Loading...
Min 09/02/1997 657 Wichita Falls, Texas Memorial Auditorium Building September 2, 1997 Items 1 & 2 The City Council of the City of Wichita Falls, Texas met in regular session on the above date in the Council Room of the Memorial Auditorium Building at 8:30 o'clock a.m., with the following members present: Kay Yeager - Mayor Don Johnston - Councilors Dan Shine - Angus Thompson - Bill Daniel - J. W. Martin - Harold Hawkins - James Berzina - City Manager Greg Humbach - City Attorney Lydia Torres - City Clerk Mayor Yeager called the meeting to order. Invocation was given by Reverend Hector Medina, Our Lady of Guadalupe Church. Item 4 Thomas Brent Lucus, Fire Equipment Operator, Fire Department, was honored as Employee of the Month for the month of September. Mayor presented him with a plaque, City pin, transit tickets, dinner tickets, and a check. Mayor proclaimed the week of September 6-14, 1997 as Fiestas Patrias Celebracion in the City of Wichita Falls. Mayor recognized Wichita Falls Explorer Post #500 which is made up of young men and women who are interested in law enforcement. This recognition is for outstanding and positive efforts by the youth of our community. They competed in the 1997 Alamo Area Law Enforcement Competition and came home with numerous first, second and third place trophies. Mayor congratulated them and encouraged them to continue their positive direction. Item 3 Bill Tisdale, 4405 Prince Edward, mentioned a petition he had submitted with 200 signatures regarding passes at the Weeks Golf Course and asked if anything had or would be done in regards to providing passes. City Manager informed him that Management sets the policies at the Weeks Golf Course, and at this time will not be issuing any passes. Mr. Tisdale stated that 90% of those who played out there in the summer are kids who are back in school. You are going to lose a lot of money by not providing passes. Mr. Tisdale added that City Manager had always had a grudge against seniors. Item 5 The Minutes were approved as distributed. 658 Items 6a-8c Councilor Martin requested that Item 7d be brought down to the regular agenda. Moved by Councilor Johnston that the consent agenda be approved with the exception of Item 7d. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 6a RESOLUTION NO. 132-97 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO APPLY FOR $9,897.00 IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EQUIPMENT Item 7a RESOLUTION NO 133-97 RESOLUTION TO AWARD BID AND CONTRACT FOR 1996-97 BUDGET UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT Item 7b RESOLUTION NO. 134-97 « ► RESOLUTION TO AWARD BID AND CONTRACT FOR TRAVIS STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT (CDBG) Item 7c Bid was awarded to Lassetter Bus and Mobility in the amount of $345,524.00 for the purchase of heavy duty transit buses. Items 8a-8c Minutes of the meeting of the following boards and commissions were received. a. Water Resources Commission, August 1, 1997 b. 4B Sales Tax Corporation, August 13, 1997 c. Commission on Human Needs, August 18, 1997 Item 7d Moved by Councilor Johnston that the following proposals be awarded for the City's insurance program: William-Dwyer Building and Contents - $25,000 premium Extra Expense, City Hall - $ 1,001 premium Excess Workers' Compensation - $38,291 premium Boiler and Machinery - $ 4,618 premium Electronic Equipment - Included as Sublimit under Sedgewick of Texas. Inc. property coverages. Airport Liability - $ 2,000 premium TOTAL PREMIUM COSTS: $70,910.00 659 Item 7d cont'd. Motion seconded by Councilor Hawkins. Councilor Martin asked if the policy gives replacement cost coverage under building and content. Mrs. Jan Stricklin replied that it does. Councilor Shine asked how general liability was covered. Mrs. Stricklin explained that bids were requested on the entire insurance program for property, casualty and certain liability coverages. We sent out packages to six agencies, but only TML responded. TML's proposal involved the joining of funds which would result three times as expensive as we would wish to pay for it. We are self-insured for the extended liability. Our claim experience is very low compared to the rates. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 9a A public hearing was held to receive comments regarding the 1997-98 proposed budget and property tax rate. Mayor Yeager declared the public hearing open and allowed for public comment. Billy and Penny Henderson, 4428 Prince Edward, asked Council to consider the 20- year retirement issue for the City employees. Mrs. Henderson informed that a letter had been sent to the Council to consider this issue. As it stands now with the City's 25 year retirement plan if one of our spouses were to be killed before the 25 year retirement, the survivors would not be able to draw those benefits until the 25 year retirement period was completed. This causes a lot of hardship for the family members. In 1995 the Texas Municipal Retirement System gave cities the option to accept a 20 year plan. Many cities have done this and it is a very good benefit for the employees. Your retirement would be 40% lower at 20 years than if you stayed until 25 years. We hope you will consider this issue during your budget talks. Mrs. Stricklin informed that the cost would be $72,431 per year for 25 years. Mr. Henderson said if this passed it would be a comforting fact to know that his family and other City employee's families would be taken care of. David Brock, 1819 Hines, wanted to know if the tax increase was based on the current tax rate or an effective tax increase. City Manager explained that the rate as it stands now before taking any action is 67.672 cents. The half cent sales tax allows us to reduce taxes by 16 cents; it is going down to 51.28 cents. If we did not have this sales tax we would be proposing 67.67 cents. There is no change in the rate because of the growth. The rate is based on the effective tax rate. Mayor allowed for additional public comment. There being no one else who wished to be heard, Mayor declared the public hearing closed. Item 9b Moved by Councilor Hawkins that the line item within the proposed 1997-1998 budget regarding funding to CAC for the Neighborhood Action Groups in the amount of $10,090 be approved. Motion seconded by Councilor Johnston. Councilor Martin asked if the adoption of the budget could be postponed in order to discuss the 20-year retirement issue. City Manager stated that the budget has to be adopted before October 1. City Attorney informed that it needs to be adopted today because of the 30 day period for an ordinance to go into effect. 660 Item 9b cont'd. Councilor Thompson noted for the record that he has not and will not participate nor vote on this issue. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Abstentions: Councilor Thompson Item 9c ORDINANCE NO.80-97 AN ORDINANCE MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE SUPPORT, MAINTENANCE, BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1997, AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1998, BOTH DATES INCLUSIVE, ADOPTING THE BUDGET FIGURES AND ACCOUNTS AS PART OF SAID APPROPRIATIONS, DECLARING AN EMERGENCY Moved by Councilor Martin that Ordinance No. 80-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine. Mayor urged citizens to look carefully at their tax statement because it will include City, school, and county taxes. Reflection of the sales tax on city property will be included in that statement. Mayor informed Council that changes regarding the staffing levels in City Clerk and Legal Department will be evaluated, and this information is in the commentary of the agenda packet. Councilor Hawkins was in agreement with Councilor Martin to discuss the 20-year retirement and suggested that this be done at a worksession. Mrs. Stricklin said that it could be done any month of the year, but for better implementation it should be done before January 1. Councilor Hawkins said he would like for this to be discussed sometime during the year so that if it is voted in that it could be done by January 1. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 9d ORDINANCE NO. 81-97 AN ORDINANCE LEVYING, ASSESSING, AND FIXING THE TAX RATE FOR P THE USE AND SUPPORT OF THE WICHITA FALLS MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, AND PROVIDING FOR THE INTEREST AND SINKING FUND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1997-98 AND APPORTIONING EACH LEVY FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND PROVIDING FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF ANNUAL OCCUPATION TAXES PROVIDED BY LAW, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY Moved by Councilor Thompson that Ordinance No. 81-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Johnston and carried by the following vote. 661 Item 9d cont'd. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 10a A public hearing was held to receive comments regarding a proposed annexation of an area generally known as the Kovarik Road area. Mayor declared the public hearing open and allowed for public comment. Kirby Kellogg, Kovarik Road area, mentioned statements made by the City Staff last year. He stated that they had an adequate volunteer fire protection, and he wanted to know if the City would provide them with that same type of rural fire fighting capabilities. Our houses are built by the same builders that build inside the City and they would not jeopardize their reputation by building in an inferior way. My house is built to City Code. If you annex us you are arbitrarily supplanting your services against our will. We already have fire protection, trash collection, septic system, sheriff's patrol, and water service. Are you gong to reimburse us our $1000 membership to the Wichita Valley Water? If not, is this equitable? Are we still going to have to pay the higher Wichita Valley water rate while we are waiting for water lines to be installed and while other City residents pay a lower rate? He said that Staff had stated that the basic tenant of wise urban planning is to fill in existing City land. We agree with this statement. The Council talked about how the City could plan better within the ETJ to make growth outside the City more comparable with practices inside. I submit to you that this is the best way to handle this matter and also to save the City and us a considerable amount of money. If you take us in you will simply extend the ETJ, and your perceived problems will still be with you in the new ETJ. When you put all this together, it just makes sense to fill in the large amount of undeveloped, well located, affordable land inside the City, rather than to annex more. Plan better in regards to the ETJ and that will take care of that. No one has asked to be annexed, it is just the opposite no one wants to be annexed. What the neighbors want is to be left alone by the City and not annexed. I have a petition signed by virtually all the residents on Kovarik Road asking not to be annexed. We ask that you treat us fair and do the right thing by not going against the will of the people. Peggy Arnold, 5116 Whispering Creek, said that she did not move outside the City to avoid paying City taxes. We moved out there because our children had animals, and this was a more convenient way to care for the animals. We pay a double rated water bill, we paid for our own fire hydrants, we pay county and irrigation taxes and City sales tax. We want to live outside the City limits to have what we cannot have inside the City. Our streets are paved and curbed, we have all the things we need out there. If you extend the City limits to another city limits there will not be any way to live outside the City limits. That is where we want to live is outside the City limits. C. D. Rogers, 5207 Whispering Creek Lane, said his concern lies within the services to be provided. We do have a 4" water main and we did put in fire hydrants at our expense. He said he was told by a City utility employee that the 4" water main would not sustain the fire hydrant and would create such a vacuum on the line it would pull it in on top of itself. I do not know if this is true, but I hope that the plan includes to increase the size of the 4" water main on Whispering Creek Lane. We do have septic tanks and there are no plans to provide sewer services out there. We did move out there because we enjoy living in the country. Our houses are built to standard. He asked that they look seriously at the water main on Whispering Creek. We already have the services you are offering, like fire protection, law enforcement, trash collection, etc. Their main concern out there is grass fires. I can withstand being annexed if you can provide some guidelines for services that seem to exceed what you listed on the service plan. Cheryl Bourgoin, 6341 Kovarik Road, moved outside the City limits, not to escape being a part of Wichita Falls but to enjoy the freedoms that we have of not being in the City limits. She understands the City's power to annex. She felt that the service plan was lacking in providing services for which they would be paying. The plan did not include a program of application as to when and how things would occur during that four year plan. If she is going to pay City taxes, she would like the same services as are provided inside the City limits, such as sanitary sewer. She said that the City wants to annex now to save costs but you want to wait 662 Item 10a cont'd. twenty years down the road to put in sewer which would be more expensive. She felt like the citizens of Wichita Falls should be told what the cost is going to be to them in annexing this area. We do not have fire hydrants on Kovarik Road, but we have adequate fire protection because of the tanker truck which the volunteer fire department has. She suggested that if that area is annexed that the City look into providing adequate fire protection out there. She asked if funds were allocated in this budget for the service plan and the services to be provided. She wanted to know what they were going to get in return for paying City taxes and when they could expect it to happen. City Manager informed that there are different things in the budget for that. We have an arrangement with Wichita Valley Water to take over the water service of that area; money is to be paid to them. Engineering is looking into the time schedule of bringing in different services. Regarding the sewer lines, when we say we are going to provide services similar to what is in the City, most of the people in the City ran their sewer lines. We provide the main lines going down the street and lines going to the houses are the responsibility of the property owner. We have different things in the budget which take account of the things you brought up today. Some of the areas have been sighted ahead of others. Mr. Bonnett added that they plan to work Wichita Valley to stage it in, but see it moving forward expeditiously. They will start off extending it where the network is now and move to the northwest. Mrs. Bourgoin said that if it is not in the service plan the City has no obligation to provide those services, therefore, she would like to see a more detailed plan. Mayor pointed out that most of the funding for water and sewer within the City limits does not come from the tax rate but from the water and sewer fund, so that your property taxes do not support those improvements. Mrs. Bourgoin asked if capital improvement costs can be passed on to the annexed individuals. City Manager stated that It depends on the nature of the capital improvements, and gave the example of a main which opens up an area. She asked if capital improvements were in the budget such as the Faith Village flooding issue. Mrs. Bourgoin stated that if the mere fact is to protect the City in the long run as how things are built out there, there is a provision in the Code which addresses that, and she suggested that the City look into that section. Wade Yandell, 5950 Kovarik Road, said he moved outside the City limits because that WAN is where he wanted to live. He is concerned that this is the fourth time that they have gone through this process. He was told by a City official some time back that there could not be a development of the water lines outside the City limits because they would control the development of the properties inside the City limits. I believe this is still a true statement. Planning folks try to develop it in an orderly pattern, yet we are going after 5000 acres when we have not developed what is inside the City limits. We think the reason is just the tax dollars. I am opposed to the City extending their ETJ out three and a half miles. He mentioned an article in the paper where Certainteed agreed to pay a fine. How is the City addressing the problem of emissions from that plant. Also, 23 years ago City engineering, put in a sewer line on Seymour Highway and missed it by two feet, and they are still having to doctor it. We prefer to stay in the rural area. He wanted to know if they would have accurate figures at the next public hearing. He does not want to be annexed. Councilor Johnston suggested that he contact TNRCC or Certainteed to obtain correct information on the emissions. Wayne Nicholson, 5129 Anchor Road, said it seems we already have a big problem with retaining the water inside the City limits and he wanted to know about water retention on their property. He wanted to know when the City would install a water meter on the existing line that is out there, and if they are still going to have to go through Wichita Valley Water and pay the price they pay to have a meter set. In addition, he wanted to know if they were going to pay Wichita Valley rates or City rates? Councilor Daniel suggested that Mr. Clark give an overview of the service plan in order to clear up some of these questions. Mr. Clark gave a general overview of the service plan. Under the terms of annexation, within a reasonable amount after annexation, regular City services would be provided, and he cited what those were. He pointed out that under planning and zoning services, when an area is annexed it is zoned as Single Family 1 and this would be rezoned through a public hearing process. Also, Building Code is not enforced out there only what is required by the State of Texas. The largest item is water services and a contract has been established with the Wichita Valley Water Supply Corporation on how that would be accomplished. Mr. Bonnett provided information on the scheduling and the process, said they would be looking at doing this in two years. 663 Item 10a cont'd. Louise Marshal, lives on Anchor Road, asked how many sirens would be in the proposed area. Traffic Director responded that there would be seven additional sirens and this is in the budget. A citizen said he was concerned with his animals and wanted to know how long they would be grandfathered and what would happen if the property next to his is developed. In particular he wanted to know if his fences would have to be moved. City Manager replied in the affirmative. Marvin Lester Sigler, 4612 Seymour Highway, said he leases a portion of his property for a fireworks stand and unless that is grandfathered, he will lose that income. If there is a period of grandfathering it would be a great help to him. Citizen asked that the planning and zoning services be explained, in particular existing land uses. Mr. Clark explained that when property comes into the City it would be zoned Single Family 1 until it is rezoned to reflect the development and character of the area, and this would consist of a public hearing. During that time and even after that time, any use that is operating now legally may continue to operate. However, the regulations allow for some decision making when it comes to the question of expansion or changes, Mayor allowed for additional public comments. There being none, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. Mayor expressed appreciation to all who came and for their comments. She announced that the second public hearing would be held two weeks from tonight at 7:00 p.m. at the Knights of Columbus Hall on Turtle Creek Road. Councilor Shine suggested that at future public hearings Staff provide a formal presentation and allow for questions and follow up with general discussion. Council agreed. City Manager commented that there is always the idea that the City will furnish all the services, and that has never been the case. I think most people understand that, but there are still people who feel that when they are annexed they will have water and sewer and paved streets the next day. Councilor Hawkins wanted to know when planning needed to begin for the third waste water plant and if that is computed into the service plan. City Manager responded that it was not computed into this service plan, but we will probably do a Texpool loan. Councilor Hawkins asked about the cost of sewer mains and if they had been put into the service plan. City Manager replied that is a function of the whole development of the area, therefore, it is not in this service plan. You are not going to build that third waste water plant until it is economically smart to do it. It is a function of growth more than anything, and then becomes a function of expense. Councilor Hawkins asked when it would be necessary to develop the additional water plane to service the area that is out there which is on a different elevation than this. City Manager said they are looking at expanding the treatment capacity at existing plants. Our next big investment in water that serves the entire community is going to be the next cell expansion at the Cypress Plant. Expense is not computed. Overall community consumption is what will drive this; an industry will drive it quicker than annexation would. City Council recessed at 10:30 a.m. and reconvened at 10:45 a.m. Item 11 a ORDINANCE NO. 82-97 AN ORDINANCE PERMITTING THE POSSESSION, SALE, AND CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND WINE IN THE RIVER BEND NATURE WORKS FACILITY IN LUCY PARK Moved by Councilor Martin that Ordinance No. 82-97 be passed. 664 Item 11 a cont'd. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 11 b a ORDINANCE NO. 83-97 ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING GENERAL FUND EQUITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $625,000 FOR THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF TWENTY FIVE OUTDOOR WARNING SIRENS Moved by Councilor Thompson that Ordinance No. 83-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 11c ORDINANCE NO 84-97. ORDINANCE WAIVING APPENDIX A, SUBDIVISION SECTION 9(B)(2)(a) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES WITH RESPECT TO PLACING CURB AND GUTTER ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SOUTHWEST PARKWAY ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH LINE OF LOTS 2C AND 2D, CERTAIN-TEED PRODUCTS ADDITION Moved by Councilor Martin that Ordinance No. 84-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 11 d ORDINANCE NO. 85-97 ORDINANCE MAKING AN APPROPRIATION IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR ADDITIONAL GRANT REVENUE FROM THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT ACCEPTING SAME Moved by Councilor Martin that Ordinance No. 85-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Johnston and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None 665 Item 11 e ORDINANCE NO. 86-97 ORDINANCE MAKING AN APPROPRIATION IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR ADDITIONAL GRANT REVENUE FROM THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT ACCEPTING SAME Moved by Councilor Thompson that Ordinance No. 86-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Johnston and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 11f ORDINANCE NO 87-97 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, APPROVING THE MASTER AGREEMENT AMONG THE WICHITA COUNTY-CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS HOSPITAL BOARD (THE "CITY- COUNTY BOARD"), WICHITA GENERAL SERVICE CORPORATION, D/B/A UNITED REGIONAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, INC. ("URHCS") AND BETHANIA REGIONAL HEALTH CARE CENTER ("BETHANIA"), AND IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDED AND RESTATED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT AND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY-COUNTY BOARD, URHCS AND WICHITA COUNTY; A LEASE WITH BETHANIA, THE CITY-COUNTY BOARD AND WICHITA COUNTY; AND A SUBLEASE WITH THE CITY-COUNTY BOARD, URHCS AND WICHITA COUNTY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SAID AGREEMENTS; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Martin that Ordinance No 87-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Johnston. Mayor commented that she believed they had gained ground in almost every aspect of concern that Council has. The proposed documents allow the City/County Board to have many more controls than it now has. This is in the best interest of the City, County and the community. I believe the City and the County are protected in regards to the provisions of indigent health care. There are parts of the document that provide for protection in the future if the laws of the State change and make the City responsible for even a part of indigent care. It is incumbent upon the City and County to adopt these documents. While the City and County do not have ownership in the Wichita General Hospital, ultimately, we are responsible to the citizens to assure that the public interest and trust is affirmed and that it is best served in our responsibility to provide health care to the citizens of Wichita Falls and the County. Councilor Hawkins said he still had concerns about the appointment of the two managers of the two hospitals to the Board of Directors and asked why they had to be on the Board of Directors. He gave the comparison of the City Manager's position. Mr. Frank Yeager stated that it is common practice and it will serve to better improve their rapport with the directors. Also, a lot of items can be better understood and solved before they become an issue. They are two of sixteen directors, and will not be allowed to vote or participate in the discussion of items that affect their positions. It gives us a much stronger organization to do it this way. 666 Item 11f cont'd. Councilor Hawkins asked why the vote made the difference since as CEOs they would have input on the Board. Mr. Yeager replied that this was a part of the negotiations and it was dealt with at great length. In their particular positions it is important that they be able to vote on some of the issues coming before that Hospital Board. Councilor Johnston commented that it is general practice that the CEO be a member of the board. Councilor Shine said that the gain far outreaches any small item we may bring up today. We cannot stop it today because if we did we would unwind a lot of problems. Councilor Hawkins asked if the other non-profit boards which the Committee looked at had CEOs as members on the board, and Mr. Yeager replied that they did. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Mayor asked that Item 12b be taken up at this time. Item 12b RESOLUTION NO. 136-97 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, APPROVING THE MASTER AGREEMENT AMONG THE WICHITA COUNTY-CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS HOSPITAL BOARD (THE "CITY- COUNTY BOARD"), WICHITA GENERAL SERVICE CORPORATION, D/B/A UNITED REGIONAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, INC. ("URHCS") AND BETHANIA REGIONAL HEALTH CARE CENTER ("BETHANIA"), AND IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDED AND RESTATED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT AND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY-COUNTY BOARD, URHCS AND WICHITA COUNTY; A LEASE WITH BETHANIA, THE CITY-COUNTY BOARD AND WICHITA COUNTY; AND A SUBLEASE WITH THE CITY-COUNTY BOARD, URHCS AND WICHITA COUNTY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SAID AGREEMENTS; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Martin that Resolution No. 136-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 11 ORDINANCE NO. 88-97 AN ORDINANCE REZONING 2806 GRANT AND 2802, 2804, 2806, 2808, 2810, 2812, 2814 & 2816 KELL BLVD., DESCRIBED AS LOTS 11 THROUGH 14, 16-A, 18 & 19, BLOCK 6, WEST SIDE ADDITION OUT OF HIGHLAND ADDITION, WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, FROM LIMITED COMMERCIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL CONDITIONED ZONING; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW 667 Item 11 g cont'd. Moved by Councilor Martin that Ordinance No. 88-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Hawkins. Mr. Clark informed that the petitioner is trying to expand his existing business which is a non-conforming use in a limited commercial zone. There was some concern by Staff and Planning and Zoning Commission that this could be a spot zoning, therefore, it has been recommended that the rezoning be accomplished but as a conditioned rezoning to general commercial for the block. This would allow, with review by the Planning Commission, for development to occur further in that block, however, not completely opening the door to any of the uses which reflect larger scale site sizes. Planning Commission does recommend general commercial limited conditioned zoning. Tom Longest, 2007 Hiawatha, petitioner, explained the situation and asked that Council consider approval in order to best utilize that property. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 11 h ORDINANCE NO 89-97 AN ORDINANCE REZONING 2028, 2030 AND 2032 MAURINE STREET, DESCRIBED AS LOTS 3, 4, & 5, BLOCK F, RAY MASSIE SUBDIVISION, WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, FROM MULTIFAMILY TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL CONDITIONED ZONING; 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. 89-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Thompson. Mr. Clark informed that this area has some general commercial adjacent to it, but also multi-family residential. While it is limited commercial, it is now filled up with a good bit of residential. Staff and the Planning Commission felt that a conditioned general commercial zone would be in order to establish some edge and review on what development would take place there. Councilor Hawkins asked why the other properties were not taken in. He felt it was spot zoning. Mr. Clark said it had to do with the amount of existing residential in the area. There was a question as to whether that would be best at this point and time. However, City Staff and the Planning Commission are looking at the future land use of the area and it may be that in the process that position may be more supportive. Councilor Shine did not feel it was in order to make any changes to this without talking to the property owner out there. Councilor Hawkins suggested that next time the entire area be considered. Helen Nicks, lives on Harlan Lane, stated that there are only two houses left in that area that have not been taken in as commercial. If you take the whole area in it would benefit everybody. My acreage is in the back against the irrigation ditch, and I am going to be closed off by commercial on Maurine Street. Mayor commented that this falls under the realm of Planning and Zoning and they should look into the rezoning of some of the rest of this and see some of the compatible uses, etc. The proposal before us is the rezoning of the three lots on Maurine Street. 668 Item 11 h cont'd. Bobby Davis, 2028 Maurine, is the owner of the three lots being considered. He said that whatever the Council wants to do is fine with him. Mr. Wilson and others felt that if he got his lots rezoned it would be profitable to them. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 11 i ORDINANCE NO. 90-97 AN ORDINANCE WAIVING SECTION 4220(I), OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, GOVERNING THE PLACEMENT OF A CARPORT IN THE EXTERIOR SIDE SETBACK AT 1615 13T" ST.; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Shine that Ordinance No. 90-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Thompson. John Childs, 1615 13th Street, owner, said the closest building to where he wants to attach this carport is 40 feet. It is a pie shaped property and I bought it solely for the purpose of being able to park two cars parallel. Pauline Childs, 1615 13th Street, said that there is a ruling that if you have access you should put the carport in the back. We do have a paved alley, but it is not feasible to have a , r carport back there because there is no adequate lighting and there are dumpsters where trash, nails, glass, etc. are in the alley. I do not want to drive up in a dark alley where I would have to get out of my car to open the gate to get in my yard. It would be a safety feature for us to have it in the front, and we would appreciate your consideration. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 11 ORDINANCE NO. 91-97 ORDINANCE WAIVING APPENDIX A, SUBDIVISION SECTION 9(B)(2)(a) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES WITH RESPECT TO PLACING CURB AND , GUTTER ON THE EAST SIDE OF FELL LANE ADJACENT TO THE WEST LINE OF 1101 FELL LANE Moved by Councilor Hawkins that Ordinance No. 91-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Thompson and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None 669 Item 12a RESOLUTION NO 135-97 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT TO ENGINEERING CONTRACT FOR LAKE ARROWHEAD RAW WATER LINE ENGINEERING STUDY Moved by Councilor Thompson that Resolution No. 135-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Martin and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 13a Moved by Councilor Johnston that bid be awarded to American Communications for the purchase of outdoor warning sirens in the amount of$518,139.10. Motion seconded by Councilor Thompson. City Manager informed that they would be going to the 4B Board to fund this. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Shine, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays: None Item 14a A discussion was held regarding the current status of previous City Council Ordinances ordering the repair or demolition of a sub-standard structure located at 1013 Wood Street, Wichita Falls, Texas. Mayor commented that Mr. Gene Buchanan, owner of the structure at 1013 Wood Street, had appeared before the Council on July 15 in the public portion of the meeting and at that time Council suggested that he work with Mr. Jim King and present him appropriate plans of the rehab of this property. This has been before the Council three previous times. Mayor asked if Mr. Buchanan has ever come to the Staff with a formal plan. Mr. King replied that they have never received nor is there on file any engineering plans, drawings or specifications from a builder that would indicate the completion date of this project. There have been permits issued for parcels of the structure to be rehabilitated. However, none of these permits have ever been finalized or closed out by the Building Inspection Division, and as a result they have been closed administratively. Those permits expired due to lack of completion or lack of effort, and were canceled administratively. Mr. King informed that the City's independent report was received late Friday afternoon and Mr. Buchanan does not have a copy because of the time factor. Councilor Thompson said he and Councilor Hawkins had met with Mr. Buchanan and suggested that he secure an independent view as to what it would take to rehab the house and how far it has come. Mr. Buchanan should have dialogued more with Code Enforcement on what needed to be done. If these are the current pictures and there has been no improvement other than what we see here, I feel that Council will have a negative response. Councilor Thompson was concerned that there is a deep suspicion, especially in the East Side, that the City has some ulterior motive in demolishing houses. We need to assure them that is not the case. Councilor Daniel agreed that there is a suspicion about the City wanting to tear down houses, and he asked Mr. King to explain how this procedure worked. Mr. King explained the procedure in detail. 670 Item 14a cont'd. After looking at the pictures on the structure several questions were asked about the condition of the structure and the requirements. Councilor Hawkins asked questions about the electrical and plumbing permits which were issued. Mr. King informed that inspections were made but there was never any clearance to connect and the permits expired. As a result, permits were closed out administratively. Councilor Hawkins asked if a foundation that does not have the 18" clearance affects the livability of a house. Mr. King informed that they do not inspect occupied dwellings. Councilor Hawkins felt that today's Code was being applied to yesterday's building, and he did not agree with that because this was an existing building. He believed that Mr. Buchanan should be given a specific period of time to present Mr. King with a plan and a financial statement that shows he can rehab this house. Mayor stated that Council had already allowed him time and nothing has happened. Councilor Hawkins felt that the property was worth saving. Councilor Thompson said that there needs to be a general consensus as to what is acceptable in various neighborhoods. I am not in favor of sub-standard housing, but there has to be more than one standard. I hope we can come to some agreement in the future as to what is livable. Gene Buchanan, informed that this started in 1995 and the work was completed in 1995. On August 22 he met with partial City Council and they suggested an independent report from a Realtor who had nothing to do with the house. He provided letters to the Council from Bill Rowland and Davis Electric which stated that the house is in good shape and needs only minor repairs. The electrical and the plumbing was done in 1995. No work has been done since 1995 but it is secure. He asked Council to give him time to do the final work. Mr. Buchanan informed that he had gone to Mr. King, as instructed by Council, and applied for a permit but was turned down. Councilor Martin stated that Council had instructed Mr. Buchanan to provide Code Enforcement with a set of plans and a completion date and none of that has been accomplished. Mr. Buchanan stated that the house is secured and they have completed the gas, water, sewer, and plumbing; the only thing that is not done is the commode and water heater. Councilor Martin said that Mr. Buchanan did this without providing a set of plans to Code Enforcement. Discussion ensued on the foundation and what had and had not been done. Councilor Hawkins said that Mr. Rowland said this structure is not in danger of collapsing, however it is not ready to be occupied in its present condition and it does need to be finished. Councilor Daniel commented that Council writes ordinances that take into account existing conditions but they also require that once individuals take an existing building and remodel it that they bring it up to Code. Councilor Hawkins said that Mr. Buchanan has made mistakes, but questioned if this house needs to be torn down because it is falling down. Councilor Daniel asked if we should allow the individual to decide how our ordinances should be enforced or is it up to the individual to conform to the ordinance. Mr. Buchanan has been before this body at least three times and has been told specifically that we want to encourage good building codes, quality buildings, and we want to encourage people to remodel buildings, and here is a plan and a method to do it. Mr. Buchanan made errors and did not follow through with what is required by the City and our Ordinances, and because of that he is in default. Mr. King informed that Mr. Buchanan's permit was denied pending receipt of financial stabilization of the building, plan specifications, and financial capabilities which is in accordance with the Ordinance. Mayor said that the Council does not want houses to be demolished, that they would rather have them rehabbed. We have established ordinances to protect the public safety and welfare of the citizens of this community and have established procedures to enforce those ordinances. Over the past six years Mr. Buchanan has had ample opportunity under the direction of three Councils to comply with the Ordinances and work with City Staff in rehabilitating this structure. I think it is time to move on and support the Staff in all the work they have been doing. Councilor Thompson said that the letters from Mr. Rowland should carry some wait and also the letters from Mr. Cunningham and Davis Electric. He suggested that Council physically walk through this structure to look at it for ourselves. He felt like there was some 671 Item 14a cont'd. miscommunication because of the differing views from Mr. Buchanan and Staff. Councilor Daniel pointed out that none of the Council is qualified to inspect these structures. Instead we develop policies and procedures which are applicable in situations like these. We have a man who is questioning our procedure, and our obligation is to the citizens as well as to Mr. Buchanan. Councilor Thompson agreed and stated that this is not a way to deny any validity of the Staffs reports. Councilor Shine asked if there was a way to save the house. Mr. Clark replied that the information is given when the inspection is done and a check list is provided as to what needs to be repaired for them to follow through. We look for a serious amount of information regarding a rehabilitation plan. Councilor Shine said he was worried about the procedure. If someone wants to rent a house they should be able to depend on the decision that is made from the Inspection Department and on that basis, only, is where we should go. Mr. Clark said that those are the basis under which we operate. Councilor Shine asked if our procedures currently in place were strong enough to lead to what is approved or not approved? Mr. Clark replied that when a structure is tagged for demolition it becomes subject to the City's building codes for remodeling. Mr. Clark agreed that permits were issued and inspections were made, but when you look at the structure there are still major problems. Councilor Johnston said there were several problems here. Is the structure a health hazard, is it ready for occupancy or will it ever be? I do not see that it is a health hazard but I do not believe it will receive an occupancy permit. Mr. Clark said that is our problem because we are trying to help people do their real project but when it takes four or five years it is difficult. Councilor Johnston said that demolition had been ordered three times and it has not occurred. I cannot say it is a structurally unsound building, however, it does need to be brought up to Code. Councilor Hawkins was in favor of allowing Mr. Buchanan another opportunity. City Manager has concern that this has been drug out a long time and we have been objective by obtaining an independent report. We have asked people who are in the same situation as Mr. Buchanan for a plan and for a financial, and it would be easier if they provided that. We try to solve the dilemma on a daily basis and we are not getting any closer to it. Until the roof and foundation are addressed, it cannot be occupied. These things go to Court as this one case has and we have to have a standard with which to go to Court, not just how we feel or what we think his intentions are, but on how the structure is. Everything you have seen on this reflects that the structure is not good, and he has filed no plan with us to make it good. I do not see the dilemma here. We are interested in saving the house, all he needs to do is provide the plan and financial. We would not have had these three or four meetings but we never get that level of information, and that is our problem with it. It either meets the Code or it doesn't. Councilor Johnston commented that you have a structure that is not a hazard, but is a long way from being occupied. City Manager stated that he believed Mr. Buchanan wants it occupiable but he has not provided us anything to address the structural integrity of the structure. If he would come in and provide us that, this problem would be over, but we are not getting that. It does not address the real problem that our Staff has with this structure. We have not had the piece of communication as to what the finished product is going to be and we cannot work in that arena anymore than he or you can. Mayor stated that Mr. Buchanan has been informed of what he needs to do and that has never happened. Obviously, from the report the building is not in eminent danger of falling down, but so far he has not complied with the wishes and directions of the Council, and this could go on forever. Several Councilors agreed. Councilor Johnston said that we did not follow through in demolishing the structure after the thirty days when the structure was in poor condition two years ago, and now time has passed and the house still stands. He has put it in a semi-safe condition and it is not a hazard any more. We meant what we said, it was just not accomplished. City Manager mentioned that this is kind of a trap that we fall in through our own processes. You can get building permits and that keeps it alive for another year if you make any kind of effort at all. Maybe in these cases, where we are talking about a house that is going to be brought back from demolition or not, no permits should be issued until we have the complete plan. We would not issue a permit on a case that has been brought before Council for demolition unless we see from the property owner a complete file building permit that takes 672 Item 14a cont'd. all the renovation into account. Maybe we should treat these as a special category, but there is not going to be partial permits, it is going to be for the whole project or not at all. Councilor Johnston simplified that they would get one series of permits at one time and get all the permits done at one time. They will have to do all the structural work or whatever is necessary to make the building safe. When the permits expire and the work is not done, the structure is demolished. Councilor Shine asked if that was where we were now with Mr. Buchanan. Councilor Johnston commented that the problem is he has been getting permits. Mr. King said that procedure would be greatly beneficial to them. Financial constraints are always a consideration on structures like this and piece-meal permits drag this out for years. A one permit issue would be beneficial. Councilor Martin said a plan should be submitted to Code outlining the foundation and ceiling and entire structure repairs. There are too many things in here which need to be accomplished to make it a habitable structure. Plans need to be submitted with a definite completion date. Mr. Buchanan stated that every part of the house has passed City inspections. Councilor Daniel said he was very sensitive as to how the Council and its actions are perceived and I want to be very clear that there is not one of us that want to tear this house down. We have received calls from citizens in the Eastside and I have visited with a couple who have a very nice house and who are very concerned about the houses around them being allowed to be run down, and they said it is the City's responsibility to see that the houses are maintained according to Code. That is why we are here; we have been asked by those neighbors to do something about it. We do not want to tear your house down, but if an individual is not willing to work within the system according to procedures outlined, we have no choice but to say "so be it". Council concurred that Mr. Buchanan get with the proper people this afternoon and provide some evidence that he is willing to commit financially and provide plans to bring this into compliance as directed by Staff. That needs to be accomplished today, and if he cannot then Staff is to move forward with demolition. Item 14b Councilor Johnston asked about the radar status. City Manager informed that the federal people have cleared the radar to the State before we can have access to it. The State has said they wanted it and they now have ownership to the radar. They have given us a preliminary answer that the application submitted by the North Texas Radar Group is not qualified. They now will run it through to see if any state agencies want it and there is one that says that they do. We can ask them to continue to pay rent until this is completed. Mr. Parker said that they have canceled their lease, but there is a radar waiting disposition. Councilor Johnston suggested sending the rental bill to the State. Mayor reported that they are working for a positive on-going of a portion of the Red River Chloride Project. If this happens we will not have to build Lake Ringold. Also, there will be a meeting in Munday, Texas concerning the potential four-lane of Highway 277 between here and Abilene. Item 14c City Manager informed Council that they would have to have a quorum at the Public Hearings for the proposed annexation. City Manager informed that he has copies of the 9-1-1 Budget, which will be on the agenda for the next Council meeting. Item 14d City Council went into Executive Session at 1:18 p.m. as authorized by Section 551.071 of the Government Code. 673 Item 14d cont'd. City Council reconvened at 1:35 p.m. Mayor announced that no action had been taken and no motions were made during executive session. The City Council adjourned at 1:35 p.m. PASSED AND APPROVED this_ day of I Ux . 1997. KOHRA A. AGE MAYOiR ATTEST: Lydia Torres City Clerk W",