HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 03/14/1983 - Specialti_
MINUTES
CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 14, 1983
4:00 P.M.
PRESENT
Mayor Luther Jones
Mayor Pro Tem Betty Turner
Council Members
Jack Dumphy City Manager Edward Martin
* Bob Gulley Assistant City Attorney John Bell
Dr. Charles Kennedy Acting City Secretary Dorothy Zahn
Cliff Zarsky
ABSENT
Council Member Herbert L. Hawkins, Jr.
Mayor Luther Jones called the meeting to order in the Council Chamber of
City Hall.
Acting City Secretary Dorothy Zahn called the roll of required Charter
Officers and verified that the necessary quorum was present to conduct a
legally constituted meeting.
Mayor Jones explained that the meeting had been called to discuss the City
Hall issues and reviewed the motion previously approved/by the City Council on
Weanesday, March 9, 1983. He stated that after the motion was passed, many
citizens addressed the Council and stated that they did not want City Hall on
the Shoreline median and that is the reason that the Council hos decided to
discuss this further.
Council Member Zarsky requested that the staff provide information and
statistics, explaining the reason for the proposed public/private partnership
and the amount of lease payments that the City is now paying for facilities all
over the City. He stated that if the citizens do not want this type of building
under the present financing venture, they may prefer to have a bond issue to
pay for a new City Hall. He stated that there is a need to explain to the
people the real need for a City Hall.
Council Member Kennedy agreed that there is a definite need for such a
building and this need existed as long as ten years ago at which time the City
Council serving then was attempting to provide additional space for City
offices. He pointed out that the need is greater now in order to provide
BOJJLMED
SgP 1 91984
Minutes
Special Council Meeting
March 14, 1983
Page 2
efficiency of government since operating out of six or seven different locations
is very inefficient and costly. He explained that the City had first attempted
to enlarge the existing City Hall and that is the reason the plan to locate it on
its present site evolved. He reviewed the reasons for this location in
conjunction with a library.
Mayor Jones stated that he felt that there was a need to end the contract
with Kinney Associates, vote on a fifteen million dollar bond issue to purchase
the land and build a new City Hall and change the Shoreline median to make it
a park now and forever in the future.
Council Member Zarsky referred to the Mayor's statement in regard to a
fifteen million dollar bond issue and stated that he was of the opinion that a
referendum was in order for the people to indicate their preference on the
location of City Hall. He explained that he is not completely convinced that the
people who spoke the preceding Wednesday actually reflect the will of the
majority of the people, and only a referendum would decide that.
Mayor Jones stated that he felt that the people indicated last week that
they felt very strongly against any further construction on Shoreline Blvd. and
they were in favor of open space for this area. He expressed the opinion that
a bond issue to locate the City Hall and library near the Court House would be
in order.
Council Member Kennedy pointed out that the only trouble with a
referendum that just says "Yes" or "No" would not allow the means of moving
forward because only a bond issue would accomplish that.
Mayor Pro Tem Turner stated that a cost efficient government is not
possible with the space that the City now has. She pointed out that the City
spends a great deal of money to lease space in other areas, about one-half
million dollars a year, and it became very apparent to her that there was a
need for a new City Hall when she first became a member of the Council. She
explained that at the time the Council solicited the proposal for the
public/private development of a new City
anticipated that the location would be here on
she no longer felt that a City Hall should be
still a need for a City Hall and she was of
would be in order.
Hall, nearly all the proposals
Shoreline Blvd. She stated that
located on Shoreline but there is
the opinion that a bond election
utes
,?ecial Council Meeting
March 14, 1983
Page 3
Council Member Dumphy reminded the Council that at the time this was
first discussed, they were considering the saving of money.He stated that the
view on Shoreline is very important and he cares a great deal about the City,
but pointed out that the people who drive down Shoreline to look at the bay
cannot really see it for a distance from the Annex almost to Exposition Hall and
to imply a new City Hall would block the view is simply not true. He also
noted that the Council had pointed out the location where they would like to
construct the City Hall on the hill and he would assume that the price of that
land has increased a great deal since those statements were made. He pointed
out also that if there is a bond issue with a specific location that is not owned
by the City, the price of the desired property would increase tremendously.
Mayor Jones inquired if the City does not have the right of eminent
domain, and Council Member Dumphy agreed but emphasized the fact that that
is extremely costly also. He reminded the Council that the City cannot
purchase that land from the County but will have to purchase land somewhere
else and exchange it for the property they plan to use. Mr.Dumphy also noted
that when a bond issue is presented to the voters, it is possible that it will not
be approved because people are economically in a depressed situation and it will
be difficult to convince the citizens to vote to approve a bond issue that might
possibly increase taxes. He questioned the procedure to be followed if the
bond issue does not pass. He summarized by stating that the reason he
prefers the site on Shoreline is strictly for economic reasons.
Mayor Jones estimated that a bond issue for a new City Hall should be for
approximately 15 million dollars.
City Manager Martin pointed out that according to the Laventhol-Horwath
study, it was indicated that the "do nothing" alternative in relation to City
offices over the next thirty (30) years would be much more expensive than
constructing a new City Hall because of the projected increase in rentals. He
continued by stating that in terms of private/public partnership versus a bond
issue, in his opinion, the same project possibly would be more expensive
through a bond issue because of the construction requirements and bidding
processes necessary for such a project.
Council Member Zarsky expressed the opinion that the Council would have
a much more difficult job of convincing the public of the need for a City Hall.
Minutes
Special Council Meeting
March 14, 1983
Page 4
A motion was made by Council Member Zarsky that a bond election for a
new City Hall be conducted at the time of the City elections on August 13,
1983.
Mayor Pro Tem Turner stated that she had prepared a motion covering
several items and received consent from Mr. Zarsky to withdraw his motion until
after she made her motion as follows:
I. That the present public/private venture negotiations to build a City
Hall on the Shoreline median be suspended;
2. That the City Council move forward with a new City Hall project;
3. That the new City Hall be built on a site other than the Shoreline
median, preferably on property near the Court House;
4. That we attempt to restructure the Kinney Street public/private
venture in a vicinity of the Courthouse. This would involve making
land available at no cost to the City;
5. If that is not possible, the Council schedule a bond election no later
than August 13, 1983; and
6. When the new City Hall is built, the Council commit to tearing down
the City Hall Annex, the old City Hall, the Public Utilities Building
(and possible Exposition Hall) and take necessary steps to assure no
future building on the Shoreline median.
(The above motion is listed as it was amended after further discussion.)
Mayor Jones questioned whether or not the Council should have the bond
election at the same time the general election is conducted on August 13, 1983
and expressed the opinion that possibly it should be conducted earlier to
remove it from the political arena.
Council Member Kennedy enumerated the advantages of having the bond
election earlier than August 13th noting that actually the City is probably
proposing to have a joint City Hall -Library site in order that parking may be
shared and the possibility of closing a street between two blocks. Dr. Kennedy
expressed the opinion that the five million dollars would allow for the purchase
of enough lots for both facilities. He noted that if the election is delayed until
August the library project will be further delayed. He suggested the date of
June 1, 1983 for the election, and as soon as the bond issue passes progress
could began on the new central library.
Council Member Zarsky stated that he would agree to that date also if it is
far enough ahead of the Council election.
lutes
Special Council Meeting
March 14, 1983
Page 5
Council Member Dumphy pointed out that the Library Board wanted to
move forward as soon as possible on their facility and he felt that this would
delay that project unnecessarily. He stated that if it was the Council's desire
to have a bond election, it should be held in May.
City Manager Martin pointed out to the Council that even if the bond issue
passes the bonds would probably not be sold for six to eight months and
explained that a bond election could be held within a 45 -day period and still
allow for the three readings of the ordinance calling the election.
Council Member Zarsky asked about the possibility of leasing property from
the County for 99 years and if that cost would have to be included in the 10
million dollars which is planned to be used by the publiciprivate partnership.
Assistant City Attorney John Bell stated that that figure would not have to
be included in the 10 million dollars if it was just a straight lease and not a
finance mechanism.
Mayor Jones called for a discussion of Item 4 of Mrs. Turner's motion.
City Manager Martin explained that action on this portion of the motion
would involve contacting a number of people to obtain land from the County and
he estimated it would be a 30 to 60 day project which would be in conflict with
the Item 5 which originally called for the bond election to be held prior to June
1st. He pointed out that restructuring of the Kinney Street public/private
venture would depend upon the results of negotiations with Nueces County to
obtain land on the hill in the vicinity of the Court House.
Mayor Jones pointed out also that if the contract with Kinney Associates is
terminated, the City is obligated to pay one-half of the cost incurred, which
would be approximately $117,000.00.
Mayor Pro Tem Turner noted that there has been a tremendous amount of
time spent by the developers with department heads concerning space for the
new City Hall and possibly that would have to be redone.
Council Member Dumphy expressed the opinion that the same building
design could be used on another site. Mr. Dumphy also noted that demoliton of
the buildings on the existing City Hall site and possibly Exposition Hall would
require a great deal of money and suggested that this expense be included in
the bond issue.
Minutes
Special Council Meeting
March 14, 1983
Page 6
City Manager Martin explained that with the public/private venture, the
estimated cost included demolishing those buildings, and if the Council decided
to have a bond election, the cost for that action should be included in the bond
issue.
* Council Member Gulley arrived at the meeting at 5:16 p.m.
Mayor Jones informed Mr. Gulley of the motion on the floor and Council
Member Dumphy stated that he preferred not to call for the vote until the
Council has heard from the people in the audience.
Mayor Jones called for comments from the audience. Mr. J. E. O'Brien,
4130 Pompano, informed the Council that he felt that the discussion held today
shows a definite improvement on the part of the Council to hear from the people
but questioned the rush in calling the bond issue. He stated that he liked the
idea of one site for the library and City Hall but he felt that the public should
have all of the information available before they vote so that they can make an
intelligent choice during the bond election. He stated that he believed that the
members of the City Council will find that the Taxpayers Association can be
very reasonable when they feel that the Council is acting fairly. He declined
to answer the question as to whether or not they would support the bond
issue.
Mrs. Pauline Clarke, representative of the League of Women Voters,
expressed support of this Council in their efforts to get a new City Hall and
assured them that they would put forth every effort to assist the City in this
effort but they hope that the Shoreline median will be vacated and restored as
a public park. She stated that if the plan for the new City Hall is good, the
League will support it.
Mr. William G. Morgan, 4517 Dolphin, informed the Council that he did not
think that a majority of the people agreed that the existing City Hall and other
buildings should be torn down because of the tremendous expense just for a
larger park in this area.
Mr. Benny Benavidez, 4421 Cleo, agreed that all of the old buildings
should be torn down and City Hall should be located across from the Court
House because of the possibility of a more efficient government if it is near that
building. He urged that the City Council move forward to accomplish this.
Mr. Jack Gordy, 5802 Everhart, also objected to the rush on conducting
the bond election. He expressed the opinion that it should either he conducted
,inutes
Special Council Meeting
March 14, 1983
Page 7
with the August election or even after the election if the Council did not want
to make it a political issue.
Mr. Larry Tucker, 4600 Ocean Drive, expressed the opinion that placing
the Library and City Hall together would be undesirable. He noted at the time
the Annex was constructed for patriotic purposes, it was the understanding
that it would be torn down after that use was no longer necessary. He stated
that the library should be located elsewhere. He also expressed the opinion
that the people who decided to construct the City Hall on the bayfront were
very intelligent because the bayfront was built for the use of people in several
Counties and the one thing that represents all of the people of this community
is this City Hall and it is appropriately located on Shoreline Blvd. Mr. Tucker
also noted that the idea of the private/public financing is a type of financing
device that is occurring all over the United States. He suggested if a bond
election is conducted, it should be made very clear to the citizens that there
will be a large difference in the cost of the City Hall and they should be aware
of what they are voting on. He urged that the plan to construct the City Hall
in partnership with Kinney Street Associates at the Shoreline Blvd location be
continued.
Mrs. C. A. Gregg, 308 Kathryn, stated that a number of people have
questioned the selection of a developer without going out for bids.
Mayor Jones explained to Mrs. Gregg that the City sent out invitations to
a large number of developers and seven people responded to that invitation,
following which Laventhol-Horwath studied the proposals and made the
recommendation as to which firm would be the best to select.
Mr. Pat Duaine, 4909 Branscomb, thanked the Council for listening to
statements made the preceding Wednesday in regard to this matter. She
expressed the opinion that with a majority of the citizens in support, the bond
issue will pass.
Mrs. Barbara May, 3307 Manitou, noted that a lot of the people who spoke
last Wednesday were not present today. She expressed the opinion that fiscal
responsibility is very important and the plans that have already been made were
fiscally sound. She questioned whether the voters will approve the bond issue.
Minutes
Special Council Meeting
March 14, 1983
Page 8
Mr. J. R. Keeling, 331 Poenisch, congratulated the Council on their
change in plans and offered support for this bond issue. He urged that the
bond issue be presented so that it is very clear that if it is approved, existing
buildings will be torn down. He stated that he felt the new City Hall site
should be ample enough to provide for future expansion and agreed that the
Council should consider combining the City and County jails and the possibility
of moving the police department nearer City Hall.
Mr. Sam Allen, 509 Larson, predicted that the plan the Council has made
today is the biggest blunder they have ever made. He stated that he had
always supported the bond issues presented by the City, but he could not
support a bond issue for a new City Hall when it could have been constructed
without a tax increase. He pointed out that those who objected to the City Hall
located on Shoreline Blvd. expressed concern about its blocking the view but
noted that even the Bayfront Plaza Convention Center Complex is constructed
on public land, a portion of which was on the median of Shoreline. He noted
that the City Planners were wise enough to make Shoreline Blvd. very wide at
this location to accommodate the public buildings. He stated that he has a copy
of the bayfront plan which the Council adopted a short time ago which indicated
that the City Hall should remain where it is. He stated that he felt that having
a bond election for a new City Hall would be a big mistake and voters would
reject it.
Mr. Hank Snyder stated that since last Wednesday he had conducted an
impartial poll of citizens by calling them on the telephone and the poll indicated
87 of the people that he called preferred to have the City Hall located on
Shoreline Blvd. and 13 responded that they did not.
Mr. Tom Hunt, Sr. expressed appreciation to the City Council for
complying with the wishes of the people who had spoken the preceding
Wednesday. He stated that he was of the opinion that people are very
concerned about open space on Shoreline and prefer not to have buildings on
the median. He also expressed the opinion that a $10 million building that is
planned would not supply the needs for City Hall for very long and stated that
he felt that taxpayers will approve the bond issue for a new City Hall to be
located on the hill near the County Court House. He questioned the increase in
estimated cost of 10 million dollars to 15 million dollars and also urged that the
bond issue not be rushed so that better planning can be included in the issue.
,l1nutes
Special Council Meeting
March 14, 1983
Page 9
He stated that this Council should also be concerned about the new Council that
will be elected in August and give them an opportunity to work on the new City
Hall. He suggested that the Council wait until August 13th, or even after that
date, to have a bond election.
Mayor Jones explained that the 15 million dollars that he had mentioned
was just an estimate.
Council Member Zarsky expressed the opinion that there should be an
option on the ballot devised in some manner so that voters could indicate
whether or not they were in favor of public/private financing as originally
planned.
Others speaking in favor of the bond election to locate City Hall on the
hill were Mrs. James H. Martin, President of Corpus Christi Council of Garden
Clubs; Mrs. Victoria Sloan; Mrs. Fredricka Casillas and Mr. Charles Nichols.
Council Member Gulley stated that he had several questions in regard to
the motion and referred in particular to Item 4 which mentions land available at
no cost to the City. He stated that he could not understand how land could be
available at no cost to the City. He also expressed concern about the passage
of a bond election for 15 million dollars for a single bond issue for City Hall,
noting that during the previous bond election, a 45 million dollar bond issue
included basic services but he did not think that the voters would approve a
single issue for a City Hall. He also pointed out that the existing location of
the City Hall is very convenient; people can get to the building without much
trouble; and if another public building is placed up near the Court House, a
tremendous traffic problem will be created. He also expressed the opinion that
in view of the fact that so many people had objected to the obstruction by the
City Hall building of the view of the bayfront, he felt that citizens would have
the same difficulty with a new land mass because It would definitely obstruct
the view of the bay. Fle stated that City Hall would not be that much of an
obstruction, and he felt it was a mistake to go ahead with the bond issue fpr a
new City Hall.
Council Member Zarsky reiterated that he felt that people should have an
option to vote on the location of the City Hall if the mechanics of such an issue
on the ballot could be resolved.
City Manager Martin stated that he would hesitate to have this item on a
ballot for a bond issue because of possible conflicts that might exist.
Minutes
Special Council Meeting
March 14, 1983
Page 10
Council Member Zarsky suggested that the City Manager be allowed to
study this until next week.
Council Member. Dumphy concurred with Council Member Zarsky that the
City should find out which location the citizens prefer and how they want City
Flail financed.
Council Member Gulley questioned why there is a need to go to the extra
expense of having a special election one month before the general election is
scheduled.
Council Member Kennedy stated that there were three reasons, as follows:
I. So that it will not become a political issue;
2. If there is the possibility of a complex with the City Hall and the
Library together, a parking area could be combined and;
3 Such a measure would delay the construction of the Library if they
have to wait until August.
Council Member Gulley reiterated that he would prefer a bond election with
the general election because he felt that 30 thousand dollars was too much
money to spend just to keep this from becoming a political issue.
Council Member Kennedy stated that the City will probably know within ten
days whether or not they will be able to obtain the land from Nueces County.
After a further discussion, the date for the bond election as listed in item
5 was changed to read "no later than August 13, 1983".
Mayor Jones called for the vote on the motion and it passed as follows:
Jones, Turner, Dumphy, Kennedy and Zarsky voting "Aye"; Gulley voting
"No"; Hawkins, absent.
There being no further business to come before the Council, on motion by
Council Member Zarsky, seconded by Council Member Dumphy, and passed
unanimously, the special Council Meeting was ajourned at 7:05 p.m.