Loading...
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