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