Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 02/09/1987 - SpecialMINUTES SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 1987 Bayfront Plaza Convention Center, Room 203B 7:00 p.m. PRESENT Mayor lather 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 Mayor Luther Jones called the Convention Center. City Manager Craig McDowell City Attorney Hal George City Secretary Armando Chapa meeting to order at the Bayfront Plaza City Secretary Armando Chapa called the roll and verified that the necessary quorum of the Council and the required Charter Officers were present to conduct the meeting. Mayor Jones stated that the purpose of the meeting was to further consider the proposed amendments to the City Charter, allow for comments from the public, and subsequently submit them to the voters on April 4, 1987. He expressed appreciation to the Charter Revision Commission who had worked diligently to prepare the revised charter amendments. He asked Mr. Todd Hunter and Mr. David Bonilla, who were co-chairmen of the Commission, to make a brief report prior to the public comment. Mr. Todd Hunter presented a report on the organization portion of the proposed revisions, stating that Mr. Bonilla will provide some of the issues as his part of the presentation. Mr. Hunter explained how the Commission had performed their work during the past year. He stated that the Commission had been divided into three subcommittees entitled Administration, Public Representation, and Finance and Taxation, to study the issues. He expressed the opinion that the result of their study was a much more concise Charter that is in compliance with State law and one which they feel will be easier to work with and easier to understand. He recommended that the Council adopt the document and place it on the ballot at the April 4 election. MICROFILMED Utes bpecial Council Meeting February 9, 1988 Page 2 Mr. David Bonilla discussed briefly the following issues that had elicited more comments from the public: (1) Annexation: Article I, Section 2, subsection (d). The Commission felt that annexation by ordinance is a power that the City should have. Based on that belief, the Commission made the decision to include a method of annexing non -controversial pieces of property which should be annexed by the City, but they modified the method to require three readings of the ordinance by the Council and require a 60 -day delay before the annexation is final. During that 60 -day period, citizens who are opposed to the annexation could submit a petition signed by 500 voters of the City requesting that that annexation be considered as a referendum. (2) Initiative and Referendum: Article I, Section 4, subsections (a) thru (1). This is a fundamental principle of home rule cities. This is a method by which 5% of the voters pursue legislation through initiative, and referendum is the method by which 5% of the citizens may request that they be allowed to vote on an ordinance that they feel should not have been passed. (3) Mayor Pro Tem: Article II, Section 4, subsection 12, deals with how Mayors are replaced. The Commission modified subsection 12 to state that in the event the Mayor is unable to serve, the Mayor would be replaced, if there is less than one year remaining in the term, by the member of the Council who received the largest number of votes at large in the election. If there were more than one year remaining in the Mayor's term, the Mayor would be replaced by a special election called by the Council. Mr. Bonilla focused on Section 4 which states that the Mayor Pro Tem will be selected by the City Council, and they may do this on a rotating basis or for an entire term, whichever the Council prefers. (4) City Manager: Article III, Section 2. The major change was the removal of Sections 3 and 4 which dealt with removal and hiring of department heads which previously required approval by the Council. The Commission felt that the City is a business similar to any large corporation in which the chief executive officer runs the business. They, therefore, felt that the City Manager should have the authority to hire and dismiss employees without the approval of the Council. (5) Tax Cap: Article VIII, Section 1. The Commission made the decision to allow the tax cap to remain in effect since it had been established by the voters in 1980 and the actual tax rate is below that cap. They did include a provision by which it could be amended by ordinance subject to the approval of the voters in a referendum. In other words, the voters would still have to approve the removal of the tax cap. In response to a question by Mayor Jones, Mr. Bonilla explained that the annexation by contract is still in the Charter. .utes Special Council Meeting February 9, 1988 Page 3 Council Member Slavik asked for an explanation of the new Article VII, Section 4. She expressed the opinion that this might be in conflict with the State law, Article 126911 pertaining to political activities by City employees. Assistant City Attorney Jimmy Bray explained that the State law Article 1269M applies only to fire and police officers and it prohibits their campaigning in uniform or while they are on duty. He noted that the proposed Charter section applies only to other employees of the City. Council Member Guerrero referred to the same Section 4 and expressed the opinion that the Charter provision is not as liberal as the ordinance recently passed on this subject, and Mr. Bray stated that the ordinance is just a little more specific in context, and the employees should be governed by the Charter and the ordinance. City Attorney Hal George provided a further explanation by stating that the Commission did not intend to make any change in the existing law except that the Charter is more liberal than the previous wording in the Charter which prohibited any type of political activity. Mr. Hunter agreed that that was the Commission's intent and suggested that City Attorney George might be able to further clarify Section 4 before it is placed before the voters. Further discussion followed and it was the consensus of the Council that this section should be clarified to be more explicit as to what City employees can do politically. In response to a question from Council Member Frank Mendez, City Manager McDowell explained that all City employees had been provided with a memorandum in regard to just which political activities they may participate in. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC The Council agreed to allow the City Secretary to speak first. City Secretary Chapa addressed the Council on the following items: (1) Article II, Section 1 (b) which deals with the election date. He requested that the date of the election be changed in the Charter to delete the reference to April or May. He explained that if this is done, the governing body may select the election date from the State designated uniform election dates. City Attorney George commented that the Commission felt that the election date should remain as close as possible to the traditional election date, and that is the reason the April or May dates were included in this section. utes special Council Meeting February 9, 1988 Page 4 Mr. Chapa explained that the State Legislature is still working on changing the April/May uniform election date. Mayor Jones agreed with Mr. George that the citizens should be aware of the approximate date on which the election will be held. Mr. John Bell stated that their committee was aware of the proposed legislation; they were also aware that the Texas Municipal League was attempting to retain the April date in odd -numbered years. He explained that the Commission did not want future Councils to have the flexibility to change the election date at will. They therefore decided to list the April and/or May dates in accordance with the future State law on uniform election dates. Mayor Jones pointed out that if the Charter did not specify a date, then the Council could establish any of the four uniform election dates. City Manager McDowell stated that he felt that the Council should not be able to set any date in the year but should be limited to either an April or May date. City Secretary Chapa stated that another concern he had was the requirement in the existing charter for candidates to submit a petition. He stated that he would like to have the requirement for a petition eliminated from the Charter. Mayor Jones agreed and expressed the opinion that candidates should not have to pay a fee and should not have to submit a petition. The other Council Members concurred with the Mayor and the City Secretary. Mr. Bonilla stated that the Commission did not discuss that but the requirement for petitions is not in the proposed amendments. City Secretary Chapa continued by referring to Article II, Section 14, subsection (b). He stated that this refers to workshop sessions of the City Council and he questioned the requirement that would prohibit the Council from discussing items during the workshop session and voting on them during the regular meeting on the same day. He wanted the Council to be aware of this change in the event they did not agree with this. After discussion, it was the consensus of the Council that the proposed amendment should remain as it is so that the Council could not conduct discussions on items in the morning and then vote on them the same day. Council Member Strong pointed out that the phrasing in the section mentions "items previously scheduled for such regular or special sessions." She noted that the Council would still be allowed to place a new item on the afternoon agenda that might come up during the workshop session. City Secretary Chapa stated that his last concern was the requirement that the City Secretary take minutes of workshop sessions as designated in Article utes apecial Council Meeting February 9, 1988 Page 5 II, Section 14, subsection (c). He questioned the need to take minutes of workshop sessions. Council Member Strong stated that she felt that it is important that minutes of workshop sessions be prepared and suggested that no change be made in the proposed language. During discussion of this section, several Council Members expressed the opinion that minutes or recordings should be taken of even the closed meetings, but it was pointed out that such a requirement is now being discussed at the State level. City Attorney George expressed concern that such minutes or recordings might have a detrimental effect if the City should become involved in a lawsuit, particularly in settling lawsuits or prices the City is willing to pay for certain pieces of property. Mr. Hunter pointed out that this section does not prohibit taking minutes or recordings of closed sessions, but it does not require that it be done. Council Member Slavik referred to Article III, Section 2, subsections (j) and (k) and expressed concern that the City Manager would not have to present to the Council for confirmation his appointments of department heads. Mr. George noted that the Council still must be informed of certain appointments. Council Member Guerrero explained that a few years ago, a City Manager created new positions and approved large salary increases without the Council's knowledge. He stated that this is the Council's concern about the proposed change. Mr. George Brown, a member of the Commission, stated that the ordinance referred to by the City Manager which was passed at the Council's request was brought to his committee's attention, and knowing that that ordinance was in existence, they felt that a Council/Manager form of government should not require approval of appointments made by the City Manager. He pointed out that this is the only City with a Council/Manager form of government that has such a requirement. Council Member Mendez pointed out that the ordinance previously passed requires that the Council be informed of salary changes and changes in the management structure. Mayor Jones then referred to the timetable for the election and reminded the Council that in order to comply with the Election Code, the election must be called by February 17, 1987. Mr. Chapa explained that changes could be made up until 30 days before the election, or up until March 4, 1987. utes special Council Meeting February 9, 1988 Page 6 COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Mr. R. J. Herschbach pointed out that the existing charter states that all existing ordinances and laws will remain in full force and effect, and this statement does not appear in the proposed revised charter. City Manager McDowell stated that this statement is included in a different section of the Charter, and the change was made to eliminate duplication. He assured the Council that it does state that all existing laws, ordinances, etc. will remain in full force and effect. Mr. Herschbach continued by referring to Article VII, Section 4, which refers to political activities by City employees. He stated that as a former City employee he had worked very hard to have this covered by state law, and in Article 1269M, it is clarified as to what fire and police officers can engage in politically. He questioned if the proposed Charter section allows freedom of speech for City employees and asked that this section be changed to specifically prohibit employees from political activities while in uniform, during working hours or on City property, but allow them freedom after hours. Council Member Mendez stated that he felt that this was clarified in the Ordinance the Council recently passed. Mr. Herschbach also questioned the proposed amendment that addressed classifications in the fire department and Civil Service and stated that he felt that the fire positions should be listed in the proposed Charter so that they could not be eliminated by a City Manager. City Manager McDowe]1 pointed out that the Council now approves salaries, classifications, etc. through collective bargaining; this is subject to the approval of the Council; and he felt that it does not need to be included in the Charter. Mr. Lewis Lovelace, 1549 Case Grande, stated that he would like to see a change to require that the City Attorney be elected and not be under the City Manager. He also objected to additional powers being granted to the City Manager in the proposed Charter. He expressed the opinion that this proposed Charter is not specific enough. Council Member Slavik stated that she understood that there was some discussion on the possibility of electing the City Attorney. She expressed the opinion that the City Council needs an attorney, whereas the City Attorney now has as his first obligation allegiance to the City Manager. City Attorney George explained that the City Attorney is required to represent the City, the City Council, Boards and Commissions, and not primarily the City Manager. _rites Special Council Meeting February 9, 1988 Page 7 Mr. Hunter informed the Council that the Commission had discussed the possibility of electing the City Attorney but reached the conclusion that it would be preferable to continue having the City Manager appoint the City Attorney. Council Member Guerrero stated that at times he has felt that he did not have an attorney and there have been times when the City Attorney was obviously representing the City Manager rather than the City Council. Mr. Lovelace interjected that he had frequently had the impression that the City Attorney did not properly represent the citizens. Mayor Jones pointed out that if the City Attorney is not performing well, it is the responsibility of the City Manager, and the City Manager can be dismissed by the Council at any time. He expressed concern that electing the City Attorney would result in a very political situation. Mr. J. E. O'Brien, 4130 Pompano Place, referred to Article 1, Section 4 (b) which addresses the power of initiative and referendum and objected to the fact that it excludes certain items such as the operating or capital budgets of the City, appropriations already made, levy of taxes, and the individual salaries of City officials or employees. He expressed the opinion that a good initiative and referendum section should not have any limitations and nothing should be excluded. Mr. O'Brien then referred to Section 4 (g) which in effect requires that if a petition is presented and approved, the issue will be placed on the next City Council election ballot. He stated that this indicates that the matter could not be considered until the next City Council election which he felt was an unnecessary delay and suggested that this be amended. Mr. O'Brien then referred to Article II, Section 2 (b) which allows political organizations to make nominations of candidates, expressing the opinion that this would make City elections partisan. He then suggested that the Council consider delaying the referendum on the Charter until the new Council is in office. He stated that he felt that the citizens should have more time to try to understand the Charter. He also indicated that the City Attorney should be elected or another attorney should be employed to directly represent the Council. Council Member Slavik agreed with Mr. O'Brien that initiative and referendum items should not be delayed until a City Council election and stated that she did not believe that this was the Commission's intention but that the Section was just poorly worded. City Manager McDowell stated that it was the intent of the Commission that issues will only be considered every two years. utes apecial Council Meeting February 9, 1988 Page 8 Mr. John Bell explained that the members felt that otherwise the City would have to bear the expense in the approximate amount of $70,000 several times during the year on I & R matters. Council Member Mendez addressed the I & R issue and complimented the Commission on including the opportunity for citizens to have a voice in government. He also agreed that allowing a referendum every two years is the correct time frame. Mr. Bell addressed the Council as a member of the Commission and noted that the new Charter will be thirty pages long as opposed to the existing one hundred twenty page Charter. He stated that it has been said that it is a "General" Charter but he thought that this was the best thing that could happen because it is easy to read and understand. He stated that the document presented to the Council is the result of a lot of compromise on the part of the Commission members who now approve of this document. Mrs. Pauline Clarke, 3902 Mueller Street, commented that the Council selected the members of the Commission who worked for over a year to prepare this document and urged that it be presented to the voters without any changes. Mr. August Meinrath agreed that the makeup of the Commission assured that everybody in the City was represented. He urged that the citizens be educated as to the contents of the proposed Charter. Council Member Slavik urged that the annexation issue not be listed on the ballot with any other important issues because she felt that people are very concerned about annexation by ordinance and it might not be approved. Dr. Miriam Wagenschein, 6810 Sahara, informed the Council that the Commission debated the issue of allowing the City Manager the authority to hire and dismiss department heads. She stated that she now agrees that it should be the prerogative of the City Manager rather than the Council. She also pointed out that the proposed Charter is quite an improvement over the existing one. Mr. Brown also requested that the Council not make any changes but present the document to the voters as recommended. Mr. Lovelace inquired if the citizens could vote on individualportions of the Charter amendments, and Mr. Hunter assured him that they could vote one issue down and approve another issue. Mayor Jones inquired if the Council felt that another public hearing was necessary on this issue, or if further discussion and decisions could occur during a regular Council Meeting. Council Member Strong pointed out that publication advertised two hearings, therefore, she felt that a second public hearing should be conducted. rotes 0pecial Council Meeting February 9, 1988 Page 9 It was the consensus of the Council that the meeting on Monday, February 16, should be held. Mr. Quadalupe Valdez commended the Charter Revision Commission members for their excellent work in revising the City Charter. He suggested that letters be sent to various organizations to send representatives to the meeting next Monday night so that more people will be aware of the contents of the amendments. There being no further business to come before the Council, on motion by Mayor Pro Tem Best, seconded by Council Member Mendez and passed unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. February 9, 1987. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the Special Council Meeting of the City of Corpus Christi of February 9, 1987. WITNESSETH MY HAND AND SEAL, this the l3 day ofypa% 19 kg . Armando Chapa, City Secretary City of Corpus Christi