Month 1997-2 February
Meeting of 1997-2-25 REGULAR MEETING
Minutes, Lawton City Council Regular Meeting
February 25, 1997 - Page
LAWTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 25, 1997 - 6:00 P.M.
WAYNE GILLEY CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER
John T. Marley, Mayor, Also Present:
Presiding Gil Schumpert, City Manager
Felix Cruz, City Attorney
Brenda Smith, City Clerk
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. with Invocation by
Pastor John Butler, Beal Heights Presbyterian Church, followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance. Notice of meeting and agenda were
posted on the City Hall bulletin board as required by law.
PRESENT: Jody Maples, Ward One
Richard Williams, Ward Two
Joe Dutcher, Ward Three
John Purcell, Ward Four
Robert Shanklin, Ward Five
Charles Beller, Ward Six
Carol Green, Ward Seven
Randy Warren, Ward Eight
PRESENTATION OF EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH AWARD TO HA WILSON,
Rick Endicott, Auditing Director, introduced Ha Wilson and
congratulated her for being selected as Employee of the Month.
Ms. Wilson has worked for the City for two years and her duties
include tracking inventory of a large number of pieces of
equipment and auditing of purchase orders. Mayor Marley presented
the following items to Ms. Wilson: plaque from T & S Printing;
gifts from Ryans Steak House, Star Shots, Auto Shine, Goodyear,
Video Triple Theater; and a certificate and two days off from the
Comments of Tony Virtu are included verbatim as follows:
"I apologize to the members of the Council for the necessity of
this thing around my neck. In a few moments youll know why it is
necessary. I was here two weeks ago, I presented a problem to the
City Council, I think members of Council should be made aware of
what is going on since I have been denied placement on the agenda
under the two week emergency provision. First, I tried to give
Jeff Welch, a City Investigator, information favorable to me. He
told me on Friday, February 21st, that he did not and would not
contact the person who holds this information although that
person is a local attorney. Second, I also tried to give the City
Attorney a copy of a document that was filed with the Comanche
County Court on January 31st of this year. This document shows
the two police officers and one county sheriff can back up my
claim of ownership. He refused to make a copy and sent me out of
his office. The Mayor did later make a copy of that document, I
dont know if he shared it with anyone.
Third, I tried to speak with the Mayor and City Attorney man to
man about a possible solution, possible, I dont know if we can
reach a solution to my problem without the need for expensive
litigation. Both have refused. All I ask is to try, try to come
to a solution. Again, maybe we can, but if we dont talk, we
definitely cant. The City Attorney has indicated to me the
litigation expenses are preferred.
Fourth, after I told the Chief of Police of my peaceful
demonstration beginning February 8th, he showed me in the
Municipal Code that if I was inside a building that I could be
arrested for trespass, but as in the one-sided mentality of a
police officer who removed me from my property and allowed it to
be stolen, the one-sided investigation of the City detective last
year, and the one-sided investigation by the City Attorneys
Office, this too is one sided. If you read on in the Municipal
Code, it says under Offenses and Crimes, lets see, 16-442, which
is peaceful demonstration, all persons shall have the right to
peacefully demonstrate, strike or otherwise use the public
streets, roads, sidewalks or other public property of this City
for the purpose of expressing opinions or viewpoints or imparting
information. Theres two more paragraphs, b and c, that list what
you can and cant do, you cant disrupt people, you cant block
people, I have no intention of doing that. But if it is City
property and it is accessible to the public, no matter what time
of the day or night, you may find me there.
This problem can be handled easily. The Mayor, five members of
Council, by your Charter, can call an emergency meeting, tonight
or tomorrow would be nice, Im homeless, folks. And we can try,
again, we can try to come to a solution, or all of you could
ignore the problem. Let me read a definition, its the
definition of cover up, taken out of the dictionary, to conceal,
the act of concealing, hiding or ignoring something wrong or
criminal. Ill be around for a little while. I have details if
members of Council, I still wont make details public, but I will
give details to any members of Council who wish to speak to me."
Mike Underwood, 4634 Meadowbrook, owner of Mikes Sports Grille,
said he was real unhappy due to something that had occurred
directly across from his restaurant at 517 E Gore. He said the
Employee of the Month also receives a gift certificate from
Mikes Sports Grille, also, but the employee must park in the
south parking lot because if she parks in the east parking lot,
the car may be towed off after 19 years of use.
Underwood said he has approximately 60 employees, paid over
$550,000 in payroll last year and the City and State split about
$120,000 in taxes generated from the restaurant, which he
considers an asset to the community. He said everything was fine
until January 31 when a letter was sent to his neighbor, Mr.
Frank Richards, stating that the parking east of the restaurant
was not up to Code and that anyone parking there, if Richards did
not put up a sign or call the police and have those individuals
towed off, then Richards would be fined in Municipal Court.
Underwood said he talked to Richards, who felt the restaurant had
been a good neighbor, had used the property for parking for 19
years, had kept the trash picked up, and that he did not plan to
make changes. Monday at 8:15 a.m. City crews removed the asphalt
bumper going from the curb to the street, which allowed cars to
pull into the parking area without being damaged. City crews
scraped that off because it was a traffic hazard; there are two
more by the highway patrol station a block away, but apparently
those were not considered a "traffic hazard".
Underwood said he had tried to find out who did not appreciate
his business, and related attempts in this regard. He asked which
Council member had made a complaint. Shanklin said he would
respond when Underwood was finished speaking.
Underwood said he had respected Shanklin for 35 years and had no
idea why he wanted to send the City on a parking lot that is just
for convenience. He said in one hour, 109 businesses were found,
both small and large, which do not meet the parking code of
asphalt; they could not afford it and would go out of business.
He said his original intention was to pass that around to Council
and staff so the code could be enforced. Underwood said he did
not want these people going out of business because someone had
something against him; but you would have to be blind not to see
150 to 200 businesses that have the same problem he does.
Shanklin said he saw correspondence from another councilman that
alluded to that parking where the asphalt is up against the curb.
He said the City paid a $20,000 judgment as a result of allowing
Mikes to do business the way he is, because the City did not
enforce the regulation equally. He said this has not been there
for 22 years but that has nothing to do with it; no one can put
asphalt up against the curb and start jumping onto someones land
whether they want you there or not. Shanklin said if that were
true, he could have another couple of driveways on his
properties, but it violates the ordinance. He said that others
say if Mikes can get by with that, why are you picking on me,
and we backed off. He said he did not have the authority to
direct anyone to do anything, and did not.
CONSIDER MINUTES OF LAWTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF
FEBRUARY 11, 1997.
MOVED by Green, SECOND by Maples, for approval of the Minutes.
AYE: Williams, Dutcher, Shanklin, Beller, Green, Warren, Maples.
NAY: None. ABSTAIN: Purcell. MOTION CARRIED.
1. Hold a public hearing and adopt a resolution declaring the
single family structure at 1410 SW C Avenue to be dilapidated and
detrimental to the health and safety of the community, and
authorize the expenditure of CDBG Contingency Funds, if
necessary, to demolish this structure. EXHIBITS: RESOLUTION NO.
Dan Tucker, Building Development Director, said Council tabled
action on this property in August 1996 for 180 days to give Mr.
Warner the opportunity to acquire the property, obtain a permit
and begin remodeling and reconstruction of the house. Permit was
obtained in October 1996; video was presented showing remodeling
work currently being done. Exterior is closed to access. No
utilities are on, however, a power pole for construction had been
erected and inspected.
Tucker said the permit will expire in April 1997, however, the
180 days for which it was tabled has lapsed.
Shanklin asked if staff recommendation was to demolish. Tucker
said he did not think that would be the right thing to do.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED.
Joe Warner said he is doing the work, and the building is
structurally sound. The current construction permit will expire
April 30, 1997. He requested that he be given until that time to
finish the work.
PUBLIC HEARING RECESSED.
MOVED by Shanklin, SECOND by Beller, to accept the time frame to
extend the building permit to April 30, 1997.
Purcell said this is a problem that was discussed two weeks ago
about the same kind of issue; Council considered this on August
13, it took over two months to get the permit and Council gave
180 days. He said this one may be a little more complicated than
others but we have that continual problem where we give people
six months to get it done, they do not start for five months and
then request another extension. Purcell said that is not the case
here but Council must pay attention to that because some of the
really dilapidated buildings need to be torn down.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Dutcher, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Green,
Warren, Maples, Williams. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
2. Hold a public hearing and consider an appeal of the
decision of the Lawton Metropolitan Area Planning Commission on a
Use Permitted on Review request for attached housing at 910 and
912 NW Ferris Avenue. EXHIBITS: PETITION WITH ATTACHMENTS; LMAPC
MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 1997; MEMORANDUM FROM CITY ATTORNEY DATED
JANUARY 30, 1997.
Schumpert said the appeal was initiated by the President of the
Old Town North Neighborhood Association; appeal was filed with
the City Clerk to appeal the decision of the LMAPC to approve the
request for a Use Permitted on Review. He said 910 and 912 Ferris
are two lots where an individual applied for a building permit to
construct duplexes; it was determined that one of the lots was
too small to house the duplex, however, by combining the two
properties and allowing a Use Permitted on Review then a
quadraplex, or two duplexes with a common wall, could be built.
The Board of Adjustment has approved the variances as recommended
by the Building Development Department and the LMAPC approved the
Use Permitted on Review. The appeal was filed requesting Council
overturn the LMAPC action of granting the Use Permitted on
Beller said the traditions of Old Town North should be carried
on. He said staff recommended denial of the appeal; a building
permit was issued and the zoning was applicable. He said if Mr.
Nottingham could build what he wants to build, it would probably
be better than what is allowed in that particular zoning. He
asked if Old Town North and Mr. Nottingham could reach an
agreement to accomplish what they both want to accomplish, which
is to maintain the serenity and the Old Town North atmosphere or
aesthetics. He said if it is legal for these to be put in, the
City would be looking at litigation and attorney fees. Beller
suggested Nottingham and Johnson work out an agreement to settle
the issue. Beller said he would like to make a motion to table
Cruz said the appeal has been filed and Council must open the
public hearing. Council may affirm or reverse the Planning
Commission but it would not be appropriate to table this for the
parties to reach agreement because the City has received a valid
Schumpert said the owner of the properties applied for a building
permit to construct two duplexes, and it was determined that
there was insufficient frontage on one of the lots. He said in
working with the person, a solution was found to combine the two
lots and he could then in fact build a quadraplex, and the
process was to obtain a Use Permitted on Review from the LMAPC,
and also receive variances from the Board of Adjustment; both of
those actions have taken place. He said until the appeal was
filed, he could have applied for a building permit for the
quadraplex because he had the ability to do so; once the appeal
was filed, issuance of the building permit was suspended until
the appeal was heard.
Beller said he felt Mr. Nottingham wanted to work with Old Town
North and keep the neighborhood as contiguous as he could with
what is there today. He said his personal opinion was that a nice
little structure would look better than a trailer, although there
are beautiful manufactured homes, but this does not appear to be
one of them.
Dutcher asked the options available to Council. Cruz said actions
could be to uphold the decision of the LMAPC to grant the Use
Permitted on Review, or reverse it. Dutcher asked if Council had
the ability to table this. Cruz said once the appeal has been
heard, Council may defer a decision to a later date, but the
parties must be listened to now.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED.
Stephen Johnson, resident of Old Town North and President of Old
Town North Neighborhood Association, presented slides and
reviewed them stating that Mr. Nottingham had to go to the Board
of Adjustment to get variances for lot size and frontages to
build this construction project on 912 NW Ferris. During the
Board of Adjustment it came out that there were economic
considerations; Mr. Nottingham desired to put up four units to
make it lucrative and wanted to rent the property. He said Ms.
Jones, who is a member of the Planning Department, made the
comment that she doubted or had some doubt in her mind as to
whether this Use Permitted could be put on the lot in question.
There was a petition filed with the City Clerk in early
September, and it was mentioned during the Board of Adjustment;
Mr. Vincent, the Assistant City Attorney, said this was really
not an appropriate forum for the petition to be addressed and it
would be more appropriate for it to be before the Commission or
the City Council, consequently, some short thought was paid to
the petition. These were from members who live within 300 feet of
the proposed building site.
Johnson said the provision under which this was granted was the
attached housing in the City Code, Use Permitted on Review. The
LMAPC did grant permission for the construction project and a
building permit has been prepared, however, it is being held in
abeyance pending the result of this hearing.
Johnson said 18-113 of the City Code covers procedures for
authorizing uses permitted on review occupancy permits;
subparagraph a, says that uses listed under the various districts
herein as uses permitted on review are so classified because they
more intensely dominate the area in which they are located than
do other uses permitted in the district; their nature makes them
desirable to be permitted to locate therein. He said the comment
he would make to that is that in an R-2 zoned district, the
dominant dwelling feature ought to be two family houses, however,
Old Town North is predominantly a single family district. Most of
the apartments and two family houses that are there have been
there since World War II and were grandfathered in when the
zoning restrictions were changed to R-2 from R-4.
Johnson said Division 3 of the Code provides for R-1 single
family dwelling; uses permitted are detached single family
dwellings, and uses permitted on review are townhouses.
Definition of townhouses was shown on the slide; townhouses are
shown to be single family dwellings joined by contiguous walls.
18-540 C states that for purposes of Sections 18-540 to 543 of
the code is to provide a mechanism that permits more flexible
housing development and design within residentially zoned
property in an R-2 district; the intent of this regulation is to
allow deviations from certain development regulations in the R-2
zoned district without increasing the overall permitted density
thereby providing the owner/applicant with a variety of housing
types and designs. He said the comment he would make is that the
key, operative words in this subparagraph are "without increasing
the overall permitted density". Johnson said if one were to
approve attached housing without increasing the overall permitted
density in an R-2 district, then the attachment must be single
family housing attached to form two family housing; otherwise,
the overall density would be increased to multiple family.
Johnson said 18-541 covers general provisions for attached
housing; subparagraph B states that development partition and
sale of individual dwelling units in two family structures are
permitted upon issuance of Use Permitted on Review. These
attached housing regulations permit the sale of individual
dwelling units, which is attached by a party wall to a similar
dwelling unit which is constructed in conformance with use and
development regulations pertaining to two family dwellings
provided the unit meets the provisions outlined in 18-542. He
said his comment would be that the operative words in this
subparagraph are "development, partition and sale of individual
dwellings in two family structures". It is significant to note
that the only place in the City Code where attached housing is
mentioned is under R-2.
Johnson said Division 4 is R-2 or two family dwelling district;
uses permitted is any use permitted in a single family dwelling
district plus two family dwellings or a single family dwelling
and garage apartment. Uses Permitted on Review are any use
permitted in R-1, which is townhouses. For R-3 the multiple
family dwelling district permits multiple family dwellings,
apartment houses, rooming houses, boarding houses, homes for the
aged, resthomes, and use permitted on review is any use in R-1 or
R-2. There again, that would permit townhouses.
Johnson said 18-540 covers the attached housing regulations,
definitions and purpose and application. LMAPC would have been
justified in issuing a permit for a townhouse since it is a Use
Permitted on Review in R-1, R-2 or any district, and that could
have been done, however, the requirements in other parts of the
Code could not have been met.
Johnson said the LMAPC action to approve the attached housing of
either four single-family dwellings or two two-family dwellings
was not in keeping with the intent of the portion of the City
Code dealing with attached housing. If the 15th & Columbia
Partnership had owned Lots 914, 916 and 918, as well as 910 and
912, would the LMAPC have been able to authorize construction of
a string of attached housing projects with two units on each lot
for a total of ten units, and would that not have been a complete
perversion of the intent of the attached housing regulation in an
R-2 zone. It would. The reason the attached housing is mentioned
in the Code only in the section dealing with R-2 is that the
intent is the attachment of single-family dwellings to form two-family dwellings. It also permits the
ownership and sale of each
of these individual units within those two-family structures.
Johnson said it is the opinion of Old Town North that the LMAPC
may have improperly interpreted the intent of the attached
housing regulations for some period of time, indeed, there is no
mention of attached housing to form any more than single, two-family structures, and were it so, the
attached housing would
have been mentioned in other sections of the City Code. The
recommendation of the Old Town North Neighborhood Association is
that they overturn the decision of the LMAPC regarding the
construction project at 910 and 912 Ferris and deny the building
permit; that those portions of the City Code pertaining to
attached housing be scrutinized carefully and adjudicated as to
the actual intent thereof and that the City Code be tightened up
to leave no opening for misinterpretations.
Beller asked the City Planner if the problem is the contiguous
wall between the two units. Bob Bigham, City Planner, said the
provision was created many years ago to provide this type of
flexibility, but allowed for the safe guard of the public hearing
process to see whether the neighbors were agreeable to this type
of development. Beller asked if the units could be built as long
as there was not a wall joining the two buildings. Bigham said
the applicant is authorized by R-2 to build detached duplexes on
each lot. Beller said the problem then would be the contiguous
wall adjoining the two. Bigham said 18-540 through 543 provides
flexibility, through the public hearing process, to attach the
two units, so whether they are attached or detached, there are
still four units on the two properties, and they can be sold
Purcell said with the definition of townhouses, if these were
"townhouses", would they be permitted in R-2 zoning. Bigham said
yes, but it does not meet the other requirements for townhouses;
townhouses have an attached dwelling unit which can be sold with
a parcel of land and this is not the case in this situation.
Bigham said townhouses are a Use Permitted on Review activity in
an R-2 but the lots do not fulfill the size requirements to apply
for townhouses. Each residential district allows for townhouses
at different densities, but there are other requirements such as
a much larger parcel of land.
Maples asked if the two parties had agreed to work this out.
Beller said his statement was that Mr. Nottingham was willing to
work with the homeowners association. Maples asked Mr. Johnson
if that was acceptable. Johnson said that would depend on the
outcome of the hearing and Councils decision on the appeal.
Johnson said if Mr. Nottingham wins and is willing to allow input
on the type of building he plans to construct, they would do so;
however, if not, Mr. Nottingham may want to ask the Association
what he could build that they would be happy with. Maples said if
Council tables it, neither party would win, but if a compromise
could be reached, both would win.
Johnson said the issue is the action of the LMAPC was in
contravention of the City Code. He said he had nothing against
Mr. Nottingham or what he was trying to do, and they would prefer
a building to an empty lot or a trailer, but the issue is whether
the action was appropriate.
Shanklin said the Associations main objection is that there are
two lots, one 40 and one 50, and the property line will be a
party wall. He said the objection is that the project is an R-4
and not an R-2, and may compromise the Old Town North plat
Williams asked if it is an interpretation of the zoning that is
causing the problem, and if it is an R-4 trying to be built in an
R-2. Cruz said it is not an interpretation of zoning, the two
properties are zoned R-2, and a duplex can be placed on each of
the two lots; the issue is whether they can be attached so that
the common wall will be on the property line. Cruz said that is
permitted with Use Permitted on Review following the attached
housing provision of the City Code, Section 18-540 to 543.
Purcell asked if the person could build a duplex on one lot and a
duplex on the other lot. Bigham said yes. Mayor Marley said one
lot is not big enough to do that. Bigham said on September 13,
the Board of Adjustment granted a variance to allow a duplex to
be built on the 40 lot. Purcell said he understood the Board of
Adjustment said that the person could build one duplex on the 40
lot and the second on the 50 lot and Bigham agreed.
Purcell asked Mr. Johnson which was preferred because even if
Council grants the appeal, they can build the two duplexes except
there would be a distance between the buildings, and it would be
the same thing except the buildings would not be attached.
Johnson said the Association would have no objection if Mr.
Nottingham wanted to build two detached duplexes on each of the
lots, there is no objection and it is a use permitted in the
Code. Johnson said the objection is that when you attach them it
becomes much like Mr. Schumpert said, a quadraplex, and a
quadraplex is called for in R-3, multiple unit housing.
Beller said that would be setting a precedent and Johnson agreed
and said on every two empty lots, people could put in
quadraplexes, if possible.
Nifa Brandt, 910 Arlington, said in Dallas, Texas, you can stick
your hand out the window and touch your next door neighbors
house. She said she was concerned that this would be a fire
hazard in Old Town North. Brandt asked what the blue print would
look like for this and asked how much distance there would be
between the houses. Shanklin said there would be none, it would
be a party wall, and there are none like that in Old Town North
now. Brandt asked how fire regulations would affect that.
Purcell asked Mr. Nottingham if he would be willing to build two,
detached duplexes. Nottingham said the problem is the 40 and he
would have to build a 30 wide duplex which would look square,
boxy and have no architecture at all. Nottingham said he was
planning to build something much nicer than what he will be
forced to build if the appeal is granted; the Association has
never seen the plans or architecture, but if he cannot do it, he
would be forced to build separate duplexes. Nottingham said he
was trying to get away from the 10 side yard.
Sally Keogh, 506 NW Bell, said they were most concerned with
setting a precedent. She said Old Town North is a beautiful
neighborhood and if one person can change the rules and put up a
quadraplex, it could happen throughout the neighborhood.
Steve Newcombe said he was a partner in the 15th & Columbia
Partnership, which is planning the project. He said he did not
know it would stir up such controversy. Newcombe said the
property is dilapidated and they had spent a lot of money on the
plans; the property they are wanting to build is very nice. He
said he lives in North Addition and had recently spent a lot of
money remodeling an old house, and the structure they want to
build would be an asset to the neighborhood, but the structures
they will be forced to build will not look nearly as nice.
Newcombe said North Addition has a lot of this type of housing in
it now, and that he had a four plex in his back yard now,
although he did not put it there and it was there when he bought
Newcombe said the area between 9th and 6th Street three blocks
south of Ferris has a number of structures built in the back
yards. He said it is not their intention to destroy the
neighborhood and they did not want to upset anyone and that he
did not know there were so many people who were so upset about
this until tonight. Newcombe said the structure they plan to
build is much nicer than the 20 or 30 structures he took pictures
of that are built there already; there are commercial buildings
on Gore but are in Old Town North. He said the property is
completely dilapidated at this time and they had to evict a
homeless person from it. It was their intention to build
something that would be an asset, and would certainly be better
than a vacant lot or the existing mobile home.
Jane Shaw, 1001 NW Bell, said she lives across the street from
Mr. Newcombe and his quadraplex. She said it does change the
complexion of the neighborhood and street. Shaw said this would
be a legal, permanent change that everyone could do. She said she
has an apartment that no one lives in but it has been there since
World War II. Shaw said it is not a quadraplex with four people,
four cars, and their four friends with their four cars, or an 18
wheel semi-truck cab parked in front of your house because they
live there; were talking about a community of families with
children who would like to have one family dwellings.
Linda Mayes, 1007 Columbia, said she is a member of the
Association but would like to say on Mr. Nottinghams behalf that
he has a point in that if he ends up building two duplexes, and
if he cannot make them look nice, then Old Town North should
consider that. Mayes said Nottingham should also respect the Old
Town North Associations point of the implication of a precedent
change. She said if those two issues could be satisfied as far as
not setting a precedent, what they are concerned about is having
other than single family dwellings permitted or an apartment
complex being built in the neighborhood, and that is not desired.
Mayes suggested it would be good if some compromise could be
reached where they could be assured that the integrity of the
neighborhood could be preserved, the Code could be tightened up,
and in this particular case reach a compromise with Mr.
Nottingham so that something nice could be built.
Mr. Johnson said Mr. Newcombe said they were trying to upgrade
the neighborhood, and those intentions are well directed, but
more and more older homes have been upgraded and are making
wonderful homes for people throughout the district. He said it is
not a run down neighborhood and it is being improved all the
Yvonne Johnson, #7 NW Fort Sill Boulevard, said the issue is that
Mr. Nottingham is trying to build a quadraplex, and Old Town
North is zoned R-2. She said in 1976, the residents asked Council
to approve the R-2 zoning, which was done. Johnson said at that
time, they said the neighborhood was important because in a few
years it would be eligible for the National Historic Register;
the area is now eligible and in April, the Oklahoma Historical
Society will take nominations for this district to be placed on
the National Register.
Mrs. Johnson read the following as to the historic value: "Its
significance primarily is architectural as it contains the
largest concentration of pre World War II housing in the City.
This includes one of the largest concentrations of craftsmen
bungalow style homes in Southwestern Oklahoma. The district also
contains a wide variety of other architectural styles including
national folk, Tudor revival, colonial revival, mission, Spanish
colonial revival. The district also has historical significance
as the first major residential area in the City and many of its
residents were prominent citizens. In short, the Old Town North
Historic District is the best physical representation of what
Lawton was like prior to its fundamental transformation during
and after World War II." She said she was sure that none of the
members wanted to shown as voting to do anything to damage the
historical or aesthetic integrity of Old Town North. She asked
that the appeal be upheld.
PUBLIC HEARING RECESSED.
MOVED by Maples, SECOND by Shanklin, to reverse the LMAPC
decision granting the Use Permitted on Review, and approve the
appeal sought by the Old Town North Neighborhood Association.
AYE: Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Green, Warren, Maples, Dutcher.
NAY: Williams. MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
Council recessed at 7:10 p.m. and reconvened at 7:15 p.m. with
roll call reflecting all members present.
3. Hold a public hearing and adopt a resolution declaring the
main fire-damaged structure at 1207 SW G Avenue dilapidated and
detrimental to the health and safety of the community and
authorize the expenditure of CDBG Contingency Funds, if
necessary, to demolish this structure. EXHIBITS: RESOLUTION NO.
Dan Tucker, Building Development Director, presented a video of
the structure which had been involved in a fire on November 20,
The structure is dilapidated; interior has extensive fire damage;
it is open and unsecured. Staff has been working with the owner
to arrive at a solution but has not been successful. The property
also contains another building to the east, which had not been a
problem, but it has recently become unsecured and it will be
brought to Council at a later date if it continues to stand open.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED.
Dollie Collins, owner, said she contracted Mr. Cruz, Building
Development, who had referred her to Mrs. Hamilton, Housing &
Community Development, to see if the house could be repaired. Ms.
Collins said her mother used to live in the house and that Mrs.
Hamilton said it would require $16,000 to fix the house and that
a contractor would have to be found. She said she would like to
sell the property to the resident next door, who would like to
tear it down.
Green asked if the prospective buyer is present. Dorothy Woods,
1201 G Avenue, said she would like to buy the property, tear down
the fire damaged structure, and repair the structure that was not
damaged by the fire. She said she had not obtained a demolition
permit because they were running a title search and the abstract
is being brought up to date, and as soon as that is done, an
application will be submitted for a demolition permit.
PUBLIC HEARING RECESSED.
Purcell asked how long it would take to tear the structure down.
Ms. Woods said the permit allows 30 days to start and a total of
90 days to have everything finished, and that she would request
that amount of time.
Williams asked what the normal routine would be if the Council
adopted the resolution to have the structure torn down and paid
for with CDBG funds. Cruz said the structure would be torn down
and a lien would be filed on the property with the County Clerk;
the costs would be placed on the tax rolls and the City would be
reimbursed at a later date. Williams asked how long it would take
the City to process the paper work and get the structure torn
down. Tucker said the owner is given a 15 day period to obtain a
permit to demolish; if that does not happen, the City obtains
bids, and selects a contractor in two to three weeks. Tucker said
the 30 days in the demolition permit to start work is part of the
total 90 days allowed by the permit. Tucker said the Citys
contractor would have the same 90 days, but additional time would
be needed to award the contract.
Cruz asked if the resolution covers only the building damaged by
the fire and Tucker said yes, and it does not include the other
building and that notice had not been given on the other
building. Williams asked Ms. Collins if she would take immediate
action on the other building to get it secured or repaired, and
response was yes.
Green asked if Council could extend the time of 30 days to 60
days for the present owner and the buyer to make the exchange.
Cruz said the resolution provides for a certain time frame.
Schumpert asked if Council could give 180 days without adopting
the resolution. Cruz said yes, but if it is not done, the entire
process will have to start over.
Ms. Woods said she had lived next door to this for a year and
that it is to her advantage to tear it down. She said she could
do it with much less hassle.
Warren asked if Council could table the item. Schumpert said if
time is granted and the work is not done, the process must be
Cruz said the public hearing can be recessed, and the item can be
tabled to be returned.
MOVED by Green, to table this for 60 days to give time for the
property transaction to be made and staff would not have to start
over. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND.
MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Shanklin, to give the property owner
90 days to complete demolition and to clear the property to the
Williams asked if Council could agree that it is a dilapidated
structure, a fire hazard and detrimental to the health and safety
of the community and call for its destruction, but leaving the
cost of the destruction up to the new owner. Shanklin said the
new owner is not requesting CDBG funds. Williams said he
understood that and said it would be the staff recommendation,
less the CDBG funding for removal of the structure. Williams said
the City would be saying it was a dilapidated structure that
needs to be torn down, and the owner has a certain amount of time
to do that at his expense. Cruz said if the owner does not comply
by that time, the City can initiate demolition.
Mayor Marley asked that the motion be stated and the Clerk stated
the motion as shown above, pointing out that the motion does not
call for adoption of the resolution. Purcell asked if this is not
done within 90 days that the process would have to be started
over again and Cruz said yes.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION by Purcell, SECOND by Beller, to table this for
90 days. AYE: Beller, Green, Warren, Maples, Williams, Dutcher,
Purcell, Shanklin. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
4. Hold a public hearing and adopt a resolution declaring the
main structure at 1008 SW H Avenue to be dilapidated and
detrimental to the health and safety of the community, and
authorize the expenditure of CDBG Contingency Funds, if
necessary, to demolish this structure. EXHIBITS: RESOLUTION NO.
Item was removed from agenda; owner has obtained a demolition
5. Hold a public hearing and adopt a resolution declaring the
main structure at 1406 NW Kingsbury Avenue to be dilapidated and
detrimental to the health and safety of the community, and
authorize the expenditure of CDBG Contingency Funds, if
necessary, to demolish this structure. EXHIBITS: RESOLUTION NO.
Tucker presented a video of the property; building is vacant;
wooden exterior is open but not extensively damaged. Vandalism
has taken place inside the structure and it was brought to the
attention of Building Development by the Police Department
because youth and others have been using the structure. Multi-family units are adjacent and are well
maintained. 1406 Kingsbury
is a blighting influence on the area.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. No one appeared to speak.
PUBLIC HEARING RECESSED.
MOVED by Williams, SECOND by Warren, to adopt Resolution No. 97-25. AYE: Green, Warren, Maples,
Williams, Dutcher, Purcell,
Shanklin, Beller. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
(Title only) RESOLUTION NO. 97-25
A RESOLUTION DETERMINING A CERTAIN MAIN STRUCTURE TO BE
DILAPIDATED AND DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH, BENEFIT AND WELFARE OF
THE COMMUNITY, AND ORDERING THE DESTRUCTION AND REMOVAL OF SAID
6. Receive a briefing on the Hotel-Motel Tax from the Lawton
Chamber of Commerce and Industry. EXHIBITS: MID-YEAR ALLOCATION
REPORT; LIST OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS.
Mark McCord said the mid-year expenditure report had been
provided and shows that $159,786 has been expended; $189,073 has
been collected. The reason for the difference is because some
items anticipated for expense in previous months will not be
expended until later months. It is anticipated that the gap will
be zero within the next 30 to 45 days as those expenditures come
on line. Economic Development line item shows expense of $29,249.
All expenditures meet the requirements within the hotel/motel tax
agreement. Tourism Development expense is $92,423, and the only
salaries paid from hotel/motel tax are within this department and
there are only two salaries paid, as per the agreement, and those
funds are calculated within this $92,000.
McCord said items had been miscoded on the monthly expenditure
report, salaries being one, and they were included on the wrong
line item on shared administrative cost, and it should have gone
under the Tourism area as was agreed to previously. Updated
report for January 31, 1997, will reflect that change in coding,
as well as several other items that were miscoded from the
Sports Promotion, out of $20,000 allocated, $18,152 has been
spent and most of those expenses come within the first six months
of the year. Fort Sill Enhancement, expense has been $9,206;
Shared Administrative cost, expense has been $10,756.
McCord said reviewed activities and accomplishments during the
first six month period as: Pope Industries, 125 jobs, $2.5
million payroll. Pope has qualified for the Oklahoma Quality Jobs
Program; their manager will be transferred here in April and
employees may start work by June 1. Bar-S Foods Company, 350
jobs, $8 million payroll. Defense Finance and Accounting Service,
a great deal of time has been spent working with the Oklahoma
Congressional Delegation to be sure this becomes a reality, and
as of January 1997, 151 jobs have come on line and a payroll of
$4.7 million; 575 jobs are anticipated ultimately. ITI Marketing,
225 jobs committed to with 209 on line now; $2.9 million payroll.
TCIM Services, also a telecommunications company, 225 jobs with
$2.9 million payroll; 14,000 sq. ft. structure is being built on
11th Street, and hiring will commence upon completion.
McCord said part of the success of economic development is
creating image in the market place. Trade shows are a part of
this and LCCI staff will attend the following: Food Processors
Trade Show in Las Vegas; National Manufacturing Show in Chicago;
and Super Comm Telecommunications Show in New Orleans. LCCI will
complete a full color economic development brochure within the
next 30 days; it was anticipated that this expense would be
incurred in previous months but the design and printing took
longer. By May 1 there will be an on line home page and
production of an economic development video will begin.
Interactive CD Rom will be done for marketing and only 5% of the
economic development organizations in the country are using this
technology. This will be used at trade shows and firms can be
given a CD Rom to take home.
Support Net Program for business expansion and development; first
meeting will be held tomorrow to begin the small business
assistance. Visits with local industries will be conducted to see
what can be done to help them expand and what can be done to tear
down impediments to their expansion.
Sheila Lee, Tourism Director, said the purpose of the Tourism
Development Task Force is to enhance the convention and tourism
potential thereby creating economic impact and jobs. They strive
to bring conventions and events which enhance the community
socially as well as economically. 1997 Oklahoma Junior Beef Expo
will be hosted by Lawton in April. Four tournaments are scheduled
this summer through the Amateur Softball Association, and the
participants will create a desirable environment for youth and
families, as well as creating an economic impact. Mid America
Dance Network Conference is scheduled for October 1997 will allow
the community to be showcased with outstanding performances of
the arts, helping to encourage growth in this segment and
highlighting talents found in the community. A host of military
conventions scheduled this year will allow those who have lived
and trained in this area to return and enjoy the rich history
which is a vital part of the community.
Lee said gatherings such as the Oklahoma Association of
Environmental Education will provide the opportunity to showcase
our accomplishments regarding environmental awareness and educate
others as to how and why this is done. Visitors survey has been
designed and placed in local hotels to receive data.
McCord said the Governmental Affairs efforts have enabled Fort
Sill to gain $12.8 million in necessary MCA funding, this is a
plus up and is not budgeted money. He said no organization can do
this alone and this is the reason the economic development team
was formed which is a coalition of individuals from a broad
section of the community who work every day with prospects.
McCord said they consider it a privilege to be custodians of
these resources and that they endeavor to use them in ways to
create economic impact within the spirit of the agreement. He
said the annual report will be presented in a few months.
Green said the Miss Black Oklahoma Pageant will be here in June
Shanklin asked about the 225 telemarketing jobs. McCord said one
firm currently has 209 jobs and the other is waiting for their
building to be finished. Shanklin asked how many hours the
employees get to work. McCord said the agreement was that 90 of
the employees have to work 40 hours a week, and the others may
work flexible hours, but all full time employees must be offered
benefits and the wage rate must be at least $6.50 per hour for
those positions; an incentive was provided to these companies
from Comanche County and that was the agreement made with the
Shanklin said he saw seven or eight payroll checks cashed by
these individuals which did not reflect that. McCord said he
would check into that because the agreement is specific. Shanklin
said 225 jobs to him should be equal to 40 hours a week. McCord
said that is correct in many cases but in Lawton Fort Sill there
is a unique situation where many spouses of soldiers and many
others who wish to have flexible hour employment, which these
companies provide. He said TCIM will be in bound
telecommunications and 90 to 95% of the jobs will be full time
Beller said Pope Industries will be a great asset and asked how
aggressive we are in seeking spin off companies such as this.
McCord said they aggressively pursue such companies because
Goodyear is a fantastic corporate citizen that provides many
opportunities in that regard. Pope will manage a Goodyear
contract, as well as four or five others, from here. McCord said
they are also focusing on companies that will supply Bar-S Foods,
and a company will be visited next week who may be able to supply
Bar-S Foods box needs.
Beller said on Pope Industries, they went from a building they
thought there would use to another building. He asked if we are
working with them to be sure it is ready as quickly as possible.
McCord said yes, they ultimately located in the old Thermo
Plastics building on S 11th Street near the Airport, which will
allow them to get in faster because they can inhabit the building
and begin work while expansion of the facility is being done.
McCord said the City has been involved in projects, and Building
Development has done a great job in providing support; the County
has also been instrumental, as have Goodyear and Vo Tech.
Purcell complimented the Chamber on the progress made and the
report. He asked if reprogramming was needed at this time and
McCord said no. Purcell asked that Council be provided a copy of
the budget by category by month that was discussed. McCord agreed
and said that had been provided to the Finance Director.
7. Consider waiving the "no bid" response for Alternates #1
and #2 by Cajun Contractors, Inc., and consider awarding a
construction contract for the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
Renovation Project 97-2. EXHIBITS: BID TABULATION; LETTER OF
RECOMMENDATION FROM CH2M HILL, INC.
Schumpert said it seemed to be a long time getting to this part
of the project and that many briefings had been held with the
consultants and staff; plans were approved; DEQ approved the
designs; bids were received, and this will allow over a 26 month
period to upgrade the current treatment plant and expand its
capacity to 18 mgd which will significantly affect the
certificates we have from DEQ. Three bids were received for this
project; the bids were reviewed by staff; the credentials of the
firms have been checked and staff and the project manager with
CH2M Hill have visited with them. Recommendation is to award the
contract to Cajun Contractors, Inc.
Schumpert said staff and CH2M Hill had included a number of
alternatives in the project to determine if they would work or be
significant changes. Some of the alternatives were to verify or
to double check what we are doing and whether it is the right
approach, and give one more opportunity to review to see that the
right approach was taken in the plant design. Because the
apparent low bidder indicated a "no bid" response, the Council
action must be to waive the "no bid" responses and then award the
Beller said information states under Addendum No. 1, part 1, 2a,
"bid amounts for each of the listed bid alternates must be
provided for the bid to be considered responsive". He said the
City requested that and asked if we are now saying that we do not
have to adhere to this particular paragraph that says it must be
a responsive bid. Schumpert said it was his understanding that
the Council has the ability to waive that, and that information
is contained in the fourth paragraph on the second page of the
background states: "The Oklahoma Supreme Court has considered
that term to allow public bodies to consider not only the lowest
price for the work to be done, but also to select the bidder who
has the ability to respond to the requirements of the contract
without defeating the overall objective of competitive bidding.
Under the Courts ruling, the Council may consider and determine
Cajun Contractors, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder and
award the contract."
Beller asked if there would be repercussion from those who sent
in responsive bids. Cruz said the addendum was made that they had
to bid on the alternatives, but the bid packet also provided a
waiver of any informalities and the Council is asked to determine
that this is an informality which can and ought to be waived.
Cruz said the key issue and technical term is the lowest
responsible bidder; that is the term used in the City Code and
the Competitive Bidding Act, and the Supreme Court has considered
the lowest responsible bidder. Beller asked about responsible
bidder versus responsive bid. Cruz said City staff uses the term
non-responsive, but the Council may waive irregularities and
staff is requesting that this be considered as an irregularity to
the bidding process; if that is waived, the bid can be awarded to
Shanklin said he asked for background on the builders several
weeks ago and was told that it would be provided, but that he
knew that it would not be provided. He said this is a $17 million
project, one of the biggest secrets in Southwest Oklahoma, and
that he had heard nothing about it except what he read in the
agenda packet. Shanklin said he was extremely upset with it, and
that Mr. Ihler is not present, but the story he told Mr. Ihler a
year ago was that we would get a fleecing because contractors, on
something of this magnitude, there will be only one guy that
Shanklin said on the second item, the one they want us to give it
to is a no bid, he said there is no change, its just alike, but
the other one wants $500,000 more. He asked if that was really a
bid, and said that the next item where it was said no bid, the
next guy wanted $85,000 more. Shanklin said he would not go for
this at all, and there are several other reasons; how many
housing units are in our perimeter of the ridge line that we have
left before we build this 18 mgd plant and start having to pump
over the ridge line from wherever to use that plant. He said DEQ
projects 100 gallons per citizen, including inflow and
infiltration; in 1996 we did 8.87 million, or 120 gallons; that
is just barely out of the range for compliance. Shanklin said we
only treated 9 so were going to bring it to 18, and if it is 100
gallons per citizen, it will serve 150,000 citizens, but we have
to have a little bit for our industry. Shanklin said the cart is
before the horse because first we build the plant, and then come
back to take care of the I & I.
Shanklin said we need to go to DEQ or somewhere and say this is
not a responsible bid. He said they have to be smarter than to
bid $500,000. Shanklin said he could not support awarding the
contract until we sit down with the consulting engineer and have
a workshop because this is big bucks, their fee is $2.1 now,
which is almost 12%; the fee curve is somewhere around 7.5% when
you reach that $20 million range.
MOVED by Shanklin, SECOND by Maples, to set up a special meeting
with those engineers, workshop, to see how we come out, see how
they arrived at some of this, and not award the contract tonight.
Williams asked what would be accomplished with a workshop.
Shanklin said we may decide to go to EPA and ask them to look at
it and see if we should rebid it. Williams asked if Shanklin was
questioning the numbers for the 18 mgd plant. Shanklin said no,
and he did not think that was needed but was not successful.
Shanklin said Fort Sill has not stabilized but we are going to
build a 18 mgd plant, and if it is 100 gallons per citizen per
day, just divide 100 into 18 million.
Williams asked if this was one of the projects in the 1995 CIP
and Mayor Marley said yes. Shanklin said he wanted to get our
Williams asked if anything will be deducted from the base bid as
a result of the deductive alternates. Schumpert said none of the
alternates are recommended.
Beller asked if we need items one and two. Schumpert said no.
Beller asked why they were included. Schumpert said the key word
is "substitution"; it was a substitution for the dry pit
prerotation pumping system. Schumpert said the question was
whether the pumping system we were putting in was the best that
the industry had, and as one last check to make sure we did not
miss something, or if there was something out there that was
better, and we believe the reason for the plus numbers,
particularly the one that is $500,000, is that the bidder was
attempting to say that he was not going to fool with that and did
not want to bid for that; and the second one is the same thing,
it is a substitution for a spiral scraper type clarifier
mechanism, was there another type of mechanism out there that
would be better than what we were looking at in the bid package.
Schumpert said obviously there was not because their system would
cost more than ours and ours will accomplish the work, so it was
a reality check one more time because it is a project of this
magnitude, our engineers estimate was $18.2, to make sure we
were setting up the plant to do the job in the most efficient,
effective, economical fashion. He said those two items were
substitutions, and you can draw from the way the other two
bidders bid it is that they were saying no, if you do it any way
other than what you are doing it, you can, but we will charge a
large amount for that, so we said we would stay with the current
system for both of those actions and will not substitute.
Purcell asked Shanklin if he thought the company had over bid on
the $17 million or that the City should have had the firms bid on
something smaller than 18 mgd.
Shanklin said none of the current members were present when this
originated; others were fed the bait, then others the hook, and
now the sinker and we get it all right now. He said if we build
an 18 mgd plant, where will the people come from to use it unless
you pump the sewage to it. Shanklin said he would blame this on
the consulting engineer and asked why we would not build a plant
west of town; you will have to pump over the ridge line, and a 18
mgd plant will handle 150,000 people, and when would we have that
many people. Shanklin said the current population is going to
have to pay for this, and the money could be better spent
Purcell asked if the thought was that we do not need an 18 mgd
plant and therefore this bid is too high, and we need a workshop
to discuss that. Shanklin said we did not get a competitive bid.
Purcell said three bids were received. Shanklin asked if the one
firm could be $500,000 out in left field. Purcell said one
company bid $18.7 million and the possible winner bid $17.6 and
the alternates were add ons. Shanklin said he wanted to be able
to talk about it and that he still did not know who these people.
Mayor Marley said in 1985 the plan was for the plant to be bigger
and they ran out of money, so another phase was created and the
public voted down funding for that because in the late 1980s it
was fine, but we are beyond that. He said you cannot build today
what you need today and hope to be able to expand in the future
but you must look ahead. Mayor Marley said he did not know
whether it should be 15 or 18 mgd, but the plant was supposed to
be 18 mgd and some of the parts will handle that. He said he
agreed with the need to understand this.
Shanklin said on the request to waive the no bid response on an
$18 million project, we should be more professional than that.
Mayor Marley said it appeared only to confuse the issue, but the
basic bid should be given consideration.
Williams asked the consulting engineer about pumping over the
ridge line, and asked for information about other projects that
have been done by Cajun Contractors. Murray Fleming, CH2M Hill,
said there is a lot of history on the plant sizing. Fleming said
the base bid is what the contractors bid for everything in the
plans and specs; the reason the alternates were put in was to
hedge our bets that we would be within the money. Fleming said he
had promised the City that the bids would be within the $18.8
million and the City has done some of the work so the engineers
estimate went down to $18.2; bid alternates allowed that if the
bids came in over the estimate, that some of the items could be
Fleming said on the first two alternates, they had been
approached by manufacturing representatives on some equipment
that said their equipment would save money. He said they did not
believe it and put the best item in the base bid, but allowed the
contractor to circle add or deduct on the equipment because the
representatives said it would be a savings but they felt it would
be additional cost. Fleming said they found out a week ago that
the people were having a hard time getting prices on those items
and could not put together a good bid with a number for it, and
the other two contractors threw some money at it, as Shanklin
stated, and that is not an equitable thing when one contractor
shows $500,000 and the other shows $100,000, but they were trying
to put some numbers in there, as a basic guess. He said Cajun
could not get a bid on it so they indicated a no bid. Fleming
said the rest of the alternates were specified as deducts because
items were being deleted, but on the first two, they did not know
if it would be additional or deductions.
Fleming said they had over 75 plan holders on this job between
subcontractors, suppliers and general contractors; six general
contractors had specifications although one was not really in the
business, and two of them dropped out a week before the bid
because they won work somewhere else. He said the bid was below
the estimate and they visited with the firm to be sure they had
not left something out, but Cajun indicated they felt good about
their bid. Fleming said they checked nine references on six
projects ranging from $5 million to $19 million projects, so the
firm is a going concern in the Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana area,
and good references were received. He said he had seen a few
projects rebid and had never seen any get less expensive.
Shanklin said he did not hear an answer to the question about the
ridge line. Fleming said he addressed the population. Shanklin
said there is only so much land left that can be built on within
the ridge line and still have gravity flow to the Wastewater
Treatment Plant, otherwise, it will have to be pumped. Shanklin
asked if an 18 mgd plant can handle 150,000 people. Fleming said
he would have to look at the numbers, but the 15 mgd plant was
based on the 2020 Plan to serve the population shown, and that
the 3 mgd extra was brought to Council because there were only a
few things that had to be done to go from 15 to 18 mgd because of
the existing facilities being converted, and direction was
received to go to 18 mgd.
Shanklin asked if Fleming could see that the plant would be too
big to serve only those inside the ridge line. Fleming said he
was going only on the 2020 Plan and did not know if it included
land beyond the ridge line or not; they were given a population
and told to plan for that.
Bob Bigham, City Planner, said if the question is what the
population could be within the ridge line, it could be several
hundred thousand. Shanklin said some sewage is being pumped now.
Bigham said there are some minor ridges within the City, but
there are no pump stations going outside the major ridge line.
Shanklin asked if there could be 200,000 people inside the ridge
line and Bigham said yes. Bigham said there are several minor
ridge lines, one for Nine Mile Creek tributary, Cache Creek, Wolf
Creek, Squaw Creek; each has its own ridge line; in East Lawton
there is a minor ridge line and there are some pump stations on
that. Shanklin asked if you could go further east and Bigham said
yes, that area will still gravity flow into the treatment plant
but there are no transmission lines.
Beller said Fleming made the statement that numbers usually
increase if the project is rebid, and the base bid is fine, but
the differences between the alternates is substantial; one is
$66,000 on alternate three versus $227,000 versus $210,000, and
that bothered him. He said on alternate six there is a $190,000
bid versus a $350,000 versus $350,000. In the digester gas
burner, $43,000, $42,000 and $3,400; the figures cause concern.
Fleming said these numbers are not being considered in the award
of the project, but would have been if deductions were needed.
Beller said the reason the alternates were included was that they
may have been needed, and did not understand the hedging portion
on the alternates. Fleming said if the low bid had come in at
$8.5 million and we needed to come in at $8.2, we would look for
$300,000 in deducts and pick which ones the plant could do
without. Beller said that is like building a car and not putting
in a carburetor. Fleming said it is not that important of a part.
Beller asked why we asked for it then and that was his point,
maybe we have asked for something we do not really need in this
$17.6 million; the City is being scrutinized because it is
looking forward to a $61 million sewer renovation project and for
Council to go with this, it is a lot of money to the people of
Schumpert said when the sales tax election was being held, the
citizens were told that this plant would be built and that the
three projects would be done no matter what; however, we held the
consultant to the line several meetings ago and caused him to
guarantee that this plant will not cost more than $18.7 million
and now he is guaranteeing that it will not cost more than $18.2
million because we have some deducts. Council was also told that
the 15 mgd plant would meet the 2020 Plan needs, however, for a
little more money, in this magnitude, it can be made 18 mgd, and
Council agreed that should be done. Schumpert said if the lowest
bid would have come in at $18.5 million, Council has the option
to ask what could be changed or do less and ask what it would
cost for the 15 mgd versus the 18 mgd. Schumpert said there was a
need for flexibility to be able to stay within the money and
staff was pleased that none of the deductions had to be taken. He
said the base bid includes everything needed to have an 18 mgd
plant and it is under the engineers estimate and the number
which CH2M Hill said it would be.
Purcell said Cajun would still be low if all the deducts were
taken; they would be $17,082,000; Western Summit would have been
$18.6 million and Archer-Western would have been $18,034,000.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION by Purcell, SECOND by Williams, that we waive
the "no bid" response and award the construction contract to
Cajun Contractors in the amount of $17,627,000 for the WWTP
Renovation Project 97-2.
Shanklin said when we were talking about the 18 mgd plant,
nothing was ever said that the engineering was above and beyond
that, and that is $2.1 million.
Beller said he was convinced of the need for the plant and that
it should be 18 mgd, but that he was confused about the bid
alternates and waiving that. He asked the attorney if the City
was in the clear as far as that point and Cruz said yes.
Maples asked what size plants there are in Oklahoma City or
Tulsa. Fleming said Tulsa has two 42 mgd plant and one 12 mgd
VOTE ON SUBSTITUTE MOTION: AYE: Maples, Williams, Dutcher,
Purcell, Beller, Green, Warren. NAY: Shanklin. SUBSTITUTE MOTION
8. Consider approving a resolution changing the name of the
Lawton Municipal Airport to Lawton-Fort Sill Regional Airport.
EXHIBITS: RESOLUTION NO. 97-26.
Beller said there had been discussion about this for several
months at the airport, and they attended a transportation
committee meeting; this met with approval from those at Fort Sill
who are elated that we are trying to work toward a joint usage
airport. He said the name change is not just for the sake of
change, but it is to try to accomplish a mission to bring Fort
Sill and the Lawton Municipal Airport together as one. Beller
said there is a downsizing in the military of airfields, and it
is our hope and desire that we can enhance the Lawton Municipal
Airport with the name change to bring in more activity. Another
reason is that in some major terminals, in Dallas particularly,
the Lawton area is listed on some boards as Lawton Fort Sill and
on others as Lawton, and the use of the Lawton Fort Sill name is
preferred. Beller said the Airport Authority passed a resolution
this morning recommending the name change, and said there is a
minimal cost involved on lettering. He said the Airport Manager
had assured him that funding would be available for the
lettering, which will be in the hundreds of dollars range.
MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Purcell, that Resolution No. 97-26 be
approved changing the Lawton Municipal Airports name to the
Lawton Fort Sill Regional Airport.
Green said she asked Beller to attend the transportation meeting
while she attended something else.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Maples, Williams, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller,
Green, Warren. NAY: Dutcher. MOTION CARRIED.
(Title only) RESOLUTION NO. 97-26
A RESOLUTION CHANGING THE NAME OF THE LAWTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT TO
THE LAWTON-FORT SILL REGIONAL AIRPORT.
9. Consider approving the record plat for Stonebridge Estates
and accepting water and sewer improvements, maintenance bond,
utility easement outside the platted area for the water main
extension, and warranty deed or easement outside the platted area
for drainage. EXHIBITS: PLAT MAP; DRAFT LMAPC MINUTES.
(MAINTENANCE BOND AND PERMANENT UTILITY EASEMENT ON FILE IN CITY
Schumpert said he was visited by the initiator of this request,
and it was represented to him that there was only one item
remaining on the list of conditions to this that had been applied
by LMAPC and that had to do with a drainage easement, and it was
in the hands of the attorneys. He said the individual felt the
attorneys would be able to work that agreement out by the time of
this meeting, and since that was the only remaining thing, he did
not wish to have to wait another three to four weeks before
getting this approved based on the one item left to be done.
Schumpert said he agreed to place the item on the agenda and
agreed with the initiator that if we were not able to come to an
agreement on the language for the drainage easement or right of
way or whatever the document would be that the attorneys would
finally agree to, then he would pull the action. He said that was
the agreement they had at the time they left the meeting.
Schumpert said since that time he had been told there were
actually eleven conditions that were placed on it, and at the
time he told staff this would be on the agenda, only two of the
conditions had been met, so he said we would proceed. Schumpert
said all of the conditions have been cleared with the exception
of the one they met about. He said several documents have changed
hands and the language in the document that is in disagreement
has to do with what is now a permanent drainage right of way
document which indicates that the City would maintain the trees
and shrubs in that drainage easement or right of way in their
natural state. At the time of the meeting, Schumpert indicated to
the initiator that the sole purpose of having a drainage easement
was for the City crews to have the ability to clear or manage it
so that we would not have a situation such as the one that now
exists in Meadowbrook, and to have language saying we would
maintain things in the right of way which could affect the
drainage, that he could not support that.
Schumpert said as of today, that language is not included, but in
the mean time, a number of Council members had contacted him and
corrected his thinking regarding it be pulled from the agenda,
that it should remain on the agenda, and it is on the agenda. He
said it is a serious situation to staff because we cannot agree
or recommend language which indicates the City will maintain
trees, shrubs or whatever they may be, in a drainage right of
way. He suggested the City Attorney outline legal options
Cruz said LMAPC approved the record plat based on certain
conditions, one being the granting of the right of way for the
channel, which is required by City Code. He said if that
condition is not met, then the LMAPC Chairman is under no
authority to approve the plat and the record plat must be
approved by the LMAPC and signed off by the Chairman, and
approved by the Council and signed off by the Mayor. If one of
the signatures is missing, it would not be accepted for recording
in the County Clerks Office. Cruz said drainage is required in
the City Code; at the time the construction plat for this
subdivision was presented to LMAPC and Council, it included this
drainage area. At the time the record plat was presented to
LMAPC, and is now being presented to Council, it does not include
that drainage area, that portion being stripped from the record
plat which should be in the record plat as part of this process.
He said if Council were to consider approving this record plat
with some modification with respect to the grant of the right of
way for the drainage, any modification to the requirement of the
LMAPC should not in any way degrade the intent of the LMAPC. Cruz
said if a modification is made and it is within the intent of the
LMAPC, and that is for the City to have the capacity, ability and
right to clear the channel without having to get permission from
the owner, that is within the intent; but if you accept this with
the requirement that we must have to request permission from the
grantor each time we enter that property, then that would be
against the City Code and against the intent of the conditions
imposed by the LMAPC, and under that situation, the record plat
must be returned to the LMAPC for reconsideration.
Shanklin asked what if this person did not own that land. Cruz
said at the time the property was presented for the construction
plat, it included that drainage area. Shanklin said the document
he was looking at did not show that. Cruz said Shanklin was
looking at the proposed record plat, which deleted the remainder
of what was in the construction plat. Cruz said at the time the
construction plat was presented, the developer owned the channel.
Cruz said the question is if the developer does not own the
channel, is there a requirement for the off site improvement and
the answer is yes, the City Code states the LMAPC has the right
to require the dedication of drainage channels which are not part
of the subdivision.
Williams said water flows through it now and the City has never
done any work out there. Dutcher asked about the Holy Family
Catholic Church and Beller said the water runs behind it. Dutcher
said the water would then run behind this property. Cruz said the
property is being developed under the subdivision regulations and
it is not just one small tract at a time.
Purcell said from all the information he had in writing, Mr.
Eason and his personnel did not know about this submission of
right of way dedication and approval form for drainage area
located outside the plat was needed until it went to LMAPC on
February 12. He said he had asked if there was a document or
letter showing that Eason was notified prior to that date at the
LMAPC meeting that he had to do that submission of right of way
dedication. Purcell said he had a problem with that because it is
indicated on a letter dated 25 November to Landmark Engineering
from the Planning Department that there was discussion regarding
the requirement that the drainage right of way on the western
portion of the plat be deleted from the platted area, and that is
in fact what happened; I recommend that you not make the change
because Mr. Eason would be responsible for the maintenance of the
channel, well, that is what he wants to do, he wants to remove it
and be responsible for the channel, so this is coming on 25
November that if he removes it, he will be responsible and he
said he would remove it and be responsible, then on 12 February
we say he cannot do that. Purcell said he had a problem with that
but perhaps there was something where Eason was notified prior to
12 February that he could not do that and the only way he could
get this was to do the easement.
Purcell said all Eason really wants to do is somehow preserve for
as long as possible the natural trees in that area, and he knows
it will not be forever and the people who bought the adjacent
land know it also, eventually something will happen and the City
must have a recourse to be able to do something with the drainage
area to prevent a bad situation in the future. He said if some
wording could be included where the City would attempt to leave
it as long as possible, that Mr. Eason could agree to that.
Purcell said it seemed the attorneys on both sides should be able
to work that out to everyones satisfaction.
Beller said time is of the essence because builders are waiting
to build; construction could begin in March and if it has to go
back to LMAPC, it could be delayed 60 days.
Cruz said the approval of the record plat should and must meet
the intent of the dedication; based on Purcells comments, a
proposed right of way document has been sent back and forth. If
Mr. Eason were to agree to a modification of the document that
was sent to his attorney on 17 February where we added language
to the effect that "with the right of ingress and egress to and
from the same for the purpose of installing, constructing,
operating, maintaining, repairing and replacing in, over,
through, and upon said property as described a drainage channel
along with the further right to operate, maintain, repair and
replace the same"; if we were to add the following terms and he
agrees, "however, the City will endeavor to maintain the trees
and shrubs in their natural condition, their natural state, if
possible". Cruz said if Eason is agreeable to that, he would say
that meets the intent of the LMAPC and felt that unless he was
totally wrong, that the Commission and the Chairman would sign
off on the plat.
Al Jung, Landmark Engineering, said he is the engineer of record
on the project. He asked Cruz if that was a drainage right of way
document. Cruz said yes. Cruz said what was initially transmitted
to the attorneys in Oklahoma City was an easement document, and
the same legal description is shown and everything is the same
except for the addition of that language.
Jung said he knew Mr. Eason was concerned about a fee simple
transfer, such as a warranty deed or a drainage right of way on
the record plat, but this is less than a fee simple and that he
could not speak for Mr. Eason, who was not present, but that
seems better than what was shown originally. Cruz said it is less
than fee simple and the question was the maintenance of the trees
and shrubs in the area unless the City definitely had to remove
them for obstructions.
Mayor Marley asked if Council could approve it with this
condition and if that is not agreeable, something else would have
to be done. Cruz said Council could approve it subject to that
condition, and before the Mayor signs off on the record plat, we
must have the written document saying it is approved, and then it
goes back to the Chairman for signature.
MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Purcell, to include the language as
Mr. Cruz said: "however, the City will endeavor to maintain the
trees and shrubs in their natural state if possible", and approve
the record plat as recommended.
For the record, the recommended action was shown as follows:
Approve the record plat for Stonebridge Estates and accept the
water and sewer improvements, maintenance bond in the amount of
$22,039.05, a utility easement outside the platted area for the
water main extension, and a warranty deed or easement outside the
platted area for drainage.
Maples said if the area were left for Eason to maintain, he could
make that decision, but if it is granted to the City, it will be
up to the City staff to interpret whether or not it is needed.
Beller said Eason felt comfortable with the language.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Williams, Dutcher, Purcell, Shanklin,
Beller, Green, Warren, Maples. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
Williams said staff had worked with this entity for a few months
and it appeared that a number of issues came up at the eleventh
hour and had to be worked out before the Council. He said if that
could have been worked out before, it should have been. Williams
said the construction industry employs a large number of people
and the harder we make it for them to keep the progress going,
the harder it will be to keep people working. He encouraged staff
to work through the projects as best as possible so business can
10. Consider approving amendment to the lease agreement
between the City of Lawton and the Lawton Arts For All, Inc. for
office space at Town Hall. EXHIBITS: AMENDMENT; PROPOSED LEASE
MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Green, to approve the item. AYE:
Dutcher, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Green, Warren, Maples,
Williams. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
ADDENDUM: Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the
installation of traffic control devices at the intersection of SW
8th and "I" Avenue. EXHIBITS: RESOLUTION NO. 97-27.
Shanklin said he listened to the tape when Council approved
putting a yield sign at 8th and "I" but that he said 8th and "H",
but the conversation dealt with 8th and "I" prior to that. He
said the language should be cleaned up and that the yield signs
should go on the north and south side of 8th Street at the
intersection of "I", and the appropriate place for the Children
At Play signs would be by the tennis courts on "I" as staff deems
MOVED by Shanklin, SECOND by Green, for approval of Resolution
Purcell asked if the signs should be on 8th and "I" instead of
8th and "H". Shanklin said the signs were already in place on 8th
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Green, Warren,
Maples, Williams, Dutcher. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
(Title only) RESOLUTION NO. 97-27
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC CONTROL
DEVICES AT CERTAIN DESIGNATED LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF
11. ITEM CONSIDERED SEPARATELY AS SHOWN BELOW.
12. Consider the following damage claim recommended for
approval and consider passage of the resolution authorizing the
City Attorney to file a friendly suit for this claim which is
over $400.00: Dilsharm and Felesha Williams. EXHIBITS: LEGAL
(Title only) RESOLUTION NO. 97-28
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO
ASSIST DILSHARM AND FELESHA WILLIAMS IN FILING A FRIENDLY SUIT IN
THE DISTRICT COURT OF COMANCHE COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, AGAINST THE CITY
OF LAWTON; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO CONFESS JUDGMENT
THEREIN IN THE REDUCED AMOUNT OF FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY-THREE DOLLARS
AND 60/100S ($553.60).
13. Consider adopting a resolution ratifying the action of the
City Attorney in filing and making payment of the judgment in the
Workers Compensation case of Marshall MacDonald in the Workers
Compensation Court, Case No. 96-15704R. EXHIBITS: RESOLUTION NO.
(Title only) RESOLUTION NO. 97-29
A RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE ACTIONS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY IN MAKING
PAYMENT OF THE JUDGMENT IN THE WORKERS COMPENSATION CASE OF
MARSHALL MACDONALD FOR THE AMOUNT OF EIGHTEEN THOUSAND, SIX
HUNDRED FIFTY-FIVE DOLLARS ($18,655.00) PER ORDER OF THE WORKERS
COMPENSATION COURT, AND FILING A FOREIGN JUDGMENT IN THE DISTRICT
COURT OF COMANCHE COUNTY FOR PURPOSES OF PLACING SAID JUDGMENT ON
THE TAX ROLLS.
14. Consider accepting an easement from Mr. and Mrs. Dismuke
for installation of a street light in Tomlinson Addition.
EXHIBITS: NONE. ACTION: Accept easement on SE corner of Lot 14,
Block 4, Tomlinson Addition (#12 NW 26th Street) from Mr. & Mrs.
Dismuke for installation of a street light in Tomlinson Addition.
15. Consider adopting a street light resolution to authorize
installation and removal of additional street lights in
residential areas. EXHIBITS: STREET LIGHT RESOLUTION 394. ACTION:
Adopt Street Light Resolution 394, which calls for installation
of one light at #12 NW 26th Street, and replacement of one 100
watt light at the SE corner of NW 78th and Rogers Lane with a 250
16. ITEM 16 WAS CONSIDERED SEPARATELY AS SHOWN BELOW.
17. Consider acknowledging receipt of a permit for the
construction of modifications to the existing Wastewater
Treatment Plant from the Oklahoma State Department of
Environmental Quality to serve the City of Lawton, Comanche
County, Oklahoma. EXHIBITS: NONE.
BACKGROUND: On January 24, 1997, the City of Lawton was granted
Permit No. ST000016960884 from ODEQ for construction of
modifications to the existing WWTP that will include a new 1400
GPM RAS pump station, 6000 GPM filter backwash waste pump
station, 2500 GPM nitrification dewatering pump station, 700 GPM
non-potable water pump station, 70 foot diameter trickling filter
clarifier, flow equalization basin diurnal cell, and all
appurtenances to serve the City of Lawton. A condition of the
permit is that it must be noted in the minutes of the next
regular meeting of the Lawton City Council. Permit is on file in
City Clerks Office.
ACTION: Acknowledge receipt of a permit for the construction of
modifications to the existing WWTP from ODEQ to serve the City of
Lawton, Comanche County, Oklahoma.
18. ITEM 18 WAS CONSIDERED SEPARATELY AS SHOWN BELOW.
19. Consider approving the record plat for Pebble Creek
Addition, Part 2B, and accepting the improvements and maintenance
bonds. EXHIBITS: PLAT MAP. ACTION: Approve the record plat for
Pebble Creek Addition, Part 2B, and accept the improvements, the
maintenance bond in the amount of $7,192.00 for water and sewer
improvements and the maintenance bond in the amount of $14,266.05
for street improvements.
20. Consider entering into a contract with Mr. Alan E. Jolly
for fire protection outside the Lawton City limits, and authorize
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the contract. EXHIBITS: NONE.
ACTION: Approve the contract and authorize execution.
21. Consider approving contract change order of Custodial
Maintenance Contract (CL96-128) with Service One Janitorial to
exclude janitorial services for the Animal Shelter Administration
Office (Item 3e of contract). EXHIBITS: CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER;
MEMORANDUM. ACTION: Approve contract change order to exclude
custodial services provided by Service One Janitorial Services to
the Animal Shelter Administration Office, and authorize execution
of the contract change order.
22. Consider extending contract for Fire Department Badges &
Collar Insignia. EXHIBITS: VENDORS MAILING LIST; RECOMMENDATION.
ACTION: Extend contract for Fire Department Badges & Collar
Insignia with Law Enforcement Equipment Company, Kansas City, MO,
and Hook-Fast Specialties, Providence, RI, and authorize
execution of contract extension documents. Contract will be at
the same terms through March 31, 1998.
23. Consider awarding contract for Dewatering Polymer.
EXHIBITS: VENDORS MAILING LIST; BID TABULATION; RECOMMENDATION.
ACTION: Award contract to Allied Colloids, Inc., Suffolk, VA, and
authorize contract execution.
24. Consider awarding contract for Jogging Track Material.
EXHIBITS: VENDORS MAILING LIST; BID TABULATION; RECOMMENDATION.
ACTION: Award contract to Red Dog Track, Inc., Strawn, TX, and
authorize contract execution.
25. Consider awarding contract for Outdoor Tennis Court Paint.
EXHIBITS: VENDORS MAILING LIST; BID TABULATION; RECOMMENDATION.
ACTION: Award contract to BSN Sports, Dallas, TX, and authorize
26. Consider awarding contract for Auctioneer Service.
EXHIBITS: VENDORS MAILING LIST; BID TABULATION; RECOMMENDATION.
ACTION: Award contract to Stallings Auction Service, Lawton, OK,
and authorize contract execution.
27. Mayors Appointments. EXHIBITS: NONE.
HUMAN RIGHTS & RELATIONS COMMISSION:
SFC Mechille McDonald, Fort Sill Rep., Term: 2/25/97 to
Janis Brennan, Native American Rep., Term: 2/25/97 to 9/30/98
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION:
Tom Hall, Ward 2 Rep., Term: 2/25/97 to 2/25/99
Kent Jester, Ward 2, Term: 2/25/97 to 7/1/2002
LAWTON METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING COMMISSION (LMAPC):
David Means, City Rep., Term: 2/12/97 to 2/12/2001
Ken Kleypas, Term: 2/24/97 to 2/24/2000
28. Consider approval of payroll for the period of February 10
through February 23, 1997. EXHIBITS: NONE.
Mayor Marley asked that Item 11 be considered separately as
someone had asked to speak on it. Purcell asked that Items 16 and
18 be considered separately.
MOVED by Purcell, SECOND by Williams, to approve the Consent
Agenda items as recommended with the exception of Items 11, 16
and 18. AYE: Shanklin, Beller, Green, Warren, Maples, Williams,
Dutcher, Purcell. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
11. Consider the following damage claims recommended for
denial: Cheryl and Scott McCullough; and Rexine Gibson. EXHIBITS:
LEGAL OPINIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Denial of
Rexine Gibson was recognized to speak regarding her claim. She
said she owns the property at 6103 Dearborn; on Friday, September
20, the tenant told her the sewer had backed up and that the
bathroom facilities were not usable. A plumber was called, the
line was rodded and it would only go as far as where it connects
into the Citys line. A second plumber was sent out for his
opinion and it was the same. She said they dug down 12 feet to
the connection to the City main and found that the City main had
collapsed and that her riser had fallen into the City main and
this was causing the problem. There was no problem with the 160
feet of line going from the main to the house.
Gibson said it was an expense to her of $860, which was a real
burden. She said her tenant was home while the work was being
done and observed the problem and work, so she had his
statements, as well as the two or three plumbers who were
present. She said she had been led to believe from day one that
this was a problem with the City line, and that she would not
have filed a claim if the problem would have been with her line,
but it was indicated to her in every respect, other than through
the City Attorneys Office, that it was a problem created by the
City and that was why she filed the claim.
Gibson said according to the letter from the City Attorneys
Office, it is unknown whether the break in the main was due
solely to the fall of the riser or if it existed before the riser
fell. She said she could go only by what the plumbers said.
Gibson said she realized it was the City Attorneys job to
protect the City and the number of claims the City has received,
and that she was in favor of having the things fixed. She said
according to the information she had, this was a problem created
by the City and asked that consideration be given to paying the
Cruz said the question was whether the sewer line collapsed
causing the riser to fall in, or did the riser cause the main to
collapse. He said based on the best information they had, with
the tapping bell which was made of aluminum which contributed to
the corrosion of the main, that contributed to the riser falling
into the main causing the main to collapse. Cruz said assuming
the main had collapsed, the City had not received any prior
notice that there was any defect on the main so on that basis
also, the recommendation is for denial of the claim.
MOVED by Williams, SECOND by Purcell, for denial of the Gibson
Shanklin said it is not the Citys fault when the riser falls
into the trunk line. Gibson said she had been led to believe all
along that it was the Citys problem. Maples said the City had
not received notice of a prior defect on the line so State
Statute will not allow the Council to pay the claim, and if they
do, the could each be held liable individually.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Beller, Green, Warren, Maples, Williams,
Dutcher, Purcell, Shanklin. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
MOVED by Purcell, SECOND by Warren, to deny the McCullough claim.
AYE: Green, Warren, Maples, Williams, Dutcher, Purcell, Shanklin,
Beller. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
16. Consider accepting the Wastewater Treatment Plant
Incinerator & Lime Slurry Demolition Project 96-9 by M & M
Wrecking and placing the Maintenance Bond into effect. EXHIBITS:
NONE. ACTION: Accept the project and place the maintenance bond
Purcell said the contractor finished 14 days early and $45,000
under bid, and should be commended.
MOVED by Purcell, SECOND by Dutcher, to accept the Wastewater
Treatment Plant Incinerator & Lime Slurry Demolition Project 96-9
by M & M Wrecking and place the maintenance bond into effect.
AYE: Warren, Maples, Williams, Dutcher, Purcell, Shanklin,
Beller, Green. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
18. Consider waiving Council Policy 5-2, and consider an
agreement for the sale of treated water to the J.T. Neal
Grandchildrens Trust, Larry D. Neal, Trustee, to provide water
service to the development of Wichita Ridge Estates subdivision.
EXHIBITS: MAP; COUNCIL COMMITTEE MINUTES; PROPOSED AGREEMENT;
COUNCIL POLICY 5-2. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Waive Council Policy 5-2
and approve the agreement.
Purcell asked if Council is being asked to waive a policy, and if
there would be one water meter, or multiple meters, which was not
to be done any more. Schumpert said the reason for waiving the
Council Policy is that it states that in this situation, the area
is required to be annexed into the City, and the recommendation
is to waive that; the applicant agreed, in lieu of that, to put
in the streets to the City standards, less the curbing. Schumpert
said there will be only one meter.
Beller asked why we would care how the streets are built if the
area will not be annexed. Schumpert said at some point in time,
some Council will be given the opportunity to annex that. Mayor
Marley asked why we wanted to accept it without the curbing if it
will be annexed at some point, and if the City would have to do
MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Dutcher, that Council Policy 5-2 be
waived and that the agreement be approved.
Schumpert said the staff position is to annex the property; the
Committee for Outside Water Sales told Neal if he would agree to
put in the streets to City standard, less the curbs, it would
recommend waiving the Council Policy and approving the agreement.
Purcell asked if the policy is to annex anyone outside the City
limits who wants water. Schumpert said no, only if they fall
within a certain criteria. Williams asked if they would be
concrete or asphalt streets. Warren said probably a mixture to
meet the City Code standards. Williams asked if someone
recommended them doing the streets in order to be able to get
water. Schumpert said according to the policy, in this situation,
you should annex the property; the Committee for Outside Water
Sales met with the applicant and their agreement was if you put
the streets in to our standards, we will recommend that you be
sold water, and not be annexed, and that was agreeable. Williams
asked what the applicant said about being annexed and Schumpert
said he did not want to be annexed. Shanklin said the houses
would be located on several acre tracts, and curb and gutter
would not be practical. Warren said the property falls into the
timing area that would call for it to be annexed. Schumpert said
it depends on the ridge lines and whether they have water
available from a water association, etc.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Maples, Williams, Dutcher, Purcell,
Shanklin, Beller, Green, Warren. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
29. Pursuant to Section 307B.3, Title 25, Oklahoma Statutes,
consider convening in executive session to discuss the appraisal
or acquisition of real property located at SW 6th and Texas
Avenue (South of the Public Works Yard) in Section Six (6),
Township One North (T-1-N), Range Eleven West (R-11-W), Indian
Meridian, Comanche County, Oklahoma, and take appropriate action
in open session if necessary. EXHIBITS: NONE.
30. Pursuant to Section 307B.4, Title 25, Oklahoma Statutes,
consider convening in executive session to consider a settlement
offer received in a third party claim of Cathy A. Williams
against Florence H. Elling, and take appropriate action in open
session. EXHIBITS: NONE.
31. Pursuant to Section 307B.4, Title 25, Oklahoma Statutes,
consider convening in executive session to discuss claims
alleging unlawful arrest and assault and battery to claimants,
Clayton L. Green, Jr. and Russell Lane Green, and take
appropriate action in open session. EXHIBITS: NONE.
MOVED by Dutcher, SECOND by Maples, to convene in executive
session to consider items so listed on the agenda. AYE: Williams,
Dutcher, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Green, Warren, Maples. NAY:
None. MOTION CARRIED.
The Mayor and Council convened in executive session at 9:20 p.m.
and reconvened in regular, open session at 9:45 p.m. with roll
call reflecting all members present.
Cruz said the Mayor and Council met in executive session to
consider the three items on the agenda; on Item 29 relating to
the property at 6th and Texas, no action is needed in open
Cruz said on Item 30 relating to the third party claim of Cathy
Williams, recommendation of approval authorizing settlement of
this case was made.
MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Maples, for approval of Resolution No.
97-30. AYE: Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Green, Warren, Maples,
Williams, Dutcher. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
(Title only) RESOLUTION NO. 97-30
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF A THIRD
PARTY CLAIM BY CATHY A. WILLIAMS AGAINST FLORENCE H. ELLING.
Cruz reported no action is needed on Item 31 at this time.
REPORTS: MAYOR/CITY COUNCIL/CITY MANAGER.
Maples reported that today is Council Member Shanklins birthday
and everyone sang Happy Birthday to him.
Schumpert said Bar-S has apparently agreed to the contract for
municipal services. He said the staff got put in a corner on
that, but was attempting to prevent problems such as are now
occurring in Altus.
Green said there were good comments in Jet Magazine in a February
issue about Lawton, and that she would like to be able to read
Mayor Marley said March 11 is voting today and that is also the
week of spring break. He encouraged those parents who may be out
of town that week to get absentee ballots and for everyone to
exercise their right to vote.
Shanklin said we had a person come before Council tonight
indicating he felt he was being persecuted or picked on, and had
a list of different businesses in town that have gravel parking
areas. He said that was not where the City lost its $20,000
judgment, but that was because the individual at Branders was
forced to put in asphalt, and someone felt the City caused that
because he would bring competition. Shanklin said many people
know the City paid that $20,000 judgment and lost because the
rules supposedly were not being enforced equally, and that was
the area used to prove it. He said you cannot put asphalt up
against the curb and start driving in anywhere. Shanklin said the
City receives letters from individuals wanting to clean up on
Gore Boulevard, but evidently it did not bother than to see cars
packed every which way. He said the City was not picking on any
individual, and we were talking about putting asphalt against the
curb and using it for a driveway, and that cannot be done.
There was no further business and the meeting adjourned at 9:50