Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/20/2000 BAKERSFIELD David Couch, Chair Patricia J. DeMond Jacquie Sullivan Staff: Trudy Slater REGULAR MEETING NOTICE LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE of the City Council - City of Bakersfield Thursday, January 20, 2000 1:15 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room Second Floor - City Hall, Suite 201 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. ADOPT DECEMBER 16, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 3. PRESENTATIONS 4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 5. DEFERRE~ BUSINESS A. REVIEW AND COMMI'I-I'EE RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE USE OF ELECTRIC BICYCLES ON THE BIKE PATH 6. NEW BUSINESS A. REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING REQUEST OF MARTHA KNIGHT B. REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING DRAFTING AN ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION OUTLINING THE ANNEXATION PROCESS WITH CONSIDERATION OF SUGGESTIONS FROM THE ANNEXATION TASK FORCE C. REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING READING COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS SEPARATELY INTO THE RECORD, AS OPPOSED TO COMBINING ITEMS, FOR THE BENEFIT OF .THE TELEVISION AUDIENCE WHO MAY NOT-BE FAMILIAR WITH THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE AGENDA D. REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION RELATING TO PROCEDURE OR POLICY FOR COUNCILMEMBERS PLACING AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA E. REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.28.090 OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT 7. COMMITTEE COMMENTS FILE DRAFT BAKERSFIELD ~1~ I andy, Ci~'-Manager David Couch, Chair Staff: Trudy Slat~Mrana7' Patricia J. DeMond Jacquie Sullivan AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE Regular Meeting Thursday, December 16, 1999 1:30 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room 1. ROLL CALL Called to order at 1:35 p.m. Members present: Councilmember David Couch, Chair Councilmember Patricia DeMond Councilmember Jacquie Sullivan 2. ADOPT NOVEMBER 4, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Adopted as submitted. 3. PRESENTATIONS None. 4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS None. DRAFT Agenda Summary Report Legislative and Litigation Committee December 16, 1999 Page 2 5. DEFERRED BUSINESS None. 6. NEW BUSINESS A. REVIEW AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE USE OF ELECTRIC BICYCLES ON THE BIKE PATH City Attorney Bart Thiltgen briefly explained that State law prohibits motorized bikes on bike paths unless the local governing body specifically allows it. The City's Municipal Code prohibits motorized vehicles on the bike path. An ordinance change specifically allowing electric or motorized bikes on the bike path would be required before they could be allowed on the City's bike path. Committee member Pat DeMond indicated that during the developmental stages of the bike path, it was agreed there would be no motorized vehicles on it. Mr. Rich O'Neil, Kern River Bike Path Committee, indicated the committee was opposed to electric bikes on the path or any motorized vehicles. The path comes within four feet of the equestrian paths. There is a public safety issue as well as safety for equestrians. The bike path also goes into the flood plain which, he believes, is against the off-road vehicle ordinance. Handicapped vehicles are allowed on the bike path. Mr. O'Neil is concerned about environmental impact and wildlife habitat. Committee chair David Couch questioned if noise was an issue, and Mr. O'Neil indicated he did not feel the electric bikes were extremely noisy. Mr. Paul McGrath indicated he would like to ride his electric bike on the bike path as he would feel safer on it on the bike path than on the street. The electric bike provides the electric power he needs to ride a bike. He feels electric bikes are the most safe thing they have on the market today. Committee member Jacquie Sullivan stated the purpose of an electric bike was more recreational than a motorized wheelchair which was necessary for mobility. Other electric bikes issues discussed included noise, weight (approximately 55 lbs.), and the possibility of allowing a portion of the bike path to be used for electric bikes. DRAFT Agenda Summary Report Legislative and Litigation Committee December 16, 1999 Page 3 Chairperson Couch indicated he would like to hear an electric bike and felt he could not give. an opinion on the issue until he does. The Committee concurred that it would like a demonstration and asked staff to have an electric bike at the next Committee review of the electric bike issue. B. REVIEW AND SET COMMITTEE CALENDAR FOR 2000 The Committee reviewed the proposed committee calendar for the year 2000. The committee approved meetings scheduled at 1:15 p.m. in the City Manager's Office on the following dates during 2000: January 20, February 17, March 23, April 20, May 18, June 22, July 13, August 24, September 21 October 19, November 9, and December 7. ' 7. COMMITTEE COMMENTS None. 8. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 2:05 p.m. Staff Attendees: Administrative Analyst Trudy Slater; City Attorney Bart Thiltgen, Deputy City Attorney Virginia Gennaro; Assistant Recreation and Parks Director Other Attendees: Mr. Paul McGrath; Mr. Rich O'Neil; Ms. Barbara Fowler (P:\L&L\L991216.MIN) LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE CALENDAR 2000 ADOPTED SCHEDULE Legislative & Litigation Committee Meetings r~ Council Meetings (7 p.m.) 1:15 p.m., City Manager's Conference Room Workshops/Closed sessions (5:15 p.m.) Holidays ~ ~_..~ Hearings 6114, ADOPTION 6/28/99 @ 7:00 P.M. Mondays at noon; Wednesdays at 5:15 p.m. (Info as of 11-3-99; Res. 159-99) JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 ._,,__,,=1 =0 =5 19 =1 =5 23 24 25 2L~J 27 28 29 27 28 29 26 27 28 I 29J 30 31 30 31 APRIL MAY JUNE S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 2 3 4 ~5 6 7 8 7 8 9 .~_ lr..~1 12 13 4 '5 6 7 8 9 10 16 17 18 ._,,~.,121 22 21--~:~ 23 [~4~125 26 27 18 19 20 ~23 24 23 24 2512sl27 2s 29 28 ~i~:~ 30 31 25 26 27 1~28..I 29 30 30 JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 2 3 ~!~5- 6 7 8 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 -~i~! 5 6 7 8 9 16 17 18 21 22 20 21 22 25 26 17 18 19 22 23 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 27 28 2913ol31 24 25 2612712s 29 30 3O 31 OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 1 2 22 23 24 27 28 19 20 21 222" "~'' ~ 25 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 30 31 31 26 27 28 I 29 I 30 ' 24 ~:25:~ 26 27 28 29 30 31 Committee meetings: Jan. 20, Feb. 17, Mar. 23, Apr. 20, May 18, Jun. 22, Jul. 13, Aug. 24, Sep. 21, Oct. 19, Nov. 9, Dec. 7 League Annual Conference, Anaheim (tentative), Sep. 7-10 (p:\l&l\l&lcal00.wb2) Mayor & Council Forum, Monterey, Jul. 26-28 Adopted at Committee meeting of Dec. 16, 1999. Women's Business Conference, Apr. 27 Bart J. Thiltgen ,,../' ~,.:, ,'.w _~iL -~!~\ Al~ D. D~el WM~r H. Poff. Jr. ~i,~, o. ~,~o~ CITY OF BA~RS~LD C~l He~z ~ J~ice Sc~l~ O~CE OF THE CITY A~NEY ~nia Ge~ 1501 ~U~. A~ ~w C. ~n BA~RS~LD, CA 93301 ~IST~ ~IST~ ~LEPHO~: ~1-326-3721 ~n A. Aquil~ FACS~E: ~ 1-852-2020 November 16, 1999 Mrs. Martha Knight 2420 C Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: 1601 13th Street Dear Mrs. Knight: This letter is in response to your correspondence of October 16, 1999 addressed to Councilwoman Patricia DeMond. Ms. DeMond referred yourcorrespondence to staff for comment and reply. In preparing this response, I have reviewed all prior correspondence and memos between yourself and the City, have spoken with City employees involved in this transaction and have reviewed applicable California law. Your citation to "Section 1102 of the Real Estate Disclosure Law of 1989" is, unfortunate y, of no assistance in resolving this matter as it pertains to residential property only (Civil Code section 1102 - "Disclosure upon transfer of Residential Property"). Even if an argument for application of this disclosure law to this transaction was accepted, Civil Code section 1102.2 specifically exempts transfers by eminent domain (1102.2(b)) and transfer or exchanges to or from a governmental entity (1102.2(j)). Additionally, liability for failure to disclose arises only as to known conditions (section 1102.4). During the City's ownership of the property in question, it was vacant (undeveloped) and the City was not aware that the property Was' not serviced by water and/or sewer utilities. MY review of Agreement No. 99-13 dated January 13, 1999, shows that you agreed that all claims, causes of action and entitlements arising from the transaction were resolved. Further, it is our understanding that prior to your entering into this transaction, you were afforded ample opportunity to inspect the property being exchanged, as well as MRS. MARTHA KNIGHT November'16, 1999 Page 2 · the ability to seek legal representation. The funds and property which the City transferred to you in this mutually agreed exchange provided legally adequate consideration for your property. Access to sewer and water utilities at the vacant property was one element which was presumed to have been considered in your evaluation of the exchange. For the City to pay 'additional public money now that this transaction is complete would subject it to both criticism and potential liability for improper use of public funds. While it is certainly regrettable that your assumption of utility service to the City parcel was not found to be true, the City cannot assume any responsibility for thisunknoWn condition. For all of the above reasons, I must unfortunately come to the conclusion that recommends against your request for additional payment. Very truly yours,' MICHAEL G. ALLFORB¢ Deputy City Attorney MGA:lsc:alj:cj cc: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers S:\MGA\Letters\MKnight 1112.wpd [ Bakersfield, California 93301 · . ~ October 16, 1999 Patricia DeMond Bakersfield City Council 1501 Truxton Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 Dear Mrs. DeMond: As you prepare to discuss my request for reimbursement for water and sewer installation expenses on the lot at 1601 13t~ Street, which the City traded me to acquire my lot on 16t~ Street, I would like to direct your attention to Section 1102 of the Real Estate DisclosUre Law of 1989. Under this law, any party selling real property must disclose if the Property lacks water and sewer utilities. I have been ad,vised that this law applies to property exchanges as well as sales. Including the words "as is" in the contract does not absolve the City of its responsibility under the law to disclose the absence of water and sewer on the property. I accepted the lot on 13t~ Street "in good faith" expecting it to have utilities and it did not. I believe it is only fair for the City to reimburse me for the expense of adding these utilities to the property. Thank you for considering my case. Respectfully Yours, Martha Knight Bakersfield Ballet Theatre October 6, 1999 Martha Knight Bakersfield Ballet Theatre 2420 C Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 Dear Ms. Knight: Thank you for your leiter' of October 5, 1999, concerning the unforseen expenses you experienced on the relocation of your storage building. I understand the point you are making in your letter. While i have Some level of sympathy with your situation, two major points need to be added to provide the other side of the story, as follows: 1). You and the City willingly entered into a contract. The City felt that you were offered far in excess of the value of the property, but a settlement is a settlement, and a ~ contract should be binding, on both Parties. · .2) Your investment in the original building was $25,000. You now have an asset worth $75,000 to $105,000. after only owning the $25,000 asset for a few years. You, not the City, hold control, and you can evenlually sell that asset. Even with a cost to you of $12,000, that is a dramatic gain. We appreciate the difficulty that was placed on you by having to move. but we bargained in good faith. A staff report is enclosed. Under the circumstances, I cannot recommend further compensation by the City. Yours trulY, Mayor BP:rs Enclosure bc: , City C°uncilmembers Gregory Klimko, Finance Director Alan Tandy, City Manager 1501 /ruxtun Avenue · Bakersfield, California 93301 October 5, 1999 Mr. Bob Price, Mayor of the City of Bakersfield, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Obi ~ 1 99 Bakersfield, California, 93301 MAYO F,~ OFFICE Dear Mr. Price, I am writing ta yon concerning th~City acquiring mY property on 16th Street, the site of the proposed new Amtrak Station. Last December I traded to the City of Bakersfield my property and warehouse for a City owned lot at 13th and Eye Street~, and a check for $75,660.00 to build a metal storage building. I vacated my property in February and have since been building the new warehouse. My friends at the Fox Theater have been graciously allowing me to store my scenery temporarily in their annex building. Starting with the $75,660.00, which was barely enough to build a basic 2,000 square foot building to replace my condemned building of the same size, I chose to make the building 400 square feet bigger, to increase the size of the roll-up doors, and to put down an asphalt drive area rather than a slurry coat. These, and' some other small changes, were strictly optional and I paid for them out of my own personal funds. I have no regrets that I had to personally pay extra for these as they were choices which made the building more useful. ' The building is finished and has passed all the inspections. I am ready to move in. It is a fine building and will serve my needs well. I thank you for your part of it. The lot which it stands on is another story. The City traded this lot to me as a replacement for my lot on 16th Street. It.is a fine lot of adequate size in a good location. I was very satisfied with the trade. When it came time to hook up to the sewer, howeVer, we discovered that the lot had no sewer access. We learned that, some years ago, my lot and the property to the South were all one parcel which was later divided into two. The property to the South' runs along the.alley where the utilities are located. The lot I was given has no utility access. Because there had been a structure on the lot before, we all assumed that utilities would be there. We tried to persuade the other property owner to allow us to run a sewer line under the back of his property, but he refused to give us an easement. We ended up having to dig up the sidewalk down Eye Street, hook to the sewer, and then pour a new sidewalk The cost was $5,600.00. We thought at that time that we could put a one inch water pipe in that same ditch and be done with it, but the California Water Service would not allow it. The code requires that a water line be ten or more feet away from a sewer line. That meant that any water coming to my property would have to come from the alley up the center of Eye Street. The street would have to be dug up and replaced. I was further advised by the Water Company that it had been decided by the Public Utilities Commission that I had to put a six inch water main up Eye Street. All I need is a one inch pipe! The Water Company "estimated" that the cost to me would be $8,887.00 if they did the work. I was free to find an independent pipeline contractor who might charge me less. I have accepted a bid from ConCastCo for $4,981.00 to do the job. The Water Company will make me pay them 12% of that - $597.00 (don't know why). They also require a $1,000.00 hook-up fee. The cost to bring water service to my lot has become $6,578.00. Combined with the sewer cost, you would have to say the lot I received as a trade has cost me $12,178.00. I have a problem with having to pay this amount out of my pocket. The sewer and water were not added expenses I "chose" to have. They are forced upon me because the lot the City gave me was basically an unimproved lot. In order to make it into a buildable lot it has cost me over $12,000.00. This is an issue of fairness.. The lot I gave the City had water and sewer; the lot I received in trade should also have had water and sewer. I was happy in my old facility on 16th Street. I didn't choose to move, I was forced to. I wish I were still there without the negotiating ordeal, the loss of valuable time, and now a huge financial outlay. I feel it is not right for us to be taken out of out existing storage situation and then be forced to pay · $12,000.00 to make it happen. Recently, when I was down at the new warehouse painting, (to save money), Don Anderson, the City Relocation officer, came by to ask me, "Are you happy?" Certainly the building makes me happy. It's nice. But I shared with him the financial problems relating to the sewer and water issues. He expressed sympathy for my situation and offered to go back to his boss and see if there could be any relocation assistance given to me. The next day, he came to tell me that his boss, the Finance Director of the City told him "no". Mr. Klimko stated to him that the settlement agreement was final. It was nice of Mr. Anderson to try. Now, I appeal this issue to you. I feel that the fair thing to do would be for the City to reimburse me the $12,178.00 required to make the Eye Street lot buildable. In this way, the lot on 16th Street, taken by the City, would be replaced with a comparable buildable lot with water and sewer services~ If it would be helpful to you, I would be haPpy to appear before you to answer any questions you might have. S.incerely Yours, . ..~ ~ Martha ~night / · 1 1-800-345-7334 . ' ....... ' '. ' ....... ".:. ...... ... ................ . . / CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Sc.OOL' /-/ e-53 6-.53 OIST. J t I ' I I__~ I I I I I ' ' ~ ~ '"' · I ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ : 395 ~. ~ 394 ~ ,, ,, ,,. I' ~ ~'~ ~ ' , _ ,. ~ i ' ~ ~ ' ~ CAL IFOt~NIA AV'~. ~ ~ 3 I' I (~I I I'-- ~ o~ I I ~'""" ~.~o ~ ~*.,,,.. ,~. MAY 0 6 ~ ASSESSORS MAP NO.fi.:53 ............. ~ .., .. .. _ , ~ ATTACHMENT A CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ANNEXATIONS RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE THE ANNEXATION PROCESS To improve the annexation process involving inhabited properties without 100% land owner consent, the following actions should be considered. VOLUNTARY ACTIONS BY THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1. Provide individual notification to each property owner'of an intention to initiate an annexation. Include the name of the annexation proceeding and information on. how to participate in the annexation process within the notification. 2. Publish one display advertisement in the newspaper with the heading "Legal Notice" to announce a scheduled protest hearing. 3. Published notices should give 30 to 45 days advanced notice of hearings/meetings. 4. Adopt a standardized protest letter form. 5. Disclose the criteria for counting and /or disqualifying a protest letter for each annexation. 6. Put annexation information on the web page (City). VOLUNTARY ACTIONS BY THE COUNTY 1. Notify all owners of property within the proposed annexation area upon notification of the proposal by LAFCO. 2. Notify the' Citizen's Advisory Committee on Annexations of a proposed annexation. 3. County staff knowledgeable in the annexation process Should attend annexation informational meetings held by the City. I:\KLEIN\CITI ES\ ADVCOMM \IDEAAMD3 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT NO. 1-98 MAY 20, 1998 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: ANNEXATION PROCESS The City Council referred the Annexation Program to the Urban Development Committee on March 25, 1998. The Committee, at its April meeting, discussed proposed changes and additions to the program. The Committee listened to input from several residents on suggestions for changes to the annexation process. There was a consensus among Committee members that the program be improved and expanded to include more opportunities for resident input. The Committee recommended the following changes: 1. Improve and expand the functions of the annexation hotline to 'include options for getting information on upcoming meetings, important dates, etc. 2. Provide for individual noticing of protest hearings rather than relying on newspaper ads. 3. Experiment with conducting a resident forum prior to the filing of the annexation to get input from residents and notice the forum. 4. Revise the numbering system used to track survey results. 5. Coordinate a greater number of small neighborhood meetings in each area so that each resident has an opportunity to attend a meeting. 6. Hold at least one City services faire in each potential annexation area. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT NO. 1-98 PAGE -2- MAY 20, 1998 7. Develop an issue of Borderline which details how the annexation process works. 8. Provide for no further "bundling" of non-contiguous areas. The Committee unanimously approved these changes to the process and recommends Council approval. Respectfully submitted, C0u¢cilmember Kevin McDermott, Chair V andy Rowles Councilmeml~$r'P'a~ricia M. Smith DBT:jp S:\Urb-Dev-Com Rpt 1-98 MEMORANDUM January 12, 2000 TO: BART J. THILTGEN, City Attorney FROM: ROBERT M. SHERFY, Assistant City Attorney ;~,r~yV~ SUBJECT: PLACING ITEMS ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Question Who is responsible for preparation of the City Council Agenda, including the placement of items on the agenda? Answer The City Manager, pursuant to direction of the City Council, is responsible for the preparation of the agenda. Analysis Section 35 of the Bakersfield City Charter provides as follows: "The City Manager shall have general supervision and direction of the administrative operation of the city government." The duties of the City Manager are set forth in Section 36 of the Charter and include: "... To recommend for adoption to the Council such measures as he may deem necessary or expedient; .... " Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 2.04.040 B provides that: "The preparation of the agenda and its distribution shall be as directed by the council." Bad J. Thiltgen, City Attorney Janua~ 12,2000 Page 2 Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 2.04.070 provides the order of business, beginning with the invocation and ending with adjournment. Changes in the order of business at a noticed meeting can be accomplished only by 5 affirmative votes of the City Council (BMC § 2.04.070B). The Council Orientation Handbook, provided to all City Councilmembers, provides on page 5 as follows: "The council agenda is the official order of business at council meetings. Items for the agenda are prepared and submitted to the city manager by the department heads who investigate and approve each item. Copies of the agenda are available from the city clerk and at the entranCe to the council chamber at each meeting." Based on a review of the above sections, it would appear that the day-to-day administrative operation of the city is the responsibility of the City Manager. The City Council has reserved to itself the right to provide direction to the City Manager with regard to the. preparation of the agenda and its distribution, consistent with BMC § 2.04.070. However, the City Manager, under the provisions of the Charter, has ultimate responsibility for the day-to-day operations of City government which would include the preparation and distribution of the agenda. RMS:dlr S:\RMS~Vlisc Office\CouncilAgendaMmo.wpd I MEETING DATE: December 15, 1999 I AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar I I ITEM: 8. c. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: Bart J. Thiltgen, City Attorney DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE: November 24, 1999 CITY ATTORNEY CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: An Ordinance Amending Section 2.28.090 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code Relating to the Board of Zoning Adjustment. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends referral to the Legislative and Litigation Committee. BACKGROUND: Staff is proposing an amendment to Section 2.28.090 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code concerning the appointment of members to the Board of Zoning Adjustment. The proposed amendment eliminates the City Attorney's Office from membership, whether as a member or as an alternate, on the Board of Zoning Adjustment. Since the City Attorney is required to provide legal advice to the City Council in the event of an appeal from a decision of the Board of Zoning Adjustment, it would create an apparent conflict of interest (even if no actual conflict exists) if a member of the-Board of Zoning Adjustment, or an alternate member, were to be from the City Attorney's Office. Staff is recommending the appointment of a member and an alternate from the Economic and Community Development Department as a replacement for the City Attorney's Office member and alternate. Because the Board of Zoning Adjustment considers conditional use permits and modifications, staff believes that a representative from the Economic and Community Development Department would have pertinent input into these decisions, along with the current Building Department and Public Works members. The only other amendments to Section 2.28.090 are technical changes reflecting the currently existing staggered terms for each of the members and the terms of the alternates. S:\COUNCILV~,dmins\BZAAmnd.wpd RMS:cj November 24, 1999, 1:27pm DE15CA.CC ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.28.090 OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO. THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: SECTION 1. Section 2.28.090 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 2.28.090 Board of zoning adjustment- Created - Membership - Terms - Vacancies - Alternates - Removal. A. There is created a board of zoning adjustment of the city, which shall consist of three members, which membership shall be selected on the basis of one member each from the public works, building, and economic and community development departments of the city, and who shall be appointed by the city council, and one alternate for each department who shall also be appointed by the city council. Each member and each alternate shall serve for a term of three years and may be reappointed. B. The economic and community development member shall be appointed to serve for a term which shall expire December 1, 2000; the public works member shall be appointed to serve for a term which shall expire December 1, 2001; and the building member shall be appointed to serve for a term which shall expire December 1, 2002. Alternates shall be appointed to serve for a term which shall expire on December 1,2000. Thereafter, each alternate shall be appointed for the same term as the member for whom he or she serves as an alternate. C. At the expiration of each of the terms so provided for, successors shall be appointed for a term of three years. D. Vacancies on the board shall be filled in the same manner for the unexpired term. E. An alternate shall participate and vote in the place of any member who is absent or disqualified for an economic interest in a matter before the board of zoning adjUstment. F. Members of the board of zoning adjustment may be removed in the same manner as members of the planning commission, as provided by law. Page 1 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.28.090 OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: SECTION 1. Section 2.28.090 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 2.28.090 Board of zoning adjustment - Created - Membership - Terms - Vacancies - Alternates - Removal. A. There is created a board of zoning adjustment of the city, which shall consist of three members, which membership shall be selected on the basis of one member each from the public works, building, and legal economic and community development departments of the city, and who shall be appointed by the city council, and one alternate for each department who shall also be appointed by the city council. Each member and each alternate shall serve for a term of three years and may be reapp_ointed. B. (gf~e The economic and communit~ development member shall be appointed · to serve for a term which shall expire December 1, ~ ~2000; one the public works member shall be appointed to serve for a term which shall expire -Deceml~e-r~ i ~ and one the building member shall be appointed to serve for a term which shall expire December 1, -t-96-2 2002. Alternates shall be_appointed to serve for a term which shall e_9.~pire on Decemb__e_r__l_, 2000. Thereafter_,_each alternate shall be ap~oo~inted for the same term as the member for whom he or she serves as an alternate. C. At the expiration of each of the terms so provided for, successors shall be appointed for a term of three years. D. Vacancies on the board shall be filled in the same manner for the unexpired term. ~ :The A_~n alternate shall participate and vote in the place of any member who is absent or disqualified for an economic interest in a matter before the board of zoning adjustment. F. Members of the board of zoning adjustment may be removed in the same manner as members of the planning commission, as provided by law. Page 1 of 2