~_ '*'r. N (0 ch L~ Cn'" A v 0 O 0 ..~. r m M ~' Q~w ~ s a~~e `e o -° e ~9~: ~~er ~~g~ ..~+~~ Mo`oe° a• a E'~ »~ do a . h~pp .. ,_~ ~»~ ~. $~~~ ~~ ~ V' mW~ KJ' m' LV de ~ Z 00 yv W to d LMAC 0 2 5 City of Bakersfield 12 / 2 6 / 01 Display Parcels 14:57:47 Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 09 Type options, press Enter. 1=Select 2=Change. 3=Copy 6=Miscellaneous information Opt Parcel/APN 386-210-09-00-1 386-210-10-00-3 386-210-11-00-6 386-210-13-00-2 386-210-14-00-5 386-210-15-00-8 386-210-16-00-1 386-210-17-00-4 386-210-18-00-7 386-210-19-00-0 386-210-20-00-2 4=Delete 5=Display 7=User-defined codes 8=valuations ... Related Parties Sts SANDERS RAYMOND A & CYNTHIA A BUSBY JACK & JULIE FAMILY TRUS KALBAUGH W S & DOWNS S J ET UX ESPERICUETA PEDRO JR & ANA PADILLA RICHARD G & RITA J ASELTINE WILLIAM D & CYNTHIA M HASHIM SCOTT E & LORETTA M PEARCE RICK LEE & WENDY RENEE. ESPERICUETA JAIME & LYNN CAMPS BART B & BARBARA JEAN NEFF PATRICK D & JOYCE M + F3=Exit F6=Add F8=LX switch view F22=Owner/Address F23=More options LMAC025 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Display Parcels 15:10:18 Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 09 Type options, press Enter. 1=Select 2=Change 3=Copy 6=Miscellaneous information Opt Parcel/APN 386-210-21-00-5 386-210-22-00-8 386-210-23-00-1 386-210-24-00-4 386-210-25~-00-7 386-210-27-00-3 386-220-01-00-0 386-220-02-00-3 386-220-04-00-9 386-220-05-00-2 386-220-06-00-5 4=Delete 5=Display 7=User-defined codes 8=valuations ... Related Parties Sts NEFF PATRICK D & JOYCE M BALCH RODNEY C & RACHEL SMITH GARY GEORGE GALEY DONALD & JEAN TRUST RCJMMELL JAMES K & DAYNA S FAM CHILES TERRY V & ANA LUCIA MEDEARIS WILLIAM E & MARJORIE PHILLIPS STEPHEN R & LINDA L MC CORMICK FRANK & GEORGIA HABERLANDER JOHN K & JENNIE M LANGSTON DUANE & MICHELLE + F3=Exit F6=Add F8=LX switch view F22=Owner/Address F23=More options LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry ..15:12:34 Main Address 9348 MORNING SIDE CT Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 09' 00 1 Parcel processing code Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address Sts _ SANDERS RAYMOND A & CYNTHIA A 9348 MORNINGSIDE CT PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 15:12:53 Main Address *UNASSIGNED Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 0 00 3 Parcel processing code Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address _ BUSBY JACK & JULIE FAMILY TRUS 4001 PANORAMA DR. PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield l~/~~/ul Parcel Inquiry 15:14:03 Main Address *UNASSIGNED Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 11, 00 6 Parcel processing code Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address _ KALBAUGH W S & DOWNS S J ET UX 3508 LA COSTA ST PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 15:14:12 Main Address 8601 MORNINGSIDE CT Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 13 00 2 Parcel processing co e Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address _ ESPER~CUETA PEDRO JR & ANA 100 BAKER ST PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93305 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 15:14:19 Main Address 8801 MORNINGSIDE CT Book Page Lot Type Check 386. 210 14 00 5 Parcel processing code . Effective date, status . 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type _ PADILLA RICHARD G & RITA J PRIMARY OWNER Address 8801 MORNINGSIDE CT BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 15:14:28 Main Address 4701 COSMO ST Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 15 00 8 Parcel processing co e Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address _ ASELTINE WILLIAM D & CYNTHIA M 4701 COSMO ST PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 15:14:36 Main Address *UNASSIGNED Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 16 00 1 ,. Parcel processing code Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address _ HASHIM SCOTT E & LORETTA M 5904 HIDDEN VALLEY RD PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel 2nquiry 15:14:43 Main Address *UNASSIGNED Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 17 00 4 Parcel processing code : Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address _ PEARCE RICK LEE & WENDY RENEE 2520 KENT DR PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel, F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 15:14:48 Main Address 4544 COSMO CT Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 18 00 7 Parcel processing code .. Effective date, status . 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address _ ESPERICUETA JAIME & LYNN 4544 COSMO CT PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 15:14:54 Main Address 4500 COSMO ST Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 19 00 0 Parcel processing code Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address Sts _ CAMPS BART B & BARBARA JEAN 4500 COSMO ST PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield l~/Lb/Ul Parcel Inquiry 15.15.03 Main Address *UNASSIGNED Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 20 00 2 Parcel processing code Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address _ NEFF PATRICK D & JOYCE M 1321 VALE ST PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 15:15:16 Main Address *UNASSIGNED Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 21 00 5 Parcel processing code Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address Sts _ NEFF PATRICK D & JOYCE M 1321 VALE ST PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 15:15:25. Main Address *UNASSIGNED Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 2`'2 00 8 Parcel processing code Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address _ BALCH RODNEY C & RACHEL 11587 NORTH ARMSTRONG PRIMARY OWNER CLOVIS CA 93612 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 1.5:15:33 Main Address *UNASSIGNED Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 23 ~00 1 Parcel processing code Effective date, status . 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type _ SMITH GARY GEORGE PRIMARY OWNER Address 317 MING AV BAKERSFIELD CA 93307 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry ~ 15:28:42 Main Address . *UNASSIGNED Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 24 00 ~4 Parcel processing code `. Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address Sts _ GALEY DONALD & JEAN TRUST 3408 PANORAMA DR PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 15:28:54 Main Address *UNASSIGNED Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 25 00 7 Parcel processing code Effective date, status . 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address Sts _ RUNIl~IELL JAMES K & DAYNA S FAM 5909 MEADOW OAKS CT PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history LMAC040 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Parcel Inquiry 15:29:04 Main Address 9602 MORNINGSIDE CT Book Page Lot Type Check 386 210 27 00 3 Parcel processing code Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, .press. Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address _ CHILES TERRY V & ANA LUCIA 9602 MORNINGSIDE CT PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Rel party history a ~~ ~W zY W ~Q ~~ ~U W U! ~~ NN X • N ~ C X O .. `° N ~.. ~~ 0 c~ ' •~ Qt0 Y M K? m d. Yh m~ M ~~e `~ on~p"~c (L .. ?~..~ a v e W ~no~~°~o g p~ya3tN~0 Q rte- o a °u v'v ao~i ~rn ~~ Y ~~ ~W !B N~ ~2 dN~i~l. WW U~ ~ q tD p. Q Na ~~ a O a I-- W pg U~ ~Wap ~y~ ~ N N O PP~~ ~Y (~ -~i ~ U h LMAC025 City of Bakersfield 12/26/01 Display Parcels 15:30:04 Book Page Lot Type Check 386 040 17 Type options, press Enter. 1=Select 2=Change 3=Copy 6=Miscellaneous information Opt Parcel/APN 386-040-~7-00-5 386-040-18-00-8 386-040-19-00-1 386-040-20-00-3 386-040-26-00-1 386-040-27-00-4 386-040-28-00-7 386-050-01-00-1 386-050-06-00-6 386-050-08-00-2 386-050-09-00-5 4=Delete 5=Display 7=User-defined codes 8=Valuations ... Related Parties QUEEN MILLER FMLY TR JONES ARTHUR & MARILYN JONES ARTHUR & MARILYN JONES ARTHUR W & MARILYN R REDDY GAUTHAM MALLADI TR ET AL CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO PIEDMONT OIL CO SF PACIFIC PROPERTIES INC CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO USA LYLES DIVERSIFIED INC Sts F3=Exit F6=Add F8=LX switch view F22=Owner/Address F23=More options LMAC04 0 City of Bakersfield Parcel Inquiry Main Address 9101 BELLA DR Book Page Lot Type Check 386 040 ~17 00 5 Parcel processing code Effective date, status 0/00/00 Active Type option, press Enter. 5=Display Opt Name/Related type Address _ QUEEN MILLER FMLY TR 9101 BELLA DR PRIMARY OWNER BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 12/26/01 15:29:40 Sts Bottom F2=Address F3=Exit F8=Select path F12=Cancel F15=Re1 party history • B A K E R S F I E L D PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (661) 326-3724 RAUL M. ROJAS, DIRECTOR • CTf Y ENGII~IEER July 11, 2002 Ms. Lynn Espericueta 100 Baker Street Bakersfield, California 93305 Subject: Potential .Assessment District for Paladino/Cosmo Dear Ms. Espericueto: Thank you for your recent inquiry concerning water for your neighborhood. Construction of a water system for your neighborhood is usually accomplished through 4 the ..formation of an assessment district. An assessment district is a procedure by which bonds are sold to finance improvements. In this case, proceeds from the bonds would pay for the water. main and a lateral to_ the front property line of each pro ert .The cost of p Y connection of each property to the lateral is a separate charge, set forth below, and is not financed through the assessment district proceedings. The assessment procedure must be initiated by the property owners in the area. We have enclosed two co ies of a etition p p for your use, for the formation of an assessment district to construct water mains and laterals within the area shown on the attached map marked ,"Exhibit A". You may circulate this petition to your neighbors for their review and signature. This petition should be signed by the owners of 100% of the property within the area. The petition must be signed by the property owner (not a tenant). If the property is owned by more than one person, such as husband and wife, only one person needs to sign the petition. The street address and date must also be included with the signature. Since several petitions may be circulating in this area, signing more than one petition will not invalidate the petition. ~~~, In addition, during the assessment proceedings each property owner will be provided a ballot which will indicate either support of or opposition to the assessment proposed to be levied on the property. The City would like to see 100% of the vote in support of the assessments before proceeding .further; if there is a significant opposition to the assessments, the proceedings will stop and this type of financing will not be able to be used for, your water project. S:ILETTERS120021Paladino Cosmo Petition Letter.doc The estimated total cost of the district, including improvements and administrative costs, is $235,000. The City of Bakersfield will contribute by providing the engineering and inspection. The estimated cost for each homeowner for a water main in the street and a lateral to the front property line is approximately $2,44 per acre. This cost can be paid in cash or be spread over a 15-20 year period. and added...;.:, to your property tax bill. Connection to the water line will not be mandatory; however, all property owners within the district will be assessed their share of the district cost. In addition, the cost of the connection from the lateral to the house will be the responsibility of each property owner, as will the payment of the water connection fee. This fee is due and payable only upon connection and is $ ].,300 per household. As we discussed, since the City will not form an assessment district for an amount lower than $1,.000,000, the Paladino/Cosmo Water project will have to wait until it can "piggy- back" with another developer's prof ect in the City. Please return the signed petition to the Public Works Department, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301, to the attention of Marian Shaw. If you have any questions or need additional petitions please call Lauren Dimberg at (661) 326-3585. Very truly yours, RAUL ROJAS Public Works Director ~` r, ~ ~~~ e ~,~ . ~, By: MARIAN P. SHAW Civil Engineer IV -Subdivisions cc: Reading File Project File Lauren D imb erg, Engine er II John A. Stinson, Engineering Technician I ~ ~}~ S:ILETTERS120021Paladino Cosmo Petition Letter.doc