Loading...
1978 10 26 CC Minutes81026 -1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN October 26, 1978 The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in regular session, Thursday, October 26, 1978, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Baytown City Hall. The following members were in attendance: Jody Lander Jimmy Johnson Ted Kloesel Mary E. Wilbanks Eileen Caffey Allen Cannon Emmett 0. Hutto Fritz Lanham Dan Savage Scott Bounds Eileen P. Hall Councilman Councilman Councilman Councilwoman Councilwoman Councilman Mayor City Manager Assistant City Manager City Attorney City Clerk Mayor Hutto called the meeting to order and the invocation was offered by Councilman Jimmy Johnson. Minutes Councilman Kloesel moved for the approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of October 12, 1978, and the special meeting of October 19, 1978, and ratification of actions taken concerning each of the matters listed on the agendas of said meetings; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Kloesel, Wilbanks, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Receive Petitions None. City Manager's Report Jim Hutchison, of Busch, Hutchison, and Associates, has written a letter to Council regarding maps that were used concerning the site for the proposed municipal airport. In his letter, Mr. Hutchison indicated that the map which was shown in the slide presentation at the public hearing was a schematic or an outline of a more detailed map. The more detailed map was used in the handout that was furnished two weeks prior to the public hearing. This handout contained a map of the proposed site plotted from current deed records which reflect the exact location of both canals in relation to the airport layout. Both the engineers and the FAA were fully aware of the canals when recommending the site that is being considered. Council had no questions. Downtown Merchants' Committee - The Downtown Merchants' Committee will have their annual Christmas parade on Thursday, November 30, at 6:30 p.m. All of the Council members are invited to participate in the parade and will be contacted in that regard. CETA Program - Council approved the City's participation in the CETA Program at a recent meeting. One of the programs was the Youth Program which is underway. Twelve or thirteen people are working in various departments under this program. 81026 -2 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 Traffic Signal Improvement Program - The signal heads, poles, cables and controllers were ordered on June 12. The signal heads and the cable have been received, the poles are expected within 30 days, and no delivery date has been given on the control equipment. The contractor has begun work utilizing those materials which were delivered. The aerial interconnect on North Main, North Commerce and North Pruett has been made and the conduit for the underground cable on North Alexander has been laid. Street Improvement Program - Brown and Root, Inc. has five streets ready to be surfaced and the top coat has been laid on Third, South Shepherd, Allman, Denby, and Louisiana Streets. Limestone has been added to the base on Oak Street and James Bowie Drive; the contractor plans to start laying the asphalt next week. Sliplining - The contractor has pulled the 12 -inch liner between East Texas and East James which consisted of approximately 1170 feet, and which is an important part of this contract. Seven service connections have been made and a manhole has been constructed on the East Texas and Wright Street Project. Jenkins - Hollaway Park - This project is approximately 80% complete. Some asphalt work remains to be done on the hike and bike trails. The fencing for the ballfields has not been completed. Most of the other parts of the development are built and generally only the cleanup work remains to be done after this week. Neighborhood Center - The building is completely dried in with all the doors and windows installed. The contractor has material on hand for the inside finish work which began this week. Questions or Comments Regarding the City Manager's Report Councilman Kloesel inquired as to the progress of work on the collapsed section of Fourth Street. Mr. Lanham responded that he was not aware of the problem but would check on it and would try to expedite the repair work. Consider Request of Houston Lighting and Power Company for Fuel Cost Adjustment and Cost of Service Adjustment for the Month of November 1978 Council has received a copy of a letter from Jim Schaefer, District Manager for Houston Lighting and Power Company. In his letter, Mr. Schaefer sets forth the proposed fuel cost adjustment and cost of service adjustment factors for the month of November 1978. Electric power consumption for November is estimated to be 1,000 KWH for the typical customer. The proposed cost for 1,000 KWH is $33.60. This is a reduction of $1.81 from the October cost. This reduction is due to the resumption of H L & P's winter rate schedule. The new rates include a $.52 fuel cost adjustment and a $.07 cost of service adjustment. Councilman Kloesel commented that comparing this figure to previous years, there is really an increase and felt that Council should take action to disallow this increase. Councilman Kloesel stated that he questions the usefulness of the City of Baytown participating with the Texas Municipal League. He commented that he is not convinced that they are oriented toward the average citizen. In comparing information furnished by H L & P and that furnished by the City's rate consultants, Councilman Kloesel felt that there was a discrepancy in return on consumer equity. Councilman Kloesel moved that Council disallow the increase for the month of November 1978. The motion died for lack of a second. 81026 -3 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 A Representative of the Baytown Chamber of Commerce Will Appear Mr. Lanham explained that the representative of the Chamber of Commerce was unable to appear. Council received a copy of a letter from Leon Brown, President of the Chamber of Commerce, and also a copy of a resolution adopted by the Chamber of Commerce endorsing the use of vacant property in the downtown area as a parking area. The property referred to is the Goldfield property. Council awarded the contract for the demolition of the building on this property and the Legal Department is in the process of foreclosing on the property for delinquent taxes. The Chamber's request has been endorsed by the Downtown Merchants' Association. Councilman Johnson inquired if the City will encounter any problem with the county or the school district when foreclosing on this property. Scott Bounds, City Attorney, commented that he has not talked with representatives of the county or the school district, but if the City forecloses on this property and purchases it at the tax sale, the City would hold the property as a trustee for the school district, county, and for the City. In response to a question from Councilwoman Wilbanks, Mr. Bounds explained that both entities have the right to foreclose, but have not made an effort to foreclose and to collect their delinquent taxes. The City initiated the lawsuit and is proceeding toward a foreclosure sale. The county and school district are parties to the lawsuit to foreclose for taxes. Councilman Johnson inquired if the City paid the school and county taxes, would the City become sole owner of the property. Mr. Bounds stated that the City could acquire title to the property in that manner. Councilman Kloesel stated that he felt the City should discuss this with the school district and the county to make them aware of the City's intentions. In response to a question from the Mayor, Mr. Bounds replied that the school, state, county, and City have joined together to foreclose on several pieces of property. Whoever is the foreclosing jurisdiction will bid in their taxes at the foreclosure sale, the City will bid in all the delinquent taxes for the school, county and for the City and would purchase title to the property by tendering the City's delinquent taxes. No actual money trades hands; the City takes title by putting the City's tax lien against the property. Then the City attempts to rent the property and to perfect the City's title to the property by holding it for a period of 2 years. The City uses the rentals received to offset the legal costs incurred in foreclosing against the property. Once the City pays those costs, then any rental proceeds or any proceeds from the sale of the property are split equitably between the school, county, and the City. Council will make a determination after the foreclosure procedure is complete. Ordinance - Granting Incentive Pay to All Members of the Baytown Fire Department Who Receive Master Fire Fighter Certification The City implemented an educational incentive pay program for civil service employees in the 1977 -78 fiscal year budget. Fire and Police Department employees are paid $30 per month additional pay for intermediate certificates; employees with advance certificates are paid an additional 81026 -4 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 $60 per month. There is now a third classification for members of the Fire Department which is a Master Fire Fighter certification. These certifications are made by the Texas Commission on Fire Protection and Personnel Standards and Education. The City's procedure has been that when the Commission certifies a police or fire employee as intermediate or advanced, additional pay is granted. Requirements for the Master Fire Fighter certification are as follows: (1) Must possess an advanced Fire Fighter certificate; (2) Must possess either an Associate degree plus 12 years of fire protection experience, or a Baccalaurette degree plus 6 years of fire protection experience, or a Master's degree plus 4 years of fire protection experience. Mr. Lanham commented that it is his understanding that the Commission takes into account the type of degree that the fireman has. The Fire Chief has recommended this third classification for the Fire Department, and that a total of $90 per month additional pay be granted when the Master Fire Fighter certification has been obtained; the Administration concurred. The Administration has found that this program has encouraged the City's policemen and firemen to take additional training which benefits the City. At present, four members of the Fire Department are designated as Master Fire Fighters. Councilman Lander inquired if this training is done on the fire fighters' own time and at their own expense. Mr. Lanham responded in the affirmative. Councilwoman Wilbanks inquired if the state set up the different degree levels in years of experience. Mr. Lanham explained that the Commission must approve and designate all degrees. Councilman Kloesel moved for the adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. In response to a question from Council, Mr. Lanham explained that the City is also paying employees in the Public Works Department who have obtained water and wastewater A and B licenses additional pay, and was doing so before the additional pay was given to the civil service employees. Councilman Kloesel inquired if the City has an A license for the water and wastewater licenses. Mr. Lanham stated that the City does have such a license, but does not have an employee that has obtained an A license. Councilman Kloesel clarified his original motion to include that anyone who obtains an A license in the water and wastewater division also be given $90 per month additional pay. This was agreeable to Councilman Johnson who seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Kloesel, Wilbanks, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2565 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF BAYTOWN CLASSIFICATION AND SALARY PLAN TO GRANT EDUCATIONAL INCENTIVE PAY TO FIRE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL WITH MASTER FIRE FIGHTER CERTIFICATES AND PUBLIC WORKS PERSONNEL WITH GRADE A WATER AND /OR WASTEWATER CERTIFICATES. 81026 -5 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 Ordinance - Amending the Animal Control Ordinance At the October 12, 1978 meeting, the Administration presented but did not request action on a proposed ordinance amending the City's animal control ordinance. After discussing the proposed ordinance, Council directed the Administration to make several revisions and place the revised ordinance on the next agenda. Mr. Bounds commented that he underlined the proposed changes in the ordinance but that some of the changes that were underlined were not significant. He further explained that he had redefined "animal" and "fowl" in order to simplify those definitions. He commented that he also redefined "run at large" and "subject to capture." A new section, Section 5 -3, "Preventing Capture," was added and makes it an offense for anyone to purposely prevent a humane officer from making a capture of an animal. He commented that he modified Section 5 -4, "Rabies Protection," and Section 5 -5, "Quarantine Procedure," to clarify that the City would have the authority to quarantine an animal in situations where rabies is suspected. Section 5 -6, "Unreasonable Noise Prohibited," was redefined in terms of modern penal code to make the offense more clearly prohibited. Section 5 -7, "Certain Animals Restricted," was consolidated with certain sections of the present animal code, with the only significant change being that the Administration added a Subsection 4 (a), "Bees Prohibited Within 300 Feet of a Residence, Church, School, or Hospital." In Section 5- 10, the change makes it an offense for a person to fail to provide proof of vaccination after redemption of any animal susceptible to rabies. Councilman Kloesel commented that his only feeling about any changes in this ordinance is limited to the sections concerning rabies control. Councilman Johnson commented that Council would penalize a number of people in the City if the ordinance is passed as proposed. There are many beehives in the City and many pigeons. Councilman Johnson commented that he could support the rabies and dog control sections. Mr. Bounds pointed out that all the changes in the ordinance relate to rabies control with the exception of the subsection dealing with bees. The present ordinance affecting pigeons is not in any way affected by the amendments in this ordinance. Mayor Hutto commented that he thought a pigeon would fall under the definition of a fowl. Mr. Bounds commented that under the present code, it is unlawful for any person to keep, possess, or maintain any livestock or fowl within 300 feet of any public eating place, food handling establishment, church, school, or hospital. Mayor Hutto inquired if the present ordinance included pigeons and Mr. Bounds responded that the present ordinance does include pigeons. Mayor Hutto recognized Mr. and Mrs. L. 0. Musick, who own property at 4817 North Main. Mrs. Musick explained that when she and her husband purchased the property, they were not aware that they are extremely allergic to bees. Mrs. Musick stated that the adjacent property contains beehives, and that both she and her husband have been stung by bees while attempting maintenance of the property. Mrs. Musick felt that since a city ordinance requires that the property be mowed, the City should provide her with access to that property. Mayor Hutto explained that this is actually a personal matter and suggested that the Musicks seek legal advice, then present the problem to the party who owns the bees. 81026 -6 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 Mrs. Musick requested that the City Attorney explain the reason persons are required to mow property when prohibited access to the property. Mr. Bounds explained that property owners are required to mow in order to prevent the spread of disease by discouraging mosquitoes and rodents from living in the tall weeds. Mr. Bounds also pointed out that although property owners are required to mow their lots, the City is not required to furnish a property owner the equipment with which to mow or access to the property. Mr. Bounds stated that he felt Mrs. Musick would have a legitimate private nuisance suit against the owner of the beehives if the bees were preventing the Musicks from getting onto their property. This is the course that Mr. Bounds suggested that the Musicks take. Mayor Hutto recognized Mr. J. P. Bailey, who explained that he has been keeping bees for more than 30 years and that bees do not hunt or indiscriminately sting people. Mr. Bailey felt that the Musick's problem could be worked out by talking to the beekeeper and asking him to move the beehives. Mr. Bailey stated that he would be willing to speak to the beekeeper to see if the problem could be resolved. Mayor Hutto recognized Bill Engelhart who is a beekeeper and is also allergic to bees. Mr. Engelhart stated that controlled bees are harmless, and that the passing of the ordinance would do away with controlled bees in the city, but would not eliminate the problem of uncontrolled wild bees. Mayor Hutto recognized Arthur J. Lindstrom, another beekeeper who concurred with what the other beekeepers have stated. The general consensus of Council seemed to be that the ordinance should be adopted with the exclusion of any reference to bees. Councilman Kloesel moved that the proposed ordinance be adopted, deleting Section 5- 7- (a)(4); Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Kloesel, Wilbanks, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2566 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, REPEALING CHAPTER 5, "ANIMALS," AS PRESENTLY CONSTITUTED AND SUBSTITUTING IN ITS PLACE A NEW CHAPTER 5; REPEALING ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT HEREWITH; CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PRESCRIBING A MAXIMUM PENALTY OF TWO HUNDRED AND N01100 ($200.00) DOLLARS FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Ordinance - Awarding the Bid for the Purchase of Pickup Trucks Four bids were received for the purchase of nine pickups for various city departments. A tabulation of the bids is attached to the minutes as Exhibit "A." Seven of these vehicles are long wheelbase half -ton pickups. Vinson Baytown Dodge submitted the low base bid and is low bidder on the options. Two of these vehicles will be for the Parks Department at a total cost of $10,955.30. One pickup is for the Utility Collection Department at a total cost of $5,111.55. Four pickups are for the Public Works Department at a total cost of $21,966.56. Total cost of these 7 pickups is $38,033.41. Id 81026 -7 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 Bob Hamric Chevrolet submitted the low bid for two short wheelbase half -ton pickups at a total cost of $10,695.44. These two pickups will be used by the Inspection Department. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Kloesel moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilwoman Wilbanks seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Kloesel, Wilbanks, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2567 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING BIDS FOR ONE -HALF TON PICKUP TRUCKS AS FOLLOWS: VINSON BAYTOWN DODGE FOR SECTION I AND BOB HAMRIC CHEVROLET FOR SECTION II OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN BID NO. 7810 -3, AND AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT BY THE CITY OF BAYTOWN FOR EACH SECTION AS SET OUT BELOW. Ordinance - Awarding the Contract for the Police Department Radio Maintenance Building Two bids were received for the construction of the police radio maintenance building. A tabulation of these bids is attached to the minutes as Exhibit "B." Council received a copy of a letter from Mr. Stan Holzaepfel regarding the exceptions he took to the bid. For that reason, the Administration felt that Holzaepfel's bid does not meet specifications. Chatham Construction Company took no exceptions to the bid; however, an alternate bid was submitted to delete the 18 -inch overhang at both ends of the building which would reduce the bid from $30,200 to $28,900. Since the overhang is unnecessary except for esthetics, the Administration felt that Council should take advantage of the alternate even though no alternate was included in the specifications. The Administration recommended awarding the contract for the police radio maintenance building to Chatham Construction, and include a change order to eliminate the overhang for a reduction in cost of $1,300. In response to a question from Councilman Lander, the City Attorney explained that Council does not have the authority to change a bid except under Article 2368a, which is by change order. Mr. Bounds explained that Mr. Holzaepfel did not bid in the basic specifications. Therefore, one cannot compare his bid to Chatham's bid because he did not bid the basic bid. Council may choose to reject the bids or accept the Administration's recommendation. In response to a question from Councilman Kloesel, Mr. Lanham explained that Mr. Holzaepfel submitted a bid based on the City's specifications with exceptions. The exceptions are not alternates, the exceptions are Holzaepfel's base bid. Councilman Lander moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. Norman Dykes, City Engineer, explained that Mr. Holzaepfel's alternate bid contained the same provisions as the basic bid which provisions do not meet specifications. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Mayor Hutto Nays: Council members Lander, Johnson, and Cannon Kloesel, Wilbanks, and Caffey 81026 -8 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 ORDINANCE NO. 2568 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN ACCEPTING THE BID OF CHATHAM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A POLICE RADIO MAINTENANCE BUILDING AND AUTHORIZING THE CONTRACTING OF INDEBTEDNESS BY THE CITY FOR THE SUM OF TWENTY -EIGHT THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND NO 1100 ($28,900.00) DOLLARS WITH REGARD TO SUCH AGREEMENT. Ordinance - Authorizing and Directing the City Manager to Execute a Contract with the Bay Area Heritage Society with Regard to the Museum and Museum Program Council appropriated $12,000 in Revenue Sharing funds toward operation of a museum program in the City of Baytown. This contract would allow the Administration to transfer these funds to the museum with a stipulation of the contract being that a part -time curator would be retained. Other than that, this contract is very similar to the contract that the city had with the Board last year. The contract does not require that the entire $12,000 be expended toward the hire of a curator. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilwoman Wilbanks moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilwoman Caffey seconded the motion. Councilman Kloesel felt that the City should not be involved in the operation of a musuem. He felt that this should be handled by the private sector. In response to a question from the Mayor, Mr. Lanham explained that the reason that the Administration included the provision that a curator be hired was because this was mentioned during the Revenue Sharing hearing as one of the reasons for requesting funds. Councilwoman Wilbanks inquired about the section dealing with public liability insurance. Mr. Bounds explained that this is a requirement of the existing contractual agreement and felt that it is important that the City be assured that the Society is properly covered by insurance because of the City's joint participation in the museum agreement. The City could be held liable as a party to any action involving a personal injury on the premises, and therefore, Mr. Bounds felt it is important that the Society have adequate insurance coverage. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Wilbanks, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: Councilman Kloesel ORDINANCE NO. 2569 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH THE BAY AREA HERITAGE SOCIETY WITH REGARD TO THE SUPERVISION AND MANAGEMENT OF A MUSEUM AND MUSEUM PROGRAM; AUTHORIZING PAYMENT BY THE CITY OF TWELVE THOUSAND AND NO 1100 ($12,000.00) DOLLARS WITH REGARD TO SUCH AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Ordinance Approving Final Payment on the Market Street Bridge Project At the last Council meeting, Council decided to delay action on final payment on the Market Street Bridge Project because a question was raised about the surface roughness of portions of that project. Accordingly, the City Engineer 81026 -9 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 and the consulting engineers reinspected the area in question and concurred in the following points: 1. The surface is rougher in places than is desirable. This is due to the lack of concrete finishing expertise on the part of the contractor. 2. Attempting to overlay the concrete with asphalt to develop a smoother surface will result in a continuing maintenance problem. The asphalt will not wear as well as concrete and over the years would develop rough areas because of peeling and dislodgement of the asphalt. 3. The roadway is serviceable and structurally sound. The inconvenience caused by removing the rough area and replacing it with new pavement will not be worth getting the smoother surface. 4. Over a period of time, traffic will wear the concrete smoother, although it will not wear away all the existing roughness. Total cost of this contract with change orders is $1,126,272. The actual cost for work done is $1,098,734. This represents an underrun of $27,537.56. The final payment in the amount of $123,596.36 remains to be paid. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Kloesel inquired as to how long it would take to remove the rough area and have it repaired. Jim Hutchison, of Busch, Hutchison, and Associates, explained that the contractor spent approximately 3 weeks out in that area with a grinder trying to smooth the north side of the road. Mr Hutchison explained that the only way to remove it would be to break up the road. Councilman Johnson inquired if the City could legally penalize the contractor and added that he would have to vote against the approval of this ordinance. Councilman Kloesel felt that the roadway should be corrected rather than penalizing the contractor. Councilman Cannon felt it would be unreasonable to have the contractor come back out and tie up that area for weeks to make repairs, but felt that a penalty is due; Councilman Johnson concurred. Mr. Hutchison stated that he would talk to representatives of Farrell Construction Company to determine what the contractors would prefer to do and report back to Council at the next meeting. He added that he would impress upon the contractor that Council would prefer the roadway be repaired rather than a penalty be paid. Council concurred. Ordinance - Approving Final Payment on Sandblasting and Painting of the East James Street Water Tower This item was passed. Ordinance - Approving Final Payment on the Police Garage This item was passed. Ordinance - Approving Final Payment on the Kilgore Road /Mockingbird Lane Storm Sewer Project This work has been completed and the final contract amount is $260,040.15. This represents an underrun of $4,469.90. Final payment in the amount of $38,267.07 remains 81026 -1'0 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 to be paid. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Lander moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilwoman Wilbanks seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Kloesel, Wilbanks, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2570 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ACCEPTING CONSTRUCTION OF THE KILGORE ROAD /MOCKINGBIRD LANE STORM SEWER PROJECT BY R. T. BISHOP CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. & R. T. BISHOP, A JOINT VENTURE, FINDING THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT; ACCEPTING THE CONSULTING ENGINEERS' CERTIFICATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE; AUTHORIZING THE FINAL PAYMENT TO THE SAID R. T. BISHOP CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. & R. T. BISHOP, A JOINT VENTURE, AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Ordinance - Appointing H -GAC as the City's Purchasing Agent for Radio Equipment The proposed ordinance authorizes the City to enter into an interlocal agreement with the Houston - Galveston Area Council so that H -GAC can act as the City's purchasing agent for radio equipment. H -GAC takes annual bids on radio equipment for governmental agencies within its 13- county region. In past years, the City has been able to purchase radio equipment using bids H -GAC has received and saved considerable money because of the volume discounts. If this proposed ordinance is approved, the City will enter into a purchase agreement with H -GAC before the radio equipment can be acquired. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Cannon moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Kloesel, Wilbanks, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2571 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST TO A CONTRACT WITH HOUSTON - GALVESTON AREA COUNCIL APPOINTING HOUSTON- GALVESTON AREA COUNCIL AS THE CITY'S PURCHASING AGENT FOR RADIO EQUIPMENT AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Ordinance - Authorizing the City to Enter into a Contract with Baytown Housing Authority to Operate Recreation Centers The City has had contracts similar to this contract for the past 3 or 4 years. The proposed ordinance authorizes the City to enter into a contract with the Housing Authority to operate recreation centers at the Sam Houston and Edison Courts community centers from October 1, 1978, through December 31, 1978. The Council received a copy of a letter from William N. Eiland, Director of the Baytown Housing Authority. In his letter, Mr. Eiland notified the City that the Housing Authority will be unable to fund the operation of the neighborhood centers beyond December 31, 1978. Mr. Eiland cites budget constraints as the reason. The Housing Authority will provide the City with $1,750 for this purpose. N 81026 -11 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Cannon moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilwoman Caffey seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Kloesel, Wilbanks, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2572 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST TO A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN AND THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, WITH REGARD TO PROVIDING CITY OF BAYTOWN PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL FOR THE ORGANIZATION, SUPERVISION,AND ADMINISTRATION OF COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES PROGRAMS AT EDISON COURT AND LINCOLN -SAM HOUSTON COURT COMMUNITY CENTERS AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Consider Authorizing Langford Engineering, Inc. to Update the City's Central District Wastewater Treatment Study The City has added a number of subdivisions to the Central District sewer system over the past several years. The City has entered into a contract with the Coady Water District to provide sewer service which will be provided by the Central District system. The Administration has received requests from 3 other areas north of the City to enter into a contract with the City or have the City annex the area to provide sewer service which would also be serviced by the Central District. Before making a recommendation to Council, the Administration felt that there is a need to update the engineering study that was made several years ago on the Central District. The City needs to know if the trunk lines have the capacity for these additional areas, and if the treatment plant itself has any excess capacity to take on these additional customers. One of the recommendations made by the Planning Commission in their annual report was that there be a comprehensive sewer plant update to include all the area north of the city limits to Interstate 10. This would not include the entire area, but only the area that is to be in the Central District, the area where the Administration feels the need is most critical. The City's contract with Langford Engineering includes a provision for this type work. Section 8 of that contract provides for engineering work in addition to the type of work paid on a percentage basis. This work would be based on salary cost times a multiplier of 2.25. Mr. Langford estimates that the study and report will cost approximately $4,500. This would involve population studies, and the number of additional customers who have tied into the system since the last study. This will help determine what the capacity is at both the plant and the trunk lines. Councilwoman Wilbanks felt that the City needs this information in order to address whether those areas requesting service should be allowed to tie into the system or should those areas be annexed. The Administration recommended that Council grant authorization for Langford Engineering to proceed with the study. Councilman Johnson moved to accept the recommendation of the Administration; Councilwoman Wilbanks seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Kloesel, Wilbanks, Caffey. and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None 81026 -12 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 Councilwoman Wilbanks commented that after this study has been completed, she would like Council to have a work session addressing this problem of annexation as opposed to other methods of providing service. Resolution No. 645 - Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations from the Contingency Fund to Various Line Items All Within the General Fund Budget for the Fiscal Year 1977 -78 The proposed ordinance would authorize the City Manager to transfer $58,961 from the General Fund Contingency Account to various accounts within the General Fund for the 1977 -78 fiscal year. This transfer is necessary to balance these accounts. Payment for sick leave to employees who have terminated employment with the City is the largest item. The next largest item is material for the drainage crews. The Administration recommended approval of the resolution. Councilwoman Wilbanks moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilwoman Caffey seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Kloesel, Johnson, Wilbanks, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None RESOLUTION NO. 645 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO TRANSFER FIFTY - EIGHT THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED SIXTY -ONE AND NO 1100 ($58,961.00) DOLLARS FROM BUDGET ACCOUNT NO. 0101 -12 -1000, "CONTINGENCIES," TO ACCOUNTS WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND. Resolution No. 646 - Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations from the Contingency Fund to Various Line Items All Within the Water and Sewer Fund Budget for the Fiscal Year 1977 -78 The proposed resolution would authorize the City Manager to transfer $13,684 from the Water and Sewer Fund Contingency Account to the Wastewater Treatment Account for maintenance of machinery. This transfer is needed in order to balance this account for the 1977 -78 fiscal year. The Administration recommended approval of the resolution. Councilwoman Caffey moved for adoption of the resolution; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Kloesel, Wilbanks, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None RESOLUTION NO. 646 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO TRANSFER THIRTEEN THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY -FOUR AND N01100 ($13,684.00) DOLLARS FROM BUDGET ACCOUNT NO. 1001 -12 -0100, "CONTINGENCIES," TO WATER FUND ACCOUNT NO. 1005 -05 -0100, MAINTENANCE, MACHINERY. Consider Detour Alternatives for Bayway Drive Improvements Project The State Department of Highways and Public Transportation is in the process of preparing plans for the next phase of the Bayway Drive Improvement. It will be necessary for the City to acquire right -of -way which would extend from Crow Road to Park Street. Because the roadway will be raised at the inlet by the Burnett School, it will be necessary to detour traffic around construction at this site. One alternative is to use North and Wooster Streets as a detour. Another 81026 -13 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 alternative is to build a temporary bypass at the inlet. Both North and Wooster Streets are relatively narrow residential streets and will not lend themselves readily to truck and school traffic. Moreover, such traffic will cause the streets to deterriorate. However, construction of a temporary bypass would lengthen the project by several months. This bypass would be constructed at the expense of the Highway Department, but would take some of the money that otherwise would be spent on the roadway. Of the two alternatives, a temporary bypass is probably the least disruptive. The Administration recommended that the Council authorize the Administration to request that the Highway Department build a temporary bypass at the inlet on Bayway Drive. Councilman Johnson moved to accept the recommendation of the Administration; Councilman Kloesel seconded the motion. In response to a question from Councilman Johnson, Mr. Lanham explained that the City will have to acquire right - of -way on both sides of the existing road - -some from the school and some from the property owners on the opposite side. In response to a question from Mayor Hutto, Norman Dykes explained that the State Highway Department estimated that it will take approximately 3 to 4 months to build a temporary bypass. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Kloesel, Wilbanks, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Hear Report from the City Attorney on Houston Lighting and Power Company's Rate Increase Request A tabulation furnished by H L & P dating from June 1976 to November 1978 of the electric service cost data for residential bills of 1,000 KWH was included in the packet. The calculations reflect the basic cost a customer pays for his service, the added fuel cost, the cost of service adjustment, the total monthly bill and the Company's return on equity. Council also received a copy of a comparison prepared by Scott Bounds, City Attorney, noting differences of position taken by H L & P, the cities, and the Public Utility Staff. Mr. Bounds explained that the Public Utilities Staff position does not indicate the position of the Public Utiltites Commission. The Public Utilities Staff, the cities, and H L & P were all in an adversary position before the Public Utilities Commission. These copies are attached to the minutes as "Exhibit C." Mr. Bounds felt that the cities were well represented before the Commission in the rural rate case and this will favorably affect any decision in any city rate case appealed to the PUC. The chart also maps out major disagreements between H L & P, the cities, and the Public Utilities Staff. There were significant areas of agreement and methodology technique in judgement which is not reflected. This is only looking toward the differences in rate proposals. Mr. Bounds briefly reviewed the charts with Council. Councilman Kloesel asked that Mr. Bounds check into the area concerning advertisement because there is a strong feeling among the citizens toward Houston Lighting and Power's advertising. Mr. Bounds explained that it is his understanding that H L & P is allowed only certain types of advertising by the PUC. Council scheduled a work session to discuss the H L & P rate increase request for Thursday, November 2, 1978, at 5:00 P.M. 61 UZU -14 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 Mr. Lanham encouraged Council to ask for any information which Council may feel necessary to better understand the rate making process. Consider Application Made by Exxon Chemical Company USA, Baytown Olefins Plant for a Permit to Discharge Wastewater and Rainfall Runoff into Tabbs Bay This application is not to the City, but in keeping with past practice, the Administration is placing all public hearing notices on the agenda. On November 16, 1978, the Texas Department of Water Resources will hold a public hearing on a permit application from Exxon Chemical Company USA for a discharge permit for the Baytown Olefins plant to discharge a volume of wastewater not to exceed an average of 1,060,000 gallons per day and a variable amount of rainfall runoff. The discharge is to Scott Bay - outfall 001 (cooling tower blowdown - 81% and deminerilization backwash - 19 %), and to the west fork of Goose Creek - outfall 002 (rainfall runoff), thence to Goose Creek, thence to Tabbs Bay. Council took no action. Consider Appointment to the Local Board of Trustees for Volunteer Firemen This will be discussed during executive session. Consider Appointments to the Baytown Cultural and Fine Arts Study Committee This will be discussed during executive session. Councilman Kloesel reiterated once again that appointments to committees are not personnel matters and he felt that these should be discussed and appointed in public. Committee Reports None. Unfinished Business None. Recess and Reconvene Mayor Hutto recessed the open meeting into executive session to discuss personnel matters and land acquisition. The following business was transacted: Consider Appointments to the Local Board of Trustees for Volunteer Firemen Council was not prepared to take action on this item. Consider Appointments to the Baytown Cultural and Fine Arts Study Committee Councilwoman Caffey moved that the following persons be appointed to serve on the Baytown Cultural and Fine Arts Study Committee: Mr. P. J. (Jack) McClendon, Jr. Mr. William McNeill Mr. Kim Martin Ms. Barbara Hinds Ms. Anna Haley Mr. Lawrence Weiler Mr. E. Reginald Brewer 81026 -15 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 Councilman Lander seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Lander, Johnson, Wilbanks, Caffey and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Abstained: Councilman Kloesel Councilwoman Wilbanks commented that she would be glad to meet with this group and help set up the first date for their meeting. Adj ourn There being no further business to be transacted, Councilman Johnson moved to adjourn; Councilman Kloesel seconded the motion. The vote for adjournment was unanimous. Karen Petru, Deputy City Clerk APPROVED: Ei een P. Hall, City Clerk 81026 -16 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 E X H I B IT "A" �o o� W �M W L C) �-- U Z Cl I- ce- 0- M JL O V A a n 0 M m 1 00 n M N 1 O Q ca Q .0 n M � -•oo w .n .n o oo 0 u M 00 M CO N p 4 M r- Cll M z N m - —.M lal LA UN GO O n c OI- tL CT% N No O -rop Z Z C O1 'O O O Ln O Cn CO CO CT .- .•- Q CO N O e-- M Z O •- N M M .-- w o O f- Ci O O w .9 `^ O ° ro o x cc :3 N ca o Crl O ° p p O N 1.0 Q 0 0 onn rz ° ° ° ° x co ° � N - M t3 !- M Ill O U X Ql .- U lyj sue' � O O N O O ~ O m Z •- d p O v Lf% m ti's .� .� N M. 00 � N w � n eri CO O C; C4 z r - CO Lr% M 93 Uja O n LL° u�'-, v vs N Ct O M O •Q O M 3 Cv � u` -T Zv 0 N � d O � M Z � . l0 w 0 N 1 W w N a p lJf O o }a ••W CTC p w m lam. f n•w a J <L L y C d Q e m Y Q .,C O Cn V C.a 1 F-' Cn + T �y a CL W 'O �L U 4- x O Q w O m w C O •U. t,' � X .. L M E u Q J Q .L.J Q� V! f0 •- Ql 03 Q d' j wz wo LLI !- NM -j xO z-- a 0 O J O O � N n N 1026 -17 00 n M Vb• i N N l0 �n- O 0 0 O Ift V1• M M O tO 1 o cr) o co . ^` !yj lU t (7 ._j % I 81026 -18 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 E X H I B I T "B" TiT�E. BID: DATE POLICE RADIO MAINTENANCE BLDG. 781 0 -2 10 -16 -78 - 9:30 am, CITY OF BAYTOWN . BID TABULATION ITEM QTY DESCRIPTION HOLZAEPFEL-CONST. UNIT EXTENDEO G 8. CH THAM UNIT EXTENDED UNIT XTENDEO UNIT EXTENDED �- UNIT EXTENOEO F C p' POLICE RADIO MAINTENANCE BLDG. $27,700.00 $30,200.00 COMPLETION TIME: 70 works g days 60 working days d e Does not,meet Deduct Alt. No. 1 Specifications. $1,300.00 00 N GROSS TO AL $27,700.00 $28,900.00 . LESS DISC.'-- NET. TOTA L ��' . 81.026 -20 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 26, 1978 B X H I B I T "C" 81026 -21 The Light company Houston Lighting &Power October 20, 1978 Mr. Fritz Lanham, City Manager City of Baytown P. 0. Box 424 Baytown, Texas 77520 Dear Mr. Lanham: Submitted herewith is the information requested at last evenings City Council meeting. The attached tabulation is on a monthly basis for residential customers of Houston Lighting E Power Company, assuming a monthly usage of 11000 KWH. We have brought the calculations up to date and they reflect the base cost a customer pays for his service, the added fuel cost, the cost of service adjustment, the total monthly bill and the Company's return on equity. Please note that during the 30 months that the COS adjustment has been effective, it has amounted to only $5.18. Please contact us should you require further information or have any questions regarding the attached material. Sincerely yours, Jlm F. Schaefer District Manager JFS:fe Attachment P.O. Box 210 . 333 Ward Road . Baytown, Texas 77520 . (713) 427 -7581 4 a it I ! Total With 5% Tax $31.32 32.05 31.93 30.44 30.94 29.05 29.63 28.46 30.01 30.65 31.50 34.91 33.75 34.13 34.67 34.99 33.78 31.29 31.07 31.29 31.70 34.18 34.90 37.95 35.75 37.41 81026 -22 Return on Equity 12.83% 13.37% 14.08% 14.54% 14.97% 14.89% 14.66% 14.54% 14.43% 14.48% 14.63% 14.40% 14.53% 14.58% 14.45% 14.20% 14.23% 14.33% 14.35% 14.09% 13.85% 13.65% 13.30% 13.20% 13.111% 13.05% ELECTRIC SERVICE COST DATA FOR RESIDENTIAL BILLS OF 1000 KWH SINCE LAST RATE INCREASE IN JUNE, 1976 Fuel COS Month Base Cost Adjustment Adjustment June, 1976 $27.92 $1.843 7.0t ) u I y 27.92 2.564 3.9t Aug. 27.92 2.475 1.7� Sept. 27.92 1.019 5.5t Oct. 27.92 1.50 4.5t Nov. 25.52 2.117 2.7$ Dec. 25.52 2.669 2.9t Jan.,1977 25.52 1.495 9.4t Feb. 25.52 2.93 13.01 Mar. 25.52 3.499 16.91 ,Apr. 25.52 4.424 5.2t May 27.92 5.186 14.31 June 27.92 4.106 11.31 July 27.92 4.457 12.61 Aug. 27.92 5.004 9.4 Sept. 27.92 5.306 10.01, Oct. 27.92 4.136 11.3 Nov. 25.52 4.128 15.11 Dec. 25.52 3.909 15.71 Jan., 1978 25.52 4.127 15.7 Feb. 25.52 4.486 18.8¢ Mar. 25.52 6.786 24.3Q Apr. 25.52 7.465 25.71 May 27.92 7.927 28.91 June 27.92 5.806 ,32.6G July 27.92 7.394 31.21 Total With 5% Tax $31.32 32.05 31.93 30.44 30.94 29.05 29.63 28.46 30.01 30.65 31.50 34.91 33.75 34.13 34.67 34.99 33.78 31.29 31.07 31.29 31.70 34.18 34.90 37.95 35.75 37.41 81026 -22 Return on Equity 12.83% 13.37% 14.08% 14.54% 14.97% 14.89% 14.66% 14.54% 14.43% 14.48% 14.63% 14.40% 14.53% 14.58% 14.45% 14.20% 14.23% 14.33% 14.35% 14.09% 13.85% 13.65% 13.30% 13.20% 13.111% 13.05% 81026 -23 State and City Sales Tax Repealed �� Not Yet Available e; 1 i ELECTRIC SERVICE COST DATA FOR RESIDENTIAL BILLS OF 1000 KWH SINCE LAST RATE INCREASE IN JUNE, 1976 Fuel COS Total Return on Month Base Cost .�_ Adjustment Adjustment - With 5% Tax Equity Aug., 1978 $27.92 9.210 31.6 $39.32 12.95% 27.92 6.174 36.10 36.18 13.05% Oct. 27.92 7.023 46.61 35.41:: Nov. 25.52 7.544 53.81- 33.60* State and City Sales Tax Repealed �� Not Yet Available ..t 15 14 13 12 11 1( c 81026 -24 HOUSTON LIGHTING & P0?ER COMPANY RELATIVE RATES OF RETURN BY RATE CLASS 81026 -25 HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY _ RELATIVE RATES OF RETURN BY RATE CLASS - 150 140 130 E _.. 120 110 Ll"ta 100 Z 90 cc H u' 80 LL 0 u 70 60 " l u 50 -•� 40 t 30 6 2C 1C c (, 2_ 6� x PRESENT RATES PROPOSED RATES N � DIFFERENCES i co N RATE BASE ITEMS HL & P CITIES � PUC STAFF REMARKS ia. Construction work in progress Includes all CWIP Includes all CWIP Includes only part 1a & b account for about (CSti'IP) in rate base in rate base of CWIP in rate $41M of $123M difference base between HL & P and cities Ib. Allowance for funds used Not capitalized Capitalized to Capitalized the Relates to cash flow for during construction offset CWIP part CWIP not construction and "real (AFUDC) in rate base earnings" . Other .differences- - 2. St'. A. Parish n6 3 -31 -78 expendi- Total estimated 3 -31 -78 expendi- Cities also adjusted opera - tures cost tures ting revenues thru 6- 30 -79; $8M 3. Depreciation reserve Adjusted reserve Reduced by similar for one half of amount the total depre- ciation expense 4. Land value Current market Original value Original value Reduces replacement cost value rate base about $346M •!f— � 6. Original cost /replacement 60/40 70/30 67.25/32.75 PUR Act allows 75/25 -60/40 cost weighting ti N DIFFERENCES CONTINUED • • � N • weighting include growth O rate, inflation, company's � RATE BASE ITEMS HL & P CITIES PUC STAFF REMARKS 5. Working capital, other 1.3 mo. average •Average daily cash Accepted HL & P Net reduction in rate base 8. Depreciation rates and current assets, and calculated under balance plus monthly of about $75�i with reservation noninvestor supplied Federal Power averages of special the National Energy Act capital Commission deposits and working 'formula funds 6. Original cost /replacement 60/40 70/30 67.25/32.75 PUR Act allows 75/25 -60/40 cost weighting weightings. Factors to use in determining weighting include growth rate, inflation, company's need for new capital, and • quality of service 7, Damage and insurance Disallowed Disallowed $�M in cost of service 8. Depreciation rates and Accepted HL & P's Reduced 1�iajor issue is the affect expense with reservation on future fuel supplies of • the National Energy Act and Docket 600. If accept PUC's reduction, cities would urge an additional $13Ai revenue reduction Other PUC differences- - 9. �Yeather adjustment Accepted HL & P's Not Allowed $8M to PUC ._ a -- ..� DIFFERENCES CONTINUED N I N RATE BASE ITEMS HL & P 0 10. Nuclear fuel in process 11. Amortization of Allen's Creek loss 12. Miscellaneous: land held for future use, retirement, over- time allowance, employee benefits, lobbying, rate case expense, city franchise tax CITIES PUC STAFF REMARKS Accepted HL & P's Disallowed a $6.4M to PUC; AFUDC portion allowed on portion not in rate base Accepted HL & P's Disallowed a Business risk portion (cost of capital) �3� Disallowed a portion DIFFERENCES - RATE OF RETURN RATE OF RETURN ITEMS HL & P CITIES PUC STAFF REMARKS 1. Return on common equity 15.97 13.6- 14.39b (13.95�b) 13.80 without 16.8- 18.07go with- without ITC ITC out investment tax credit (ITC) 2. Return on original cost of invested Included: Included: capital Long term debt Short term debt Long term debt Cities adjusted long term Preferred stock Long term debt Preferred stoclt debt, preferred stock, and Common equity Preferred stock Common equity common equity to 7 -30 -79 Accumulated job Common equity Accumulated figures development deferred credit investment tax credit 11.14° return 9.89- 10.16�o return 10.02 return (10.020) �� This represents the major difference between cities and HL & P, representing about $54hS revenue dif f er- ence 3 0 `n I TENS N O o'�o Cost of service clause Fuei cost clause RATE DESIGN 1. Cost of service methodology 2. Present relative rate of return/ Proposed relative rate of return a. Residential b . Commercial ( biGS ) c. Large general service d. High voltage service e. Public utility s f. Streets HL & P CITIES PUC STAFF RED4ARKS Requested Not allowed Not allowed Requested Endorsed HL & P's Disallowed tax Tax rolled into base rates factor (gross receipts tax) Probability peak Plant utilization Probability peak Industries intervened. PUC accept with reser- accepted HL & P's recommen- vation dations with minor reserva- tions Generation plant revenue �-� allocation HL & P's Cities 70/71 8?/X 34.53ro 25.62po 127/126 134/1.15 21.41 19.84p 103/102 101/1.25 15.40 15.73go 134/130 96/1.25 28.60% 38.56go 98/103 98/X -18/16 19/X 0.06% 0.250 �-� � r � ITEMS HL & P CITIES i ' N 3. Residential seasonal difference First ?00 kw same 00 � price alI year 4. Peak months 5. Residential minimum bill 6. Rural /city Bottom Line • PUC STAFF REMARKS Seasonal differential 14iay - October June - October Billing months $4.50 $5.50' , Same rate � Maintain some Same rate differential $175M/12.6�0 $52M/3.68% increase PUC did not base recommen- dation on same basis as HL & P and � C,�'.ec�