2001 07 31 WS MinutesIm
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN
July 31, 2001
The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in work session on July 31, 2001, at
5:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of Baytown City Hall, 2401 Market Street, Baytown,
Texas, with the following in attendance:
Ronnie Anderson
Calvin Mundinger
Don Murray
Mercedes Renteria, III
Scott Sheley
Pete C. Alfaro
Monte Mercer
Ignacio Ramirez, Sr.
Patti Merrell
Absent: Coleman Godwin
Council Member
Council Member
Council Member
Council Member
Council Member
Mayor
City Manager
City Attorney
Assistant City Clerk
Council Member
The meeting was opened with a quorum present after which the following business was
conducted:
Discuss TSP Options.
Mayor Alfaro stated that this was a City Council work session, for the exchange of
information between the Council and City staff. For the record, he noted that notice of the
meeting had been posted on July 27, 2001, at 8:30 a.m.
Manager Mercer listed the Options that staff had compiled regarding the operation of the
TSP landfill.
I . Employ a consultant to do a technical review of TSP's permit applications;
2. Seek party status during the upcoming preliminary hearing;
3. Pass an ordinance prohibiting or regulating the landfill;
4. Retain a law firm to keep the City apprised of the status of TSP's
applications;
5. Enter into an agreement with an entity that has obtained party status to keep
the City apprised of the status of TSP's applications;
6. Continue to have members of the City's staff monitor the status of TSP's
permit applications;
7. Encourage the citizens to participate in the contested case hearings; and,
8. Conduct a public forum and invite USX and TSP to address questions from
the City Council as well as the citizens of Baytown.
Page 2 of 2
Minutes of the Work Session —July 31, 2001
The disadvantages of Option No. 2 were discussed. The time to seek party status has
already expired. Staff noted that at the last preliminary hearing, there was a discussion
regarding allowing only those to seek party status who had just become aware of TSP's
applications due to a faulty translation. In that case, the City could find it difficult to
overcome this hurdle. In addition, the City could draw a lawsuit based upon a breach of its
Industrial District agreement with USX, for which the City has no insurance coverage. It
was pointed out that Option No. 3, could also be construed as a breach of contract.
There was further discussion regarding a similar situation in the City of La Porte's decision
to oppose the issuance of a permit for a solid waste facility, an action that drew litigation.
It was determined that the City had breached its Industrial District agreement. This resulted
in a judgment against La Porte, which had to pay $2,300,000 to the solid waste facility and
extend its Industrial District agreement for 4'/4 years.
Feedback from the Council supported the need to keep the public better informed, and
indicated that Council intends to adopt a more aggressive posture regarding the landfill,
that the health and safety of the citizens are of the highest importance, that Council must be
kept apprised of future legal alternatives, that citizens have a right to know why USX is
supporting TSP, that perhaps the scope of the charge to the legal firm should be broadened
beyond the TSP applications, for all legal ramifications, now and in the future.
Mr. Mercer suggested that staff go forward with Option Nos. 4, 6, 7, and 8, with a slight
change in the language of Option 7:
7. encourage the citizens to paHt6ipate be involved and stay informed in the
contested case hearings.
Upon the suggestion that the law firm be affiliated with an entity that already has party
status, Manager Mercer stated that the firm staff is recommending also represents
Chambers County.
More discussion followed regarding indirect involvement by entering into an interlocal
agreement with an entity that already has party status. City Attorney Ramirez advised that
the City would lose attorney- client privilege and would not be privy to any confidential
information if it were not the one that retains the law firm.
Upon the suggestion that the City oppose the landfill due to health and safety concerns, it
was again determined that, because of the Industrial District agreement and possible legal
liability, this is not a viable choice. It was suggested that Council invite Carl Parker,
attorney for TSP, to the public forum with TSP and USX. TSP's financial status was
questioned in the event of any mishap attributable to the landfill.
"Citizens for a Better Baytown" was encouraged to continue its opposition to the landfill.
Page 3 of 3
Minutes of the Work Session —July 31, 2001
00� Adjourn.
Council Member Mundinger moved adjournment. Council Member Murray seconded the
motion. The vole follows:
Ayes: Council Members Anderson, Mundinger, Murray, Renteria, and Sheley.
Mayor Alfaro
Nays: None.
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 5:43 p.m.
Patti Merrell
Assistant City Clerk