Min 06/11/1966 Wichita Falls, Texas
Memorial Auditorium Building
July 11, 1960
Items 1 t 2
The Board of Aldermen of the City of Wichita Falls, Texas, met in called session
on the above date in the Council Room of the Memorial Auditorium Building at 7:30
o'clock P.M. , with the following members present :
Leroy Daniel Mayor pro tem
R. Kenneth Bill X
Ur. D. C. Burross X
.James M. Davis X Aldermen
Max Kruger X
Jack Davis City Manager
H. P. Hodge, Jr. City Attorney
Wilma J. Thomas City Clerk
R. C. hancier Absent
Cletus C. Schenk Absent
The invocation was given by Alderman Davis.
Item 3
' w On June 6, 1966, payment was authorized in the amount of $310,300.00 to pay
the City's portion of widening FN 369 between FBI 2380 and State Highway 79. This
cost was based on the engineer's estimate. City Manager Jack Davis explained that
the city's share based on the unit bid prices from the low bidder amounts to
$328,000.00, which includes engineering; and contengencies. Additional funds in
i
the amount of $17,700.00 are required to complete this amount.
RESOLUTION NO. 650
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 646, dated June 6, 1966, the Board of Aldermen
transferred from the Water and Sewer Fund to the General Fund the sum of Three
Hundred Ten Thousand Three Hundred and No/100 Dollars (0310,300.00) to be used to
pay the City's part of the cost of widening; FM No. 369 between FH No. 2380 and
State Highway No. 79; and,
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the City's part of such cost will be
Three hundred Twenty-Light Thousand and No/100 Dollars, which is Seventeen Thousand
Seven hundred and No/100 Dollars more than originally estimated.
1 Nf)tq 'THEREFOkE, BE IT KESOLVED BY THI. BOARD OF ALDLRIIEN OF THE CITY OF P;ICHIV.
FALLS, TEXAS, THAT:
There is hereby transferred from the Cater and Sewer Fund to the General Fund
an additional Seventeen Thousand Seven hundred and No/100 Dollars to be used to
pay the City's part of the cost of widening FM No. 369 between FM No. 2380 and
State Highway No. 79; this transfer stall be a temporary loan only, and shall be
repaid to the 'rater and Sewer Fund out of the proceeds of a future capital improve-
nents Mond fund.
iloved by Alderman Kruger that kesolution No. 650 be passed.
:htion seconded by Alderman Burross, and carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mayor pro tem. Daniel, Aldermen Hill, Burross, Davis, and Kruger.
1 Nays : None
ORDINANCE NO. 2251
9 AN ORDINANCE MAKING AN APP11,J)PRIATION FI ON THE UNAPPROPRIATED GENERAL
FUND TO ACCOUNT NUMBER 044-Y-8, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
a'
Moved by Alderman Hill that Ordinance No. 2251 be passed.
Motion seconded by Alderman Kruger, and carried by the following vote:
Ayes : 11yor pro tem Daniel, aldermen hill, Burross, Davis, and Kruger.
Nays: None
912
Item 4
d
The public hearing was declared open to those wishing to be Beard regarding
proposed changes in the electrical code. These changes are concerned with rec-
iprocity of registration and ownership. City Manager Jack Davis presented a
brief background sketch of the proposed changes.
N The first person to be heard was William E. Archer, 1712 Collins, in the
electrical contracting business with office located at 1416 5th Street. He
spoke in behalf of himself as a member of the electrical industry. Several 71
comments were made with regard to safety. He stated it was the responsibility
of the City of Wichita Falls to determine the qualifications of its electricians,
and if any member of any firm desires to be in the contracting business, let him
qualify himself. It was his opinion that with a reciprocity agreement we would
not be requiring the protection that is needed for the citizens of Wichita Falls.
Outside people would be able to come in and not establish a business. he also
stated this was the first time the industry had not been allowed to participate
in a study of these ordinances, and he wished they had been asked to make recommend-
ations in this matter.
Finis Taylor, of Burkburnett, appeared stating he held a journeyman electric-
ian's license in Wichita Falls. to thinks the ordinance we now have is a good one,
and if changed it would weaken our requirements for good journeyman electricians,
thus in turn endangering lives. IIe feels each electrician should take an examin-
ation in this area to familiarize himself with the code, stating that a man
will be a better electrician if he is familiar with the code. Being a good electric-
ian in another city would not necessarily make him a good one Here. alderman Davis
stated he thought this was a good point to bring out, that being a good electrician
somewhere else would not necessarily qualify hip► here unless he had taken a com-
parable code examination. Mr. Taylor stated he opposed the proposed changes in
the ordinance.
Raymond Seidel spoke as a representative of the National Electrical Contract-
or's Association. He stated that electrical work was highly specialized and tech-
nical in character, and the electrical contractor is a separate form of business
within electrical industry. It might be defined as a speedy and economical
performance requiring experience, selection, purchase, and delivery of the right
kinds of electrical apparatus, appliances, equipment, and materials including
their correct assenbly and installation. The electrical contractor is the only
one capable of furnishinE such performance of responsili.lity. It requires his
control of material selection, and scheduling of work. The policy statement of the
association is the belief that the contractor who tries to broaden his performance
and responsibility across many fields of varied construction to include eiectrical
work as a sideline will undermine public regard for electrical contracting as a
specialized field of electrical uork. The elecrical contractor sees in this
amendment anyone with equal Notivation to make a living to be equally capable of
venture into electrical contracting; business without his or the public regard for
the factors of experience and responsibility.
VAyor pro tern Daniel stated it was their desire to strengthen instead of
weaken the code. Alderman Davis asked in what way would the proposed changes
lessen the safety requirements. Alderman Kruger asked wherein would it hurt the
city if this amendment was adopted. :Ir. Seidel stated he thought the door became
omen to a contractor who had profit in mind foremost. Also damage that inferior
contractors do to Io itima.to contractors.
Vyor Fro tem Daniel asked if he "felt that it was a weak ;oint of our code
that if the owner dies the business is permitted to be carried on - did he think
it would be stronger if he had to be a master electrician in his employ. Aldernarr
lurross asked if a journeyman could not strive to attain a raster electrician even
though he might not desire to be a contractor.
Jim Pottyiohn, who resides at 526 lest Inwood, stated that he felt a recipro-
cal agreement would bring prole into I;ichita Falls who did not spend their money
here except while they were in the city. In other words, non-residents. He
stated he was interested in seeing Wichita Falls growing. ?layor pro tem Daniel
stated the ordinance was not written for protection of the contractor, but for the
safety of our citizens. Vr. Pettyjohn stated that each journeyman is qualified to
do the electrical work. If an electrician was non-union he could bring in any-
one, and he was opposed to the amendments. He stated that the industry thanked
the council for listening to them.
Kenneth Adair. , 110 Dundee, stateu he holds a journeyman's license, and is
opposed to the changes in the electrical ordinance. He said he was not afraid
to take a test in any city, and if a man is afraid then he is not qualified.
y13
Item 4 cont'd
The national code is a minimum requirement and it is up to each city to make the
best for their citizens. He believes we are setting a standard of high quality,
and if a man is qualified what do we stand to gain by not requiring him to take
a test? When a master electrician makes a decision it is based on his experience
and money. He feels reciprocity would weaken our code. He felt the ownership
requirement might discourage small businesses. IIe also asked how the Electrical
Advisory Board felt on this matter. The City Manager stated it was not the
Advisory Board's responsibility to advise on everything that goes into an ord-
inance. At this time Nr. Seidel stated he had attended a meeting with three
members of the Council and the Advisory Board in regard to these matters.
Bob lb rath, 307 Star Avenue, holds a journeyman's license in Wichita Falls,
and is opposed to both changes. He stated that a business would cease to operate
if a contractor did not have a master electrician. He was opposed to reciprocity
because no two cities have the same electrical code. He would be opposed to a
set electrical code because of varying factors across the state. He does not
feel it would be good for the city from a safety or economical standpoint. If
this new section is enacted it would weaken and not strengthen our present code.
"Ir. Morath stated he worked for one firm on a job Here whose owner was not a
master electrician, as is required by the present ordinance. IIe was informed
that if such were the case then he had taken out the permit before the ordinance
was changed making that requirement. Alderman Davis asked if in this instance
did he recall any instances where he might have directed that the work be done
in an unsafe manner so that the firm could make more profit. Mr. Morath did not
feel that he did. With the contractor being unfamiliar with the code, the local
electrician would possibly have to correct some of his work or ideas. He felt
a journeyman's job could be affected if a master quit the job.
Joe Adair, 1502 Harrison, commented that all electricians in Wichita Falls
desire high standards and feels that all have worked for these ordinances to
attain a high degree of safety. He feels the City of I;ichita Falls has the best
ordinance in the state of Texas, and is opposes; to both changes.
City i•lanager .lack Davis explained that the reason for the proposed changes
came about as a result of the City Council directing him to investigate if and
why our requirement for master electricians was longer than in other cities in
Texas, and for further investigation into reciprocity and ownership. The quest-
ion loci of ownership had cone up before.
Alderman Furross made several comments regardinr the electrical ordinance
which has been amended nine times since. No ordinance which has been passed,
includint the milk ordinance, has consumed ;'ore time than the electrical ord-
inance. He stated that no one can write ox enact a perfect ordinance, and that
several policy questions, as well as technical, had to be resolved. He stated
the Council was not representing these nen as electricians, but as citizens of
Wichita Falls. he related an incident in which an individual questioned why he
was denied taking the test. Alderman Burross stated that anyone is entitled to
be heard, and the charges investigated.
I
Don Moore, of this city, inquired whether this man actually took the test
who said he was denied it. Mayor pro tem Daniel replied he was just a man in
industry who was trying to state his case, and was not an electrician.
Verle Welborn stated he was opposed to a reciprocal agreement for journey-
men. Their interest would not be in their work as they would just be here for
a job, and would not have the local community's interest at heart. He stated
he would not see any advantage to a master electrician's license unies >
person desired to be a contractor here or anywhere else. No more r.n"pour is
needed so it would serve no purpose to allow outsiders to come in. An does not
feel the ownership requirement would make it safer. The only purpose of a
master electrician in this locality would be a contractor. If a mastuT electr-
ician is not the owner of the business he might compromise his wort: i , order
to keep his job if the contractor gave him orders which should not be carried out.
Alderman Davis asked who was responsible in case of faulty work, the master electr-
ician or contractor. City Manager Jack Davis stated the owner or contractor
would be. The master electrician could also have his license revoked. It. Welborn
was opposed to both amendments. He also wondered what method would be used to
determine a man's qualifications, and how he would be identified in another city.
The Advisory Board would review each individual case.
Lawrence Holland, 1717 Wilson,stated he felt they were trying to tear down
the code instead of elevate it. He was not in favor of reciprocity unless we can
get the same from other cities. He was informed that it would definitely be a
I
914
Item 4 cont'd
cooperative agreement in writing.
Donnie Taylor, 1007 Lincoln, stated he was an apprentice, and asked what were
the reasons for the proposed changes. Mayor pro ten Daniel stated it was for
increased safety. Mr. Taylor felt it should not be too restrictive just for its
own sake, but should be used to protect the public in regard to safety.
Charles Jones, of 1407 Michna, a journeyman, stated that since he first took
the test some chances had been made which were better for the City of Wichita Palls ;
however, lie was opposed to both these changes.
,Alderman Kruger stated he was glad for the citizens to express their opinions,
and that they had not ;re-judged or made up their minds before.
City Slanager Jack Davis stated there had been some questions on the motives
involved, and that he and John Roark had nothing to gain by any recommendations
they make or do not make, and no ulterior motives are involved.
Robert Davis, of Burkburnett, stated he was a journeyman electrician, and
desired to know what safety factor wouid 5c gained by bridging mcn in from out
of town. ( tier questions involved qualifications. City tanager Jack Davis in-
formed him it would still be up to the L.lectrical Advisory board to approve or
disapprove each applicant.
Donald G. 1,'rilht, a journeyman, statod that a person could not go to another
city and Rio the same work without a test because the code will be some different.
He suggested that re-testing should be accomplished at certain intervals in order
to keep the men familiar with the current code.
Ed Yeager, of ' ichita foster Advertising Company, was opposed to the proposed
changes. Others would be brought into Wichita falls with a reciprocity agreement,
and he feels we should support our own peorle by using the resources we have here.
A few of these -protestants appeared more than once.
;Ioveu by �ldcrman Kruger that the meeting be adjourned.
(lotion seconded by Alderman Bill, and carried unanimously.
The board of Aldermen adjourned at 10:30 P. A.
' t i�'� day of „��',�,
PASSED ��'�D t,` PK��\'Li l _I his 1966.
--�--
TT :'savor
1 i�l I E S I
City Clerk