1980 09 11 CC Minutes, SpecialWi
00911 -1a
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN
September 11, 1980
The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in
special session on Thursday, September 11, 1980, at 5:30 p.m.
in the Council Chamber of the Baytown City Hall with the fol-
lowing members in attendance:
Fred T. Philips
Jimmy Johnson
Perry M. Simmons
Mary E. Wilbanks
Eileen Caffey
Allen Cannon
Emmett O. Hutto
Fritz Lanham
Dan Savage
Randy Strong
Eileen P. Hall
Councilman
Councilman
Councilman
Councilwoman
Councilwoman
Councilman
Mayor
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hutto.
Hold Public Hearing on Proposed Tax Rate
Mayor Hutto opened the public hearing and requested that
all persons desiring to speak sign the register provided in the
hallway. Mayor Hutto explained that the public hearing is being
conducted in accordance with 7244c, Civil Statutes of Texas which
requires that the tax assessor - collector according to a formula
set forth by law calculate the tax rate and if the governing body
desires to implement a tax rate which exceeds the tax assessor -
collector's rate by three (3 %), a hearing must be held. The tax
assessor - collector's rate is determined by calculating the revenues
necessary to pay bonded indebtedness and adding to that the same
operating and maintenance cost needed to operate the city during
the last year. This figure does not include increases in operating
costs or salaries or additional services, etc. The proposed tax
rate that Council is considering is $1.35 or $.09 less than the
tax rate last year. This is possible because of the revaluation
of all properties within the city to 1977 values which resulted
in an increase in the total value of properties on city's tax roll.
Even though the proposed rate is lower than last year's rate, the
hearing must be held because the proposed rate is more than three
(30) percent higher than the rate determined by the tax assessor -
collector, operating according to the statute. Notice of this
hearing has been published in the manner required by the statute.
Both proponents and opponents of the tax rate will be given an
opportunity to present their views. However, the proposed tax
rate is the only subject to be discussed at the hearing. Dis-
cussion of another subject will cause that speaker to be declared
out of order. Listed below are the persons who made presentations:
Ken Yaw, 5007 Glen Haven - Mr. Yaw stated that some of the
articles that had appeared in the paper had been a bit confusing;
therefore, he would like to clarify some points. Mayor Hutto in
response to a question from Mr. Yaw responded that the increase
percentage difference between $1.13 versus $1.35 is approximately
twenty (20 %). Mr. Lanham explained that the big increase in the
budget is in the water and sewer fund because of conversion to
surface water. Tax revenue goes to the general fund which finances
those functions other than water and sewer. Mr. Yaw's response
was that he had noticed where the city planned to increase water
and sewer rates to make those functions self sufficient. Therefore,
00911 -2a
Minutes of the Special Meeting - September 11, 1980
he could not understand the justification that that enters into
increased budget. Mr. Yaw stated that he is one of the unfor-
tunate persons who will be facing a 250% increase in taxes, rather
than a 6 -7% decrease in taxes. Mr. Yaw stated that he did not
protest that increase because he felt that that was a problem
that had developed over the years, but he did have alot of faith
in the elected representatives to take that into account when
establishing the tax rate to provide an overall tax decrease.
Mr. Yaw stated that he is employed in industry and his income
has not increased at the rate of 20 -30% a year. Mr. Yaw ended
his presentation by stating that he felt that Council should
consider in these inflationary times and in times when the economy
is in such severe trouble that we ought not to pad the budget in
any more ways than necessary to provide the services necessary
to maintain the community.
Jack Henderson, 1908 Oak Shadows - Mr. Henderson stated
that he is a member of the Baytown Taxpayers' Association and
was present to speak on behalf of Lamar Kelley, President of
that association. Mr. Henderson read the following statement:
"To avoid possible misquotations, I will read a prepared
statement that I wrote this morning.
Baytown Taxpayers' Association would like to see a tax
rata set somewhat below the $1.35 that has been proposed
by the City Council.
It is our understanding that the various departments
presented their budget requests and that these requests
were accepted pretty much without question. In addition,
we understand that some additional funds became available
unexpectedly and that very quickly some Administration
people began a search for ways in which to spend this money.
It is not the purpose of the Baytown Taxpayers' Association
to hamstring Council but we feel the budget can be materially
reduced without denying the City anything that it really needs.
We are opposed to following the well publicized Federal prac-
tice of spending all funds possible so as to justify increased
allocations next year. We are also opposed to spending tax
funds for embellishments that do not contribute to the
efficient and responsible performance of required City services.
We, therefore ask for an opportunity for representatives of
the Baytown Taxpayers' Association to go over the budget,
item by item, with Council or its representatives to
determine whether there may be items that the efficient
management of the City's affairs does not require. Thank
you."
T. E. Cook, 5002 Ashwood - Mr. Cook stated that he had
attended the hearing to obtain additional information. He inquired
how much additional revenue would the $1.35 rate bring in? He
also commented that most of the citizens who are interested in
the future of Baytown are interested in Baytown progressing in
many ways, but at the same time, he felt that at this time, Council
should look very closely at added expenditures and try to keep
these as low as possible, consistent with good services for the
citizens. Mr. Lanham responded that the $1.35 rate would provide
approximately $1,860,000 over and above this year's tax revenue.
Mr. Cook commented that it seemed difficult to hold a proposed
tax rate hearing for the public when the public has no idea.
what is projected in the proposed budget; therefore, he felt
that the meeting time is rather inappropriate. In summary, Mr.
Cook stated that he would like to see the city maintain a "bare -
bones" type budget, consistent with giving good services to the
citizens of Baytown.
00911 -3a
Minutes of the Special Meeting - September 11, 1980
Ewell Brigham, 4209 Summer Lane - In response to questions
from Mr. Brigham, Mr. Lanham explained that the city budget had
not been adopted by City Council, but there would be an item on
the Council agenda for September 25 in that regard. Also, Mr.
Lanham explained that the last pay raise granted City employees
was October, 1979, and the pay raise being proposed would be for
October since the city's fiscal year is October through September
30.
Mr. Brigham inquired of Councilman Simmons how much of a
decrease in the proposed tax rate does he feel appropriate after
reviewing the budget? Mr. Simmons responded that he was thinking
in terms of $.05 to $.08 reduction, and to accomplish that he
would prefer that a majority of the Council vote to direct the
City Manager as to "x" number of cents desired to be eliminated
from the tax rate and allow the City Manager to effect those
economies and make recommendations to Council for approval.
In response to Mr. Brigham's question as to how much does
a cent in the tax rate bring in, Mayor Hutto responded approxi-
mately $63,000. Mr. Brigham responded, so if one is talking
about a $.05 reduction, then what your talking about is roughly
$300,000. The Mayor responded in the affirmative.
Mr. Brigham stated that he had come to the hearing with a
proposal fir Council's consideration. The proposal being that
a nickel can be deducted from the proposed tax rate if approxi-
mately $300,000 in revenue sharing funds are applied to the budget
capital items and if the pay raises for city employees are deferred
for one month. By doing that a nickel can be deducted from the
proposed tax rate with no cut in departmental budgets. However,
by cutting in other areas and reducing the budget by lo, that
would provide another $200,000 deduction which would bring Council
to fir. Simmons suggested $.08 tax decrease. Mr. Brigham also
recommended a reorganization of city departments be considered
to arrive at additional efficiency in the government.
H. H. Bridges, 5709 Bayway Drive - Mr. Bridges had signed
the register to speak, but declined since the budget had not
been finally adopted.
Mayor Hutto stated that on behalf of himself and City Council,
he wished to extend appreciation to the citizens who attended the
public hearing, as well as those who made comments. Mayor Hutto
explained that he had been on Council since 1975 and he had never
served with a group who was more mindful of the tax burden than
the group now serving on Council. Mayor Hutto stated that all
those who made presentations made good points, but there is a
difference in implementing some of the proposals from the citizen's
point of view and being a member of the governing body responsible
for implementing the various suggestions. Mayor Hutto reminded
those present that when the vote was taken on the proposed rate,
all Council members expressed the feeling that the proposed rate
would be the maximum. The entire Council hopes to be able to put
into effect a substantial cut in the tax rate. Mayor Hutto
emphasized that the Council could not promise anything at this
point.
Mayor Hutto announced that the City Council will vote on the
tax rate during the City Council meeting to be held on September 25,
1980, beginning at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Baytown
City Hall.
Councilman Simmons requested that he be permitted to read into
the record of the hearing a letter from Mr. Hobart W. Enoch, former
tax assessor collector for the Goose Creek Independent School
District. The letter is attached as Exhibit "A."
00911 -4a
Minutes of the Special Meeting - September 11, 1980
Mayor Hutto again announced that the City Council will
vote on the tax rate during the City Council meeting to be
held September 25, 1980, beginning at 6:50 p.m. in the Council
Chamber of the Baytown City Hall. Afterwhich, Mayor Hutto
declared the public hearing closed.
Eileen P. Hall, City Clerk
W
Mr. Perry Simmons
Councilman
District 1
Baytown, Texas
Dear Perry:
EXHIBIT "A."
September 10, 1980
I was happy to see the recent stand you took on the tax rate reduction
for the proposed rate for the new budget. There are some basic questions
which I think each councilman should take into consideration.
As a retired Tax Assessor - Collector with 26 years of experience I see
some very dark clouds forming with the Peveto bill that will soon create
some burdensome taxation on all taxpayers and will soon force some long
time residents of this area to find some area with a cheaper tax burden.
I am sure this is not the intent of any councilman or city employee to
bring this about.
As a typical example, my tax bill on valuation was increased by 100%
and if the present tax rate is decreased by only $0.09 per 100 valuation,
I an in for a sizable increase in op cash outflow. At present I am granted
an exemption, but in 1981 when the Peveto bill takes effect and all values
are increased to 100% if the exemption is not increased then I will receive
�. another large increase unless the rates are decreased to about $0.65 per
100 valuation. If the council cannot see a greater decrease than the
proposed $0.09, then I have s0' doubts that they will see fit to reduce
them 50% in the future.
I am told in a recent newspaper article that I am facing water bill
increases of about 100$ or more for which I will not receive any increased
services or increased amount of water that I will be able to consume. I
wonder where the inflationary spiral will cease.
If this were the only taxing institutions that I would receive an increase
from I might be able to bear the load, but others have already given there
indication of proposed increases. When these are added to utility increases
it seems the only person who is forced to pull Ln his belt is the poor
taxpayer and consumer.
For the person who is on the limited income I am sure at times they
almost feel like throwing in the towel and giving up. Somewhere someone
is going to have to find where govermental agencies can out their wants
and consider basic needs as the citizens is having to do in his budget
at home.
I only hope the council will take a very close look at the budget and
fight to protect the local taxpayer in his constant fight to survive.
fOBAART
3
* in�H
403 Woodcrest
opk Baytown, Texas 77521
I
' j i r
, • r 'f 'fir ..
�� :�" - ,,� .:r; (, �, .. . }f�', ,. ,, i . Vic:• ,
` a i -an i^ 1_ t 07.
l
.1•..x).1 ...I OJ: . 'f . .'! 01?; 'lrr fol nor:!" onto
-f 01 loci Sin : ^^j;'7m .f., P1 no UN SW ')i -00 )__. -
Omar W .,. np .
M'-
...�. • ny on: ni � .: NO ` . .. Won n of . '? — .(._ `• _- a K ...
vv-p-q . •- 'my . orM InCTIOWN 7_ . ' . CYO-d Ole— ON .-
k -VIA And 00 f ! A& T.
... .. .w3v o
pi'."'ar. ...,'"f.r ! ..nr O;': :C' .:C .... r.L'.
.r �',I, .. ...1 ...:j�� ':..1• "F1' .. C7._ :�f !;':�' ... .., :('(J��:: ,fi :�•I1J ::.1 . .- -: :7 •r
a inarar ON Syr or
am
00911 -1
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN
September 11, 1980
The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in
regular session on Thursday, September 11, 1980, at 6:30 p.m.
in the Council Chamber of the Baytown City Hall with the fol-
lowing members in attendance:
Fred T. Philips
Jimmy Johnson
Perry M. Simmons
Mary E. Wilbanks
Eileen Caffey
Allen Cannon
Emmett 0. Hutto
Fritz Lanham
Dan Savage
Randy Strong
Eileen P. Hall
Councilman
Councilman
Councilman
Councilwoman
Councilwoman
Councilman
Mayor
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hutto and the
invocation was offered by Councilman Cannon.
Minutes
Councilman Philips moved to approve the minutes of the
meetings of August 26, 1980 and September 2, 1980; Councilman
Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows:
Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks,
Caffey and Cannon
Mayor Hutto
Nays: None
Receive Petitions
None.
City Manager's Report
Water Consumption - As a result of recent rains, water
consumption has decreased. Presently, the average is between
9- 10,000,000 gallons per day. Available pumpage is somewhere
between 10- 11,000,000. Therefore, the Administration recommended
that the watering restrictions be altered so that citizens may
water from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. according to the restrictions
provided in the ordinance. The city will continue to utilize water
from the Exxon well, although pumpage from that well has been
reduced. According to the ordinance, Mayor Hutto has the authority
to effect his change and since Council concurred with the Adminis-
tration's recommendation, Mayor Hutto authorized the change in hours
for watering as recommended by the Administration.
Drainage - Work in Parkridge Bend has been completed; work on
Airhart Drive is approximately 80% complete; work near Carver -Jones
School has been completed.
00911 -2
Minutes of the Regular Meeting - September 11, 1980
Harris County Flood Control District - The cleaning of Goose
Greek Stream north of Baker Road has been completed up to Inter-
state 10. The flood control crews are preceding northward of
Interstate 10 and highway crews have cleaned under Interstate 10
which should give some relief to the residents of McNair who have
appeared before Council in the past.
Councilman Philips mentioned that in the Goose Creek Stream
work, the county has left an unsightly area on Baker Road at the
creek on the north side. He requested that the Administration
contact the county in this regard.
Park Street - The contractor is 95% complete on the storm
sewer work and 95% complete on the concrete work on the south
side. Box inlets have been poured on the south side. The
existing traffic is scheduled to be shifted to the new concrete
pavement early next week so that work can begin on the north side.
In response to questions from Council, the Administration
was unaware of the expected completion date of this project,
but a report will be given at the next Council meeting.
Councilman Johnson inquired if Council would be in a position
to reject a bidder if that bidder had not performed satisfactorily
on a city contract. Randy Strong, City Attorney, stated that
generally speaking Council is obligated to accept the lowest and
best bid; therefore, if Council should determine that a bidder
is not the lowest and best bidder, Council would be under no
obligation to accept that bidder.
Mayor Hutto stated that he felt that the proper approach
to the problem would be for the City of Baytown to establish more
realistic time frame for completion of whatever project is being
bid and the Administration should be charged with the responsi-
bility of making certain that the contractor is on the job and
performing during that period.
East District - The contractor has completed most of the
eight -inch gravity sewer line along Raccoon from Cary's Bayou
south to the end of the line on that street. Most of the eight -
inch line on Knight Lane has been completed and the contractor
is beginning to install the twenty -four inch line on Cary's
Bayou near Raccoon, as well as the ten -inch line on Savell.
The well point system along East Baker Road has been set up.
The contractor is also forming the walls of the lift station
which is located in Jenkins Park near Raccoon.
Water Line to Gentry School - This lint was completed and
tested and placed in service on the Saturday before school began.
Mr. Lanham commended the city staff that worked many hours during
the weekend to put that line in service.
Community Development Program - Seventy -five percent of the
sidewalk has been poured; the contractor is setting the form for
the street and the total project is approximately 40% complete. ,.
1980 Street Improvement Program - All of the work with the
exception of general cleanup has been completed.
Sliplining - All the liner has been installed and the service
connections have been made. Cleanup work remains to be completed.
Texas Municipal League Regional Organization and Harris County
Mayors and Councilmen's Association - Mr. Lanham made reference
to these two upcoming meetings.
00911 -3
Minutes of the Regular Meeting - September 11, 1980
Work Session - Council set a work session to discuss the
1980 -81 City of Baytown Budget for 5:30 p.m., Monday, September 15,
1980.
Questions and Comments Regarding City Manager's Report
Councilman Johnson mentioned that he had visited with the
Consulting Engineers on the Kilgore Road /Ward Road Drainage Project
who had recommended that the city work with the county while the
county is in the area to get the county to install one or two
additional pipes underneath the lower bridge which is near the
bayou on Kilgore. Also, at 1903 Clayton, the owner of that
property is having difficulty with dirt disappearing in an area
where the city performed some sliplining work. At the inter-
section of Clayton and Ivie Lee, there is a tree which is
covering the street light.
Jean Shepherd inquired if there would be an additional
waiting period before the new hours for watering would become
effective? Randy Strong, City Attorney, responded that there
would be no waiting period.
Councilman Philips expressed concern that the highway
construction on Loop 330 and Loop 201 has the left turn from
Decker to Airhart blocked off. The traffic is being routed to
the traffic light. Councilman Philips stated that he would like
to check with the highway department to make certain that this
is not a situation that will be practiced until the interchange
is completed. Mr. Lanham stated that the Administration would
bring those plans back to Council for review.
Mayor Hutto commended the police department for the apparent
professionalism which is practiced by the personnel in that
department as evidenced by the letters which citizens have
written thanking the department for their courteousy and pro-
fessional behavior.
Ordinance - First Reading on Proposed Annexation of 163 Acres
More or Less Located North of Massey Tompkins Road between
North Main Street and the Subdivisions of Chaparral Village
and C. A. Wright
A public hearing was held on this proposed annexation
at the August 26, 1980, Council meeting with no opposition
being expressed. The Planning Commission took action on a
portion of this proposed annexation, Briarcreek Subdivision;
however, the City Attorney has ruled that action to be invalid
since there were five abstentions with two members voting approval.
Therefore, the Planning Commission will need to reconsider the
plat for this subdivision. Council may desire to continue with
the annexation on first reading since there must be second and
final reading before the annexation procedure is final.
Councilman Philips moved for the adoption of the ordinance
on first reading; Councilwoman Caffey seconded the motion. The
vote follows:
Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks,
Caffey and Cannon
Mayor Hutto
Nays: None
00911 -4
Minutes of the Regular Meeting - September 11, 1980
ORDINANCE NO. 2964
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXTENSION OF CERTAIN
BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, AND THE
ANNEXATION OF 163 ACRES MORE OR LESS, LOCATED NORTH OF
MASSEY TOMPKINS ROAD BETWEEN NORTH MAIN STREET AND THE
SUBDIVISIONS OF CHAPARRAL VILLAGE AND C. A. WRIGHT,
WHICH SAID TERRITORY LIES ADJACENT TO AND ADJOINS THE
PRESENT BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS.
Proposed Resolution - Establishing Rules of Procedure for Conduct
of Council Meetings
Members of City Council have requested that the Administration
gather information from other cities and develop rules of procedure
for conduct of Council meetings. The Administration, in compliance
with that request, has developed the proposed resolution for Council
consideration. After some discussion, Council determined that the
best procedure would be for Council to review the resolution, noting
changes.
Council made no changes under Section 1, Subsections a, b, c
and d. Under Subsection e, Council requested that this section
be modified to delete the last sentence, "No member shall address
the Council until after being recognized by the Chair." Also,
Council requested that the wording, "personal references to Coun-
cil members," be clarified so that it is clear that one Council
member may refer to another Council member with regard to business
that has come before the Council. Council made no changes in
Subsections f and g.
Council approved the provisions of Section 2, Subsections a,
c, d and e. However, Council requested that under Subsection b,
the wording, "and unless further time is granted by a majority
vote of the Council, shall limit his remarks to five (5) minutes,"
be deleted. Also, Council requested that Subsection f be deleted.
Subsection f provided that all persons shall refrain from smoking
while in the Council Chamber.
Council approved Section 3 which listed the order of the agenda,
with the exception under Item No. 8, Council requested that the
wording, "A time limit of five (5) minutes shall be imposed unless
further time is granted by a majority vote of the Council," be
deleted.
Councilwoman Wilbanks stated that she was uncertain that
Council had been using the motion to table in the correct manner
and requested that the Administration check into the proper pro-
cedure for tabling. Mr. Lanham stated that he believed that
Roberts Rules of Order would set forth a procedure for tabling.
Councilwoman Wilbanks responded that if Council clarified its
use of the various motions, the problem may be solved.
Council concurred that there should be a provision in the
resolution that the City Clerk announce the vote. Also, Council
requested that the Administration check Roberts Rules of Order to
determine if it is necessary to have a motion and second to adjourn
a meeting.
The Administration will incorporate these changes and place
an item on the agenda in this regard.
00911 -5
Minutes of the Regular Meeting - September 11, 1980
Ordinance - Awarding Bid for City_ Depository
The Administration advertised for bids for city depository
contract with one of the requirements being that the specific
rate is to be stated as specificed in the bid form and must be
equal to or above the rate for U. S. Treasury Bill. A lesser
rate shall be cause for rejections of bids. Only one bid was
received which was for a lesser rate than specified. In view of
this requirement, the Administration recommended that the city
readvertise and that the specifications be changed since it is
fairly obvious that the city will not get a rate above the
treasury bill. What the Administration suggested is that the
city rebid and that the rate be tied to the treasury bill rate,
but allow bidders to bid either above or below. This way all
bidders will be on the same basis. The one bid received is
from the city's present depository, Texas National Bank. The
bid of Texas National Bank is .9867 or almost 1% below the
treasury bill.
On the basis of the explanation, Councilman Philips moved
to reject the bid and readvertise as the Administration had
suggested.
Craig Wooten, Executive Vice President of Texas National
Bank, was recognized by Mayor Hutto. Mr. Wooten took exception
to Paragraph No. 11 which provides that the city may terminate
the contract, along with the option of withdrawing time deposits,
including principal and accrued interest, or in the alternative,
to allow said funds to remain on deposit until maturity. He
felt that this provision was slanted in favor of the city. Mr.
Wooten expressed the feeling that the contract should be mutually
beneficial to both parties.
The City Attorney explained that this was not an "open -
ended" provision to allow the city to terminate the contract at
any time. There must be a breach of the contract on the part of
the bank before this provision would ever apply.
Mr. Wooten responded that the bank's attorney had reviewed
the contract and felt that the provision did afford the city pro-
tection, but afforded the bank no protection.
Mr. Wooten felt that the specifications stated that to bid
a lesser rate than the treasury bill shall be cause for rejection
did not imply that to bid a lesser rate would mean automatic
rejection. He felt that his bank had bid a fair bid where the bank
could make a profit. He explained that the money generated by the
city is not like normal CD money. The city's money is guaranteed
100 %, not only by the bank, but by government securities which
make it difficult to bid above these other bonds. With the rates
fluctuating like they do, it is very difficult for a bank to bid.
Mr. Wooten pointed out that his bank has submitted an alternate
bid and requested that Council consider that bid since the other
banks in town now have that bid to utilize as a guide should Coun-
cil reject the bid.
Councilman Johnson inquired if the other banks could have
bid as Texas National Bank did at a lower rate? The City Manager
responded that there would be no way to be certain, except that
the specifications do state, "specific rate is to be stated as
specified in the bid form and must be equal to or above the rate
per U. S. Treasury Bills. A lesser rate shall be cause for
rejection of the bid."
00911 -6
Minutes of the Regular Meeting - September 11, 1980
Councilman Philips stated that he felt that the city has
the option of purchasing a U. S. Treasury Bill at anytime, but
if the city desires the accomodation of a bank, then the city
must pay a toll; therefore, Councilman Philips proposed that
the city accept the bid. He felt that the bid was a good bid
that had been made in good faith. The bid does not tie the
city down to a loss, if the city desires to invest in a U. S.
Treasury Bill, it may do so. Councilman Philips moved to
accept the bid with the provision that the default clause be
clarified to say that there be no misunderstanding on either
party's part that that clause is not mutually beneficial.
The City Attorney stated that what he would propose is
a rewording of that last sentence to state clearly that the
city retains the option to terminate the contract after the
contract is breached, even though the city may elect to leave
the money in the depository after the breach.
Mayor Hutto asked Mr. Wooten if this would be agreeable
to his bank. Mr. Wooten responded in the affirmative.
Councilman Johnson seconded the motion.
Councilman Johnson inquired if this would be legal.
The City Attorney explained that what Council would be
doing is accepting a bid which does not meet specifications.
The question of legality goes back to other banks that may
have bidded had they known the city would have been willing
to accept a bid lower than the treasury bill rate. Those
banks may take some action on that basis. The City Attorney
stated that in his opinion the city would be exposing itself
to some liability.
On the advice of the City Attorney, Councilman Philips
withdrew the motion and Councilman Johnson withdrew the second.
Councilman Philips moved to reject the bid on the basis
that to accept the one bid is not considered legal.
Councilman Cannon inquired if this motion included re-
advertisement for bids?
Mayor Hutto inquired what length of time would the Ad-
ministration be talking about? Mr. Lanham responded that
probably the bids would be opened on September 24 which would
mean a tight schedule to change over to another depository if
another should be selected.
Councilwoman Wilbanks stated that in the past if a bid
did not meet specifications, no action was taken. The question
became moot; therefore, she was wondering if it would be necessary
to vote.
Mayor Hutto felt that the only reason to vote would be
that perhaps there would be a Council member who may want the
opportunity to vote against rejection of the bid. Mayor Hutto
stated that he would do whatever Council desired.
Councilman Philips then restated the motion that the single
bid be rejected on the basis that it did not meet specifications
and that in order to consider it would be illegal and therefore,
he moved to readvertise for bids and revise the specifications
to accept a figure less than the treasury bill rate. The motion
died for lack of second.
00911 -7
Minutes of the Regular Meeting - September 11, 1980
Mayor Hutto stated it appeared that Council would take no
action.
Mr. Lanham pointed out that Council had approved the bid
form and had authorized the Administration to advertise for bids;
therefore, the Administration would need some sort of instruction.
Mayor Hutto responded that personally he did not have the
expertise of the Administration in finance; therefore, he would
have to rely on the Finance Director's advise.
Mr. Lanham stated that he had been informed by the City
Attorney that the only reason that the specifications had been
presented to Council originally was due to the fact that such
a drastic change was being considered. The Administration can
make the necessary changes and have an item on the next agenda
in this regard. Council took no action.
Ordinance - Approving a Contract with Lake Municipal Utility
District to Provide Sanitary Sewer Service
The Administration was not ready to present information on
this item.
Ordinance - Authorizing Final Payment to C. A. Wright for
Construction of Basketball Play Slab at Central Heights Park
The work has been satisfactorily completed and the Ad-
ministration recommended approval of the ordinance authorizing
final payment to C. A. Wright for construction of basketball
play slab at Central Heights Park.
Councilman Johnson moved for adoption of the ordinance;
Councilwoman Wilbanks seconded the motion. The vote follows:
Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks,
Caffey and Cannon
Mayor Hutto
Nays: None
ORDINANCE NO. 2965
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ACCEPTING CONSTRUCTION OF A
CONCRETE PLAY SLAB AT CENTRAL HEIGHTS PARK BY C. A. WRIGHT
COMPANY; FINDING THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT; ACCEPTING THE CITY ENGINEER'S
CERTIFICATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE; AUTHORIZING THE FINAL PAY-
MENT TO THE SAID C. A. WRIGHT COMPANY AND PROVIDING FOR THE
EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF.
Ordinance - Authorizing Final Payment to McConnell Construction
for Goose Creek and Newcastle Street Park Projects
This work has been inspected and meets specifications. The
Administration recommended approval of the ordinance, authorizing
final payment to McConnell Construction Company for Goose Creek
and Newcastle Street Park Projects.
Councilwoman Caffey moved for adoption of the ordinance;
Councilwoman Wilbanks seconded the motion. The vote follows:
Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks
Caffey and Cannon
Mayor Hutto
Nays: None
00911 -8
Minutes of the Regular Meeting - September 11, 1980
ORDINANCE NO. 2966
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ACCEPTING CONSTRUCTION OF
CONCRETE WORK FOR GOOSE CREEK AND NEWCASTLE STREET PARK
PROJECTS BY McCONNELL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY; FINDING
THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS
OF THE CONTRACT; ACCEPTING THE CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIF-
ICATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE; AUTHORIZING THE FINAL PAY-
MENT TO THE SAID McCONNELL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND
PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF.
Ordinance - Authorizing Final Payment to Bible Engineering Cor-
poration for Technical Assistance Analysis of Four Municipal
Buildings
The City of Baytown received a grant to have a study made
of the four municipal buildings to find ways of reducing energy
consumption. The reports have been submitted and representatives
of Bible Engineering Corporation were present to review those
reports for Council. Mr. Wayne A. Mather, Vice President with
Bible Engineering, along with Stephen A. ;Mangold and John R.
Spollin were present. Mr. Mangold stated that four individual
reports had been developed for each of the four buildings - -City
Hall, Civic Center, Police Building and Sterling Municipal Library.
Each report had been developed by a format established by the
State of Texas, Governor's Office for Energy Resources so that
the city can use these reports to request funds from the state
for implementation of some of the suggested energy conservation
measures. Many of the suggestions do not require additional
funds. The reports give the approximate initial cost for imple-
mentation of the energy conservation measures, as well as the
energy savings that would result from implementation. Sterling
Municipal Library has already effected some of these measures
which have begun to result in savings.
Councilwoman Wilbanks inquired if there are funds avail-
able at the state level for specific energy conservation uses?
Mr. Mangold responded that he believes that is correct and the
format of the report is actually the next step for going back
to the State of Texas to request funding. The State has some
sort of matching fund program, but Mr. Mangold did not have
the details. Mr. Mangold, in response to a question from the
City Manager, stated that probably only 1/3 of the energy
conservation measures suggested would need additional funding.
Councilman Philips inquired what mangitude of savings
would be achievable? Mr. Mangold responded that the possible
savings is different on each of the four buildings. Each
report contains a graph on Page No. 6 which reflects a 10 -year
savings. For example, on the Baytown City Hall, over a 10 -year
period, the city would be saving approximately $32,000. Each
of the energy conservation measures are detailed as to what each
of the individual costs would be, as well as what savings would
be derived on each item.
Councilman Philips inquired if the credits and the cost
to achieve those credits are feasible? Mr. Mangold responded
that the maintenance and operations procedures are definitely
feasible because these are things that can be done immediately.
The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance
authorizing final payment to Bible Engineering Corporation.
Councilman Philips moved to adopt the ordinance; Council-
woman Wilbanks seconded the motion. The vote follows:
00911 -9
Minutes of the Regular Meeting - September 11, 1980
Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks
Caffey and Cannon
Mayor Hutto
Nays: None
ORDINANCE NO. 2967
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN
AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO BIBLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION FOR
A TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ANALYSIS OF FOUR MUNICIPAL
BUILDINGS IN THE AMOUNT OF SEVEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED
EIGHTY -FOUR AND N01100 ($7,884.00) DOLLARS.
Ordinance - Awarding Contract for Community Development Housing
Rehabilitation Project 79- 03- 08 - -1125 Bookertee
Two bids were received for rehabilitation of a house at
1125 Bookertee. The low bidder is Morgan Construction Company
for the amount of $7,759. The Administration recommended
approval of the low bidder.
Councilman Johnson moved for the adoption of the ordinance;
Councilman Simmons seconded the motion.
Councilman Philips suggested that the provision of the
ordinance providing for change orders up to twenty -five (25 %)
percent of the contract was excessive and suggested that ten
(10 %) percent would be more reasonable.
Councilman Philips suggested that the motion be amended to
accept the bid subject to a limitation of ten (10 %) percent on
change orders. This was acceptable to Council members Johnson
and Simmons. The vote follows:
Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks,
Caffey and Cannon
Mayor Hutto
Nays: None
ORDINANCE NO. 2968
AN ORDINANCE AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR A COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT 79 -03 -08 TO MORGAN
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE SUM OF SEVEN THOUSAND
SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY -NINE AND N01100 ($7,759.00) DOLLARS.
For tabulation of the bids, see Attachment "A."
Ordinance - Adopting 1979 Edition of Standard Building Code and
Amending that Code to Prohibit Use of Wood Shingles
Jack Cramer, Chief Building Inspector, presented the rec-
ommendation of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals concerning
the 1979 Edition of the Standard Building Code which is used
for regulation of non - residential structures. The reason for
changing from the 1976 Edition which the city is currently
operating under is that these editions are reprinted every
third year and once the new edition is released, the old edition
is no longer printed. Also, by law, when a new edition is
released, the city is required to adopt that edition. The 1979
Edition of the Standard Building Code is basically the same as
the 1976 Edition with the exception that this code provides
that any commercial establishment no matter what the size must
00911 -10
Minutes of the Regular Meeting - September 11, 1980
have two restrooms. The board felt this requirement to be
too stringent and recommended that the city amend the 1979
Edition to provide that one restroom be required for five
employees or less. The other amendment that the board is
recommending is that the use of wood shingles be prohibited
for new construction. On an existing building with wood
shingles, this requirement would not apply for replacement.
The Administration concurred with the recommendation
of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals.
Councilman Cannon inquired if the Board had voted
unanimously for the two amendments. Mr. Cramer responded
in the affirmative.
Councilman Cannon moved to adopt the ordinance; Council-
woman Caffey seconded the motion. The vote follows:
Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, ;Yilbanks,
Caffey and Cannon
Mayor Hutto
Nays: None
ORDINANCE NO. 2969
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 7, "BUILDINGS," OF THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN BY ADOPTING
THE 1979 EDITION OF THE STANDARD BUILDING CODE; AMEND-
ING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF SAID CODE; PROVIDING A RE-
PEALING CLAUSE; CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PRO-
VIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF.
Ordinance - Amending FHA Minimum Standards One and Two Family
Dwellings
Mr. Cramer distributed FHA Minimum Standards for One and
Two Family Dwellings with proposed amendments included for
Council inspection. Mr. Cramer stated that he had read
numerous codes, only to conclude that this code is far superior
to the new codes being published. The Board of Adjustment and
Appeals is recommending that Section 5.02 of the minimum stan-
dards be deleted because this section provides that a maximum
of 30`10 of the lot can be built on. A previous amendment to
the code provided that 45% of the lot could be built on. The
Board is requesting that this be deleted because of inflation
and the rising cost of property to allow citizens to utilize
more of their lot. With the building setback lines, the
city would still be able to control the situation. The second
amendment applies to building setback lines. Presently, the
city is operating with building setback requirements of fifteen
foot minimum setback line in the front and the rear. Numerous
requests to build 15 -16 foot additions to the rear of homes
are denied each year because of the existing regulations. The
Board felt that there would be no problem with a five foot
setback line in the rear. In fact, most of the new codes
provide no rear building setback.
Council inquired concerning the fire aspects of the five
foot setback. Mr. Cramer stated that he had spoken with the
Fire Chief who had no problems with the five -foot setback.
Presently, most of the utility easements which are 16 -20 feet
wide are to the rear of the home. Mr. Cramer stated that this
amendment would mainly affect the older areas where people are
interested in adding to their home.
00911 -11
Minutes of the Regular Meeting - September 11, 1980
Council expressed concern that in some situations there could
be only 10 feet between houses which could present a real problem
with fire fighting.
Councilman Cannon inquired if there would be a method by which
Council could make this provision apply to the older parts of town
and exclude the newer subdivisions?
Mr. Cramer responded that that would be very difficult to con-
trol and he reiterated that he felt that this would not be a prob-
lem in the newer subdivisions.
Councilman Philips pointed out that in five or ten years this
could be a problem in what is now considered a newer subdivision.
The next suggested amendment is the prohibiting of wood shingles
for construction of new residential structures. This is the same
provision that was just discussed with regard to commercial prop-
erty. An existing wood shingle roof can be replaced with another
wood shingle roof.
In response to a question from Council, Mr. Cramer explained
that this amendment is to provide protection for future fire
hazards and will not affect the key rate on insurance. Within
the last ten years, only one residence has been constructed
with wood shingles.
Mayor Hutto stated that what this amendment would do is
eliminate the choice of the homeowner. Since very few builders
would build speculative homes with wood shingles and since Baytown
has had very few homes constructed with wood shingles, wood shingles
should not be a problem. He felt that the homeowner should have
the freedom of choice. Councilman Johnson concurred.
Mr. Cramer stated that Baytown has had a good record with
regard to wood shingles, but the Board felt that this would be
a measure for future protection.
Another amendment being considered is to add a provision
that each sleeping area shall be provided with a minimum of
one UL approved, listed and labeled smoke detector installed
adjacent to the sleeping area.
The Board also recommended that the sections dealing with
plumbing, electrical and mechanical be deleted since the City
of Baytown has adopted individual codes to regulate those areas.
The Administration concurred in these recommendations.
Mr. Cramer pointed out that he had added items to the FHA
Minimum Standards which provide information to those seeking
building permits, such as how to obtain a building permit,
permit fees, how to figure what will be owed for those permits,
etc.
Council commended.Mr. Cramer and the Board for an excellent
job.
Councilman Johnson moved to adopt the ordinance with the
exception of Section 7- 5.1(d). Councilman Johnson felt that
that decision should be left to the discretion of the homeowner.
Councilman Cannon stated that he would second the motion
if Councilman Johnson would be willing to move the setback line.
Councilman Johnson responded that he had considered this until
the Fire Chief has stated that there would be no problem with
fire fighting.
00911 -12
Minutes of the Regular Meeting - September 11, 1980
Councilwoman Caffey seconded the motion. The vote follows;
Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons and Caffey
Mayor Hutto
Nays: Council members Philips, Wilbanks and Cannon
ORDINANCE NO. 2970
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN
AMENDING SECTION 7 -5.1 "MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS FOR
ONE AND TWO LIVING UNITS -- AMENDMENTS," BY DELETING LOT
COVERAGE STANDARDS; ESTABLISHING MINIMUM DISTANCES
BETWEEN STRUCTURES AND PROPERTY LINES; REQUIRING THE
USE OF SMOKE DETECTORS; DELETING MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL,
AND PLUMBING STANDARDS; REPEALING ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT
HEREWITH; CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR
THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF.
Mayor Hutto recessed the open meeting into executive session
to discuss personnel matters. When the open meeting reconvened,
Council members Wilbanks and Cannon were no longer in attendance.
The following business was transacted:
Appointments to Baytown Traffic Commission
Councilman Philips moved that Robert Carr, C. P. White and
Vernon Hill be appointed to the Commission to serve two -year terms;
Becky Claton and Tommy E. Cook to serve for one -year term. Council-
man Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows:
Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Caffey
Mayor Hutto
Nays: None
Appointments to Clean City Commission
Councilwoman Caffey moved to reappoint the following members
to two -year terms on the Clean City Commission: Leonard Stasney,
Eva Smith, Mery Rosenbaum and Jo Roosa. Also, Councilwoman Caffey
included that Norma Porras be appointed to the Commission for a
two -year term. Councilman Philips seconded the motion. The vote
follows:
Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Caffey
Mayor Hutto
Nays: None
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was
adjourned.
'Li V.
Eileen P. Hall, City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A."
BID TABW ATION
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROJECT 79 -03 -08
BASE BID
ALTERNATE I
TOTAL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1125 BOOKERTEE
SEPTEMBER 2, 1980
MORGAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
$7,577.00
182.00
$7,759.00
EASTSIDE CONSTRUCTION C0MPANY
BASE BID
ALTERNATE I
TOTAL
$8,945.00
250.00
$9,195.00