Loading...
1979 05 10 CC Minutes90510 -1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN May 10, 1979 The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in regular session on Thursday, May 10, 1979, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Baytown City Hall. The following members were in attendance: Fred T. Philips 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 invo- cation was offered by Councilwoman Mary E. Wilbanks. Minutes Councilman Philips moved for the approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of April 26, 1979; Council- woman Wilbanks seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Kloesel, Wilbanks, Caffey and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Receive Petitions None. City Manager's Report Garth Road Project - The County received bids today on the Garth Road Project. Marathon Paving is the apparent low bidder with a bid of approximately $2.4 million dollars. The bids will be tabulated and presented to the County Commissioners for action before work can begin. Loop 201 - The ribbon cutting for the opening of the next segment of Loop 201 is scheduled for May 15 at 11:30 a.m., and will be held on Loop 201 near Arizona Street. Department of Highways and Public Transportation - The Department of Highways and Public Transportation has employed consulting firms to make the study of a bridge over the ship channel. Air. Lanham explained that he and Bobby Rountree, Director of Parks and Recreation, have met with these engi- neers along with Mr. Poorman. There is a possibility that the bridge will come down to ground level in the area where Council has been considering a marina. The engineers will be able to tell the Administration within about six weeks where the bridge would come down to ground level. The Administration suggested no further action be taken on the proposed marina until the Administration receives this information. Council had no objection to delay further action on the proposed marina until the Administration receives more detailed information from the Department of 90510 -2 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 Highways and Public Transportation. Zero Base Budgeting - The Administration would like to schedule a work session with the Council before the next Council meeting on May 24 to report to Council on the Ad- ministration's planning for zero base budgeting. The Admin- istration is developing the documents to begin the zero base approach. Bicentennial Park Phase II - Approximately 200 feet of sidewalk was repoured today and the project is approximately 95% complete. Street Improvement Program - The base work has been completed on Lazy Lane, Leavins Street and Kilgore Road, and the work has begun on the base of Cedar Bayou Road. Street Assessment Projects - One -half of the street has been poured on Lynchburg Road, Wye Drive and Ashleyville Street. Jenkins - Hollaway Park Pavilion - The foundation and the rough end plumbing has been completed and the contractor is in process of framing the building today. (questions and Comments Regarding the City Manager's Report In response to a question from Councilman Johnson, 11r. Lanham stated that the Administration had not been contacted by the Baytown Heritage Society regarding the placement of the old Cedar Bayou Methodist Church at the Bicentennial Park. Councilman Cannon commented that some progress has been made on the flooding problem on Loop 201, and inquired if this is a temporary measure. Mr. Lanham commented that it is his understanding that the State will be installing pumps at this location. Councilman Cannon also commented that he would like the Administration to be in touch with the Department of High- ways and Public Transportation with regard to road condi- tions on Interstate 10 to request that the existing lanes on Interstate 10 be temporarily retopped. The construction in progress, along with the poor road conditions, present a hazard to motorists. Councilman Kloesel stated that the installation of pumps on Loop 201 to alleviate the flooding is a temporary solution. He felt the Administration should request that that entire section be raised. Councilman Philips commented that he also felt that the pumps are not really a permanent solution and suggested that Council go on record to the State stating that the pumps are a temporary solution and suggesting that a permanent solu- tion of raising the roadbed be considered in the next budget for the State Department of Highways and Public Transporta- tion. A resolution in this regard will be placed on the next agenda. Consider Recommendation of Trustees of Baytown Employees' Supplemental Retirement Plan Concerning Proposed Agree- ment to Terminate Inactive Participants in the Plan Mr. Lanham reported that the Trustees are not prepared to make a recommendation at this time. Platters have arisen that may involve litigation. Therefore, the Board is not prepared to report at this meeting tonight. 90510 -3 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 Mayor Hutto recognized Albert E. Vacek, Jr., an attor- ney in Houston who is representing the Baytown Professional Firefighter's Association. Air. Vacek commented that the reason he would like to make a statement is because there has been a tremendous misunderstanding with regard to his clients and why they feel that there is a grievance here. A letter went out to the members of the Supplemental Retire- ment Program which is supplemental to the TMRS Retirement Program. This-letter advised participants that the supple- mental plan was going to be terminated, that the money was going to be taken out of that plan, and it was going to be put into a new TMRS Plan in order to increase benefits available to the employees and to take all of the City employees in under the TMRS Plan. Mr. Vacek commented that the Baytown Professional Firefighter's Association has no problem with the new TMRS Plan. They feel that it is an exceptional plan and would like to see the City adopt it. They would all like to participate in it. Mr. Vacek further explained that when his clients received this letter, sev- eral of them pulled out the trust agreement and read through the instrument. Apparently, there is a plan set up by the City of Baytown whereby money would be contributed both by the City and by the employees into a third entity, which is this trust. This was intended by the originators of the plan to be totally separate and totally apart from the City. It was an entity created with its own Board of Trustees. The only similarity that it had of anything or any connec- tion with the City was that the Mayor and the City Council and people of that nature were trustees of this plan. There is a direct prohibition in the plan and also a prohibition in the trust agreement itself that states, "under no circum- stances, at any time, either directly or indirectly will the City use this trust money, or will it ever go back to the City for its benefit." Mr. Vacek commented that this triggered a red flag for his clients who came to him to determine what the situation was. Mr. Vacek explained that his clients felt that rules as originally established were not being adhered to. Many of the people accepted the offer of the City to take back their contributions and to waive any rights to the City contributions. Mr. Vacek explained that his clients are upset because back in March of 1973, when this plan was instituted, they felt that this plan was great. They put their money into the plan and have been looking forward to the extra plan. By contributing to this plan, they waived their right to invest in other things with the hope that they would be getting the difference which was contributed by the City. Cdr. Vacek explained that by terminating the plan, the City has taken away this investment potential that his clients had and this is what is upsetting his clients. Air. Vacek stated that his clients are not attempting to sabotage anybody else in the City. They want to see everybody bene- fit under the new TMRS Plan. However, they do feel that their interest needs to be protected. Once the money is gone, they feel that they might have some difficulty in getting it back even though they do prevail in court. Something has to be done to try and protect that fund until a final determination is made as to how the money will be handled. Air. Vacek emphasized that the firemen were not trying to be unfair to other City employees. Councilman Johnson inquired as to how many people are involved and how much money is being discussed. Mr. Vacek responded that strictly by the numbers which were set forth at the meeting which he attended with the Board of Trustees, when the City planned to terminate the plan, there was in excess of $580,000 that was being held in this trust. After the letter went out, many of the people wanted to get their funds which they had contributed back. The trust then distributed $170,000 which left approximately $330,000 which is presently residing in a CD in one of the banks in Baytown. Apparently, the whole controversy here is what is going to happen to that $330,000? A substantial amount of that money 90510 -4 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 is a direct result of people who have withdrawn from the plan, not because of this letter, but they terminated employ- ment. As a result, that money is supposed to stay in the plan. Then it comes down to the decision of what happens to the money which was contributed by the employees and that money which was contributed by the City. The Board of Trustees' number was approximately $52,000 which had been contributed by employees who had not left the plan and they felt that the City's matching funds for that was approxi- mately $56,000. As you can see, that is $108,000 which from your $330,000 leaves a pretty substantial amount that is still in this CD. The question comes up then, how much has actually been vested? The amount that is apparently vested is $45,000. Mr. Vacek commented that he and his clients wanted to try and avoid litigation if-at all possible and they are willing to take only that portion which had vested of the City's funds and release the balance to the City. This was a proposal which they felt was more than equitable for the City because much of the money is being left on the table. Mr. Vacek commented that if you look at the trust and this is his legal interpretation of it, the trust and plan state that, "anytime the plan is terminated, all funds will be distributed to the participants." *Councilwoman Wilbanks gone. Councilman Philips inquired if the trust has been dissolved. Mr. Vacek commented that that is up in the air, and the funds are still intact for the time being. The. funds have been taken out of the hands of Aetna, which was the insurance company that was administering it and it was put in the CD. Consider Bond Sale A total of $2,880,000 in bonds from 1975 Capital Improvement Program remain to be sold. These were adver- tised for sale in January, and bids were received and rejected. A bond sale was scheduled earlier, but as you recall, on the recommendation of Tom Masterson of Underwood and Neuhaus, the City's financial advisor, Council delayed the bond sale because of the legislation that had been introduced in Washington regarding tax exempt housing bonds. Mr. Lanham explained that there was an improvement in the market immediately after that legislation was introduced. Mr. Masterson has recommended to the Administration that the City schedule a bond sale for May 24, 1979 at 6:30 p.m. Mr. Lanham briefed Council on the recent trip to New York to meet with the bond rating firms. The rating firms were provided with a great deal of information about the economy of the area and about the City's finances. The Administration has been notified by Standard and Poors that the City's rating will remain A -plus. The Administration has not heard from Moody's but will hear from them before the bond sale. Mr. Lanham suggested that possibly after the completion of the City's re- appraisal program, the City should try very hard to get a Double A rating. Mr. Lanham further commented that in the meantime, the Administration is going to send some additional information. The rating firm expressed concern that the re- appraisal program is in progress but it is not a reality. The Administration recommended that the Council schedule a bond sale for the next meeting on May 24. Councilman Philips moved that the bond sale be con- ducted on May 24, 1979; Councilwoman Caffey seconded the motion. The vote follows: 90510 -5 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Kloesel, Caffey and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Resolution No. 672 - Authorizing Pre - Application for Federal Assistance for Municipal Airport Council received a copy of the pre - application for land acquisition and development of a Baytown municipal airport in their packet. A formal application will be submiLted at a later date. A revised pre - application was placed at the Council table, due to an error in the engineering fee on the original. The original form indicated an engineering fee of $284,300, which was in error because land and relocation of utility lines were included. The corrected pre - application indicates an engineering fee of $186,200 which is based on actual construction in connection with this project. On federally funded projects such as this, it is no longer permissable to have an engineering fee based on a percentage of construction costs. It must be a lump sum agreement. There is another item on the agenda which would approve a contract with Busch, Hutchison an' Associat--s for this amount for the preparation of tho plans. In addition to that, there would be surveying costs and resident represen- tative or inspection costs. Mr. Lanham stressed that this is a pre - application. The Administration will come back to Council at a later date with a revised application. The Administration recommended approval of Resolution No. 672. Mr. Lanham commented that Council has received a copy of a document which shows the items for which federal funds would be available and then there is a number of non - eligible items that would not be matched with federal funds. Mr. Lanham suggested that a number of those items, such as the additional parking, could be reduced to 30 spaces which would give a total of 60 spaces. The Administration recom- mended that the ramps and the T- hangers be deleted from the list. If those things are deleted, then the non - eligible items will total $302,440. The City's share for the eli- gible items would be $862,420. When those two totals are added, the City's share represents approximately $1,165,000, which does not include what would be paid to the Humphreys. Councilman Kloesel felt that the citizens should approve the expenditures for an airport prior to applying for funds. Mr. Lanham explained that there will be no expenditure of funds in making this pre - application. No funds will be expended until an election is held and grant funds are received. The proposed engineering contract provides that work on the plans will not begin until there is an election. The City is not paying for the work that the engineers are doing on this because it is included in the $50,000 fee. In response to a question from Councilman Cannon, Scott Bounds, City Attorney, explained that under the Surveying Contract, Section III, Authorization of Services, "execution of this agreement by the authorized representative of the owner shall constitute authority for the engineer to commence work on the project; provided, however, that the engineer shall not commence the work defined by Section II, para- graphs C and D, until the project is financed by a bond election." The purchase of Humphrey Airport is not included in the pre - application because no federal funding is available for this purpose. FAA has stated that there would be problems associated with the operation of Humphrey Airport and a municipal airport, and has recommended that Humphrey Airport 90510 -6 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 be abandoned as an airport should a municipal airport become a reality. In response to a question from Councilman Kloesel, Mr. Lanham explained that this information plus the appraisal that the City will get on the Humphrey property, will give the City the figure that is needed for a bond election. Councilman Philips commented that another bond election is being considered for the near future, and he inquired if perhaps the City could be putting either one or both in jeopardy. Councilman Kloesel felt that both issues should be placed on the same ballot at the same time. Councilman Philips felt that this might be the best approach. Mr. Lanham commented that legally the elections can be held at the same time or separately. Councilman Johnson moved for adoption of Resolution No. 672; Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. Councilman Kloesel commented that the voters of Baytown should be presented an opportunity to decide whether they want an airport but he is not convinced that the City should make an application before the voters made a decision. Mayor Hutto commented that the City must meet certain guide- lines when applying for federal funds. One of the guidelines in this case is that the City get this pre - application into the FAA to determine the amount of money that will be presented to the citizens in the bond election. Twenty percent of the cost plus the non - eligible items will be the amount that needs to be placed on the ballot. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members and Cannon Mayor Hutto Philips, Johnson, Caffey, Nays: Councilman Kloesel RESOLUTION NO. 672 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PREAPPLICATION FOR FEDERAL ASSIS- TANCE FOR THE BAYTOWN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. Resolution No. 673 - Certifying the City's Intent to Comply with Requirements of the Uniform Relocation Act of 1970 One of the requirements for seeking federal funds for land acquisition is certification of intent to comply with the Uniform Relocation Act of 1970. The proposed resolution certifies that it is the City's intent to comply with the Uniform Relocation Act in the acquisition of land for the proposed municipal airport. The Administration recommended approval of Resolution No. 673. Councilman Philips moved for adoption of Resolution No. 673; Councilwoman Caffey seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Caffey and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: Councilman Kloesel RESOLUTION NO. 673 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING COMPLIANCE WITH THE UNIFORM RELO- CATION ASSISTANCE WITH REAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION POLICIES ACT OF 1970. 90510 -7 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 Ordinance - Authorizing the City to Enter into an Agreement for Engineering Services for the Proposed Municipal Airport This contract is different from most engineering contracts that the City has had through the years in that it is based on a lump sum payment for the preparation of plans and specifications as opposed to a percentage of the cost. This is a requirement of the FAA. This contract provides for a lump sum fee for engineering services in the amount of $186,200 and this amount is based on the estimated construc- tion cost and does not include land or relocating utility lines. The lump sum amount is based on the recommended percentage set forth in the Texas Society Professional Engineers ;.Manual of Rates to be Charged for this type of work. The Administration felt that this is consistent with past practices with the exception that it is a lump sum amount. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Johnson moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Philips seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Caffey and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: Councilman Kloesel ORDINANCE NO. 2659 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST TO AN AGREEMENT WITH BUSCH, HUTCHISON & ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES. Ordinance - Amending the Aircraft and Airports Code to Allow Helicopters to Land at Locations other than Established Airfields The proposed ordinance would delete the word helicopter from the definition of aircraft. According to the City's Code of Ordinances, aircraft must land at a designated airport or heliport. This would exempt helicopters from that requirement. ;Mr. Lanham explained that helicopters are being used mcre and more by construction contractors to travel to different construction sites. The Administration saw no reason to regulate helicopters and recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Kloesel expressed concern that if not regulated, helicopters might be landed where crowds of people congregate which would present safety hazards. He felt that there is a need for medical helicopters to land within the City and there is also a need for public service helicopters. However, he felt that the policy should be firm as to where these helicopters are permitted to land. Councilman Johnson said that he would have no objection to the Administration authorizing contractors to land at construction sites. Mr. Lanham explained that the Admin- istration would need some guidance from Council in this regard. At present, if an organization contracts the use of a helicopter, all responsibility rests with that organi- zation and the pilot. However, if the City were to estab- lish a policy of permitting helicopters, the responsibility would rest with the City. The item died for lack of motion. Ordinance - Authorizing an Agreement with the Texas Depart- ment of Community Affairs for Operation of the Youth Conservation Corps Program 90510 -8 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 For several years the City has participated in a Youth Conservation Corps program sponsored by the Texas Department of Community Affairs. This year the City would like to hire twenty young people and three supervisors to work in the YCC Program during the months of June and July. As part of this program, these employees would work on the installation of playground equipment at the W. L. Jenkins Park and construct picnic facilities at that park and other parks throughout the City. These employees would work 30 hours a week at minimum wage, and participate in 10 hours of environmental education at no salary. The total grant amount is $18,200. The City funds in the amount of $4,838 will be used to match the grant funds. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Kloesel moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Philips seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Kloesel, Caffey and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2660 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS WITH REGARD TO A YOUTH CONSERVATION CORPS PROGRAM AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Ordinance - Awarding the Bid for Reroofing of Roseland Park Pavilion Two bids were received for the reroofing of the Rose- land Park Pavilion. The bid tabulation is attached to the Minutes as Attachment "A." The low bid was submitted by Downing Roofing Company in the amount of $2,508. Revenue Sharing funds have been appropriated for parks improvements such as this. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Johnson moved for the adoption of the ordinance; Councilwoman Caffey seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Kloesel, Caffey and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2661 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING THE BID OF DOWNING ROOFING COMPANY FOR THE RE- ROOFING OF THE ROSELAND PARK PAVILION AND AUTHO- RIZING THE CONTRACTING OF INDEBTEDNESS BY THE CITY FOR THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED EIGHT AND N01100 ($2,508.00) DOLLARS WITH REGARD TO SUCH AGREEMENT. Ordinance - Amending Mechanical Code to Allow Renewal of Elapsed Licenses Without Examination Several meetings ago the City Council was presented with an ordinance which would change the City's Mechanical Code to allow air conditioning contractors and journeymen who have been licensed, but have allowed their licenses to expire to renew that license by paying a penalty and back fees if the license has expired within a two -year period. At that time, the City Council was concerned about the inconsistency between the proposed provision and the pro- vision in the Electrical Code which provides for a six -month 90510 -9 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 renewal with re- examination. At its April 25, 1979 meeting, the Mechanical Board again considered the question of renewal. The Board again recommended the two -year period for re- licensing without examination. As presently written, a problem exists for Mr. Jordan who has contacted many members of the Council. The amendment would solve that problem. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Mr. Bounds pointed out that previously the Mechanical Board had recommended that regardless of the time since the license elapsed that it could be renewed without exami- nation. Councilman Kloesel commented that his preference would be to restrict this elapsed time to six months. Councilwoman Caffey moved for adoption of the ordi- nance; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Kloesel, Caffey and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2662 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MECHANICAL CODE TO ALLOW RENEWAL OF ELAPSED LICENSES WITHOUT EXAMINATION; AND MAKING VARIOUS PROVISIONS RELATED THERETO. Resolution No. 674 - Authorizing Local Sponsorship of the Corps of Engineers, Baytown, Texas Project Council has received a copy of the proposed resolution which endorses the Corps of Engineers Plan as presented in the Design Memorandum, and authorizes the City to be local sponsor of the project. Mr. Lanham commented that there are some questions that the Administration has regarding that study that will be included in the letter that the Adminis- tration will write to the Corps of Engineers. Mr. Lanham commented that the Administration felt that there are some errors that need to be corrected but those errors do not have to do with the estimated cost of the project. The resolution provides that sponsorship is contingent upon voter approval. In the resolution, City Council sets forth its intention to furnish or cause to be furnished the following requirements of local cooperation: a) Share in the cost of the project in an amount equal to 20% of the final first cost ( that being the 20% of the cost of buying the property and the relocation expense); b) Hold and save the United States free from damages that may result from implementation and management of the project, not including damages due to the fault or negligence of the United States or its contractors; (Council has already passed a resolu- tion which included that and at that time the Administration told Council that that is a require- ment of the federal government.) c) Assume public ownership and management of the project lands, and costs of management, including policing, safeguarding of public health and safety, road maintenance, and regulation of the future uses of these lands as nature areas or for 90510 -10 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 passive uses consistent with the high potential for recurrent flooding and the flood damage pre- vention objectives of the project; d) At least annually inform affected interests regarding the limitations of the protection afforded by the project; and e) Enforce flood plain management regulations for the projected 100 -year flood plain to minimize future flood damages, consistent with regulations required for participations in the National Flood Insurance Program. (The City is a part of the National Flood Insurance Program and the City does enforce the Flood Management Regulations.) Mr. Lanham further commented that all of these condi- tions have been approved by Council on at least one occasion before. Councilman Cannon felt that under Section A wording should be added to restrict sponsorship to the city limits. Councilman Kloesel inquired if all individuals owning property in the designated area regardless of when the property was purchased would be included in the federal assistance? The plan provides that property will be appraised and payment will be made on that basis regardless of who owns the property. Councilman Johnson moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 674 with the inclusion of wording in Section A to designate within the city limits. Councilman Philips seconded the motion. Councilman Kloesel inquired if it would be possible for the property owners to share in the 20% funding to relieve the City of the responsibility. Mr. Lanham explained that all the federal documents indicate the local sponsor is to pay 2070 of the cost and the City of Baytown is the local sponsor. Also, there is no provision for owners to accept 20% less than what they would otherwise get. What the City is agreeing to do is to pay 20% of the first cost, whatever that total may be. Councilman Kloesel expressed concern that the City might not be able to afford the $7,000,000 plus. Mayor Hutto pointed out that the only alternatives are to par- ticipate in the evacuation efforts or maintain the area which will cost approximately the same amount over a period of 15 years and still have the problem. Councilman Kloesel took the position that if the bond issue failed, the area's population would decrease lessening the cost of maintenance. However, Councilman Philips felt that the area would be populated and would become a real slum area and thereby a serious problem for the entire community. Mr. Lanham pointed out that the entire community has contributed to the problem and the entire community will have to be part of the solution. Tax money will have to be used to rid the community of the problem. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Caffey and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: Councilman Kloesel RESOLUTION NO. 674 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING LOCAL SPONSORSHIP OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS' BAYTOWN, TEXAS PROJECT. 90510 -11 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 Resolution No. 675 - Regarding Proposed Legislation Con- cerning-Structure of Port Commission of the Port of Houston At the last Council meeting, Mayor Hutto requested that an item be placed on the agenda regarding proposed legis- lation concerning the structure of the Port Commission of the Houston Port Authority. The status of this legislation is that in the Senate, House Bill No. 2203 has been tagged by Senator Jones of Houston. There is no way of knowing whether the bill will be voted on, but at this point it would be appropriate for City Council of the City of Baytown to express their thoughts on this bill. The Administration recommended approval of the resolution which indicates that Baytown has vital interest in the makeup of the Port Commis- sion of the Houston Port Authority due to the high percent- age of tonnage shipped from the Baytown area and encourages the legislation to recognize and consider the interest that Baytown has in the membership of the Port Commission. The City Council is not suggesting how the Commission should be constituted but is suggesting that the interest of the Baytown area should be considered. Councilman Philips moved for adoption of Resolution No. 675; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. Councilman Kloesel commented that Baytown has a high percentage of tonnage but is lacking in public wharf facil- ities. All of the docking facilities in Baytown are pri- vately owned. He commented that his feeling about the Port Commission is that their biggest concern is attracting business to the public wharves. Councilman Philips mentioned that the City of Pasadena has no public wharf facilities, yet that city is attempting to appoint one member of the Port Commission. Councilman Kloesel further stated that he would like to have a voice on the Commission, but at the same time he did not want to limit Galena Park or Pasadena since he felt those cities have a more direct interest in the Port Com- mission than Baytown. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Caffey, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: Councilman Kloesel RESOLUTION NO. 675 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE INTEREST OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN IN THE MAKEUP OF THE PORT OF HOUSTON COMMISSION AND REQUESTING THE LEGISLATURE TO CONSIDER THIS INTEREST WHEN CONSIDERING ROUSE BILL NO. 2203. Resolution No. 676 - Supporting Harris County Bond Election Commissioners Court has requested Council support of the County Bond Election to be held on May 22. The bond issue includes, among other things, streets in the Baytown area - -Baker Road and North Main specifically. Also, included in the bond issue are funds for flood control improvements. Even though no designation has been made as to exactly where these funds will be expended, the Administration is confi- dent that some of the funds will be expended in the Baytown area. The Administration recommended approval of the reso- lution. Councilwoman Caffey moved for adoption of the reso- lution; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. Councilman Philips called attention to the fact that no increase in the present county tax rate will arise from the passage of the bond issue. The vote follows: 90510 -12 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 Ayes: Council members Philips, Kloesel, Johnson, Caffey and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None RESOLUTION NO. 676 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN ENDORSING ALL PROPOSITIONS FOR HARRIS COUNTY CAPITAL IAiPROVE- MENTS AND URGING ALL REGISTERED VOTERS IN HARRIS COUNTY TO VOTE IN THE MAY 22, 1979 BOND ELECTION. Report on Dirt Work at Jenkins- Hollaway Park The sand was scraped off the end field and the deter- mination was made that only two loads of dirt would be needed. The teams have been playing ball since that time with no difficulty. Discuss Paving of City -Held Property on North Main In October, the City Council received a letter from the Chamber of Commerce regarding the old Goldfield building that was located at the corner of North Main and Defee. At that time the Chamber was interested in having the building removed, which has been accomplished. The second request was for a public parking area which was supported by the Downtown Merchants Association. The Administration has acquired an estimate of approximately $10,000 to pave this lot. Approximately 22 cars could be parked in this area if paved. At one time the Traffic Committee was considering a recommendation that no parking be allowed on North Main in this area. The legal status of the property is that the property is now jointly held by the City and other taxing entities due to delinquent tax sale. The point was made that the City could lease the property for fair market value, but the property could not be sold because the landowner has the right to reacquire the property within two years of the tax sale by paying the delinquent taxes, plus a penalty. After the two -year waiting period, the City could then sell the property and issue clear title. Councilman Johnson inquired if representatives of the Chamber of Commerce or the Downtown Merchants Association had been told of the two -year waiting period and the fact that any improvements made, would become the property of the owner upon his reacquiring the property. Council favored the Administration discussing the possibility of a lease agreement with the understanding that those leasing the property would provide pavement. Consider Authorizing Appraisal Contract for Airport Property The Administration has requested that Dominy, Ford, McPhearson & Teel present fee proposals for appraisals of airport property which proposals follow: 1. To appraise improvements only, excluding real estate, the appraisal fee would be between $3,300 and $3,600. These improvements would include the hangers, offices, runways, taxiways, and other air improvements that are specifically suited to a fixed -based operation airfield. In addition, this would include an estimate of the value of the intangible air rights associated with the air field. Wk 90510 -13 Minutes of the Regular meeting - May 10, 1979 2. To appraise the real estate without any regard to improvement on the real estate, the appraisal fee would be $2,600. 3. If improvements, air rights and real estate were appraised, the appraisal fee would be between $4,000 and $4,300. The Administration recommended proceeding with the appraisals, but requested guidance from Council on what is to be appraised. Councilman Kloesel expressed the feeling that the entire package should be appraised, but Mayor Hutto pointed '^ out that the owners of the property had specifically expressed no interest in selling the real estate to the City of Baytown. Councilman Kloesel pointed out that if the City of Baytown expressed no interest in the purchase without the land, the owners may alter their position. Councilman Cannon pointed out that to have an appraisal of the entire package would place the City in a better bargaining position. Besides, if the owner refuses to sell the land, this would release Council from any obligation to purchase the property. Councilman Kloesel moved to authorize appraisal of improvements, air rights and real estate for an appraisal fee of $4,000 - $4,300. Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Kloesel, and Cannon Nays: Council members Johnson and Caffey Mayor Hutto Councilman Johnson moved to authorize the appraisal on improvements. Councilman Philips seconded the motion. Councilman Kloesel strongly opposed this position because this would leave the City with the alternative of purchasing air space and hangers and leaving the land. His contention was that the air space would be of no value to the City. Councilman Cannon felt that to purchase the improvements without the land would be only an exercise in goodwill with very little return on the City's money. To appraise the land would provide more opportunity for return on the investment. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson and Philips Mayor Hutto Nays: Council members Kloesel and Cannon Abstained: Councilwoman Caffey Ordinance - Amending the Wrecker Ordinance Pertaining to Wrecker Fees The present wrecker ordinance contains no definition of heavy -duty wreckers or specific fee schedule for heavy -duty wreckers. Therefore, in order to tow from the scene of an accident, the only allowable charge by ordinance is that listed for normal tows. The wrecker operators have advised the Administration that this is no longer feasible. Mr. Lanham concurred that it is not reasonable to tow a tank truck from the scene of an accident for the same charge assessed to tow a regular sized vehicle. The ordinance that was recommended a few weeks ago by the Wrecker Committee included a separate charge for heavy -duty wreckers. The Administration recommended that only that portion of that ordinance be approved, that is the portion that would set 90510 -14 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 fees and define heavy -duty wrecker. The proposed ordinance provides that a fee for use of a heavy -duty wrecker shall not exceed $30 per hour, provided however, that a minimum fee of $60 may be charged. A heavy -duty wrecker is defined as an auto wrecker with a manufacturer's carrying capacity certificate of no less than 5,000 pounds. All of such vehicles shall be equipped with a wench capable of lifting a minimum of 30,000 pounds. Any such wrecker shall addi- tionally be equipped with a wrecker boom, capable of being used for lifting vehicles, truck trailer or equipment, air brakes and air lines, and must also have a tow bar suffi- cient to prevent the swinging of any equipment being trans- ported by such wrecker. The Wrecker Committee felt this to be a reasonable charge. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Johnson commented that he agrees with Mr. Lanham that $27.50 is not a worthwhile charge for lifting a tank truck. Councilman Johnson moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Kloesel seconded the motion. Councilman Cannon inquired if there is really a need for the City to regulate heavy -duty wreckers? Mr. Lanham commented that that is something that might be considered, although he felt there is as much justification for regu- lating heavy -duty wreckers on a rotation basis as there is to regulate the regular wrecker service. Mr. Lanham explained that the only reason the City regulates the regular wrecker service is that the wreckers are being called out by the City government, and one of the City's interests is to have disabled vehicles removed from the streets quickly as possible. The wrecker owners who were present felt that the fee for heavy -duty wrecker service should not be regulated, but had no problem with the Police Department dispatching heavy - duty calls for clearing the scene of an accident. Based on this information, Councilmen Johnson and Kloesel withdrew their motion and second. Councilman Johnson moved that the City of Baytown deregulate the heavy -duty wreckers; Councilman Kloesel seconded the motion. The City Attorney explained that the change could be made but it must be in writing. Councilman Philips suggested that the ordinance be amended to state that the heavy -duty wrecker rates are not subject to regulation under this ordinance. Councilman Kloesel withdrew his second to Councilman Johnson's motion. Mr. Lanham stated that the definition of a heavy -duty wrecker should be left in the ordinance so that there would be no misunderstanding about that, and the charge portion of the ordinance could be deleted. Mr. Lanham inquired if private or towing vehicles would be permitted to tow from the scene of an accident, if this ordinance were adopted? Councilman Philips responded that he felt that the private wrecker should not be allowed to come to the scene of an accident. This will afford the local wrecker operators some protection and maintain police control over the matter. Councilman Philips moved that the current wrecker ordinance be amended to state that heavy -duty wrecker rates shall not be subject to regulation under this ordinance; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: 90510 -15 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Kloesel, Caffey and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2663 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6, "AUTO WRECKERS AND TOWING VEHICLES," OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN TO PROVIDE FEES FOR USE OF HEAVY DUTY WRECKERS; MAKING VARIOUS OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED THERETO. Consider Appointments to the Wrecker Committee Councilwoman Caffey commented that she would like to recommend that the Council consider changing the structure of this existing wrecker ordinance and have it changed to a citizens committee rather than the way it is structured now. She further commented that she feels very strongly about Council members serving on committees and commissions and felt that it is not right for Council to be a voting part of a committee or commission where they make policy and vote again at the Council table. She felt that Council members could sit on a committee as an ex- officio member and give input but not vote. She further commented that she had asked the City Attorney to draft a rough draft of an amend- ment relating to the structure of the committee which would read as follows: "That the term as used in this chapter shall mean the auto wrecker committee and the committee shall be composed of the following persons: Chief of Police Auto Wrecker Permit Holder Three other citizens not in the auto wrecker business." Councilwoman Caffey recommended that Council look at the proposed amendment and requested that an item be placed on the next agenda in this regard. Councilman Cannon stated that since this item will be placed on next agenda, he would like to have an item on the agenda to discuss the structure of committees in general. He commented that he has some concern about City Council members sitting on permanent committees. He felt that all Council members should be removed from standing committees. Consider Appointments to Plumbing Appeals and Advisory Board This item will be discussed during executive session. Consider Appointments to Board of Adjustments and Appeals (Building Code) This item will be discussed during executive session. Ordinance - Appointing the Board of Equalization and Establishing the Time and Date of the First Meeting This item will be discussed during executive session. Committee Reports None. Recess and Adjourn Mayor Hutto recessed the open meeting into executive 90510 -16 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 10, 1979 session to discuss possible litigation and personnel matters. When the open meeting reconvened, Mayor Hutto announced that no business was transacted. With no further business to be transacted, Mayor Hutto adjourned the meeting. 1-1� 00� Qrtntj Karen Petru, Deputy City Clerk APPROVED: Eileen P. Hall, City Clerk Attachment "A" D a) y m�r M t m w i V � O <O O -n lD O N W rn O D cr z v n 'II C 0 z n D� Co C � rD O 4 v n � - o rn N 3 � C) M W o r o c rn o =i -^ m .. z o cn N --i m 0 � J rn o +� •• �yU) 0 > M80 :0 < r z 0 0 -? z �Z <' V mo N � O O Z z Oo O a) o 1'h O O � O O b Z W K EA 3 m •tom 0, to N �n v v U1 Un ol m °¢ m o 2 Cl o a o O� om z -i N c Z x z 0 m 0 c z =� X i LD M nz 0 nt 0 c z n-4] rn x y Z 0 m 0 Attachment "A" D a) y m�r M t m w i V � O <O O -n lD O N W rn O D cr z v n 'II C 0 z n D� Co C � rD O