Loading...
Min 05/18/2004 342 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Wichita Falls, Texas Memorial Auditorium Building May 18, 2004 Item 1 The City Council of the City of Wichita Falls, Texas met in regular session on the above date in the Council Chambers of the Memorial Auditorium Building at 8:30 o'clock a.m., with the following members present: Bill Altman - Mayor Johnny Burns - Mayor Pro Tern Arthur Bea Williams - Councilors Linda Ammons - James Esther, Jr - Harold Hawkins - James Berzina - City Manager Bill Sullivan - City Attorney Lydia Torres-Ozuna - City Clerk Michael Norrie - Absent Mayor called the meeting to order. Item 2 Pastor Kile Bateman, Evangel Temple Assembly of God, gave the invocation. Item 3 Mayor recognized Mrs. Jessica Hartman, Executive Director of Wichita County Heritage Society, who presented an award to the City for the preservation of Memorial Auditorium. Mayor expressed appreciation for the recognition by the Wichita County Heritage Society, and thanked them for all their efforts. Mayor proclaimed the week of May 17-21, 2004 as "Small Business Week in Wichita Falls" in recognition of contributions by small businesses. Mrs. Vanda Wright, Interim Director of the Small Business Development Center, and Mr. Tommy McCulloch, Chair of the Board of Directors for the Board of Commerce and Industry, accepted the proclamation. Item 4 The Minutes of April 20, 2004 and May 4, 2004 were approved as distributed. Items 5a-6c Moved by Councilor Ammons to approve Council Bill Number 110. Motion seconded by Councilor Hawkins. Councilor Burns raised a point of order. He stated that the Consent Agenda should be voted on in its entirety and not individual items under the Consent Agenda. Mayor acknowledged the error and asked for the motion and second to be removed Councilor Ammons removed her motion and Councilor Hawkins removed his second. 343 Items 5a-6c continued City Manager gave a briefing on the items listed under the Consent Agenda. Moved by Councilor Ammons that the Consent Agenda be approved. Motion seconded by Councilor Hawkins and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Altman, Councilors Williams, Ammons, Esther, Burns, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 5a RESOLUTION NO. 66-2004 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WAIVER FOR A CITY EMPLOYEE QUALIFYING FOR VARIOUS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT FUNDED PROGRAMS; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Items 6a-6c Minutes of the following board and commission meetings were received. a. Wichita Falls Library Board — March 23, 2004 b. Wichita Falls Traffic Safety Commission —April 7, 2004 c. Water Resources Commission Meeting — March 24, 2004 Item 7 A public hearing was held to discuss local incentives that may be offered to qualified businesses within the City of Wichita Falls' designated enterprise zones or block groups that qualify as enterprise zones. Mayor declared the public hearing open. Mr. Dave Clark explained that the Enterprise Zone operation is a benefit allocated principally through the State of Texas and it has been in operation in this community for approximately 20 years. In 1998 the Enterprise Zone area was revised to meet the current circumstances for the development of those zones and at that time a list of potential benefits was established that was incorporated in the development of that strategy for the local area. More recently the State has changed the regulations regarding the Enterprise Zone development and is essentially requiring that a public hearing be held to identify some of the overall regulations that may be provided to a local enterprise zone corporation. He further explained that while the Enterprise Zone perimeters are established through the 1998 efforts the designation of an individual company as an Enterprise Zone project has to do with the local company's plans and employment development and where they are headed with that. He explained what the State does with the Enterprise Zone. When a company has been designated the State provides opportunities for funding employee training and a break on sales tax for materials used in construction, which are some of the principal benefits. The City may provide abatements for taxes in increased value of real property, waiver development fees, provide capital improvements in water and sewer facilities, may provide improved fire and police protection, special transportation services, provision of available vacant surplus municipal land, streamline the development process, and free-port tax exemption on certain free-port goods. These are some of things can be accomplished and the reaction to a particular project is individualized. Mayor called for additional public comments. There being none, Mayor declared the public hearing closed. Item 8b was taken out of order and considered at this time. 344 Item 8b ORDINANCE NO. 38-2004 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, ORDAINING THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE TEXAS ENTERPRISE ZONE PROGRAM PURSUANT TO THE TEXAS ENTERPRISE ZONE ACT, CHAPTER 2303, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE (ACT), PROVIDING TAX INCENTIVES, DESIGNATING A LIAISON FOR COMMUNICATION WITH INTERESTED PARTIES, AND NOMINATING CHAVEZ CONTRACTING, INC. TO THE OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TOURISM (EDT) THROUGH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BANK (BANK) AS AN ENTERPRISE PROJECT (PROJECT); FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Williams that Ordinance No. 38-2004 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Esther. Tim Holmes, Vice President Chavez Contracting, gave background on the company and the current site. James Chavez, President and owner Chavez Contracting, mentioned the benefits to this community as well as to his company. Motion carried by following vote. Ayes: Mayor Altman, Councilors Williams, Ammons, Esther, Burns, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 8a ORDINANCE NO. 37-2004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, APPOINTING LARRY GILLEN MUNICIPAL JUDGE FOR A SPECIFIED TERM; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Burns that Ordinance No. 37-2004 be passed and that the number "two" be inserted in the blank for the number of years. Motion seconded by Councilor Hawkins and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Altman, Councilors Williams, Ammons, Esther, Burns, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 8c ORDINANCE NO. 39-2004 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, MAKING AN APPROPRIATION IN THE HOTEL/MOTEL FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000 FOR FIREWORKS TO BE USED AT A FOURTH OF JULY CELEBRATION AT SHEPPARD AIR FORCE BASE; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Hawkins that Ordinance No. 39-2004 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Williams. 345 Item 8c continued City Manager noted that historically the City has not been involved in this. There are three sponsors —TV3, Pruitt Ford, and the City of Wichita Falls. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Altman, Councilors Williams, Ammons, Esther, Burns, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 9a RESOLUTION NO. 67-2004 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, AWARDING BID AND CONTRACT FOR THE LAKE KEMP RAW WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM PROJECT (CWF04-544-24); FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Councilor Burns stepped out of Council Chambers. Moved by Councilor Hawkins that Resolution No. 67-2004 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Esther and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Altman, Councilors Williams, Ammons, Esther, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 9b RESOLUTION NO. 68-2004 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, TO APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE, L.P. FOR RELOCATION OF TELEPHONE CABLES AFFECTED BY THE FAITH VILLAGE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, PHASE I; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Councilor Burns returned to Council Chambers. Moved by Councilor Williams that Resolution No. 68-2004 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Ammons and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Altman, Councilors Williams, Ammons, Esther, Burns, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 9c RESOLUTION NO. 69-2004 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, ACCEPTING THE KICKAPOO DOWNTOWN AIRPARK TAXIWAY B CONSTRUCTION PROJECT (CWF 03-25) AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT TO JORDAN PAVING COMPANY; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Williams that Resolution No. 69-2004 be passed. 346 Item 9c continued Motion seconded by Councilor Esther and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Altman, Councilors Williams, Ammons, Esther, Burns, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 9d RESOLUTION NO. 70-2004 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO APPLY FOR, ACCEPT, REJECT, ALTER, OR TERMINATE THE GRANT AND WILL ACT AS THE AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL FOR THE FIFTEENTH YEAR FUNDING OF THE NORTH TEXAS REGIONAL DRUG ENFORCEMENT TASK FORCE; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Williams that Resolution No. 70-2004 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Ammons and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Altman, Councilors Williams, Ammons, Esther, Burns, and Hawkins Nays: None City Council recessed at 9:30 a.m. and reconvened at 9:50 a.m. Item 10a City Manager brought the Council up to date on the Loop 11 Roadway Project. He informed that for some time this project had been identified on the City's construction plans. The State Highway Department has put that on there and the MPO has indicated that it is one of the high priorities. At this point it has received a certain level of approval from the State, and staff is looking at the right of way that needs to be acquired. We have been waiting for a long time for the State's plans as to how the road would fit there. Since that time there have been several attempts to put together the right of way that would be needed to do the project. I am not entirely sure whether that is the entire hold up. He noted that there are utility lines out there that need to be relocated. The City has been pursuing a traditional approach that we take to acquiring right of way as to funding and utility relocations. We pursue that from the normal stand point. Mr. Leiker will give you more update on the construction stages. Mr. Darron Leiker informed that the construction cost is funded by Texas Department of Transportation through the Transportation Improvement Program and they have identified that project for 2006-bid letting. Mr. Hawkins corrected that the bid letting will be in 2007. Mr. Leiker stated that at the last TIP meeting TXDOT said that date could be moved back if the right of way and the other things come together quicker than expected; that date could float back to 2006. That was the original bid letting date. We are hoping that things get wrapped up by March of 2006. City Manager felt it would be useful to discuss the normal process used or factor in terms of right of way acquisition and utility line relocation. There are three different ways to do this. If the City does the whole project then it is the City's or in the past it has depended on the funding, and this particular project has followed a particular process. Mr. Taylor stated that the City Manager was correct stating that if it is a City-funded project totally, the City would be responsible 100% for all the cost. We have done urban improvement projects in the past using TXDOT dollars and Barnett Road is a prime example of that. The City's responsibility was all the right of way and easement acquisition. We paid for storm sewer, sidewalk and curb & gutter while the State paid for the pavement. It ended up being a 40-60 project with the City paying 60% and State paying 40%. At FM-2380, which is under construction, the City was required to participate 10% in right of way acquisition for the portion of the project that was in the City limits and we were responsible for relocating our own utilities. We had sewer and 347 Item 10a continued water lines to be relocated and the other utility companies were responsible for relocating their own utilities. Regarding Loop 11, Mr. Taylor informed that at one time that was a City-funded project and we were asking for urban dollars for that project. The State had their consultants perform a study and they came in and said that was a viable project for the State and it became an on-system road at that time. The State will designate that and they will be responsible for maintenance of that road. A former mayor several years ago made the promise that we would pay for the right of way and we would adjust the utilities. That is not the normal process for us to do that. The State sent us an agreement over a year ago with that funding system in place. That funding agreement was sent back to the State stating that we wanted the standard funding agreement but we understood that there were property owners out there that might donate the right of way in lieu of taking payment. Historically we have been responsible for 10% of right-of-way acquisition and relocating our utilities, water and sewer and storm drainage, if necessary, for projects in the City limits of on system projects, which means a road that will be maintained by the State after construction. It is my understanding that the State wants us to relocate all utilities on this project. He informed that there are petroleum product pipelines, a power line, and probably phone lines. To my knowledge we only have one water line that needs to be adjusted for this project. Councilor Hawkins said that his understanding was that at the time of discussion of the right of way acquisition there was no mention of utilities; the State added that. He mentioned that former Mayor Jerry Lueck told TXDOT in Austin that we wanted the Loop 11 Road Project done if the City buys the right of way and TXDOT builds the road. I would like to see us get this project started. We were looking at this project starting in 2004 now we are looking at 2007, which means the start would be 2008. 1 would like to ask the City to contact TXDOT and tell them that we would honor the prior mayor's commitment to purchase the right-of-way, which will be owned by the City as soon as they can start the construction. We did not commit to the utility relocation however we would be willing to commit to our 10% share, as we have done in the past. He mentioned several cities that go further than that in order to get some of their roads built, Abilene and Plano are two of those cities. I believe Loop 11 extension will increase development out there. He felt that once this road is built we would see some development that will produce enough income to pay the difference of what we are looking at. Councilor Hawkins said that he would like to see the City Manager and the Property Administrator talk to the family involved whose property is under discussion and come to an agreement so we can press to the State to get this job done. The dangers of crossing US-287 are well known and this will alleviate some of that danger. The longer we wait and drag our feet, the more it is going to be rolled back. We need that done in order to protect the citizens of Wichita Falls and to stimulate the growth on the north side. Councilor Ammons said she had talked to someone at TXDOT. Historically it is the City's position not to participate more than 10%. City Manager stated that it depends on the project and the only way we have ever participated in those projects has been on a 90%-10% share with the City relocating our own utilities. Councilor Ammons stated that when we only participate 10% we are not getting the projects other cities are getting because of our efforts in trying to secure those projects. I agree with Councilor Hawkins that unless we work to get the Loop 11 extension project done it is going to be a dead issue. I hate to see other cities benefit because of their investment and us sitting here stonewalling or saying we are not going to do it unless it is 10% or nothing. Is there a compromise? Can the Council re-look at what we participate in historically and do what it takes to get this project done? Mayor said that he spent two years correcting errors and statements made by a prior mayor who never consulted the City Council and my authority as mayor on this Council is one vote and that was the same for the prior mayor. Any representations that I make to outside groups, including the State, only are to use my best efforts to encourage a favorable position by the City Council. I do not have the power to commit the City to anything as an individual and neither did the prior mayor. It is my belief that this project might have moved a little faster if he had not been involved in that process a few years ago that caused quite a bit of confusion in Austin. Nevertheless, there are always within the City's scope of activities more opportunities to spend money and it is always the Council's position to try to look for ways to prioritize the spending of our money. We have had a successful program over the years in the way we have been funding these matters. I will in no way support making this an exception. There are creative ways that we are trying to look at now with the State on providing for the overpass and the interchange, which would take a great deal more money than that and which is much more important to this City than is Loop 11. The way we have been going about it is in line with what we have done historically. I think we are making progress and we are pretty close. I see no reason to change a policy to make an exception in one case; 348 Item 10a continued I am not going to compare with a city like Plano, which has a huge sales tax base and more revenue and income per person from sales tax than we or any other community will see. The way we have been doing it has been successful over the years and is in line with the vast majority of cities in this State, not going out and picking up exceptions. Councilor Ammons commented that if Councilor Hawkins is talking about a $200,000 expenditure, how much did we spend just on landscaping of the Business Park? I think that was $100,000. Councilor Burns interjected that if you look at this one instance that is fine and I will accept that as the number, but in every future instance when we try to acquire right of way on a project, there will not be a property owner willing to donate the right of way because they will know that if they hold out long enough the City will purchase their property. It is my view that we continue to send mixed messages to the citizens out there. I think that this project was set back so far by the prior mayor because of misstatements he made and because of the confusion that he caused amongst the property owners. We make the Property Administrator's job more difficult by implying that we are going to purchase the right of way while she is trying to negotiate with them to get the best possible deal for the taxpayers of Wichita Falls. Councilor Hawkins disagreed. There are exceptions to every rule, and I do not think this one will have long ranging effects. There have been other cities that have increased their participation in order to get projects and they did not have to continue at that rate thereafter. This is one that has been identified and it keeps being put back. Why should we encourage anyone to locate on the north side if we ourselves are not willing to participate to a greater extent. As it is now SAFB and the people out there are not considered in their health and safety in the crossing of US- 287. We are saying let's hold off and not buy this land. That property owner probably would not have been as difficult to deal with had not some past history happened. That is my opinion. I appreciate what the Property Administrator has done but we hired the City Manager to run the City for us and we direct him on policy and I would like to see him more involved with his staff when it comes to negotiations on something like this. Can we give and take—you bet we can. We ask our citizens to continually give to build our streets and put in sewers, yet we annex and do not put in waterlines for their protection. The City needs to show more support for District 5 so we can see growth on the 144-287 Corridor. Councilor Williams asked for the most current numbers. I do not want anybody to try to do political and emotion blackmail to make me vote on something because someone went out acting like a cowboy and made promises that they could not have made except for one vote, and they made them after the fact. I do not want to be bound by things after the fact. I think the Property Administrator has been out making the inroads and trying to get this done. This is a safety factor and I do not think there is anything anyone on the Council has done in the almost six years I have been on that is tantamount to stonewalling or not considering the needs of the people on the north side, but we still have a city to run and we have to do it in an appropriate way. Also, when you use Plano as an example, they have a tax base that is six times larger than ours, although the size is comparable you cannot use it as a comparison. I am interested in hearing what the Property Administrator has to say. Pat Hoffman, Property Administrator, informed that until three weeks ago TXDOT had not committed to access, control or lack of, meaning that the individual property owners may or may not have access to the property off of this road. Until that was determined and TXDOT was going to commit, none of the property owners were willing to commit 100%. In theory, they were willing to donate this but not until they knew if they were going to have access and where the access was going to be. We have reached an agreement with the family Mr. Hawkins mentioned without paying any funds and the only thing we were waiting on was for TXDOT to give us control of access. I suggested to the property owner that he talk to TXDOT because it was out of my hands. He did meet with them and once again they have changed the control of access to accommodate him, but I have not gotten an update on that. Councilor Hawkins said that at the last legislative session there was a bill that went through that required interstate highway access not be denied except at certain controlled points and they are trying to apply that same rule to Loop 11. Mrs. Hoffman questioned how a piece of property could be sold without providing access. Councilor Hawkins said that TXDOT told him the biggest hold up was the City's not guaranteeing they would acquire the property, and it was at that time when I first heard they wanted us to pay for all the utility relocations. He said that what he is asking for is a commitment from the City to say that the land is there and we will assure TXDOT it will be owned by the City when the time comes for them to begin construction. 349 Item 10a continued Councilor Esther commented that no one particular Council member has a right to commit this City to anything. I was under the impression that if we were making commitments to TXDOT it would be as a result of us having some committees. What I see more than anything here is even if we would acquire the land you are still running into controlled access, which is the debate. We are trying to create something innovative, and we eliminate a hazard but at the same time we want to make sure that we do it within the correct procedures. There is a procedure that staff must follow I to make sure that we have complied with the law and in conjunction with that make it convenient for the property owners involved. I think that is where we are. Councilor Hawkins stated that it is our job to set policy and we can set a policy on one project that does not apply to others if Council deems it is in the best interest of the City. City Manager commented that he did not know anybody that is against that project. If the Council wants to change the policy we will, but our thought is why. Left to her own the Property Administrator could have that property already acquired except for the controlled access. I still believe that those property owners there see enough value to this project; a reverse benefit type project in its purest form that no matter what the cost of that road would be a good deal. When I look at this I would have to say that we do things differently, every city does something a little bit differently, but if you change the formula on this one you better be ready to change it on everyone of them because the State is not going to back up. You are going to move closer and closer into not only buying all the right of ways but you will be asked to move the utilities. You cannot afford that project if you have to do all those things. We would have to look at the Street Maintenance Fund and I ask why do that if we have a process in place that may get it for you for nothing. Let the State come up with the final rulings on access and let the Property Administrator finish her job and see where we at that point and time. If Council wants to bring it back you can always do that, but I would not do that now because of precedence and the fact that it is going to take money that you have already committed in other places. Councilor Hawkins stated that we say the holdup is access, but I am hearing from the State that it is acquiring the property. He suggested that we tell them we will acquire that property but not relocate utilities at our expense. If we make that commitment then we can say that we are not the hold up but it is the State. He asked that we let the State know that this is an urgent need and ask for their commitment. City Manager commented that if you do this "one time " and buy property for a project that the State is going to limit access to then I submit that you are going to be doing that in a lot of other places and you are going to have other places with nice roads built for them that they will not be able to use. I would not do this right now; let's see if we can do it the traditional way and if we can't we can always come back. The State still needs to make decisions on access and we can work parallel with them to see which of those properties we can get. Councilor Hawkins agreed but he felt that we needed to be in real discussion on this access even if it may be controlled access and he felt the City Manager should be involved. City Manager informed that if he needs to be in those negotiations he would be. Councilor Williams commented that if the City were to purchase these properties access would not come any more readily Charles Elmore, 1133 Crescent Lane, commented that Loop 11 has been a biggie with him. I have watched the dodge ball game with the 18-wheelers on US-287 as people are trying to get to work either at SAFB or 1-44. We are very fortunate we have not killed somebody out there. From the audience it sounds like the State is saying that the ball is in the City's court and the City is saying it is in the State's court. We do not have somebody saying we need this in the way of access for people who own that property. You can let the property owners know that the State will provide this type of access. That way the Property Administrator can ask them to donate the property and she can inform them about the access. I feel an urgency because there is a serious safety problem on US 287 and I can see a tremendous economic advantage to the City, but it will not be an economic advantage if we do not have access to that property. Sidney Smith, 2811 City View said he heard this rhetoric of how you are helping District 5. Count the cars that are coming out of Wichita Falls on Loop 11 and you will see that you are helping all of the people of Wichita Falls. SAFB is out there but there is no guarantee it will continue. You also see that the property that has access to it will grow and move to the point that it will pay for itself in ten years. He mentioned the "Kell Freeway that goes nowhere" as an example of what has gone on out there. Our area was annexed and there are no improvements since it was annexed. You are dragging your feet on making some final decisions. If we have people who have 350 Item 10a continued already made up their minds on how it is going to go then we are up against a blank wall. I would like to see that road extended to help all the citizens of Wichita Falls. Item 10b Councilor Esther stated that Councilor Burns and Councilor Hawkins would not be with us after this meeting. They are exciting and there has not been a dull moment. They brought debate, laughter and seriousness and that is the diversity that has worked on this Council. He thanked them for their seriousness. I am proud that these gentlemen are self-made men and are sincere in what they say. I hope they keep their fingers it the pie so that we can continue to grow as a City. Councilor Hawkins thanked Councilor Esther for his remarks. He shared an anecdote from his childhood days. He thanked Mr. Darron Leiker for the streetlights on Missile Road and striping on the streets at SAFB. He asked Mr. Leiker to carry the striping to the Missile Road gate. He asked that staff check the lights at the waterfalls; they are out again. He asked staff to look at the Building Codes regarding remodeling of a residence by an owner. He suggested that owners be allowed to remodel once every two years. He thanked the staff and the employees of the City and fellow councilors for their support over the years. It has been enjoyable, enlightening, and rewarding. He looks forward to being under less pressure but guaranteed the citizens of Wichita Falls that he was stepping down from Council but he was not leaving, and he encouraged them to call him if he could be of any assistance. Councilor Williams stated that there are a lot of people who talk about what Wichita Falls needs but they do not do anything about it only to criticize but Councilors Burns and Hawkins have given their time and done something about it. She commented that running this City is not easy and you will not get thanked often for it. She thanked Councilor Burns and Councilor Hawkins and wished them well in whatever they do. Councilor Williams referred to a fax circulating asking City employees to take a "sick day", and she asked the City Attorney if that was, under current State law, an illegal act for non-union City employees. City Attorney replied that he did not know the answer to that and he would not want to be giving those folks legal advise, but obviously the City would look at whether or not taking a sick day for other than being sick as not being proper. Councilor Williams said she did not want him to give them legal advise she just wanted to know. In the five years I have been on the Council we have had real money problems and we have talked about not giving raises. We have given the step increases but we have never discussed cutting anybody's salary not one single day. I think it is a reverse situation. The things that concern the medical insurance are not anything we had a choice in so we are trying to do the best we can, but it is a tactic that does not take into consideration that there are things that happen that we have no control over that have to be done. I do not want anybody to look at that fax and think that is the way to handle any situation that is not of our choosing. I want to know the consequences of that act, and even if it is legal it is a tactic that is not fair to our City because if they take a sick day they are still getting paid for it. Councilor Williams thanked Mr. Leiker and his entire Department for taking care of projects that she turned over to them. I appreciate the work you and your staff are doing. Councilor Ammons said she is going to miss Councilor Burns. He has been my main form of entertainment these past three years. She also thanked Councilor Hawkins for his service on the Council and all he has done during his tenure. She commented that Council meetings are free and where could you get this form of entertainment as well as these discussions and still remain friends. Councilor Ammons asked if it was possible to have a blanket waiver relating to the resolution of City employees qualifying for U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development funded programs. City Attorney opinioned that they should come to Council on a case-by-case basis. City Manager added that it is a HUD requirement. Councilor Ammons asked staff to check on persons parking on their yards after 5:00 p.m. on Stamford Street. She asked if Code could go out there after hours. Mr. Dave Clark informed that Code does work in the evenings and on Saturdays. Councilor Ammons mentioned the health insurance situation and commented that she knows how expensive health insurance is and that the City is self-insured. She asked if a mass meeting could be conducted where City employees could talk to some other insurance carriers to see if there is a cheaper way to fund health insurance. City Manager stated that we have done 351 Item 10b continued something similar to that periodically. At different times we have had individual employees who have gone and talked to other insurance companies but have not come up with a better rate. We have also looked at taking bids. I do not think any of that should be eliminated from the realm of possibilities of things to do. City Manager stated that he was a little disappointed that a fax can show up as something that represents the City employees. We don't know who sent the fax and we don't care but we do care what is in the fax. I would not say that it does not represent the feelings of a multitude or even the majority of the City employees because nobody likes to see these things going up. I think it unfairly characterizes the City employees as in this one group because someone decides to send out a few faxes. I am not sure it rightly speaks for all the employees because some of them have gone out there and shopped the insurance market. Maybe one of the things we have not done a good job of is making people more aware of what those costs are and we should do that. Costs are going up everywhere and we see that continuing. We are keeping these costs under control as much as possible. I think you are on the right track. Councilor Ammons commented that maybe it was a communication issue on whether we are getting the best deal for our employees. City Manager replied that we could improve the communications. City Manager added that our City employees know what sick leave is for and they have honored it and not abused it, and the fax puts them in a bad light asking them to take a sick day but I want to believe that is not what our employees are like. Councilor Ammons commented that it had been a blast serving with Johnny and Harold. Councilor Burns thanked everyone for their kind words. I am an entertainment value at work and at home. He thanked his fellow Council workers for the stimulating debates and interesting experiences and vast wealth of knowledge he has acquired while on the Council. He also thanked the staff noting that this has been one of the best experiences he has had. I appreciate everyone who has hung in there with me. Mayor referred to the insurance issue and noted that the City's self-insurance program is not a profit issue; it is operated on a break-even basis. When you compare it to a profit making company you are automatically looking at some percentage that is going to be higher because of the profit incentive and you would have to make that up in any negotiations. That is one comparative factor that does not exist in the City's system. Another thing we have seen over the years is where another entity will go out for bids and the first year they get a low bid, it is very difficult for them to change and you start seeing substantial increases. One thing we need to keep in mind is that once you go to a private health care system you have dismantled the whole operation of our self funded trust and the expertise the City staff has developed, and it is very difficult to reinstate and get back into. You need to keep looking at the private market because it gives you a benchmark that tells you whether you are doing a good job or not. The Employee Benefit Trust board had a difficult time making this decision but had no alternative because of the amount of the deficit. Others are going through the same thing. Health care costs in Texas tend to be slightly higher than around the country. It is a hot button issue and one that we have to keep paying attention to and one that the City is going to have to put funds into, not just the employees. Mayor said that in the past six years he has been on the Council he tells people that he has always been impressed at the high quality overall of our city employees and we are very fortunate that we have city employees that are of the high quality level and do an excellent job. Yesterday a fax was sent out unsigned, and my policy is that I pay no attention to letters or fax that are unsigned because it does not represent an excellent workforce. I do empathize with the employees over the health care increase cost but that one fax sent by one person should not represent the image of the City of Wichita Falls employees who are very dedicated employees that we can proud of. Mayor commented that every City Council tends to develop its own personality, which is a composite of the individuals that make up that Council. We have been blessed to have a City Council that has had a personality that has been dedicated to improving the lot of the citizens of Wichita Falls. We are made up of different personalities and there is interaction among those personalities. There can be a difference of opinion but I am proud to have worked this past couple of years with a council that has demonstrated that their interest was the best interests of the citizens of the City of Wichita Falls. In a few weeks we will have two new council members and it has been an honor and a privilege to have served and worked with Johnny and Harold. They are different personalities and we have voted differently on issues, but I am convinced that in their hearts they tried to represent the City and have it make progress and improve the life of the citizens of Wichita Falls. He asked the citizens to thank them when they see them for doing a yeoman's job because they have tried to make our City a better place to live in. 352 Item 10c City Manager referred to Council members and commented that they do not leave they keep coming back. Councilor Hawkins, you have never let us slide and you brought a lot of things to our attention. I want to thank you for the ten years you made our organization better than it was. You have had a lot of good ideas and have kept us on our toes and we have been friends and have brought us a lot of valuable things. Councilor Burns, everyday is a new day with you. You have always brought us a good attitude and bright thoughts. I have always enjoyed that you would listen, and I have enjoyed our conversations and ideas and the humor has been great. We are going to miss both of you. Item 11 No one signed up to speak under Public comments. Item 12 City Council went into Executive Session at 11:05 a.m. as authorized by Section 551.074 of the Texas Government Code. Mayor announced that immediately after the Executive Session the Council would depart for the tour and would return to formally adjourn in Council Chambers. Item 13 The City Council departed for tours of the Public Safety Training Center at 710 Flood Street, Wichita Falls, the Fire Drill Field at 1302 Harding Street, Wichita Falls, and various Residential locations within Wichita Falls receiving renovation assistance from Habitat for Humanity and Housing and Urban Development Programs. Mayor announced that no votes were taken in Executive Session. City Council adjourned at 1:50 p. m. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of 2004. WILLIAM K. ALTMAN MAYOR ATTEST: - Lydia Torres-Ozuna City Clerk NOTICE OF MEETING Regular Meeting Of The Mayor And City Council Of The City Of Wichita Falls, Texas To Be Held In The City Council Chambers Of The Memorial Auditorium, 1300 Seventh Street, On Tuesday, May 18, 2004, Beginning At 8.30 a.m. City Council: Mayor William K. Altman - Councilors Arthur Bea Williams, Linda Ammons, James Esther, Michael Norrie, Johnny Burns, and Harold Hawkins. 1 . Call to Order. 2. Invocation: Pastor Kile Bateman Evangel Temple Assembly of God 3. Presentations: 4. Approval of Minutes. CONSENT AGENDA 5. Resolutions: a. Resolution Authorizing A Conflict Of Interest Waiver For A City Employee Qualifying For Various U.S. Department Of Housing And Urban Development Funded Programs. (City Council Bill #110) 6. Receive Minutes: a. Wichita Falls Library Board — March 23, 2004 b. Wichita Falls Traffic Safety Commission — April 7, 2004 c. Water Resources Commission Meeting — March 24, 2004 City Council Agenda Tuesday, May 18, 2004 Page 2 REGULAR AGENDA 7. Public Hearing: Public Hearing To Discuss Local Incentives That May Be Offered To Qualified Businesses Within The City Of Wichita Falls Designated Enterprise Zones Or Block Groups That Qualify As Enterprise Zones. 8. Ordinances: a. Ordinance Appointing Larry Gillen Municipal Judge For A Specified Term. (City Council Bill #111) b. Ordinance To Consider Nominating An Application From Chavez Contracting, Inc., As A Texas Enterprise Zone Project Through The Texas Economic Development Bank. (City Council Bill #112) c. Ordinance Making An Appropriation In The Hotel/Motel Fund In The Amount Of $15,000 For Fireworks To Be Used At a Fourth Of July Celebration At Sheppard Air Force Base. (City Council Bill #113) 9. Resolutions: a. Resolution To Award Bid And Contract For The Lake Kemp Raw Water Supply System (CWF04-544-24). (City Council Bill #114) b. Resolution To Approve Contract With Southwestern Bell Telephone, L.P. To Relocate Telephone Cables Affected By The Faith Village Drainage Improvement Project, Phase I. (City Council Bill #115) c. Resolution Accepting The Kickapoo Downtown Airpark Taxiway B Construction Project (CWF 03-25) And Authorize Final Payment To Jordan Paving Corporation. (City Council Bill #116) d. Resolution Authorizing Application For Fifteenth Year Funding Of The North Texas Regional Drug Enforcement Task Force. (City Council Bill #117) 10. Other Council Matters: a. Discussion of Loop 11 Road Way Project. City Council Agenda Tuesday, May 18, 2004 Page 3 b. Discussion Of Items Of Concern To Members Of The City Council. c. Staff/Council Discussion. END OF TELEVISED SEGMENT 10. Comments From The Public To Members Of The City Council Concerning Items That Are Not On The City Council Agenda. 11 . Executive Session: (1) Deliberate The Evaluation Of The City Council Appointed Officials As Authorized By Section 551 .074 Of The Texas Government Code. 13. The City Council Will Adjourn For Tours Of The Public Safety Training Center At 710 Flood Street, Wichita Falls, The Fire Drill Field At 1302 Harding Street, Wichita Falls, And Various Residential Locations Within Wichita Falls Receiving Renovation Assistance From Habitat For Humanity And Housing And Urban Development Programs. 14. Adjourn. Wheelchair or handicapped accessibility to the meeting is possible by using the handicapped parking spaces and ramp located off the east parking lot on the Sixth Street entrance. Spanish language interpreters, deaf interpreters, Braille copies or any other special needs will be provided to any person requesting a special service with at least 24 hours notice. Please call the City Clerk's Office at 761-7409. CERTIFICATION I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at Memorial Auditorium, Wichita Falls, Texas on the day of 20 at o'clock (a.m.)(p.m.). City Clerk