Loading...
1981 04 30 CC Minutes, Special10430 -1 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN April 30, 1981 The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in special session on Thursday, April 30, 1981, at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Baytown City Hall with the fol- lowing attendance: Fred T. Philips Jimmy Johnson Perry M. Simmons Mary E. Wilbanks Roy L. Fuller Allen Cannon Emmett 0. Hutto Fritz Lanham Dan Savage Randy Strong Eileen P. Hall Councilman Councilman Councilman Councilwoman Councilman Councilman Mayor City Manager Assistant City Manager City Attorney City Clerk The meeting was called to order with a quorum present and the following business was transacted: Receive Report of 1981 Capital Improvements Steering Committee Charles Tillery, Chairman of the 1981 Capital Improvements Steering Committee, reported that the committee had reached a consensus that the recommendation to City Council be a bond program of $21,000,000 with $3,000,000 additional for inflation for a total recommendation of $24,000,000. The Finance Subcommittee felt that the city could afford to finance a $24,000,000 bond program with very negligible effect on the taxpayers. The final capital improvements package which is being recommended includes 39 high priority projects with only 2 of the original high priority items being omitted. At the same time, 14 additional projects have been included which the subcommittees concluded to be just as important for Baytown at this time. In addition, the committee is recommending that the museum project be treated as a separate item on the ballot. The committee felt that the police radio equipment should not be included in the bond program as a capital improvement item and requested that Council consider alternative means of funding this project. The Solid Waste Subcommittee did not feel that the city should undertake any type expenditures for solid waste disposal facilities at this time. Instead, the recommendaion is that the city should extend its present landfill agreement as long as possible by taking bids in the near future for landfill services. The city will require at least two years lead time to acquire the necessary permits and facilities for another solid waste facility. If the arrangement for landfill services can be extended two years before the termination of that agreement, the city should begin the process of developing a new solid waste disposal facility. The Steering Committee's recommendations with regard to a five -year capital improvements bond program follow: 10430 -2 Minutes of the Special Meeting - April 30, 1981 Water Projects .................$ 3,5401000 Sanitary Sewer Projects ........ $ 6,340,000 Drainage ...... ... ............$ 4,000,000 Streets /sidewalks /bikeways ..... $ 4,940,000 Public Buildings ...............$ 2,590,000 Parks & Recreation .............$ 3,290,000 Museum .........................$ 300,000 TOTAL $24,000,000 Councilman Johnson inquired what alternate method of financing would be available to finance the police radio equipment? Mr. Lanham explained that this could be a budgeted item, certificates of obligation could be sold or the equipment could be purchased on a lease purchase arrange- ment. More cities are going into lease purchase arrangments because in this way the equipment is completely financed within three -five years. The police department radio proposal included purchase of some real estate and the construction of a small building and tower, but the bulk would be for the purchase of radios. Councilwoman Wilbanks informed the Council that counties already have the capability to purchase through the state and there is legislation being considered which would allow cities to purchase in bulk through the state. Councilman Cannon stated that if the radio proposal is to be excluded from the bond proposal, he would like a solid indication from Council that another alternative will be effected within the next budget year; Councilman Johnson concurred. In the proposal that the Steering Committee considered, $20,000 would have been attributed to the purchase of land; $42,000 for engineering and architectural and $261,000 for the actual purchase of radios for a total of $323,000. Councilman Philips suggested that possibly the county would be interested in participation on the construction of the tower. Councilwoman Wilbanks responded that that would be something both entities could address at budget time. Mr. Lanham pointed out that actually this is something Council could begin before budget time. Council could issue Certificates of Obligation or enter a lease purchase agreement at any time. The requirements to pay off such obligation need only be included in future budgets. The Chief of Police was present and stated that profes- sional assistance is recommended because the last time equipment was purchased from H -GAC, the equipment was delivered with no assistance to install the equipment. The city is still experiencing difficulties with the equipment due to errors in installation. He recommended an engineering study or professional help before the purchase, during the installation and after installation. Councilman Philips requested that the Administration have a proposal developed by a professional communications consultant. 10430 -3 Minutes of the Special Meeting - April 30, 1981 Mr. Lanham responded that if Council so desired an item could be placed on the next agenda in that regard. Council indicated an item in this regard should be placed on the next agenda. Councilman Simmons inquired if the Steering Committee is recommending that only the museum be considered separately on the ballot? Mr. Tillery responded that that was the only one that the Steering Committee specifically recommended be a sepa- rate item; however, there may be some bonding requirements that would require that public buildings be separated. A representative of the Financial Advisor was present and explained that, by law, the water and sewer projects need to be listed as separate propositions. With regard to the other items, Council would have the option of listing those items as Council so desires. Mr. Lanham explained that in the past bond proposals have been broken down similar to the breakdown in the memoran- dum from Mr. Tillery. Also, in the past, public buildings have been separated, for example fire stations and fire equip- ment was one item, city hall was another, and community build- ing another. The bond representatives stated that there would be no prohibition to listing public buildings separately. Councilwoman Wilbanks inquired if perhaps it would be better psychology to identify under public buildings what is actually being considered? The bond representative responded that he felt it would be better to list public buildings with first priority given to whatever that first priority is to be and whatever money is left to other public buildings. If only one project is specified, the money can only be utilized for that purpose. Mayor Hutto stated that his understanding was that under public buildings on the voting machine itself, there would be listed an item for fire stations and an item for city hall. The bond representative explained that it would be up to Council how the various items are to appear on the ballot. Mayor Hutto stated that he understood that the Steering Committee has recommended that public buildings be voted on as one item, but in the past items under public buildings were listed separately. The bond representative stated it would be best to make the proposition broad enough so that if monies are remaining other improvements could be made, for instance fire stations could be listed with the wording and other public buildings. Councilwoman Wilbanks stated that she would have no problem with having the item listed as public buildings, as long as wording is included to identify to the public what is being voted on. Mr. Tillery stated that the Steering Committee did not wish in anyway through its recommendation to restrict the Council in the way the items are to be listed on the ballot. The committee would prefer Council to use its good judgement, along with the bond representative's information to formulate the ballot. 10430 -4 Minutes of the Special Meeting - April 30, 1981 Mr. Lanham explained that the Administration needed guidance to be able to inform the bond attorneys how the ballot is to be printed. The bond representative explained that if Council would indicate what they wanted on the ballot and how it should be listed, the bond attorneys will be able to word the propositions in a general enough fashion so that Council will not be limited, but specific enough to let the people know what is being voted on. Councilman Cannon stated that Council could elect to have two items related to public buildings. One would be for city hall expansion and other buildings and the other fire station improvements and other buildings. Then the citizens would have two votes. Mr. Lanham explained that in the past when fire stations were listed on the ballot, it was listed as fire stations and equipment to allow for the purchase of equip- ment to equip the station. Mayor Hutto stated that he would like to indicate in black and white that the citizens will be voting for fire stations and improvements to city hall. Councilman Philips stated that he would hope that the citizens would be educated to the fact that this is a pack- age of improvements that the city needs. Mayor Hutto requested that Council give the Administra- tion a clear indication that Council would like City Hall separated from the fire stations under Public Buildings. Councilman Philips stated that he could see no good reason for that; Councilwoman Wilbanks concurred. She felt that the items should be prioritized as part of one propo- sition. Mayor Hutto stated that he had from past bond elections. He stated whole would feel more comfortable if rated. He felt that citizens might is being included with fire stations of that item. reservation about this that the citizens as a those items were sepa- feel that the city hall simply to assure passage Councilman Philips stated that he would like to present the entire bond proposal package in an open and above board manner, but at the same time he would like to give the total proposition the very best chance possible to pass. Whatever method that is, he would support. Councilman Fuller pointed out that be consolidating those items, Council would be taking a chance on the entire proposition being defeated. Mayor Hutto stated that if the citizens feel that improvements to city hall are necessary, they will indicate SO. The Mayor felt that fire stations should not be endan- gered by another item. Councilman Cannon pointed out that one is a public safety type proposition, while the other is a different category. Therefore, he could see merit in splitting the two. 10430 -5 Minutes of the Special Meeting - April 30, 1981 Wayne Gray, Vice Chairman of the Steering Committee, stated that the committee had worked very diligently to bring a package to the public that the public could vote to implement. Councilwoman Wilbanks stated that the more Council conferred, the more evident it became the city must have the fire stations and that Council cannot jeopardize the fire stations. Councilman Cannon inquired if there was need for a motion to split public buildings so that the voters would be considering fire stations and related equipment and city hall expansion separately? He stated that he would be in favor of splitting the two. Mayor Hutto stated that Council needs to give the bond attorney an indication. He stated that is the only one listed that he could see that needed to be separated. Councilman Cannon stated that if Council had completed its discussion of that item, he was concerned with the Massey Tompkins extension ( Rollingbrook). He stated that he had always been a supporter of the project, but the figures startled him. When looking at the figures, 4.1 million is 18% of the total 24 million project. He felt that that particular item should be considered separately. Mayor Hutto stated that he would hate to set a prece- dent regarding streets since this had never been done in the past. If Council began to separate items, there could be different factions attempting to support or defeat a particular proposition because it is only beneficial to one area of the community. Councilman Cannon pointed out that since this one project represents 18% of the entire bond proposal, this project could cause all the proposed street improvements to be defeated. That subcommittee chairman explained that the sub- committee felt that this project was of high priority for this bond issue and in the next bond issue, the subcommittee felt that the widening of Massey Tompkins should be considered to provide an access across town. Councilman Cannon stated that 10 years ago he would have agreed, but in the near future Spur 201 will provide access across town. Mr. Lanham explained that many of the items listed for streets relate to Massey Tompkins / Rollingbrook. If the first priority is not approved, then Items 6 & 4 may not be needed. Councilman Cannon inquired if anything had been included for the short section of Rollingbrook which has not been expanded to four lanes? Mr. Lanham responded that the City has an agreement with the owners that when that land is developed, they will complete that roadway at their expense. 10430 -6 Minutes of the Special Meeting - April 30, 1981 Councilwoman Wilbanks pointed out that that agreement has been in effect for a long period of time and she finds it difficult to envision the Rollingbrook extension proposal passing and the city still having that dangerous situation existing. She stated that if the Rollingbrook extension proposition passes the city needs to bring a decision on that section. All parties involved need to be contacted and the city needs to deal with that section of road. Councilwoman Wilbanks addressed the recommendation that no item be included in the bond proposal concerning solid waste disposal. She requested that the Administration place an item on the next regular agenda where the City Man- ager would bring Council up to date on that situation so that Council can begin to explore the alternatives. Councilman Philips stated that the Administration needs to establish what the contract period for landfill services will be. Mayor Hutto stated if there were no further questions or comments, Council would consider adoption of the report of the 1981 Capital Improvements Steering Committee. Councilman Philips moved to adopt the report of the 1981 Capital Improvements Steering Committee; Councilwoman Wilbanks seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Mayor Hutto informed Council that the Administration needs to have a tentative election date in order to allow time for the bond attorneys to prepare the ordinance. Councilman Philips moved to set Tuesday, June 9 as the date for the bond election; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Mayor Hutto stated that Council will need to appoint a public information group and suggested that Council appoint Mr. Tillery and Mr. Gray to be in charge of public information. Councilman Johnson moved to appoint Mr. Gray and Mr. Tillery to the public information committee; Councilman Simmons seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmon, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None 10430 -7 Minutes of the Special Meeting - April 30, 1981 Mr. Lanham reported that the financial advisor had_ prepared some information based on the proposed sale of 24 million in bonds. The projections are to sell 8 million in 1981; 8 million in 1983 and 8 million in 1985. Taxicab Proposal A memorandum was addressed to Council regarding the request of Mr. Jim Cannatella for permits to operate a taxicab service in Baytown. Council had scheduled a public hearing for May 14; however, Mr. Cannatella had requested more time. Councilman Philips commented that this bears on whether Council should be approached by an individual who has an idea, with little or no financial backing. He suggested that Council should set policy that first the Administration ought to have a test of financial ability before Council becomes involved. Although Council may be in sympathy with the individual's request, it may not be to the best interest of the citizens to approve a permit for a business when, in fact, the applicant has no financial support. Mayor Hutto stated that he would be relucant to keep any citizens or any individual from addressing Council on any matter that they deem important. Mr. Lanham stated that the Administration can talk with these persons and ask more questions so that they can get the idea that Council wants more information than just an individual coming in making a request. Councilman Johnson stated that he agreed with that policy, but by the same token he had talked with people who want to hear from Council and he felt that Council should be the sounding board. Request of Council Members to Attend Institute Council members Wilbanks and Philips requested Council consideration to attend the TML Institute in Lubbock. Council had no objections. Council requested that the Administration check into a policy regarding Council travel and in that context also establish a policy on spouse attendance. Mr. Lanham responded that the Administration would study policies in other cities and an item in that regard would be placed on the next agenda. Adjourn There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned. r Eileen P. Hall, City Clerk