Month 1999-10 October
Meeting of 1999-10-12 Regular Meeting
LAWTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 12, 1999 - 6:00 P.M.
WAYNE GILLEY CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER
Mayor Cecil E. Powell, Also Present:
Presiding Bill Baker, City Manager
John Vincent, City Attorney
Sandra Rench, Deputy City Clerk
Lt. Col. Jeff Ewing, Fort Sill Liaison
The meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m. by Mayor Powell. Notice of meeting and agenda
were posted on the City Hall notice board as required by State Law.
PRESENT: G. Wayne Smith, Ward One
Richard Williams, Ward Two
Glenn Devine, Ward Three
John Purcell, Ward Four
Robert Shanklin, Ward Five
Charles Beller, Ward Six
Stanley Haywood, Ward Seven
Randy Warren, Ward Eight
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF LAWTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR
MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1999.
MOTION by Smith, SECOND by Haywood, for approval of the minutes. AYE: Haywood,
Warren, Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
Russel John, member of the 15 member Flower Mound Road Water Association said they have a
water line which is approximately 165 feet on Flower Mound Road. He said several years ago
when the area was annexed south of Lee on Flower Mound Road they rebuilt the road and did a
good job. He said the water line is on the east side of the road and has been there since the 1960's
and after the improvement project was completed the line was left in good shape. He said the
improvement project they had this past summer left the line exposed in one area and in several
areas over a foot of dirt was removed from over the line so the pipe will be subject to freeze. He
said they feel the road improvement project was due to the correctional facility which is good for
the City of Lawton and they are a part of the City but felt it was unfair that they are asked, as a
small non profit water association, to bare the cost of lowering the line. He said they would
appreciate the Council's immediate consideration to do something with this because freezing
weather is coming soon.
Beller asked if the water line has to be lowered or if there is a way it can be covered. John said
they have cut the slope to cover it and it would need to be sodded, they don't have any rock beds
to work through and it could probably be trenched and lowered. Beller asked how long the line
is. John said there is a mile of line and one area is exposed and over a foot of dirt is gone from
one part and they think they are close to the surface on other portions of it.
Devine asked if Mr. John knew what it was going to cost to lower the line. John said no. Devine
asked if Mr. John was just making the Council aware of the problem. John said yes and the line
was in good shape until they had the improvement project and they felt it was an imposition on
the 15 member association to have to bare the cost of lowering the line. Devine asked Mr. John if
they are requesting the City's assistance in getting the line lowered or to share in the cost for it.
Mr. John said yes.
Purcell said it is a bigger issue than that, if they are going to trench it and help lower it, which
they should do, they need to increase the size of the 2" pipe. He said when they annexed that into
the City of Lawton they didn't do anything to provide water service to the citizens who live in
that part of the city, they are still using water from the water association pipe. He said if they are
going to trench it they should consider putting in a bigger pipe and move the water meter from
the water association out of the city limits down on Bishop Road.
Shanklin asked Bill Baker why, if they exposed it, they didn't put it back because he was told by
the City Attorney that they couldn't do it and if that is true asked why. Baker said he talked to
Mr. Webber, Commissioner Turner, Mr. Mann and Senator Helton on this item. He said there is
a lot of concern and the information he received is that this is a private line that does not belong
to the City, they have no responsibility for the maintenance of the line and can't legally touch the
Shanklin asked if they can just bulldoze it up for a half mile. Baker said the City didn't tear it up,
this project was a cooperative effort between the City, County and State, the State did the road
surface, the County did the road preparation including the drainage work and the bar ditches, the
City didn't do any of the work. He said the City's part of the agreement was to provide funding to
do the base and road preparation for the first mile. He said he looked into this and found that the
association could lower the line and file a Tort Claim against the City and the Council could
consider the claim, if they wanted to get an estimate before they do the work they could put that
estimate with their Tort Claim. He said the other option he told Mr. McMahon the other day was
to get with the County and see if they would do something because it was the County that did the
work, not the City, and that is what he knew about the situation.
Shanklin said Mr. Turner is present and would like him to respond.
Gail Turner, County Commissioner, said this has been a coordination between the City and the
County, the first mile is in the City limits and the County has had nothing to do with this because
it is in the City's jurisdiction, not in the County's. He said the County didn't have anything to do
with the portion where the water line was uncovered because it is in the first mile, the County has
basically zero responsibility for that mile because it is in the City's jurisdiction not the County's.
He said Jenkins was the dirt contractor the City and County paid but it is a totally separate
contract at Bishop Road, the County went south and the City went north, so the County has no
responsibility or jurisdiction over the first mile of road, water line or ditch.
Shanklin asked if their equipment was in there at all. Turner said no.
Shanklin asked where Baker got his information.
Mayor Powell said he has been to the location at the request of several people and Mr. John's
point is well taken, the cold temperatures are coming and this is something they need to move on
rather expediently. He said the City Attorney has assured him that he will look into this
tomorrow and will move on this to work with Mr. John in an attempt to arrive at something to
Purcell said if they are going to trench it and bury the line they need to get something back to the
Council to approve putting in a better pipe because they are going to have to do it eventually and
should see if they can do it now. He said they would have to come up with some money to do it
but they shouldn't bury an old rotten pipe just to solve the problem quickly, they still have a
major problem for that one mile of road for the citizens that live out there.
Shanklin asked to go back to Mr. Baker's comments that the County did it and asked what led
him to believe that. Baker said that was his understanding from Public Works. Shanklin said
someone must be in error. Baker said it was his understanding that the City didn't do any of the
Powell said Jenkins did the dirt work and didn't know who contracted with them but they didn't
want to do any more because they were afraid they would get into more of the pipe at that
location. Shanklin asked if they were employed by the City of Lawton. Vincent said he didn't
know at this point but now that he has heard from Mr. Turner he remembered the situation but
when they were investigating it earlier this week, that is not what they were told. He said the
information they received was that they had entered into a cooperative agreement with the
County, the County hired the engineer to do the design work and the County actually let the
contract and the City paid the County approximately $115,000 and he needed to look into the
information Mr. Turner provided today because that is not what they were told before.
Tom Hall, Chairman, Parks & Recreation Commission, said he was joined by Commission
members Jerry Thorne, Ron Watts and Jackie Barrett, and they were present to express their
concern that their preference for the location of the city playground was not emphasized enough.
He said their request was to locate the city playground at Elmer Thomas Park and the members
wanted to express that to the City Council because they didn't feet it was expressed fully that it
was the intent of the Commission and thought several of the members had spoken with the
Council members about this but wanted to go on record in that regard.
Warren asked what their number two was on their pick list. Hall said it was Greer Park.
Devine said he thought they settled that, that it was going to be in Greer Park. Powell said that
was correct and asked Mr. Hall to restate his comments.
Hall said when it comes to matters like this they want to make sure their feelings are known
because they feel sometimes the staff recommendations are not fully putting the emphasis where
they would like to put it so they will be coming to the Council to make sure they are letting them
know where their emphasis lies and he invited the Council members to attend their meetings. He
said he talked to Mr. Baker who will be attending the meeting on October 25 so they will be able
to get more input.
Shanklin said if the new parks director is not interested in the Parks and Recreation Commission
maybe they need to look at abolishing it if that is how some of them feel, if they aren't going to
be listened to they don't need to waste their time.
Baker said he sent Mr. Hall a letter with a copy to the Council. He said they want to be
supportive and cooperate with the Parks and Recreation Commission and if they feel that support
has not been that good up to this point, they are sorry and will improve, that is one reason why he
will be going to the meeting and has asked the Assistant City Manager to start attending the
meetings. He said in his letter he told Hall if he or a member of the Commission have any
problems involving city staff, if they are not being supportive, not getting the information or not
being cooperative, to contact him personally and he would look into it. He said it is their intent
and was confident it was Mr. Salva's intent to be cooperative with the Commission and he had
discussed this and was not concerned that it would be a problem in the future. He asked the
members to contact him if they have any problems and he will assist in resolving the problems.
Shanklin said in reference to Elmer Thomas Park, if there is going to be a master plan it should
be approved by Council, and asked if they are designating one individual who just came into
town to tell them what they are going to do and make contact with different other entities like the
Chamber of Commerce and McMahon Foundation when at one time they said that the contact
with McMahon Foundation would be done through the Mayor, Mayor Marley was the Mayor at
that time, and any contact with McMahon was supposed to go through the Mayor. He said he
didn't want to go over eight or ten things they didn't fulfill that when McMahon gave them
something they ignored it so they appointed the Mayor and the Minutes will reflect that the
Mayor would be the contact at all times with McMahon Foundation.
Baker said he wasn't aware of that but Mr. Salva was looking into the Master Plan at his request
and he and Salva knew they would not proceed with this until Council authorized a request to
McMahon. He said they were looking at a possible $10,000 request to McMahon and he had told
Mr. Salva that it wasn't something they needed to go to McMahon for, when they get ready to go
to McMahon they need a building or some similar type of project and they wouldn't be going to
McMahon for a request without Council's approval.
Shanklin asked if the Clerk or Purcell recalled the conversation regarding the Mayor taking any
requests before McMahon. Purcell said he remembered the Council asking them for money.
Shanklin said he recalled the Council agreeing that the Mayor would make any requests to
McMahon. Purcell said he recalled that they couldn't ask them for money, only the Mayor
because they weren't sure of the approach when asking for money.
Shanklin said they are trying to stop the rank and file of going to DEQ or the EPA on their own
and not through the City Manager with the Mayor's signature and they need to send the number
one elected official to McMahon, which is the Mayor, and is their point of contact and if they
check the minutes it is in there. He asked if the Council agreed that the point of contact for
McMahon should be the Mayor.
Williams said either the Mayor or City Manager and didn't think anyone would be asking them
for money, they know what the needs are. He said Mr. Wood, their executive director, calls Bill
Baker or the Mayor so he wouldn't have any problem with either of them.
Beller asked if they understand that the Parks and Recreation Commission is an advisory board
which means this is what they would like to see but if the staff thinks there is a better way to
serve the community, he would hope the board wouldn't get upset just because they didn't take
their recommendation in the advisory capacity. Hall said they know they are an advisory board
and may not always agree with the staff and the City Council can overturn both of them but they
want to emphasize their point of view and they don't always feel that is being expressed.
Warren said if they are talking about the 35th Division scenario at the last meeting he was fully
aware from Mr. Salva's briefing that the Commission's choice was Elmer Thomas Park and staff
didn't agree with that and he knew what they wanted and understand what staff wanted and
understood why staff wanted it at a different location and he was fully aware of everything that
was going on.
Williams asked if they are still meeting at the H.C. King Center and if there are any vacancies on
the Commission. Hall said they are still meeting at the same location and there are two Mayor
vacancies that just came about and one other commission member.
Ray Sartain, 2319 NW Austin Drive, said a month ago he was denied a building permit because
he hadn't done any work within 30 days, however as he stated before, he got the building permit
on August 5, had an electrician in the house on August 8 and did some work at another place and
he was getting his equipment and said that the last time and is again here to ask because no one
believes he is doing anything, he had a licensed contractor come to the house and he has a
contract with him and had pictures. He said he was asking for another month or two to get the
house in shape.
Powell asked what address Sartain was talking about. Sartain said it is for 806 SW 15th and no
one told him he had 30 days. Powell said this address is on Page 216 (Minutes) if they wanted to
look at it.
Williams said that was put back on the demolition list.
Vincent said it isn't on the agenda and the Council can't take any action.
Sartain said the contractor had a list of all the materials he had and asked for reconsideration on
Powell said the Council can't take any action on audience participation and asked for advise to
Vincent said in order for this to be reconsidered by the Council it has to be reagended and the
Council Policy would have to be waived. He said he thought the contract for demolition had been
let. Tucker said they have asked for estimates, received the request from Mr. Sartain and they
gave him two weeks in which to get his demolition permit. Vincent said normal practice is if the
Council directs this item to be put back on the agenda with consideration of waiving the policy
the contract is not let, so it is up to the Council as to whether they direct them to put it on the
Williams said he wouldn't.
Shanklin said he would, they should listen to it and he told Mr. Sartain that he could take this to
District Court and get an injunction against the City, they are denying him his right to fix it up
and thought he had honorable intent because he did some work.
Sartain said he would appreciate more consideration.
Powell said this can't have any action whatsoever at this time.
Baker said they are preparing to let the demolition contract and asked if council wanted the staff
to do something differently.
Williams said he didn't, they need to let it go.
Vincent said he had been contacted by an attorney and had furnished him records back to 1997
which was the first time they had considered it and he has been advised of his rights.
1. Consider approving proposed changes to Council Policy 5-2, Treated Water Outside
Municipal Limits to Individuals and Multi-Water Users. Exhibits: Proposed Council Policy 5-2.
Bigham said at the last City Council meeting staff had been directed to revise Council Policy 5-2
as it related to selling water outside the city limits. He said they have a copy of the revised
Council Policy which essentially removes the Development Timing Areas on Page 7. He said
essentially if water is sold outside the City limits through a multi-meter agreement, it is the
option of the purchaser as to whether he wants to be annexed into the City, if he does then the
annexation would occur and all the infrastructure to the development
would have to happen, if the purchaser wishes not to be annexed then the private water line
would be put in and not accepted by the Council. He said Page 7 of the agenda, 2.c. "If the area
not annexed into the city" add "the private water line" take out the comma "connection
City's water main shall be designed and installed in accordance with the City Code." He said that
would clarify the actual connection to the public and private lines have to meet City Code
Vincent asked if Bigham was changing the word "connecting" to "connection". Bigham
Vincent said there had been discussion about subsection f. which is the current policy and is the
service line from the private water main to the house or structure, right now it has to meet City
Code and there was discussion whether the service line that connects to a line that is not
necessarily to City Code meets the City Code and was bringing that up for discussion. He said
they also need to change the effective date to October 12.
Beller asked what Bigham's position is on f. on page 8. Bigham said he didn't have a strong
position one way or the other, this has been a standard provision in the agreements and is
applicable to the individual water agreements. He said he didn't think there was any great
additional cost to put it to City standards but in the event a public water line is put in, in lieu
the private water line they would already have that private service line meeting City Code
standards. He said if the Council wants to delete that it would be fine but recommended the
second sentence relating to the back flow device be left in.
Beller said if the service lines aren't annexed they don't have to meet the standards so why would
they require it unless annexation is requested so asked that they delete the first sentence of the
Williams asked for a difference or reason in trying to determine the water line that would meet
City Code versus the water line that would not meet City Code, is it just the schedule size of the
pipe itself. Bigham asked if he was talking about subsection f. and said that would be the service
line from the meter to the house and Tucker may be able to elaborate on the City Code standards
but this would be the same standards they use in the City, such as the proper size line, schedule
pipe and the connections. Tucker said regarding the lines from the meters to the house the City
standards are the State of Oklahoma Plumbing Standards, and the difference is that there may or
may not have been someone check it but they protect their public water supply with the back
flow preventer at that point.
Beller asked if the installation person would have to meet the state standards. Tucker said yes
Purcell said b. and c., which is where the people earlier had a problem and the next item, he
didn't understand the wording because b. states that if the areas are to be annexed then all
infrastructure must be brought up to City Code, if it is to be annexed to sell City water; c. says if
it is not to be annexed just the lines connected to the City main have to meet Code and asked
what happens five years later when it has to be annexed. Vincent said that is similar to what they
are facing with the Flower Mound Association right now, by changing the word connecting to
connection they are only actually talking about the physical location of the connection to the City
main to the private service main that will service the various houses, they are not talking about
the service lines themselves at that point. He said regarding b., if the developer requests
annexation at the same time he is getting water from the City then that development will be
inside the City limits by the time everything gets built so all the infrastructure, streets, storm
drainage, etc. will need to be built according to Code because he is requesting that come into the
City right now. He said section c., with the change from connecting to connection, they are only
talking about the one point and it puts them in the situation they have with the Flower Mound
Road Association because he understands the line is two inch PVC pipe of some kind. He said he
has not seen it but was told it is similar to what the oil companies used years ago that is rolled out
and buried and it wouldn't necessarily meet the schedule for pipe strength and structure, etc. so
by changing connecting to connection they are only talking about a point where if they left it at
connecting that would mean at the time of initial installation it would meet the Code standards.
Purcell asked how that solves the problem when five years later they annex the portion where the
connection is which meets the city standards but everything else from that connection into
wherever they're annexing does not. Divine said it would be go back to the Grandfather clause
where once they change the connection or the water line they would have to bring it up to City
Code at that time, in other words if it wasn't annexed they could use what they have now, once it
is annexed, if they make any changes in any way on the water line they have to bring it up to City
Code. He said once it is disturbed it has to be brought up to City Code before they can get service
and it has to be inspected.
Purcell asked what happens if they don't want it annexed but the City says they are going to
annex and go through the process, do they still have to bring it up to Code. Devine said it goes
back to the Grandfather clause until they make any kind of change on the line then it would have
to be brought up to City Code.
Vincent said under the new annexation laws that went into effect in the early 1990's the city has
to produce a five year plan that will show how the city service will be taken into the new
annexed area if it isn't done at the request of the people being annexed, that doesn't mean the
services have to be provided within five years it means the plan has to show a five year plan on
bringing services into it. He said if there is a two inch line that doesn't provide fire flows and it
annexed in and they have a requirement to provide fire service then they will have to come up
with a plan on how to do it.
Shanklin asked if it would be at his expense. Vincent said it would depend on what plan they
adopt, most generally it would be the City, but there are water, street and sewer districts that can
be created under the Statutes if certain conditions are met that would amortize the cost to
different people across the board that are being serviced.
Devine said they need to delete the first part regarding the service line shall meet the standards of
the City Code to the second sentence for the back flow device.
Shanklin asked what defines the builder, if it is the individual building a home. Vincent said it
would be the person setting on the service line.
Vincent recommended additional wording to the second sentence of f. The builders shall be
required to install a back flow preventer and valve "onto service lines serving the residence."
Devine agreed with the recommendation.
Powell asked if that was in the form of a motion and Devine said yes.
Smith and Beller seconded the motion.
Vincent asked if that included changing "connecting" to "connection" and Devine
agreed to change it to connection.
Vincent said the other change would be to the effective date.
MOTION by Devine, SECOND by Smith and Beller, to delete the first sentence of 2.f. which
would then read "All builders shall be required to install a back flow preventer and valve onto
service lines serving the residence" and changing 2.c. "connecting" to "connection"
effective date of October 12, 1999. AYE: Warren, Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin,
Beller, Haywood. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
2. Consider waiving the provisions of Council Policy 5-2 and consider entering
into a multi-meter agreement with the Windridge Estates Water Association, Inc. for the sale of treated
outside the City limits, and rescind an individual agreement with Dr. McGath. Exhibits: Letter of
Request with Map; Location Map; Proposed Agreement; Excerpt 9/1/99 Council Minutes.
Vincent said there was some confusion on what language was supposed to be placed in paragraph
9 based on a motion made at the Outside Water Committee meeting. He said they have prepared
draft language and he had provided that to Mr. Copeland, the attorney for the Water Association.
He said the draft basically rewrites paragraph 9, there is no difference in the contract or
agreement in the agenda with the proposed new agreement except for this paragraph which goes
along with the revisions made in the Council Policy whereby "The buyer agrees that upon
annexation of the area served by the buyer, at the request of the buyer or a majority of the
property owners" then they have to build their infrastructure, if the city annexes it then "If
area serviced by the buyer is annexed by the City absent the request of the buyer the City shall be
responsible" for providing any infrastructure in the area that is not already in there and goes
State Statutes so there is no conflict there. He said they could contract the way the motion was
but they prepared two contracts and the message he received from Mr. Copeland today was that
if he didn't hear from him by 5:00 p.m. then Dr. McGath agreed with the language in the
proposed new paragraph 9.
Dr. McGath said he was in agreement with that and the motion carried in the previous item
makes this a moot point as long as they can change it to the paragraph just read.
MOTION by Smith, SECOND by Purcell, to waive the provisions of Council Policy 5-2 and
approve a multi-meter water association agreement with the Windridge Estates Water
Association Inc., for the sale of treated water outside the City limits, and rescind an individual
agreement with Dr. McGath.
Shanklin said the first time Dr. McGath applied for water he had asked him if he was planning on
selling the property and he understood that he wasn't and he asked Dr. McGath at the last
Committee meeting if he remembered that conversation and the only reason he asked him that
was because his property is next to Quail Run Estates. Shanklin asked why they had to build that
association to the City's standards and why Larry Neil had to build the roads to our standards and
raise it up 6" at a considerable expense. He said there is a water association and a development
and asked if that is the difference. Bigham said the agreements the City of Lawton had with
Dennis Bly of Quail Run made it a requirement that the streets and water lines had to be to the
City standards, the same language was in the Wichita Ridge agreement on the west side of town.
He said it was part of a compromise to the Council Policy, in lieu of being annexed the
Committee recommended the requirements in the water agreement. Shanklin said they wouldn't
have had to do that to get water there. Bigham said under the revised Council Policy that would
not have been a requirement, it was negotiated in the Water Committee meeting and the
recommendation to the City Council to include that language in the agreement and the applicant
was agreeable to executing those documents. Shanklin said they wouldn't have had to go to that
expense then. Vincent said the old Council Policy required that developments such as Mr. Neil's
be annexed and in lieu of annexation, in order to waive the Council Policy so he wouldn't have to
be annexed, he agreed to put the infrastructure in according to Code and it was a negotiated
agreement. He said when they are negotiating they start with a clean slate and they each ask for
certain things until they reach an agreement and it was approved by Council.
Shanklin said he has no heartburn with Dr. McGath doing this section but has a heartburn with
putting people's feet to the fire when it isn't necessary just because they had the water and he
didn't like that.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood,
Warren. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
3. Consider the following damage claim recommended for approval: George and Jynelta
Snodgrass. Exhibits: Legal Opinion/Recommendation. Action: Approval of claim in the amount
ITEM 4 WAS CONSIDERED SEPARATELY AS SHOWN BELOW.
5. Consider a resolution approving action taken by the Lawton Water Authority
issuance, sale and delivery of the Authority's promissory note to the Oklahoma Water Resources
Board; ratifying and confirming a certain lease agreement, as amended; and containing other
provisions related thereto. Exhibits: Resolution No. 99-126.
(Title only) Resolution No. 99-126
A resolution approving action taken by the Lawton Water Authority authorizing issuance, sale
and delivery of the Authority's Promissory Note to the Oklahoma Water Resources Board;
ratifying and confirming a certain lease agreement, as amended, and containing other provisions
6. Consider approving proposed changes to Council Policy 2-1, Initiation of Civil
Subsequent Legal Proceedings. Exhibits: Proposed Council Policy 2-1. Action: Approval of item.
"Background: The proposed change will allow the City Attorney authorization to initiate an
action in the District Court of Comanche County for collection of money owed in an amount not
to exceed $1,000.00 without prior approval of the Council. Further, it will also allow the City
Attorney authorization to waive collection if the amount owed to the City is less than $500.00."
7. 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 Ronald D. Maiberger in the
Workers' Compensation Court, Case No. 98-3380X. Exhibits: Resolution No. 99-127.
(Title only) Resolution No. 99-127
A resolution ratifying the actions of the City Attorney in making payment of the judgment in the
Workers' Compensation case of Ronald D. Maiberger for the amount of Fifteen Thousand Six
Hundred Twenty-One Dollars and Forty-Two Cents ($16,621.42), 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.
8. Consider approving a resolution amending Resolution No. 99-120 by correcting
description of the property located at 806 and 806-1/2 SW 15th Street. Exhibits: Resolution No.
(Title only) Resolution No. 99-128
A resolution amending Resolution No. 99-120 by correcting the legal description of 806 and 806-1/2 SW
9. Consider accepting a public utility easement from the Cracker Barrel Old Country
maintain a sanitary sewer main. Exhibits: None. Easement on file in City Clerk's Office. Action:
Approval of item regarding easement in the vicinity of 605 E Gore Boulevard.
10. Consider approving the plans and specifications for a left turn bay at SW
10th Street and
Lee Boulevard. Exhibits: Location Map; Memorandum from Engineering Associate. Action:
Approval of item.
11. Consider approving plans and specifications for the Chisolm Drainage Channel
#99-22 and authorizing staff to advertise for bids. Exhibits: Location Map. Action: Approval of
12. Consider accepting median openings and turn bays constructed at 2302 E. Gore
and 2612 W. Lee Boulevard for public dedication and an escrow agreement in lieu of
maintenance bond. Exhibits: None. (Escrow Agreement on file in the City Clerk's Office) Action:
Approval of item.
13. Consider approving Change Order #1 assessing liquidated damages, accepting
Street and Waterline Project 99-10 as constructed by T & G Construction, Inc., and placing the
Maintenance Bond into effect. Exhibits: Location Map. (Change Order #1 is on file in City
Engineer's Office) Action: Approval of item.
14. Consider awarding a construction contract to Thaxton Electric Company for
Public Library Lighting Project #99-24. Exhibits: Bid Tabulation. Action: Approval of contract
in the amount of $58,920.00.
15. Consider approval of the costs of demolition on the following properties,
condemned and demolished by the City: #14 SW B Ave., 610 SW B Ave., 2601 SW B Ave., 210-1/2 NW Columbia
Ave., 1606 SW D Ave., 811 SW E Ave., 904 SW E Ave., 1408 SW E Ave.,
1312 SW G Ave., 403 SW Garfield, 413 SW Garfield, 2030 and 2030-1/2 SW Monroe Ave., 514
NW 58th St., 2515 SW I Ave., and 2606 SW H Ave. Exhibits: Notice of Amount of Cost for
each property. Action: Approval of item.
16. Consider approving the following contract extensions: A) Liquid Sulfur Dioxide
Industries, Inc.; B) Electric Motor Repair with J & W Electric Motor Company; C) Welding
Gases with Mid South Gas (f/k/a Sooner Airgas); D) Rear Suspension Repairs with Loden
Springs Suspension; E) Upholster Damaged Seats with L & L Machine. Exhibits: None. Action:
Approval of item.
17. Consider awarding bid for Sale of Landfill Scale. Exhibits: Department Recommendation;
Abstract of Bids. Action: Award bid to Sooner Scale, Inc., of Oklahoma City.
18. Consider awarding contract for Portable Air Compressor. Exhibits: Department
Recommendation; Abstract of Bids. Action: Award contract to Kirby Smith Machinery, Inc.
19. Consider awarding contract for Palletized Road Paint Striper. Exhibits: Department
Recommendation; Abstract of Bids. Action: Award contract to Kelly-Creswell Co.
20. Consider appointments to boards and commissions. Exhibits: Memorandum.
Citizens' Advisory Committee CIP: Mike Jones, Ward 6, Term: 10/12/99-5/12/2001; Dr. Frank
Wamsley, Ward 2, Term: 10/12/99-9/24/2002
Parks & Recreation Commission: Jana Barrett, Ward 5, Term: 10/12/99-5/12/2000
21. Consider approval of payroll for the period of October 4 through 17, 1999.
MOTION by Williams, SECOND by Purcell, to approve the Consent Agenda items as
recommended with the exception of Item 4. AYE: Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller,
Haywood, Warren, Smith. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
4. Consider the following damage claims recommended for denial: Anthony M. and
Cominos; Weldon and Beverlee Gray; Don and Carol Hathaway; Meadowbrook Square
Apartments; and Debra J. Riggens. Exhibits: Legal Opinions/Recommendations. Action: Denial
Powell said Mr. Cominos could not be present and requested this to be on the October 26 agenda.
Vincent requested that Anthony M. and Cola Jean Cominos claim be tabled to the October 26,
meeting and recommend denial for the remainder of Item 4.
Powell asked if they paid for the resodding of lawns on the south side of Country Club Drive
after the new one was put in. Baker said the City did not sod it, it was a construction contract and
the contractor was required to sod, it is not unusual to have that in their construction contracts
but the City did not perform the work and didn't sod it. Powell asked who paid for the contract.
Baker said the City of Lawton paid the contract. Powell said even though the City did not do the
work themselves it was paid for by the City and asked why they have a rule for one side of the
street and a different rule for the other side of the street. Baker said that is usually a part of a
construction contract, as far as their work though Public Works he can't recall them sodding
back an area or planting grass or seed, they restore the area with top soil and level it and then
leave it. He said they have not, as a standard practice, replaced the grass or put in the sod.
Powell said that is hard to explain to someone living across the street and the claim is being
denied, both are in the easement, the difference was they let a contract on the south side of the
street and on the north side of the street they did it themselves, the claim is Don and Carol
Williams requested the Hathaway claim be pulled. Vincent said they can reconsider it by tabling
it for two weeks.
Vincent recommended the others be denied which would be Weldon and Beverlee Gray;
Meadowbrook Square Apartments and Debra J. Riggins.
MOTION by Devine, SECOND by Haywood, to table the claims of Anthony M. and Cola Jean
Cominos; and Don and Carol Hathaway and to deny the claims of Weldon and Beverlee Gray;
Meadowbrook Square Apartments and Debra J. Riggins. AYE: Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller,
Haywood, Warren, Smith, Williams. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
REPORTS: MAYOR/CITY COUNCIL/CITY MANAGER.
Shanklin said he read in the newspaper this morning about a comma and asked if they had ever
discussed that and had Vincent been made aware of that regarding the comma that was missing in
the initial refresher. Vincent said according to the union the comma was missing, the City
Attorney's Office who helped draft that doesn't think the comma was missing. Shanklin asked
what the intent of the story was. Vincent said the intent of the story was that they go out and get
their own training and then the City would pay for the initial or first refresher course or
subsequent courses and was what they intended when they drafted that in 1994. Shanklin said
they paid for it all. Vincent said unbeknownst to his office and the City Manager's Office it was
being paid for through the basic school by fire fighters up to 1997 and Mr. Schumpert stopped it
Shanklin asked if that was how they got their EMT. Vincent said they are paying a 6% incentive
and it is the feeling of the City, just as they proposed in the current contract that is up for
arbitration, that the fire fighters who want the 6% incentive should provide their own training to
receive the 6% which is approximately $1,250 to $1,350 depending on their grade and rank per
Shanklin asked if they give them other education funds for their incentives. Vincent said there
are other education incentives available and under the revised contract, depending on what the
arbitrator will choose and what the Council should choose after that, will come back
approximately November 4, and those will possibly be revised.
Shanklin said the arbitrator ordered the comma to go in. Vincent said he awarded it for all non-probationary
fire fighters after a certain date but those prior to that he did not. He said the
newspaper didn't quite get the quote right from the arbitrator and he would provide a copy of the
arbitration award to the Council.
Powell said there will be a Y2K community meeting at the Vo-Tech Worley Center at 6:30 p.m.
to 8:00 p.m. in Room 301. He said this came as a request from his office through Washington
D.C. as part of the President's request to have these meetings. He said there will be 24 people
present from different organizations to answer questions and presentations will be given. He said
it will be straight to the point and hope to answer some questions dealing with Y2K and it is a
free informational session for the Community.
Powell said on October 29, at 4:00 p.m., there will be a ground breaking ceremony for the 82nd
Street reconstruction project and asked for everyone to be there, the contract has been let and the
dirt work will probably start a couple days before that. He said it will show the citizens that the
CIP money is working for them and hoped to have the Secretary, Neil McCaleb and Bob Rose,
Mr. Lloyd Benson will be present and it will be great.
Devine asked why someone comes in for a permit and gets strung along for a long time, he did
everything he was asked to do, spent all kinds of money and then was told no. He said he didn't
understand what was happening to the staff. He asked for an agenda item to this effect, he said
Mr. Baker is aware of this because it is Second Street, someone needs to answer to this.
Williams said last Friday PSO, City National Bank, the Lawton Constitution and the Lawton
Housing Authority participated in the Downtown Chowdown and he thanked the Parks and
Recreation and Public Works Departments and the celebrity servers for all their time and help.
He said all the proceeds were donated and will go to the United Way and thanked everyone for
their help in making the Chowdown a success.
Baker said he has asked Mr. Wells to give the Council a briefing in November on the Y2K on
where the City is and Mr. Jackson has been working very hard on that. He said there is more
happening than they think and Council needs to be aware of what is going on with Y2K in the
Baker said CH2M Hill was the consultant on the water project, the short term/long term water
study and their water treatment capacities with reports to the Council. He said another important
part of their scope of services was to look at the operation of their City dams and the impact
south of the City and they were to come back with some recommendations on how to address that
problem from a technical standpoint and they are ready to give the presentation to the Council.
He said the presentation will take an hour and didn't know if they wanted to have the presentation
at a regular or special meeting, they can come to Lawton when the Council wants to set this up.
Several Council members requested a special meeting, Shanklin requested it be heard at a regular
Devine said the person who gave the orientation to the Council members on their computers
doesn't know what he is in for and did a good job.
22. Pursuant to Section 307B4, Title 25, Oklahoma Statutes, consider convening
session to discuss the civil suit styled City of Lawton v. IUPA, Local 24 and William Mathis,
Supreme Court Case No. 91,397, and take appropriate action in open session. Exhibits: None.
MOVED by Smith, SECOND by Williams, to convene in executive session to consider Item 22
as recommended by the legal staff. AYE: Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith,
Williams, Devine. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
The Mayor and Council convened in executive session at approximately 7:35 p.m. and
reconvened in regular, open session at approximately 7:40 p.m. with roll call reflecting all
Vincent reported the Mayor and Council went into executive session to discuss Item 22 and
Vincent requested to the authority to continue with the appeal.
MOTION by Smith, SECOND by Devine, to authorize the City Attorney to continue with the
appeal. AYE: Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, William, Devine, Purcell. NAY: Shanklin.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. upon motion, second and
roll call vote.