Loading...
ccreg 09-01-1992 276 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 1, 1992 The Schertz City Council convened in Regular Session, Tuesday, September 1, 1992 immediately following the Board of Adjustment meeting, in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 1400 Schertz Parkway, Schertz, Texas. The following members were present: Mayor Earl W. Sawyer, presiding; Councilmembers Joe Potempa, Hal Baldwin, Barbara Stanhope, Mary Marsh and Ken Greenwald. Staff present were City Manager Kerry Sweatt and City Secretary June Krause. #1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A. B. Regular Meeting of 8-4-92 Special meeting of 8-12-92 Mrs. Marsh moved to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 4th and Special Meeting of August 12, 1992. Mr. Greenwald seconded the motion, which carried with the fOllowing vote: AYES: Councilmembers Potempa, Baldwin, Stanhope, Marsh and Greenwald. NAYS: None ABSTAINING: Mr. Baldwin for the meeting of August 12, 1992. #2 HEARING OF RESIDENTS: A. Mrs. Dorothy Coons said she would like to know the reason why they can not build the building they requested. She said this is for her husband's hobby and the Council just took his hobby away from him by not approving the request. She then polled the Council as to whether they had hobbies and what they were. She said she had moved to Schertz in 1987 as a widow, then met and married Mr. Coons. She said she did not need a bUilding such as this prior to getting married, that Mr. Coons had a hobby building at his old address but sold it. Mr. Coons said that after knowing the whole story, he could not believe Council turned them down. Mr. Greenwald said the reason was explained at Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. For one thing, the building really is not portable and if they intend to make this into a workshop, how would they get power for his tools without electricity. #3 ORDINANCE: Mayor Sawyer introduced an ordinance and read the caption as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 92-M-19 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ TO REQUIRE INSTALLATION IN CONVENIENCE STORES OF SECURITY CAMERA SYSTEMS, SILENT ALARM EQUIPMENT, COMPLIANCE SIGNS, ILLUMINATED PARKING AREAS, HEIGHT MARKERS, CASH ,F",,!~ ~ IJ d MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND WINDOWS WITH CLEAR AND UNOBSTRUCTED VIEWS; PROVIDING FOR ROBBERY PREVENTION AND AWARENESS TRAINING; CREATING AN ADVISORY BOARD; PROVIDING FOR PENALTY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. potempa_moved to approve on final reading the ordinance requlating convenience store security. Mr. Greenwald seconded the motion. Mr. Sweatt advised that the corrections had been made changing parking "lots" to parking "areas". Mrs. Marsh referred to Sec. 10.95.9, saying she could not find anywhere in there that said the Advisory Board would make recommendations to City Council for possible adoption. Mr. Marsh also said that the City Manager could dismiss the Advisory Council and she felt that should come under the City Council. Mr. Sweatt said that under (d) that if the Board was not taking any action, it could be dismissed. Mr. Potempa suggested it should properly read "The purpose of the Board shall be to advise the City Manager and the City Council," etc. Mrs. Marsh said to add "and make recommendations". Mayor Sawyer then called for a vote on the motion and the motion carried as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Potempa, Baldwin, Stanhope, Marsh and Greenwald. NAYS: None A gentleman from the ordinance said he had appeared at the previous hearings but would like to make some remarks. He has consulted an attorney who is a specialist in Municipal Government; and he can find no authority under State Municipal laws for a $5,000 civil fine. He said they also noted that the ordinance has no provision for a trial. He said they feel $50 maximum cash is not reasonable. They feel the provisions of this ordinance are dangerous to the convenience store employees and customers. They had previously pointed out several suggestions and only one was taken. He advised that Council was writing a "road map" for the criminal. He said the next time he would see Council would be on paper. #4 TAX PUBLIC HEARING: Consider and take action on setting the time and place for a publiC hearing on a proposal to increase total tax revenues. ..,. 1'"'1 C) .Gi0 Mr. Sweatt said this was required under the Tax Code to clarify action by the City Council. We are asking that Council set a public hearing on a proposal to increase the tax rate. We suggest that we set the date at 6:00 p.m. on September 10th. This will allow our minimum dates of publication and anticipates a public hearing on the budget no later than September 15th. Mr. Baldwin moved to set the date for public hearing on the proposed tax increase for September 10, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 1400 Schertz Parkway. Mr. Potempa seconded the motion, which carried with the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Potempa, Baldwin, Stanhope, Marsh and Greenwald. NAYS: None #5 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT: A. We sustained some damage to the City Hall today. One of our customers hit another vehicle and knocked the vehicle into the side of the building. There was no structural damage. The difficulty will be in finding matching brick for replacement. B. We are saddened to learn that Mr. Jim Shriver is still in the hospital and in extremely bad condition. #6 ITEMS BY COUNCIL: Mrs. Stanhope said she had attended the Jamboree Sunday afternoon on behalf of the Schertz Humane Society and was very pleased to find a lot of people present. #7 ITEMS BY MAYOR: Mayor Sawyer said he had received a invitation from LaFarge, saying they would like to give Council a tour of their plant and have a video if anyone wants to view it. #8 BUDGET WORKSHOP: Mayor Sawyer called a recess at 7:28 p.m. in order for the Council to move to the Conference Room for the budget workshop. The Regular Meeting was reconvened at 7:35 p.m. Conference Room of the Municipal Complex. in the Mayor Sawyer said that the City Manager had some answers to questions raised at the last budget workshop. Mr. Sweatt said the first question concerned changing the Dispatchers from a Service Grade 6 to a Service Grade 8. We have calculated those three ways - the minimum cost would be $5,236, the middle ground (which is more advisable) would cost $7,736 and the maximum would cost $10,002. The next question was to determine where we might transfer funds to the Street Department for street repair purposes. There are three ways that you might revise funding without making other changes throughout the budget. One - use some or all of the contingency fund in the General Fund, in the amount of $3l,800. Two - you could raise the tax rate up to slightly below the rollback rate to produce approximatelY $19,000. The third way would be to delay the proposed salary change in classification value for one, two or three months into the fiscal year. In General Fund the one month delay would produce a non expenditure of $6,043 - two months would be $12,086 and three months would be $18,129. Mr. Sweatt said that while he concurs that all of our personnel are underpaid. we have suggested to Council a provision in our overall classification and he said he could not recommend the revision of one select group at this time. A change from SG6 to SG8 for these four of the employees, using the middle group, would produce a average salary increase of 19.5%. He said he felt this would create extremely bad moral problems to single out one group of employees. He said, as pointed out earlier, the 5% change in value of the pay scale is only the first of several changes that will have to be made to bring our salaries up to a comparable rate. We propose, next year, to do a complete reclassification and task study that will result in a major change in our classifications for various work positions. Mrs. Marsh asked when staff would be doing this study. Mr. Sweatt said we would propose bringing that to during our next budget process, along with another increase. As you know, from our comparisons, this us just slightly off the bottom of the comparisons. Council 4% or 5% 5% moves Mrs. Marsh said Council is not picking out one pay grade for specialized treatment but are trying to rectify what they perceive as having been a wrong all the time. The dispatcher positions have in the past and do now deserve a higher service grade than they are now in. Mr. Sweatt then explained how he arrived at the minimum, middle and maximum for the increase to a grade 8. He said the maximum would move all dispatchers who have not reached their maximum to the corresponding step in SG 8. That would maintain the integrity of the relationship of their time to each other. Their place in the service grade scale is predicated on tenure. The least expensive way would be to move each of the four to the first step in the beginning of Servcie Grade 8. However, if an employee leaves they would be hired in at the same basic level as these who have tenure. -=J J 280 The third alternative is to try to move them into some relationship to each other keeping some separation between them according to tenure. Mrs. Marsh said that makes sense to her and Mr. Baldwin said this should take care of any inequity and seems to be what Council is asking for. Council then discussed the various ways of reclassifying positions in relation to Civil Service. Mr. Sweatt assured Council that the reclassification of positions would be brought to them before being implemented. After lengthy discussion, Mr. the position of Dispatcher to a as explained by Mr. Sweatt study and reclassification. Baldwin recommended raising Grade 8, using the mid level and then next year have the Mayor Sawyer polled the Councilmembers, asking if they agreed with Mr. Baldwin's recommendation and all agreed. Most of the Council was not in favor of delaying the salary increases to meet the monetary needs for this service grade move. Mr. Sweatt advised that one way to raise the money needed for this change would be to raise the tax rate to just under the rollback level or use the contingency monies. Mrs. Marsh said we could take the money needed out of the Non-Departmental contingency and look at the sales tax at mid year. Council agreed with this concept. Mayor Sawyer then suggested Council look at ways to raise some additional money for street repair materials. Mr. Sweatt said he did not have the full answer on the bond money that is still unsold but he felt it could be used for street purposes. The amount of unsold bonds in the 1987 series amounted to about $500,000. Mr. Baldwin said he was concerned because we need to do some long-term major rebuilding of streets so we really need to sell some of the bonds. Mr. Potempa reminded Council that $102,000 is needed to the water lines in Mobile Villa and it would be senseless to redo the streets and then go back and put in the water lines. Mr. Sweatt said some of the 1987 bonds were to fix streets in Mobile Villa but we have not done the streets because we do not have funds to relocate and replace the water lines. He is still checking on this. q~q ~CJ-L.. Council agreed to wait until the City Manager gets a reply on the bonds and then get to work on that. They decided they would wait to add anything to the street department materials and try to use bond money to rebuild streets. Mayor Sawyer ended by saying we need to think of ways we can bring money into the city and the sales tax seems the best way. #9 meeting motion, ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Baldwin_mQy'~g to adjourned the at 8:28 p.m. with Mrs. Stanhope seconding the which carried unani.mo /UZ'/~la~~~__ ~~yor, City of SChe~z, Texas ATTEST ecreta~~irtz