Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 02/16/1987 - SpecialMINUTES SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING February 16, 1987 Bayfront Plaza Convention Center, Room 203B 7:00 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 City Manager Craig McDowell City Attorney Hal George City Secretary Armando Chapa Mayor Luther Jones called the meeting to order at the Bayfront Plaza Convention Center. City Secretary Armando Chapa called the roll and verified that a quorum of the Council and the required Charter Officers were present to conduct the meeting. Mayor Jones informed the public that this is the second of two public hearings scheduled on the proposed revisions to the City Charter. He called on Mr. David Bonilla to briefly describe the proposed amendments. Mr. Bonilla, Co -Chairman of the Charter Revision Commission, made opening remarks in which he complimented Todd Hunter on his leadership in this effort. He explained that the Commission was charged in January, 1986 to study the current charter and make recommendations to update the Charter. He explained that the Commission consisted of 38 members, appointed by the Council, who performed this task. Mr. Bonilla stated that five basic subjects had received comments from the citizens in both public hearings and in other meetings of the Commission and that he would like to review those sections. (1) ANNEXATION: Article II, Section 2. The Commission included in the proposed Charter the right for the City to annex by ordinance, basically for non -controversial pieces of property. They also included a method to allow for a petition containing 500 signatures of registered voters to be presented to the City Secretary to call for a referendum on an annexation ordinance. MICROFILMED utes special Council Meeting February 16, 1987 Page 2 (2) INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM: Article I, Section 4, (a) through (1). This is a fundamental part of a home rule City in that it allows for participation by the public in proposing City ordinances and calling for elections for consideration of ordinances that they feel the City Council have passed in error. (3) MAYOR PRO TEM: Article II, Section 4. The significant change is in Section 12 which was amended to provide that when a Mayor becomes ill or is unable for some reason to perform his or her duties, and there is less then one year remaining in the term, the Council Member at large who received the greatest number of votes will be named Mayor. If, however, more than one year remains in the term, an election will be conducted to allow the voters to elect a new Mayor to complete the term. Otherwise, the Mayor Pro Tem will be elected by the Council, which could be on a rotating basis or for the entire term. (4) CITY MANAGER: Article III, Section 2. The Commission felt strongly that this City should be run like a business; the Council should set policy; and the City Manager is the chief executive officer who should run the business. Because of that, Sections 3 and 4 of the existing Charter were deleted which will now allow the City Manager to hire and dismiss departments heads without obtaining approval of the Council. (5) TAX CAP: Article VIII, Section 1. Some modification was made, but the tax cap as established in the election in 1980 was allowed to remain, but in the event the City Council found it necessary to change the tax cap, it could be accomplished by passage of an ordinance, but such ordinance would have to be approved by the voters of the City. Mr. Bonilla continued by stating that basically, although the Council has not made a decision on the recommendations on the amendments, the procedure to place it on the ballot has not been established yet, but it was his understanding that the City intended to have the controversial issues listed separately to allow the voters to either approve or vote down those items. Mayor Jones suggested that the Council allow the public to speak and then provide time for their comments as necessary. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Mr. Bruce Aycock referred to the tax cap and expressed concern about allowing it to remain, since, in his opinion, the tax cap inhibits the bond rating of the City. He informed the Council that in 1980, the City enjoyed a AA bond rating, and after the tax cap was approved by the voters, that rating was decreased to Al. He stated that he had received information to the effect that that increase had resulted in an increase in interest rates of 15 points. Mr. Aycock stated that right now the City should be AAA rated because of good management and prompt payment on bond issues. utes special Council Meeting February 16, 1987 Page 3 Mr. Aycock continued by stating that on bond issues, the lower rating has cost the City a great deal of money in interest payments. He described the tax cap as an action that reduced the City's assets by approximately two-thirds. He expressed the opinion that the tax cap should be removed from the new charter to effect an improvement in the City's bond rating. Mr. John Bell, a member of the charter revision commission, informed the Council that several minor mistakes had been pointed out to him and he assured the Council that these would be corrected, if the Council agrees, by the City Attorney before the document is finalized. Mr. Bell then addressed the initiative and referendum issue and stated that he had been designated to discuss this with Mr. J.E. O'Brien. He stated that he had met with Mr. O'Brien on two occasions and Mr. O'Brien was critical of some deletions, and he would like to ask the Council to approve some changes that he would recommend at this time. Mr. Bell stated that he would like to suggest that a clause be added to the effect that if the petitioners submit a petition with the required 5% of the signatures of the public within 60 days of passage of an ordinance, then he felt that a referendum to rescind an ordinance or pass a new law should be held at the next uniform election date rather than at the next City Council election as the section specifies at this time. Mayor Jones inquired of Mr. Bell as to what kind of ordinances would be subject to a referendum. Mr. Bell responded by stating that an ordinance dealing with leases is addressed in another section of the charter, and an ordinance annexing property is also dealt with in another section of the charter, and both of those have their own mechanism to initiate a referendum. He stated that the only ordinance he could think of that would be subject to a petition would relate to legislative types of ordinances. Council Member Mendez referred to the initial language that was suggested on the I & R issue and state that he was apprehensive that the Council would be confronted with a referendum issue every time an ordinance is passed. Mr. Bell stated that the new wording would allow for situations in which 5% of the registered voters presented a petition within 60 days of passage of an ordinance, a referendum should be conducted at the next uniform election date. He stated that it is very difficult to obtain that many signatures and noted also that this would apply to ordinances, not resolutions or motions. Council Member Mendez pointed out that the Council needs to be sure that they do not approve routine items by ordinance since they would all be subject to referendum. City Attorney George explained again that the type of ordinances subject to referendum were things such as banning smoking in City Hall, but not ordinances utes special Council Meeting February 16, 1987 Page 4 authorizing purchasing of services or contracts for projects involving appropriations. Mr. Bell further explained that previous appropriations and budgetary matters are clearly not subject to the referendum procedure. Mr. Bonilla informed the Council that the Commission as a whole has not had time to study Mr. Bell's amended version and he would prefer not to express an opinion at this time. Mrs. Carol Sue Hipp, representing Leadership Corpus Christi Alumni, expressed support by that organization of the adoption of the proposed charter as a whole. Mr. Arnoldo Moreno, Chairman of the Planning Commission, presented handouts to the City Council in which he listed several concerns in connection with the portion of the new charter pertaining the the Planning Commission as listed in Article V. He described some minor changes that they would like to have added to the proposed charter amendments. Mayor Jones pointed out that the Council has had two propositions presented to them from Mr. Bell and from Mr. Moreno. He inquired if it would be possible for the commission to meet to discuss these changes and present their recommendations to the Council prior to the deadline for preparation of the ballot for the election. Mr. Bonilla stated that he believed the Commission could meet to discuss these recommendations. Several Council Members concurred that these suggestions should be referred to the Commission before the Council acts on them. City Secretary Chapa referred to the discussion the preceding week of Article II, Section 1, regarding the membership and terms of the Mayor and Council Members. He noted that they also discuss the date on which the general election should be held. He informed the Council that he had discussed this matter with Mr. George and Mr. Bray and stated that since last week, he has learned that the State legislature is now considering the first Saturday in May as one of the uniform election dates. He pointed out that locally this would conflict with Buccaneer Days' activities. Mr. Chapa continued by stating that he is now recommending that that section of the charter specify that the Mayor and the Council will be elected for two-year terms and that the general election be conducted during the first five months of odd -numbered years on a date set at least six months in advance by the City Council in accordance with the State Election Code. He noted that this would allow the City the flexibility to decide on a date that would be most conducive to holding the election here in Corpus Christi. Mayor Jones inquired if that would allow the Council to change the date of the election every two years, and Mr. Chapa replied in the affirmative. Mayor utes opecial Council Meeting February 16, 1987 Page 5 Jones stated that he believed that this was something else that the commission should consider. Council Member Strong expressed the opinion that this section needs to be worded so the people will know that the Council will not be allowed to change the election date every two years. Council Member McComb stated that he felt that the City should comply with the State Election Code in setting the date. He pointed out that there would seem to be a conflict in this section which first states that the Mayor and Council Members must serve two-year terms, but then gives them the alternative to set an election date in January which would mean that they would not actually serve the full two years. Council Member Slavik agreed with Mr. McComb that she did not like the five month flexibility. She suggested that the specification of April or May, which is in the present version, should remain but suggested that this possibly should be referred to the Commission. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Best that the hearing be closed, seconded by Council Member Strong, and passed unanimously. Mayor Jones called for discussion of the suggested changes, stating that he has a problem with the suggestions made by John Bell on I & R. He objected to allowing five citizens to present a letter indicating an intention to circulate a petition and by this action delaying an ordinance passed by the Council for a 60 -day period. Council Member Slavik inquired of Mr. Bell as to why that phrase was included in the I & R section, and Mr. Bell stated that it was taken from the model charter. Mr. Bray explained that most cities do not have a stipulation that allows five people to stop enforcement of an ordinance, but most city charters do allow for stopping enforcement when the actual petition is submitted. Mr. Bell further explained that his revised version does not allow for the five people to stop an ordinance, but the presentation of the petition does do so. Council Member Pruet questioned the I & R section because it would lead to more and more government by referendum. He pointed out that ordinances are usually considered on three readings and if a large number of people object to an ordinance, they have ample time to speak in opposition during those three readings. Mr. Pruet also questioned why the Council should ask the Commission to review these revisions within just 24 hours when they have studied it for over a year. utes special Council Meeting February 16, 1987 Page 6 Council Member McComb expressed the opinion that the I & R section should remain as it was originally submitted by the Commission rather than considering Mr. Bell's recommendations. Mayor Jones asked the Charter Revision Commission to study these three issues and report to the Council within the next week. Mr. George informed the Council that the ordinance calling the election will include twelve propositions on the charter revision section. He reviewed those twelve propositions. Mayor Jones commented that the things being referred to the Commission do not address the tax cap referred to by Mr. Aycock, and Mr. George stated that that is correct except for the change which allowed removing the cap by ordinance to be approved by the voters in the event of a major disaster such as a hurricane. Mr. Bonilla addressed the tax cap and stated that the Commission discussed this at length, but since the voters had approved the tax cap in 1980, and the current tax rate is less than the cap, they did not feel a change was in order at this time. Mr. Jack Graham, 7005 Ashdown, expressed the opinion that many commission members had worked very hard on this document; they studied the issues thoroughly; and he felt that the recommendation should be adopted by the Council immediately. There being no further business to come before the Council, on motion by Council Member Slavik, seconded by Council Member Strong, and passed unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m., February 16, 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 16, 1987. WITNESSETH MY HAND AND SEAL, this the 19 IT . /3K day of ,