Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 09/08/1987MINUTES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 9:00 a.m. PRESENT Mayor Betty Turner Mayor Pro Tem Clif Moss Council Members: David Berlanga, Sr. City Manager Craig McDowell Leo Guerrero * City Attorney Hal George Frank Mendez * City Secretary Armando Chapa Bill Pruet Mary Rhodes Mary Pat Slavik Linda Strong Mayor Betty Turner called the meeting to order in the Council Chamber of City Hall. The invocation and Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States were led by Mayor Pro Tem Clif Moss. Mayor Turner administered the oaths of office to the following people: Jake Sanchez, and Donald Taft - Planning Commission; Dorothy Garrett - Sister City Committee; David Gray - Ambulance Advisory Council; Celina Cavazos - Human Relations Commission; Mark Scott, Govind B. Nadkarni, Paula Gaut and Lawrence Balderas - Landmark Commission. Mayor Turner recessed the Council Meeting at 9:10 a.m. to convene the JTPA Executive Committee Meeting. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Turner reconvened the Council Meeting at 9:45 a.m. * Council Member Mendez arrived at 9:25 a.m. * Council Member Guerrero arrived at 9:45 p.m. Council Member Slavik requested that the Council grant five minutes of time to a group from Flour Bluff concerning an excavation project in Flour Bluff and the Council agreed. MICROFILMED :mutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 2 Messrs. Joe Hansler and Vic Menard, residents of a Flour Bluff neighborhood, appealed to the Council in regard to a plan by Heldenfels Brothers, Inc. to excavate a 57 -acre tract near the corner of Caribbean Drive and Flour Bluff Drive which is approximately 2,000,000 cubic feet of soil, zoned residential and is surrounded by residential properties. The concerns of the neighborhood are that 1. It will detract from the appearance of a highly -visible area; 2. Lower property values in a high -valuation area; 3. Blowing sand will be a nuisance; 4. Blowing sand will be a safety hazard to student pilots operating at Waldron Field; and 5. Low area will become a breeding place for mosquitoes. They requested the City Council's support in protecting their property from this commercial excavation and requested that an emergency ordinance be passed requiring that the contractor apply for an excavation permit. Discussion followed and it was the consensus of the Council that the residents set up a meeting between the residents, Mr. Nino Gutierrez of the State Highway Department, and the contractor to make him aware of the problem; City Attorney Hal George will look at the existing ordinances to determine whether they are in conflict with other ordinances on the books; and that the Engineering Department will inspect them under the code to ensure that they do not go over the allowable one foot of excavation. Mayor Turner stated that doing something retroactively, after the fact, when there has been no ordinance in place will subject the City to serious liability. She encouraged the residents to meet with the State Highway Department and that the City will look into the possibility of developing an ordinance that responds to their concerns for the future. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Turner referred to the Board and Committee following appointments were made by the Council: Park and Recreation Board Claude Axel Cathy Harrison Dave Porterfield Guadalupe Valdez Xavier Perez Gwen Bryant Jim McCown Landmark Commission Appointments. The Claire J. McCauley Janet Allen * * * * * * * * * * * * * * A motion was made by Council Member Slavik that the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of September 1, 1987 be approved as presented; seconded by Council Member Pruet and passed unanimously. Mayor Turner called for consideration of Consent Motions 1 thru 3. Minutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 3 1. M87-0312 Approving plans and specifications and authorizing receipt of bids on October 13, 1987, for modifications to the Oso Water Reclamation Plant to improve operational efficiency. 2. M87-0313 Approval of the Tax Roll levy for the City of Corpus Christi for the Tax Year 1987 in accordance with Section 26.09(e) of the Texas Property Tax Code, which states that the Assessor will submit the appraisal roll, with amount of tax entered, to the governing body for approval as the City's tax roll. 3. M87-0314 Approving specifications and authorizing Staff to solicit proposals for street sweeping services. In reference to Item No. 1 concerning the Oso Water Reclamation Plant Improvements, Council Member Slavik inquired if these improvements will help the odor problem, and City Manager McDowell replied that this should address the odor problem. In answer to a question from Council Member Strong, Engineering Services Director Victor Medina stated that the equipment is just being replaced and making it more efficient in its operation. Council Member Mendez stated that the minority business enterprise participation has been set at five percent and inquired if it was difficult to increase it to ten percent, and Mr. Medina stated that it was very difficult in this case; Staff wants the work to go as quickly as possible; the less sub contractors that there are, the better it will be; and Staff would like to have the plant shut down the least amount of time possible. Mr. Mendez suggested that wherever possible, the City set the minority participation at ten percent. In reference to Item No. 2 concerning approval Council Member Slavik noted that she is going to she is still against the 1}C and would like to provide funds for the aquarium. vo ha of the 1987 Tax Roll Levy, to no on this item because ve the }C only which would Mayor Pro Tem Moss noted that with the low tax base that the City has, the tax levy will only raise 18 percent of the gross budget of the City, and of the operating budget, it is less than half at only 45 percent. He stated that we should take that into account in finding every opportunity that we can to raise the tax base for our City. ftnutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 4 In reference to Item No. 3 concerning the contract for street cleaning, Mayor Turner noted that performance standards or the Staff's analysis comparing the City's operation were not included in the support material the Council received, and she would like to see those items. She inquired what kind of an investment the City had in street cleaners, and if any were recently purchased. She also noted that as a strong advocate of privatization she feels very strongly that the public sector should be competing against the private sector, and that our Street Department should have an opportunity to bid against the private sector relative to the specifications. City Manager McDowell stated that there are three categories of streets for what is presently being done; 1. the central business district which will be swept every other day; 2. arterial streets which are swept once a week; and 3. residential streets which are swept twice a year. He stated that Staff knows what our costs of operation are because it is in the budget; we are asking the private sector for a bid on the same basis that we do sweeping at the present time; and we have not purchased any equipment lately. Council Member Mendez stated that we need to see if it would be economically feasible for the City to do it. In answer to a question from Council Member Mendez, Mr. McDowell stated that the specifications call for the same schedule that is being done now and does not call for an increase in services, but that we could bid an alternate for increased sweeping. Council Member Guerrero stated that the ultimate goal in privatization is that it will save on down time, employees being ill, insurance, etc. He stated that if the private sector could do it for the same amount as the City, the savings will be far greater because it will eliminate a lot of expenses that the City has that they will not. In answer to a question from Council Member Pruet, Mr. McDowell stated that Staff looked at what it costs the City to sweep that same area; made some estimates on what it would cost from the private sector; and determined that it would be cheaper to do that. He explained that he does not have the figures, but it was a very rough calculation and just an estimate. Mayor Turner requested information on the downtime of the machines and the maintenance costs. In answer to a question from the Mayor, Mr. McDowell replied this calls for a five-year bid, the base price being established in the first year and escalating in the subsequent four years based on the consumer price index. No one spoke in regard to the Consent Motions. A motion was made by Council Member Guerrero to approve Consent Motions 1 thru 3; seconded by Council Member Berlanga and passed; Slavik voting "No" on Item No. 2. linutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Turner called for consideration of Consent Resolutions, Ordinances and Ordinances from previous meetings, noting that Items, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8a, 15, and 16 are withdrawn for discussion. No one spoke in regard to the above items. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes and the following were passed: 8. RESOLUTION NO. 19964 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH OCEANSIDE ASPHALT, INC. FOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION INCLUDING CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS ON BONNER DRIVE FROM SOUTH STAPLES STREET TO EVERHART ROAD AND BURTON LANE, BETTY JEAN DRIVE AND NELSON LANE FROM WILLIAMS DRIVE TO HOLLY ROAD, ALL IN THE GARDENDALE AREA OF THE CITY, APPROPRIATING $1,079,335.42. The foregoing Resolution passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken. 9. ORDINANCE NO. 19966 CLOSING THE HEARING ON STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON THE FOLLOWING STREETS: Gardendale Area, Phase I - 1. Bonner Drive, from Everhart Road to South Staples Street, and 2. Betty Jean Drive, Nelson Lane and Burton Lane, from Holly Road to Williams Drive; FIXING A LIEN AND CHARGE, THE MANNER AND TIME OF PAYMENT AND COLLECTION: AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The Charter Rule was suspended and the foregoing Ordinance passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken. 10. SECOND READING ANNEXING A 26,593 SQUARE FOOT TRACT OF LAND OUT OF LOT 8, SECTION 11, FLOUR BLUFF AND ENCINAL FARM AND GARDEN TRACTS, OWNED BY ENCINO--CIMARRON AND ENCINO-CIMARRON 62, LTD. The foregoing Ordinance passed on second reading by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken. 11. SECOND READING The foregoing Ordinance passed on second reading by the following vote: linutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 6 Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Pruet absent at the time the vote The foregoing Ordinance passed on Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye"; was taken. second reading by the following vote: Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken. 12. SECOND READING AMENDING CHAPTER 6 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO ESTABLISH REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES FOR THE REGULATION AND GRANTING OF PERMITS TO CONDUCT THE BUSINESS OF GROOMING, BREEDING, SHOWING, EXHIBITING, OR BOARDING OF ANIMALS; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. The foregoing Ordinance passed on second reading by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken. 13. SECOND READING ADOPTING THE LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AN ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. The foregoing Ordinance passed on second reading by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken. 14. ORDINANCE 19967 AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 39, PERSONNEL, BY ADDING A SECTION 39-18, RESIDENCY OF OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES: PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE. The foregoing;ng Ordinance passed on third reading by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken. * * * * * * * * * * * * * In reference to Item No. 4 regarding the City Hall Land Expansion Project, Mayor Pro Tem Moss inquired about the reason this property needs to be acquired, and City Manager McDowell stated that the need is for additional parking for the new City Hall, and that the City is in the process of acquiring extra parcels to provide parking. He further stated that it is not an overrun on the City Hall project. In reference to Item No. 6 concerning the San Carlos Sanitary Sewer Improvements, Council Member Slavik referred to the low bidder and inquired if the City had done much business with A.M.H. Construction Company, and Victor linutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 7 Medina, Director of Engineering Services, stated that the City has worked with their crews but not the company. He stated that since the bid was so low, Staff investigated the company; they were able to get a bond; but that they could not get insurance coverage for that type of work. In answer to a question from Council Member Slavik in reference to Item No. 7 regarding the Tax Collection Contracts with Corpus Christi Independent School District and Corpus Christi Junior College District, Mr. McDowell stated that this is the prorated share of what it costs the City to collect; the City is not taxing boats; the school district is; and the total cost of operation is approximately the same whether boats are included or not. In answer to a question from Mrs. Slavik, Director of Finance, Debra Andrews, stated that the cost to collect on the boats is nominal; it is a minimal cost; those are already in the costs; the contracts have been negotiated; and this is really an extension of the last three-year extension. Mayor Turner inquired if there has been any dialogue with the county to see if they would like to give up their tax assessment collection, and Ms. Andrews replied there have not been any discussions with them, but that Staff will pursue that. Mr. McDowell pointed out that Staff does it much more efficiently, quicker and at less cost. In answer to a question from Mayor Pro Tem Moss regarding increasing tax collections, Mr. McDowell stated that we will pursue it aggressively; we are making all reasonable attempts; and that the list is published by the media. Mrs. Andrews stated that the City uses media contact on this as much as possible; and if the taxpayer does not pay his taxes after February 1st to July 1st, there is another 15 percent penalty. Council Member Berlanga inquired what kind of obligation the collective agencies have with the City, and Mrs. Andrews replied goals and objectives are set up with them each year; there are monthly monitoring meetings; and the contract is up June 1st of next year. In reference to Item No. 8a regarding the consultant proposal to plan, design, and implement a new City Radio Communications System, Council Member Slavik mentioned the cost of $98,000 for this item. She stated that we need to justify this expense and inquired why the group range of $40,000 was not acceptable. Mr. McDowell stated that the prices ran from $40,000 to $226,000; it was the recommendation of the Fire Chief, Police Chief, Head of Radio Maintenance and Dan Hobbs, Director of Management and Budget, that the firm they are recommending was the best qualified to do the work with the best proposal. Minutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 8 In answer to a question from Council Member Slavik, Mr. McDowell stated that Staff did not want to go to one of the potential suppliers; they wanted an independent evaluation. Mrs. Slavik inquired about the first phase, and Mr. McDowell stated that the first phase is to look at what our existing coverage is; where the problem areas are; identify those problems; and the corrective action that needs to be taken. He further stated that the study is part of the bond issue. Mrs. Slavik inquired about the funding for the future study, and Mr. McDowell explained that $98,000 is for phase 1 thru 5; funds for the actual purchase of a system would be from a future bond sale; and that money for the communications system is in the bond program. Mayor Turner expressed concern about the Police Department needing radios and inquired when the report will be completed, and Mr. McDowell stated that we will know in about three to four months what the problem is; the solution to the problem will have to wait for a future bond sale; it will be two months for the first phase; about two and one-half months for the second phase; and twenty months for all five phases. In answer to a question from Council Member Slavik, Mr. McDowell explained there are no sources of funds for the radios until we sell the next bonds which deal with the construction of the facility; we think there are some things that will come out of this that we will be able to address from an operational standpoint, short of having to purchase a brand new system. Council Member Rhodes stated this type of consulting work is justified, and that when areas get into very technical procedures like this, it is money well spent. She pointed out that it has not been approved which bonds are going to be sold this year, and inquired if this system could be included. Mr. McDowell stated that it would be possible; it would be a Council decision; and that this was not included in the recommendation of the Task Force. Discussion followed and Council Member Mendez stated that this issue needs to be addressed now to see how it could be corrected. He continued by stating that alternative ways of funding the Police Station should be studied to see if there are other options on how it could be done. In answer to a question from the Mayor about purchasing the system and moving it to the new facility, Mr. McDowell explained that part of the problem would be to install it in the old building and move it which would be a tremendous expense. Mr. McDowell noted that we need to study the facts; what the actual problems are; and what it takes to correct them. He stated that this should be dealt with from a factual standpoint. tinutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 9 In answer to a question from the Mayor about the cost, Mr. Hobbs stated it would be $1.5 million total for the radio communications system. After more discussion, Council Member Mendez suggested that this matter be put on the agenda so that the Police Chief can address the Council on the problems concerning the radio. No one from the audience spoke on the above items. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes and the following were passed: 4. RESOLUTION NO. 19960 AUTHORIZING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS BY THE CITY TO CONDEMN FEE TITLE TO PARCELS 2 AND 3 FOR THE CITY HALL PROJECT AND TO ACQUIRE SAID PARCELS FROM THE OWNERS. The foregoing Resolution passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye." 5. RESOLUTION NO. 19961 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE DOCUMENTS PARCEL 12 IN CONNECTION WITH THE MARY APPROPRIATING $13,500. The foregoing Resolution passed by the Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes, 6. RESOLUTION NO. 19962 NECESSARY FOR THE CARROLL CHANNEL following vote: Slavik and Strong ACQUISITION OF WIDENING; AND Turner, Moss, voting, "Aye." REPEALING RESOLUTION 19879 AND ANNULLING THE CONTRACT AWARD TO A.M.H. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE SAN CARLOS SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS; RETAINING THE CONTRACTOR'S BID SECURITY CHECK IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,370.05 AS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH J & B CONTRACTORS; APPROPRIATING $106,282.63. The foregoing Resolution passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye." 7. RESOLUTION NO. 19963 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENTS WITH THE CORPUS CHRISTI INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE CORPUS CHRISTI JUNIOR COLLEGE DISTRICT FOR THE CITY TO ACT AS THEIR TAX ASSESSOR -COLLECTOR. The foregoing Resolution passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye." linutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 10 8a. RESOLUTION NO. 19965 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH RAYMOND C. TROTT, CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. TO SURVEY THE CITY'S EXISTING AND FUTURE RADIO COMMUNICATION NEEDS; AND APPROPRIATING $98,000. The foregoing Resolution passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye." * * * * * * * * * * * * * In reference to Item No. 15 regarding use privilege agreements, Council Member Rhodes reiterated that she is going to vote against this item again; and she thinks it will be a big mistake if the Council turns over decisions on encroachments of public rights-of-way to someone designated by the City Manager. In answer to a question from Council Member Mendez, City Manager McDowell stated there is a ninety -day provision where it could be revoked; the Council will be provided a quarterly report; and that minor uses was taken out. After some discussion, Council Member Guerrero asked the Council to concur with Council Member Rhodes on this item because the Staff has enough pressure and responsibility, and that it would be in the best interest of the Staff and the City. Mayor Pro Tem Moss pointed out that since there is a ninety -day quarterly review it could be delegated to the Staff and be countered by the Council. Mr. Moss stated that this is not being given away. Council Member Slavik asked why the Staff is recommending this, and Mr. McDowell replied that Staff is bringing the current code in conformance with the new charter. In answer to a question from Mrs. Slavik, Mr. Medina stated that it does not come up that often; when it does the Staff does get criticized; and Staff is trying to expedite the efficiency of the Engineering Department. Council Member Strong mentioned the fact that she requested the amendment in the wording to allow for the Council to get a quarterly update report; she feels that the public's position is protected in this; the Council has the final say; and it is appropriate that the Staff handle this. Council Member Mendez referred to the $100 fee charged and stated canopies and fences differ in scope, and $100 is a large fee for just putting up a canopy. Mr. McDowell explained it includes the cost of coming down and filling out the paper work; the inspector checking and signing off on it; and then notifying the appropriate parties. linutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 11 Council Member Rhodes expressed concern about allowing an encroachment in the public right-of-way. She stated that the appeal process does not hold any water; and if they fence off public land, the public is not going to know the difference. She continued by stating that it is wrong for the Council to give away anything that is the public's property. In answer to a question from the Mayor, initiated by the Staff under a section of Council may elect to delegate on these minor Council's prerogative and it is OK with him with this reponsibility. Mr. McDowell stated that this was the Charter which says that the issues. He stated that it is the if the Council wishes to continue Council Member Slavik expressed concern about right, and in answer to her question about Item "G", stated that the reason for Item "G" is so that the subordinate to any easements so that there could not adverse possession. protecting the public's City Attorney Hal George public's right is always be any possibility of an Mayor Pro Tem Moss noted that the Council should be very cognizant of their responsibility to look after the public's needs. He stated that with Council Member Strong's amendment all action will be reviewed by the Council; they are not giving anything up; and it is a good way of managing and streamlining procedures. Council Member Pruet noted that these are normal routine matters that could be handled by the Staff; the Council will have the review capability with the amendment; it will expedite and reduce the processing time; and it will cut down a lot of routine matters that come before the Council. In reference to Item No. 16 regarding the third reading of proposed amendments (regarding sign regulations) to Articles 12, 15, 16, 20 and 21 of the Zoning Ordinance, Council Member Pruet pointed out that the majority of the cities that were surveyed still allow some type of portable sign program; this is not going to save businesses that are condemned to failure; but it will have a significant impact on small businesses that are trying to keep their doors open. He stated that he did not think the elimination of portable signs is going to solve the beautification problems that the City has. Mr. Pruet noted that Alternative "B" proposed by the Staff is a workable solution which has a lot of benefits to the small business community and urged the Council to consider Alternative "B." Council Member Guerrero asked about the extent of the beautification effort; and if there is any reasonable way to take any alternative and enforce it. He stated that there is no way to enforce any type of portable signage in Corpus Christi. He then urged the Council to accept no alternatives. Council Member Strong pointed out that portable signage is disallowed in certain zones and once it is allowable, there will be an increase in portable signs. She stated that the most equitable situation would be that the sign linutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 12 allowances are the same across the board; and that there are alternate ways to handle this problem. She stated that she did not think we are adding to the quality of life in Corpus Christi if we allow sign proliferation to continue. Council Member Rhodes pointed out that for the ones who have legal signs, there is a way to make them into permanent signs, and for the people who manufacture the signs, there is a way to change their business over. She noted that the ones who will be affected are the ones that have illegal signs in the first place. Council Member Slavik expressed concern over the small businesses and suggested the regulation for portable signs, such as in Dallas and Abilene, would be a fair compromise. She stated this would allow for portable signs; they must be engineered, permitted and limited to one thirty -day period; if violated, they would be impounded; with said policy to be reviewed in one year. Council Member Berlanga noted that regardless of what is done, businesses are going to be hurt; the consumer needs to be informed; he sympathizes with the Staff with the problems regulating the portable signs; and we need signs. He stated that he hopes a good alternative is found. Council Member Guerrero stated that if we eliminate the signs, we are going to force the issues on the alternatives; to impound the signs would be ridiculous because the Staff is unable to enforce it now; and to review it in a year is a political answer. He stated that we need to quit compromising and do what is right. Council Member Pruet pointed out that the Planning Commission had a great deal of input from the public and have limited to specific zoning where it is allowed. He stated that there are a lot of other things that need to be done to clean up the City more than eliminating the portable signs. He again asked the Council to look at the Planning Commission's recommendation and Staff's Alternative "B." Council Member Mendez pointed out that in looking at the other cities that allow portable signs, they need a full-time inspector to make the inspections, and approximately 80 percent of them are illegal. He stated that he thought the enforcement of it would be totally impossible, and even if they were allowed, a lot of them will be illegal. The following citizens spoke in opposition to the prohibition of portable signs: Jonna McCuffy, 1409 Devon, a small business -person; Sandra Robinson, 729 Claride, a representative of Nail Gallery, presented the Council with a petition and results of an informal poll; Joe Bader, 4001 So. Port; John Rosse, owner of a portable sign business; Al Kucera, 4936 Hakel; Lucy Vallario, 1218 Shields; George Polinard, 4701 Andover; J. B. Ward, 4600 Ocean Drive, who runs a bicycle shop in So. Park Shopping Center; and Leo Estrada, 5302 Sugar Creek. !Mutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 13 Mayor Turner stated that the sign polution in Corpus Christi is becoming a very serious problem, and that the City has tightened up on sign restrictions in every area of allowable signs. She also noted that the portable signs do not add much to the beautification of this community. Council Member Berlanga expressed his concern regarding losing businesses over the portable sign problem. He then made a motion to postpone the third reading for thirty days until more information is obtained and another alternative can be reached. The motion was seconded by Council Member Slavik and failed to pass by the following vote: Berlanga, Pruet and Slavik voting, "Aye"; Turner, Moss, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, and Strong voting, "No." Council Member Strong pointed out that the going to be stopped tomorrow, and that there will City Secretary Chaps polled the Council for ordinances failed and passed: use of portable signs is not be a one-year phase out. their votes and the following 15. AMENDING THE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 2, ADMINISTRATION, BY ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION TO ARTICLE I THEREOF, WHICH PROVIDES FOR AUTHORITY OF THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO ISSUE STANDARD FORM USE PRIVILEGE AGREEMENTS, ADOPTING A STANDARD FORM DOCUMENT, AND ESTABLISHING A FEE THEREFOR; PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE: AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. The foregoing Ordinance failed to pass by the following vote: Moss, Mendez, Pruet and Strong voting, "Aye"; Turner, Berlanga, Guerrero, Rhodes and Slavik voting, "No." 16. ORDINANCE NO. 19968 AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY ADOPTING NEW ZONING REGULATIONS FOR SIGNS IN "B-1" NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS, "B-3" BUSINESS, "B-4" GENERAL BUSINESS, "I-2" LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND "I-3" HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS. The Charter Rule following vote: "Aye"; Berlanga, was suspended and the foregoing Ordinance passed by the Turner, Guerrero, Mendez, Moss, Rhodes and Strong voting, Pruet and Slavik voting, "No." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The meeting was recessed at 12:30 p.m. Mayor Turner reconvened the Regular Council Meeting at 2:00 p.m. Mayor Turner then read and presented a proclamation in honor of the Corpus Christi Skier's Club to Mr. Butch Robinson, President of the Corpus Christi Ski Club. Mr. Robinson introduced Mrs. Robin West, Vice President of the Corpus Christi Skier's Club, and Mrs. Mary Ann Robinson, also a member. Mayor Turner then read and presented a proclamation in recognition of Ice Capades participants who will begin their United States tour here in Corpus linutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 14 Christi. She presented the proclamation to Mr. Corey Chandler, Promotional Manager, and Mr. Robert Gallagher, Road Manager. Mr. Hymie Gonzalez, Coliseum Manager, then presented letters to the City Council inviting them to attend a performance and an "after party." They were accompanied by one of the stars of the show, Teddy Ruxpin. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * A status report on the Aquarium Project was presented by Mr. John Dorn, President of the Board, who provided an update of the concept design of the Aquarium which will be located on North Corpus Christi Beach. He informed the Council that Phase I is about 909, funded, noting that it is one of four phases planned. He described the exhibits to be located in the Gulf of Mexico Building. Mayor Turner asked Mr. Dorn about the fund raising project and the anticipated date of the beginning of the structure, and Mr. Dorn replied that there is a development committee that is working to obtain grants and gift donations for the project; they expect to begin construction during the first quarter of 1988; they have identified a contractor and are in the process of negotiations; and if the schedule is followed, they feel that the Aquarium will be open in the latter part of 1989. Mayor Turner then recognized Council Member Leo Guerrero and Mr. Donald Taft who are the liaison appointees for the City Council on the Aquarium Project. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Turner called for acceptance of the Laventhol & Horwath study on the Economic and Fiscal Impact analysis of the reopening of Packery Channel boat pass. She provided information in regard to the commissioning of the study and asked the representative to make the presentation. Mr. John Rossi, Head of the Real Estate Division of Laventhol & Horwath, explained that they were charged with preparing an impact study. He explained that an impact study is an attempt to measure how things will be with or without some event and noted that in the City, they know that tourism will grow; however, an impact study tries to determine the difference between tourism with the boat pass and without the boat pass. Mr. Rossi emphasized the fact that this is not a feasibility study; it was not an environmental impact study; nor was it a cost benefit study; and the result was a study that would have an effect on the economy of the area. Mr. Rossi continued by stating that they attempted to try to estimate the number of jobs created, including temporary construction jobs and the long-term employment, taking into consideration the number tourist days and apportioning inutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 15 that between the island and the City of Corpus Christi. He noted that this is a recreational boat channel, not a commercial channel, and they researched three other cities for comparison purposes. He stated that the analyses were undertaken for the 1989 to 2010 period; fiscal impacts were estimated under three funding scenarios. The first scenario assumed that funding for the channel and bridge are provided from non -local governmental sources; the second scenario assumed that 50% of the channel improvement costs are borne by the City with the remainder of the channel cost and the bridge financing by non -local sources; and the third assumed 100% funding of the channel and bridge by the City. He stated that the economic impact analysis for all three funding scenarios is estimated to be $22.9 Million for the channel and bridge which would result in direct economic impacts of $264.5 Million in total output, $97.9 Million in total earnings, and that 395 jobs are estimated to be created in 1989 if that is the construction year, and afterwards, employment will be reduced to 63 jobs in 1990 with a steady escalation each year to 523 jobs by the year 2000. Mr. Rossi continued his analysis by stating that they continued the study to the secondary development impact which would include an increased demand for certain housing on the island for a total of approximately 375 additional units, and there will be other incremental commercial development. Mr. Rossi stated that the estimated maintenance will be about $300,000 per year and projected those figures for increases in future years. Mr. Rossi summarized by stating the results of their study show that the channel will have a definite impact on this area and it is a strong project for the future economy. Council Member Strong inquired about the maintenance figures and inquired if that figure was based on a situation with or without a sand by-pass plan, and Mr. Rossi stated that they did use that figure with the sand by-pass. Mayor Turner then stated that Council Member Strong and Mr. Homer Innis are the Council's liaison appointees to the Packery Channel Board. Council Member Slavik inquired about the difference between economic impact study and economic feasibility study, and Mr. Rossi explained that a feasibility study answers the question as to whether this project is economically feasible or supportable and an economic impact study tries to measure the impact of this project for the entire community. Council Member Slavik continued by stating that the cover letter indicated that some assumptions made by Laventhol & Horwath inevitably will not materialize and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur; therefore, actual results achieved during the period covered by the prospective financial analyses will vary from those described in the report. She questioned the meaning of this statement, and Mr. Rossi stated that the company stated that this is a report based on available information and that is standard verbage. linutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 16 Council Member Rhodes inquired as to what the Council is voting for according to the Agenda and what will actually be approved, and City Manager explained that acceptance of the report is needed so that the company can be paid. Council Member Rhodes stated that the figures provided were in accordance with what the company was asked to do but expressed the opinion that three other types of studies would have been more beneficial to the City Council. She stated that had she been on the Council, she would have been opposed to paying for this kind of study. She also noted that the study is based on significant growth in the area, and Mr. Rossi stated that they base their finding on a rather slow growth pace for one or two years, a larger growth factor for a few years, followed by an additional slow growth period. Council Member Berlanga concurred with Council Member Rhodes' concern about the type of report that was prepared. He then asked for Mr. Rossi's recommendation in regard to the City's involvement in the project. Mr. Rossi stated that he did not have a recommendation to make but he could mention the following facts. He stated that the opening of Packery Channel would have significant economic impact on the community, but this is something that the City has to consider in terms of priority. Mayor Turner pointed out that the report had answered the question as to whether this project will have a significant impact on this City, and the City Council needs to determine whether the expenditure will support the economic impact. Council Member Strong pointed out that the City Council had previously accepted the idea to consider the opening of the boat pass but they needed to know if there is no economic impact, the boat pass would not be pursued and they need to consider the economic impact in order to continue with plans for the project. Mrs. Strong then announced that the Reopening of Packery Channel Committee had been formed and they have assumed the responsibility of obtaining a permit from the Corps of Engineers. Mayor Turner recognized Mr. Homer Innis who is the Co -Chairman of the ROPC. She stated that this is an exciting project; she is grateful for the ROPC; and this group will pay for and obtain the permit from the Corps of Engineers. Council Member Slavik referred to previous discussions on the opening of the boat pass and stated that she has never been convinced that Packery Channel is the appropriate location for the boat pass. She stated that she was aware that State agencies had performed studies in regard to this and suggested contacting the appropriate State agencies in regard to the appropriate location for a boat pass. She stated that many people do not feel that Packery Channel is the best place for this and she has major concerns about it because she is of the opinion that it should be where deep water meets deep water. She reiterated that State agencies should be contacted in regard to studies already made on the subject. 'inutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 17 Mr. Paul Obersteller addressed the Council and stated that he is associated with the Packery Channel Association which has 1,700 members. He stated that they became concerned about the quality of the exchange of water from the Gulf into the Laguna Madre and they are concerned with improving the quality of that water. He expressed the opinion that the $600 Million estimated income from the boat pass and the bridge are very impressive figures. He stated that their organization is concerned about the maintenance costs and noted that an estimated $8 Million will be required to open the boat channel without the bridge. He suggested that $110,000 a year would be a reasonable maintenance estimate for that project. He explained another boat pass that was unsuccessful in that sand was continuously deposited there, but with a sand by-pass system, sand will be redeposited near the jetties, and his organization recommends the utilization of this system. He informed the Council that they have signed a contract with a local engineering firm to prepare the application to be presented to the Corps of Engineers, the cost of which will be paid for by his organization. He agreed that the bridge will be very useful, but the channel could be opened without building the bridge. He stated that he would like to see the boat pass opened even at City expense and offered to work with the City Council on identifying funding for the project. Council Member Berlanga referred to the sand by-pass, and Mr. Obersteller explained the sand by-pass system when there is a north current and a south current. Council Member Slavik referred to her suggestion about State studies that had already been prepared and inquired if this organization has studied those reports. Mr. Obersteller stated that Texas Parks and Wildlife Department had conducted a study in the 1950's which indicated that Packery Channel should have been opened at that time as well as the Murdoch Channel. He explained that the fish pass was funded by the State; it was not successful; it was a mistake; and that study might provide some interesting information. Mr. Wayne Johnson stated that he has owned property on Packery Channel and urged that the boat pass be opened. Council Member Strong pointed out that there was no reason to identify funding until the Council learned whether or not it was economically feasible. She expressed the opinion that that has been demonstrated and the next step is to determine the funding source. She stated that she thought the question of economic impact was properly determined by this study. Council Member Mendez stated that the past City Council had requested this study and agreed that environmental impact study still needs to be done. He suggested that the Council allow Council Member Strong to work with the ROPC and make it clear that the City Council strongly supports the acquisition of the permit from the Corps of Engineers. He stated that the Council should proceed with the project in the future under the direction of this Committee. Minutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 18 A motion was made by Council Member Mendez to accept the report, seconded by Council Member Pruet. Council Member Guerrero stated that he has a problem with paying $45,000 for the report which includes very little useful information. He stated that he did not think that this should have been accepted by the staff and he has read the report several times and did not think the information contained therein is of very much benefit. Council Member Slavik stated that she too was disappointed with the information in the report because she was of the opinion that the Council needed something on the feasibility of the project. She expressed the opinion that everyone knows that spending $22 Million for a boat pass and a bridge would be of benefit to the City. She stated that since the Council had employed this firm, she feels that they should pay the fee. Mayor Turner called for the vote on the motion to accept the study and it passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong, voting "Aye"; Guerrero voting "No." Mayor Turner stated that this report will be submitted to the Committee and the Council looks forward to their recommendations. Mr. Irving Dietz addressed the Council and in response to Council Member Slavik's reference to a study on passes in the Gulf of Mexico, informed the Council that Mr. Innis is the one who performed the studies for the State. Mr. Innis addressed the Council and stated that it was an error that Yarborough Pass has been recommended as a suitable alternative for this site. He stated that Packery Channel will be a much better site for the boat pass and explained that the purpose of the Parks and Wildlife Department study was to determine whether the artificial pass or a natural pass would be preferable. He stated that the Yarborough Pass failed before the dredging was accomplished. He explained the effects the currents from the Rio Grande River and the Gulf of Mexico have on the material that is moved. He stated that Packery Channel's location has been confirmed by the Parks and Wildlife Department as the best location for a boat pass. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Turner called for consideration of Ordinances from the Regular Agenda on Items 18 and 19. There were no comments from the audience or the Council on these Ordinances; City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes; and the following Ordinances were passed on first reading: 18. FIRST READING 4inutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 19 AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 35, OIL AND GAS WELLS, SECTION 35-60, DRILLING BLOCKS, BY AMENDING THE CONFIGURATION OF DRILLING BLOCK MAP EXHIBIT A, DRILLING BLOCK NUMBERS 183, 188, AND 189; PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. The foregoing Ordinance passed on first reading by the following vote: Turner, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Moss, Pruet, Rhodes, voting "Aye"; Slavik and Strong were absent at the time the vote was taken. 19. FIRST READING AMENDING SECTION 105.2 OF THE MECHANICAL CODE ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO. 19288 TO PROVIDE FOR THE FILING OF A CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE AND SUSPENSION OF PERMITS WITHOUT INSURANCE COVERAGE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. The foregoing Ordinance passed on first reading by the following vote: Turner, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Moss, Pruet, Rhodes, voting "Aye"; Slavik and Strong were absent at the time the vote was taken. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Turner called for consideration of License Revocation Hearing of David Soliz dba Soliz Electric Company. She stated that the Council had been provided with supplemental information in regard to this and inquired if Mr. Soliz was present. When it was determined that he was not in the audience, Mr. Lorenzo Gonzalez, Building Superintendent, assured the Council that he had been notified. A motion was made Council Member Rhodes that the license revocation be upheld, seconded by Council Member Guerrero and passed unanimously by those present and voting. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Turner announced the public hearing on the following item: Annexation of 3,630.06 acres of land and 32,966.32 acres of water, generally located along the fringe of the present city limits, from far west extending along the south city limits to the far east. Mayor Turner explained that the Planning Commission had conducted the first public hearing on this subject on September 2, at which time they tabled action and recessed the public hearing. She questioned the effect their not taking any action would have on this hearing. Mr. Kelly Elizondo, Assistant City Manager, explained that only 40 days could lapse between the first public hearing and the adoption of the ordinance effecting the annexation. He explained that the first public hearing was conducted by the Planning Commission on September 2, 1987; it was recessed until 9inutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 20 September 16 at which time it probably will be closed; and at least 20 days must lapse before the first reading of the ordinance. City Attorney Hal George stated that the initiation of annexation procedures is triggered by the time of the first public hearing. He read from the State Law which sets forth the regulations in regard to annexation, as well as an opinion from Assistant City Attorney Bob Coffin. Mayor Turner then suggested that the first reading of the ordinance be scheduled for October 13, and staff indicated that they have no problem with this date which would be an appropriate time frame regardless of whether the first hearing is counted as being the one on September 2 or this one on September 8. Mr. Elizondo explained that the proposal recommends the annexation of 3,630.06 acres of land and 32,966.32 acres of water, generally located along the fringe of the present city limits, from far west extending along the south city limits to the far east. He stated that the following are the primary reasons for the annexation: 1. They are logical areas for future growth; 2. They are areas where services are available or can be obtained; 3. The land values in these areas indicate that the land is considered urban land and these increased values are because of their location; 4. The additional 1.45 miles into the Gulf of Mexico may be placed under the drilling ordinance for the purpose of controlling the activity in order to preserve and protect the gulf beaches; 5. The areas can be integrated without difficulty into the Corpus Christi Urban Pattern both physically and administratively; and 6. Based on 1986 tax roll land valuations, it is estimated that it will increase and strengthen the City's tax base by over $372,500 annually. Mr. Elizondo continued by stating that there has been concern expressed about the inclusion of the same area that was previously considered as part of an annexation election in 1986 which the voters did not approve. He explained that at that time 13,754 acres of land on the island were proposed for annexation, and only 279.56 acres are being considered at this time for annexation. He stated that out of 279 acres, 262.08 have all City services in place and City building permits can and are being issued upon request of the property owners. He explained that the remaining 17.4 acres are "pockets" that are totally surrounded by the City and services are readily available to those property owners. Mr. Elizondo continued by stating the Charter Amendment authorized in April of 1986 explains how annexation can occur and this proposal to annex by ordinance meets all of the requirements of the City Charter and State law. He noted that there was some concern expressed about the Land Office and informed the Council that they have their jurisdiction and the City has its jurisdiction. He assured the Council that what has been presented to them is a proposal, not a plan, and it can be changed as the Council desires. Mayor Turner interjected that the public has the right, according to the City Charter, to petition for a referendum, and Mr. Elizondo stated that is Minutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 21 correct. He continued by stating that it requires 500 signatures to petition for a referendum on private property considered for annexation. Mayor Turner inquired if that included public property, and Mr. Elizondo expressed the opinion that it does not. Mayor Turner continued by stating that she served on the Charter Revision Commission and she thought the intent of the Commission was that the petition could include whatever land was being considered for annexation, whether it is private or public property. She then asked for a legal opinion on that point at a later time. Mr. Elizondo continued his presentation by displaying a map which showed a comparison of the land included in the 1986 annexation election and the land that is proposed for annexation at this time. He stated that the proposal in the annexation election was about 60 square miles whereas this annexation proposal is for approximately 280 acres only. He explained the roles of the Land Office and the Railroad Commission in connection with the subject property. He pointed out that the annexation will protect the beaches through the existing City ordinances, particularly the Bay Drilling Ordinance and the Bay Drilling Committee which supervises the operation of drilling operations in the bay. Council Member Rhodes commented that the State laws are sufficient to handle this, but if this is not annexed, the City would have to rely on the State to enforce the law. Mr. James Conn, Petroleum Superintendent, explained that there are no drilling rigs in the area at this time but there are approximately six or seven wells in that area, and if the water area is annexed, the area will automatically be protected by the City ordinances on bay drilling. He explained that each company has to provide insurance and bonds when drilling in the bay. Council Member Slavik stated that it was her understanding that the State and Federal agencies will provide protection of the bay. She then asked about the one -mile exemption. Mr. Conn explained that the State allows drilling within one mile of the shore; City ordinance does not allow this and it is controlled through the Bay Drilling Committee. He explained that the Committee does not make recommendations on annexation. In response to the Mayor's request, Mr. Conn stated that he is a Petroleum Engineer and stated that he believed that the annexation would offer maximum protection for the beaches. Mayor Turner called for comments from the audience. Mrs. Pat Suter, Vice President of the Coastal Bend Sierra Club, admitted that this City's Bay Drilling ordinance is the ideal protection and is followed by many other cities in the state. Mrs. Suter addressed another issue by stating that on August 19, the City Council received a memo from staff which presented Minutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 22 an annexation plan for a period of two years. She stated that plans should go through the Planning Commission and expressed the opinion that the actions were inappropriate. She quoted from the staff memorandum which referred to land and water areas; she objected to the fact that a "plan" was presented to the City Council whereas now there is a proposal rather than a plan and she is opposed to the method of circumventing public's vote which the two—year plan evidently does. Mayor Turner explained that on the Charter Revision Commission, the issue of annexation was not included in the charge to the Planning Commission on development plans. City Manager McDowell explained that the plan Mrs. Suter referred to was presented to the City Council but it should not be considered an official plan at all. A motion was made by Council Member Guerrero that the annexation "plan" originally presented to the City Council was submitted in error and the "proposal" is what is being considered. The motion was seconded by Council Member Rhodes and passed unanimously. Mr. George Kimer, 11602 Possum Creek, owner of River Hills County Club expressed opposition to the annexation of tract 2 which is 200 acres known as River Hills Country Club. He stated that they do not receive any City services; River Hills is chartered for a country club and golf course only; most of their members are from Nueces County; and reiterated that they do not have any City services. Mayor Turner asked for an explanation of the reason for annexing the River Hills Country Club, and Mr. Elizondo explained that services are available; all other private country clubs are a part of Corpus Christi and are paying taxes. Mr. John Rider, 3341 Catfish Drive, also asked that the River Hills Country Club be withdrawn from the annexation because he felt that the country club has benefited Corpus Christi more than Corpus Christi has benefited the country club. Council Member Mendez stated that one of the questions brought up concerned Wood River which was annexed by contract. He stated that he agrees that River Hills Country Club should be excluded from the annexation. He pointed out that adjacent to the Wood River Subdivision is the Haxel Bazemore Park and he requested that the City require the developers of Wood River to dedicate park land adjacent to the existing Hazel Bazemore Park which would then provide a large regional park. Council Member Rhodes returned to the issue of the River Hills Country Club and pointed out that they are completely surrounded by the City; it is just a small pocket in the middle of other annexed areas; they utilize City streets to Minutes . Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 23 get to and from the country club; and she was of the opinion that it should be annexed. Council Member Strong inquired of Mr. Elizondo as to where the country club obtains ambulance, fire, and police services, and Mr. Rider explained that they receive those services from sources other than the City of Corpus Christi. Mrs. Marie Spear, 9320 S. Padre Island Drive, stated that she is in favor of annexing the parts of Padre Island that were omitted from previous annexations but expressed concern about the lack of information provided in regard to the cost of services and the amount of taxes to be derived from the annexation. She pointed out that the Planning Commission did not have enough information and they recessed their public hearing for that reason. She objected to the annexation of the water area and stated that she too was shocked that there existed a "plan" dated July, 1987 which included areas that were voted down by the voters in 1986. She expressed the opinion that if that plan exists, the public has the right to know about it and questioned why that plan was prepared and then withdrawn. Mayor Turner assured her that the plan has been withdrawn, and once the Planning Commission makes their recommendation and the City Council makes their recommendation, the annexation procedures will move forward. Mrs. Gwen Bryant, Citizens for Progress, stated that she is speaking as a private citizen and expressed approval of the annexation proposal and agreed with the reasons as presented by the staff. She stated that she had studied the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting and expressed the opinion that all of the concerns expressed that evening were answered by the Planning Commission and the Planning staff. Mrs. Bryant also pointed out that only 8.6% of the eligible voters went to the polls to vote on the annexation election in 1986; however, the proposed Charter Amendments, which included the annexation by ordinance revision, were voted on by 53% of the voters who overwhelmingly approved the amendments to the City Charter. Mr. J.E. O'Brien, 4130 Pompano, complimented Mayor Turner for resolving the time problem of the annexation by directing that the first reading of the ordinance would be on October 13. He too objected to the fact that "plan" was presented which has since been replaced by an annexation "proposal." He referred to Proposition 12 of the Charter Amendment Election which clearly indicated that the annexation by ordinance would be allowed subject to a petition presented from 500 registered voters, and it did not distinguish between private or public land. He suggested that D-1 be deleted from the annexation because the Taxpayer's Association is in favor of calling for an election on this portion of the proposed annexation. Ms. Charlie Ward, President of Citizens for Progress, stated that they have not met to discuss the annexation issue but she personally would like to ask that the voters put this annexation in its proper prospective, noting that it 1inutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 24 will generate $325,000 annually in tax revenue. She also pointed out that many objectionable uses could be placed in the areas outside the City limits. Mr. Nick Nikoloric, Manager of the Padre Island Property Owners Association, which consists of 500 property owners, are in favor of the proposed annexation. Mr. Lewis Lovelace, 1549 Casa Grande, expressed opposition to the annexation because the voters were opposed to this in 1986. He stated that he was of the opinion that pressure was being brought on the City staff by Mr. Ralph Durden to annex those areas on Padre Island and stated that he is opposed to this because he feels that a tax increment financing zone will be established in that area. He also objected to the annexation of Hazel Bazemore Park because the County spends more than they receive in upkeep on the park, and the City would have to assume that responsibility. Mayor Turner stated that she felt it was important that he have all of the facts because some of the property mentioned is not included in the annexation proposed. She stated that Hazel Bazemore Park is not in the projected proposal, and virtually none of the area turned down by the voters in 1986 is included in this proposed annexation, noting that only 279 acres are included. She then asked the staff to meet with Mr. Lovelace to make him aware of exactly what is included in this annexation. Mr. John Palmer, property owner on Padre Island, expressed support of the annexation and congratulated the Planning staff for preparing this proposal. He agreed that the annexation is necessary for orderly development of Padre Island. Mr. Claude D'Unger stated that he is a Certified Land Man associated with the oil industry. He stated that there are some areas in the overall two-year plan that he is opposed to. He stated that he has no association with Mr. Durden and the idea of conducting an election at this time is foolish because 92% of the eligible voters did not even bother to vote in the 1986 election. He also objected to the accusations made about the staff in connection Mr. burden and stated that none of the people who have spoken really addressed the annexation itself. He stated that he would like to suggest that Tracts E-1 through E-5, primarily in the Five -Points area, be deleted from the annexation and suggested that area Tracts F-1 through F-3 be deleted, which include Greenwood Wastewater Area and the Rodd Field Village, noting that he did not think they would add any tax income to the City. Mrs. Elizabeth Walker of the Padre Island area stated that they are working on a master plan of the area with the City staff and they feel that the annexation is necessary for protection and control of development of the island. Minutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 25 Mr. Irving Dietz explained the history of the Greenwood Sanitary Landfill and pointed out that it will not derive any tax income. He inquired if the water area is developed with oil wells if the oil companies would be taxed, and Mayor Turner applied in the affirmative. Mr. Dietz stated he would be opposed to a further tax on the oil producers. Mr. John Rider spoke again in opposition to the annexation of River Hills Country Club. Mr. R. F. Hasker objected to the fact that the plan was prepared by the staff without the approval of the Planning Commission and expressed the opinion that there was too much confusion in regard to this annexation. Mayor Turner requested that Mr. Elizondo display the map one more time for the benefit of those in the audience, and Mr. Elizondo again described the 279 acres and in addition 16 or 17 acre pockets where services are available. Mr. D'Unger spoke again and stated that a Navy representative will attend the Planning Commission meeting. He informed the Council that oil and gas explorations are coming back even in the Laguna Madre; Padre Island has no protection for oil and gas exploration; and the first line of defense will be the City's drilling ordinance. Mr. Vern Shirley, 2126 Meadow Wood Drive, responded to the comments in regard to the low voter turnout for the annexation election in 1986. He stated that he felt that it is his right to vote and those who did not vote in that election should not be addressing the issue. There were no further comments from the audience. A motion was made by Council Member Pruet that the hearing be closed, seconded by Council Member Strong and passed unanimously. Council Member Slavik asked the staff about the public concerns. She noted that the public wants to be sure that they will still have access on the public beaches even if the water area is annexed, and Mr. McDowell assured her that access to the beaches is provided by State law; staff is only proposing to annex water areas to protect the Gulf and beach areas. Council Member Slavik then inquired as to what the staff plans generally to annex and if that plan included the area removed from consideration the preceding week. City Manager McDowell explained that the concern about what is to be annexed is a future issue but he felt that it will probably be the London area which is under consideration now as a part of the development plan. He stated that the book called Annexation Proposal includes everything planned for the next two years. inutes Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 26 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Turner called for City Council liaison reports. Mayor Pro Tem Moss reported that he and Jim Barnette had attended the last Regional Transit Authority Meeting; they did not have a quorum again; he expressed the opinion that there are not enough members on that board who are even interested; and again suggested that the City talk to the County Commissioners and that a letter be sent to the one City appointee who does not attend regularly. A motion was made by Council Member Guerrero that a formal letter be sent to the County Commissioners requesting that they replace their appointees who do not attend the meetings. There was no second to the motion, but it was the Council's consensus that letters should be written to the County Commissioners and the City's appointee who has not attended the meetings regularly. Mayor Turner then called for petitions or information from the audience on matters not scheduled on the agenda. Mr. Thurston Lambright, 202 Doddridge, stated that he had presented a petition to the City Secretary's office in regard to building and zoning violations at 3747 Denver Street and 3751 Denver Street. Mayor Pro Tem Moss assured him that the information was provided the Council Members in their packets that were delivered to their homes. A motion was made by Council Member Guerrero that this item be placed on the agenda for next week; the motion was seconded by Council Member Mendez. Assistant City Manager Elizondo explained that from what the staff has been able to discover, the uses at those two addresses are non -conforming uses which were in place prior to adoption of the zoning map. It was the consensus of the Council that this item would be placed on the agenda the following week for discussion. Mr. Joe A. Hansler, a resident of Flour Bluff, appeared before the Council again and informed them that he had gone to the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation and personnel there stated that they could do nothing about the proposed excavation of property located ar Caribbean and Flour Bluff Drives because it was up to the City Council. He stated that he had spoken to a member of the Planning staff of the City who informed him that excavation could not occur on RE zoned property. He again asked that the ordinance be amended that day following a two-hour notice of a special meeting. Minutes - Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 27 Mr. Larry Wenger, Director of Planning, explained that in order to construct an excavation pit, a property owner would have to have a permit and it does require industrial zoning, but in this particular instance, Heldenfels Brothers is not proceding to perform excavation because they are only taking one foot of soil from the property. Mr. Hansler expressed concern that if one foot of soil is removed now, there is nothing to prevent their going in and removing another foot of soil the next week. Council Member Strong stated that this matter was brought to her attention by the residents of Flour Bluff during the past week. She stated that she had checked with the Engineering Department; the staff investigated it; the trucks do not meet the weight limits on Caribbean Drive; the construction company is paying for the City water being used from the fire hydrants, which is a usual procedure; and they have indicated that they will take care of any damage inflicted on Caribbean Drive. She expressed the opinion that there is a loophole in the City's Code of Ordinances that needs to be corrected, but she expressed the opinion that there was nothing that the Council could do today. She stated the the staff assured her that they will monitor this entire operation to prevent their blading off more than twelve inches of soil. Mayor Turner assured Mr. Hansler that this will be referred to the staff for review and agreed that the staff should investigate the ordinance on this subject. Mr. Frank Stephens, 1737 Caribbean, also spoke in regard to this same activity and expressed the opinion that it is a commercial industrial activity. City Attorney Hal George stated that he sympathizes with the people involved but the problem is that this is only a one-time use and the construction company plans to take only eight inches of soil for removal to another location. He stated that the City has a limited right to tell people how they can use their property and the City cannot tell this property owner what he can or cannot do. Mr. Victor Medina, Director of Engineering, explained that Flour Bluff Drive is a thru street with no weight limits for trucks; Caribbean is not a thru street; Traffic Engineering controls that; and he is not sure that a wavier can be granted. He pointed out that if Carribean is the only access to their property, the City must grant them the right if they agree to repair any damage. Discussion followed on this safety factor of the use of Caribbean Drive for this operation. Others expressing concern about this were: Mrs. Gail Hoffman, Mrs. Michelene Hansler, and Mr. Bruce Hoffman. Further discussion followed, and it was the consensus of the Council that an ordinance should be on the agenda the following week to prevent any future occurrences such as this. linutes • Regular Council Meeting September 8, 1987 Page 28 Mr. Richard Gonzalez presented to the Council flyers inviting them to the Mexican Independence Celebration to be conducted at the Water Street Market on Tuesday, September 15, from 7 to 11 p.m. There being no further business to come before the Council, on motion by Mayor Pro Tem Moss, seconded by Council Member Pruet and passed unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at 6:18 p.m. September 8, 1987. * * * * * * * * * * * * * I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of the City of Corpus Christi of September 8, 1987, which were approved by the City Council on September 15, 1987. WITNESSETH MY HAND AND SEAL, this the etty Turn r, MAYOR I mie day of Orctoimm, (1417_ Armando Chapa, City Secreary City of Corpus Christi