Loading...
ccswks 06-28-1995 ------ d# SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 28, 1995 The Schertz City Council convened in Special Workshop Session on Wednesday, June 28, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. in the Conference Room of the Municipal Complex, 1400 Schertz Parkway, Schertz, Texas. The following members were present: Mayor Hal Baldwin, presidingi Councilmembers Charles McDonald; Joe Potempa; Timothy Swinney and Ken Greenwald. Absent: Councilmember Dereda Burkett. Staff present were City Manager Kerry Sweatt and City Secretary Norma Althouse. #1 HEARING OF RESIDENTS: James Harris of FM 1518 and Schaefer Road gave a brief update on the Defense Environmental Reclamation Project going on at Randolph AFB. The last time the committee met, they discussed three areas of concern. The first area is the BX service station where everything seems to be okay. The second area is the fire training area where they are still testing. The third area is the sewer line on the east side of the base where they have been asked to look into the runoff. Mr. Harris indicated this area is of some concern to him. Mr. Sweatt commented that a landowner who lives downstream from Woman Hollering Creek had complained about runoff and Mr. Harris suggested the landowner and/or the City request a copy of last year's runoff report. Mr. Harris next referred to Item #4 on the agenda, the discussion of bond refinancing matters, and expressed the hope the City is considering refinancing at a lower interest rate. Mr. Harris then commented on Item #8, the agreement with Southwestern Bell, and said he is in the discussion about what the compensation is and whether it goes into the General Fund. He the franchise fee a tax on the citizens. franchise interested based on considers Lastly, Mr. Harris agreement with the procedures are to Baldwin advised Mr. make arrangements to mentioned Item #12, an employment City Manager, and asked what the get a copy of that agreement. Mayor Harris to speak with Mr. Sweatt and meet with him about that matter. #2 Discuss reconsideration of Lookout Road rezoning request from Salinas-Lomelin Joint Venture. Mr. Sweatt reported that the Planning and Zoning Commission had received a request from Salinas-Lomelin Joint Venture to rezone 77.256 acres along Lookout Road from M-l to MH. After reviewing it preliminarily, they voted to disapprove the request and not recommend a public ~ ,J'1,J- hearing. The applicant is asking Council to reconsider the request and hold public hearings because they feel maybe all the information was not available at the time they appeared before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Normally this request would not be considered again until a year had passed after its disapproval. Since no public hearings were held, however, Mr. Sweatt said he consented to put in on Council's agenda for discussion. There was no one present to represent the request, but Council went ahead and talked about it. Mr. Potempa asked who owns the property and Mr. Sweatt replied Salinas-Lomelin Joint Venture owns it. Mr. Potempa then asked if there are water lines in the area and Mr. Sweatt answered there are not. To this, Mr. McDonald added there are no sewer lines either and Mr. Sweatt admitted that's correct. Mr. Greenwald had given a handout from the Zoning Ordinance (Article XXIII, Section 2.2.2) to the Council highlighting the conditions that must be met for Planning and Zoning to recommend a public hearing on a request. The applicant did not meet the criteria. Mr. Greenwald felt Planning and Zoning made the correct decision. Council had also received a copy of the Planning and Zoning Commission's minutes of the meeting when the applicant appeared before the Commission. Mr. Sweatt aCknowledged that all these reasons for disapproval seem logical, but the applicant wants a public hearing. Several Councilmembers felt then, that the applicant should have come to the meeting. Mr. Swinney asked if allowing a public hearing on this will set a precedent and was told by Mr. Greenwald it will. Mr. Sweatt disagreed, saying he didn't see it as setting any kind of terrible precedent. Mayor Baldwin noted that Planning and Zoning has been endowed with the authority to make a decision on these matters and they have done so. Unless the applicant has some kind of mitigating circumstances which he feels change the facts, then the Mayor said he didn't see it as an issue. The consensus of the Council was not to act on this request. #3 Discuss public hearing on a Specific Use Permit request from GVEC for construction of a substation in Live Oak Hills Subdivision. Mr. Sweatt advised that GVEC has acquired 11 acres in the Live Oak Hills Subdivision where they propose to construct a substation. The substation will furnish a second feed of electricity into our community and additional power. The property is currently zoned for residential and they have applied for a Specific Use Permit because a substation is not a normal use in a residential area. ~ .~ d73 There was discussion about the substation eventually feeding along Schertz Parkway, about the lines not being underground and about how the lines were going to connect with the main power source. Mr. Swinney asked the reasoning for that location and Mr. Sweatt related CPS has a main transmission line adjacent just to the west. Mr. Swinney indicated he would like some technical information on the substation. Council, when asked by Mayor Baldwin, agreed they were ready for this item to be placed on next Thursday night's agenda. It was now 7:35 p.m. Salinas-Lomelin Joint meeting and asked to consented. and Charles Huriega, representing Venture (Item #2) arrived at the be allowed to speak. Council Mr. Huriega related that when they appeared before Planning and Zoning, there were a lot of questions for which they didn't have the information available. After that meeting, they had an informal discussion with Steve Simonson and Pia Jarman where they went into more detail. Mrs. Jarman stated she would reconsider their request. Mr. Huriega then asked Council if they would like to hear more. Mayor Baldwin told Mr. Huriega to go ahead. Mr. Huriega commented the Comprehensive Plan and the City Plan were written at least 10 years ago and things have changed. They see an economic need for mobile home development in this area. This location would provide a direct link to the race track via Lookout Road. Mr. McDonald asked how many people working at Retama need to live in a mobile home and Mr. Huriega answered quite a few. Sometimes their work is seasonal. Mayor Baldwin asked if they would be selling mobile home lots and Mr. Huriega replied no, they would be leasing them. The Mayor then expressed concern about a mobile home park located in the middle of an industrial area. Mr. McDonald expressed concern about availability of water and sewer lines. Mr. Huriega related they had spoken with adjacent property owners and with CCMA and no one seemed to have an objection to a mobile home park in that area. Mr. Huriega pointed out they own 3 to 4 sides of the property abutting this area they wish to develop. They're not looking at a spot zoning type situation. According to the City's major thoroughfare plan, which has been revised, it was intended Lookout Road would come over to Tri-County and then continue back to 482. The Council let Mr. Huriega know that was not the case maybe Selma is planning that, but not Schertz. Mr. Huriega conceded it is Selma and then admitted that would obviously be a nice connection. ~ ,17'1 Mr. Huriega went on to say they are willing to look at installing restrictive zoning buffers. They told Mrs. Jarman they are willing to look at any restrictive zoning covenants that Planning and Zoning feels are adequate to buffer the property. Seeing as to how the developers own the surrounding properties, they would not develop one to the detriment of the others. This is proposed strictly as a response to market indicators and compatibility of existing land use rights. One of the partners on the development team was asking if they have the option to revert this back to agricultural use and yes they do, but that would not get them anywhere. They're trying to work with the City in coming up with a development that would be compatible with the City's vision and Comprehensive Plan, but also take into consideration what's going on behind Lookout Road. There's a lot of speculation going on right now with respect to upper end RV parks and mobile home parks. Mr. Potempa asked what happens if the market reverses and the race track doesn't survive. Mr. Huriega replied it would revert back to what it is now. When you're downzoning, as they are requesting, you should have no problem upzoning if the market dictates. Mr. Swinney observed that Mr. Huriega's comments about the race track seem optimistic in comparison to the financial difficulties Retama has been having. Also, if this development is gearing toward the seasonal type of folks who work there, Mr. Swinney stated that doesn't sound like the upper end scale of people to him. Mr. Huriega, noting the race track business is new to him, said he was surprised to find out there is a circuit of race track patrons that make the rounds allover the country and they are directly tied into the breeders, the racers and the trainers and most times they don't purchase a new house. They like the upper end temporary type residence. Mr. Huriega commented one problem with developing this is that the ordinance on the mobile home parks requires a lot to acre ratio. Their typical lot layout shows double wide lots and single wide lots. There was a brief discussion on today's mobile homes. Mr. Potempa pointed out the problem with a mobile home is that at the end of 20 years, it's worth nothing. It depreciates like a car. Mr. McDonald mentioned that if you put them on a permanent foundation, they appreciate. Mr. Swinney implied that it seems like all the economic changes being brought up are tied to the race track and in his opinion are speculative. If these are to support the requirement in the ordinance for Planning and Zoning to recommend a public hearing (there has been environmental and/or economical changes which warrant a change since its original zoning), he's not convinced. Mr. Huriega ./ --------- .~ v?7.F remarked that's one of the reasons he would like the opportunity to make another presentation and have the developer make the case for the economics involved. Mayor Baldwin, affirming they've heard the case presented tonight, said they need to consider it and decide if they want to reopen it. What is the next step, considering they may be interested in hearing more. Mr. Sweatt explained that, if Council is interested, then it will be placed on next Thursday's agenda as an action item to refer it back to Planning and Zoning for a hearing, and the process begins again. Mr. Huriega added that after talking with Mrs. Jarman in their informal meeting, she agreed there were a number of issues that had not been presented to the Commission and she would gladly entertain reconsideration by them. Mr. McDonald referred to Mr. Huriega's letter and asked when he had spoken to the Councilwoman. Mr. Huriega replied he had called Ms. Dereda (he was informed it is Mrs. Burkett) and told her about the case and asked her if she knew what the process was for getting on City Council's agenda. Mr. Huriega declared he didn't know anyone else to contact except Mr. Simonson. Mr. Potempa asked Mr. Huriega why he didn't contact City Manager. Mr. Huriega answered that after original appearance before Planning and Zoning, they spoken with Mr. Simonson trying to set up a meeting the City Manager and Mr. Simonson told them they needed to go before City Council. the the had with just Mayor Baldwin asked Council if they want this item on their agenda next Thursday. Mr. Swinney was not satisfied there's any personal justification to put it on the agenda. Mr. McDonald indicated he was not in favor of being bitten by a race track that's not too successful (and others are having trouble), if that's what we're hanging our hat on for this developer's economic statistics. There was no one else in favor of putting it on the agenda. Mr. Huriega then asked the process for having the property considered for agricultural use. Mr. Sweatt stressed that doesn't meet any of their present needs. Mr. McDonald pointed out they have a tax exemption on agriculture now, so there's no advantage to changing it. It was pointed out to Mr. Huriega there is no agricultural zoning. Mr. Huriega insisted there is no industrial use for the property. What the developer intends if it cannot be rezoned to MH, and there is no industrial use for the property, is to have it reverted back to an appropriate zoning for its current use. He believes it will be easier to bring the zoning back up to anything other than industrial. Would that conflict with the 12 month ~ A7~ ordinance regulation? Mr. Greenwald replied if coming in with a different zoning request from the request, then the 12 months does not apply. they're original #4 Discuss bond refinancing matters. Mr. Sweatt introduced Tom Anderlitch of Rauscher, Pierce, Refsnes, Inc. and stated he is here to discuss the possible refunding of outstanding bonds and the reduction of debt service cost. Mr. Anderlitch reported they had been working with Mr. Sweatt on this and talking about it since January as they have seen declining interest rates. They prepare reports and constantly monitor all the issues of outstanding debts for all the political subdivisions by which they are employed. There used to be an old rule of thumb that they needed to have a 5% net savings back to the political subdivision and if they didn't, he was not in favor of refinancing because the only people making money were the brokers, bond attorneys, bond printers, etc. In March, they supplied Mr. Sweatt with some figures that came back to 4.89 and Mr. Sweatt's question was did they think interest rates were going to decline a little further. They told him they thought so, but that's speculative. Mr. Anderlitch had prepared a booklet for each member of the Council and reviewed some of the highlights with them. Tab 2 is all the outstanding debts. Tab 3 tells you the bonds that are going to be refunded. There are seven different issues of bonds from 1975 through 1990 that they are looking at refunding. They way the computers are programmed, they only refund those maturities that are advantageous to the City. In other words, it is an interest savings over and above the cost of reissuance and it picks out those particular maturities, interest coupons and interest rates where a savings can be generated. If it turns out there is not an interest savings and it will be negative, then the computer kicks it out and it is not considered in the refunding analysis. Mr. Anderlitch further explained the interest rates on the bonds they're talking about refunding average somewhere between 6 1/2% to 10%. Tab 3 will give you each maturity and each bond and will coincide back to the summary page in Tab 1. If you look at the bottom part where it says miscellaneous refunding information, you will see that the principal amount of the bonds to be refunded will be $1,525,000. In order to refund that amount, they need to issue $1,700,000. The rate yield on the bonds outstanding now is 8.719%. Total debt service savings to the City, in this case, is $117,800. Then there's the present value savings. The debt service savings, as a percent of the total debt service on the refunded bonds, is 5.3179%. If you look at the top where it says sources of funds, the principal amount of the current interest bonds would be $1,700,000. ~ ..-:-- .;5'17 From the interest and sinking fund, they are levying taxes now on a lot of these issues and this is money that would accrue as of June 28th that the City has already collected on those particular bonds that are being refunded. That amount is $20,000. The interest which will accrue on the refunding bonds is $7,315 and that's a total source of funds. That brings it up to the $1,727,000. They take that money and go out and buy government bonds and pledge those into an escrow account that pays off the outstanding bonds as they mature. They need to buy bonds that will mature at a fixed time so when that comes due it pays off the outstanding debt and they, in effect, defease all of the outstanding bonds. Mr. Anderlitch emphasized the figures will change, but this is their best guess as of today. These would be the costs and there's $17,500 for insurance which gives a triple A rating and makes the bonds more acceptable into the market and they get a lower yield and interest cost as far as the City is concerned. Then there is accrued interest, issuance expenses and the underwriter's discount. The people they would put together to buy these bonds and market them would work for about $7.50 per thousand and that translates to $12,750. The remaining costs would be $47,000 with a rounding amount in there of $2,000. That balances back to the figures they started with of $1,727,000. Mr. Anderlitch mentioned what he had recommended to Mr. Sweatt was that they continue to monitor this for the City and see where interest rates are going. After some further review, Mr. Anderlitch told Council what they would see budgetwise, from 1995 through 2005, would be an average of an annual savings of $11,000 to $12,000 after the refunding. Mr. Sweatt reminded Council this is a combination of GO's and CO's and revenues. This is not a savings that would inure exclusively to the General Fund. In fact, it's roughly half and half. The savings would be spread back out to the appropriate funds. Mr. Anderlitch once again mentioned these figures are their best guess as of 2:00 p.m. today. If interest rates change and go up, then the savings goes away. If interest rates decline, then the savings can be far greater. Mayor Baldwin asked what the earliest date would be when they could sell the bonds if they started the procedure with an official approval next week. Mr. Anderlitch replied within 30 days. Mr. Swinney noted the next major movement from the Federal Reserve is expected to be in August and Mr. Anderlitch agreed, indicating you live in fear of what they're going to say. ~' " ~ . ~ '. -~, " A7',f Mr. Anderlitch then told Mayor Baldwin his suggestion would be, if Council likes the concept, let them monitor it, get back with Mr. Sweatt and then get back to the Council when they think the timing is right. It has to be approved by Council anyway, and that time lets them set up the marketing mechanism. Mr. Greenwald mentioned the earliest 30 day point after the next meeting would be August 6th. Mr. Anderlitch recommended Council just approve the concept at the July 6th meeting, continue to let them monitor for the City, and then let them get back with Mr. Sweatt even if they need to have a special meeting. That way they can get everything done up ahead of time and be ready to go. The consensus of the Council was to place approval of the concept as an action item on the agenda of the July 6th meeting. #5 Discuss final consideration of an ordinance rezoning 8.9633 acres from NS to PUD (Laredo/Greenshire). Council agreed they were ready for this to be on next Thursday night's agenda. #6 Discuss establishing a Incorporated. final consideration Reinvestment Zone for of an Intsel ordinance Southwest Mr. Sweatt conveyed a request from the applicant that this matter be tabled. The company is finishing up surveys of the soil conditions and the evaluations indicate they may have some problems with the current site. They've asked for time to come up with a solution, which may involve having to change sites. They're still interested in locating in Schertz, this is just something they had not originally anticipated. This item was placed on hold. #7 Discuss final consideration of an ordinance approving a Tax Abatement and a Tax Abatement Agreement with Intsel Southwest Incorporated. This item was also placed on hold. #8 Discuss final consideration of an ordinance adopting a Franchise Agreement with Southwestern Bell Telephone Company and approving certain matters relating to settlement of a class action lawsuit involving Southwestern Bell Telephone Company. Mr. Sweatt reminded Council they have discussed on several occasions, and passed on first reading, an ordinance that establishes a new franchise arrangement with Southwestern Bell Telephone Company. The franchise arrangement is that -~' -~ .;1'71 mechanism by which the telephone company and other utility companies use the rights-of-way and property of the City. Payment for those is in the form of a franchise payment, but it's simply a payment for the right to use public property. The City of Schertz joined 56 other cities in a class action suit against Southwestern Bell in March of 1992 to resolve the issue dealing with previous payments for services and the contention by some cities that certain services should have been included in the overall calculation for municipal fees. This litigation is scheduled to proceed until August of 1995. A settlement has been proposed in which, among other things, a payment will be made to each of the 57 cities. The City of Schertz is estimated to receive $155,533 as our portion of the class fund. There's also discount certificates available for certain kinds of non-regulated services. Payment of those class action fees and charges are not subject to a pass through charge by the telephone company as part of the settlement agreement. Mr. Sweatt further stated part of the settlement agreement calls for the adoption of a new franchise ordinance that would describe the manner in which, among other things, the company would use the property of the City and the payment the company would make for use of the property. In the City of Schertz case, the calculation for the payment is predicated on, instead of 3%, a 4% type of arrangement. However, it's on a flat fee as opposed to a percentage of gross receipts. The condition of the settlement is that the City of Schertz, along with the other 56 cities, adopt this new arrangement prior to the end of July and that all those documents and releases be made available to the company so the court will resolve the matter in August of 1995. The manner in which the payment to the City is calculated is based on a somewhat intricate formula, but basicallY is a flat rate based on types of services by the individual user. Those fees would be passed on to the customer. The calculation by Southwestern Bell is that the maximum that would be paid to the City of Schertz the first year under this five year franchise arrangement is $47,800. Based on information we have currently, that appears to be an increase of as much as thirty cents per month to the individual single-line customer. We've asked them to furnish us with additional information. Mr. Sweatt related they have prepared, in the ordinance, the adoption of the settlement agreement and the conditions for use of the property. The maximum amount that could be received the first year is $47,800. If we have further information by next week's meeting, Council certainly has the right to reduce that amount. It is recommended Council consider adopting this ordinance. ~ ~,f'tJ Mr. SWinney, saying he is not willing to jeopardize his yes vote over a franchise fee, thought Mr. Harris brought up a good point in noting that the fees are adding up. Can we break out of our governmental habit pattern and see if we can really do without a franchise fee or at least the increase? How would it affect the budget? Mr. Sweatt replied the $47,800 probably represents 2 1/2 to 3 cents of the tax rate. Mayor Baldwin explained it's an operating cost to the company that they just happen to tag onto the bill so that everybody sees it. In any other company it would be just part of the sale price of the product to the customer and you wouldn't see it. In the case of utilities, they stick it right out front. Mr. McDonald asked what kind of revenue would be generated if we stayed at the old 3% rate. Mayor Baldwin commented the whole purpose of this suit was so we could collect tax on new services that have never been taxed before. Mr. Potempa asked for an example of those and Mr. Sweatt replied all the direct services from the phone company, including installation charges and one-time beneficiary services. Mr. Sweatt noted they just used the percentage calculation to get to a number. It's not really a percentage and that's what makes it more difficult to define. We do have an agreement now, if accepted by Council, of a manner by which charges will be calculated in the future. Mr. McDonald urged going ahead with the ordinance or we won't get the $155,000 settlement. Mr. Sweatt remarked he will give any additional information they may receive to Council next week as to how they calculated that and whether there are opportunities/and or options to lower that $47,800 number. Mr. Greenwald inquired if there's any way, in this agreement, to go 3 1/2% next year and 4% the year after. Mr. Sweatt answered our choice is to set any amount at the $47,800 or lower the first year and then they will collect a flat rate fee to equal that number. Mr. Sweatt emphasized that's the best answer he can give. If we set a number of $40,000, they would set their flat rate charge, based on number of services, to produce that amount. Then next year's payment would use that same amount on the new number of lines and services in the City. It would likely go up and we might, by the end of 5 years, be back to the $47,800 or we might be well above it. Mr. McDonald asked when we have to make a decision on the discount certificates and Mr. Sweatt replied he thinks it's 60 days. Mr. Sweatt said, in his opinion, the non-regulated services the City would be buying for the next 10 years will not produce us as much as if we took the cash value of those certificates which is about 10% or another $16,000. / ~. -" ' ,-- %1 Mr. Swinney asked Mr. Sweatt if he could play with some figures and see if it's possible to adjust that amount. Mr. Sweatt promised to do that. After further discussion, Mr. Sweatt advised Council another option the City has is to continue to litigate with Southwestern Bell. Mayor Baldwin, noting they have to come up with a decision by next Thursday's meeting, asked if Council is ready to go with this item for next week's agenda. They were ready. #9 Discuss award of bid for Equipment for the Library Department. Data Processing' Mr. Sweatt informed Council that in the budget this year they had anticipated expenditures for software and hardware to begin the conversion of the Library Department to a data processing system. The City solicited bids for the hardware and has received bids ranging from $12,604 to $22,807. We believe each of those proposals meet the basic intent of the specifications. The low bid of $12,604.52 is from Ger Mar Co. and after review with all other data processing personnel, we find they meet all the conditions and can supply the hardware we requested. The budgeted funds will be exceeded by $6,105 and Friends of the Library and the Library Board have agreed to fund that amount from their sources. Mr. Potempa asked if the $12,604.52 will take care of the entire conversion and not create the need to get additional hardware and/or software for this project. Gail Douglas replied it will provide what is necessary for this particular project. Ms. Douglas explained this includes three public access terminals which means the card catalogue would be on computer. In the future she may want to have three more and that would involve only hardware, not more software. This also includes two terminals at the circulation desk so checkout would be automatic, saving a lot of time. It also includes the file server, and a work station for it, which would take care of the whole system. Ms. Douglas went on to say right now this is complete, but automation is advancing faster than she can keep track of it. As a result there will always be things they may want to add, update and upgrade, but this is the complete system for now. Mr. Sweatt indicated they feel this is the way to go and can possibly foresee patrons, by means of computer, checking out their own books in the future. Mr. McDonald asked if this system has the capability of printing out accounts at the end of the day and Ms. Douglas replied yes it does. Not only will it save the staff time, but will better serve the patrons. ~ p:?- Mr. Greenwald reported the March statistics, which 6,237 patron visits and 8349 books checked out. Douglas reported they may hit an all-time record this of 10,000 items being checked out. were Ms. month After being were ready aqenda. asked by Mayor Baldwin, Council indicated they for this item to be placed on next Thursday's #10 Discuss by-laws for Northeast Partnership. Mr. Sweatt advised that Schertz, in cooperation with the cities of Converse, Kirby, Live Oak, Selma and Universal City, entered into a grant program with Bexar County to conduct an economic development study. The company which did the study, strongly suggested we consider a regional approach to economic development issues. We met several times and even extended an invitation to join to the cities of Cibolo and Garden Ridge. As a result of the times they have met, the cities have developed a series of proposed goals, a mission statement and other proposed activities along with proposed by-laws. These proposed by-laws are being taken to each of the member cities for review. The cities have currently been represented by the mayors, city managers and various economic development personnel. We anticipate each of the cities will consider membership in the Northeast Partnership through approval of the by-laws and an agreement to participate to pay dues now estimated to be in the neighborhood of $1,000 plus an amount based on population or electrical connections that will fund the Northeast Partnership membership and a couple of other economic development organizations and other operating costs. Mr. Potempa asked if this charge will be passed on to the citizens for electricity and does it involve all electric companies. Mr. Sweatt explained the electric connections was just a way to determine what a city's membership would be. Mayor Baldwin added they wanted a way to count the population of each one of the cities on the same basis. Mr. Potempa asked where the money will come from. Mayor Baldwin replied it will have to be budgeted. The Mayor then went on to say he thinks the Partnership has been unique in this area in that first of all, it brought eight of the cities together - the mayors and the staffs. All of us are truly interested in regional development of the entire area. All of us subscribe to the concept that what's good for one city is good for all of us. The best way to advertise anyone city, is to advertise all of us. We have a lot of assets in these eight cities to offer. It's been a very pleasant experience. All discussions have been positive. We've haven't gotten sidetracked on anythinq that's petty. Mayor Baldwin commented he has always leaned toward a regional concept in providing true / ---- .---- ,;2%3 growth and true services to this area. S.A.F.E.S. is the best example of a regional system that works and works well and saves us all money. He thinks the partnership is the right thing to do and he hopes Council agrees and is willing to participate through funding. Mr. Sweatt pointed out that collectively, for marketing purposes, the cities are a larger market with a higher population than our largest competitors. Individually we are smaller than our smallest competitors. In the regional approach to issues, our competitors are places like Georgetown, Round Rock and PIano. Mr. Sweatt further stated that after choosing a unique name for themselves, the aim was to develop a consolidated approach to economic development, including but not limited to, identity, image enhancement, marketing through support and promotion of existing businesses and industry, broadening of the economic base by diversification of employment opportunities and support of a desirable quality of life. Mayor Baldwin noted the San Antonio Economic Development Foundation is very interested in what the Partnership is doing. The Partnership will probablY pay for a position on that Board. The City of Schertz is the only city in this area actively participating in the Austin-San Antonio Corridor Council. We will encourage more participation in that. It's an opportunity to get our name out in front of the public. Our goal is to be as well known to industry throughout the United States and throughout the world as Georgetown, Round Rock and PIano. Mr. Swinney remarked he is 100% in favor of this. The ultimate effect of these cities combining their resources can be tremendous. It's money well spent. He does have a couple of questions, however. He has a problem where it says the Directors can hold their meetings any place in Texas. Even though it probably wouldn't happen, he can see possible abuse. Mr. Swinney sees no reason for the Partnership to meet outside their geographical boundaries. Mayor Baldwin said he would mention it to the Partnership. Mr. Swinney then asked if these guidelines to each individual city's by-laws. Mr. these could not override our charter. are subservient Sweatt replied Mr. McDonald, noting we are adding $1900 more to economic development, questioned if this will hinder our own economic development by reducing its funds, or are we just adding to our efforts. Mayor Baldwin replied he sees it as investing money that will pay us some big dividends. Mr. Swinney asked if there's anything to be accomplished by the Partnership that would save us money in what we're presently doing through the City's economic development ~ p'f program. supplant economic Mr. Sweatt answered this was not intended any particular expenditure and/or effort by development program of any individual city. to the Mr. Greenwald mentioned that even though, as the result of a study, a regional approach to economic development was suggested, that was not meant to circumvent any individual city. Mr. Potempa asked who's going to do the legwork once all the mayors make the decisions. Mayor Baldwin answered it depends on the size of what the Northeast Partnership becomes. If we made a video to market the area, it would be the responsibility of the Partnership to fund its distribution. Mr. Swinney observed there will be no full-time staff for the Partnership and Mayor Baldwin acknowledged not at this time, but who knows about the future. Mr. McDonald mentioned there's a lot of grant money there and Mayor Baldwin agreed. out Mr. Swinney asked about administrative support and Baldwin noted that so far, each city has taken particular responsibility and/or duty. Once officers elected, then it will be a more formal organization. Mayor on a are Mr. this some Potempa asked if the hotel/motel tax can be used and Mr. Sweatt thought perhaps it could be used of the marketing efforts. for for Mr. Swinney commended the Mayor and City Manager for all the efforts they have put into this Partnership. Mr. Sweatt suggested the by-laws for the Northeast Partnership be put on the agenda of next Thursday night's meeting for conditional approval. The Council agreed. #11 Consider and easement from City Utility District. take action to convey a water line of Schertz to Green Valley Special Mr. Sweatt water line recommended. advised this is just a housekeeping item. needs to be relocated and approval A is Mr. McDonald moved to approve the conveyance of a water line easement from the City of Schertz to Green Valley Special Utility District. Mr. Greenwald seconded the motion, which carried with the following votes: AYES: Councilmembers McDonald, Greenwald. Potempa, Swinney and NAYS: None. ./ ....---- ~,f-2 #12 Consider and employment agreement. take action on City Manager Mayor Baldwin commented he thinks everyone has had a chance to review the agreement and thanked Council for their cooperation in working on it. A copy of the agreement was contained in the Councilmembers' packets. Mr. McDonald moved employment agreement. which carried with the to approve the City Manager's Mr. Swinney seconded the motion, following votes: AYES: Councilmembers McDonald, Greenwald. Potempa, Swinney and NAYS: None. Mr. Sweatt thanked the Council. #13 Discuss City of Statements. Schertz Vision and Mission The consensus of the Council was to discuss this item at a later date. #14 EXECUTIVE SESSION: Called under Section 551 of the Texas Government Code, Sub-Section 551.072, deliberation regarding real property. An Executive Session was held from 9:35 p.m. to 10:05 p.m. #15 Consider and take action, if any, on the above Executive Session. No action was necessary. Mr. Potempa had to leave the meeting at this time. #16 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT: Noted, regarding the IH-35 improvements, there will be significant water/sewer line relocation paid for by TXDoT. The City does need to enter into agreements with them and that will be handled by Ford Engineering. No action is needed by City Council. If there are no questions, they will instruct Ford Engineering to get started on the process. #17 ITEMS BY COUNCIL: Mr. Swinney: A. Mentioned he will be flying to Honolulu this week on a mission. B. for him need City. Indicated he would like to see the City parks, recreation and playgrounds. Mr. there is a plan for that. Mr. Swinney for playgrounds in several different develop a plan Greenwald told emphasized the areas of the ~ ;2f6 Mr. Greenwald: Stated Council should consider replacing a fire truck with the money from the Southwestern Bell settlement. Mr. Sweatt announced, if it's Council's pleasure, they will make that an agenda item. Council agreed. #18 ITEMS BY MAYOR: A. Business Association needs Jubilee. Anyone interested Told Council the Schertz volunteers for the 4th of July please contact Anita Clark. B. Announced since next week's meeting has been changed to Thursday the 6th, he won't be here. #19 ADJOURNMENT: On a motion by Mr. seconded by Mr. Swinney and unanimously meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m. McDonald carried, and the ~ /.t./A.....;. Mayor, City of Schertz, Texas ATTEST: ~~ City Secretary, City of Schertz ---~