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
,