TheBakersfieldCalifornian.com

Talk about a line in the sand.

Want to build something in Bakersfield? Forget about it.

Consider it the city's revenge for a lawsuit filed Tuesday by local homebuilders upset by a spike in traffic impact fees.

Alan Tandy, Bakersfield's city manager, said the litigation "makes it impossible" for planners to process development projects.

Zone changes, general plan amendments, tract maps and other development proposals are apparently on ice.

"We attempted, on many occasions, to warn the HBA of the consequences," Tandy wrote in an e-mail, referring to the industry group that filed suit, "but they either did not fully understand or simply do not care."

State law requires developers to show their projects won't worsen congestion. If the city's underlying traffic program is bogus, as the suit alleges, developers can't prove they've lessened impacts to roads and air quality.

Bob Decker, top executive of the Home Builders Association of Kern County, said the city's saber-rattling comes as no surprise.

Homebuilders won't blink, he said, adding the de facto moratorium isn't legal.

It's also "far from impossible" for the city to process plans while the case plays out, Decker said.

Whether a development freeze would hurt the industry depends on how long it lasts, Decker said.

Bakersfield officials have already taken action.

They cancelled a Thursday committee meeting about a new habitat plan because the legal challenge requires analysis and "has seriously threatened future development potential" in Bakersfield, a memo shows.

The county adopted the same fee schedule and is also named in the complaint, although most residential construction is within city limits.

The traffic fee increase adds thousands of dollars in up-front costs to each new home. Builders reeling from the recession say it could be the death blow for some local companies.

City and county officials say they need the higher fee -- nearly $13,000 per home -- to collect the bulk of local matching funds for $630 million in federal transportation dollars secured by now-retired Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Bakersfield, before he left office. If the increase is postponed they could lose that money, they say.

NOW WHAT?

Nearly two dozen tract maps and 10 projects requiring general plan amendments are currently in the pipeline, said Jim Eggert, Bakersfield's planning director.

His department will continue processing cases "until we hear otherwise," Eggert said.

Traffic fees paid when builders pull permits will be charged according to the revised schedule, though the disputed sum may be placed in escrow.

Ted James, Kern County's planning director, said the county will also charge the new fees when building permits are pulled.

"This ordinance is in effect," James said. "It has not been thrown out by a court."

He would not say whether the county will consider halting development while the lawsuit unfolds.

At least one developer isn't happy about a possible freeze.

"We can't fathom" why the city would stall a major project when the jobless rate is so high here, said Steve Sugerman, spokesman for the 255-acre Bakersfield Commons project at Coffee and Brimhall roads.

An environmental report was recently filed with city planners. Sugerman said the developers, southland firm World Oil, hope for final approvals by the end of the year.

World Oil isn't part of the lawsuit and is fine with the city's traffic fee program, Sugerman said. Still, he blamed only the city, not the homebuilders' group, for a possible development freeze.

VOTES AHEAD

City Councilman Zack Scrivner said Tandy's concerns are valid.

The builders' allegations undermine traffic studies and make projects -- and the city -- magnets for environmental lawsuits.

"You wonder how much potential damage the HBA is doing to itself," Scrivner said.

Councilman David Couch said he's asked City Attorney Ginny Gennaro's office to report on the possibility of a joint closed session with the county to see if they can hire the same attorney.

The council's next meeting is Aug. 19.

Kern County Supervisor Mike Maggard, a former city councilman, said "the suit focuses attention on a weakness that could jeopardize development in our area."

From his vantage point, blame for the litigious atmosphere doesn't lie with the county.

"It's unfortunate that Tandy and the HBA did not continue the dialogue," Maggard said. "When you stop talking, this is what happens."