Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 11/06/1984MINUTES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 6, 1984 2:00 P.M. Present: Mayor Luther Jones Mayor Pro Tem Betty N. Turner Council Members: David Berlanga, Sr. Welder Brown Leo Guerrero *Dr. Charles W. Kennedy, Jr. Joe McComb Frank Mendez Mary Pat Slavik City Manager Edward A. Martin City Attorney J. Bruce Aycock City Secretary Bill G. Read -t/Q,cLE� Mayor Luther Jones called the meeting to order in the Council Chamber of City Hall. The invocation was given by Major Jim Waller of the Salvation Army, following which the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States was led by Council Member Frank Mendez. City Secretary Bill G. Read called the roll of required Charter Officers and verified that the necessary quorum was present to conduct a legally constituted meeting. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Betty N. Turner that the minutes of the Regular Council Meetings of October 23 and October 30, 1984, be approved as presented; seconded by Council Member Welder Brown; and passed unanimously. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Jones announced presentations by various individuals and representatives of organizations who wished to make donations to the Chamber of Commerce for expenses incurred in the submission for the homeporting for the battleship vessels. Checks were presented by the following groups: Mr. Sid Leake, representing Coastal Bend Mortgage Bankers Association Colonial Mortgage Company, Drew Mortgage Company, and Lomas and Nettleton; Mrs. Barbara Meisen of Lenders Association; Ms. Barbara Turner, Charter Savings and Loan; Ms. Margie Myers, President of the Corpus Christi Board of Realtors; and Mr. Jack Shannon, representing Hotel -Motel -Condo Association. Mr. Jimmy Lyles of the Chamber of Commerce responded and expressed appreciation to all of the groups who had contributed funds. He presented the Council Members with copies of the posters that will be displayed on Tuesday when the Navy study team will be in Corpus Christi. He explained that the team MICROFILMED nutes Regular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 2 will arrive in Corpus Christi at 5:00 p.m. on November 12; their evaluation will be conducted on November 13; and invitations to meet the study team have been mailed to invite the Council and others to the reception for Tuesday night, November 13, at the Marriott Hotel. He informed the Council that he and Mayor Jones will be in San Antonio on Wednesday to request support of that City and in Austin on Thursday to meet with Governor White. He stated that they feel very positive about the visit from the Navy. Council Member Mary Pat Slavik pointed out that there is a scheduled meeting for an assessment hearing at the George Evans Elementary School on Tuesday, November 13, at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Lyles stated that he hoped the Council Members would be able to attend the reception for a short time anyway. He stated that the committee is urging everyone to display posters and fly their Flags on the days when the Navy team will be in Corpus Christi. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Jones then administered the Oath to the following newly appointed members of Boards and Commissions: Mrs. Darlene Hunter, Building Code Board of Appeals; Mr. Quenten Cook, Marina Board; and Mr. Bill Collins, Mechanical Advisory Board. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Jones announced the bid opening on the following engineering project: Lexington Industrial Center and Manchester Place/Dona Park Sanitary Sewer Extensions - This project provides for minor sanitary sewer extensions to serve the Lexington Industrial Center in the Flour Bluff portion of the City and the relocation of an 8 -inch sanitary sewer in the west portion of the City at Dona Drive and Up River Road, to facilitate a storm sewer project. Assistant City Manager James K. Lontos opened bids on this project from the following companies: Claude Chapman Construction Company and Ibanez Construction Company, Inc. Mr. Lontos informed the Council that both bidders had submitted the required bid security bond. Mayor Jones expressed appreciation to the two companies submitting bids and stated that they will be tabled for 48 hours, pursuant to the requirements of the City Charter and referred to the staff for tabulation and recommendation. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Council Member Guerrero asked that the students from Del Mar introduce themselves and five responded. Mayor Jones called for consideration of the Consent Motions on the following items: notes Regular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 3 1. Approving a twelve months supply agreement, with option to extend for an additional twelve months, at the same terms and conditions, subject to the approval of the supplier and the City Manager, or his designee, for automatic transmission overhaul and repair service, based on low bid, to Interstate Transmission for an estimated annual expenditure of $20,870. Prices have decreased 5% since last contract August, 1983. Twenty-three bid invitations were issued and four bids received. 2. Approving a twelve months additional twelve months, approval of the supplier mechanical joint and 60 Division based on low bid Clow Corporation Oskaloosa, Iowa 4"-12" Mechanical Joint & Flanged -End Gate Valves $52,785.43 supply agreement, with option to extend for an at the same terms and conditions, subject to the and the City Manager, or his designee, for 190 flanged -end gate valves to be used by Water to the following companies: GRAND TOTAL: Corpus Christi Pipe & Supply Corpus Christi, Texas 16"-36" Mechanical Joint Gate Valves $41,713.82 $94,499.25 Fifteen bid invitations were issued; seven bids were received. Prices have increased approximately 12.8% from last contract of August, 1983. 3. Approving purchase of one vibratory soil compactor for the Street Division, based on low bid of $51,500 to J. W. Bartholow Machinery Company. Thirteen bid invitations were issued and nine bids received. This equipment is included in the 1984-85 Capital Outlay Budget. 4. The Temporary Police Facilities project be accepted and final payment of $13,448.76 be authorized to Kiesel Construction Co. The total cost of this project, which provided for the construction of two portable buildings at the Police Station, was $69,679. (Attachment #2) 5. The Hialco Renovation project be accepted and authorized to Hunt Construction Co., Inc. It is the contractor be granted a 27 day time extension final payment of $8,501.15 be further recommended that due to material delivery delays beyond the contractor's control. The total cost of this 9th Year Community Development Block Grant project is $58,579. (Attachment #3) 6. Amend prior to third reading, the ordinance amending section 23-57 of the Code of Ordinances, requiring fences around swimming pools, to allow that natural barriers or obstructions may be considered sufficient enclosure. (Attachment #4) *7. Amending the Wastewater System Capital Improvement Program approved by City Council on January 5, 1984, by revising two projects as follows: a) Nottarb Place Subdivision: Reducing the allocation of funds from $450,000 to $45,000 and releasing $405,000 for the McArdle project; nutes Regular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 4 b) Fallins Riverside and Magee Tract: Reducing the allocation of funds from $350,000 to $40,000 and releasing $310,000 to be utilized in the McArdle project. *This item was amended, see below. Council Member Mendez referred to item 7 and inquired about the EPA grant. He stated that they had a discussion in regard to the need to get the residents of Fallins Riverside and Magee Tract off septic tanks and all of the people in those subdivisions have been looking forward to completion of that project. He stated that he realizes that the funds designated for the completion of the McArdle Sliplining project are necessary but inquired as to when the plans will move forward and when funds will be available for the two projects listed on the agenda. City Manager Martin explained that this does not necessarily have to delay those projects at all. He explained that the staff will recommend the sale of some of the Allison Wastewater Improvement Bonds in January and the Council could approve this item but establish a policy that these will be the first two projects to be designated for the use of the funds from the Allison Plant Bond funds. Council Member Mendez stated that he felt that this should be done, particularly since the residents in two of the subdivisions are on septic tanks. Council Member Mendez then made a motion to add item "c" to item 7, indicating that the first two projects to be considered following the sale of bonds for the Allison Wastewater Treatment Plant will be Nottarb Place Subdivision and Fallins Riverside and Magee Tract. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Turner and passed unanimously. Council Member McComb made the observation that even though the City provides the sanitary sewer lines, some of the residents usually will not tie on to the available lines. He inquired if citizens could be forced to tie on to the sewer lines, expressing the opinion that the City should require them to do so within twelve months after the availability of the sewer lines. Mayor Pro Tem Turner indicated that she agreed that this should be done. Mayor Jones expressed the opinion that this policy should be an in-depth discussion during a Workshop Meeting. City Manager Martin suggested that possibly when these two projects are brought back to the Council next year, there could be a discussion about the possibility of requiring property owners to tie on to the available sewer line. Mayor Jones ascertained that no one in the audience wished to speak on the Consent Motions. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Turner that items 1 through 7, item 7 having been amended, be approved; seconded by Council Member Guerrero; and passed unanimously. .lutes Regular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Jones called for consideration of the Consent Ordinances and Ordinances from previous meetings on items 8 through 12. There were no comments from the Council Members or the audience on these ordinances; City Secretary Read polled the Council for their votes; and the following ordinances were passed: 8. ORDINANCE NO. 18542 AUTHORIZING, SUBJECT TO CONCURRENCE OF TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH JALCO, INC. PROVIDING FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE McARDLE ROAD SLIPLINING, PHASE II PROJECT; APPROPRIATING $1,200,000; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The Charter Rule was suspended and the foregoing ordinance passed by the following vote: Jones, Turner, Berlanga, Brown, Guerrero, Mendez, McComb, and Slavik voting "aye"; Kennedy absent. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 18543 AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF GRANT APPLICATIONS FOR SECTION 5 CAPITAL FUNDS, SECTION 8 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING FUNDS, SECTION 9 OPERATING ASSISTANCE, CAPITAL AND PLANNING FUNDS AND SECTION 9A CAPITAL AND PLANNING FUNDS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION, FOR THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI TRANSIT SYSTEM, DESIGNATING THE CITY MANAGER AS THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF SAID GRANT APPLICATIONS AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND ANY OTHER NECESSARY DOCUMENTS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THE APPLICATIONS AND ALL DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO ACCEPT THESE GRANTS UPON THEIR APPROVAL BY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The Charter Rule was suspended and the foregoing resolution passed by the following vote: Jones, Turner, Berlanga, Brown, Guerrero, Mendez, McComb, and Slavik voting "aye"; Kennedy absent. 10. SECOND READING AUTHORIZING A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE SEAMEN'S CENTER FOR A PORTION OF THE PARK AND RECREATION BUILDING. The foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed to its third reading by the following vote: Jones, Turner, Berlanga, Brown, Guerrero, Mendez, McComb, and Slavik voting "aye"; Kennedy absent. 11. SECOND READING AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND TRISTAR DEVELOPMENT, INC., FOR THE ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 27.052 ACRES OF LAND BEING A PORTION OUT OF LOTS 15 AND 16, SECTION 6, FLOUR BLUFF AND ENCINAL FARM AND GARDEN TRACTS, NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS; FINDING ALL OF SAID LAND TO LIE ENTIRELY WITHIN THE EXTRATERRITORIAL lutes Regular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 6 JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS, ADJOINING, CONTIGUOUS, AND ADJACENT THERETO; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. The foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed to its third reading by the following vote: Jones, Turner, Berlanga, Brown, Guerrero, Mendez, McComb, and Slavik voting "aye"; Kennedy absent. 12. ORDINANCE NO. 18544 AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 23, SWIMMING POOLS STANDARDS, SECTION 23-57, (1) DEFINITIONS TO MODIFY THE DEFINITION OF "PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL" AND THE DEFINITION OF "WADING POOL"; AND BY ADDING SUBSECTION (8) POOL ENCLOSURE REQUIRED; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. The foregoing ordinance was read for the third time and passed by the following vote: Jones, Turner, Berlanga, Brown, Guerrero, Mendez, McComb, and Slavik voting "aye"; Kennedy absent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Jones called for consideration of the ordinances from the Regular Agenda on items 13 through 15. There were no comments from the Council on Ordinance No. 13, pertaining to naming of parks and park facilities. Council Member Brown referred to Ordinance No. 14, which is the first reading approving a three-year lease for the festival for Bayfest, Inc. and noted that there is opposition to holding festivities on Shoreline Boulevard. He inquired if by approving this lease, this would not further encourage the continuation of such activities. City Manager Martin explained that there is a provision for a nine month cancellation clause in the lease. He explained that if the City gives nine months notice, they can require the celebration to be moved to another location. Council Member Guerrero noted that with a nine month provision, a decision would have to be made in January if the City were going to request another location. City Manager Martin stated that he placed this on the agenda under the assumption that an alternate location will not be requested for 1985. Speaking in regard to this item was Mr. Charles O. Blum, Chairman, Park and Recreation Board, who stated that the Bayfront Activities Committee has been working very well but when one takes into consideration all of the different organizations involved and the alternative sites, he did not think they would have a recommendation for the next year. Council Member Guerrero stated that evidently Bayfest will be conducted on Shoreline next year, but he understands that the Hershey Hotel staff prefers that the festival be relocated because of the traffic generated. He stated that he was also concerned about other organizations who might wish to use Shoreline. nutes Regular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 7 Mayor Jones stated that he felt that Bayfest is a major asset to the City, particularly at the Shoreline location. Council Member Guerrero agreed but stated that the City Council should not just allow Bayfest to have their activities there, because other groups should be allowed to do so also, and Mayor Jones indicated his concurrence that Feria de Hispanica and others should be allowed to use it as long as Bayfest does. Council Member Berlanga stated that he is not in favor of approving a three year lease because he felt that it should be for only one year. Council Member Slavik expressed her support of using the bayfront location for as long as the City can conveniently do so. She stated that she had talked to some of the committee members who have indicated they would be willing to move if good facilities were available elsewhere. Mrs. Peggy Clark, Chairman of Bayfest, Inc., stated that the nine month cancellation clause is the shortest they could approve because all of their activities begin almost immediately as soon as one celebration has been completed. She stated that it requires at least nine months to get everything in order for the celebration. Mayor Jones referred to Ordinance No. 15 which authorizes the sale of lots to the Nueces County MHMR Community Center and inquired if it has any connection with the zoning case that is on the agenda. City Manager Martin stated that it does not. Mayor Pro Tem Turner stated that she recalled when the house on Furman Avenue was sold and given to the City for the use of MHMR and inquired about the money involved. Mr. Utter explained that the City received approximately $42,000 because it was a 60/40 split and the total cost price was about $65,000. There were no further comments on these ordinances; City Secretary Read polled the Council for their votes; and the following ordinances were passed: 13. RESOLUTION NO. 18545 ADOPTING A FORMAL POLICY FOR NAMING OF PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI. The Charter Rule was suspended and the foregoing ordinance passed by the following vote: Jones, Turner, Berlanga, Brown, Guerrero, Mendez, McComb, and Slavik voting "aye"; Kennedy absent. 14. FIRST READING AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A THREE YEAR LEASE AGREEMENT WITH BAYFEST, INC. FOR THE PURPOSE OF HOLDING A FESTIVAL AND RELATED ACTIVITIES. nut es Regular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 8 The foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading by the following vote: Jones, Turner, Berlanga, Brown, Guerrero, Mendez, McComb, and Slavik voting "aye"; Kennedy absent. 15. ORDINANCE NO. 18546 AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF LOTS 21 AND 22, BLOCK 1003, FITCHUE PLACE SUBDIVISION, TO THE NUECES COUNTY MHMR COMMUNITY CENTER FOR THE SUM OF $6,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING THE MHMR SHELTERED WORKSHOP FACILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The Charter Rule was suspended and the foregoing ordinance passed by the following vote: Jones, Turner, Berlanga, Brown, Guerrero, Mendez, McComb, and Slavik voting "aye"; Kennedy absent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Jones announced the public hearing on two zoning applications. 16. Application No. 1084-14, Commonwealth Financial Group and InterFirst Bank of Dallas NA, Trustee: For a change of zoning from "B-1" Neighborhood Business District to "B-4" General Business District on Lots 15 and 16, Block 3, Manor Terrace, located on the northeast corner of South Staples Street and Williams Drive. Mayor Jones pointed out that the Council received no information on this case. Assistant City Manager Tom Utter informed the Council that in response to the 30 notices of the public hearing, three in favor and two in opposition had been returned and that both the Planning Commission and Planning Staff recommend approval. Mr. Utter pointed out that this will be a commercial tract; the zoning is "B-4"; but it is his understanding that there is planned construction of an office building at this location. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Turner that the hearing be closed, seconded by Council Member Mendez and passed unanimously. City Secretary Read polled the Council for their vote on the ordinance effecting the zoning change and it passed as follows: OPDINANCE NO. 18547 AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF COMMONWEALTH FINANCIAL GROUP AND INTERFIRST BANK OF DALLAS, NA, TRUSTEE, BY CHANGING THE ZONING MAP IN REFERENCE TO LOTS 15 AND 16, BLOCK 3, MANOR TERRACE, FROM "B-1" NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT TO "B-4" GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. nutes Regular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 9 The Charter Rule was suspended and the foregoing ordinance passed by the following vote: Jones, Turner, Berlanga, Brown, Guerrero, Mendez, McComb, and Slavik voting "aye"; Kennedy absent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 17. Application No. 984-13, Mr. Wallace E. Whitworth, Jr.: For a change of zoning from "A-1" Apartment House District to "A-2" Apartment House District on Lot 5 and the northeast 40 feet of Lot 6, Block 38, Lindale Park Unit 4, located on the west side of Robinson Street, approximately 250 feet south of Reid Drive. Assistant City Manager Utter informed the Council that in response to the twenty notices of the public hearing, none in favor and 14 in opposition from within the area of notification had been returned as well as 14 from outside the area of notification, and in addition three petitions containing 131 signatures, 89 signatures, and 12 signatures, all in opposition had also been received in the Office of the City Secretary. He stated that the Planning Commission and Planning Staff both recommend denial of the request for "A-2" but in lieu thereof that a special permit be approved for the installation of the MHMR Adolescent Residential Treatment Program, with a maximum density for the program of fifteen persons. Mr. Utter pointed out that the 20% rule is in effect which will require 7 affirmative votes of the Council to approve an ordinance granting the special permit. Mr. Larry Wenger, Director of Planning, located the area on the zoning and land use map, described the land use in the surrounding area, and showed slides of the vicinity. He pointed out that most of the zoning in the area is for apartments with the exception of Church facilities located on Reid Drive. He pointed out that the proposed use is not very different from the existing use in the neighborhood. Mr. Robert Tamez, representing the Board of Trustees for the MHMR, stated that the board certainly did not take lightly the concerns of the residents in the area and they looked at various aspects of this case. He pointed out that the Planning Commission recommended approval of a special permit. He also stated that they have no alternative sites and they felt that they needed to move forward with this. He stated that they had reviewed carefully the concerns of the residents in the area, and they feel that the concerns are based on misinformation. He explained how they had tried to allay those concerns after an explanation of the type of program they plan to operate at this location. He then urged that the Council vote on issues based on facts and that they consider the following. 1. Is this program needed and worthwhile? 2. Will this site really pose a danger to the residents in the area? He reminded them that they have had no problems at their current site. 3. If the Council votes against this request and MHMR finds another site and there is opposition, will the Council take the same position at that time? He again urged that they consider the facts only. Lnutes Regular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 10 Mr. Tamez continued by stating that they are now located in the Hillcrest area where they have been for four years; it is too small and unsuitable for this purpose; they do not own the building; and they feel that remodeling the existing facility would be very costly. He explained that this is an alternative location that will meet their needs. Also speaking on behalf of MHMR was Mr. Stephen Ondrejas, 4645 Ocean Drive. Mr. Ondrejas explained their plan and stated that this site is adjacent to a large multi -family dwelling; there are good school systems in the area; there are good Church facilities and shopping; and they see this as a very good land use pattern. He referred to the slide of the existing building and stated that they will make no additions to the building, but will make improvements which will enhance the entire area. He stated that they plan to comply with the limitation of 15 residents as recommended by the Planning Commission. He noted that there are 16 rooms in the building and that would be less than one person per room and this would not overcrowd the existing property. He also informed the Council that they have four covered parking spaces at the rear of the building and there will be as many as four staff people on duty at all times. He stated that it was his understanding that most of the opposition is in regard to the program that will be conducted there. Also speaking in favor of the project was Ms. Nancy Wesson -Dodd, Director of MHMR Children and Youth Program, 126 Chase Street. She explained their credentials, licenses and certificates and informed the Council that they have had 15 site visits by representatives of the Department of Human Resources and they have never found anything wrong at their existing location. She stated that the students will be between 12 and 17 years of age; they will be residents of Nueces County; and their staff disciplines them very well. She stated that it is important that they have a home atmosphere, attend public schools, and have structured activities during their waking hours. She assured the Council that their goal is to cooperate with the neighborhood. She stated it is their professional judgement that these clients present no danger to the neighborhood and there have never been any problems from the children. She then introduced a foster grandmother who works at the existing facility 20 hours each week and asked her to explain a little bit about the program. Mrs. Guerrero assured the Council that the children are very nice; they need help; and they need this place to assist them. Mr. Ondrejas then presented to the Council letters of support on the rezoning request. He noted that this will be in Council Member Berlanga's district even though it is now located in Council Member Mendez' district and stated that he did not think that they had received a single call in opposition from that location. Council Member McComb inquired if they had any other alternative sites and Mr. Ondrejas stated that they did not because they need "A-2" zoning. Mr. McComb then inquired if MHMR has a contract on the old Thomas -Spann property, and Mr. Ondrejas stated that they do have a contract at this time but this will be for offices and other programs. He explained that it is better for this program to have the children in a neighborhood atmosphere. nutes .agular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 11 Council Member McComb again referred to the new facility that is going to be built and inquired if that would not be suitable for these children, and Mr. Ondrejas explained that the new facility will be for adult mentally retarded and would not be suitable for a facility for the young teenagers. Mr. McComb inquired if the house they are currently located in was for sale, and Mr. Ondrejas stated that it is but at a very high price and that it would require extensive renovation. Council Member Slavik stated that she is very concerned about the needs for the children in this program, but she is also concerned about placing this in this particular neighborhood. She pointed out that this neighborhood has not changed much over the years; most of the residents are elderly and are rather frightened, possibly without real cause, of this proposed facility; and suggested that there are other areas in the City which provide a better location. Mr. Ondrejas stated that he was aware that the fears are based on emotion and not on fact. He stated that they might like to do something for the elderly residents in the neighborhood in that they could possibly work as volunteer foster grandparents with these children, thus reducing their fears. Also speaking in favor of the application was Ms. Diana Jones, a teacher in the Corpus Christi Independent School District, who stated that she has in her classes several of the students who are housed in that facility and she would like to alleviate the fears expressed by the residents in the area. She assured the Council and the members of the audience that the students are well controlled by supervisors and the students that she has in her class are some of her best behaved students. She also explained that if she does have a problem with any of the students, all she has to do is call the center and something is done to correct the problem. She expressed the opinion that the children need the love provided by the foster grandmother who works there; the program is well run; the staff is very good; and Nueces County is fortunate to have this facility. Mrs. Karen Beck, 3421 Lariat Lane, a member of St. Luke's Methodist Church, stated that she is also speaking in favor of this zoning application. She stated that she has learned something about the program, she has examined the existing facility because she spent an afternoon there, spoke with the staff, asked every question possible, and she came to the conclusion that there is no cause to express opposition to their program in this area. She stated that the concern of the elderly people who live in the neighborhood is unfounded. She also informed the Council that the Church operates a school for "Mother's Day Out" which is a well supervised and well run program and she did not feel that there is any possible danger to the children who attend this school. She stated that she was of the opinion that there comes a time when citizens need to support programs such as this and she felt that this was a good opportunity to establish a beginning in decreasing fear about these types of programs. nutes egular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 12 Council Member Berlanga expressed concern, stating that he could sympathize with the people who live around the subject property and he has received about 30 phone calls expressing opposition to the zoning request, yet he is also in favor of the programs operated by MHMR. He stated, however, that when he received so many calls from people in the neighborhood expressing concern, he has no alternative but to voice the opinion of the people and he has promised many of them that he will oppose this zoning request. Council Member Guerrero stated that he realizes there are people in the audience who wish to speak in opposition to this zoning request; the Council Members have heard and read about their many concerns; and he was of the opinion that his conscience would bother him if he voted against this zoning request. He pointed out that this could be a good opportunity for the people in the neighborhood because he felt that the greatest fear was fear of the unknown and he felt that this would be an opportunity for the people in the neighborhood to learn more about the program operated by MHMR. He stated that he will support the approval of a special permit even in view of the opposition. Mayor Pro Tem Turner expressed the opinion that it is not the Council's duty to support or not support this MHMR program because the issue before them is three -fold: One, is this appropriate zoning; two, is it compatible with the surrounding neighborhood; and three, is it acceptable to the neighborhood. She stated that she would have to answer "no" to all three of those because the area is predominantly zoned "A-1"; this is a very stable neighborhood; residents have lived there for many years and for the most part are older people; and if "A-2" zoning is approved in this area, too much density for this area will exist. She stated that she would not support this request for a special permit. Council Member Brown indicated his concurrence with Mayor Pro Tem Turner, stating that although MHMR has a very good program, he has received many petitions and letters expressing opposition to this change of zoning and he did not think that he could approve a special permit. Mayor Jones pointed out that three Council Members have indicated that they will vote against this zoning case and stated that he plans to do so also. He stated that if this facility were located at the subject site and operated for one year, he felt that the neighborhood would accept this use. He stated however, that he is not convinced that this is the only location where it could be installed. Council Member Slavik indicated her concurrence and stated that she was aware of a location which was for sale and where this use could be accepted. Mayor Jones stated that he felt that the members of the audience who had come to speak on this case should be allowed to do so anyway, even though it appeared that the request would not be granted. Mrs. Marian Shaw, 601 Vaky, stated that she is speaking on behalf of the residents of Lindale and they are of the opinion that this is spot zoning; they are concerned about their safety; they are not opposed to helping troubled children because they are parents and grandparents; but they do not feel that this program should be operated in their neighborhood. .nutes .egular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 13 Mr. Ralph C. Geckle stated that he owns two four-plexes on Robinson Street and they are attractive buildings. He stated that he has had a vacancy for the past one and one-half months due to the fact that this zoning case was pending. He pointed out that the Church is opposed to it; the business leaders are opposed to it; the homesteaders are opposed to it; and the owners of rental property also are opposed to the change of zoning. He questioned the reason the Planning Commission recommended a special permit. He stated that if the special permit is approved, he is apprehensive that he would be unable to rent his apartments which are located across the street from the subject property. Mrs. Vivian McDoogle stated that she owns property within the 200' area of notification and they are opposed to this change of zoning. She explained problems she had discovered in regard to the ownership of her property which she is trying to get resolved. Mrs. Mary Jane Geckle stated that she and her husband own two apartments across from 620 Robinson Street. She stated that MHMR proposes to establish this facility here but they do not want to create problems in the community, but expressed the opinion that this has become an emotional situation in their neighborhood because no one who resides there or owns property there is in favor of this site for the MHMR program. A Mrs. Alvarado addressed the Council and expressed opposition to the zoning case, stating that she is a nutritionist and has worked with senior citizens. She stated that her husband is a physician and frequently elderly people become upset and disturbed even though there is no reason. She stated that she is therefore opposed to the special permit because of its detrimental effect on the elderly people residing in the neighborhood. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Turner that the hearing be closed, seconded by Council Member Berlanga and passed unanimously. City Secretary Read called for the vote on the ordinance approving a special permit for this specific use and it failed to pass by the following vote: FAILED TO PASS AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF WALLACE E. WHITWORTH, JR. BY GRANTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE MHMR ADOLESCENT RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAM, WITH A MAXIMUM DENSITY FOR THE PROGRAM OF FIFTEEN PERSONS ON A PORTION OF LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 38, LINDALE PARK UNIT 4; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The Charter Rule was suspended and the foregoing ordinance failed to pass by the following vote: Jones, Turner, Berlanga, Brown, McComb, and Slavik voting "no"; Guerrero and Mendez voting "aye"; Kennedy absent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * nutes sgular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 14 Mayor Jones announced the hearing on the following appeal: Hearing of an appeal from Airline Ambulance Service concerning the decision rendered by the Director of Public Health to suspend Airline Ambulance's operator permit for a period of five days for violation of Section 57-190 of the Code of Ordinances. Mayor Jones reviewed the procedure as suggested by Mr. Gary Patterson, Assistant City Attorney, and stated that the following procedure will be followed: 1. A statement of the case by the appellant; 2. A statement of the case by the Health Department; 3. Presentation of testimony and evidence by appellant with cross-examination by the Health Department; 4. Presentation of testimony and evidence by the Health Department with cross-examination by appellant; 5. Closing statement by appellant; 6. Closing statement by the Department; and 7. Appellant's rebuttal. It was ascertained that the representative from Airline Ambulance Company was not present, and Ms. Alicia Perez, Assistant to the City Manager, informed the Council that Mr. Bray had been contacted and he is on his way to the Council Chamber. A motion was made by Council Member Mendez that the Council recess until Mr. Bray arrives, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Turner and passed unanimously at 4:13 p.m. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Council Member Charles Kennedy arrived at the meeting during the recess. Mayor Jones reconvened the Regular Council Meeting at 4:27 p.m. and called on Mr. Bray to speak. Mr. Bernie Bray, Airline Ambulance Service, stated that he has been operating this service for fifteen years and prior to that time they operated a wrecker service for ten years, during which time they have always had a good record. He informed the Council that he has provided training for Police Officers as a public service at no charge. He referred to the accident that occurred when the grain elevator exploded, stating that they were the second ambulance on the scene and they also saved the life of a girl involved in the Osaka murder case. Mr. Bray then referred to the incident that had occurred recently and following which they received a five day suspension issued by the permit officer, Cr. C.M.G. Buttery, M.D., M.P.H. He stated that at that time, his ambulance driver did not purposely go to the scene -- they just happened to come upon the scene and saw that a young girl was in need of medical assistance because she had a broken leg and they stopped to render aid, which he felt was appropriate. .nutes ,egular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 15 Mr. Gary Patterson, Assistant City Attorney representing the Health Department, provided background information and stated that on October 4, 1984, Dr. Buttery had issued a five day suspension order to Airline Ambulance Service. He explained that under the Ambulance Code, the Health Department regulates the ambulance service. He stated that this appeal is not a court case where the City has burden of proof, but they are here to present to the City Council for their decision as to whether or not Dr. Buttery acted properly on the basis of the facts that were presented and on the basis of the rules and regulations and whether he acted properly within the Code provisions. He stated that if this Council, after the hearing, feels that Dr. Buttery abused his administrative discretion, then the Council should grant the appeal, but if they feel he acted properly, then the suspension should be upheld and Airline Ambulance Service license should be suspended for five days. He stated that he felt that the evidence will show that Airline Ambulance Service arrived at the scene, did not communicate with the Fire Department as required by the Code, following which an investigation was conducted by Mr. Carl Young. He stated that following the investigation, it was determined that it would be proper to issue a five day suspension of service. Mr. Bray responded by stating that they had one of their ambulances that had some mechanical problems and during the process of having it repaired, one ambulance driver had taken an ambulance to return to the office by a different route from that usually taken. He explained that enroute to his office, the ambulance driver saw a child on the road who was injured and the driver would never pass an injured child who needed medical attention for a broken leg and other injuries. He stated that he felt that the driver had acted responsibly when he stopped to render aid to the injured child, even though the ambulance had not been called. He stated that he felt that his reputation had been damaged by the order for the five day suspension and that is why he is appealing the decision of Dr. Buttery. He agreed that there was failure to communicate with the Fire Department but explained that during the last few years when Aid Ambulance was being considered, he was very supportive of the establishment of the City ambulance service to improve the quality of care. He stated that they assisted in establishing Aid Ambulance Service and at that time the City agreed to cooperate with private ambulance services to allow them to pick up non -emergency type of calls and the Aid Ambulance Service would handle emergency calls. He explained that following that, the City decided to become involve in the transfer business even though they had assured him that they would not get into the transfer business. Mr. Patterson interrupted by stating that he was going to object to the line that Mr. Bray was addressing the Council and to ask him to discuss the particular case, noting that the statements that Mr. Bray was making had nothing to do with the incident a short time ago. He suggested that the statements be limited to this particular appeal. Mayor Jones stated that he was of the opinion that the Council should be very liberal and allow Mr. Bray to use his time as he saw fit. nutes :gular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 16 Mr. Bray continued and stated that at that time they tried to work with the City and for ten years they provided backup service for Aid Ambulance and they are the only service that has continued to operate. He stated that the problem they have encountered is that the only calls they receive are when Aid Ambulance needs assistance. Mr. Bray continued, explaining the incident that had occurred which caused the five day suspension and stated that the Aid Ambulance that had arrived at the scene did not have a pediatric traction splint and the Airline Ambulance driver loaned them one. He noted that the Aid Ambulance attendants put the traction splint on upside down as well. He stated that unless there is cooperation, this cannot work out with the City. He explained that it was his understanding that Dr. Buttery had supposedly sent him a letter stating that he had a five day suspension, but he never received the letter, but they sent the letter out to all of the hospitals, fire stations, and police department, informing them of the five day suspension. He stated that he felt that they found him guilty before he had an opportunity to appeal. He asked that the Council find him not guilty. Mayor Pro Tem Turner pointed out that the primary problem seems to be that the Airline Ambulance driver did not communicate with the Fire Department to let them know they were at the scene and an Aid Ambulance was called. Mr. Bray alleged that the unit that they had at the scene had faulty communication equipment and they could not get clearance from Aid Ambulance. Council Member Kennedy referred to the Code governing ambulances and stated that it was his understanding that there should be two attendants and from what he has heard from Mr. Bray, there was no intent to provide ambulance service on this call. He expressed the opinion that laws are established to provide guidance and he felt that there is a reason for the laws, but he believed that the overall aim is to see that laws are fair and just. Dr. Kennedy stated that he would like to request a comment on the statement that "at no time did Airline Ambulance Service advise that they were responding to the call." He stated that he needed to know if they were responding as an ambulance or just as a vehicle that happened to come upon a scene where medical attention was required. Mr. Bray responded to Dr. Kennedy's question by stating that he taught the EMT course at Del Mar, and one primary point that he taught was that there should be a "good samaritan" attitude, and he feels that anyone who can help where there is a medical need should do so. He assured the Council that they had no intention of answering the ambulance call -- they just happened to pass by and stopped to render aid. Council Member Slavik questioned Mr. Bray as to why he did not receive the notice of his suspension, yet notices were sent to hospitals, the fire station, and the police department. nutes egular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 17 Mr. Patterson responded by stating that that is the standard procedure to notify hospitals, etc. when a licensed ambulance operator has his service suspended so they will not call an unauthorized ambulance. Mr. Bray stated that he felt that that was wrong and he felt that any person should be able to appeal. He stated that he did not think that the Health Department has the right to suspend a license without personally notifying the party involved. He stated that he felt that it was very unfair that all of the hospitals were notified before he even knew that he had been issued a suspension order, thus damaging him and his reputation. Council Member McComb noted that Mr. Bray had stated that he never did receive a notice of the suspension and asked how he learned of the incident. Mr. Bray stated that Mr. Patterson telephoned him, but he never did receive a certified letter, even though Mr. Patterson stated that he had sent it. Council Member McComb pointed out that there was an attempt to deliver a certified letter but the letter was refused, and Mr. Bray stated that he was out at the time; his wife was out; and his secretary is not authorized to sign his name. Council Member Berlanga pointed out that Mr. Bray did violate the Code and there were other violations prior to this incident. Council Member Guerrero inquired of Mr. Bray if he was familiar with the violations listed. Mr. Bray related a similar incident that had occurred at the intersection of Airline and Saratoga, stating that they had received a call from a lady informing them of an injured child; he told his driver to go to the scene; they treated the child and took her to Spohn Hospital. He explained that Sgt. Garza, who is the dispatcher for the ambulance services, had stated that Airline Ambulance responded to that call without clearance. He stated that they are not in competition with Aid Ambulance because they are a private company, but Sgt. Garza has made this a competitive business. Mr. Bray then alleged that the City's Aid Ambulance Service has violated the Code, but they have never been cited. Mayor Jones stated that he presumes that Mr. Bray has read the City ordinance that covers the ambulances and asked him if there is a requirement that his ambulance service should call Aid Ambulance Service to inform them that they are responding to a medical emergency call. Mr. Bray stated that there is such a requirement, but even if one of his ambulances is closer to an accident and request permission to respond, they are always denied that request; therefore, they prefer not to call unless it is absolutely necessary. lutes :gular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 18 Mr. Patterson stated that he will present the City's case by the testimony by City officials. He then called Mr. Carl Young to speak. Mr. Young stated that he is a training officer for the Health Department and he has the duty of ambulance inspection and licensing and Dr. Buttery is the permit officer. Mr. Patterson requested that Mr. Young describe the purpose of the ambulance regulations and Mr. Young stated that the regulations are to make certain that there are proper equipment and proper training of personnel. He stated that these regulations apply to private ambulance services only because the public ambulance service is operated by the Nueces County Hospital District. Mr. Patterson asked Mr. Young if either he or Dr. Buttery has anything to do with Aid Ambulance, and Mr. Young replied that they were requested to make courtesy inspections each year of the Aid Ambulances. Mr. Patterson then questioned Mr. Young as to whether or not Sgt. Garza has anything to do with supervision of the private ambulance services, and Mr. Young replied that he does not but he reports anything he might see that is wrong as it relates to private ambulance service. Mr. Patterson then asked Mr. Young to relate the incidents that occurred that initiated the suspension of Airline Ambulance Service. Mr. Young explained that District Chief Robert Garza reported to them that the Airline Ambulance went to the scene of the accident without clearance of the Fire Department and the Code requires that ambulance drivers report to the Fire Department even if they just happen to come upon a scene of an accident that might require medical attention. He explained that according to 57-188 of the Code, a public ambulance vehicle should be sent first and a private ambulance is sent only if a public ambulance is not available. Mr. Patterson asked Mr. Young to explained their normal procedure in cases such as this. Mr. Young explained that he initiates an investigation which he did in this case. He explained that he talked to Chief Garza and asked if there was any communication between Airline Ambulance and the fire desk and ascertained that there was no communication whatsoever. He stated that he also talked to William Roger Angel, the Airline Ambulance driver, and he stated that he heard the call for an ambulance over his radio. He stated that Mr. Angel had informed him that he was in the 2000 block of Waldron Road and the accident occurred in the 1400 block of Waldron and Mr. Angel also informed him that he went to the scene to render aid. He stated that Mr. Angel never did tell him that he actually saw the accident, but stated that he heard it over the radio and went to the scene. Mr. Patterson inquired of Mr. Young if he had asked Mr. Angel if he had communicated with the Fire dispatcher, and Mr. Young responded by stating that Mr. Angel told him that he did not call the fire desk because the dispatcher almost always refuses to allow Airline Ambulance to go to the scene of an nutes agular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 19 accident as a responding vehicle. Mr. Young continued by stating that Mr. Angel did not say anything about having problems with his microphone or his radio. Mr. Young stated that he has heard this statement made before from other Airline Ambulance drivers. Mr. Young continued by stating that he had also inquired of Mr. Bray why they did not clear with the fire desk when they responded to an ambulance call and Mr. Bray had informed him that the fire desk seldom gives them clearance to go to the scene of an accident. Mr. Patterson continued by inquiring if Mr. Bray had ever mentioned a problem with the microphone, and Mr. Young stated that he did not mention that at all but simply told him that he preferred not to communicate with the fire desk. Mr. Young summarized by stating that both Mr. Bray and Mr. Angel stated that they did not try to call the fire desk and stated that he was also told that Airline Ambulance went to the scene to render aid. Mr. Patterson inquired if there had been other similar complaints about Airline Ambulance Service, and Mr. Young stated that this is the first time he has ever been able to get anyone to testify against Airline Ambulance; therefore, the other allegations are actually hearsay. Mr. Patterson inquired if Mr. Young had been involved in the complaint occurred 39 days before this incident and if he was familiar with complaint. that that Mr. Young stated that he spoke with Mr. Bray at that time and ascertained that they went to the scene and informed the dispatcher that they were at the scene. Mr. Young continued by stating that this is in violation of the Code because they did not obtain clearance before they went to the scene. He explained that at that time, a letter of reprimand was prepared by Dr. Buttery; he took it to Mr. Bray at which time they discussed it; he took him a copy of the ordinance at that time so that they would have the regulations before them in order that they would comply with them in the future. Mr. Patterson continued his questioning and inquired if Mr. Young had talked to Mr. Bray about that particular incident at that time and if Mr. Bray had indicated they would abide by the Code in the future. Mr. Young replied that he had indicated that he would do so and he stated that he was very unhappy about the fire desk not clearing his the scene at that time. He stated that he informed Dr. But comments and Dr. Buttery subsequently wrote a letter to Mr. to list all of the complaints he had with Aid Ambulance so corrected or discussed. Mr. Young stated that Mr. Bray has that letter. ambulance to be at tery of Mr. Bray's Bray and asked him that they could be never responded to Mr. Patterson inquired if at that time Mr. Bray had indicated that he wished the City would file charges against Airline Ambulance. nutes .egular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 20 Mr. Young replied in the affirmative stating that he did make that statement so that he could go public and air his problems publicly with Aid Ambulance. Mr. Patterson asked Mr. Young to summarize the results of this investigation of the most recent incident. Mr. Young stated that he concluded that he should receive a 10 day suspension for this violation because there was a similar one just 39 days before this incident and it was well known that Mr. Bray knew that he should obey the rules. Mr. Young stated that he made this recommendation to Dr. Buttery. Mr. Patterson then called as his next witness Dr. Christopher Buttery, Director of Public Health, and through questioning of him learned that he is in charge of regulating the private ambulance service. Dr. Buttery explained that he became involved in the matter the day after the incident occurred and after Mr. Young had talked to all of the parties involved. He stated that he could have filed criminal charges against Airline Ambulance Service but he felt that something had to be done since a letter of reprimand just 39 days before had been ignored. Dr. Buttery then provided background information in regard to his qualifications to serve as Director of the private ambulance service, explaining that he is a fully certified specialist in medicine and has had a great deal of experience in ambulance programs in other cities. Mr. Patterson asked Dr. Buttery to describe the reason for the requirement that the private ambulance services contact the fire desk in connection with ambulance calls. Dr. Buttery explained that the Fire Department wants to be sure that the nearest possible ambulance can be sent to the scene and they want to avoid the possibility of having two ambulances going to the same accident; therefore, they established the requirement that the ambulance who wishes to respond contact the fire desk before going to the scene of an accident. He referred to the incident in question and stated that an Aid Ambulance was dispatched to the scene and left after seeing the Airline Ambulance rendering assistance. He explained that the Aid Ambulance had to be called back to the scene when it was discovered that there was only one attendant, the driver, with the Airline Ambulance vehicle. Mr. Patterson noted that because of the lack of communication on the part of Airline Ambulance, the Aid Ambulance had to be called twice to the scene of the accident. Dr. Buttery continued, stating that he looked at all of the possibilities in connection with this and after considering Mr. Young's report and his recommendation for a ten day suspension, he had decided on the five day suspension because one reprimand had already been issued to this company and he was of the opinion that something more stringent should be issued than just another letter of reprimand. Further discussion followed in regard to the regulations and the confusion that existed in this particular incident. nutes .egular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 21 Mr. Bray again addressed the Council and stated that Aid Ambulance did not have a vehicle in the area because the ambulance that went to render aid was going back to their station at the time they encountered the injured child. Council Member Kennedy asked Dr. Buttery if he thought it should be unlawful for an ambulance to go to a scene to provide medical service, and Dr. Buttery stated that the issue they are trying to impress upon Airline Ambulance Service is how important it is to communicate with the fire desk and the issue that he has to examine is the potential for a death in such a situation; therefore, in his opinion, everyone should obey the Code for that reason. Council Member Kennedy inquired if the equipment requirements are the same for private and Aid Ambulance Services, and Mr. Young replied that Aid Ambulance Service has the advanced treatment system but their requirements are not the same as those for private ambulance services. Mayor Pro Tem Turner stated that she felt that Dr. Buttery was justified in his decision, but she was of the opinion that there is some room for improvement in the Code. Dr. Buttery agreed that there may be room for improvement because of the misinterpretation of the requirements included in the Code. He stated that his only problem is the fact that Airline Ambulance did not communicate with the fire desk and they are required to do so. Council Member McComb reviewed the incident as he understood it, stating that an ambulance with only one attendant was at the scene; a police officer was at the scene; the fire department engine arrive with three people, including a paramedic; and there were at least five people to attend one little girl who was injured. He inquired if there was any regulation prohibiting any of the other people from driving the Airline Ambulance to a hospital since there was only one attendant with the Airline Ambulance Service, and Mr. Young replied that there was nothing to prevent the Airline Ambulance Service from requesting such assistance. Mr. McComb continued by noting that the letter informing Mr. Bray of his suspension was sent to him on October 4, 1984, by certified mail, and notice of his suspension was sent to the hospitals, fire department, and police department, etc. the next day. Mr. Patterson explained that the personnel at Airline Ambulance office refused to accept the certified letter; Mr. Bray knew of this suspension because he contacted the City Manager, Legal Department, and Health Department and the Legal Department informed him that if he wanted to appeal, he could do so. Mr. Patterson pointed out that a copy of the letter of suspension was hand delivered to Mr. Bray the next day and letters were hand delivered to the hospitals, etc. advising them that the suspension had been stayed until the appeal had been determined. Mr. Patterson pointed out that there was no reason for Mr. Bray to suffer at all from the events. After further questioning, Council Member Slavik expressed the opinion that the Council should consider the terms of the ambulance ordinance. nutes _.egular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 22 Council Member Guerrero stated that there is a Code of Ordinances that needs some work, particularly since evidently Aid Ambulances are not fully equipped. He also referred to the lack of communication between Aid Ambulance and the private ambulance services and stated that he did not think that the suspension is justified and he questioned the fact that letters were sent to the hospitals and other groups before Mr. Bray had actually received his letter of suspension. Council Member Kennedy indicated his concurrence with Mr. Guerrero. Mayor Pro Tem Turner questioned if Aid Ambulance was in violation of the Code, and Mr. Patterson replied that they are not because the ordinance does not control Aid Ambulance. He stated that he has been advised that the requirement that the Aid Ambulances be equipped with a juvenile splint does not go into effect until January, 1985, and there was no violation of State requirements in this incident. Mr. Bray was then allowed to make a five minute presentation during which time he stated that he wanted to get one thing straight -- the State law does require this splint as of March, 1984, and this particular Aid Ambulance did not have a state license and did not have the required equipment because nobody checks the Aid Ambulance vehicles. He pointed out that the private ambulance services are strictly controlled by the Health Department, but Aid Ambulance does not have that type of supervision. He stated that they have attempted to get Aid Ambulance to cooperate with the private ambulance services, but they have refused to do so and he feels that the private ambulances could assist Aid Ambulance because they have good equipment, good response time, etc. An unidentified lady stated that she has dealt with Mr. Bray and Airline Ambulance Service and explained services they have rendered to assist her with her paralyzed son and her husband who was i11 with cancer. She stated that Mr. Bray is a fine gentlemen who had gone above and beyond the call of duty to assist her and her family. Mr. Bray stated that they are asking for a decision that will allow them to take care of ambulance cases, stating that he just wanted a fair deal. Assistant City Attorney Patterson then presented his closing statement by stating that there have been a lot of things brought up that have nothing to do with the appeal that is being considered by the City Council. He reiterated that the appeal is for the suspension because of a violation of the Code. He agreed that there may be some problems in the ambulance regulations that need to be addressed but the overriding problem is that the Council needs to deal with the violation of the ambulance code which definitely occurred. He expressed the opinion that the Council needs to uphold the ordinances; Dr. Buttery pointed out that ambulance service involves much more than just transportation; the attendant did render other services. Mr. Patterson pointed out that the Airline Ambulance did not just happen upon this accident; he heard the call on the nutes .egular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 23 radio; he was six blocks away; he went there to answer the call; and if he had simply called the fire dispatcher and informed him that he was going to the scene, there would not have been a violation as such. Mr. Patterson stated that to resolve other problems in connection with this case is wrong, even though there may be a need to look at the procedures and possibly change the ordinance. He stated that the way to solve those problems would not be helped by rescinding the five day suspension invoked on Airline Ambulance Service by Dr. Buttery, and if the Council reverses Dr. Buttery's decision, other people will begin to appeal more decisions of administrators of the Code because they will have the impression that they can count on getting the Council to overrule the penalty, or in other words, anyone can get by without following the City's ordinances. Mr. Patterson continued by stating that Dr. Buttery is a good leader in preventive medicine and it is almost essential to have an ordinance that can provide support for him. Mr. Bray then made his rebuttal statement, indicating that at no time did they intend to render ambulance service at the scene of this particular accident because normally the ambulance would have been going another route back to his station. Mr. Bray alleged that two police officers flagged the ambulance down to ask for his assistance, and he did not think that any wrongdoing had occurred because the ambulance stopped to render aid. He again alleged that they did not respond to a call, they just happened to come upon the scene. Mayor Jones pointed out that the issue here is that there are some ordinances that have to be enforced and he is very much concerned about the damage that will be done to the City if the suspension is rescinded. He stated that the Council has three choices; one, uphold the suspension, two, reverse the decision, or three, modify the decision. He stated that he felt that the Council should uphold the City staff. Council Member Kennedy stated that he thinks that the City does have a problem with ambulance service and the main problem is lack of communication. He expressed the opinion that the ordinance needs to be rewritten with emphasis on better cooperation. He pointed out that the City no longer has transfer business for Aid Ambulance Service and he is apprehensive that the City's people are not being trained properly and the equipment is not adequate. He stated that he felt the appropriate action here would be a second letter of reprimand for not communicating with the fire desk and he felt that the Council should ask the Ambulance Advisory Hoard to work on revisions to the ordinance. A motion was made by Council Member Kennedy to modify the suspension to change it to a second letter of reprimand. Council Member Mendez seconded the motion. He agreed that there better communication between the private ambulance services and Aid Service. five day should be Ambulance flutes _.egular Council Meeting November 6, 1984 Page 24 Council Member Berlanga agreed ordinance, but at the same time he trying to enforce the City Code; should be supported by the City Buttery's decision. that there may be some problems with the sees that Mr. Carl Young and Dr. Buttery are there was a violation of the Code; and they Council. He stated that he will uphold Dr. Council Member McComb stated that the third option is modification, noting that the City does have a set of Codes and he thinks that Dr. Buttery did what he thought was best by suspending the service. Council Member McComb then made an amendment to the motion to support Dr. Buttery's decision, but reduce the time of suspension to one day and make that date November 6, 1984. Discussion followed on this and Mayor Pro Tem Turner referred to Dr. Kennedy's recommendation that this entire matter be referred to the Ambulance Advisory Board to improve their regulations and attempt to improve their relationship between the private ambulance service and Aid Ambulance. Council Member Guerrero stated that he wanted to make one thing very clear, by supporting Dr. Kennedy's motion, the City Council is not reprimanding the staff and there is no disrespect intended, but the Council is simply talking about service to the community and he believes that Dr. Kennedy's motion will do that. (There was no second to the amendment to the motion.) Mayor Jones called for the vote on Dr. Kennedy's motion and it passed by the following vote: Jones, Turner, Brown, Guerrero, Kennedy, McComb, Mendez, and Slavik voting "aye"; Berlanga voting "no". * * * * * * * * * * * * * City Manager Martin introduced Mr. Roy Cuevas who is the assistant to the Public Health Director and is a former hospital administrator from the McAllen area. Mayor Jones ascertained that no one in the audience wished to address the Council. There being no further business to come before the Council, on motion by Council Member McComb, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Turner and passed unanimously, the Regular Council Meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. DZ/td