Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 04/30/1996I 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 April 30, 1996, which were approved by the City Council on May 14, 1996. WITNESSETH MY HAND AND SEAL, this 14th day of May, 1996 Armando Chapa City Secretary SEAL 1600 Vat' MIN T CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 2 p.m. PRF T Mayor Mary Rhodes Mayor Pro Tem Melody Cooper Cbun� oil Member : City Manager Juan Garza Dr Be. t ack Best City Attorney James R. Bray, Jr. Tony Black City Secretary Armando Chapa Tony Heldenfels Betty Jean Longoria John Longoria Edward Martin Dr. David McNichols Mayor Rhodes called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers of City Hall. following First Presbyterian Church, of the United States was led by Council Member The invocation was delivered by Rev. William �'� which the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag Heldenfels. uorum of the Council City Secretary Chapa called the roll and verified that the necessary q and the required charter officers were present to conduct the meeting. April 23, Mayor Rhodes called for approval of the minutes of the regular as presented.meeting of 1996, and there being no corrections, she proclaimed them approved * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Rhodes opened the presentations by three organizations: Environmental mental PAlliction e. Agency (EPA), United Way of the Coastal Bend, and the Greater Corp us The first presentation was given by Mr. Bob Hannesschlager, Acting Director of Multi -Media Planninga ulatedg cline. r. and Permitting Division others have been involved with bevel pi gd o��ated gasoline. r• nt Region M lag r said hewith the city. He compared two types of fuels --reduced reid vapor Memorandum of Understanding He said they were developed for vapor pressure gasoline (RVP) and reformulatd gasoline (RFG). slightly different purposes, but they both promote itv tall: Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 2 Mr. Hannesschlager explained that the problem with air quality in this area and in most cities in Texas is low-level ozone, which is produced by a complicated chemical reaction involving volatile organic compounds that react in the presence of sunshine. The reid vapor pressure of a gasoline measures how quickly the gasoline evaporates. He also described four things which can be done to lessen the impact of automobiles on air quality: slow down the amount of vehicle miles traveled by promoting car pooling; improve inspection/maintenance programs; build cleaner cars; and develop a cleaner -burning fuel, which is why RFG was developed. He said RFG basically reduces the emissions of volatile organic compounds quite a bit, while lower RVP gasoline reduces the rate of evaporation. Mr. Hannesschlager said there was a slight decrease in fuel economy with RFG, while lower RVP gasoline should be a little less expensive than RFG. Council Member McNichols asked the following: how were the parameters set for what constitutes an excessive amount of ozone; what determines a given number of exceedences in a particular area over a period of time; and what are the proven adverse health consequences of an exceedence of ozone levels. Mr. Hannesschlager replied that the data on health effects dates back several years --the ozone standard was one of the first standards established when the EPA was created in 1970. He added that the number of exceedences is laid out in the 1990 Clean Air Act, although he noted that the EPA is reexamining the standards which may result in a lengthening of the averaging period. A brief discussion of health effects ensued. Mr. Hannesschlager said the EPA was working to find more flexible ways to manage air quality problems, such as determining if there are voluntary steps that can be taken that are acceptable to the community while at the same time have air quality benefits. Responding to Council Member John Longoria, Mr. Hannesschlager said that in this part of the country ozone is really the only pollutant of concern --the rest are below any of the levels of health effects measured by the EPA. He added that there was not a big difference between the lowered RVP gasoline and reformulated gasoline, and the EPA would accept the use of either one. Council Member Martin asked Mr. Hannesschlager if he was confident that the EPA would approve the city's flexible attainment agreement. He replied that the EPA has been very pleased with the speed in which the document was created, and although there may be some minor wording changes, he did not anticipate any problems with reaching an agreement with the EPA. Mr. Martin asked what the major cause of the ozone problem has been when the city has violated the clean air standards. Mr. Hannesschlager said the chemistry behind ozone production is extremely complicated, and he said many times there is a combination of factors involved, including a stagnant air mass and meteorological events. Mr. Martin noted that the Council has been frustrated by the fact that on average Corpus Christi does not experience air quality problems but Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 3 occasionally there are "spikes" of increased ozone levels. Council Member Best said there are permits allowed for brush burning, and Mr. Hannesschlager said the state tries not to issue such permits except in the best of conditions when they will not affect people. He said the pollutants emitted from brush burning typically would not lead to the formation of ozone. The next presentation was given by Mr. Chris Nelson, Executive Director of the United Way of the Coastal Bend. He described Project Compass 1995-2000, a comprehensive, community -wide needs assessment which addresses the following: family issues, juvenile issues, substance abuse issues, basic needs, health issues (both mental and physical), and lifelong education. The project was underwritten by the United Way and the John G. and Marie Stella Kenedy Memorial Foundation. Mr. Nelson discussed some of the current socio-economic trends as well as some specific recommendations for dealing with those issues. He added that the project was available for anybody or any group to use or to reference. The third presentation was given by Mr. Mike Carrell, Chairman of the Greater Corpus Christi Business Alliance, about the Community Progress Partnership. He said that during a previous meeting the Council authorized Mayor Rhodes and Mr. Carrell to appoint a 19 -member committee to make up the partnership, which he presented. The committee would be co-chaired by Mr. Al Jones and U.S. Magistrate Eduardo de Ases and consist of the following people: Alex Harris, Alex Garcia, Debbie Lindsey -Opel, Ed Lopez, Evelyn Lott, David Underbrink, Mark Scott, Linda Mora, Gloria Hicks, Annie Castro, Vic Menard, Laurie Cook, Danny Noyola, Willia Thomasson, Ester Oliver, Jaime Capelo Jr., and Victor Penuel. Mr. Al Jones said the committee has already met and intends to make this an open forum to encourage participation and input from anyone in the community. He said the committee will keep the Council informed of their efforts and they welcome any suggestions from them as well. Mr. Jones added that the committee is studying the results of Vision 2000. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Rhodes referred to the Board and Committee appointments on the day's agenda, and the following appointments were made: Building Standards Board Ethics Commission James Hada Norma Cavazos Transportation Advisory Committee Javier Colmenero Carol Hailey Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Rhodes opened discussion on Item 6, amendments to the Drought Contingency Plan. Mr. James Dodson, Regional Water Director, said that at last week's meeting the Council passed on an emergency basis an ordinance raising the Condition II trigger level to between 40% and 30% of reservoir system capacity, with the intention that the city would implement Condition II prior to May 1, 1996 in order to take advantage of the drought contingency provisions in the Agreed Order on Estuary Inflows. In addition, the Council approved on first reading amendments to the ordinance that essentially dealt with the issue of lawn watering, which staff believes is the primary area where water savings can be achieved under Conditions I and II. Mr. Dodson said that essentially it was proposed that lawn watering be allowed once a week, with exceptions which would allow for the watering of other vegetation (flower and vegetable gardens, trees, shrubs, and plants in containers) by limited means any time during the week except during the hours of 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. He said the day's agenda included a motion to clarify those exceptions. He said the intention is to generate public acceptance of the key element, which is the restriction on lawn watering and sprinkler use. He said other recommendations were to allow the use of effluent and non -potable water sources between 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., as well as allowing owners of large parcels of land to obtain from the city a special watering plan. Other exceptions that were contained in both the first and second readings of the ordinance were: commercial nurseries would be allowed to water their stock by certain means at any time; newly planted lawns and plant materials could be watered for the first 14 days, followed by the regular water schedule; irrigation of golf course greens and tee boxes would be permitted outside the hours of 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.; and sprinkler systems could be run for short periods in order to test or maintain them. Mr. Dodson added that hoses should contain an automatic shutoff nozzle, and he demonstrated devices that are helpful to conserve water. Council Member Martin said a representative of a plant nursery indicated that 14 days was not long enough to establish a new plant system. Mr. Martin said the 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. prohibition was important for sprinkler watering but there was not significant evaporation from a drip irrigation system or from watering plants with a pitcher of water. Mr. Dodson replied that the time prohibition would not make a great deal of difference in water savings for a drip irrigation system, but the 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. prohibition does encourage people to be conscious of water conservation. Mr. Martin asked if the time prohibition would also apply to people using well water. Mr. Dodson said if people used well water from the limited aquifers in this area, they would decline very rapidly during a drought, and he suggested that people conserve those resources as well. He added that staff has consistently said that water in all of its forms is a valuable resource, and the 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. restriction was designed to make water use more efficient. City Manager Garza said that Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 5 consistency was also important. Mr. Martin questioned the language in the ordinance concerning authorization by the City Manager. Mr. Garza said that in practice, this was the kind of action that required the overwhelming support of the Council every step of the way. Mr. Martin said he felt the ordinance should contain language in which the Council instructs the City Manager to carry out the ordinance. He also suggested that the 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. restriction not be applied to drip irrigation systems, people watering their plants with buckets, etc., since it is allowed for commercial nurseries and it does not save significant amounts of water. Council Member Best asked what authority the city had to tell people whether they can water with wells on their private property. City Attorney Bray replied that the city has general regulatory authority within its city limits, and while the city generally does not regulate wells, when a water emergency situation occurs, these fairly minimal regulations are within the city's power. Council Member McNichols said it was important to send a clear message to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) that the city is serious about conserving water, and as the drought wears on, more serious consequences will result, such as effects upon employment. He said the city is trying to incorporate the least obtrusive regulations possible while still allocating its limited resources of water. Council Member Cooper said several issues were raised during her town hall meeting last night. She asked about the city's water customers, and Mr. Dodson replied that under the contracts, those entities are required to implement the same conservation measures that Corpus Christi implements. He said they have had very good cooperation with other communities in the region. Mrs. Cooper also asked about ongoing public information efforts. Mr. Dodson said staff has been working on a drought awareness plan, and essentially every means available will be used to publicize it, including television, radio, newspaper articles and ads, inserts in utility bills, and attending meetings. Council Member Black asked about toilet tank displacement methods, which Mr. Dodson explained. Responding to Council Member Betty Jean Longoria, Mr. Dodson explained that during the previous drought in 1984, Condition I was implemented in May, with Condition II implemented in July, and in September or October Condition III was implemented. At that point, the watershed received significant rainfall which brought the levels back up. Mrs. Longoria asked if water conservation would still be stressed even after this drought is over. Mr. Dodson replied that the city has had general water conservation programs in effect for many years --the per capita water use per day in this region is very low relative to other parts of the Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 6 state. He said that drought management requires short-term, temporary measures in order to achieve sometimes very drastic reductions in water consumption. Mr. Dodson added that Solid Waste Services has indicated that it has mulch available for use around trees. Mayor Rhodes emphasized the importance of using plants that are indigenous to this semi -arid area. In reply to Mrs. Cooper, Mr. Dodson said the proposed ordinance was equally applicable to businesses as well as residents in terms of their outdoor water use. He added that the city's Water Division would be the first point of contact for reporting improper use of water. Mr. Dodson then referred to Item 6.c. regarding the interbasin transfer permit requested by the Lavaca-Navidad River Authority (LNRA). He said that last week after the Council meeting staff received a copy of the TNRCC Executive Director's response to a request for a hearing for that permit. He said staff continues to argue that the TNRCC Commissioners have the right to grant the permit at their May 8, 1996 meeting (in fact, their meeting constitutes a hearing). He said several communities have passed resolutions indicating their support of the permit, and the Corpus Christi City Council was being asked to go on record stating its support for the granting of the permit. Replying to Mr. Martin, Mr. Dodson said the city is filing a brief in support of the LNRA permit application which addresses the fact that the Commissioners have the legal right to grant the permit at their May 8 meeting if they choose. Mayor Rhodes called for comments from the audience. Mr. John Hartley, who lives in the Annaville-Calallen area, asked how much water between Mathis and the city intake is used for the purpose of irrigation. He said that children are our most precious institution and they need to be protected. Mr. Dodson said the only significant irrigation use in the area between Lake Corpus Christi and Calallen is the WCID No. 3 Robstown-Five Points area, which is served by that water district. He said he thought they had approximately 6,000 acre- feet a year of irrigation rights that are separate from the city's rights. The manager of that water district said they prohibit their water for irrigation uses when lawn watering is prohibited; even if they did not follow that plan, they would be allowed under state law to use that water under their water rights. Mr. Jim Parker, 3054 Twin Creek, said he was a local landscape contractor and he did not think the 14 days was sufficient time to establish a new lawn in areas where there is no vegetation. He suggested that they have a 30 -day establishment period. Ms. Dee Huber said that many citizens do not have air conditioners or fans and they keep cool by watering their lawns or pavement in the evenings; in addition, the children play in the water. She said everyone should be required to reduce consumption by a certain percentage. Mayor Rhodes said it was not reasonable to continue allowing children to play in sprinlders when people's jobs and Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 7 quality of life needed to be protected first. Mr. Neil Trollinger, 337 Stages Dr., said that city departments should pay for their water consumption, and as recommended in the Mercer report, the city should do away with the declining block rate that is granted to large industries. Mr. Leon Perez, 904 Buford, said that toilets can be regulated for water consumption. He also questioned how some sprinkler usage would be detected. Mrs. Dorothy Spann, 502 Del Mar, agreed with the previous speaker that 30 days would be a more reasonable amount of time to establish a new lawn. She asked if residents would be allowed to use hand -watering devices from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. Mayor Rhodes said that issue would be clarified before a final vote on the ordinance was taken. Mr. J.E. O'Brien, 4130 Pompano, said that residents only use about 22% of the area's water supply, and most of the proposed restrictions apply to them. He reiterated his concern about allowances in the Utility Department, and he said there was no incentive for city departments to conserve water since most did not pay for it. He also referred to declining block rates and sewer rates, and said he opposed the resolution regarding the LNRA permit. Mr. John Meadows, 748 Matthew Dr., said the city could promote water conservation by encouraging the use of wells. He said a sign could be used to indicate that his use of well water during the restricted hours was allowed. Mr. R.F. Masker, 1813 Wallace, said the city departments should have to pay for their water use. He also questioned the use of the water gardens, and Mayor Rhodes said they would not be used at this time. Mayor Rhodes asked how the recommendation of 14 days was reached, and Mr. Dodson said he thought that was meant to address the establishment of other vegetation but not lawns. He added that it was important to provide some avenue by which new landscaping can be established. Council Member John Longoria asked about the declining block rates. Mr. Garza replied that it is part of the city's economic development policy to attract and retain business in Corpus Christi; however, the cost of water being borne by industries is very fair. He noted that if an industry is located outside the city limits, it pays twice the rate. Mr. Garza also said that the Council directed staff to have all the enterprise funds pay for their water and gas services, while the general fund departments do not. At the same time, the general fund departments have been ordered to reduce their consumption by 15% and their usage is metered. Mr. Longoria noted that one of the purposes of the ordinance is to promote efficient water Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 8 usage, and if someone defies the restrictions and uses a sprinlder between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m., they are losing water to evaporation and thereby wasting it. Mr. Longoria also asked about the LNRA permit application. Mr. Dodson reiterated that staff hopes the TNRCC Commissioners realize that in essence their May 8 meeting is a public hearing, and they could hold the hearing and then take action at that meeting. He said that typically the purpose of a hearing is to determine if there are any valid interests that are being affected by the transfer of water from Lake Texana. Mr. Dodson said there have been several people who have protested the transfer and have requested a hearing, but he did not believe any of them could meet the criteria that had been established by the commission to receive standing in a hearing. Mr. Longoria asked that if the commissioners decided to have the hearing at their May 8 meeting, would any of the protestants claim a lack of due process. Mr. Bray replied that they would have the right to make an appeal and try to establish that argument. He said it was the judgment of the attorney representing the city that it was best to encourage a decision on May 8. Mr. Martin said he felt city departments should be working toward paying for their water consumption, but it was not an issue of conservation. He noted that a 15% reduction in city use has been mandated, and he requested that a report be prepared later to determine if conservation has been achieved. He said he did not believe that the Mercer report dealt with declining block rates, but rather the water and wastewater rate base study that was conducted. Mr. Martin asked if staff felt the rate formula could be changed without regard to the 6% cap on utility rates. Mr. Bray said that assuming the 6% cap, that could be achieved similar to winter averaging. Mr. Martin asked if the 6% cap was measured by saying that if the same amount of water or wastewater was used from one year to the next, the rate should only generate a 6% increase in revenue --how they are proportioned was not that relevant. Mr. Bray agreed, saying that if that were not the understanding, the rate design could ultimately result in unfairness and would need to be corrected. Responding to Mr. Martin, Mr. Dodson said the status of the city's wells would be provided to the Council in their packets on May 3. Mr. Martin said he thought the 14 -day establishment period should be amended to be 30 days; the ordinance should include a phrase regarding changes being made upon the advice and consent of the Council; the ordinance should allow a person to exclusively use well water at any time, while requiring that he or she get a permit to do so; and to allow for the use of non -sprinklers at any time of the day. Mr. Bray pointed out that the first reading of the ordinance was still in effect. Mr. Martin made a motion to amend the ordinance to include the changes recommended by staff as outlined in Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 9 the background material. Mayor Rhodes called for a voice vote and the motion (Item 6.a.) passed unanimously. The Mayor said Mr. Martin's four suggestions would be taken in the form of four motions: the first one dealt with increasing the time for establishing new lawns from 14 to 30 days. There was no discussion and the motion passed unanimously. The second motion concerned changes being made upon the advice and consent of the Council. There was no discussion and the motion passed unanimously. The third motion concerned the use of well water and the requirement of a permit. There was no discussion and the motion passed unanimously. The fourth motion dealt with allowing hand-held watering devices between the hours of 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. The Mayor said she would not support the motion because she did not think the TNRCC would support it. Mr. Longoria asked for clarification of Mr. Martin's motion. Mr. Martin replied that as an example, if someone wanted to pour water on a flower pot at 2 p.m. they should be able to because it had nothing to do with saving water. Mayor Rhodes commented that that would also allow someone to go out with their garden hose and spray water around their yard, as well as open the door to other possibilities. Dr. Best seconded Mr. Martin's motion regarding hand-held watering devices between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. A voice vote and hand vote were taken on the motion, and it failed to pass. Mr. Bray referred to the second motion concerning the City Manager's authority. He suggested that the following more specific language be included in Section 1(a) of the ordinance: "However, any person may raise as a defense to prosecution for violation of this section the fact that the use of water was for one of the following purposes (if such defense has not been disallowed by motion of the City Council upon recommendation by the City Manager)." Mr. Martin agreed to the more specific language. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 6.a. M96-116 Motion to amend, prior to second reading, a revised ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, Chapter 55, Utilities, Article XII, Water Conservation, Sections 55-151, 55-153, and 55-156 regarding measures for Water Conservation and Drought Contingency Plan. The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 10 6.b. ORDINANCE NO. 022556 Amending the Code of Ordinances, Chapter 55, Utilities, Article XII, Water Conservation, Sections 55-151, 55-153, and 55-156, regarding measures for Water Conservation and Drought Contingency Plan. The foregoing ordinance passed on second reading, as amended, by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." 6.c. RESOLUTION NO. 022557 Resolution supporting the request by the Lavaca-Navidad River Authority for an amendment of the Lake Texana water rights permit to allow the transfer and use of Lake Texana water in the Choke Canyon/Lake Corpus Christi service area. The foregoing resolution passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye"; Heldenfels voting "No." Mayor Rhodes opened discussion on Item 7, a consultant contract for city manager recruitment. The Mayor called for comments from the audience, and there were none. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 7. M96-117 Motion approving a contract between the City of Corpus Christi and Norman Roberts & Associates, Inc. to provide professional services to recruit City Manager candidates for consideration by the City for a fee of $16,500, and reimbursement of expenses not to exceed $8,000. The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Rhodes called for a l0 -minute recess. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 11 Mayor Rhodes opened discussion on Item 8, second reading of the ordinance regulating adult businesses with undesirable secondary effects. City Attorney Bray said that although some minor modifications were made, the basic thrust of the ordinance remained unchanged: in the future adult businesses would locate in "I-3" heavy industrial zoning 1,000 feet from any residential district and 1,500 feet from other adult businesses. It is also proposed that existing adult businesses be allowed to remain where they are for 10 years so that the owners can amortize their investments. Mr. Bray said the revocation of license provisions remained basically the same in the second reading; the amendments dealt primarily with several corrective revisions as well as a clarification of due process provisions. He explained that if someone on the premises of an adult business committed a violation of the Penal Code, and someone else who represented the owner was in a position to stop that violation but did not, essentially the Police Chief has to notify the owner within a short amount of time if the city intends to use it against the owner. Mr. Bray said that whenever three convictions are accumulated, the Police Chief will make a revocation decision; staff has provided a due process procedure where that can be appealed to the City Manager, who will appoint a neutral person to hear the appeal. Until that point, the business can remain open and the revocation will take effect upon the determination of that neutral party. If the permit is revoked, the owner can appeal that decision to court (but the revocation would remain in effect at that time). The City Attorney said that the other significant amendment regarded suspension of a permit, which can occur for violations of the ordinance itself, rather than Penal Code violations. He said that some of the adult business owners had suggested --and staff agreed --that the violator be allowed to pay a civil penalty up to $500 per day rather than have a suspension. He said the Police Department felt that would serve as ample deterrent that would be equivalent to the suspension. Mayor Rhodes asked about the 10 -year amortization period, saying that if an adult business owner sold his business after seven years, would the new owner only have three years left in the 10 - year period, and Mr. Bray said that was correct. Council Member Heldenfels expressed concern about the provision whereby the Police Chief would have the authority to determine what constitutes a violation. Mr. Bray said many other cities' ordinances have been upheld with the Police Chief performing that function, but Corpus Christi's ordinance also provides for an appeal in any event from the Police Chiefs decision. Mr. Heldenfels then asked about the jurisdiction for the state district court to hear an appeal. Mr. Bray said it was the court of general jurisdiction that has authority to hear appeals from city agencies. He added that he believed the state law regulating adult businesses specifically gives the district court jurisdiction. Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 12 Responding to Council Member John Longoria, Mr. Bray said that after one conviction for a violation, there would not be an appeal at that time; however, he said the Police Chief would consider whatever arguments the owner has regarding that situation. He said the intent was to notify the owner that it was likely the particular charge or conviction would be used against them as one of the three convictions that could lead to revocation of their permit. Mr. Longoria asked why a hearing could not be held upon the first conviction, and Mr. Bray replied that it would tie up resources for a process that may never result in a second or third conviction. Mr. Longoria reiterated his concern about that issue, and Mr. Bray said the Council could direct staff to include a requirement for the Police Chief to hold a hearing at that stage. Mr. Longoria also asked about the $500 fine. Mr. Bray said that whole provision was created at the suggestion of the adult business owners, and he was not aware of any ordinances with a similar provision. He said the intent was that the amount to be paid should be comparable to actually having the suspension, otherwise it would not be much of a deterrent. He added that the provision contained flexibility for the Police Chief to consider different factors. A brief discussion ensued. Mr. Longoria commented that while the ordinance contained some useful provisions, it was excessive in other areas, particularly with regard to the "I-3" zoning requirement. Council Member Betty Jean Longoria also objected to the "I-3" zoning requirement, saying she did not want the adult businesses to operate in her district. She said she was specifically concerned about an area in District 1 bordered by Agnes and Leopard streets, Padre Island Drive and Old Robstown Road. She said she would not support the proposed ordinance. Council Member Martin asked what the net effect would be if Item 8.a.(amending the Code of Ordinances) was passed and Item 8.b. (amending the zoning ordinance) was not. Mr. Bray replied that Item 8.a. still contained some of the locational provisions, but they would not specifically be set forth in the zoning ordinance. Mr. Martin asked about the possibility of amortizing signs on adult businesses separately from the business itself, and Mr. Bray said he did not think they could be treated separately. Using Mayor Rhodes' previous example, Mr. Martin asked if a person bought an adult business with three years left in the 10 -year period, and they took out a five-year loan, could that be used as a reason to extend the amortization period. Mr. Bray said the extension would pertain to the investment in existence as of December 27, 1995. Mr. Martin said he would not object to deleting the hardship waiver, but it probably makes the ordinance more defensible; he added that at some time the process may need to be amended. Mr. Heldenfels said he thought the $500 fine provision came from the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission. Mr. Bray said he thought that was where the owners got the idea. Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 13 Council Member McNichols asked if the ordinance was aimed at the existing sexually oriented businesses, or would it be applied to all possible sexually oriented businesses. Mr. Bray said it would apply --and staff was concerned --about both. Dr. McNichols then asked if the other ordinances from which staff drew much of their information were in existence in other cities, and Mr. Bray replied that similar ordinances had been enforced in other cities for a long time. Mayor Rhodes called for comments from the audience. Mr. Jimmie Till said he has lived in northwest Corpus Christi for 71 years, and he supported Mrs. Longoria's position against opening adult businesses there. Ms. Dee Huber said she did not think the Council was concerned about residents or children -- they were intent upon moving against the topless clubs. Mrs. Dorothy Spann said she supported the ordinance, saying it was reasonably and logically written. She said that if it is considered a "red light district" in Mrs. Longoria's district, then it is a "red light district" at the corner of Del Mar and Staples streets, where Wynn Seale and Menger school children have walked to and from their schools. Mr. Leo Duran, an attorney representing adult businesses, discussed an economic survey of topless bars for calendar year 1995, which was distributed to the Council. Ms. Jackie Jackson said she did not think the Council wished to regulate adult businesses but rather they wanted to close them down. She said if they are closed, up to 2,000 employees will be left unemployed. Mrs. Eloise Olsen said she lives behind a topless bar located at Dodd Street and South Padre Island Drive, which contains a huge sign of a scantily clad woman. She said that sign was a terrible eyesore, and she said property values are affected by adjacent adult businesses. Ms. Pam Stiles, a realtor in Corpus Christi, said that since she appeared at a previous public hearing, her property has been reduced and the owner was going to have the property appraised. Mr. Grady Jackson, 722 Alden, said those businesses should not be called "adult entertainment." He questioned why the businesses should be allowed to remain in their present locations for 10 years if the owners and managers cannot be trusted to take care of their clientele. Mr. Leon Perez said that several years ago Corpus Christi had many "cathouses," which did not create a problem. He said the Council should instead close down the video stores. Dr. Rob Tschauner, 2702 Chapel View Dr., referred to two Supreme Court cases which Minutes Regular Council Meeting April30, 1996 Page 14 upheld a city's authority to regulate sexually oriented businesses because of the resulting negative secondary effects they have on neighborhoods. The court also said that a community does not need to have specific local evidence of such effects, but can rely on other cities' experiences. Mrs. Kathy Tschauner, 2702 Chapel View Dr., also quoted from the Supreme Court's opinion in one of the cases, adding that studies received from other cities conclusively demonstrate the negative secondary effects of adult businesses, including the deterioration of neighborhoods, devaluation of property, and an increase in crime. Mrs. Susan Barrett, 4006 Marion Circle, expressed concern about the 10 -year amortization period, noting that if one topless bar were sold, any caliber of sexually oriented business could move into that location, which would further decrease property values and increase neighbors' fears. Mr. Tracey Barrett, 4006 Marion Circle, said that of the 17 other Texas cities which have ordinances regulating adult businesses, the amortization periods range from six months to a maximum of three years. He asked the Council to change the proposed 10 -year period to three years. Mr. Raymond Wimberly, 806 Alden Dr., said he opposed the ordinance because it allowed the adult businesses to remain in their current locations for 10 years, saying it should be 10 days or six months. Ms. Cindy Dalton, 5214 Cromwell, said the amortization clauses in other cities are almost uniformly upheld, even with terms as short as six months or one year. She described a few of them. Mr. Doug Meissner, the owner of Bottom's Up, expressed concem about his business closing and the future of his 70 to 100 employees. He said he had been offered money for his business, but now he did not think such an offer would be forthcoming. Mr. Jerry Benadum, an attorney representing some adult business owners, asked the Council to weigh the evidence against the detriment to the community that can be accomplished by the ordinance as compared with any benefit that can be accomplished. He said the conclusions of a study conducted by the Police Department were invalid, and he questioned studies obtained from other cities. He said the ordinance was too extreme and an abuse of governmental power. Mr. Benadum also questioned specific aspects, including violations and penalties. Mr. Bill May, another attorney representing sexually oriented businesses, raised questions about the proposed ordinance, saying that the topless dancers are really independent contractors but are considered employees under the ordinance. He said that creates problems concerning violations, noting that customers may also commit the offense of indecent exposure, which can later be used as a "strike" against the owner. He cited several examples of what he said were vagaries in the proposed, complex ordinance, which will result in jury trials. Mr. May said the cost of enforcing Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 15 the regulatory provisions of the ordinance far outweigh the benefits that would be achieved. Mr. Marion Currington, a state certified general real estate appraiser, addressed the negative influence that adult businesses have on property values. He said that there is no sales activity on homes located adjacent to adult businesses, and the homeowner is forced to continue living in their home, hoping the business will be moved or close. He commented that negative influences also exist in commercial areas, noting that the downtown area was revitalized after several sexually oriented businesses there were closed. He said that creating special zoning for adult businesses will allow the Council to better control them. Mr. Currington asked that the amortization period be shortened to three years or less. Mrs. Pamela Woods, 1234 Nile Dr., said that overall the proposed ordinance is in line with ordinances in several Texas cities, with the exception of the 10 -year amortization. She asked that the Council shorten the period to three years, saying that the U.S. Supreme Court has given this Council and cities in general the authority to restrict the negative secondary effects upon neighborhoods and commercial areas. She said some studies have indicated that much of the clientele of adult businesses are from outside the immediate area, including outside the city. Mrs. Woods said the potential for crime increases when non-residents who are frequenting adult businesses have no sense of identity or accountability with the neighborhood. She also cited appraisers' studies indicating that adult businesses place a stigma on adjacent properties, and urged the Council to restore a quality of life to this community. Council Member Best made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Council Member Heldenfels, and passed unanimously. Council Member Cooper raised several questions about the "three strikes and out" provision. Mr. Bray said the ordinance defines an employee of an adult business to be someone who is making his or her living under the auspices of the owner, and the owner is responsible for the employees' behavior. Following a discussion, Mrs. Cooper made a motion to include the following language in the ordinance: "Such conviction shall not be used for purposes of revocation if such conviction is not upheld on appeal prior to the permit being revoked." Mayor Rhodes asked that if the ordinance were approved on second reading, could such technical aspects such as Mrs. Cooper's concerns be included in an amendment to the ordinance, and Mr. Bray said they could. Mr. Longoria said there were three general areas that were causing concern: the amortization period, the three -strike provision, and the "I-3" zoning, and he suggested that the Council not vote on those aspects but do vote on the rest of the ordinance. Mr. Bray said staff would not recommend doing that; instead, the Council could pass the ordinance and then make amendments to it. Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 16 Mr. Longoria said the adult businesses should not be concentrated in one area of the city, and asked what other areas would be available. Mr. Brandol Harvey, Director of Planning and Development, said that at the time staff conducted its survey of approximately 1,500 churches, parks, schools, and day care facilities, there were less than a dozen that would be located within 1,000 feet of a sexually oriented business because they were outside of residential zoning. Responding to Mayor Rhodes, Mr. Harvey said that if the criterion were to locate adult businesses 1,000 feet from residential zoning, there would be substantial "I-2" zoned areas, as well as limited "B-3" and "B-4" areas. The Mayor asked if Mrs. Cooper's suggested amendment could come back to the Council in two weeks, and Mr. Bray said it could, to which Mrs. Cooper agreed. Mr. Heldenfels said the ordinance was a violation of due process, and he said he would not support it. He said the surveys used to support the ordinance were invalid. Council Member Black said topless dancing or "gentlemen's clubs" should be separated from other adult businesses. She said she did not agree with closing down businesses after a certain length of time; rather, they should be allowed to exist and they will probably close down at some point anyway. Responding to Mr. Longoria, Mr. Bray said an owner, manager or employee is differentiated from a customer because it is the responsibility of the business to see that owners, managers and employees abide by the rules. Mr. Longoria said that section needed more work, and he suggested the creation of a new zoning classification called "B-7" that would be located 1,000 feet from schools, neighborhoods, etc., while not concentrating them in District 1. Mr. Martin pointed out that between 8 million to 10 million people in Texas are already living under similar adult business ordinances. He asked if Corpus Christi's ordinance was unique, and Mr. Bray said staff borrowed heavily from other cities. Responding to another question from Mr. Martin, Mr. Bray said the zoning stipulation was a convenient way to administer the ordinance. In reply to Mr. Martin, Mr. Harvey said that if the stipulation that adult businesses could not be located within 1,000 feet of residences, schools, churches, parks, playgrounds and hospitals was added, that would significantly further limit the areas where adult businesses could be located, particularly if residences were the deciding factor, as opposed to residential zoning. Mr. Martin said that many other cities have dealt with this issue by zoning or requiring that adult businesses be located a certain distance away from other entities. He commented that he did not think the ordinance pertaining to zoning restrictions would be approved by the Council. Mrs. Longoria said she wanted to support the ordinance but she would not if it contained the Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 17 "I-3" zoning restriction. Mr. Harvey pointed out that if the Council were to approve locating adult businesses in `B-3," then they could also be located in "I-2" and "I-3." He added that "I-3" zoning accounts for about 40% of the city's non-residential zoning, and "I-2" accounts for another 25%. Mayor Rhodes acknowledged that there was a perception problem with regard to locating adult businesses in "I-3" zoning, but if that were removed, that would place more burden on the neighborhoods, rather than lessening it --it would have the opposite effect of what was originally intended. Mrs. Cooper asked if the adult businesses could be required to be located in "I-3" zoning and 1,500 or 2,000 feet (rather than 1,000 feet) from residences. Mr. Bray replied that the businesses must have some reasonable amount of territory within which to operate. Mr. Harvey said that if the regulation were 1,500 or 2,000 feet from residential zoning, it would probably reduce the available area from about 63 sites as presently discussed to about 40 sites. Mayor Rhodes said the whole argument that the city would be eliminating jobs at the adult businesses and reducing tax revenues is faulty because the ordinance would not close down any businesses; rather, they would be zoned to appropriate areas of the city. She used the example that requiring a meat slaughtering plant to be placed in the proper zoning does not pass judgment on that business. The Mayor emphasized that Corpus Christi, which is the eighth largest city in the state, would be the only major city to not have an ordinance regulating adult businesses, which would probably attract many more adult businesses here. Referring to Mayor Rhodes' previous example, Dr. McNichols said that if you wanted a meat packing plant in a certain area, you would not shut down an existing meat packing plant. He said it went back to an argument made when this issue was first discussed --that changes should be made proactively, not retroactively. He said staff never documented that the existing adult businesses create great problems. He also differentiated between the existing topless bars and more "formidable" adult businesses. Mr. Martin said he felt that Mrs. Longoria's comments needed to be addressed further, and he made a motion that the items be tabled to allow the Council to discuss the issue of locating adult businesses in "I-3" zoning. Mrs. Longoria seconded the motion. Mayor Rhodes said she would support the motion to table because there was too much need for this ordinance and too much time had been invested in it. The motion to table passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, and Martin voting "Aye"; McNichols voting "No." Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 18 Mayor Rhodes asked that this item come back before the Council at the next possible opportunity so the Council will not have to review it all again. Dr. Best asked if the public hearing was closed, and the Mayor replied that if the item comes back for a vote by the Council, the public will have the opportunity for input. 8.a. POSTPONED Anlei.di..g the Co& of Ordinaa.ccs, City of Cmptis-Christi, by addn.g a new Cllal tei 48, Sexually Oiieut, d Businesses; requiring permitting of-sexually—oriented businesses; initial peiniit appli atia,r r pealing Chapter 28, Ma0sagi. Porlois; providing for penalties, 8.b. POSTPONED pal La gc rlarior3 ul ttie 9a.ti utienta.d business as an excluded use in tit, "BD" Ceiyiis Christi Beath -Eli -sigh District; by * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Rhodes opened the public hearing on Item 9, Wynn Seale area street improvements, Phase III. Mr. Bray said the proposed ordinance as presented did not have some of the standard provisions needed, and staff provided an amended ordinance. The Mayor made a motion to substitute the ordinance submitted by staff, seconded by Council Member Heldenfels, and passed unanimously. Mr. R.H. Shackelford read the following statement into the record: "My name is Robert H. Shackelford. I am the City Engineer for the City of Corpus Christi. I have been so employed for nineteen (19) months. I am a Professional Engineer, licensed by the State of Texas since 1979. I have 37 years of experience in design, construction and estimating project costs. I am familiar with the Wynn Seale Area Street Improvements, Phase III project. This Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 19 project encompasses: 16th Street - Cole Street to S. Staples Street; 17th Street - Cole Street to S. Staples Street; 18th Street - Cole Street to Baldwin Blvd.; and Naples Street - 18th Street to S. Staples Street. "Currently, 16th and Naples Streets are narrow, two-lane roadways with roadside ditches for drainage; 17th and 18th streets are somewhat wider. Random sections of sidewalk exist within the project area, but they are in poor repair. Partial curb and gutter, also in poor repair, exists on 17th and 18th Streets. The nature and scope of this project is to reconstruct 16th and Naples Streets as 28 -foot wide roadways which will widen to 40 -foot. "These street sections will have curb with gutter, underground storm sewer, concrete driveways, and sidewalks that meet ADA requirements. Seventeenth (17th) Street will be widened to a 38 -foot and 40 -foot pavement section and 18th will be widened to a 40 -foot roadway, accommodating two 12 -foot wide travel lanes and two parking lanes in recognition of current zoning and parking demands. Curb and gutter, underground drainage, sidewalks and concrete driveways will be provided throughout the project. "This project is funded from 20th Year Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, Street Bond Funds, and Utility Revenue Bonds. Prior to this hearing, I had an estimate of project costs prepared, and it compared favorably with the bids received. In my opinion, the costs are true and accurate. The project is estimated to start in May, 1996 with completion in 130 working days or in November, 1996." Mr. George Paraskevas then read the following statement into the record: "My name is George N. Paraskevas and I am a state -certified Residential Appraiser and have been evaluating property and practicing real estate in the Corpus Christi area since 1971. I have experience in appraising both commercial and residential property, and I am familiar with the real estate market in Corpus Christi, Texas. "I am familiar with the Wynn Seale School Area, Phase III, improvement project. I agree with Mr. Shackelford's description of the conditions to be changed and I am familiar with the improvements to be made by the City of Corpus Christi, Texas. I have reviewed the project assessment roll, and personally examined each of the 76 parcels of land therein. In my opinion, each such parcel will be specifically benefitted by each improvement to be assessed against it, without regard to the community benefit. In addition, it is my opinion that each such parcel will be specially enhanced by such improvement at least to the extent of the assessment stated." Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 20 Mayor Rhodes called for comments from the audience, and there were none. Council Member Best made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Council Member Heldenfels, and passed unanimously. Responding to Council Member John Longoria, Mr. Shackelford said there are some areas where the city will be rerouting the sanitary sewer lines from behind the property into the front; as a result, the city will be relocating the private sewer services from the house to the new sanitary sewer line. Mr. Longoria noted that there was a large difference in the amounts of some of the bids, and Mr. Shackelford said sometimes the bids are weighted differently. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 9.b. ORDINANCE NO. 022558 Ordinance closing the April 30, 1996 public hearing on street improvements on the following streets: 16th Street - Cole Street to South Staples; 17th Street - Cole Street to South Staples; 18th Street - Cole Street to Baldwin Boulevard; and Naples Street - 18th Street to South Staples, known as the Wynn Seale Area Street Improvements, Phase III Project, fixing a lien and charge and adopting an assessment roll indicating assessments of $145,067.66 on the 76 items. An emergency was declared and the foregoing ordinance passed, as amended, by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye"; Cooper absent. 9.c. M96-118 Motion awarding a contract in the amount of $822,640 to Haas -Anderson Construction for the Wynn Seale Area Street Improvements, Phase III project. The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye"; Cooper absent. ************ Mayor Rhodes opened the public hearing on Item 10, closure of a portion of Rose Street Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 21 right-of-way. Mayor Rhodes called for comments from the audience, and there were none. Council Member Heldenfels made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Council Member Betty Jean Longoria, and passed unanimously. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 10. FIRST READING ORDINANCF Closing and abandoning a 23 -square foot portion of a 60 -foot wide right-of-way on Rose Street at the corner of Rose Street and Antelope Street; subject to compliance with specified conditions; and the owner replatting the property within 180 days at the owner's expense. The foregoing ordinance passed on first reading by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." ************* Mayor Rhodes opened the public hearing on the following zoning case: 11. Case No. 396-1. Domingo and Elena Valader A change of zoning from "R -1B" One -family Dwelling District to "AB" Professional Office District on Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, Section 18, 4.12 acres out of Lot 29, located on the north side of Holly Road, approximately 120 feet east of Sean Drive. Mayor Rhodes said the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval. (This case was tabled by the City Council on April 9 and April 23, 1996.) Mr. Harvey said that Mr. Joe Garcia, representing the applicant, indicated that he would not be able to attend the Council meeting. Mr. Harvey said that at the Council's request, staff hosted a meeting between representatives of the neighborhood and the applicant, and what resulted was consensus on several items, including additional landscaping, set -backs and screening fences. He said one item that was not resolved was that the applicant would like to have any type of professional office/non-residential use, and two-thirds of the neighborhood representatives said they felt the use should be limited to medical -type professional offices. Mr. Paul Daniels, 6822 Lakeview Dr., said he still opposed the use of the property as a dental clinic, but he understood that the case probably would be approved. He said since what was being requested was a special permit for a dental clinic, other types of professional offices should not be allowed there. Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 22 Responding to questions from Mr. Daniels, Mr. Harvey said the residents' concern was that there be more landscaping than what is normally required for a professional office. Regarding the location of the driveway, Mr. Harvey said staff would use the location that was shown on the proposed site plan, which would be attached to the special permit ordinance. He said it was not dimensioned, but it would be approximately 120 feet from the east property line to the center line of the driveway. Council Member Best made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Council Member Heldenfels, and passed unanimously. Mayor Rhodes made a motion to deny the "AB" zoning and, in lieu thereof, to grant a special permit for professional offices as specified by staff and in the site plan. Mr. Harvey said that for clarification, the special permit should read that it allows all of the non-residential uses allowable in the "AB" zoning district. Mr. Heldenfels seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 11. ORDINANCE NO. 022559 Amending the Zoning Ordinance upon application by Domingo and Elena Valadez, by granting a Special Council Permit for professional offices subject to six (6) conditions on Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, Section 18, 1.00 acre out of Lot 29; providing for publication. An emergency was declared and the foregoing ordinance passed, as amended, by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Rhodes opened the public hearing on the following zoning case: 12. Case No. 396-5. Serena & Nicholas Longo. A change of zoning from "AB" Professional Office District to "B-1" Neighborhood Business District on Ocean View Addition, Block 7, east 95 feet of Lots 1 and 2, located on the south side of Elizabeth Street, approximately 45 feet west of Fifth Street. Mayor Rhodes said the Planning Commission and staff recommended denial of the "B-1," and in lieu thereof, approval of a special permit for an antique store and bookstore subject to three (3) conditions. Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 23 Council Member Martin asked if the applicant was requesting an alternative to the Planning Commission's and staff's original recommendation of a special permit for an antique store and a book store subject to three conditions. Mr. Nicholas Longo, the applicant, explained that he had rezoned property at 801 Elizabeth in December 1993, and his business (a cafe) became so popular that it created a problem with parking; the original intention was to make it just a drive-through restaurant. As a result, his business violated the zoning ordinance and will be closed on May 26, 1996 if a solution is not found. He said he also owns property at 807 and 809 Elizabeth, and he proposed converting the back of both of those properties into a parking lot with businesses on the front portion that would complement the cafe. Mr. Longo said that although an adjacent property owner initially opposed the zoning change, he has since stated his support. Mayor Rhodes asked if any members of the audience were opposed to zoning the subject property to "B-1," and no one came forward. Mr. Longo then submitted a list of 300 people stating their support for the zoning application. Council Member Black said that previously, that portion of Elizabeth Street had been very blighted but it has improved greatly, and she commended Mr. Longo for his efforts. Mayor Rhodes asked that if `B-1" zoning without a special permit were granted, would the fence be required, and Mr. Harvey said that since the adjacent property is zoned "AB," the screening fence is not a normal requirement. Mr. Martin pointed out that the city's current zoning classifications regarding bars and nightclubs need to be clarified. He said he did not think the Council objected to granting Mr. Longo a "B-1" zoning for normal "B-1" uses, but fencing would also be an important element as that area of town continues to develop. Upon verification by Mr. Harvey, Mr. Martin said that all of the allowed "B-1" uses would not be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, but an agreement could be reached for certain uses. Mr. Harvey suggested that a special permit could be granted to allow any of the "B-1" uses within the existing structures, which would accommodate several `B-1" uses with the exception of a bar or large retail operation. Mr. Longo said if he had the opportunity to open another unique business that complemented his current business, he wanted to be able to do so. Mayor Rhodes said the Council could not risk granting Mr. Longo a "B-1" zoning for his property until some aspects of the zoning ordinance are clarified. Mr. Longo pointed out that one piece of property he owns (located at Elizabeth and Fifth Street, adjacent to the subject property) is already zoned `B-1," and he does not intend to sell his property. Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 24 Mayor Rhodes asked what Mr. Longo's options would be once the city clarified its zoning ordinance. City Attorney Bray replied that the city could initiate a zoning change for that area to "B- 1" at the city's expense (rather than at Mr. Longo's expense) if the city thought it was appropriate. Mr. Martin asked if gas stations were allowed in "B-1" zoning, and Mr. Harvey replied that a gas pumping station would be allowed but not a repair facility. Mr. Martin said the subject property should be granted a special permit for uses proposed by the applicant. He added that, based on Mr. Longo's comments thus far, he could not think of a use Mr. Longo would want that the Council would oppose. Mr. Longo asked if a special permit could designate the uses the Council would oppose, such as a bar or a gas station. In order to do that, Mayor Rhodes said this zoning case should be tabled for two weeks to allow staff to bring back a recommendation. POSTPONED ************* Mayor Rhodes called for consideration of consent motions, resolutions, ordinances and ordinances from previous meetings on Items 13 through 21, and Council Members requested that Item 21 be withheld for discussion. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes and the following were passed: 13. M96-119 Motion approving supply agreements with the following companies for the following amounts for coarse paper items, which includes approximately 2,436 cases of towels and wipers; 295 cases of drinking cups; 1,000 cases of toilet tissue, etc. in accordance with Bid Invitation No. JGPG 96-1 based on low bid for an estimated annual expenditure of $70,321.10. The term of the agreement shall be for twelve months with an option to extend for up to an additional twelve months subject to the approval of the supplier, the Joint Governmental Purchasing Group, and the City Manager or his designee. Funds are budgeted in FY 95-96 by the using departments. Century Paper Corpus Christi. Texas $47,057.50 Sysco Food Services Corpus Christi. Texas $13,528.00 Minutes Regular Council Meeting April30, 1996 Page 25 Nationwide Papers San Antonio. Texas $8,750.72 Gulf Coast Papers Corpus Christi Texas $984.88 GRAND TOTAL - $70,321.10 The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." 14. M96-120 Motion approving supply agreements with the following companies for the following amounts in accordance with Coastal Bend Council of Governments Bid Invitation No. CBCOG-96-1 for food items, which include canned and frozen fruit and vegetables, meats, condiments, etc. for an estimated six month expenditure of $81,476.15 based on low bid. The term of the agreement shall be for six months with an option to extend for up to an additional three months subject to the approval of the Coastal Bend Council of Governments, the supplier and the City Manager or his designee. Funds are budgeted in FY 95-96 by Senior Community Services. Labatt Food Service Corpus Christi. Texas $13,374.66 Sysco Food Service Corpus Christi. Texas $25,166.56 Olsen Kessler Meats Corpus Christi Texas $305.80 McLane Foods San Antonio. Texas $16,724.78 U.S. Foods San Antonio. Texas $25,904.35 GRAND TOTAL: S81,476.15 The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." 15. M96-121 Motion approving the purchase of one landfill compactor with a five-year full maintenance agreement in accordance with Bid Invitation No. BI -0188-96 from Holt Company of Texas, Corpus Christi based on the low bid of $617,388. The equipment is budgeted by Solid Waste Services Department and will be funded through the City's lease/purchase contract Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 26 with G.E. Capital. The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." 16. M96-122 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an agreement with Corpus Christi Metro Ministries, Inc. to provide $100,000 from the FY 95 CDBG Program for improvements to the facility at 1906 Leopard Street including replacement of collapsed sewer and plumbing lines, modernization of kitchen facilities, and rehabilitation of public areas The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." 17. M96-123 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an annual supply contract in the amount of $266,675 to V.C. Huff, Inc. for the construction of traffic signal improvements and signal -related maintenance work at various locations throughout the city. The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." 18. M96-124 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a contract in the amount of $42,000 with Gignac and Associates for architectural services for the signs and signals building addition to the Streets and Solid Waste facility. The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." 19. M96-125 Motion authorizing the Planning and Development staff to prepare a service plan for the extension of municipal services to the proposed annexation area and schedule two public hearings to pursue the annexation of 10.148 acres comprised of: Wood River Subdivision Unit 11A; and a 0.4608 acres of land, more or less, out of a 400 acre tract and a 205.80 acre tract out of the Mariano L. De Herrera Grant Abstract 606, Nueces County, Texas, platted Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 27 as Lot 1, Block 47, the Park at Wood River Unit 8. The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." 20.a. M96-126 Motion authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to Contract No. 7460005741-96 with the Texas Department of Health in the amount of $59,575.50 to provide immunizations to infants and children in the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program during the period April 1, 1996 to September 30, 1996. The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." 20.b. ORDINANCE NO. 022560 Ordinance appropriating a grant from the Texas Department of Health in the amount of $59,575.50 to fund immunizations for infants and children in the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program during the period April 1, 1996 to September 30, 1996; amending Ordinance No. 022279 which adopted the 1995-96 Budget by adding $59,575.50 to the No. 162 Federal/State Grants Fund. An emergency was declared and the foregoing ordinance passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Rhodes opened discussion on Item 21, easement closure in King's Crossing Unit 2. Council Member Martin said he was not opposed to this item; however, he said it was a severe violation and staff had recommended the only appropriate solution. He encouraged the Council to read the background material on this case and he asked staff to give due notice to anyone else that the next house that results in similar violations should be demolished. Mr. Martin added that he was troubled by the broadness of the Zoning Board of Adjustment's (ZBA) authority. He noted that the Council does not have any review authority over the ZBA, and he questioned if the ZBA's authority could extend to granting 100% relief from front yard requirements and basic zoning ordinances. Mr. Martin asked if the ZBA could waive the zoning ordinance. City Attorney Bray said they could not; he added that the ZBA's limit of authority is in Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 28 situations of undue hardship. He added that the city could correct a clearly erroneous decision by the ZBA by appealing it to District Court. Mr. Martin asked staff to determine exactly what the ZBA's authority was, and Mr. Bray said they would. Mayor Rhodes called for comments from the audience, and there were none. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 21. FIRST READING ORDINANCF Closing and abandoning an 802.5 square foot portion of a 20 foot wide utility easement located within Lot 1, Block 29, King's Crossing Unit 2; subject to compliance with the specified conditions; and the owner replatting the property within 180 days at the owner's expense. The foregoing ordinance passed on first reading by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Rhodes announced that the closed session pursuant to Texas Government Code Section 551.074 regarding new City Manager selection would not be held. The Mayor then announced the closed session pursuant to Texas Government Code Section 551.074 regarding the appeal from the decision of the Civil Service Board upholding the termination of Robert Wright, with action thereon in open session. The Council went into closed session. The Council returned from closed session. Mayor Rhodes made the following motion, which was seconded by Council Member Heldenfels, and City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 23. M96-127 Motion to deny the appeal of the decision of the 469th meeting of the Civil Service Board which upheld the termination of Robert Wright. The foregoing motion passed by the following vote: Rhodes, Best, Black, Cooper, Heldenfels, B. Longoria, J. Longoria, Martin, and McNichols voting "Aye." * * * * * * * * * * * * * Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 29 Mayor Rhodes called for the City Manager's report. Mr. Garza pointed out that there was no Council meeting on May 7, 1996. He said items scheduled for the May 14 meeting included an update on the future solid waste landfill project; first reading of an ordinance for a Central Power & Light rate change; contract award for maintenance of the city's water wells; four zoning cases; and the Community Cultural Plan. Mayor Rhodes called for Council concerns and reports. Council Member Best discussed motions executing contracts for term life insurance and disability insurance for city employees that were approved by the Council on April 23, 1996. He said the Council had been told last week by Mr. Pat Alba, Safety and Risk Manager, that if a vote on the contracts was taken during the April 30 meeting, staff would only have had two days to transfer the contracts from the carrier at that time to the new carrier. Mr. Martin then requested further information, and Mr. Alba sent a memo from which Dr. Best quoted as saying, "Both policies do not have expiration dates nor renewal clauses." Dr. Best said he had voted for the new contracts because he was told that if they were not approved, the city employees would be negatively impacted. He said he wished to either withdraw his vote or discuss the issue again, saying the Council was not told the truth about the policies' expiration dates. City Manager Garza apologized for the confusion, saying staff did not intend to mislead the Council. He explained that the city has practices that staff would like to change: insurance policies basically had no term --as long as the premium was paid, then coverage was continued. He said the policy did have a 30 -day cancellation notice, and by virtue of sending out the requests for proposals, staff indicated that the city would be canceling the existing policy by the end of April and commencing with new policies on May 1, 1996. Mr. Garza explained that the anniversary date of the previous policy was February, and staff asked the carriers to extend the policy for an additional month at the same rate as before. He reiterated that staff was trying to correct a practice that is not strictly within the state purchasing laws. He added that staff has drawn up contracts with definite expiration dates which will force future city staffs to go out for bids on these policies in the future. Dr. Best said staff knew of this situation long ago, and when it came before the Council for their approval on the consent agenda last week, they were told it was a "done deal" and there was no time for discussion. Mr. Garza said he was not sure if the carrier would have extended the city's policy through the end of May. Council Member Martin said that during the last Council meeting, he had asked very direct questions about this issue, such as whether the current contracts expire, and he was told that they Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 30 expire on April 30, 1996. He said the fact is that the contracts do not have expiration provisions in them; they only expired because the staff, after six years, arbitrarily decided to expire them. Mr. Martin pointed out that it was a mid -year expiration and did not occur on a policy anniversary date. Mr. Martin said he had also asked if there was any ability to renew the current policies, and he was told that there was none --that all of the city's renewal options had expired. He said that both of those statements were inaccurate. Mr. Martin added that the Council could have renewed the current contract and it would have been allowable under the law. Mr. Garza disagreed, saying that the monthly payments exceeded $15,000, and given that staff had found a problem with its practice, they were compelled to correct it. Mr. Martin asked how many years the city had been in violation of the law, and Mr. Garza replied that it had been in violation for six years. Mr. Martin then asked if the Council could have renewed the contract on a month-to-month basis while their questions were answered. Mr. Garza said they could have, but the consequences needed to be weighed. Mr. Martin asked if the Council could have legally extended the contract. City Attorney Bray replied that they probably could have. Mr. Martin asked if the contracts had been signed by the new companies, and Mr. Garza told him that they had not. Mr. Martin then asked what policies would be effective beginning May 1, and Mr. Garza said he did not know, adding that he was unsure if the current carrier would cover the city. Mr. Martin said the Council was told that staff needed time to sign up the employees. Mr. Pat Alba, Safety and Risk Manager, said there was not an open enrollment for that insurance; rather, staff turned over a computer list to the new carrier. He said there were some employees who were not currently at work, and those employees would be the responsibility of the present carrier. He said staff had been working all week to obtain names from every city department of the city employees who were out on worker's compensation, sick leave or other leave; all the other employees would be included in a list to be provided to the new carrier. Mr. Martin asked why discussion on this issue could not have been extended until today, since there were no employee decisions involved. Mr. Alba said he could not have obtained overnight the names of the employees who were out. Mr. Martin asked if there was a requirement to notify the previous carrier today which employees were remaining. Mr. Alba said staff did that, and Mr. Martin asked to see that requirement. Mr. Martin pointed out that that only affected the disability insurance but not the life insurance. Mr. Alba explained that some employees were meeting a waiting period to be eligible for disability insurance. Mr. Martin said he understood Mr. Garza to say that if the Council reconsidered this item, which he said he would prefer, some employees could be put in jeopardy. Mr. Garza said he asked the attorney that, based on the language in the contract, if there was a claim tomorrow, could the company disavow the claim, and the answer was yes. Mr. Garza said one possibility was to get a Minutes Regular Council Meeting April 30, 1996 Page 31 verbal commitment from the broker, but he did not feel comfortable unless he had a written statement that the city would be covered. Mr. Garza added that staff could have done the necessary preparatory work, assuming the Council would approve staff's recommendation; another option could have been to inform the current carrier that the city wanted to extend the contract for another month in order to have more time to discuss it. Mr. Martin reiterated that the comments staff made at last week's meeting were erroneous, and the Council was still being put in the same position it was last week. He said that yesterday he had asked Mr. Alba the same questions and received the same answers, and it was not until today that he received the correct answers. He said they should just leave it as it is. Regarding other concerns, Mr. Martin said the Council had received a memo dated April 11, 1996 in which staff said it would take approximately 10 days to determine the proper discount rate for calculating present value on the Choke Canyon note payable. He also referred to a memo from Police Chief Alvarez concerning underage drinking, and asked that the Chief or Mr. Garza schedule a Council presentation on the issue. Mr. Martin said there were some concerns with the recent statement of revenues and expenditures, and he asked for a very clear report about the water use regulations and an updated projection of the city's water resources. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Rhodes called for petitions from the audience, and there were none. There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor Rhodes declared the Council meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. on April 30, 1996. * * * * * * * * * * * * *