HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 02/06/1986 - WorkshopMINUTES
CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS
SPECIAL WORKSHOP MEETING
CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
FEBRUARY 6, 1986
5:00 P.M.
Present:
Mayor Luther Jones
Mayor Pro Tem Dr. Jack Best
Council Members:
David Berlanga, Sr.
Leo Guerrero
Joe McComb
Frank Mendez
Bill Pruet
Mary Pat Slavik
Linda Strong
Acting City Manager Ernest Briones
City Attorney Bruce Aycock
City Attorney Hal George
Assistant City Secretary Dorothy Zahn
Mayor Luther Jones called the meeting to order in the Council Chamber of
City Hall.
Assistant City Secretary Dorothy Zahn called the roll of required charter
officers and verified that the necessary quorum of the Council and the required
charter officers were present to conduct the meeting.
Acting City Manager Ernest Briones explained that the purpose of the
meeting was to discuss the Capital Improvement Bond Program and informed the
Council that Mr. Jim Seal, representing M. E. Allison and Company, Inc.,
Financial Consultant, and representatives of McCall, Parker and Horton, Bond
Attorney, were present to provide information to the Council.
Mayor Jones indicated that some of the Council Members had other meetings
to attend and had requested that the meeting be adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
A motion was made by Council Member Frank Mendez that the meeting be
adjourned at 6:30 p.m., seconded by Council Member Pruet and passed unanimously.
Acting City Manager Briones referred to the letter received from Mr. George
H. Moff, Chief Appraiser of the Nueces County Appraisal District, in which he
indicated his concurrence with the staff's projection on a ten percent growth
rate for the next six years, as based on the prior ten-year growth pattern.
Mr. Jim Seal addressed the Council in regard to the projections and the
anticipated required tax increase to support the proposed Bond Program and
stated that he agreed completely with the staff projection that an average of
MICROFILMED
Discussion of Current Concerns
February 6, 1986
Page 2
growth of 10% for the next six years is correct. He informed the Council that
if this does not prove to be true, the sale of the bonds could be extended over
a longer period of time with no problems. He also stated that he completely
agreed with the financing assumptions that had been made by the staff.
Council Member Mary Pat Slavik questioned Mr. Seal extensively in regard to
the levying of additional tax to support the budget in August in view of the
revenue sharing funds that may be lost.
Mr. Seal agreed with Mrs. Slavik that all taxes will have an effect on the
City's Aa Bond Rating, but his firm will keep a close watch on this aspect of
the Bond sales.
Mayor Jones commented that Proposition 14, which was passed a few years
ago, was the only action that adversely affected the City's bond rating and
pointed out that the City has now again acquired the Aa rating which they had
before the passage of Proposition 14 which limited the tax rate.
Council Member Guerrero asked for Mr. Seal's opinion of increasing the
proposed bond program by as much as $50 million dollars.
Mr. Seal stated that he would have to prepare more calculations before he
could give an answer on that but he was of the opinion that $50 million dollars,
in addition to what is already planned, might be too aggressive for the City.
He assured the Council that he would have no problem with recommending $10 to
$15 million dollars more which would be a reasonable amount.
Acting City Manager Briones explained to the Council the revenues generated
from the Reinvestment Zone 1 and stated that the Bond Attorney's have some
questions about using those funds for debt service. He then asked a
representative of McCall, Parker & Horton to explain this.
Mr. Jeff Leushel stated that they are concerned about the pending
litigation over the Reinvestment Zone tax collection in the City of El Paso
which is pending before the State Supreme Court. He explained that they are
concerned that there is a possibility that the monies that have been collected
by the Reinvestment Zone may have to be returned to the various taxing entities
involved in the zone. He stated that, therefore, his firm questions whether the
funds in the Reinvestment Zone could be used to pay debt service.
Acting City Manager Briones assured the Council that there is a way of
funding the improvements in the Reinvestment Zone, such as the Marina and the
Coliseum, with direct revenues from the Reinvestment Zone.
In response to Mrs. Slavik question, Mr. Leushel explained that the tax
reform act of 1985 has provisions that are applied retroactively to January of
1986. He agreed with Mrs. Slavik that this has caused some of the cities, such
as Houston, to withdrawn their bonds from market at this time. He assured her,
)iscussion of Current Concerns
February 6, 1986
Page 3
however, that the bill does not impact upon this City in going forward with this
Bond election.
In a further reference to the Reinvestment Zone funds, Mr. Utter informed
the Council that a reduction of about forty to forty—five percent would occur if
the taxes collected from Corpus Christi Independent School District and from Del
Mar College had to be refunded. He stated that the Reinvestment Zone is
receiving about $1 million dollars a year at this time but the funds that are
considered to be School District and Del Mar College District funds are being
held in escrow .
Mr. Leushel referred to the idea of having only one bond issue to be
considered by the voters. He stated that the singleness of purpose doctrine
states that bond propositions cannot be combined unless they are directly
related, i.e., streets and drainage on the same street project could be
considered to be related. He expressed the opinion that the idea of having one
bond proposition would probably not survive the opinion of the Attorney General
which is required. He stated that his firm, therefore, advises against there
being only one proposition. He expressed the opinion that at least seven issues
would be required, but they will examine this a little closer. He provided
further explanation by stating that the propositions need to be related enough
so that the voters know exactly what is included. He assured the Council that
no cities have single purpose bond elections unless it is a one issue matter.
Acting City Manager Briones assured the Council that the staff will work
very closely with the bond counsel and bond advisors to set up propositions in
accordance with the law.
Assistant City Manager James K. Lontos provided a report to the Council of
the various neighborhood meetings and the projects discussed. He stated that
the staff can work with the Planning Commission to recommend additional projects
if the Council desires to increase the bond issue.
Council Member Pruet stated that according to the neighborhood public
meetings, there had been many requests for additional allocations for parks. He
suggested that some of the additional $10 to $15 million dollars be allocated
for park improvements.
Mr. Briones stated that the program can be increased but it will be
necessary to either increase the tax to pay for the program or lengthen the time
of the program.
Mr. Lontos stated that the Planning Commission and
all of the projects; the last meeting of the Planning
workshop meeting; and at that meeting, the Planning
recommendations to the City Council to be considered by
evening, February 17th.
the staff will review
Commission will be a
Commission will make
the Council on Monday
Discussion of Current Concerns
February 6, 1986
Page 4
Council Member Slavik inquired about the receipt of the Freese Nichols
report, and Mr. Lontos replied that they have received a draft copy for staff
review; the staff has reviewed it and sent it back to Freese Nichols; and they
are in the process of making revisions. He stated that some of his staff
members plan to meet with one of the Corpus Christi '90 Committees tonight to
discuss this further. He stated that at this time, the report is just a draft
but some recommendations have been taken from the report.
Council Member Strong recommended that the Council be prepared to stay as
long as necessary on February 17, 1986 at which time they will make their
decision on the items to be included in the bond program.
There being no further business to come before the Council, on motion by
Council Member Mendez, seconded by Council Member Strong and passed unanimously,
the meeting was adjourned at 6:35 p.m., February 6, 1986.
DZ/mj
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the
Minutes of the Special Workshop Meeting of the City of Corpus Christi of
February 6, 1986.
WITNESSETH MY HAND AND SEAL, this the ;atKday of \-11/V.1:041l_' , 1986.
Armando Chapa, City Secret'3ry
City of Corpus Christi, Texas
Luth=r J.fs, MAYOR