Loading...
MIN CC 10/16/1984MINUTES OF THE HUNTSVILLE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, LOCATED IN CITY HALL AT 1212 AVENUE M IN THE CITY OF HUNTSVILLE, COUNTY' OF WALKER, TEXAS AT 8:00 P.M. The Council met in regular session with the following members present: William V. Nash, Mayor - 0. Eugene Barrett Murray A. Brown Stephen E. Davis City Officers Present: Jerry L. Dowling Bill Hodges Gene Pipes, City Manager Percy Howard, Jr. Scott Bounds, City Attorney Jane Monday Ruth DeShaw, City Secretary Bob Tavenner The meeting was called to order by the Honorable William V. Nash, Mayor. The invocation was presented by Brother Luke Curtis of the Church of Christ, State Prison Ministry, 1021 12th Street, Huntsville, Texas. CONSIDER THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING Councilmember Dowling made the motion to approve of the minutes of October 9, 1984 as prepared and Council - member Barrett seconded the motion, All were in favor and the motion passed unaninously. CONSIDER RESOLUTION Consider Resolution No. 84 -18 concerning setting a final hour for use of city recreational facilities by school age young people on school nights in conjunction with a resolution adopted by the Hi50 Board. Mayor Nash then presented a joint resolution with HISD which indicates the City Council's consensus and intention to enforce a policy that activities involving school -age youngsters (using city facilities) will be concluded at 10:00 P.M. on school nights so that students understand the important of academic achievement as it relates to the success of the individual, cormnunity, state, and nation. Mr. Nash advised this policy is being developed, at the request of Gary Collins, Superintendent, HISD, in response to the education reform bill recently adopted by the actions of the Legislature and the State Board of Education. Mr. Collins then discussed the Resolution and advised the Council of other actions taken by HISD to accomplish new policies as result of the new education reform bill. Councilmember Hodges made the motion to adopt Resolution No. 84 -18 and Councilmember Barrett seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. OPEN PUBLIC HEARINGS Open Public Hearing on City's compliance with handicap requirements of Federal Revenue Sharing regarding admission or access to, or employment in, its programs and activities * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mr. Pipes, City Manager, noted this hearing is required under the Revenue Sharing statutes. He noted the city staff has done a survey regarding the city's compliance with the statutes requiring accessibility to public facilities by the handicapped. He noted this self- evaluation covers employinent rules and practices, the accessibility to our city facilities or facilities under the city's control (city mall, police department, municipal court, library, fire stations, parks, service center, airport, emancipation park building, sewer plants), services accessibility, contractural services, etc., grievance procedures for handicapped persons, and notice and review of our self- evaluation and changes reconnnended to personnel policies and other non - compliance areas. He then presented the staff's report of its findings, which has been provided to interested individuals. He invited comments from the public to be included in the city's evaluation report which will be submitted to the Revenue Sharing auditors. Mayor Nash then called upon those registered to address the Council on this subject. Ms. Jo Shipman Ms. Shipman noted the staff has made this survey, but she felt it would be in the best interest of eveyone involved to have a handicapped person check these areas. She noted she is wheelchair bound and she has checked the accessibility of public buildings and has found very few of them to be handicapped accessible. She said City Hall is good, the Library's handicapped parking spot is behind the building and the access raiup for wheelchairs is at the front of the building and the sidewalk does not even go to the ramp. Mr. Pipes noted then the handi- capped parking space is designated in the wrong spot. Ms. Shipman agreed that this is the problem with the Library's accessibility for the handicapped. Ms. Shipman noted there is a ramp at the Municipal Justice Center, but there is no designated handicapped parking spot. Mr. Pipes noted there are two spots, for which the signs have not yet been received. He said the entire length of the outside wall of the Police Station adjacent to the parking lot has been reserved for handicapped parking areas parallel to the rear entrance, ample to accommodate four cars. Ms. Shipman asked about the Service Center's parking spot. Mr. Pipes noted the sign has not yet come in for that space, but it is on the far left end and there is a ramp up to the door. Ms. Shipman noted there were many cars parked there today when she looked, so it was difficult to see the space although she did feel there was a step there to get up to the ramp. Mr. Pipes noted there shouldn't be a step but if there is it will be taken out. Ms. Shipman asked Mr. Pipes to put himself in a wheelchair and see what happens. She said it is very, very difficult. Mayor Nash thanked Ms. Shipman for her comments. Ms. Shipman noted the airport is in compliance. She said she did not check out the sewer plants, however. She did note that she has visited with the City Manager about the courthouse parking spot and advised that the handicapped parking spot was moved from a bad spot to a worse spot noting it is very feasible, because of the location, that someone is a wheel chair will end up out in the middle of Sam Houston Avenue. Mr. Pipes noted the original space got changed somehow to the 12th street side, which has a significant uphill ramp which is difficult to maneuver in a wheelchair. Ms. Shipman asked that the City and County work this out. Mr. Pipes noted the west side of the courthouse is the side that needs to be accessed because of the easy entry, elevator, etc. from that floor of the building. He noted the city can move the sign in a matter of minutes if the county can relocate the ramp. Robert Rodriquez Mr. Rodriquez asked that it go on record that this question is asked this evening. He asked for the defini- tion of what is the city's jurisdiction and what is the county's jurisdiction with regard to the courthouse. Mr. Pipes noted the courthouse and the indentations where the parking spaces encroach into the block are the county's responsibility on Sam Houston Avenue. He noted the sidewalk was constructed by the County at the time the courthouse was built and belorgsto Walker County. He noted the city works with the county regarding the placement of handicapped signs on their property. He noted the ramps and facilities at the courthouse are the county's responsibility. Mr Rodriquez said Fipes' name is mentioned in connection with compliance with handicapped requirements. Mr. Pipes noted he ordered the signs fur 'Al, handicapped parking space, which is under the author- ity of the city. He noted the city can designate the spot and place the sign for the handicapped parking space. Mr. Rodriquez noted he only received notice yesterday of this hearing. Mr. Pipes noted the requirements for this :compliance hearing were late in coming to the City. He noted the entitlement period notice from Revenue Sharing came in September. He noted this entire program was processed in two weeks. Mr. Rodriquez asked what the fires are for non - handicapped persons who use the designated parking spaces. h1r. Bounds, City Attorney, noted the minimum fine for parking in a handicapped parking space is $50.00 and can be as much as $200.00. He noted his practice has been to reduce the minimum fine for "first offenders" to $15.00 (plus a $12.50 fine mandated by the state for "victim in crime fund "for a total of $27.50 collected from first time offenders). Mr. Rodriquez said it may be a steep fine, but he felt it should be applied because it does remove parking from those who need it. He noted if the fine is not stiff enough, the offense will most likely be repeated. Mr. Bounds noted he encourages the active enforcement of the handicapped parking statutes and he noted he seldom sees anyone, other than the handicapped people, using those designated spaces at the city's facilities. He was concerned that the city's fine for first offenders is not enough to make an impression. Mr. Bounds noted the impression is made when the offender is told,what it will cost the next time he is ticketed. Mr. Rodriquez noted the intent of his organi- zation is educatiion - -to make the public aware -- of the needs of the handicapped. He noted there are times when one of us can enG.up like they are, in a wheelchair, and it is at this point that one understands the needs and frustrations that are actually oversights.on the part of others. He offered his services and those of the other handicapped people in the city to help determine the safety of handicapped parking areas or any other accessibility questions. Sharon Golden Ms. Golden asked if there was any way the door to City Hall could be made an electrical door to make it easier for a handicapped person to enter. Mr. Pipes noted this could b e done although it has not been pursued and he did not know the costs. Mayor Nash noted during the day there is someone at the front doors at the switchboard who could assist in this regard. R. C. Joiner Mr. Joiner noted he had no other comments. He noted however that the courthouse also could use an electric door at the fountain entrance; although each time he has had to enter the building, someone has been there to open it for him. Mayor Nash noted this concludes the speakers who registered. He asked if anyone else would like to speak. There being no one, Mayor Nash then closed the hearing. Councilmember Monday suggested taking Ms. Shipman up on her offer to go with him to check out the handicapped access areas: to insure that they are maneuverable and appropriate. Open Public Hearing on Annexation of Lands * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Mayor Nash noted he would be happy to clarify and explain any of the questions citizens have about annexa- tion. He noted copies of the minutes of the first public hearing are available from the City Secretary if anyone would like to obtain a copy for informational purposes. He advised the only official action taken by the Council has been to call the public hearings. He noted the Council wishes to keep an open mind about annexation through the public hearing stage and it has not even discussed annexation of any particular area in executive session or in any other meeting. He indicated he was not aware of the feelings of the other councilmembers on any aspect of annexation at this point. He noted the input of the public is desired and the Council is interested to learn what the public has to say. Area A -- Henderson Land Company /Jenkins Road Mrs. Ross Jenkins [Box 1558, Huntsville, Texas -- 295 -6931] Mrs. Jenkins noted the people living on Jenkins Road do not want to become a part of the city. She said they want to continue to be country people living in the country. She said that is what they moved out there for and that is what they want to continue to do. She noted a new arrival on Jenkins Road moved there precisely to get out of the city. She noted they have all the facilities there that can be offered by the City. She noted their water system is excellent if not better than some areas in the city as far as the quality of the water is concerned. She said all the sewage systems are good. She said they have garbage pickup just like in the city. She noted they have access to the Sheriff's office at any time and they have only had to call upon them one time in 40 years to contain some motorcyclists racing on their road; and the response and service was excellent and timely. She said most of those now living on the road live in a small area between FM 247 and the top of the hill. She said from there on there are only two homeowners, Troy Price and herself. She said there is a big cow pasture on his side of the road and a big cow pasture on her side. She said they have no intention of developing either area. She noted Mr. Price has cows in his pasture but she does not. She said the people on Jenkins road acquired their properies there because of the quiet and beauty and peace that it gives there. She said for that reason, they don't want to get into the noises, restrictions, etc., that go with being a part of the city. She said they want to continue to live in the country. She said there will be no development in those two cow pastures and she could not see how there could be much profit in taxes because surely the city won't tax cow pastures the same as it would residents or businesses. She said Mr. Price and herself have an understanding that there will be no development in either cow pasture for quite a long time. Mrs. Jenkins said they are on Pine Prairie Water System and it provides excellent water and service. Mrs. Jenkins then presented a petition representing all of theihomeowners and landowners on Jenkins Road which advises the City they wish not to be taken into the city limits, signed by 13 families, representing 20 individuals. Bufford Smith [Rt. 9, Box 110, Huntsville, Texas -- 295 -6136] Mr. Smith advised Mrs. Jenkins pretty well summed the whole thing up. He said he has one son in the service for 18 years who has a lot on Jenkins Road and he has another son who has a lot there. He said he has a house right next to Mrs. Jenkins. He said it is like Mrs. Jenkins said and that they don't need a thing in the world that the city has because they have water; he has a deep well. He said when he built there he tried every way in the world to get some help from the city. He said it was the only half acre at that time that he could get. He said they have built a pretty nice little community out there and they have a nice little neighborhood. He said it is quiet. He said there is not a thing in the world that they would accomplish by being annexed. Tony and Freida Jennings [P. 0. Box 6918, Huntsville, Texas -- 291 -9255] Mr. Jennings said they have no comments at this time. Homer Grisham [Rt. 9, Box 30, Huntsville, Texas - -295 -5505] Mr. Grisham said lis.Jenkins and Mr. Smith said nearly everything that he wanted to say. He said he has been there 34 years. He noted about 25 -30 years ago a few of them that lived out there begged the city to run water out there to them. He said that is all they were asking and ',hey were willing to pay for it. He said since they have all struggled and strived to hang on to their places and to provide themselves with adequate water, adequate sewer system, now it looks like the city wants to come in and get the gravy. He said they don't appreciate that. He said they can't appreciate it. He said they would rather that you folks just let them 4e. He said they are happy like they are. Area 8,7- Brown Oil Tool & Highway 75 North Richard Deller [Tam Road, Huntsville, Texas -- 291 -3630] Mr. Deller said he first comes to oppose annexation because Mr. Pipes made a remark that nobody from Highway 75 North was here last week. He asked the Council why it stopped at Wire Road with its annexation proposal and why didn't the city go out and pick up Billingsley and Purina. Mr. Nash noted the pink line around the city on the map shows the extent of the City's ETJ, beyond which it cannot annex; noting those properties lie outside of the city's ETJ. He said the ETJ extends two miles from the nearest city limits and the city cannot annex more than the lands included within its ETJ. Mr. Deller was concerned about the benefits from annexation, noting the Sheriff's Department provides super police protection. He said as far as services they would receive from the City of Huntsville, they are "zero." He said they get absolutely nothing; their water is Pine Prairie, the power is from MidSouth, the septic tanks are their sewer and their sanitation is provided by private contractor. He said the city gives them nothing. He said the road that serves Tam Park Complex is privately owned, not owned by the county. He saw no advantages to being included inside the city limits. He said he as one opposes it. Area C -- Westridge Richard Deller [101 Dogwood, Huntsville, Texas - -291 -9947] Mr. Deller said "ditto" on this one too. Len George [175 Westridge, Huntsville, Texas -- 295 -9480] Mr. George noted certainly he is a proponent of annexation but he comes to speak opposed to the annexa- tion of Westridge. Mr. George said he considers himself to be, according tb the city's survey form, an average property owner, social - economically, non - minority, middle income. He said he considers himself an average resident of Westridge. He said he has the same questions as the prior speaker, Mr. Deller. He asked those questions again of the Council. He said he is not really certain, based on what he has read, as to what benefits that Westridge property owners may receive that they do not already receive for the tax dollars that they would be spending. Mr. Nash said areas are under consideration which are substantially developed; a criterion for annexa- tion given to the Planning Commission. He said those areas are either residentially on commercially dense and are using some city or public services: water, sewer, etc. He said the city, in its service plan, said it would make a commitment regarding such basic services it provides; granting that many of these services are available to people inside or outside the city. This is also one of the points of consideration, he said. He said those services the city agrees to provide inmediately to any newly annexed area, include police; fire; library; parks and recreation facilities; code enforcement; street lighting; municipal airport services; and sanitation (landfill -- within 60 days). He noted it agrees to start maintenance of street and drainage areas within 60 days. He said the public water and sewer facilities will continue as they are now. He said with regard to water, sewer or other areas; i.e., streets, drainage, these would be incorporated into the capital improvements program of the city, in priority order, for any newly annexed areas. He noted annexation provides for more within the county to pay for these services. He said the average Westridge resident will pay less taxes than the extra premium for his water costs. He said the total income from ad valorem taxes on residential property is less than what the premium is being paid by basically those same people in double water rates. He said it would be a savings to them and would not cost them more. Mr. George said maybe he is not average, but he understood this. He said he understands the Mayor has said that those who do live outside the city and do use city services should be required, in some way, to sort of share the cost or the burden of those services, and he can understand the reasoning behind that statement. He said in looking at the map, there is an area, that is very obvious to him,that is using a tremendous amount of city services, including the HEAP, public library, ballparks, etc. that is not in any of those colors indicating planned for annexation. He noted he is speaking of Elkins Lake and he is aware of the reasons for this. He said the annexation of Westridge or other areas really does not fulfill the city's total objective if it is to get those from outside the city to pay for those services that we use. He said he is also a city taxpayer and also collects a sales tax. He said thatasurvey of last week's business, shows that 45% of those making purchases at his store were from outside the city limits of Huntsville. He said as a local taxpayer, he sort of resents anything that the Council may say, act or otherwise implicate that we really don't want any- body from outside Huntsville doing business in Huntsville and that means they have to use the roads, etc. He said they should tread a little bit easy on that because he still wants to be able to pay city taxes next year. Mayor Nash said he can't imagine they ever said that and we certainly welcome the people all over the county. He said the city library, HEAP, etc. are available to county residents as well and there are no special charges for people outside the city. He said this is certainly indicative of the fact that the city does welcome the people of the county. Mr. George said as a resident of the county, he appreciates that and those services. He said he hopes to continue to be able to use them and he'll strive to pay for them in time and other things that he might be able to contribute to the city as good citizen, etc. Mr. George said he is here to represent Westridge's opposition to annexation since no one appeared last week. Mike Germany [Westridge, Huntsville, Texas -- 295 -4697] Mr. Germany advised the Council that not all of us at Westridge are middle income but he is trying to get that way. He noted since he was not here last week, all he has heard are rumors and what he has read in the paper. He noted in looking down the list in the service plan, he said if we annex all these areas, it is going to dilute the police force. Mr. Nash said there would be a dilution for nine months of the current budget year to some 95 -96% of the existing police coverage, if all areas were annexed. Mr. Germany said he lived on FM 247 before he purchased his 3 -5 acre estate in Westridge. He said he wants to stay out of town because he is a country boy. Mr. Germany said he understands that anyone can have parks, fire and library services within Walker County. Mr. Nash said the city has always provided those services without restrictions. Mr. Nash noted in comparison with Montgomery County, it'sMontgomery County Library, Montgomery County Airport, Montgomery County Landfill, etc., as down there the County provides all of these operations in which everyone shares equally in the ad valorem taxes. He said for some reason in this area, all of those particular facilities are provided by the city and continue to be operated by the city. Mr. Germany said so then were not really gaining these things. Mr. Nash said they are the same things you have. Mr. Nash said there is a changing situation, however, because some four years ago, the paid valuation within the city was approximately 50% of the county; it is now about 42t and the trend is that appraised valuation within the city is decreasing, putting more and more pressure on a smaller number of people to carry these specific types of services that are utilized by the entire county. Mr. Germany noted in regard to code enforcement, he would rather go by Wes ridge' deed restrictions as he would by the city's codes. Mr. Nash noted the deed restrictions will prevail. Mr. Gennany asked what street lights would cost each individual. Mr. Nash noted since the utility lines are at the backs of the lots and no power poles are adjacent to the streets, street lights will not be feasible. Mr. Germany noted in regard to the airport, he will not use it. He asked how many areas in the city now do not have city sewage, curbs, gutters, drainage, etc. Mr. Nash said there are some. He said those thirys are usually provided by the developer and are turned over to the city after development. He said if some areas don't have these things, that is because that is the way they were developed. Mr. Gennany asked if the Mayor thought there are places in the city that don't have sewage yet. Mr. Nash said he suspects there are places in the city that have been here much longer than that and because there is no code requirement that they be on the sewer system, they will probably stay on their septic systems for some time to come. Mr. Gennany asked if because Westridge is non - minority middle income, if this would bump those areas back down on the priority list; will Westridge come in behind them, or what. Mayor Nash said there is not a way of knowing, but he did not guess Westridge would come in very high on the list for getting sewer. Mr. Gennany said they would hate to bump someone else out of the priority ranking. Mr. Nash said he did not think they would do that. Mr. Germany noted to pick up Westridge's garbagewould cause the hiring of another private contractor and incur additional expenses for the city. Mayor Nash noted there are currently private contractors working for the city and they will take on any and all of these services in the newly annexed areas at the existing rates. Mr. Germany noted he has heard some rumors out on the north side of town it will cost those people $1,500 to get city sewer. Mayor Nash noted any rumor may be founded in some basic information. He said the city policy regarding utility extensions into developments that did not provide those facilities at the time they were developed is that the City will pay one -half of the first 300 feet of the extension. Mr. Germany expressed concern that he has just spent in vain money for a new septic system. Mayor Nash noted he did not feel this was in vain in that the city is making no commitment to extend sewer to Westridge if it is annexed. Mr. Germany asked if there was any chance in the next 20 years to have larger enough water lines for the installation of fire hydrants for fire protection. Mayor Nash noted there certainly is a chance but again, this project would be prioritized with all other needs in the city, and these decisions are made on density, safety, etc. and without knowing the details, it is difficult to predict now. Mr. Germany noted the tax rate is approximately 58Q. Mayor Nash noted it is 56Q per $100 of valuation. Mr. Germany said then on a $100,000 home, which is middle income, the taxes would be 1560.00. Mayor Nash said this is correct. Mr. Germany said then the water bill will run about $40.00 per month. He noted he will still be losing about 5400 or $500 if he is annexed. Mayor Nash noted this probably meanshe'sabove middle income. Mayor Nash said the total income that will be coming in from ad valorem taxes on residential places is less than the savings that would result from cutting out the premium on the water (double rates). He said the total is less so he is saying the average would be less. Mr. Germany noted he has the same question brought up by Len George regarding Elkins Lake's annexation question. He noted there are a few other properties that concern him. Mayor Nash noted Elkins Lake's Municipal Utility District has charged to it the developer's costs for streets and utilities; these costs were not included in the costs of the lots. These costs were instead charged to the Utility District and bonds were passed. He noted by state law, the only way a city can take -in an area including a Municipal Utility District is to take over the debt of that utility district. He noted the debt of Elkins Lake is more than the debt of the City of Huntsville. He said this would be absolutely unfair to all of the citizens of the City to absorb that debt. He noted he would hope that at some time the Legis- lature would change that law, as they did temporarily for Clear Lake in Houston, to permit Houston to annex it. He noted although since then it has gone back, but they had a law that permitted a utility district to continue to operate and to continue with its debt. He said if this were permissible, Elkins Lake would be considered for annexation, but the City is not going to take in that much debt. Mr. Germany suggested talking to Allen Hightower, our state representative, to get this law changed. Mr. Germany asked about the area between Westridge and the City limits. Mayor Nash noted this area is not developed at all. Mr. Germany said if we get the city all around it, that land will be worth 25 -30Q. He said somebody will develop it. Mayor Nash noted the basic criterion for annexation was that an area be substantially developed. Mr. Germany asked if and when Westridge gets annexed, how soon can those residents vote in city elections. Mayor Nash noted the first election would be in April, 1985. Scott Bounds, City Attorney advised the residency requirement would be immediate ability to vote, if registered to vote in Walker County. He noted to hold an office, the candidate would have to reside at his newly annexed residence for twelve months preceding the election, even though the area has not been annexed for more than four months. Mr. Germany concluded by saying that whether or not the Council realizes it, he is opposed to annexation. Area E -- Highway 75 South R. C. 8 Faye Joiner [Rt. 4, Box 1363, Huntsville, Texas - -291 -3515] Mrs. Joiner noted she registered but did not wish to speak. Mayor Nash noted this concludes the comments of those citizens registered to speak. He then asked if anyone else was present who wished to make a comment or are there further comments from those who did speak. Barry Hawes Mr. Hawes noted he has sat through these entire hearings, both this time and last time, and it has occurred to him that everyone that has come to speak is opposed to being annexed for various reasons. He wondered what the Council's conclusion is as to why no one has come to ask to be annexed. He asked why is it not an enviable position to be a part of the City of Huntsville. Mayor Nash noted all he could do is speculate and Mr. Hawes could do that as well, but he did think there are probably reasons. Len George Mr. George noted the Mayor said the water bills would be cut in half in Westridge if it is annexed. He said from what the Mayor has said the city will sort of lose money on this deal because it will not collect as much in ad valorem taxes as what is being reduced on the water bill. He asked if this is what the Mayor said. Mayor Nash said this is the situation with regard to residential places. Mr. George said but yet, because the city is sort of breaking even or maybe even losing a little bit from that deal, the City also has to go out there and maintain those facilities, the roads, the police, the garbage, etc. and the County will probably hit the city up for a little more of the ambulance services, etc., this doesn't sound much to him, as a member of the County, to be very much of a sound financial decision. He didn't know that the city always based their decisions on sound finances. Mayor Nash noted it is not being considered from a profit and loss standpoint but there are other aspects that do need to be considered. He said the water is a proprietary fund program in which an effort is made to see that it is a non - profit situation. He said over a period of time that will equalize, in other words, everyone will be involved in paying the right amount for that. He saiu the ad valorem taxes come into the general fund which is a totally different category and not a proprietary thing. He said it is the general fund that pays for these • services basically that we've mentioned. Mr. George asked if there is an excess in this fund if it could be switched to another fund. Mayor Nash noted the water and sewer funds are totally proprietary and non - profit. Councilmember Dowling noted if you put a pencil to it it may seem to come out a bad deal monetarily. He noted that is not the concern. He said the things that do have some impact, for example, are that an additional population may influence revenue sharing formulas which would provide more money in federal dollars. Mr. George noted he has read the paper from last week, but noted no one has ever said why the city wants to annex. He noted he is having a hard time trying to figure out why the city wants to go out to Westridge and annex it because it is already developed and it has to provide these services. He noted if the Council sort of wants to plan for the city's growth, it seems to him that it would take Mrs. Jenkins' cow pasture so the developer would have to build the streets and the roads. Councilmember Dowling said the City of Huntsville has been fairly generous in not paying alot of attention as to whether Nastridge residents or Forest Hills residents, when it comes time to use the library, HEAP, parks, etc., use them. He said some of those activities, such as fire service, that we have tried to work out financial arrangements with the county on, have been less than totally in the best interests of the city. He noted he can foreseea day, and it is not next year, when financially the city may have to reassess its position on some of these gratuitous items, and in doing that, it makes a case that the people that are using them should pay for them. He noted he agrees with the speakers who have come forward in these hearings when they say there will be no advantage to them when they are annexed. He said this is true to a large degree because the city is largely making available alot of the services anyway. He said that may change in the future. For example, he said, the city currently allows private garbage haulers to put garbage in the sanitaty landfill for a price. He noted every truck load of garbage that goes into that landfill is one less truck load of space available for the residents of the City of Huntsville and that land runs out at any price, ultimately. He noted he could foresee where a city might say, at some point in time, as landfill space becomes more critical, that were going to take care of the City of Huntsville and you folks that have private garbage haulers. its your problem, or were going to pay for the City of Huntsville residents to play softball but we don't want to hear anything out of the rest of you, etc. He noted we have to balance this, obviously, on your (Mr. George's) point about sales tax being generated by county residents, and he is sensitive to this issue. He noted, how- ever, that the point is the City has provided a variety' of things to individuals, that he thinks, in the foreseeable future, the City may have to address the ability to do that on a non -cost basis. Richard Deller Mr. Deller noted to Councilmember Dowling that those that live outside of the city are grateful to the city. He said he as one spends 95% of his money in the city with businesses that generate taxes, so he did not want the city to think they are ungrateful for what the city is doing for them, as he said, for nothing. He said this is why he spends his money in Huntsville. Councilmember Dowling noted ultimately, as some changes are made in that, there will have to be some consideration of the sales tax revenues, etc. He said he is not saying that the city will shut the door and put a gate out at the corporate limits and charge people to come in. Pep Novak [Brown Oil Tools] Mr. Novak noted the thing he has tried to figure out, last week when he was here and this week, is why doesn't an individual that owns property have any right to do what he wants with his property without someone saying they own it but they have nothing to say on what anyone is going to do with it. he said if he and 95 of the people living around him do not want to be annexed, why is he compelled that he has no rights to stay the way he is when he bought the property. He said as the city says when it takes in the property they have the same codes, the same sewers, the same lack of this and lack of that, that why is it that he has to be taken in, or others have to be taken in. He asked where does he or anyone else have the right to stand up and say, as he could recall when he grew up and learned things about the United States, that we have freedom. He said he sees no freedom here at all. Mayor Nash thanked Mr. Novak for his continents. He said the state legis- lature established the procedure under which cities do annex areas adjacent to them. Mr. Novak asked if he could no anything about it. He asked who does he see to get this turned around. Mayor Nash noted he would have to see his legislator. Jim Carter Dr. Carter noted he probably shouldn't say anything because he is not directly involved in any of these annexation areas, but he is a citizen of the City of Huntsville and he has run for City Council and he may do so again. He said Mr. Germany and others may want his name. He said he is going to speak in favor of annexa- tion. He said Councilmember Dowling has already made a good case and so has the Mayor in terms of the people living in and around the City using city services and getting benefits of the City of Huntsville. He said he thinks if the people will study many of the political problems in this society today, one of the problems is fragmentation of jurisdiction. He said a number of counties in a number of areas suffer because there are duplications of services and because there are not large enough jurisdictions which are needed to take into account regional type problems. He noted he has asked those people who continue to say they live in the country, why they settled so close to the city and what benefits they do obtain by living just outside the borders of the city. He said he also would say to than that the problems they might face as members of the city will probably face them anyway as development comes to them. He noted the City can help them control that develop- ment hopefully and can help them with a great many things over the long run that they may not have the power to do as independent entities. He said he did not feel these citizens would be getting a bad deal if they get annexed. He noted he did not want this hearing to end with all comments about annexation being negative. He noted there are some people out there who feel that this can be positive both for the city and for the people that live in those areas. Mayor Nash thanked Dr. Carter for his comments. Councilmember Davis Councilmember Davis noted his appreciation for the county citizens coming in to express their feelings because this is the only way the Council knows what their feelings are. He noted some legitimate points have been brought out in the last two weeks about what is or is not gained as residents of the City. He noted he is very open minded and didn't come into these hearings wanting to annex anyone or not wanting to annex anyone. He said What he wants those present here tonight to go home and think about is that he (Councilmember Davis) is a county citizen also and he pays county taxes. He said if they see the ratio of what they (as county citizens) get from the city that they pay no city taxes for and what he gets from the county and he does pay county taxes, there is somewhat of a disproportionate share there. He said if they did not have the use of the city landfill, where would they take their garbage. He said the County does not have a landfill. He said if they did not have the use of the city fire facilities: fire houses and fire equipment, they would not have a fire station. He noted there are many things like this: library, public parks, that are made available. He said the points that have been made by the citizens are very true - -what, if any, other than perhaps potential road maintenance and pothole repairs, etc., Will the City give to annexed area - -the county does not maintain paved streets. He noted the county does not come and put gravel on his road and he pdyscounty taxes. He said think about these things - -it is a two -way street. He said we live in a cononunity and we live as neighbors and they have made some very good points -- ones that he will consider when he decides for or against their annexa- tion, He asked them to think about where they would be if they did not have any of the city -run facilities. He noted landfills are not approved nowadays. He said they can't just take their garbage anywhere. He noted his appreciation for their coming. Mayor Nash then closed officially this second of a series of two public hearings on annexation of lands. Mr. Richard Deller asked to say something which has nothing to do with the public hearings. He said he wanted the Council to know that he wished he had said something when Robert Rodriquez was at the podium during the hearing on the handicapped accessibility to public facilities. He said since he has been here building buildings in Huntsville, the main thing that the building inspection division looks for is if the builder is complying with the handicapped laws. He said every building he has built has complied and every building that is being built complies. He said that is the first thing on their mind: are you complying. He said so the city is concerned and he wanted to thank Gene (Pipes) and the rest of them for it. Mr. Pipes thanked him for his comments. CONSIDER ORDINANCE Consider Ordinance No. 84 -27 authorizing the increase in certain fees for services regarding services of the water and sewer divisions Mayor Nash then presented this ordinance, the caption of which is as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 84 -27 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 17 WATER AND SEWERS, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO INCREASE CERTAIN FEES; INCREASING THE FEES FOR RECONNECTS AND TRANSFERS; ESTABLISHING FEES FOR CERTAIN SERVICES; INCREASING THE SERVICE CHARGE FOR RETURNED CHECKS; AND MAKING OTHER PROVISIONS AND FINDINGS RELATED THERETO. Councilmember Hodges made the motion to adopt Ordinance No. 84 -27 and Councilniember Howard seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT Presentation of Final Printed and Bound 1984 -1985 Budget Gene Pipes, City Manager, presented the newly printed budget to all Councilmembers. He asked the Council to return their work copies of the budgets so the City can recycle the notebooks containing those budgets. COUNCIL ACTION Board Member Reception -- Bill Hodges congratulated the Mayor for a successfVl board member reception, the 4th annual reception. He noted it went very well. Q & 11th St. Debris -- Gene Barrett thanked Gene Pipes for having the debris picked up at this intersection. New Water Tower Steve Davis asked when the new water tower would be opened. Gene Pipes said the second floor's concrete floor is being poured now. He said all of the decking is in and with acceptable weather, they will make good progress. He invited the Council to stop by for a closer look. EMS Board Meeting -- Steve Davis noted the EMS Board meets next Monday. He and the City Manager noted the public is invited to attend this meeting. MAYOR'S REPORT Proclamations Mayor Nash noted he proclaimed Fisher Tull Day for Sunday, October 14, 1984 as part of a program to honor Dr. Tull's professional accomplishments during the Contemporary Music Festival being held at SHSU this week. -- Mayor Nash said he also proclaimed BPW Week earlier today. ADJOURNMENT gctfully submitted, 4A,� uhDehaw,C.M.C. City Secretary October 16, 1984