Loading...
MIN CC 10/30/1984CITY COUNCIL MINUTES BOOK "N" -- Page 473 .473 MINUTES OF THE HUNTSVILLE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1984 IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, LOCATED AT 1212 AVENUE M IN THE CITY OF HUNTSVILLE, COUNTY OF WALKER, TEXAS AT 7:00 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 Jerry L. Dowling Bill Hodges Percy Howard, Jr. Jane Monday Bob Tavenner City Officers: Gene Pipes, City Manager Ruth DeShaw, City Secretary Scott Bounds, City Attorney The Meeting was called to order by the Honorable William V. Nash, Mayor. The invocation was presented by Counselor Scott Bounds. CONSIDER THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING Councilmember Barrett made the motion to approve of the minutes of October 16, 1984 as prepared and submitted and Councilmember Monday seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. CONSIDER ORDINANCES Consider Ordinance No. 84-10-3Q,1 providing for the regulation of chauffeured limosine service. Scott Bounds, City Attorney, reviewed the details of this ordinance with the Council. The Council decided after some discussion, that it would prefer not to take action on an ordinance of this type until and unless the city had a serious applicant for a limosine service. Councilmember Brown made the motion to table this ordinance and Councilmember Monday seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. Consider the draft annexation ordinances and area o tions Mayor Nash then presented these draft ordinances which will be considered on November 13. Councilmember Brown suggested on Area A to draft an ordinance for the option to have the Henderson Land Company and the two mobile home parks but not to include Jenkins Road. Mr. Pipes noted this can be done, noting one of these mobile home parks is already in the proposed annexation area (Ogelsby Mobile Home Park), but the other one, April Point Mobile Home Park, is not. Mayor Nash noted then these ordinances will be brought back on the 13th for voting, with the extra ordinance proposed by Councilmember Brown. CONSIDER THREE PROPOSALS TO WALKER COUNTY Mayor Nash noted the City has been working with the County to prepare an interlocal agreement or revise the existing agreement on the Emergency Medical Service and to reach an agreement on the payment of funds to the City from the county relative to past budgets of the fire department agreement. Mayor Nash noted the letter agreement indicates the deletion of subparagraph III.C, which reads: The City shall not increase the budgeted or actual operating expense budget of the fire department by more than ten per cent (10 %) in any one year without the express written permission of the County." He said this situation is not workable. He noted this included both growth and inflation and the ups and downs of any cycle and because it is cyclic, it could not work. He noted the second part of this agreement is that the county will pay the city immediately the difference in what they have paid under this contract and what is half of the operating costs and they would pay immediately that portion that covers the period that began October 1, 1983 and the work done on a fire truck in the city's shop which was under their capital program. He said both of these two figures are in the $22,486.88 portion of this letter agreement. He noted the other portion of the letter, which is approximately $40,000,is the difference they have paid in the current year (year ending 9/30/84) and what the actual costs were. He said in conformance with the previous agreement, the county would make a settlement at the time of audit. He noted the city would have preferred, since their budget was very low to start with and that created the major part of the difference, that we get some of this money early. He noted they have some problems, however, in arranging for the funds. He noted by waiting some 30 days after the audit, were talking about receiving those funds in February or March, based on when we get through with our audit, then we would receive the $40,000. He noted the Commissioner's Court has acted on this and are approving these two items. Councilmember Monday commended Mayor Nash on this document. She then moved its adoption and approval. Councilmember Howard seconded this motion. All were in favor and this motion to approve this letter as written passed unanimously An Agreement for an EMS Facility Mayor Nash introduced this agreement which would basically provide for an addition on to Fire Station No. 1 for use by EMS. He noted two existing vehicle stalls would be used by EMS. He said the agreement provides that the County would pay half of the construction and design costs. He noted there will be no financing costs as the city and county will each put up half of the estimated total cost plus 10% prior to any work being done in order that there will be no financing costs. He said the contract provides that if for any reason the contract would cease, that the property would become the property of the city's, but the city would pay a refund in its unamor- tized expenses the county had in it based on a 15 year amortization. He noted as a clarification that if the EMS addition ceases to be used by the EMS after 15 years, it would become the city's property without the city paying anything to the county. However, he noted it would be expected that the city will keep using it but our commitment is for only 15 years. He noted if the usage is for a shorter period of time, the city would pay 1 /15th of the total cost times the number of years it was used subtracted from 15 which would be the unamortized portion of it and the payment would be to the county. He said the contract also provides that the city would lease the portion of Fire Station 1 to the EMS agency for the use as an EMS facility. He noted in the case of fire or destruction, the proceeds will be divided the same as in the amortization schedule. Councilmember Monday made the motion to adopt this agreement as outlined and prepared and Councilmember Hodges seconded the motion. Discussion: Councilmember Dowling asked several questions for clarification. As a result of this discussion, Mayor Nash asked that it be made clear in this contract that the city is leasing the two existing vehicular bays to EMS which are now a part of the existing Fire Station No. 1 - -the two north bays. Councilmember Davis raised some questions r8garding landscaping and possible repainting of the entire fire station to make it look like one unit. City Attorney, Scott Bounds, noted these are items which can be included in the contract. All were then in favor of the motion an the floor andassed unanimously. An Interlocal Agreement for Emergency Mayor Nash noted the County Commissioners have not yet taken action on this agreement, however, he under- stands they are in agreement with the intent. Mayor Nash noted this agreement would set up one agreement in lieu of the two existing agreements that we have now with the County for our interlocal agreements; one for emergency services and the other for fire protection. He said it would set up one board that is constituted the same as the board for EMS, except that board has 7 positions and the proposed board has 6 positions. He noted the intent of this agreement, as set up, would be to have one board that would be over both entities of fire and EMS and there would be subcommittees under that board that are non - voting members of the board. He said the subcommittees would be formed, one around EMS and personnel within the community that would relate to that particular field; and the other would be a committee based on their work with fire suppression within the city and county. He said the board would have the authority, as would the city or the county, to add people to the ex- officio member group of that board, as changes might occur from time to time. He said basically the effort was made to follow the existing EMS contract with form and in authority. He noted this particular board would hear the budget that is prepared by the specific group and either pass on it or not pass on it and they would work with those committees until they get the budget as they would like it before they submit it to us. They would be obligated to submit to the city and the county by June 1 of each year, the budget for both EMS and for fire protection. He said this particular agreement has one basic area that is in addition to the existing agreement; this agreement also includes equipment and capital purchases as a part of it. He said in the past, this has not been done and we've only worked with operating costs. He said in the past we have had varying amounts for capital equipment, and under this agreement, the equipment that will be used jointly, will be determined jointly through this board as to what is used and the costs will be split. He noted this is one step further on in the progression on which we've been working to get the total costs involved in this agreement. He said the rest of this agreement is basically as we've discussed before. He noted the county 1s expected to take action on this in the next couple of weeks. Councilmember Dowling expressed his overriding concern is the relationship the city currently has with the ;IHuntsville Volunteer Fire Department and the ultimate restructuring of that situation. He noted the city, with (the exception of having a bunch of equipment and a couple of paid fire fighters, does not have a staff of fire fighters. He said so when we agree with the county to have a joint fire service, were obviously looking, at :least under the current policy, at having to depend on the Volunteer Fire Service. He noted this is a silent Tissue here in this contract. He noted how we actually get water on the fire is his concern. He questioned lhow smooth both operations would function under one board because one operation is revenue producing and the other is not. He noted we subsidize the EMS operation but they do generate revenue. He said the fire service just spends money. He said because of this, there is a difference in the way one budgets. Mayor Nash noted 'because of this, he would recommend that the city manager serve on this board rather than an elected official of the city and have the fire chief or a director serve in the city manager's position. He said the city is not a commissioner form of government but rather a city manager /mayor form of government. He said were talking ;about a board that is going to be involved in the administration of these units. He said if we do insert the city manager and a director, well have the same two administrative persons on each board. He noted the primary purpose for this board is for a liaison between the city and the county. Councilmember Dowling noted the budgetary end of this is his primary concern. Gene Pipes noted the EMS board adjusts EMS rates regularly and have on several occasions done so and they are keenly aware of the need to keep pace with expenditures as much as is practical. Councilmember Davis felt we are on the right tract in what we are intending to do, but disagreed strongly at the present time, to create only one board for both Fire and EMS. He felt modeling a board after the EMS board is very appropriate. He felt having a city councilmember (elected member) on the board is very appropriate just as having a county commissioner (elected member) is very appropriate. He felt the city manager should be there and the county auditor should be there as well. He felt the citizen member positimsare also important. He noted the EMS board's effectiveness and smoothness of operation over the past few years indicates it is work - iing but he did not feel putting the EMS and Fire boards together would be a good idea, He noted the fire service has different needs and different inputs and the citizens serving on the EMS board are probably there because they are interested in that board and may not be so interested in the fire service. Councilmember Monday indicated her concurrence with Councilmember Davis' view, noting we have apples and oranges at this point and we don't need to mix the two. She endorsed the two board concept and the cooperative idea in this. She wanted EMS to continue as it is with a'separate board and for the Fire Division to have its own board. She also felt the elected repre- sentativesshould maintain a position on these boards. Mayor Nash noted he has never appointed a councilmember to external committees, but only to internal things such as personnel and audit and to the H -GAC, on which an elected representative 1s required. He felt this was in conformance with our form of government. He noted he had problems putting city councilmembers into roles similar to county commissioners -- although they both be elected, they are involved in different governmental structures and are not the same at all. Mayor Nash felt problems will present themselves if councilmembers start 'assuming specific jobs or have specific jobs with regard to administration. He said the mayor and council are not administrators in any form and yet this is what we're getting into if we become members of boards such as these. He said it is because of this basic philosophy that he objects to the present set up. He noted he would like to hear from the other members of council regarding their thinking on this. jGene Barrett noted we do not have a Fire Department board at this time and he asked if there was a need for one right now. Mayor Nash noted the need is the relationship with the county in that any agreement we have with the county will work much smoother if we can do it through a board that operates between us. He said presently the county is in a position to accept the city's budget, figures, controls, etc., which is really not a comfor- 1table position for them to be in. He said it leads to the kind of problems that we have just found ourselves with inow. He said it is obvious that the county would feel much better with this joint board. Councilmember Barrett asked how this one board idea evolved, asking if other cities do it this way. Mayor Nash felt the board works ;primarily as a liaison assuming responsibility for budget and policy and the fewer of those boards we can have, the easier it will be for us to communicate -- noting just one agency working between the city and county will be more efficient because everything will go through that agency. He said if we start getting multiple agencies, we are just complicating that effort. l Gene Pipes, City Manager, spoke favorably about the Mayor's proposal. Councilmember Barrett asked if there might be some conflict or competition between two boards (Fire and EMS) for funds, etc. Gene Pipes noted the ,potential is there, but the idea here is to avoid the commissioner type of government. He said if this Council ;stays extremely neutral in terms of reviewing the budget and there is not a potential for competing budgetarily among commission members and councilmembers- -very much like the problems that are encountered in the Commissioners Court at the present time. He noted each commissioner is very much concerned about the roads in his particular Iprecinct and this is where we get into the haggling and budgeting problems. Councilmember Hodges said the City probably has twenty times the investment that the county does in capital equipment in the Fire Division, not to mention the fire houses. Mayor Nash said existing property will be leased. to this agency but would continue to be our property. He noted any property bought between the two entities would be joint assets. He said under this process, the board would review new pieces of fire equipment that are being bought and it would be paid for jointly from here on out. Councilmember Hodges said we're going in with a much, much greater investment. Mayor Nash said this is true but from henceforth, instead of the city buying all of this equipment, we're going to split the equipment too. Councilmember Hodges expressed his understanding that we would be going into this arrangement with a much larger investment than the county is. He said he felt the long range goal obviously should be a joint operating board. He noted, however, that there are some things that need to be addressed first before we get into this but he was not sure of the time schedule. He understood the county's position in wanting to have half the say so in this matter if they are going to pay half the costs. Councilmember Monday noted another aspect in long range planning is that perhaps the hospital district may be interested in participating in our EMS health care work. She noted this is another good reason to keep these boards separate because at that point we may have one board with three governmental entities working, whereas the other board would then be working with only two governmental entities. Mr. Nash felt that any entity that is involved in a project monetarily should also have voting privileges, but he felt that until such time as the hospital district is participating monetarily, they do not need to be voting, although they should be involved. Councilmember Monday agreed the hospital district should be involved, but she did not feel they would be necess- arily interested in fire services. Mayor Nash said he would not contemplate them being on the "subcommittee" for fire service, but only on the "subcommittee" for EMS. He said these subcommittees would both be very definitely within the areas of their expertise. Councilmember Monday said she felt all of this may evolve in time, but at this point, she felt it should be handled like EMS is now handled. Councilmember Brown said Councilmember Davis made the most telling point for two boards in that the two entities do have different problems at the present time and are at different stages of development. He noted he would vote for two boards. He then asked the Mayor how the board would be constituted under his concept. Mayor Nash noted in position one (an elected representative of the city), he would put the city manager, [since he is the chief executive officer of the .city and the city does not have a commission form of government]; and under position 3 (the city manager or his designee), he would put a director of the city responsible for this service -- perhaps the director of public safety. Councilmember Dowling asked why the Mayor would put the director of public safety in this position, because if the Mayor transfers the fire service over to this board, then the director of public safety no longer has an oversight on the fire department. Mayor Nish noted it is necessary that some person serve on this board who has some basic responsibility in this whole area. Mayor Nash then responded to Councilmember Brown's question about who would serve in position 2 (an elected representative of Walker County) and position 6 (a citizen selected by the Commissioners' Court), by saying that the commissioner would serve in position 2 because he is a salaried employee of the county's commissioner form of government who has a specific job. He noted in this situation, even though the council is elected, the council is not salaried and does not operate divisions of the city, but rather, are an unpaid, elected. board to make policy and pass legislation, and the county is set up so that all division heads are elected people and are paid department heads and in this situation, the county elected officials must operate on a different level from city elected officials. Councilmember Brown noted then that persons serving on our city staff whose responsibilities are similar to county commissioners, should serve in a peer capacity with a county commissioner? Mayor Nash indicated this is the point he is trying to clarify and that yes, this is the way that this particular board would be set up. He noted it is difficult to compare two totally different types of government, but the city does have paid city employees who are comparable with county commissioners as far as duties and responsibilities are concerned. Councilmember Monday noted the city council is the decision making body of the city and the commissioners court is the decision making body of the county and for this reason also, the composition of the board should remain this way. She stress that the whole reason for the board or boards is to create a vehicle of communicay • tion and in doing this we must have equal representation for communication. Since the ultimate decision making powers are with the commissioners and councilmembers, each should be represented. She said if you have city management talking with the ultimate decision making power (individual) of the county, then you are not on the same level. She said even though city management may have the best intentions, they may not have a feel for how the council feels and will not be able to deliver both ways that area in opening communication, which is the whole purpose of this board. She summarized that if were going to have commissioners on this board, we ought to have councilmembers on it as well. Councilmember Brown said he felt our citizens would want us to have a represen- tative on this board for that reason, to be at the same level. Mayor Nash asked then if anyone on the council has a solution. Councilmember Davis moved that this inter- local agreement for Emergency Services be redrafted to provide for an interlocal agreement for fire services modeled after the EMS Board, with the board representatives being_of a si W1ar nature as inraragraph 2 as stated of the proposed agreement ana Councifember Monday seconded the motion. Discussion: Mayor Nash noted the county is considering this agreement, as presented in the packet, at this time so if this is not what we would approve, we need to let them know. He said we do not need to just drop it but we need to let them know what action were taking. He noted the county is interested in there being a board of some type between the city and county. After a clarification of this motion on the floor by the mayor, a vote was taken. All were in favor of the motion EXCEPT Mayor Nash, who voted against this motion. The motion, however, carried 8 to 1. Councilmember Hodges expressed his concern for the June budget deadline spoken to in this agreement and thought it should be reviewed. Councilmember Dowling questioned the effect this agreement might have on our key insurance rate and the City Attorney noted he would check into this as a general inquiry with the insurance commission. Councilmember Dowling noted he did not especially like paragraph 2 where the board's composition is spelled out and would prefer that the board, if this is what the citv and county want, may be at the discretion of the ex- officio members, noting there may be some question regarding the relationship between the New Waverly Volunteer Fire Department and the Riverside Volunteer Fire Department and their interaction into all this - -is that a county contribution, etc. Gene Pipes, City Manager, advised this board would have nothing to say or do with the county allocation to the other fire departments within the county. Councilmember Dowling was concerned that city - county joint equipment might be stationed or moved to another city within the county. He said what happens if the volunteer fire department of New Waverly agrees to staff the new pumper truck so it then gets moved to New Waverly, etc. He noted a decision like this would need city council /commissioner ratification. After some discussion, Councilmember Dowling expressed his concern for the prematurity of this sort of agreement noting that we may wish to put in some caveats to protect us; i.e., to bar the agency /board from transferring certain pieces of equipment outside the corporate•limits of the city. He noted it would be grossly inappropriate if pieces of equipment that had been purchased by the tax dollars of the City of Huntsville, in the name of cooperation and communication, suddenly get moved to New Waverly and this may then affect key rate, etc. He concluded this is a whale of a deal for the County, noting we're putting a million dollars on the table and not exercising discretion over it. He noted his concern is for detail: fire marshal, inspection services, existing employees, etc., and questions which are not answered. He said so far it looks to be too much in the county's favor and very little in the city's interest here other than to keep the county happy, which is in the city's interest also. He noted he is reluctant to run headlong into this. Mayor Nash noted he does not see what the county is getting that they don't already have. He said the city would be gaining their involvement in purchasing equipment in the future that we have not had in the past at all. Councilmember Dowling noted they had that requirement under the existing interlocal agreement and that has been less than satisfactory. Mayor Nash noted the existing agreement is vaguely written stating only they will pro- vide a minipumper or an equal in subsequent years thereafter 1982. Councilmember Dowling noted we have to do what is in the best interest of the city,•not the county or the nation -- noting we have been very kind to the county in given circumstances in the interlocal agreement. He noted we lose control, yet we still have responsibility and liability when we give a million dollars worth of equipment, fire houses 50:50 to the county. Mayor Nash noted he is not in favor of giving it to them and this agreement does not say it will, but says that • rage 4/b -- aUUK "N" -- ULIUbtK JU, lb4. henceforth they will pick up one -half of the capital equipment costs, which up to now they have never done. Councilmember Brown noted a joint board could work out these details rather than take up the council's time. Mayor Nash agreed with Councilmember Brown that we need to let a joint board work this out, given all the input from the council this evening. Councilmember Dowling wanted to be sure the city does not abdicate its responsibility. Councilmember Brown noted this is why we need a councilmember on this board, as Councilmember Davis has suggested. Councilmember Hodges said the good news is that this is certainly a step in the right direction and he noted he would like to see what kind of an agreement Mr. Pipes could have written, based on the input from the Council tonight. Mayor Nash noted the concept Mr. Pipes has to consider, however, in writing it, is whether or not it is an agreement establishing a board, or are you talking about hashing out these details here. Mayor Nash noted it is understood there would be difficulties and problems but these are the things the board would be created to review. Councilmember Dowling argued this board can't answer some of those tough questions; i.e., will the fire chief be hired by the board or be the fire chief. of the volunteer compan"; will the city get an escape clause on its three fire stations or whether we've given those to them in perpetuity also, etc. Mayor Nash noted this agreement says well lease them to them. Councilmember Dowling noted . . for a dollar -- that's a whale of a deal." Mayor Nash responded that that is a better deal than we have now. Councilmember Dowling disagreed, noting the agreement we have now allows us to shut down at the city limits if we have the nerve to do it. Councilmember Hodges felt that this is a step in the right direction; everyone has brought up some good points; Councilmember Dowling has noted that since the city has the vast majority of the investment, perhaps we need some clauses in there until five or six years or whenever the county starts to catch up. Councilmember Davis said if the county wants to add a clause in the EMS addition to amortize it out 15 years, then is it not sensible for us to put a clause in to amortize our investment out to get something back? He said if they own 95% of the equipment and the land, do you think they would be giving it to us? Mayor Nash noted we are not giving it to them. Councilmember Davis said but we are not making them pay for it. Councilmember Dowling noted that we are at $1.00 a year, except that city residents are paying 50C of that. Mayor Nash said he thinks what they need are new negotiators. Councilmember Davis said now you can see why I want to keep the two boards separate. Mayor Nash said he still does not see why, but that question has been decided. Councilmember Hodges said with EMS we started at ground zero, but with this agreement (on fire), well never start at ground zero. He said we are working toward the right goal, but we just have some questions to answer. He said perhaps initially well have a separate board and the long range goal may be to combine the two when all these other things are squared away in the fire department. Gene Pipes, City Manager, noted the Council has some time, say until next June if need be, to work this out with the county and in determining what they're (county's) financial obligation will be for the subsequent year. He noted the current contract is in force and effect and the budget is set, although the county did increase their basic budget for this year by some $28,000 recently to make allowances for paying 50% of our budgeted fire costs, which is the first year the county has actually budgeted for 50 %. He noted we are making progress on other terms also. The Council all agreed we have come along way in the last five years regarding our negotiating a more fair and equitable fire service with the county. Councilmember Monday asked if it would be in order to simply create the board to help work out the details but continue operating under the same situation we are in now. Councilmember Brown suggested maybe a committee should be established to work out these questions - -a joint city /county committee - -to make recom- mendations to the Council. Councilmember Hodges felt we need to have this agreement pretty well worked out between the city and the county before we start getting lots of other input. Councilmember Dowling said the city needs to figure out what ITS going to do before we try to figure out what the city and county are going to do together. Mayor Nash noted until there is some sort of censensus among the city council, we cannot expect to get out in front with a plan. CONSIDER APPRAISALS Consider Additional Appraisals in New Addition Kathy James, Coordinator of the HUD grant, advised that two residences on Highway 19 are within the project boundaries of the HUU project but were not included in the public improvements portion of the grant according to the map sent to the federal government; therefore, there were no approved plans to service those two houses. She noted a land owner just south of those two houses would .like to develop it and this landowner had assumed this area was within the HUD grant boundary and that when the city completed the water and sewer project, they would be able to have access to it. She noted this particular property is within 200 feet of an existing fire hydrant and manhole, and according to the city's regulations, they will have to hook up to it. Gene Pipes, City Manager, noted but there were no service lines extended to these two houses and the third tract. He noted what we are acquiring is approval for appraisals for the easements so that water and sewer service to all three tracts can be gotten in as a part of the overall HUD project. Councilmember Hodges asked if we have to acquire those easements by purchasing them. City Attorney, Scott Bounds, said we would have to purchase them, according to federal guidelines because of the nature of this federal grant project. Councilmember Hodges asked why we couldn't get these easements for $1.00. Gene Pipes, City Manager, said it is a federal project and we have to pay for them at their appraised value. Kathy James noted there are three things the landowner can do: accept the city's offer, reject the offer, or give it to us and use it for a tax write off by completing a special form. She noted we have to give them the options according to the Uniform Acquisition and Relocation Act. Councilmember Hodges then moved to accept the proposal of Real Estate Research and Appraisal Company for $450.00 to appraise parcels K6 -4 and K6 -3. Councilmember Monday seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Dowling asked if the city has to establish its intent to acquire portions of parcels K6 -3 and K6 -4. Ms. James indicated this needs to be done also. Councilmember Dowling then made the motion that it is the city council's intent to acquire portions of parcels K6 -3 and K6 -4 and Councilmember Monday seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. SUPPLEMENTAL ITEM Consider Ordinance Amending the Motor Vehicle and Traffic Code to Permit Parking in Certain Curb Zones by Certain Jurors Gene Pipes, City Manager, presented this ordinance, the caption of which is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 12, MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC, ARTICLE VI. STOPPING, STANDING AND PARKING OF ITS CODE OF ORDINANCES, TO PERMIT PARKING IN CERTAIN LURK ZONES BY CERTAIN JURORS; AND MAKING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED THERETO. Mr. Pipes noted the county is requesting, through Judge Ernst, a number of parking exemptions fbr impaneled PAGE 477 -- BOOK "N" -- OCTOBER 30, 1984 jurors. He noted this ordinance would affect a maximum number of 18 parking places on days when both District Courts and County Court are in session concurrently. After some discussion by the City Council, it was the consensus that this was not a city problem, but a county problem and that the city should not amend its ordinance because of this situation. It was the Council's feeling that there are other ways to handle the parking problems of jurors and that this should be solved by the county without affecting a city ordinance. Councilmember Brown made the motion to table this ordinance and Councilmember Davis seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. PROPOSED TML RESOLUTIONS Review and Indicate Support /Non- support for Various 1ML Resolutions. Gene Pipes, City Manager, then covered the salient features of each resolution and the council responded on each as discussed. Councilmember Monday, as a member of the TML Resolutions Committee, will participate in a meeting in Dallas wherein it will be decided which resolutions will pass on through to be voted upon by the general body membership. The Council elected Jerry Dowling to represent the City of. Huntsville as its voting delegate at the general body meeting to cast Huntsville's vote on each, as reviewed this evening. Proposition'2 -- Permanent University Fund, -- November 6, 1984 Election Proposition Gene Pipes, City Manager, presented a request from SHSU President, Dr. Elliott T. Bowers, that the City Council pass a resolution indicating their support for Proposition 2. After some discussion, Mayor Nash felt that rather than a resolution, the Council should go on record as being in favor of Proposition 2. All members of Council concurred with this approach and it was so recorded that the City Council favored Proposition 2. MAYOR'S ACTIVITY REPORT HGAC General Assembly -- Appointment of Delegate and Alternate Mayor Nash then proposed the name of Councilmember Percy Howard, Jr. as the city's delegate to the H -GAC general body membership and the name of Councilmember Steve Davis as the city's alternate delegate. Council- member Dowling made the motion to approve and Councilmember Hodges seconded the motion, All were in favor. HGAC Health Planning Advisory Committee Appointment Mayor Nash then proposed the name of Councilmember 0. Eugene-Barrett to be-submitted as the city's nominee for consideration for appointment to the HGAC Health Planning Advisory Committee. Councilmember Hodges made the motion to accept this nomination and Councilmember Monday seconded the motion. All were in favor and this motion passed unanimously. COUNCIL ACTION Health Officer Councilmember Brown asked that a monthly report be submitted to the City Council covering the activities of the City's Health Officer, similar to the police and fire monthly reports. Dog Pound Complaint Councilmember Brown noted some citizens have complained that the personnel at the dog pound will not let them,know if their dog is impounded over the phone when they call to inquire and give a physical descrip- tion. Gene .Pipes, City Manager, noted there is a certain liability problem involved here if the personnel were to try to identify by verbal description a certain animal. He noted it is better to have the citizen come by to identify the animal personally to avoid any error and to provide some affirmative defense. Council- member Brown said they won't even acknowledge whether or not they have a beagle so that the citizen will know if it is necessary to come out for further identification. Certificate of Conformance Councilmember Brown noted the city had received the Certificate of Conformance in Financial Reporting for fiscal year ended September 30, 1983. He advised this is the highest form of recognition in governmental accounting and financial reporting and its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by a government. He congratulated the City's Accounting Division for this achievement along with the City Manager, Gene Pipes. Of Pumpkins, Rabies and Flags Councilmember Dowling noted his Halloween Pumpkin was stolen from his front porch and he hoped the villain enjoyed it. Councilmember Dowling asked if we were still in the midst of a rabies watch or if the scare was over. The City Manager noted since we had the city -wide inoculation campaign, he has not heard of other incidences and he felt the problem has been dealt with and no new cases have been reported. Councilmember Dowling noted the American Flag at Fire Station 1 is tattered and needs to be replaced. Abandoned (7) Building and Drainage Councilmember Dowling also noted he has observed that the old bus station on Sam Houston Avenue has been under renovation but suddenly it appears that all work has stopped. He noted in its present condition, it does represent certain health and safety hazards and he asked that the city check on its status to see if it can be taken care of. Councilmember Dowling also noted that the council and staff must deal with Huntsville's drainage problems. Gene Pipes, City Manager, indicated the staff will .be having a staff retreat wherein they will be discussing drainage problems in detail. ADJOURNMENT Respectfully submitted, th De Shaw, C.M.C. y Secretary