A couple of quotes in the paper earlier this month caught my attention because they came from the mouths of local politicians, yet sounded so strangely right.

“In today’s world, with all the pressure on growth and development, it’s not prudent to require large lot development,” said Kern County Supervisor Ray Watson.

“We have to be smarter about how we utilize our land as a resource,” chimed in Supervisor Mike Maggard.

Yes! And double YES!

Too bad they were using the right words to justify the wrong kind of development.

They approved quarter-acre lots on about 79 acres in western Rosedale that leapfrogs past similar suburban developments out into “ranchette” land. This is the first of a four-part development, the rest of which is set to come back to the board soon.

This is Kern County being more prudent and smarter? Than what? Plopping hundreds of acres of sprawl even farther out?

This is the first of the 13 projects that were stalled during the development moratorium county supervisors called while they figured out how to pay for new roads.

In fact, this project will pay far higher impact fees than any other county project so far.

This 79-acre development at Nord and Dunn avenues, along with its three sister projects farther northwest at Nord and Palm avenues, which will bring a total 750 new houses to the area, are going to create a lot more traffic and air pollution. 

Cumulative air pollution from these developments plus our existing air quality problems will be so great, the county acknowledged that even with all mitigation measures at its disposal, including some never before implemented, the developments will have a significant impact.

None of the developments connect to already urbanized areas, so all the services — police, fire, water, drainage and sewer (likely the real issue here) — will have to be stretched to meet them.

Neighbors, who mostly live in 1- to 2-acre ranchettes, want the lot sizes increased to be more compatible.

But I say we don’t need them at all. At least not now. The housing market’s still in the toilet and the city of Bakersfield alone has more than 60,000 housing units approved but not yet built. That doesn’t count what the county has on the books.

“That’s a 20-year backlog of houses,” said Gordon Nipp, local Sierra Club member, who, like me, sees no reason to move on these developments now.

Well, other than the developer will build sewer lines out to his project, which will allow connections for a lot more homes in the area as well. That’s a laudable goal in the land of countless septic tanks. But is it worth the traffic, bad air and loss of ag lands?

Nipp says no. 

“Hold off, figure out what to do about the traffic situation. And give the community a chance to say what they want” in the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan update.

Nipp is even more concerned by an ag land mitigation measure offered to developers that he feels will not only not help save ag land, but will undermine his previously successful efforts at saving farmland.

The county is offering to allow developers a menu of options for ag land preservation from replacing one-for-one each acre developed, to finding other farmland to put under a “security zone” contract.

That’s only good for a set amount of years, though, so it doesn’t have the rock-solid guarantee of a conservation easement, which Nipp has been negotiating with developers independently for some time now.

“If they let these developers do security zones, I’m afraid it will set a precedent and undercut what we’ve been working for,” Nipp said.

Farmland preservation in the Central Valley is serious business.

In Kern County alone, we’ve lost more than 30,000 acres to urbanization between 1990 and 2004, according to the American Farmland Trust Web site (www.farmland.org).

About 40 percent of those acres were considered “high-quality” farmland.
And our densities appear to be going backward. In 2004, our growth patterns gave us a density of 6.9 people per urbanized acre. But projections show that will drop to about 6.4 people per urbanized acre by 2050.

The American Farmland Web site has also tracked what Kern and other Central Valley counties said they wanted to achieve under their general plans, and what actually happened.

Not good.

“What we’ve found is most counties and cities aren’t even tracking those things,” said Ed Thompson, California director for American Farmland Trust. “They have no idea what percent of development is on high-quality farmland and the lack of efficiency of those developments.”

Quarter-acre lots leapfrogging into open space is not “efficient,” in case anyone needed that pointed out.

Judging by the recent supervisors’ decision, it clearly needs to be pointed out.

Lois Henry’s column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. E-mail her at lhenry@bakersfield.com or call her at 395-7373.

I’m officially begging.

Please, please please! Can’t Castle & Cooke, or the Nickel family or some other reputable development company buy out General Holding Inc. and put an end to our long, local nightmare?

Since Sacramento-based General Holding came to town and bought the land above Hart Park to develop its “The Canyons” project, we’ve had nothing but trouble.

Now, there are three lawsuits against the city involving General Holding and a Bakersfield city councilman is facing a possible recall for his underhanded maneuvers to try and manipulate the planning commission in The Canyons’ favor.

I’m 100 percent for the recall of Ken Weir, who has clearly shown his disdain for his constituents and the credibility of his office.

A recall effort has begun, by the way, according to retired minister Willard Winn, the effort’s unofficial spokesman. 

The group is still forming, he said, but things are happening fast.

They’ve pulled the necessary paperwork, hired an attorney from Los Angeles who specializes in political campaigns to set up the committee’s legal structure and act as treasurer and they anticipate filing all the paperwork and fees with the city next week.

They don’t have a candidate and are still sorting out logistics, but they’re planning to hold a meeting next week — time, date and place to be announced as soon as they get a big enough venue.

He said right from the start when Weir refused, until ordered by the state, to disclose his conflicts including his highest paying clients, people had concerns. Those concerns only grew with time.

Ward 3 voters knew exactly where former Councilman Mike Maggard stood on development, Winn said.

But with his vague answers on the Hillside Ordinance and refusal to discuss his position on The Canyons, Weir flew into office under the radar.

“I really feel like a stealth candidate got through and we didn’t realize who he was or what he was about.”

I agree, Weir does not deserve to remain in that council seat.

But I also think Weir is a symptom. The disease is General Holding. Weir says he isn't beholden to the developer, but I believe his actions say otherwise.

As far back as 2000, nearly a decade now, General Holding was talking about its plan to build on the bluffs. They didn’t submit an actual plan with the required environmental documents to the city, but they sure talked about it a lot.

Meanwhile, they fought the city over its trails plan, fought over park locations, fought over roads and launched a scummy misleading ad campaign against then-councilman-now-Kern-County-Supervisor Mike Maggard which went kablooey on them when he won his county seat in 2006 by a healthy margin.

And, of course, there are the lawsuits against the city over its slightly enhanced Hillside Ordinance.

What General Holding didn’t do, until recently, was get its environmental docs in order and actually move through the process. Finally, the EIR will go to the Planning Commission on June 19.

We went through one of the biggest real estate booms in Bakersfield’s history and instead of building and selling homes, General Holding pouted and argued.

This is Bakersfield, for Pete’s sake, not Berzerkeley! There’s no one named “Butterfly” chaining herself to a cactus on the bluffs and facing down bulldozers.

And the city has not tried to thwart the developers’ efforts, either. On the contrary, General Holding, and its point man Robert Kapral, seem to be their own worst enemies.

In just one example, a simple request by planning staff for legal land descriptions set off a nearly month-long letter-writing fit by Kapral, who seemed to see something more sinister in the request. Kapral even sent a critique of The Canyons’ own EIR, which means the city has to stop, back up and answer that critique, further dragging out the process.

It’s almost like they’re trying not to get this done.

I can’t help but think if this had been a Castle & Cooke development (say what you will about them having far too much sway with the city, and you may be right) it would be done already.

Maybe they would have tussled over some aspects, but it would be done and I bet you anything the trails would have been added and made part of a major marketing campaign — “‘The Bluffs,’  luxury living and wide-open vistas.” OK, so there’s a reason I’m not in marketing, but you get the picture.

General Holding came in here and thought they could run the show their way. They found a willing accomplice in Weir, unfortunately.

But as they, and Weir, are discovering, we do have some standards here.

Lois Henry’s column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. E-mail her at lhenry@bakersfield.com or call her at 395-7373.

If you’d like to join the effort to recalled Bakersfield City Councilmember Ken Weir or find out more about it, call Willard Winn at 872-6626, or e-mail him at willard_winn@hotmail.com

Interesting Council meeting.

So Planning Commissioner Russell Johnson lives to fight another day. Even Councilman Ken Weir wouldn't make the motion to get rid of him after bringing it to the council!

But Councilwoman Sue Benham was right, WATCH OUT for the ordinance changes that may be coming via Weir's recommendation to the Leg and Lit committee.

And interesting timeline note: It's all coming back to council June 11 and as Councilman David Couch said, Weir could get rid of Johnson by a policy change, which would be in time to have him off the commisson by June 19, when The Canyons is scheduled to make its first appearance before the commission.

Keep your eyes open!

Another interseting side note was the consent item that authorized the city to hire a consultant to get the Hillside Ordinance underway. I was wondering if that would get sidetracked, somehow. It didn't, which is good because if the city hadn't completed the EIR in a "timely manner" according to the judge, the developers would have asked him to toss out the ordinance entirely.

Loved Weir's take that it was JOHNSON who dragged the council through the mud on this issue.

And I take exception to his comment that, other than his park gripe, my column wasn't worth commenting on! I think there was plenty in it for him to complain about!

Best "new" word by Councilwoman Irma Carson  - unpleasanty.

Best visual immage - Councilwoman Jacquie Sullivan chasing down and punching out taggers as she said she'd like to do. Now THAT would be a YouTube winner!

Here it is only 24 hours after Earth Day and I’m about to crab on “green.”

I’m not opposed to conserving resources or finding more environmentally friendly ways to live.

What I’m annoyed with is “green lip” and no real “green action.” (Plus I’m flat out sick of the word “green” at this point.)

My crabbiness first found focus in those “Flex Your Power” television commercials that started last summer.

You know the ones — where some yahoos are apologizing to doe-eyed kids for trashing the planet. Then the music picks up and it ends with the highly questionable factoid that installing a more efficient cooling system on your house would equate taking 275,000 cars off the road.

Aside from sounding like a load of hooey intended to lull us into thinking “someone” is doing “something” about the problem, it just begs more questions.

What kind of cooling system? What kinds of cars? Hummers? Priuses? Take them off the road for how long? An hour? Forever?

And it completely dodges the real question: Why not take actual cars off the road?

That involves two words that no one seems capable of uttering, no matter how truly green they are — public transit.

Yes, I know this goofy ad campaign is put on by the California Energy Commission in cahoots with power companies and they have no pull when it comes to transportation. But it’s indicative of California’s and Bakersfield’s fairy-tale approach to real life problems.

Public transit is the single best way to get cars off the road, cut emissions and move people more efficiently. Study after study has shown that to be the case and one just came out in February that confirmed those findings and found that in cities where public transit was part of the planning process, even motorists drove fewer miles.

Back in 2006, real legislators spent actual time and effort and got a law passed to great fanfare that put California on the warpath against climate change — the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (imagine a booming voice and swelling background music).

I have zero hope this will result in a boost for public transit from what I’ve read so far about how the California Air Resources Board is implementing the act.

I’m not saying what the board has focused on is useless. Hey, having a reminder about proper tire pressure is important, you bet. (This is one of the “early action” items listed by the board. I swear.)

However, when you consider that the paltry public transit systems this country does have save 4.2 billion gallons of gas each year and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 37 million metric tons, according to a study released by the American Public Transportation Association in February, it might be a bit more meaningful to focus on that rather than finding ways to increase methane capture from landfills (another “early action” item California regulators are hard after).

I’ve talked to planners here and elsewhere about public transit for many years and I know the obstacles.

Mass transit needs a certain density, about 17 dwelling units per acre, to make it feasible. Bakersfield has an average 5.67 dwelling units per acre.

And as long as cars are more convenient, people won’t take the bus.

Well, whaddaya know? Our years of inattentive road planning might be beneficial after all if it gets people on the bus because they can’t motor across town in under an hour.

And, of course, gas prices might catapult more of us out of the driver’s seat even sooner.

But here’s the real issue, cities with great public transportation didn’t spring up overnight. They had leaders who looked into the future and thought about these things.

They maintained public rights of way for trains, buses and trolleys, they required developers to provide access to public transit, they developed retail/commercial centers as hubs for transit, they had bus lanes and a host of other things. Above all, they had vision.

The Golden Empire Transit district can do a few creative things to accommodate more riders. But as long as Bakersfield leapfrogs in all directions, it’s almost impossible for GET to efficiently serve more than a few core neighborhoods efficiently.

So what have our leaders done lately to help?

The Super Wal-Marts have to make bus turnouts and put up shelters.

Otherwise, it’s bupkiss as usual.

Lois Henry’s column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. Comment at people.bakersfield.com
 

Go here to learn about your own personal carbon footprint and what’s available in Bakersfield to help you reduce it:
www.CommuteKern.org

Recall Bakersfield City Councilman Ken Weir!

Bakersfield deserves better than what Weir has given us so far and, by all appearances, intends to keep on giving us.

Let’s recap:

Right out of the gate, incoming Councilman Weir went to a closed session council meeting about a lawsuit against the city in which one of his long time clients, Gordon Downs, was a plaintiff. Weir had to be told by his attorney that was a no-no.

He refused to disclose the names of his high-paying clients as required by law until the state ordered him to cough up the list.

Now Weir is trying to manipulate the Planning Commission, obviously before the controversial Canyons project by Sacramento developer General Holding (in which Downs also has a substantial interest) comes before the commission, possibly by June.

Weir also acknowledged to me that he was part of a meeting with city staff about a month ago where he brought up a hard-won city park in The Canyons project.

Though Weir said it was a general discussion, I can’t help but wonder if he was trying to influence staff’s recommendation for that park. The Canyons developers fought the park for years because they wanted that spot for higher priced homes. In fact, they have an alternate plan from the one now under environmental review that cuts the park out entirely.

Hmmm ... anyone else see a pattern here?

I have an idea, if Weir thinks General Holding has such a great project, why not wait for it to come to the council and (gasp!) VOTE FOR IT. You know, out in the open, right there on KGOV, so his constituents and everyone can see.

But no. Since the beginning, Weir has clearly been more comfortable using the back door.

I was curious why Weir, or whoever is pulling his strings, is in such a lather to get rid of Planning Commissioner Russell Johnson now, even as the council’s Legislative and Litigation Committee prepares to consider his proposal to change how the council picks commissioners.

It’s not about The Canyons, Weir insisted.

I don’t buy that.

Just looking at the timing, Weir’s proposal wouldn’t have made it out of the Leg and Lit committee and been approved by the full council (IF it got approved) in time to beat The Canyons project to the commission. Hence the rush to boot Johnson, whose connection to former councilman/now Kern County Supervisor Mike Maggard, who tried to hold General Holding to some measure of accountability, has made him anathema.

No, no, no, Weir told me, it’s not about The Canyons.

Johnson, he said, doesn’t share the same development vision as voters in northeast Bakersfield. They’re concerned about “disjointed decision making” and no “cohesive plan.” They want a change in “philosophy.” These voters, he said, want new “goals and objectives.”

These views were expressed to him while he went door to door during his campaign and are being incorporated into a “process we’re going through right now and the public will be invited to share their input. But we’re just at the beginning stages.”

When I asked for specifics, ANY specifics, such as an example of disjointed decisions from the commission, how voters differ philosophically from Johnson or the commission, what goals and objectives they have in mind, what process was being started or even who “we” referred to, Weir came up short. No specifics. Nada. Zippo.

That didn’t stop me from asking for them over and over.

By the end of our conversation, Weir exasperatedly told me there was no “we,” but that he was working with staff to put groups together, uh, well there are no formalized groups yet ...

And finally: “This is premature to talk about.”

Call me cynical, but I don’t believe there is any “process” underway to develop a cohesive vision for the northeast. And if there were, I sure don’t believe Weir would entertain, much less seek out, any pesky public input.

Weir is an old-school politician entrenched in an ideology of representation-for-the-few, uninterested in true collaboration for the betterment of this community overall. He is a throwback to the backroom deal.

We need to throw him back.

Lois Henry’s column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. E-mail her at lhenry@bakersfield.com or call her at 395-7373.

I spoke with the BC Security Chief Mark Graf to double check how his security team was informed about the party/fight on March 29 where possible gang members started a ruckus.

They were NOT INFORMED by anyone in the administration, nor by the Bakersfield Police Department. They heard about it through the grapevine and ASKED police about it, who then gave them information.

Someone on the original blog posted a comment that communication was even more key than arming campus security. I agree. And I think this shows there is a major gap in that realm as well.

Also, I heard from Sandra Serrano, Kern Community College District Chancellor, that the district has hired a consultant to look at various communication methods for notifying students and employees of an emergency situation. They may do text messaging or a PA system, or a combo of both.

The report should be ready by May 1, she said.

Just about two months ago, I had a conversation with Bakersfield College President Bill Andrews that has proved prophetic.

I was concerned, as I still am, that BC security personnel are ill-equipped to
handle a rampaging shooter bent on murder as tragically happened one year ago today at Virginia Tech. BC security officers need to be armed and trained to police officer standards, as are officers at Kern High School District and Cal State Bakersfield.

Crazed-shooter scenarios, however, don’t bolster the argument for arming campus officers, President Andrews told me two months ago. Those people plan in advance and often go in with the intent of dying. There’s nothing even an armed campus force could do to prevent a situation like that.

True, I said. But they might be able to shorten the rampage.

Either way, Andrews told me a shooter incident isn’t the most likely scenario at BC, which relies on the Bakersfield Police Department to handle serious crimes.

“In (BPD Chief Bill) Rector’s best estimate, the type of issue we would likely have on our campus, rather than a shooter, would be gang related, or a domestic shooting,” Andrews told me.

Guess what happened?

An off campus party (just about a street away) in the wee hours on March 29 that involved BC students attracted some unsavory characters, possibly members of the highly unfriendly and easily agitated Crips gang.

Things did not go well. The words “utter chaos” were used to describe the scene in which 150 people were running away as cops showed up. Rocks were thrown, windows broken and two people ended up going to the hospital after being hit with rocks and a third person was assaulted, according to police, who didn’t get a lot of information nor cooperation, Sgt. Greg Terry said.

So far, the campus is handling this as a disciplinary matter, according to spokeswoman Amber Chiang. It’s under investigation to see if the student code of conduct was violated.

While administrators are busy with their conduct demerits, I hope someone besides me is wondering if it isn’t time to beef up security.

And not just at BC. In the last couple weeks some pretty frightening things have been happening at other Kern Community College District campuses.

On April 10, a call came in to the Porterville College admissions office from a man threatening to shoot up the cafeteria and kill as many people as possible. The security “team” of one evacuated the cafeteria. The campus was locked down while police did a search. No one was found, according to Monte Moore, campus spokesman.

The call was traced to a phone booth across town and police are processing some latent fingerprints and checking videos from businesses in the area, Sgt. Mike Blain told me. Police have stepped up campus patrols as well.

The same day at Cerro Coso, about 8 p.m., a man was seen walking on campus with some kind of long gun, according to Ridgecrest Police Capt. Jon Wheeler. A security guard yelled at him and he ran off. The campus went into lockdown. Police searched but found nothing.

I’m not superstitious but these incidents practically scream “WARNING!” to me.

Even if no one thinks guns and increased training are in order, what about just more cops? BC has 11 full-time and one part-time officers to cover 15,000 students. They should have at least 15 officers in order to keep up with industry standards of 1.3 officers per 1,000 population.

Indications are, however, that the campus security department isn’t a high funding priority.

Security finally did get radios capable of communicating with the outside world, including BPD. And they got three new patrol cars, but the cars have no lights.

BC Chief Mark Graf tells me funding to get proper lights for the cars isn’t in the budget just yet. But he’s hopeful. Remember though, it took eight years (8 YEARS!) to get radios that could communicate with BPD after an incident in which a BC officer was attacked.

Graf was confident that even with his personnel and equipment limitations, his people are ready.

Graf said they did have an “incident” about three years ago where someone called after seeing a man with what appeared to be an M16 rifle in one of the BC parking lots. It turned out to be a student with an Airsoft rifle who was taking a picture that he superimposed in front of a dragon for an animated graphics arts project.

“But we were on scene in under a minute. Evacuated and cordoned off the parking lot. I put officers in high spots for observation and we notified the child care center,” Graff recalled. “Using parking permits, we tracked the owner of the car and had it all wrapped up in 15 minutes.”

Even so, Graf agreed he would like his officers armed and given proper training.

How many more warnings do we need?

Lois Henry’s column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. E-mail her at lhenry@bakersfield.com or call her at 395-7373.

While everyone’s busy freaking out over the proposed Big West refinery expansion because they work with some nasty chemicals and that crud might get out, I’d like to point out something vitally important that’s been overlooked  — me.

Specifically, my commute, Rosedale Highway and the possible 115 extra trucks per day that Big West’s EIR predicts would bring to the road I love to hate.
Rosedale Highway needs 115 more trucks a day like it needs a hole in the head.

The county tells me truck traffic from the refinery, which they calculated at 70 new trips a day, is a drop in the bucket compared to daily trips attracted by the Northwest Promenade shopping center of 5,000 to 10,000. But drops add up.

Like all the new retail popping up on Rosedale. The developments aren’t Promenade size, but the impact still packs a punch. Heck, the Hooters just down the road is sure to cause backups all the way to F Street.

Yes, hydrofluoric acid is serious stuff, modified or not, and so is the need to increase refining capacity, at least until we’re all putt-putting around in flying cars like the Jetsons.

Local leaders must balance those issues with a strict eye to caution.

But who’s watching out for me!? Er, Rosedale Highway?

The city got that $700 million windfall from retired Rep. Bill Thomas for roads and set aside a measly $26 million to widen Rosedale to six lanes from Highway 99 to Calloway Drive, which wasn’t great but it was better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, I suppose. (When we might actually see backhoes in action depends on when the city will come up with the needed $3 million in matching funds. Construction had been set to start at 2010, but we’ll see.)

Meanwhile, the city approved a couple smallish commercial projects at Rosedale and Allen Road and the county approved a 10,000 square-foot (67,000 square feet at full build out) retail center at Fairhaven Drive (where the Hooters is being advertised) smack between the refinery and Highway 99.

That doesn’t even include stuff in the offing, such as a proposed Target store and retail center expected to bring nearly 400,000 square feet of retail and 23,000 square feet of fast food/restaurant space to Rosedale and Renfro Road and, of course, more houses.

Then there’s another massive, 225-acre — 1.6 million square feet of retail and 1 million square feet of office space! — proposed project just south of Rosedale at Coffee and Brimhall roads.

In case anyone hasn’t thought of this, and it appears they haven’t, adding more traffic to Rosedale without any serious road improvements is not helping.

The planned widening project was already too little too late. Allowing more and more retail plus what may be coming from the refinery is like local government imitating one of those naughty “Calvin” cartoon decals “watering” motorists on Rosedale Highway.

And don’t even get me started on that Landco Spur railroad crossing that continues to vex commuters on a nearly daily basis. The later you are to work or an appointment the greater your chances are of being stopped by the train — and the longer it will linger for seemingly no reason dead on the track. Seriously, I think Vegas could make book on it.

An overpass/underpass would cost as much if not more than the entire widening project, $25 million to $30 million. There is no Thomas money designated for the overpass/underpass, but the city will be asking for $15 million in Proposition 1B money in June and if we get it, I’m told Thomas money will be freed up to match what we get from the state.

Yes, fixes are in the works. But the fixes are on a much slower schedule, it seems, than the development that’s allowed to race forward, putting more and more cars on already overloaded roads.

The county finally came around with an increased traffic impact fee, from about $6,000 to $12,000 per home, and a bond of $150 million for roads. While the city has set higher interim fees on developers, it’s still working on a permanent increase due out in June or July. They’re planning to do their own bond, possibly up to $200 million in the next three or four years.

It’s hoped that money will help pay for several projects to alleviate Rosedale traffic, including a new interchange at 7th Standard and Highway 99 (construction starts May 1 — yay!) widening 7th Standard Road (going out to bid in December — yay, again!), the Hageman flyover connecting to Golden State Highway over Highway 99 (funding is still being sorted out, so no timeframe) and, of course, connecting Highway 58 to the future Westside Parkway (options still being discussed/debated/argued over so no timeframe here either.) 

Meanwhile, we're stuck. Sort of like sitting behind a convoy of Big West fuel tankers at the Landco Spur.

Lois Henry’s column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. E-mail her at lhenry@bakersfield.com or call her at 395-7373.

It’s tough to be a kid in Kern County.

I know people always say this is a great place to raise children, but that’s not true if you’re poor, uneducated, a minority or any combination of those factors. And a lot of kids in Kern are all those things.

I bring this up this because today is the annual Child Abuse Prevention Summit (free and open to the public from 8 a.m. to noon in the Holiday Inn Select ball room).

This event coincides with the release of the annual “report card” produced by the Kern County Network for Children, which has been keeping tabs on how children are faring in Kern since 1992.

Some facts to chew on from the report card:

• Twenty-nine percent of Kern’s children lived in poverty 2006 compared to 17.7 percent statewide. In fact, Kern’s figure has increased since 2004 while the state’s has dropped.

• More than 22 percent of Kern’s students were learning English as a second language in the 2006-2007 school year.

• About 28 percent of adults in Kern had no high school diploma, compared to 19.9 percent statewide. Again, that figure has gone up in Kern since 2004.

The summit is held in April, which is Child Abuse Prevention month.

We could use a little prevention.

According to the report card, 19.5 of every 1,000 children in Kern County were abused, an increase from a rate of 17.9 per 1,000 children in 2004. The state’s rate in 2006 was 10.8 per 1,000 children, down from 11.2 per 1,000 children in 2004.

Despite that increase, stats show our child abuse referral calls have gone down and are, in fact, at their lowest rate since 2000.

I’m hoping that’s a good thing, because the state had a similar referral drop. But my fear is that people just don’t want to get involved.

Even day-care clients knew something was off at the foster home of Kathy Jean Scott back in 2004 when 4-month-old Eduardo Calzada died in her care.

Scott also ran a day care center at the home and parents dropping off their children said the doors were always locked and they weren’t allowed in.

One woman told police she went to the home and could hear children inside though no cars were in the driveway and the doors were locked as usual.

But no one reported that to authorities until after baby Eduardo was found dead with multiple skull fractures.

Scott was arrested a year after Eduardo’s death and was finally sentenced this week to 25 years to life for his death.

Perhaps if one of those parents locked out of their own day care had thought to speak up, Eduardo would be a healthy 4-year-old today.

Kern’s Child Protective Services has taken a lot of heat over the years when children in their care, like Eduardo, are killed or injured. While I believe the public is right to demand answers, I also recognize that most of the time, CPS is on the scene long after the damage is done.

This year’s report card highlights programs aimed at changing that dynamic.

One such program, known as “differential response,” is designed to get families on the right track before they become a tragedy in the newspaper.

Family advocates go with CPS workers on calls and in cases where abuse isn’t happening but poverty, alcohol or other factors have put the family at risk of abuse, the advocate works with the family to connect them with programs or services to get them off the path toward abuse or neglect.

A pilot program was run in 2006 and 887 families received services, according to the report card. Of those families, the circumstances of 30 percent had improved six months after they started working with the advocate.

If it really helps, I’m all for it. We need all the help we can get.

At any given time, there are about 2,500 Kern kids in foster care. That’s a rate of 7.3 in foster care per 1,000 Kern kids, according to the report card. The rate statewide is 4 per 1,000 kids.Like I said, it’s tough to be a kid in Kern County.

To view the Kern County Network for Children report card, go to http://www.kcnc.org

Lois Henry’s column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. E-mail her at lhenry@bakersfield.com or call her at 395-7373.

I’ve been accused of being somewhat negative in this column, only seeing the bad, a real glass-half-empty kinda gal.

Half empty, half full — who cares when there’s an old lipstick smudge on the rim!? (That’s how MY brain works, anywa.)

OK, here’s my shot at being positive.

It’s not all bad news in Kern’s animal overpopulation story.

Don’t get me wrong, we still have a BIG problem. But there are good-hearted, dedicated people chipping away at it.

And you can help.

You don’t even have to pick a side in the mandatory spay/neuter battle.

Kern Humane Society

This organization has been around for 35 years. The whole focus is to help people with costs to sterilize their animals. They run a thrift shop downtown and use the proceeds for several voucher programs.

Most of the vouchers are small and intended to help toward the surgery cost, not cover it entirely. There’s also a program for income eligible people that can cover more of the costs. And they donate to larger spay/neuter events with the SPCA.

If you have a few hours a week, this is a great way to dip your toe in. You’re not going to be embroiled in controversy, saddled with 12 dogs or overwhelmed by pleas for help.

It’s a low-key outfit run by several smart, funny ladies who take their mission seriously, but not themselves.

“We’re not a terribly slick organization,” said Sue Bennett, the spay/neuter director.

On her wish list are more volunteers in general, someone to put together a classroom education program, a new brochure (in their last brochure, Bennett was pregnant; her daughter is now 31 years old). And money is always helpful.

The Bakersfield SPCA

This is another great place to pitch in. And they have lots of ways to help.

Every Saturday morning, they have a volunteer orientation where the coordinator finds out what you like, don’t like, can or can’t do, how much time you have and where your interests lie. Then she will find a way to get the most out of you.

You could man a booth and give out information about the SPCA at community fairs. Or be part of their classroom education program. Help with the pet therapy program at senior homes. You could clean cages, feed and exercise animals. And they always need more foster families.

Right now they have a big need for volunteers to help sort and sell books for their annual book sale fundraiser starting April 25 through May 17 at the old Michael’s store near East Hills Mall (you could even be allergic to animals and still help out!).

They can always use more donations of blankets and sheets, and again, money is always appreciated.

Aside from that, Director Sandy Dralle urged the community to participate in their upcoming events.

• April 16, Unleash Your Love, pet adoption day, in conjunction with KGET Channel 17, 1220 L street, from 5 a.m. to 7 p.m.

• April 4 through July 3, The Sullenger Financial Group’s Reigning Cats & Dogs Art Exhibit at the Larry E. Reider Gallery, 2000 K Street, Suite 110. Art is of cats and dogs and proceeds benefit the SPCA and Arts Council of Kern.

ALPHA Canine Sanctuary

This is a no-kill rescue operation that can house 100 dogs, according to Director Marilyn Stewart. With the massive amount of unwanted and stray pets, however, they have more calls for help than openings, she said.

Stewart has also recently gotten into the spay/neuter game after receiving a grant to provide $100 toward sterilization of pit bull dogs or pit mixes. She said pits or pit mixes account for one in four shelter dogs.

You can help ALPHA Canine out by opening your check book.
Money, Stewart said, is what’s needed most. That and dry dog food.

Kern County Animal Control Shelter

The shelter has a crew of about 30 volunteers right now who Animal Control Division Chief Denise Haynes said are a dedicated bunch that help show animals for adoption and do clerical tasks. They even have a professional photographer who donates her time to make pet-of-the-week photos for newspapers and television.

If you want to get more hands-on, Haynes said the shelter is now developing a foster program that will allow families to keep animals in their homes until they can be adopted. It will be about a month or two until that program is running as Haynes’ crew is still settling the procedures.

The county has to be careful to make sure the animals are safe and the families are equipped to care for them.

Animal Control also does school programs, teaching kids about pet responsibility and the importance of spaying and neutering. But not very many schools participate and Haynes would love to have more.

“Our program is growing, but it hasn’t caught on as well as we’d like,” Haynes said.

Volunteers take note! This is an easy, fun way to help make a difference and the shelter will even train you!

Teachers! Here’s your chance to get some free instruction on a topic your kids will love!

Friends of the Kern County Animal Control Shelter Foundation

This is a very new organization, started about two and a half years ago. Its focus is to raise money and help provide the shelter with things that would otherwise take a lot of time to go through the Board of Supervisors.

That means if the shelter’s washing machine breaks, the Friends pays for laundry service until it’s fixed. Or they run towel drives, or plant trees and put up benches in the doggy park area at the shelter.

“We do a little bit at a time,” said President Sherry Bullock. “Helping in whatever way we can.”

What the Friends needs most right now is money, she said. Even small donations help.

They recently received a $490 grant from PetCo, “Which is huge for us!”

Tehachapi Humane Society

This organization has so many ways to help, I can’t list them all.

They have spay/neuter vouchers for domestic pets and feral animals, a lost animal network, a placement network, foster homes, pet food for financially strapped families and more. They even have their own “Dog Whisperer,” so to speak, a lady who will come to your house and help you work out barking, biting, digging or other issues with your pooch.

Seriously, they’re working all the angles.

“We look for any type of help,” said President Sharon Cornelison. If you bake, they’ll take your cookies for their bake sale. Anything!

Right now, though their biggest need is for foster families. They don’t have a shelter so they need people willing to keep animals until they can be adopted. That and and they need pet food, which is going fast these days.
•••
I’m sure there are more organizations and individuals out there doing what they can. I commend them. And I urge you to join them.

Lois Henry’s column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. E-mail her at lhenry@bakersfield.com or call her at 395-7373.

How to contact local animal organizations

Bakersfield SPCA
3000 Gibson St.
323-8353
10 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday-Saturday. Closed Sunday.
www.bakersfieldspca.org
The SPCA has cat or dog
sterilization days about once a quarter and is planning cat and dog sterilization events in mid-May and mid-June in conjunction with the county, but dates haven’t been set.

Check with the SPCA for those dates.
Those interested in the feral cat voucher program should call to see if vouchers are available.

Kern Humane Society
900 21st St.
325-2589 or 589-2173
Thrift store hours
10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Tuesday-Saturday
Small spay/neuter vouchers available to help defray costs.

The Cat People
www.thecatpeople.org
4909 Stockdale Highway
Bakersfield, 93309
327-4706
Vouchers available

Alpha Canine Sanctuary
391-8212
Needs money or dry dog food
Provides $100 vouchers to spay pit bull or pit bull mix dogs

Kern County Animal Control Shelter
http://www.co.kern.ca.us/ac...
Bakersfield shelter
201 South Mount Vernon Avenue, Bakersfield 93307
868-7125
Adoption Center 868-7144

Tehachapi Humane Society
www.tehachapihumane.org
Mailing Address:
PO Box 922
Tehachapi, CA 93581
Street address:
21600 Golden Hills Blvd
Tehachapi, CA 93561
(661) 823-0699
Call for hours.

Friends of the Kern County Animal Control Shelter Foundation
Write to: 201 South Mount Vernon Avenue, Bakersfield 93307
Or email: friendskerncountyanimalshelter@yahoo.com

H.O.P.E. update
The H.O.P.E Animal Foundation had been running transports to Bakersfield twice a month to take about 100 animals to its Fresno facilities for extraordinarily low-cost spay/neuter surgeries.
They needed help coordinating the trips, making the appointments, getting payment, etc., and no one stepped forward. They couldn’t handle that extra logistical load, so they stopped the transport.
The SPCA is working to see if it can pick up the logistical slack and bring H.O.P.E. back to Bakersfield, according to SPCA Director Sandy Dralle.
Her board will meet next week to talk about how to fill H.O.P.E. needs.
Others are also trying to work out the kinks.
Cindy Holloway, who works for the Animal Emergency and Urgent Care hospital, is rounding up people interested in making this work and wants to hold her first meeting soon. She’s asking interested people to email her at cindyaeuc@yahoo.com.
Dralle said other groups are encouraged to come to the SPCA meeting to see if they can join forces.
“This can’t just be one group doing this,” Dralle said. “It has to be the whole community.”

Animal Control Numbers for March
Adopted out: 43 cats; 264 dogs
Sent to rescues: 72 cats; 183 dogs
Total intake: 777 cats; 1,414 dogs
Euthanized: 621 cats: 771 dogs

Relations between the City of Bakersfield and the state Department of Fish and Game have grown about as prickly as the cactus the state is so hot over right now.

I’m trying to decide if that’s such a bad thing.

A slightly more adversarial relationship might make everyone a little sharper and keep the city from getting sued for boneheaded approvals of subdivisions in the middle of nowhere that cut through prime endangered species habitat. In case you don’t recognize it, I’m describing the 220-acre Ten Section project, which the Sierra Club filed suit over on Tuesday.
 

Really, now. Even the most rabidly pro-development members of the community must get at least a little tired of the city council’s constant approval of projects (often over the objections of its own planning commission and planning department) that breed lawsuit after lawsuit. Suits that actually stick, too, resulting in do-overs of environmental impact reports, scaled down projects, years-long delays or other changes.

Why can’t the council follow the rules and get it right the first time?

Which brings me back to thinking a little less “cozy” and a little more “toe-to-toe” between the city and Fish and Game might not be so bad.

City planners, though said it is imperative the city maintain a good relationship with Fish and Game in order to continue the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan — technically a “take” permit allowing for construction on lands with threatened and endangered species — which they’re sparring over now. The plan was established in 1994 and expires in 2014 and everyone, including Fish and Game, wants it to be renewed.

Without that plan, developers could still get permits from the city but they couldn’t disturb the ground until they also got permits separately from Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

There would no longer be a uniform approach to species protection through land conservation.

Not having the habitat plan would be worse on the plants and critters we’re trying to protect, Jim Movius, lead planner for the city, told me.

But from Fish and Game’s perspective, the critters and plants, particularly the Bakersfield cactus, haven’t fared so well even with the plan because of the city’s voracious appetite for growth.

The flashpoint has become the proposed 890-acre “The Canyons” project on the bluffs overlooking Hart Park by Sacramento-based General Holding.

Fish and Game threatened to revoke or suspend the habitat plan, which it can do if a species takes a serious downhill slide, if the development is approved as outlined in its draft environmental impact report.

Fish and Game threw down a similar, if less threatening, gauntlet over the Ten Section project in southwest Bakersfield, but then backed off. The city council approved it and now the Sierra Club is all over it like a cheap suit.

I asked Fish and Game’s senior environmental scientist, Julie Vance, why they folded on Ten Section. She said Ten Section had done a lot of mitigation and Fish and Game felt the city had taken the department’s concerns more seriously. Even before Fish and Game’s Ten Section opposition, Vance said, the department tried to get the city’s attention about species degradation. No one listened, she said. So, unless developers can assure them no cactuses will be harmed, Fish and Game is stickin’ to its guns on The Canyons.

That stance hit city planners like a glass of cold water in the face.

The city, and county, have been working diligently to buy land for habitat preservation — more than 15,000 acres in areas that were identified by Fish and Game as prime habitat, planners told me. And Fish and Game has no call to pull the plug on the habitat plan, they said, without actual science showing how development is causing species to decline to dangerous levels.

Vance said they’re working on that.

“While a deal is a deal and we stand by the permit, our job is to make sure species are getting the level of protection they were supposed to get under the permit,” Vance said. “We can’t stand by and watch a species decline to the point it can’t recover because we signed an agreement.”

Fish and Game is trying to proactively improve the situation before it gets to that point, she said.

Meanwhile, planners are waiting for Fish and Game’s specific demands on The Canyons’ environmental report. If it’s too lengthy, which is what many expect, the document will have to incorporate those demands and then be recirculated for a second round of comments.

Sounds like a lot of work.

But I bet it’s less than defending yet another loser lawsuit.

Lois Henry’s column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. E-mail her at lhenry@bakersfield.com or call her at 395-7373.

Habitat Trust Group Meeting

When the habitat plan was created in 1994, the Implementation Trust Group was also created to buy the land that would go into conservation.

It’s run jointly by the city and county, with advisory positions by Fish and Game and U.S. Fish and Wildlife and one at-large member.

Since its inception, the daily functions of the trust — finding property, buying it, managing it and transferring title to the state — have been done either by county staffers or retired county staffers under contract. They city has acted as treasurer, collecting and disbursing developer fees of $2,145 per acre.

More county retirements earlier this year prompted the city to suggest taking over the trust’s daily functions.

The transition to city control will be a main topic at the trust’s next meeting, 10 a.m. Friday in the County Counsel’s office on the 4th floor of the County Administration building, 1115 Truxtun Ave.

While County Planning Director Ted James told me he felt the city had “stepped up to the plate” when it offered to take over, he has numerous questions about the transition, including whether the city is ready to take on property management and whether it has one person to oversee trust functions. The current trust administrator is scheduled to be phased out in May when the city takes over.

“My theme is going to be continuity,” James said.

The current administrator, Steve Strait, is a retired county staffer whose contract with the trust has earned him $62,000 to $83,000 a year for the past couple of years. The other former county staffer under contract to the trust, Mitch Van Wyk, scouts the land and prompts offers. He has earned between $72,000 and $104,000 a year, but part of that pays for multiple listing services, according to James.

For its part, the city is hoping to get more bang for its buck by having city staffers handle the administration, management and title transfers. They plan to keep Van Wyk to chase down new properties.

City Planning Director Jim Movius said his staff also hopes to try a few new things, such as finding other groups to take over the conservation lands besides Fish and Game, which he said has a nightmarishly slow escrow process. In fact, there are 70 or more pieces of property that have been in escrow with the state since 2005 and still haven’t cleared title.

“We’re paying taxes on those properties until the title changes,” Movius said.

The city will also be looking at other lands perhaps on the fringes of the conservation areas but that could be good corridors for species and lands that aren’t as pristine as the state previously would have liked.“We’re going to hit it harder than we have in the past,” he said.
 

This nice lady thinks I have more in common with the sewer than I might like to admit.