Month 2000-3 March


Meeting of 2000-3-28 Regular Meeting


MINUTES
LAWTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 28, 2000 - 6:00 P.M.
WAYNE GILLEY CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER

Mayor Pro Tem G. Wayne Smith,    Also Present:
Presiding        Bill Baker, City Manager
        John Vincent, City Attorney
        Brenda Smith, City Clerk
        Lt. Col. Jeff Ewing, Fort Sill Liaison

The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. with invocation given by Minister Edwena Reddick-Scott, Rivers of Life Family Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. Notice of meeting and agenda were posted on the City Hall notice board as required by State Law.

ROLL CALL
PRESENT:    G. Wayne Smith, Ward One
        James H. Hanna, 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

ABSENT:    None.

PRESENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL BUILDING SAFETY WEEK PROCLAMATION

Smith read the Proclamation and presented it to Dan Tucker, Code Administration Director.

CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF LAWTON CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING OF MARCH 9 AND REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 14, 2000.

MOVED by Haywood, SECOND by Devine, for approval of March 9 Minutes. AYE: Hanna, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.

MOVED by Devine, SECOND by Warren, for approval of March 14 Minutes. AYE: Devine, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Hanna. NAY: None. ABSTAIN: Purcell. MOTION CARRIED.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION: None.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1.    Consider an agreement between the City of Lawton and Independent School District No. 8 of Comanche County. Exhibits: Agreement.

Baker said at the January 25 meeting Council approved an expenditure plan for the 2000 Capital Improvements Program; subsequent to that an agenda item was brought for an agreement between the City and the Lawton Public Schools which was tabled at the March 14 meeting to allow the attorneys to look at the agreement further. He said he attended a meeting with the City Attorney, Assistant City Manager, Mr. Beauchamp and Mr. Wade where the agreement was reviewed and some changes were made which are being proposed tonight. Baker said the changes will do a much better job of protecting the City's interest.

Vincent said Page 2 of the agreement, second line down, states the City agrees to pay the Board twenty-six and eight tenths of one percent; it should not read of one percent and it should be twenty-six and eight tenths percent, so the "of one" should be stricken.

Beller asked if that is the only change being requested. Vincent said the stricken portions show the old language; the new language is underlined and provides for a complete change in the method of payment by going from a flat payment of $203,333.33 to a payment of 26.8% of each month's sales tax receipts for Capital Improvements. Beller asked if they had met with the School Board and if the School Board had approved the agreement. Vincent said they met with the School Board representatives, and the Board has approved the agreement as it appears in the agenda folder.

MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Shanklin, to approve the agreement as presented in the agenda.

Purcell said he passed out a sheet and Council should take a good, hard look at this. He said his proposal was for the City to pay the Schools either $203,333 per month, which is 1/60th of the $12.2 million total, or 26.8%, whichever is less, each month. Purcell said if the City has not paid all the Schools are entitled to by the 59th month, the City would pay the difference, and if the Schools owe money back on the 59th month, they would pay the City back.

Beller asked how this would affect the building of Central Junior High School, what the financing plan is for Central Junior High School and for Mr. Wade to explain how this change will effect the planning that is now being done.

Chuck Wade, Attorney for the Lawton Public School System, said Mr. Beauchamp wanted to be present with him this evening but he is in Washington with the Mayor, and the Board President, Patty Neuwirth, is present tonight. Wade said the proposed change could have a direct negative impact on the timing of the construction because there is no present plan to try to raise any bond money using sales tax receipts as the basis for the bond sale. He said the Schools intend to use their present revenues and reserves, plus the money they would get monthly from the sales tax receipts, to fund the project, and the present plan is to do this on a construction manager basis. He said if it were to be done under a general contract, as previous building projects have been done, the Schools would have to wait until $10 million was in the bank or available; under this method they will be doing it with various subcontracts for various phases of the project and will be able to phase them over a period of time.
Wade said he was not asking for a disproportionate percentage of the sales tax collection and we went into this as a joint venture. He said when we agreed to the 26.8%, and there was no hesitation on their part to agree to that, they agreed to something that ultimately if the sales tax receipts are not sufficient to generate what was anticipated over the five years, the Schools would not get the full $12.2 million. He said they were not asking for any more than their fair share and only to be treated equally insofar as an equal share or a fair, proportionate share of the receipts as they are received each month.

Warren asked how the Schools planned to finance the project and if it would be a pay as you go arrangement. Wade said it would be pay as you go but before they let a separate subcontract they must have the money in hand to fund that contract. Warren said he had heard that the School was considering contracting with a company in Arkansas to build the school building and then the School would lease it back from that company; he asked if that was correct. Wade said there had been one meeting that he had attended with some financial consultants that mentioned the possibility of doing it on a lease purchase basis; no company in Arkansas had been mentioned, and this was suggested as a consideration but there has been no consideration at all by the Board itself, so there is certainly no present plan to pursue lease purchase as an option. Wade said as far as bond revenues are concerned, there is a problem until there is a definitive ruling on the Constitutional question as to whether you could effectively use these anticipated receipts as a source of revenue to fund a bond issue.

Warren said he was concerned that there was no mention of repayment in the event that the Supreme Court were to deem that this was an unconstitutional endeavor. Wade said he and Vincent had discussed that and Wade was personally of the opinion that if, in fact, it was declared unconstitutional, it would be prospective in effect only and there is some precedent for that based upon previous Supreme Court rulings wherein they have declared a particular statute unconstitutional. Wade said if the court were to order the funds to be repaid at some point, that court ruling would control. He said it was also his legal opinion that this present school board could not legally commit a future board to make some financial commitment back to the City under any circumstances.

Warren asked if the City were to ask for a memorandum of understanding or something of that nature that would indicate that there was an intention between the two parties that if it were declared unconstitutional that the school would repay it, would there be any interest on the school's part in doing that. Wade said in his opinion there would not be, and he would have to advise them that they legally could not enter into that type of an agreement for the reason they would be committing a future board, making a financial commitment on behalf of a future board, and the Oklahoma Constitution prohibits them from doing that, and Vincent may want to comment on what he said.

Vincent said he would respectfully disagree; if the court orders it to be paid back, they have to pay it back, but what Mr. Warren was talking about was that if the court were to order that and we had that language in there, would Wade have an objection to it referencing a court order that the Schools would pay it back. Wade said he would object. Wade said he agreed that if the court ordered the Schools to pay it back, they would have a financial obligation to pay it back, but that it would not be legally appropriate for the School District to agree to language that would say in the event that were to happen, we would pay it back because we still may want to pursue that and he did not know what the options might be at that point but wanted to keep all options open. Vincent said he and Wade had discussed this issue and the language in paragraph four was the language they were able to arrive at mutually and if there is a desire to change that, it can be done but then it would be up to the Board to decide whether to accept it or not. Wade said the Schools would comply with whatever ruling or mandate the Oklahoma Supreme Court might make as far as any obligation from the Schools back to the City.

Warren asked if the Supreme Court were to hear this, would it judge simply on the Constitutionality of what has taken place and then leave the question of whether the School should pay it back to some other court. Wade said the Supreme Court would make a finding as to whether the ruling was prospective or retroactive in application, and in previous cases, any ruling of this type has only been prospective in effect so it would not generally be remanded back to a district court to decide what happens as far as any pay backs are concerned; that issue would need to be resolved at the Supreme Court level.

Warren said he was a little uneasy going into a contract where something as simple as saying "yes, we are willing to pay that back" is going to be a stumbling block to keep us from entering into a contract but if the Council wanted to do so, he could go along with it. Warren said he did not think they were performing their duties as stewards of the citizens' money when they can sign a contract that is three pages long that deals with $12.2 million, yet we have a contract that is over 40 pages long that deals with the sale of beverages at baseball fields and he did not know why you would go down to the letter on selling Pepsi but we do not do that on $12.2 million but that is up to the Council.

Wade said we clearly state in the revised paragraph four that in the event there is such a ruling and it affects the payment of sales tax money from the City to the School Board that those payments are to immediately cease. Warren said he understood that and he had not even thought about repayment until he read that provision and it brought that question up about repayment of what had already been paid, as well as the question as to why it was not included.

Beller said in playing the "what if" game, we are building the worst scenario possible. He said the people of Lawton voted by an overwhelming majority to do this and the City would not have any more right to that money than the School Board would, and "what if" the City has to pay it all back, "what if" the City gets sued. Warren said that was his concern. Beller said it is typical legalese to see how much we can confuse it and the citizens of Lawton have been confused enough for the last six to eight months and we are just adding to that confusion by saying "what if" someone files suit, do we hope this happens, do we want this to happen, or why do we not approach it with a more positive attitude and agree to this as we have done in the past and if someone sues, then worry about that variable. Beller said it appears a barrier is being placed before they even get to the target. Vincent said no sir, you see our recommendation here in the document. Beller said that was what he had moved to approve.

Purcell said the reason he had proposed a different one was that he went through and calculated, and it does not make any difference if we collect $758,000 in taxes in a month, either 26.8% or the $203,333 comes out the same. He asked what happens if one month we collect $1.5 million, we are then under this agreement going to pay the school for that month $402,000. Purcell said we could end up paying them the entire $12.2 million after four years and asked if that was what Council wanted to happen. He said if that is the case, it would be appropriate to vote in favor of Beller's motion.

SUBSTITUTE MOTION by Purcell, SECOND by Warren, to substitute the words that we pay them each month $203,333.33 or 26.8% of that month's taxes, whichever is less.

Shanklin said the people who did not support it are still throwing logs in the path and the same people own the City as own the Schools and they voted for this method and he supported the contract as written.

Smith asked if the wording in the agreement in the agenda means that as soon as the Schools receive the $12.2 million, then that is all they would receive. Vincent said yes, the Schools cannot receive payments in excess of $12.2 million.

Wade said there was one other point he wanted to make in regard to the substitute motion, it appears at some point you would not reach your average you were looking for in the $758,000 monthly, so without a doubt if you adopt the substitute motion, there will be money owed to the School District, probably a fairly significant sum, in the 60th month. Wade said he was assuming there would be months where the collections would fall below the $758,000, and all you are doing is making the School District a second class citizen, deferring them to the end of the line; this has been a share project from day one and he did not think it was fair and equitable to the School District to defer payments in that manner.

Smith asked for a roll call on the substitute motion which replaces paragraph one with the proposal that was passed out.

VOTE ON SUBSTITUTE MOTION: AYE: Purcell, Warren, Smith, Devine. NAY: Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Hanna.

Vincent said it is a tie vote, four to four, and it has to come back at the next meeting. Shanklin said you can call the roll on the regular motion and Vincent agreed. Smith asked for a roll call on the original motion.

VOTE ON ORIGINAL MOTION: AYE: Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Smith, Hanna. NAY: Warren, Devine, Purcell.

Smith stated the original motion passed five to three.

Devine asked that an explanation be given as to how a motion can have a tie vote and then you delete that and go to the other motion. Vincent said the substitute motion did not pass. Devine said it did not fail either. Vincent said the substitute motion had a four to four tie vote; under the Rules of Procedure, it can come back at the next meeting; the original motion is still on the table to be voted on. Devine said you have not resolved the substitute motion. Warren said you cannot call the original motion until the substitute motion is finished. Shanklin said certainly you get to change your mind. Purcell was recognized to speak and Beller asked when Purcell started practicing law and why the attorney was letting Purcell answer legal questions. Purcell said it was not a legal question and he was going to make a comment. Beller said they were discussing the protocol on a vote and Purcell is a knowledgeable person. Vincent said the Council Rules of Procedure do not address this issue. Beller asked if five votes were required to approve an item. Vincent said depending on the number of persons present and the issue. Beller said there are eight members present and asked if five votes were required for the motion to be voted in the affirmative. Vincent said on a resolution and an ordinance you have to have five votes; on a contract it only takes four votes if there are only seven members present, for example; it is a simple majority on a contract. Vincent said you had a four-four tie; Rules of Procedure do not address what happens on a tie other than to say it can come back at the next meeting. Shanklin said this is not the first time this has happened where it was four to four and you still went ahead and called the original motion. Purcell said the Council may need a course in parliamentary procedure but because the four-four did not pass, that was a dead issue, we then go back to the original motion and the original motion passed five to three and if someone wants to bring it back next time they can but everyone knows what is going to happen so that is a waste. Shanklin said we are looking good on TV and Warren said that is what we are in it for.

2.    Consider adopting an ordinance amending Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 2-3-300 and Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 2-3-323 of the Lawton City Code, 1995, as amended, relating to appointments of boards and commissions and duties of the Lawton Metropolitan Area Planning Commission. Exhibits: Ordinance No. 00-11.

MOVED by Shanklin, SECOND by Haywood, to adopt Ordinance No. 00-11, read the title only.

        Ordinance No. 00-11
An ordinance amending Sections 2-3-300 and 2-3-323 of Chapter 2, Article 3, Lawton City Code, 1995, as amended, relating to appointments of members of board and commissions and authority of the Lawton Metropolitan Area Planning Commission and providing for severability.

VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Hanna, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.

BUSINESS ITEMS:

3.    Receive status report on the Robinson's Landing Sewer Project and provide direction to staff as appropriate. Exhibits: Location Map; Project History/Status Report.

Smith said we have been asked to strike this item, we have some information pending from DEQ that they are bringing to us. Shanklin asked if Smith had been asked to strike it and Smith said yes. Shanklin suggested discussing a little bit of it, like where are we, and that he had read what was written in the newspaper and asked if it was correct. Baker said the newspaper reports have been correct and we were prepared to provide the briefing but we have not received a reply from DEQ yet and it would be premature so he was recommending this item be stricken, but we are prepared to brief you if you want a briefing.

Shanklin asked if there is a chance we are going to get this or not, or we do not know, or is it just for Baker to know and the rest can find out when they read the paper. Baker said there is certainly a chance and Shanklin said he would look for it in the paper.

4.    Consider adopting an ordinance amending Article 3, Chapter 22, Lawton City Code, 1995, creating the City of Lawton Wastewater Discharge Code, establishing an effective date of April 7, 2000. Exhibits: Ordinance No. 00-12 (distributed under separate cover)

Smith said the effective date should be changed to May 8, 2000.

Jerry Ihler, Public Works Director, said staff provided a presentation at the Lawton Water Authority meeting regarding Items 4, 5 and 6 which relate to the industrial pretreatment program. Since that time there has been some discussion relating to multi-family dwelling units constructed after January 2001. After discussion and further review by staff, the recommendation was to approve the ordinance as written with the exception of Section 22-317 Interceptor/Traps, Page 2.20, Part 2; the sentence that says "all multi-dwelling units constructed after January 2001 shall also be required to install a grease trap interceptor." Staff recommendation is to remove that sentence and the multi-unit apartment complexes would not be required to have grease traps at this time. Ihler said they wanted to bring that issue back at a later date and staff recommends now that we would provide educational material to the apartment complex owners so they can pass it out to the people living there so it would help in reducing grease from those locations.

MOVED by Devine, SECOND by Shanklin, to approve Ordinance No. 00-12 with Ihler's recommended changes, waive the reading, establish an effective day of May 8, 2000, read the title only.

Purcell asked if the rates for being out of tolerance are only for industrial users and would not apply to apartments. Ihler said apartment complexes and multi-family dwelling units will not apply, however, it would not just be industrial users for the fats, oils and greases, it would be restaurants and others. Purcell asked if multi-family units would fall into the same category as individual households and Ihler said yes.

Ray Caldwell, Jr., Caldwell Mechanical and Pump Service, said he had been to several meetings with Ronnie Graves and Lou Browning on this subject, and that he had some questions and felt the Council should be made aware of certain things before voting. Caldwell presented several detailed questions with regard to the requirement for manifests, how it would affect his company and restaurants, how the City would enforce the manifest requirements on his company and any other companies which haul grease and on the small restaurants. The questions were discussed with Mr. Caldwell.

Caldwell discussed the six month test period allowed for restaurants to use enzymes and not pump their grease traps. Ronnie Graves further explained the provision allowing for restaurants to do pilot testing with enzymes and the City to monitor those tests. Devine further explained the provisions for using enzymes and the pilot program, noting that it could reduce Mr. Caldwell's amount of business. Shanklin asked who in the City of Lawton does the inspections and what they do when they are not doing inspections. Graves said the grease trap inspector at the Wastewater Treatment Plant does between 40 and 75 inspections per month, attends required training and assists with the industrial pretreatment program. Caldwell questioned use of enzymes on grease in the sewer system and this was discussed further.

Caldwell said he had a list of 26 restaurants that he used to pump that have stopped pumping due to the City's ad in the newspaper saying this was being implemented. He pointed out financial hardships he felt the requirements would place on the restaurants. Beller asked why the pumping fees increased. Caldwell said he was having to haul more grease to a disposal site and it was costing him more because he had to keep a driver going constantly back and forth, and he had to pull a full load of water and all contents but before they pulled strictly grease. Warren asked if Caldwell's cost per load went up because he had to make two trips. Caldwell said his costs went up because the cost of disposal went up. Warren asked if the cost of disposal was the same for each trip made and Caldwell said no, it all depends on the weight and content of the grease.

Beller said City staff had attended a restaurant association meeting and explained these provisions. He said many in the restaurant business feel enzymes work well and that he personally knew they worked, so the provision for a pilot program in this regard was a good idea.

Smith asked for a roll call on the motion.

        Ordinance No. 00-12
An ordinance relating to public health, repealing Article 3, Chapter 22, Lawton City Code, 1995, reserving the article and section numbers for further uses; enacting a new ordinance on wastewater treatment, providing for permitting; monitoring; and sampling of industrial users; prohibiting pollutants into the sanitary sewer system; requiring reporting from users; responsibility of users to comply with federal, state and local pretreatment standards and requirements; and charges and fees; providing for codification; providing for severability; and establishing an effective date.

VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Haywood, Warren, Smith, Hanna, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.

5.    Consider adopting a resolution indicating that the City of Lawton, Oklahoma, having the necessary legal, financial, institutional and managerial resources, intends to operate and maintain an industrial pretreatment program pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act of 1977 (Public Law 95-217) 33 U.S.C. 1251 Et SEQ. Exhibits: Resolution No. 00-37.

Ihler said the resolution states the City has the capability to administer the program as shown in the item.

MOVED by Purcell, SECOND by Devine, to approve Resolution No. 00-37. AYE: Warren, Smith, Hanna, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.

        Resolution No. 00-37
A resolution indicating that the City of Lawton, Oklahoma, having the necessary legal, financial, institutional and managerial resources, intends to operate and maintain an industrial pretreatment program pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act of 1977 (Public Law 95-217) 33 U.S.C. 1251 Et SEQ

6.    Consider adopting a resolution increasing the fees and charges for the purposes of defraying the cost of implementing and operating the City's pretreatment program. Exhibits: Comparison; Resolution No. 00-38.

MOVED by Purcell, SECOND by Warren, to approve Resolution No. 00-38. AYE: Smith, Hanna, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.

        Resolution No. 00-38
A resolution amending Appendix A, Schedule of Fees and Charges, Lawton City Code, 1995, as amended, amending and establishing the fees for the Industrial Pretreatment Program, and establishing an effective date.

7.    Consider adopting an ordinance amending Section 2-107, Chapter 2, Lawton City Code, 1995, adjusting the filing period of municipal elections to allow sufficient time for the mailing and return of absentee ballots. Exhibits: Ordinance No. 00-13; 1/19/00 Letter from Mr. Ward, State Election Board Secretary; 2/17/00 e-mail from Mr. Ward.

Vincent said it was brought to our attention by Mr. Ward at the State Election Board that in 1997 state legislation was passed that allowed charter cities to adjust their filing periods when the time for absentee ballots for municipal elections would conflict with the mailing out of the absentee ballots for a state or federal election. He said this ordinance provides for a filing period 65 days prior to the date of the City's election in March if, and only if, that date would conflict with a state or federal absentee ballot being mailed out. On those dates when the election would not conflict, we would follow the Charter provision.

MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Warren, to approve Ordinance No. 00-13, waive reading of the ordinance, read the title only.

        Ordinance No. 00-13
An ordinance amending Section 2-107, Chapter 2, Lawton City Code, 1995, authorizing the adjustment of filing period for municipal elections to allow sufficient time for the mailing and return of absentee ballots; and providing for an effective date.

VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Hanna, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.

ADDENDUM ITEMS:

1.    Consider an ordinance amending Section 6-1-5-184, Chapter 6, Buildings, Construction and Housing, Lawton City Code, and declaring an emergency. Exhibits: Ordinance No. 00-14.

Warren asked if there was a specific reason this was proposed as an emergency. Baker said we have a business that is waiting for some action to be taken before they can locate a temporary structure.

Baker said the City Code provides certain factors that have to exist before a temporary structure can be placed on a lot. The amendment being recommended in this item deletes the requirement that it not exceed 150 square feet because that is not a reasonable size and most of the construction trailers would exceed that square footage.

MOVED by Devine, SECOND by Haywood, to approve Ordinance No. 00-14.

Shanklin asked if there had been complaints about any other items in this code section. Baker said there was one other provision code but we found a way to accept a phased type of permit which would allow the temporary structure.

        Ordinance No. 00-14
An ordinance relating to buildings, construction and housing, amending Section 184, Article 1, Chapter 6, Lawton City Code, 1995, amending provisions for the usage of a portable building, providing for severability and declaring an emergency.

VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Hanna. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.

2.    Consider amending the Robinson's Landing Store Lease Request For Bids (RFB) and provide direction to staff. Exhibits: None.

Shanklin said he requested the item and understood that only two people attended the pre-bid conference. He said the issues are the gas tanks that are in the ground or partly in the ground, and offering a one-year lease when a two-year lease may allow someone to see if he could make any money or not and use the tanks that are out there until we are told that they do have to come out on a certain date. Shanklin said someone could not put in new tanks for a one-year lease. He said if it is staff's idea not to do this then Council should be told that and just come right out and say we want to shut it down and quit the charade. Shanklin said yes, he was talking to Mr. Baker.

Baker said he would like to reply and this was not the staff's idea. Shanklin asked whose it was. Baker said we brought this to the City Council on February 1 and the City Council approved everything that we are doing as far as leasing out, taking over a certain part of the operation, selling the boathouse, removing the storage tanks. Baker said we feel that the storage tanks should be removed and that was part of our proposal to the Council on February 1, which was adopted by the City Council. Baker said we do not have a problem with amending this request for bid; the points made are reasonable and we only had two people appear at the pre-bid conference, which does not show a lot of interest.

Shanklin said he would go back to where they had to wait a year until staff finally got together with an old boy wanting to put in a car lot out on Cache Road; we knew all along what to do but we were not going to do it until it finally ended up with Council people holding feet to the fire. He said there has to be some common sense applied some time in this and not just because it says it on page three, paragraph four, can't do it, and he was sick of it. Shanklin said every time he turned around he was getting a call from someone and it was just BS.

Warren asked if these are metal gas tanks. He said it was his understanding that as of December 31, 1999 or 1998, that all metal tanks were to be removed from the ground and checked for leakage. Ihler said that was correct; the tanks that are out there are partially buried, maybe a foot or two foot, and they do not qualify as underground tanks, so we really do not know for sure the condition.

Ihler said regarding the two items Shanklin brought up, it is a one-year lease with five, one-year options. He said the concern brought up at the pre-bid conference was with not having the fuel tanks, because we do not know the condition or if there is any remediation, staff's position was that we recently had to remove some tanks at Schoolhouse Slough and the City ended up paying for removing the tanks and the City is also paying for remediation, and the remediation has not been completed because we are still dealing with the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, so it was staff's recommendation to remove those tanks. Ihler said putting in an above ground tank and paying $8,000 for one tank may create a greater bid, but staff was following through with what was indicated previously that we were going to remove the tanks and it was going to be bid without the tanks and if the new lessee wanted to put in the tanks he could do so. Ihler said if Council wants to put in tanks, it can be done. Shanklin said he did not think the City wanted to spend any money out there.

Devine agreed with the one-year lease with five options because if a person cannot make it in the first or second year, they are not stuck with a five-year lease. He said he did not want the City to enter into any more contracts like it did on Schoolhouse Slough, and Robinson's Landing just cost the City $153,000 to buy that back and he did not want that to happen again, and there is no way to tell what Schoolhouse Slough may cost when the City has to buy that out. Ihler said the three other concessions are all set up in that manner, and this particular lease for the store is on a monthly basis. Shanklin asked Ihler if he wanted the store to be open and if it was that important that it be open. Ihler said yes, we want the store to be open to be able to service the residents and the campers in that area and to provide a service.

Devine asked if you could give the option if they want the fuel tanks or not; if they want them then leave them, and if not, then remove them. Ihler said bids were to be opened today and an addendum was sent out that said we would be coming back with an amendment depending on tonight's action, and the bid packet could be such that they bid it with or without the tanks to see if there is a difference. Devine said he thought that should be done.

Shanklin said he would make a motion, if that was required, to give direction to staff to put this bid packet back out, leaving the gas tanks there and the length of lease needed to be able to get someone interested in it. He asked if the other people leave April 1. Ihler said this lease will begin May 1 and he hoped to be able to open bids on April 4 if the amendment can be sent out.

Warren asked if Ihler recommended making it an option for either/or with the fuel tanks to leave the bidder that choice. Ihler said the bidder would have to put down two prices for his monthly lease, one if a new single tank, at a cost of $8,000 that the City would install, were there, and one without the fuel tank.

Purcell asked if the original bid proposal stated there would be no gas tanks and that the City was going to remove them. Ihler said yes. Purcell asked if the bid amendment will state that we are now going to leave the gas tanks. Ihler said no, what he was suggesting based on what he heard tonight was that they would go back out and ask for a quote for a monthly lease if the City had installed a new, above ground system gas tank that would provide gas for the site, and the second price would be a monthly lease price if we remove the tanks and there are no gas tanks there to see if there would be a difference in price, and if there is not a price difference, it would not be to the City's advantage to put in the gas tanks.

Purcell said he did not want to support the City putting in new gas tanks. He asked if we could just leave the two gas tanks that are there, and if we are prohibited from doing that. Ihler said we are not prohibited from leaving them there but there is a potential liability and we do not know what the condition is underneath with the existing tanks. Ihler said the Oklahoma Corporation Commission is working on revising their requirements for above ground tanks and when those revisions come forward, it is our understanding that these tanks will not meet the requirements.

Smith asked how much money had been spent on the remediation on the tanks at Schoolhouse Slough. Ihler said with the consultant and removal and aeration, in the neighborhood of $8,000 to $10,000.

Purcell said he would not support the City taking the two tanks out and putting in a new tank and then have them bid it. He said if the new bid will say that the City will leave the tanks there and ask for a price, or the City will take the tanks out completely and ask for a price, that he could support that. Shanklin said we need to work with what is out there and Purcell agreed. Smith said Shanklin's motion was to bid it with the existing tanks.

Shanklin asked if we were telling the bidders what hours they would have to work or be open. Ihler said no. Ihler said the fee the City receives from the other three concessions is based on the amount of revenue they take in so the hours are set on those, but this one is a set amount not based on revenue.

Smith asked if Ihler understood that Council wants to leave the existing tanks and offer it for bid that way. Ihler asked if Council wanted one price if you leave the tanks there and one price without the tanks. Shanklin said yes. Ihler said he understood absolutely nothing was wanted as far as any new tanks. Council agreed that was the consensus and no vote was taken.

3.    Consider accepting a Permanent Utility Easement in Lot 1 of Section 4, Township One North Range Twelve West donated by Fort Sill Federal Credit Union for an existing 24" waterline. Exhibits: None. (Easement on file in City Clerk's Office)

Vincent said this is the same easement that was accepted a couple of meetings ago from Mattie Boyles. Fort Sill Federal Credit Union has purchased the property and wishes to make a dedication. Vincent said there was a scrivener's error in the prior easement document and this corrects that error. Purcell asked if this was at 52nd and Lee and Vincent said yes.
MOVED by Purcell, SECOND by Haywood, to approve the item. AYE: Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Hanna, Devine. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.

CONSENT AGENDA:

8.    Consider approving the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Lawton and the Lawton Metropolitan Area Planning Commission (LMAPC) for metropolitan transportation planning in Fiscal Year 2000-2001 and authorize the Mayor to execute. Exhibits: MOU. Action: Approval of item.

9.    Consider endorsing the Fiscal Year (FY) 2000-2001 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) for the Lawton Metropolitan Transportation Planning Process. Exhibits: FY00-01 UPWP. Action: Approval of item.

10.    Consider approving Releases of Mortgage on residential properties belonging to Wilma Smith, and Armando V. and Rosa D. Mangual, all of Lawton, Oklahoma, and authorize execution of the Releases of Mortgage. Exhibits: None. (Documents on file in City Clerk's Office) Action: Approval of item.

11.    Consider ratifying the City Attorney's action of filing a Disclaimer in the case styled U.S. Bank National Association v. Wilma Smith, et al, Case No. CJ-2000-194, in the District Court of Comanche County. Exhibits: None. Action: Approval of item.

12.    Consider acknowledging completion of the Flower Mound Access Road (Lee to Bishop) Project. Exhibits: Location Map. Action: Approval of item.

13.    Consider accepting Chisolm Drainage Channel Improvement Project #99-22 as constructed by S Construction, Inc. and placing the maintenance bond into effect. Exhibits: Map. Action: Approval of item.

14.    Consider approving a contract with GBA Architects for the design of Ranch Oak Park Improvement Project #2000-14. Exhibits: Location Map. Action: Approve contract with GBA Architects in the amount of $3,810.00.

15.    Consider applying to the Oklahoma Arts Council for a Local Government Challenge Grant. Exhibits: None. (Application on file in City Clerk's Office) Action: Approve applying for grant in the amount of $3,000.00. Application is conditional upon matching funds being included in FY 2000-2001 City of Lawton budget.

16.    Consider approving the record plat for Bencor/Cache67. Exhibits: Plat Map. Action: Approval of record plat. Background: Bencor/Cache67 is a commercial plat consisting of two lots on approximately 2.4 acres located at the northwest corner of NW 67th Street and Cache Road. The zoning of the plat is C-5 (General Commercial District) zoning classification. The developer is Bencor/Cache67, L.L.C., and the consulting engineer is Hightower and Associates. The record plat was received on March 1, 2000. The plat does not contain any improvements to be installed nor any additional easements to be dedicated. The purpose of the plat is to allow for development of a Walgreen Pharmacy on Lot 1. Lot 2 will be held for future development. The City Planning Commission approved the record plat on March 9, 2000.

17.    Consider awarding contract for Police Motorcycles. Exhibits: Recommendation; Abstract. Action: Award contract to McKinney Harley-Davidson/Buell, Lawton, OK.

ITEM 18 WAS CONSIDERED SEPARATELY AS SHOWN BELOW.

19.    Consider approval of payroll for the period of March 20 through April 2, 2000. Exhibits: None.

MOVED by Shanklin, SECOND by Warren, to approve the Consent Agenda items as recommended with the exception of Item 18. AYE: Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Hanna, Devine, Purcell. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.

18.    Consider awarding contract for a Hydraulic Excavator. Exhibits: Recommendation; Abstract.

Shanklin said this equipment costs $100,000 and it is for Sewer Rehab. He asked if there was a running total of how much money we have spent on equipment for Sewer Rehab. Ihler said at the April 4 Water Authority meeting a presentation will be given as to the status of the Sewer Rehab Program and we can present that information at that meeting. Ihler said he knew over $1 million had been spent and it may be closer to $2 million.

Shanklin said what caught his attention was the local vendor and the 5% local vendor preference. He asked where C.L. Boyd is domiciled in the City of Lawton and where is the display, show and so forth. Ihler said from the bid packet it shows 802 SE 3rd Street. Devine said he had been there several times. Shanklin asked if local vendor preference was meant for someone who lived elsewhere and happened to have a telephone here. Vincent said he could not remember the way the ordinance was written. Shanklin said he did not think this firm should get the 5% preference just because they have a yard here.

MOVED by Shanklin, SECOND by Smith, to approve the contract award to C.L. Boyd. AYE: Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Hanna, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.

REPORTS: MAYOR/CITY COUNCIL/CITY MANAGER.

Warren made the following statement which is inserted verbatim as follows: "A few weeks ago I asked the question where is the $5 million for sewer improvements? Were we misled or is that money missing? I asked this question because one of my constituents asked me if the money would be divided between the wards. The citizen had read the press release by the Mayor and assumed the City already had the money. I explained to the constituent that to my knowledge the money had not been approved by Congress or the President. After reading today's Lawton Constitution it appears we were premature in our announcement of approval but that we were not intentionally misinformed. The federal budget approval process is difficult for Congress to understand, let alone the citizens. A project must be approved by numerous committees before final approval by Congress and the President and then the bill must be funded. It has been over a year since the bill to fund the sewer improvements was introduced and it has not been approved. However, credit should be given to Mayor Powell and Senator Inhofe for continuing their efforts to get the money. All this does not mean that we won't get the funding. It also doesn't mean that we will get it any time soon, if at all. If this funding is approved for sewer improvements, it will certainly help dispel the bitter taste local citizens have for all the federal unfunded mandates. For now, the final answer is no, we have not received the funds."

Beller said many positive comments have been received over the past couple of years about the happenings at the Lawton Municipal Golf Course and that Cindy Greer and Spanky Moody had done an enormous transformation on the golf course. He said she had spent thousands of dollars improving the golf course, she had plans for a 90 space parking lot and had talked about putting in concrete cart paths to accommodate the players and was trying to make it a real show place over what was there in the past. Beller said there was a tragic fire at the golf course a couple of weeks ago that consumed the greater part of the cart shed and damaged part of the club house because of the water damage. Beller asked the City Attorney if the City was today involved in pursuing some kind of contractual requirements between the Lawton Airport Authority and the Lawton Municipal Golf Course. Vincent said no sir. Beller asked Vincent if he had not talked with anyone and Vincent said he did not say that. Vincent said he had talked to Mr. Wade and Mr. Chris Meyers about this incident, and had furnished Mr. Wade with the documents that were in the City Attorney's Office that he did not have, Mr. Wade being the attorney for the airport. Beller asked what documents Mr. Wade did not have. Vincent said he did not have all of the lease documents. Beller said those documents are kept at the Airport. Vincent said Barbara McNalley did not have them all either. Beller asked if only the City of Lawton had the lease agreement. Vincent said by the time we got through his file, her file and our file we were able to compile all of the leases.

Beller asked if, as far as the City of Lawton is concerned, that is the interest of the Airport Authority and the City of Lawton has nothing to do with it and will not be involved with it. Vincent said he had been asked to attend a meeting with Mr. Wade and Mr. Meyers but that was his entire involvement. Beller asked why the City would be involved with it. Beller said in the agreement it says "whereas the Authority is vested with control and jurisdiction over the Lawton Municipal Airport, hereinafter called the Airport, by virtue of a lease agreement between the Authority and the City of Lawton". Beller said other than the fact that the City is the beneficiary of the trust, he asked where the City would get involved in the legalities. Vincent asked that he be able to discuss it with Beller outside the Chamber and Beller agreed. Shanklin said the City took the roads into the City limits and has to maintain them. Beller asked what that had to do with the Authority. Shanklin said nothing other than the City has been involved with the Airport and he thought that was what Beller was saying. Beller said no, he had heard rumors that the City of Lawton was pursuing it and that was basically what he was asking.

Shanklin said if that 5% bidders preference goes to someone who is domiciled in Oklahoma City, Kansas City or whatever, it needs to be brought back and looked at again. He said if that did not meet the ordinance then it would not be a valid contract. Vincent said he would review it and advise Shanklin tomorrow, and if needed, they would bring it back at the next meeting.

Shanklin said he mentioned last time that we had collected $35,000 in January for running red lights and $25,000 for driving under suspension and $17,000 for loud music from vehicles. He said Mr. Bill Anders, who came in over there three years ago, on his own initiative, by chasing down warrants that have been there for years has collected to date $566,000 so if we are passing out raises then this ought to be pretty conducive to someone getting a raise, Mr. Baker, other than just being on the staff for twenty some odd years and getting a $5,000 raise because we like the way he looks.

Devine asked if any of the Council members were interested in looking into the system of trash collection used in Duncan as far as studying it to see what it would cost. Smith said he thought that had been researched and Shanklin said it would have cost about a million dollars. Baker said they had looked at other alternatives regarding refuse collection; we have looked at the semi-mechanized system on at least two or three previous occasions over the years. There is a tremendous capital investment; it is a good program that will save money over a period of years but you have to come up with the initial capital investment. Baker said staff can look at it again and bring back a report. Shanklin said you could dig out the other one. Baker said it might be rather dated. Devine said he would like to see it studied and that he was having major problems in part of his area where people are leaving their trash cans sitting out on the curb constantly instead of putting them next to the house and dogs turn them over and tear it up and spread trash pretty bad. Devine said he was really interested in it himself and he had talked to people in his area and they were interested enough that they thought about purchasing their own containers and putting it on a pilot program just to see how it goes. Devine said he talked with the crew chief on the sanitation truck to see if he would mind and he was very receptive to trying it because we cannot seem to keep lids on the trash cans and the dogs are still running loose.

Beller suggested before trying a pilot program that we should go through the City Manager's office and a pilot program should not be set up by a section chief or a driver chief out in the neighborhood and it was something that belonged in the City Manager's office. Devine said maybe so but you have to get off your duff some time and try to do something and that was what he was trying to do. Beller said we do it through the City Manager's office, the City Council does not have the authority to go out and set up programs with employees. Devine said he did not do it as the City Council, he did it as a neighbor. Beller said Devine is a City Councilperson. Beller said it probably would work great but it should be through the auspices of the City Manager's office.

Warren said his memory was that previous studies of this went down in flames; the containers are very large, we cannot expect our crews to lift them and dump them in the trucks and we would have to purchase the automated truck to make it work. He asked if that was correct. Ihler said there are semi-automated and fully automated trucks, and Duncan has semi-automated where you can put an attachment on the back and it would pick it up and it would cost about $8,000 per truck. Beller said he thought it should be pursued as Devine suggested.

Smith said they were looking for a consensus of the Council as to whether staff should do another study on this.  Purcell said he was not sure it would pay to do another whole study because we found from the last study that we just do not have the money. Purcell suggested buying an attachment for one truck, get the containers and see how it works out in one area; trying it in a neighborhood would be more productive than another study because it comes with a big bill to refit and buy trucks and containers.

Beller asked if only one collection is made weekly, which helps defray the cost. Warren said every time this has been studied they have had to go to the second pick up as a way to generate the extra funds and that is when it all starts falling apart because the citizens do not want that.

BUSINESS ITEMS:

Addendum Item 4: Pursuant to Section 307B4, Title 25, Oklahoma Statutes, consider convening in executive session to discuss the case styled International Association of Firefighters, Local 1882, v. The County Election Board for Comanche County, Oklahoma, and City of Lawton, Case No. CJ-99-1388, filed in the District Court of Comanche County, and Supreme Court Case No. 94,331, and if necessary, take appropriate action in open session. Exhibits: None.

20.    Pursuant to Section 307B2, Title 25, Oklahoma Statutes, consider convening in executive session to discuss negotiations for a Collective Bargaining Agreement for FY 2000-2001 between the Police Union, IUPA, Local 24, and the City of Lawton, and take appropriate action in open session. Exhibits: None.

21.    Pursuant to Section 307B2, Title 25, Oklahoma Statutes, consider convening in executive session to discuss negotiations for a Collective Bargaining Agreement for FY 2000-2001 between the Fire Union, IAFF, Local 1882, and the City of Lawton, and take appropriate action in open session. Exhibits: None.

22.    Pursuant to Section 307B1, Title 25, Oklahoma Statutes, consider convening in executive session to evaluate the performance of the City Manager, City Clerk, City Attorney, and Municipal Judge; and, take action as necessary in open session. Exhibits: None.

MOVED by Shanklin, SECOND by Warren, to convene in executive session to consider the items shown on the agenda and recommended by the legal staff. AYE: Haywood, Warren, Smith, Hanna, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.

The Mayor Pro Tem and Council convened in executive session at approximately 7:30 p.m. and reconvened in regular, open session at 8:00 p.m. with roll call reflecting all members present.

The City Attorney was recognized to report on executive session items. Vincent stated the Mayor Pro Tem and City Council convened in executive session to consider the items listed on the agenda for executive session. He read each item title and stated after each one that no action was required on the item.

There being no further business to consider the meeting adjourned at 8:05 p.m. upon motion, second and roll call vote.