HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - Regular - 7/9/1992CITY OF LUBBOCK
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JULY 9, 1992
7:00 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Lubbock, Texas met in regular session on
the 9th day of July, 1992 in the City Council Chambers, first floor,
t City Hall, 1625 13th Street, Lubbock, Texas at 7:00 p.m.
Present: Mayor David Langston, Mayor Pro Tem Maggie Trejo, Councilman
M. J. Aderton, Councilman Randy Neugebauer, Councilman Max Ince,
Councilman Alex Cooke, City Manager Larry J. Cunningham, City Attorney
John C. Ross, Jr., and City Secretary Ranette Boyd.
Absent: Councilman T. J. Patterson.
Mayor Langston called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
( l.) The Invocation was given by Bob Cass, Deputy City
Manager.
( 2.) The Pledge of Allegiance was given in unison by
those in the Council Chambers.
92-51B-551-366
( 3.)
A. Consider recommendation and
Resolution #3918 designating a name
for Kingsgate Park.
RESOLUTION #3918
WHEREAS, the area known as Kingsgate Park is an 11.3 acre
neighborhood park located at 93rd and Milwaukee, Kingsgate Addition,
City of Lubbock, Texas, which provides outdoor activities such as
playgrounds, picnic areas, and security lighting; and
WHEREAS, the City of Lubbock Parks and Recreation Board and the
City Council wish to name parks after individuals who have made a
lifetime contribution to improve the quality of life for all Lubbock's
citizens; and
July 9, 1992
Page 552
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Board has recommended to the
City Council that this park be named after the following individual:
CHAS. A. GUY
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
THAT the area known as Kingsgate Park shall hereby be named
CHAS. A. GUY Park honoring CHAS. A. GUY.
Biographical Information and Achievements:
Passed by the City Council this 9th day of July, 1992.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Rita Harmon
Rita Harmon, Assistant City Manager
for Public Safety and Services
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Linda L. Chamales
Linda L. Chamales, Assistant City
Attorney
B. Consider recommendation and
Resolution #3919 designating a name
for Carlisle Park.
RESOLUTION #3919
WHEREAS, the area known as Carlisle Park is a nine (9) acre
neighborhood park located in the Carlisle Annex Addition, which provides
recreational opportunities for outdoor activities; and
WHEREAS, the City of Lubbock Parks and Recreation Board and the
City Council wish to name parks after individuals who have made a
lifetime contribution to improve the quality of life for all Lubbock's
citizens; and
July 9, 1992
Page 553
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Board has recommended to the
City Council that this park be named after the following individual:
BARBARA JEAN HINOJOSA
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
THAT the area known as Carlisle Park shall hereby be named
BARBARA JEAN HINOJOSA Park honoring BARBARA JEAN HINOJOSA.
Biographical Information and Achievements:
Passed by the City Council this 9th day of July, 1992.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Rita Harmon
Rita Harmon, Assistant City Manager
for Public Safety and Services
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Linda L. Chamales
Linda L. Chamales, Assistant City
Attorney
The City of Lubbock policy for naming parks requires
that the Park and Recreation Board submit three
names for consideration by City Council with
preference given to names of individuals whose lives
were of local or regional significance, but who are
no longer living.
KINGSGATE PARK:
The land for Kingsgate Park was purchased in 1980 to
provide the residents of the area with a
neighborhood park and was completed in early 1991.
Kingsgate is located in southwest Lubbock and covers
19.1 acres.
In FY 1988-89, the City Council allocated $200,000
for development of the site as follows: Security
lights, irrigation, landscaping, playground
1
equipment, and gamecourt.
Kingsgate Park is located at 93rd and Nashville
Avenue in census tract 105.03 and has 4,260
residents with the following breakdown: African
American .5%; Hispanic 2.8% and Anglo 94.1%.
According to Staff memo, the demographics of the
neighborhoods surrounding the parks should be
considered during selection of the name.
July 9, 1992
Page 554
Anna Jenkins, representing the Parks and Recreation
Board, presented the following names for City
Council consideration in naming Kingsgate Park:
Chas. A. Guy, Roy Bass, J. Ray Dickey, Dr. Heenan
Johnson, Jr., and Francisco "Speedy" Gonzalez.
These names were approved at the March 24, 1992
Parks and Recreation Board meeting.
At their April 9, 1992 meeting, the City Council
requested that the residents in neighborhoods
surrounding the park areas have an opportunity to
provide input regarding the park name and Staff memo
advised that public meetings were conducted for the
Kingsgate area on May 4, 1992 (four citizens
attended) and on May 26, 1992 (nine citizens
attended). During these meetings, those in
attendance supported naming the park after Chas. A.
Guy, with one opposed to considering Francisco
"Speedy" Gonzalez. An additional name submitted
since the Kingsgate meeting is W.B. "Diggs" Holden.
At their June 23, 1992 meeting, the Parks and
Recreational Board voted to recommend adding W.B.
"Diggs" Holden and Sgt. Kenneth D. Fowler to the
list of possible names for Kingsgate Park.
CARLISLE PARK:
In 1990, the 9-acre tract of land for Carlisle Park
was purchased and its development was completed in
early 1991, including playground equipment,
landscaping, irrigation and security lights.
Carlisle Park is located at Upland Avenue and 26th
Street and is in census tract 104, with 724
residents of the following demographical breakdown:
African American 20.7%; Hispanic 8.3%; and Anglo
71%.
Ms. Jenkins advised that the Park and Recreation
Board voted at their March 24, 1992 meeting to
recommend the following names: Francisco "Speedy"
Gonzalez, Dr. Heenan Johnson, Jr., A.L. Davis,
Charles Guy, and J. Ray Dickey.
In addition, a public meeting held in the Carlisle
area on May 11, 1992 with 25 citizens present
produced the names of James Miller, a Carlisle
resident for 21 years, and Barbara Hinojosa, a
former City of Lubbock employee.
Motion was made by Councilman Aderton to name
Kingsgate Park for W.B. "Diggs" Holden. Motion died
for lack of a second.
Motion was made by Councilman Ince, seconded by
Councilman Cooke to authorize Resolution #3918 to
name Kingsgate Park for Chas. A. Guy. Motion
carried: 5 Yeas; 1 Nay --Councilman Aderton.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilman Neugebauer to authorize Resolution #3919
to name Carlisle Park for Barbara J. Hinojosa.
Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0 Nays.
Mayor Langston announced Council consensus to remove Item Vs 11 and 15
from the consent agenda.
July 9, 1992
Page 555
( 4.) Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilman°Aderton to approve the Minutes of the
June 25, 1992 Regular City Council meeting as
written. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
92-51B-555-367
( 5.) ORDINANCE #9533--Zone Case #1501-C (north side of
1300 50th)--Request of Lewis Garnett for a zoning
change from C-3 to IHC on the west 30' of Lot 365,
all of Lots 366-368 and the east 20' of Lot 369•
Benhall Manor Addition.
ORDINANCE #9533
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL
MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK MAKING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO.
1501-C; A ZONING CHANGE FROM C-3 TO IHC ZONING ON THE WEST 30 FEET OF
LOT 365, ALL OF LOTS 366-368, AND THE EAST 20 FEET OF LOT 369, BENHALL
MANOR ADDITION, LUBBOCK, TEXAS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS
CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
92-51B-555-368
( 6.)
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilman Aderton to pass on second and final
reading Ordinance #9533 as recommended by Staff.
Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0 Nays.
Lot 25, 82nd Acres Addition.
ORDINANCE #9534
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL
MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK MAKING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO.
2687; A ZONING CHANGE FROM T TO IHI ZONING ON LOT 25, 82ND ACRES
ADDITION, LUBBOCK, TEXAS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS
CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
92-51B-555-369
( 7•)
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilman Aderton to pass on second and final
reading Ordinance #9534 as recommended by Staff.
Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0 Nays.
Bell Mobile Systems) for a zoning change from C-3 to
C-4 Specific Use (for 100' tall tower with no guy
wires and an equipment shelter ) on a tract out of
Section 17 Block B.
ORDINANCE #9535
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL
MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK MAKING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO.
2688; A ZONING CHANGE FROM C-3 TO C-4 SPECIFIC USE FOR A 100 FOOT TALL
TOWER WITH NO GUY WIRES AND AN EQUIPMENT SHELTER ON A TRACT OUT OF
SECTION 17, BLOCK B, LUBBOCK, TEXAS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A
SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
July 9, 1992
Page 556
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilman Aderton to pass on second and final
reading Ordinance #9535 as recommended by Staff.
Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0 Nays.
92-51B-556-370
( 8.) ORDINANCE #9536--Amendment to Zoning Ordinance #7084
to all 5,000 square feet beauty and barber supply
stores in the C-2 District.
ORDINANCE #9536
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 29 OF THE LUBBOCK CITY CODE BY ADDING
BARBER AND BEAUTY SUPPLIES AS A PERMITTED USE IN C-2 LOCAL RETAIL
DISTRICTS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING
FOR PUBLICATION.
Motion was made by
Councilman Aderton
reading Ordinance
Motion carried: 6
92-51B-556-371
Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded
to pass on second and final
#9536 as recommended by Staff.
Yeas; 0 Nays.
by
( 9.) ORDINANCE #9537--Reducing the speed limit in alleys
from 15 mph to 5 mph.
ORDINANCE #9537
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 29 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE
CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS, WITH REGARD TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTION 29-24
TO DELETE SUBSECTION 29-24(26), SECTION 29-24(27) TO ADD SEXUALLY
ORIENTED BUSINESSES, SECTION 29-3 TO INCLUDE VARIOUS DEFINITIONS
PERTAINING TO SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES; PROVIDING A PENALTY;
PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
Motion was made by
Councilman Aderton
reading Ordinance
Motion carried: 6
Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded
to pass on second and final
#9537 as recommended by Staff.
Yeas; 0 Nays.
by
July 9, 1992
Page 557
92-51B-557-372
(10.) Consider Resolution #3920 authorizing the Mayor to
execute a Gate Use Agreement with United Parcel
Services, Inc.
RESOLUTION #3920
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
r1-7 THAT the Mayor of the City of Lubbock BE and is hereby authorized
and directed to execute for and on behalf of the City of Lubbock a Gate
Use Agreement with United Parcel Services, Inc., attached herewith,
which shall be spread upon the minutes of the Council and as spread upon
the minutes of this Council shall constitute and be a part of this
Resolution as if fully copied herein in detail.
Passed by the City Council this 9th day of July, 1992.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Bern Case by Rod Paine
Bern E. Case, Director of Aviation
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Harold Willard
Harold Willard, Assistant City Attorney
LUBBOCK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
GATE USE AGREEMENT
THE STATE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF LUBBOCK §
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into at Lubbock, Texas, by and
between the City of Lubbock, Texas, hereinafter referred as to "CITY,"
and United Parcel Services, Inc., (Ohio) (TJ) hereinafter referred to as
"UPS."
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, CITY owns and operates Lubbock International Airport,
hereinafter referred to as the "Airport;" and
WHEREAS, UPS desires to transport freight to and from aircraft on
a portion of restricted area at the Airport known as the Airport
Operations Area, hereinafter referred to as the "AOA;" and
WHEREAS, in order to transport freight to and from aircraft on the
AOA, UPS must have use of a padlocked gate on Airport premises; and
WHEREAS, in consideration for the privilege of being allowed to
utilize such gate, UPS agrees to abide by all of the terms and
conditions in this Agreement set forth below; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lubbock has determined
that the execution of this Agreement is in the best interests of the
citizens of the CITY;
July 9, 1992
Page 558
ARTICLE I
NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the covenants and
conditions herein contained and other valuable consideration, CITY
hereby authorizes UPS to exercise the rights, powers and privileges
hereinafter set forth and does hereby grant to UPS the exclusive use of
the gate at the Airport whose location is depicted on Exhibit A attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
The initial term of this Agreement shall be for a period of one
(1) year beginning on the 1st day of May, 1992, and shall be
automatically renewable thereafter from month to month unless terminated
pursuant to other provisions contained in this Agreement.
ARTICLE II
In consideration of the rights and privileges herein granted, UPS
agrees to pay CITY a monthly user fee of TWO HUNDRED AND NO/100 DOLLARS
($200.00), payable in advance, on the first day of each calendar month
this Agreement remains in effect. Such monthly payments shall be made
to the Lubbock International Airport, Rt. 3, Box 389, Lubbock, Texas
79401.
ARTICLE III
This Agreement is subject to the following provisions and
conditions:
1. UPS may transport freight to and from aircraft at the
Airport only through the gate which UPS is herein given exclusive use of
and only on that portion of the AOA specifically designated on Exhibit A
as premises upon which UPS may conduct its operations.
2. UPS shall be solely responsible for all individuals who
obtain access to the AOA through the gate which UPS has exclusive use of
and shall secure such gate at all times when not being used with a
heavy-duty padlock approved by the Director of Aviation of the Airport.
3. UPS shall provide the CITY with a security plan approved by
the Director of Aviation of the Airport and in accordance with all rules
and regulations promulgated by the Federal Aviation Administration.
4. UPS will prohibit all unauthorized persons from obtaining
access to the AOA through the gate which UPS has been given exclusive
use of by this Agreement, and UPS agrees that in the event that a civil
penalty or fine is assessed or levied against the Airport or CITY as a
result of failure by UPS to comply or act in accordance with this
provision or any other applicable federal, state or local statute,
ordinance, rule or regulation concerning the Airport, UPS shall
immediately reimburse the Airport or CITY, as the case may be, the full
amount of the penalty or fine and correct the act or omission leading
to, causing or contributing to the violation.
5. UPS will abide by and comply with the Airport's
Identification Badge System at all times while this Agreement is in
effect.
6. CITY shall not be required by this Agreement to provide UPS
with access to the ADA by removing snow or ice from any portion of the
Airport.
7. The rights, powers and privileges that may be exercised by
UPS as a result of this Agreement are granted subject to the company's
compliance with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations
pertaining to the Airport or UPS.
8. CITY herein reserves the right to take any action it
considers necessary to protect the aerial approaches of the Airport
against obstruction.
July 9, 1992
Page 559
9. During time of war or national emergency, the CITY shall
have the right to enter into an°agreement with the United States
Government for military or naval use of all or part of the landing area,
the publicly -owned air navigation facilities, and any other areas or
facilities on the Airport. If any such agreement is executed, the
provisions of this Gate Use Agreement, insofar as they are inconsistent
with the provisions of the agreement with the Government, shall be
suspended.
10. This Agreement shall be subordinate to the provisions of any
existing or future agreement between the CITY and the United States
concerning the operation or maintenance of the Airport, the execution of
which has been or may be required as a condition precedent to the
receipt or expenditure of federal funds for the development of the
Airport.
11. All rights, powers and privileges acquired herein by UPS may
be immediately suspended, at the option of the CITY, if such suspension
is found by the CITY, acting in good faith, to be necessary to secure
federal financial aid for the development of the Airport, or further
development or promotion of aeronautical operations thereon.
12. Except as provided herein, any property of the CITY or any
property for which the CITY may be responsible which is damaged or
destroyed incident to the exercise of the privileges herein granted
shall be properly repaired or replaced by UPS to the satisfaction of the
CITY.
13. UPS agrees to indemnify, defend and forever save the CITY,
its authorized agents, representatives and employees, harmless from and
against any and all penalties, liability, annoyances, expense or loss,
including attorneys' fees, resulting from claims or court action of any
nature arising directly or indirectly out of any acts or omissions of
UPS, its agents, servants, guests, employees or business visitors under
this Agreement.
14. UPS shall maintain at all times, at its sole expense, with
an insurance underwriter authorized to do business in the State of Texas
and acceptable to the CITY, insurance against claims of public liability
and property damage resulting from the business activities of UPS at the
Airport. The amount of insurance coverage shall not be less than FIFTY
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($50,000) for property damage arising out of any one
accident or event, or less than ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000)
for personal injury or death of any one person in any one event, or less
than THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($300,000) for personal injury or
death of two or more persons in any one event. Certificates of
insurance or other satisfactory evidence of coverage shall be filed with
the City Secretary within fifteen (15) days after the execution of this
Agreement. Each policy shall name the CITY as an additional insured as
its interest may appear, and shall contain a provision requiring the
insurer to give the CITY written notice of cancellation or of any
material change in said policy or certificates at least ten (10) days in
advance of the effective date of such cancellation or material change.
Each policy shall also contain a provision waiving the right of such
insurer to subrogation.
15. UPS, its agents and employees will not discriminate in any
manner prohibited by federal law against any person or class of persons
due to sex, race, religion, or national origin in providing any services
or in the use of any of its facilities provided for the public. UPS
4 further agrees to comply with such enforcement procedures as the United
States might demand that the CITY take in order to comply with the
Sponsor's Assurances given by the CITY.
July 9, 1992
Page 560
UPS agrees to not discriminate against any employee or applicant
for employment because of age, sex, race, religion or national origin.
UPS further agrees to take affirmative action to ensure that applicants
are employed and are treated during employment without regard to their
age, sex, race, religion or national origin. Such action shall include,
but not be limited to employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer,
recruitment, layoff, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and
selection for training, including apprenticeship.
UPS will conduct its activities and operate its facilities in
accordance with the requirements of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973 and will ensure that no qualified handicapped person shall,
solely by reason of his or her handicap, be excluded from participation
in, be denied the benefits of, or otherwise be subjected to
discrimination (including discrimination in employment) under any
program or activity of UPS.
16. UPS warrants that it has not employed any person employed by
the CITY to solicit or secure this Agreement upon any agreement for a
commission, percentage, brokerage or contingent fee.
17. UPS shall not assign this Agreement or any rights hereunder
without prior written consent of CITY's Director of Aviation.
18. The failure of CITY to insist upon performance of any of the
terms or conditions of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver
or relinquishment of the future performance of any such terms or
conditions and the obligations of UPS with respect to such future
performance shall continue in full force and effect.
ARTICLE IV
This Agreement may be terminated by either party hereto after the
initial term upon thirty (30) days written notice to the other party.
Failure by UPS to comply with any of the above provisions or
conditions may result in immediate termination of this Agreement, at the
option of the CITY.
EXECUTED this the 9th day of July, 1992.
UNITED PARCEL SERVICES, INC.
/s/ Henry H. Kraus
Henry H. Kraus, Vice President
ATTEST:
/s/ Thomas G. Scott, Sr.
Thomas G. Scott, Sr.
Legal and Regulatory
CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS
/s/ David R. Langston
David R. Langston, Mayor
ATTEST:
Zsl Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
IsZ Bern E. Case
Bern E. Case,
Director of Aviation
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Harold Willard
Harold Willard,
Assistant City Attorney
July 9, 1992
Page 561
According to Staff memo, this Agreement will allow
United Parcel Service (UPS) exclusive use of a west
side gate in the Air Operations Area (AOA) of
Lubbock International Airport.
As part of the security requirements of the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) each point of access
into an AOA must have a security plan which
supplements the overall Airport Security Plan. To
establish responsibility for security, to indemnify
the Airport for possible fines related to security
breaches and ensure that persons working on Airport
property are covered by liability insurance (with
the City named as an additional insured), it is
necessary that all persons or entities requiring
such access into the AOA be under an agreement with
the City.
This agreement is for one year at the rate of $200
per month, and will increase annual Airport revenue
by $2,400.
The Airport Board has unanimously accepted this
agreement and recommended it to the Council for
approval.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilman Aderton to authorize Resolution #3920 as
recommended by the Airport Board and Staff. Motion
carried: 6 Yeas; 0 Nays.
92-51B-561-373
(12.) Consider Resolution #3921 accepting paving
improvements constructed by Williams and Peters
Construction, Inc., in Lakeridge Country Club
Estates Lots 801-835.
RESOLUTION #3921
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS ON PORTIONS OF STREETS AND
AVENUES AS LISTED BELOW:
WHEREAS, in conformance with the paving requirement provisions of
City Ordinance 1331, the subdivider of Lakeridge Country Club Estates,
Lots 801-835 (inclusive) made arrangements with Williams & Peters
Construction Co., Inc., for the construction of paving improvements on
certain streets dedicated in said subdivision under the provisions of
said Ordinance prior to the recording of the subdivision plat of the
above -mentioned addition including the following streets:
Salem Drive from its intersection with the south end of
radius of 91st Drive and Salem Avenue to its intersection
with the west lip line of Raleigh Avenue known and
designated as New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 94 of Unit
Number 2034.
Raleigh Avenue from its intersection with the south lip line
of 93rd Drive to its intersection with the west end of
1 radius of Raleigh and Quinton Avenue known and designated as
New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 95 of Unit Number 2034.
Quinton Avenue from its intersection with the south lip line
of 93rd Drive and Quinton Avenue to its intersection with
the west end of radius and Raleigh Avenue known and
designated as New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 96 of Unit
Number 2034.
July 9, 1992
Page 562
93rd Drive from its intersection with the west end of radius
of 93rd and Quaker Avenue to its intersection with the west
property line of Lot 825, Lakeridge Country Club Estates
known and designated as New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 97
of Unit Number 2034.
93rd Drive from its intersection with the east end of radius
of 93rd and Salem Avenue to its intersection with the east
property line of Lot 818, Lakeridge Country Club Estates
known and designated as New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 98
of Unit Number 2034.
WHEREAS, the construction of the above improvements on the
above -mentioned streets was performed under the supervision of the City
Engineer, and said improvements have been completed and have been
inspected and found to have been constructed in accordance with City
specifications and in accordance with the provisions of City Ordinance
1331; NOW THEREFORE:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
SECTION 1. THAT the improvements on said portions of the
above -mentioned streets BE and the same are hereby accepted and the City
Engineer BE and he is hereby authorized to notify the developer of
acceptance by the Lubbock City Council.
SECTION 2. THAT this Resolution shall take effect and be in force
from and after its passage.
Passed by the City Council this 9th day of July, 1992.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Isl Ranette Boy
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Larry D. Hertel
Larry D. Hertel, City Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ J. Worth Fullingim
J. Worth Fullingim, Assistant City
Attorney
May 28, 1992
Page 471
What insurance company would issue a policy covering
the above exposures? Should the City undertake to
do what an insurance company may not be willing to
do? Should the City place itself between the
federal government and Exxon in the event of an
environmental claim made by the federal government
against Exxon? These are questions that the Council
should consider in its deliberations on this
request.
Brazos River Authority is requesting authority to
execute an agreement with Exxon to purchase mineral
interests of Exxon at Lake Alan Henry. The River
Authority feels the price is right, it is quicker to
purchase the property, it will establish a benchmark
price for other properties and the environmental
risks are not very large. The City Attorney,
however, strongly recommended against the agreement
because of the very broad liability that the City
would assume by executing the agreement. The City
Attorney would recommended that the River Authority
condemn the mineral interests if necessary rather
than execute the Exxon agreement.
This matter was discussed in executive session, and
after executive session Mayor Langston announced the
discussion and consensus of Council to request a
motion to approve acquisition of the property
subject to and contingent upon Freese & Nichols, on
behalf of the Brazos River Authority, going to Exxon
Corporation for purposes of review of Exxon's
environmental study, and once the City is assured
that there are no environmental problems, as
analyzed by these environmental experts, the goal is
to move forward with the purchase of the properties.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Patterson, seconded
by Councilman Maloy to approve assignment of mineral
interests and Bill of Sale of Exxon's mineral
interests in the Lake Alan Henry area to Brazos
River Authority on behalf of the City of Lubbock,
contingent upon Freese & Nichols review, on behalf
of Brazos River Authority, of Exxon's Environmental
Study and assurance from Freese & Nichols after the
review, that no environmental problems are present.
Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
92-51A-471-302
(27.)
expired on April 12, 1992.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Patterson, seconded
by Councilman Aderton to hold board appointments
until the next City Council Meeting. Motion
carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
May 28, 1992
Page 472
92-51A-472-303
(28.) Consider eight appointments to the Community
Development Advisory Committee. The terms of Paul
Nash, Russ Wilkinson, Larry Gardner, Vonda
Somerville, Roosevelt Carroll, Betty Carr, Robert D.
Snell, and Dorthy Dailey Furr are to expire on May
31, 1992.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Patterson, seconded
by Councilman Aderton to hold board appointments
until the next City Council Meeting. Motion
carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
92-51A-472-304
(29.)
92-51A-472-305
(30.)
Gomez, Beatrice Narvaiz, Betty Wheeler, Dale
Bradley, Earl Elliott, and Lalo Quirino are to
expire on May 25, 1992.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Patterson, seconded
by Councilman Aderton to hold board appointments
until the next City Council Meeting. Motion
carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
Law, will expire on June 1, 1992.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Patterson, seconded
by Councilman Aderton to hold board appointments
until the next City Council Meeting. Motion
carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
There being no further business to co before'&,puncil, motion was made
by Mayor Pro Tem Patterson, seconded ky Council ma
ma r. r J o adjourn
c17�
the meeting at 3:13 p.m. Motion carried: -Z-�aj ; 0 ays-.-
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
Read and approved this the 11th day
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
July 9, 1992
Page 563
92-51B-563-374
(13.)
This is a routine acceptance of paving improvements
required at the time of platting this new
subdivision consisting of street and alley paving
and curb and gutter on:
Salem Drive from 91st Street to Raleigh Avenue.
Raleigh Avenue from 93rd Drive to Quinton
Avenue.
Quinton Avenue from 93rd Drive to Raleigh
Avenue.
93rd Drive from Quaker Avenue to the west
property line of Lot 825, Lakeridge Country Club
Estates.
93rd Drive from Salem Avenue to the east
property line of Lot 818, Lakeridge Country Club
Estates.
There is no City cost due the contractor upon this
acceptance and Staff recommended approval of this
resolution.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilman Aderton to authorize Resolution #3921 as
recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0
Nays.
RESOLUTION #3922
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS ON PORTIONS OF STREETS AND
AVENUES AS LISTED BELOW:
WHEREAS, in conformance with the paving requirement provisions of
City Ordinance 1331, the subdivider of Prairie Point East, Lot 29-58
(inclusive) made arrangements with Ronnie Zahn Paving for the
construction of paving improvements on certain streets dedicated in said
subdivision under the provisions of said Ordinance prior to the
recording of the subdivision plat of the above -mentioned addition
including the following streets:
Avenue V from the north end of radius of the intersection of
88th Street and Avenue V to the south end of radius of the
intersection of 82nd Street and Avenue V known and
designated as New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 89 of Unit
Number 2034.
88th Street from 7 feet east of the east property line of
the alley east of Vernon Avenue to the north end of radius
of the intersection of 88th Street and Avenue V known and
designated as New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 90 of Unit
Number 2034.
WHEREAS, the construction of the above improvements on the
above -mentioned streets was performed under the supervision of the City
Engineer, and said improvements have been completed and have been
inspected and found to have been constructed in accordance with City
specifications and in accordance with the provisions of City Ordinance
1331; NOW THEREFORE:
July 9, 1992
Page 564
SECTION 1. THAT the improvements on said portions of the
above -mentioned streets BE and the same are hereby accepted and the City
Engineer BE and he is hereby authorized to notify the developer of
acceptance by the Lubbock City Council.
SECTION 2. THAT this Resolution shall take effect and be in force
from and after its passage.
Passed by the City Council this 9th day of July, 1992.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Larry D. Hertel
Larry D. Hertel, City Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ J. Worth Fullingim
J. Worth Fullingim, Assistant City Attorney
This is a routine acceptance of paving improvements
required at the time of platting this new
subdivision consisting of street and alley paving
and curb and gutter on:
Avenue V from 88th Street to 82nd Street.
88th Street from the alley east of Vernon Avenue
to Avenue V.
There is no City cost due the contractor upon this
acceptance and Staff recommended approval of this
resolution.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilman Aderton to authorize Resolution #3922 as
recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0
Nays.
92-51B-564-375
(14.) BID #11982--Paint and paint supplies (Central
Warehouse).
Kelly -Moore Paint Co.--180 ea. silicone sealant in
11 oz. tube.
Sherwin-Williams Paint Co.--35 gl. light gray enamel
paint in 1-gallon containers; 50 gl. exterior,
white, latex paint in 1 gallon container.
July 9, 1992
Page 565
Glidden Paint Co.--35 gl. light gray enamel paint in
1 gallon containers; 200 gl. paint thinner in 1
gallon containers; 50 gl. alum. paint in 1 gallon
containers; 100 ea. gloss black spray paint in 11
oz. cans; 180 ea. red spray paint in 11 oz. cans; 24
ea. flat black spray paint in 11 oz. cans; 72 ea.
orange spray paint in 11 oz. cans; 6 ea. moss green
spray paint in 11 oz. cans; 24 ea. brown primer,
spray paint in 11 oz. cans; 1,900 gl. bright white
interior latex paint; 120 ea. pan & roller frame
set.
Bowman Lumber--320 ea. blue marking paint in 15 oz.
cans; 180 ea. fluorescent orange spray paint in 15
oz. cans; 60 ea. red marking spray paint in 15 oz.
cans; 48 ea. white marking spray paint in 15 oz.
cans.
Adams Paint Co.--40 gl. red oxide primer in 1 gallon
containers; 120 gl. white hi -gloss exterior enamel
paint; 360 ea. paint roller cover 3/4"X9".
Childress Hardware --All or None Items 26-29: 300
ea. 1-1/2" paint brush; 320 ea. 2-1/2" paint brush;
280 ea. 3-1/2" paint brush; 280 ea. 4" paint brush.
Monarch Paint Co.--6 ea. alum. finish spray paint in
13 oz. cans; 6 gl. latex, interior bone white; 360
ea. gloss white spray paint in 11 oz. cans; 20 ea.
yellow spray paint in 11 oz. cans; 100 ea. gray
metal primer spray paint in 11 oz cans; 24 gl. paint
& varnish remover in 1 gallon containers.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilman Aderton to authorize low bids meeting
specifications. Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0 Nays.
92-51B-565-376
(16.) BID #11900--Annual pricing for tires and tubes
Warehouse Auto Parts).
Firestone Service Center -Winchester Mall--30 ea.
tire, highway, LT235X75R15, 6 ply; 10 ea. tire,
highway, P215X85R16, 8 ply; 10 ea. tire, highway,
P235X85R16, 10 ply.
July 9, 1992
Page 566
A To Z Tire Service--8 ea. tire, rear, tractor
18AX26, blas, 8 ply R-4; 10 ea. tire implement
9.5LX14SL, 4 ply; 6 ea. tire, tractor, blas,
tubeless R-4, 14.00X24, 12 ply; 4 ea. tire, tractor
20.5X25, 12 ply; 6 ea. tire, radial, tractor
20.8XR38, i ply; 6 ea. tire, rear, tractor 20.8XR42;
40 ea. tire, tube type highway 10.00X20, 12 ply; 100
ea. tire, tube type mud and snow 10.00X20, 12 ply;
20 ea. tire, radial, highway 10.00RX20, 14 ply; 10
ea. tire, radial, mud & snow, 10.00RX20, 14 ply; 10
ea. tire, steel belted, all season P215X75R15; 10
ea. tire, all season, P225X75R15; 200 ea. tire, all
season, P235X75R15; 10 ea. tire, all season
P195X75R14; 20 ea. tire, radial, mud & snow,
1100XR20, 14 ply; 20 ea. tire, radial, highway,
1100XR20 14 ply; 10 ea. tire, highway, 110OX20, 12
ply; 60 ea. tire, all season, P185X75R14; 20 ea.
tire, all season, P205X75R14; 10 ea. tire, all
season, white wall, P225X75R15; 10 ea. tire, all
season, white wall, P225X75R15; 400 ea. tire,
pursuit, black wall, steel belted, P225X70HR15; 20
ea. tire, pursuit, white wall, steel belted
P235X70HR15; 10 ea. tire, 6 ply, 9.5LX15SL; 20 ea.
tire, tube type, rib implement, 11LX15, 8 ply; 10
ea. tire, contractor F-3, 11LX16, 10 ply; 50 ea.
tire tube, 90OX20; 20 ea. tire tube, 750X20; 10 ea.
tire tube, 14.9X24; 120 ea. tire tube, long stem,
TR-150, 750X16; 10 ea. tire tube, 20.5X25; 50 ea.
tire tube, 1300-140OX24; 10 ea. tire tube, 570X8; 10
ea. tire tube, 700-75OX15; 10 ea. tire tube, 11LX16;
10 ea. tire tube, 11LX15; 10 ea. tire tube, 400-
48OX8; 10 ea. tire, highway, 90OX20, 12 ply; 10 ea.
tire, tube type, rib implement, 11LX16, 8 ply; 10
ea. tire, mud & snow, 110OX20, 12 ply; 4 ea. tire
loader, 12 ply, 17.5X25; 6 ea. tire, radial,
highway, 8RX19.5, 8 ply; 20 ea. tire, mud & snow,
P245X75R16, 10 ply; 10 ea. tire, radial, highway,
7.50XR16, 12 ply; 10 ea. tire tube, radial, long
stem, TR-150, 7.00-7.50XR16; 10 ea. tire, highway,
120OX20, 14 ply; 10 ea. tire tube, 12.00X20; 6 ea.
tire, highway, 8XI9.5, 8 ply; 200 ea. tire, pursuit,
black wall, P235X70HR15.
Treadco, Inc.--10 ea. tire tube, radial, 11.0=20;
20 ea. tire tube, 750X20; 10 ea. tire tube, 14.9X24;
120 ea. tire tube, long stem, TR-150, 750X16; 10 ea.
tire tube, 20.5X25; 50 ea. tire tube, 1300-140OX24;
10 ea. tire tube, 570X8; 10 ea. tire tube, 700-
750X15; 10 ea. tire tube, 11LX16; 10 ea. tire tube,
11LX15; 10 ea. tire tube, 400-48OX8; 10 ea. tire,
highway, 90OX20, 12 ply; 10 ea. tire, tube type, rib
implement 11LX16, 8 ply; 10 ea. tire, mud & snow,
1100X20, 12 ply; 4 ea. tire, loader, 12 ply,
17.5X25; 6 ea. tire, radial, highway 8RX19.5, 8 ply;
20 ea. tire, mud & snow, P245X75R16 10 ply; 10 ea.
tire, radial, highway, 7.50XR16, 12 ply; 10 ea. tire
tube, radial, long stem, TR-150, 7.00-7.50XR16; 10
ea. tire, highway, 120OX20, 14 ply; 10 ea. tire
tube, 12.00X20; 6 ea. tire, highway, 8XI9.5, 8 ply;
200 ea. tire, pursuit, black wall, P235X70HR15.
July 9, 1992
Page 567
92-51B-567-377
McWhorter's, Inc.; -6 e ' a., ,.,tire, front, tractor,
10.00X16SL, 6 ply;' 6` ea"'. tire, rear, tractor,
18.4XR34, 8 ply, radial; 6 ea. tire, rear, tractor,
18.4XR38, 8 ply; 6 ea. tire, tractor, rear 20.8XR34,
8 ply; 10 ea. tire, highway 8.75X16.5 8 ply; 10 ea.
tire, mud & snow, 8.75X16.5 8 ply; 10 ea. tire,
tubeless, 16.9X24, 6 ply; 10 ea. tire, mud & snow,
750X16LT, 8 ply; 20 ea. tire, 6 ply R-1, 14.9X24; 10
ea. tire tube, 17.5X25; 10 ea. tire, 12 ply, grader
1300X24; 6 ea. tire, radial, mud & snow, 8RX19.5, 12
ply; 6 ea. tire, mud & snow 8X19.5, 8 ply; 6 ea.
tire, front, tractor, 11.00X16 8 ply.
York Discount Tire Co.--10 ea. tire implement 6 ply
700X7.6 15SL; 6 ea. tire front tractor 14LX16.1SL 6
ply; 40 ea. tire tube type highway 900X20 10 ply; 20
ea. tire highway 750X16 10 ply; 10 ea. tire tube
type tri-rib 600X16 6 ply; 10 ea. tire tube type
highway 1400X24 18 ply; 10 ea. tire radial highway
900XR20 10 ply; 20 ea. tire mud & snow LT235X85R16
10 ply; 200 ea. tire tube radial, 10.00XR20; 10 ea.
tire tube 600X16; 20 ea. tire tube 400-480X12; 10
ea. tire, all season 6 ply LT30X9.50XR15; 10 ea.
tire motorcycle, highway, treadlock, 400X18; 10 ea.
tire rib 4 ply 4.80X12; 40 ea. tire, radial, highway
1100RX22.5 14 ply; 30 ea. tire mud & snow,
1100RX22.5, 14 ply; 30 ea. tire, mud & snow
LT225X75RI6, 6 ply;
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilman Aderton to authorize low bids meeting
specifications. Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0 Nays.
Consider Resolution #3923 accepting paving
improvements constructed by Williams and Peters
Construction Company. Inc., in Preston Hills
addition, Lots 127-165.
RESOLUTION #3923
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS ON PORTIONS OF STREETS AND
AVENUES AS LISTED BELOW:
WHEREAS, in conformance with the paving requirement provisions of
City Ordinance 1331, the subdivider of Preston Hills, Lots 127-165
(inclusive) made arrangements with Williams & Peters Construction Co.,
Inc., for the construction of paving improvements on certain streets
dedicated in said subdivision under the provisions of said Ordinance
prior to the recording of the subdivision plat of the above -mentioned
addition including the following streets:
South half of 82nd Street from its intersection with the
west end of radius of the alley return west of Colton to its
intersection with the west end of radius of Elkhart Avenue
known and designated as New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 99
of Unit Number 2034.
83rd Lane from its intersection with the east lip line of
Elkhart Avenue to its intersection with the east
right-of-way line of Durham Avenue known and designated as
New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 00 of Unit Number 2035.
83rd Street from its intersection with the west end of
radius at Colton Avenue to its intersection with the east
back of curb of Elkhart Avenue known and designated as New
Subdivison Sub -Unit Number 01 of Unit Number 2035.
July 9, 1992
Page 568
Dover Avenue from its intersection with the north lip line
of 83rd Street to its intersection with the cul-de-sac south
of 82nd Street known and designated as New Subdivision
Sub -Unit Number 02 of Unit Number 2035.
Durham Avenue from its intersection with the north lip line
of 83rd Lane to its intersection with the cul-de-sac south
of 82nd Street known and designated as New Subdivision
Sub -Unit Number 03 of Unit Number 2035.
Elkhart Avenue from its intersection with the north end of
radius of the alley return north of 84th Street to its
intersection with the south lip line of 82nd Street known
and designated as New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 04 of Unit
Number 2035.
WHEREAS, the construction of the above improvements on the
above -mentioned streets was performed under the supervision of the City
Engineer, and said improvements have been completed and have been
inspected and found to have been constructed in accordance with City
specifications and in accordance with the provisions of City Ordinance
1331; NOW THEREFORE:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
SECTION 1. THAT the improvements on said portions of the
above -mentioned streets BE and the same are hereby accepted and the City
Engineer BE and he is hereby authorized to notify the developer of
acceptance by the Lubbock City Council, and to direct the payment of the
City's portion of the cost in the amount of $2,373.20.
SECTION 2. THAT this Resolution shall take effect and be in force
from and after its passage.
Passed by the City Council this 9th day of July, 1992.
/s/ David-R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Larry D. Hertel
Larry D. Hertel, City Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ J. Worth Fullingim
J. Worth Fullingim, Assistant City
Attorney
July 9, 1992
Page 569
This is a routine acceptance of paving improvements
required at the time of platting this new
subdivision consisting of street and alley paving
and curb and gutter on:
The south half of 82nd Street from the alley
west of Colton Avenue to Elkhart Avenue.
83rd Lane from Elkhart Avenue to Durham Avenue.
83rd Street from Colton Avenue to Elkhart
Avenue.
Dover Avenue from 83rd Street to the cul-de-sac
south of 82nd Street.
Durham Avenue from 83rd Lane to the cul-de-sac
south of 82nd Street.
Elkhart Avenue from the alley north of 84th
Street to 82nd Street.
Upon this acceptance there is City cost due the
contractor in the amount of $2,373.20 and Staff
recommended approval of this resolution.
Councilman Neugebauer recused himself from
discussion and vote on this item due to his previous
involvement in the project.
Motion was made by Councilman Ince, seconded by
Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to authorize Resolution #3923 as
recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 5 Yeas; 0
Nays; 1 Abstention --Councilman Neugebauer.
92-51B-569-378
(15.) RFP #11986--Computer hardware maintenance
(Information Services).
IBM --IBM Hardware Maintenance.
Digital Equipment Corporation, Albuquerque, NM --DEC
Hardware Maintenance.
(Rankings were based on evaluation criteria which
consisted of timely service 25%, record of service
15%, staff experience 15%, availability of parts
15%, cost 15%, support structure 5%, problem
management 5%, and additional services 5%.)
Mayor Langston announced that a local bidder had
requested to address this item.
Mr. Robert Pratt, an officer of Responsive Services
International Corporation of Lubbock and vendor in
this process, presented comments with regard to a
request for proposal for on -site computer
maintenance services and pointing out that of the
three respondents to the RFP, only his company is
local. Mr. Pratt stated that to the best of his
knowledge, all three respondents agreed to meet the
basic service requirements listed in the RFP but he
complained that Responsive Services International
was not recommended by the evaluating committee for
award of any part of the bid.
July 9, 1992
Page 570
Mr. Pratt alleged that the process is not open and
cited the failure of his efforts to learn the status
of the RFP evaluation through official channels. He
then questioned whether his proposal was correctly
understood or treated fairly because of the contents
of the proposals being held confidential.
Mr. Pratt closed by stating the following opinions:
1. On -site computer maintenance
services are definable and do not
require unique creativity and thus
do not come under the Local
Government Code high technology
purchasing guidelines. Use of an
RFP for procurement in this case is
an incorrect procedure.
2. The Local Government Code makes
clear that if proposals are to be
opened in a manner to avoid
disclosure of the contents to
competing offerers and to keep the
proposals secret during negotiation,
it must be provided for in the RFP,
and he alleged that no such
provision was made in RFP #11986.
3. Several of the items in the RFP used
to evaluate the competence of the
offerer are subjective and provide
no hard data from which a decision
can be made. He stated his opinion
that several requests go beyond the
City's ethical investigatorial duty
and either have nothing to do with
the offerer's ability to perform or
outside of the scope that the buyers
need to know.
4. In Mr. Pratt's opinion, the
committee, by refusing to take
advantage of the ability to
negotiate with the offerers in
advance of recommending an award or
to go into further negotiations,
purposely made itself less informed
and less able to make a decision
that is in the best interest of
Lubbock.
5. His further opinion is that the
committee's use of inappropriate
evaluation guidelines and its
refusal to talk with the offerers
individually removed any spirit of
competition that might have existed
for this RFP and denied the only
unknown vendor, Responsive Services
International, due consideration.
Mr. Pratt also advised that he has requested an
opinion of the Attorney General regarding the issue
of secrecy of the RFP Process. He did say, however,
that in his opinion, the Purchasing Department and
the Information Services Department have done what
they believe was correct.
July 9, 1992
Page 571
Lynn Hutchinson, Local Manager for IBM Marketing and
Services and vendor in this process, stated his
disagreement with the contention that maintenance of
computers is a commodity and is not a high-tech
issue. He said that IBM and Digital Equipment are
leaders in the field of computer maintenance and
that both companies require intensive, lengthy,
highly technical and specialized training of
individuals who service computers.
Mr. Hutchinson pointed out the IBM reference list of
users of the maintenance for the type of equipment
the City owns, and alluded to the adequacy and
accessibility of a $10 million local inventory of
parts and equipment which is reserved exclusively
for maintenance agreement customers. He then
mentioned that Mr. Pratt's company purchases some
parts from IBM, but may not acquire them from the
local reserved stock and must wait for shipments
from outside this area. Mr. Hutchinson advised that
in addition, his branch has access to inventories in
Amarillo, Midland, Abilene, Odessa, Roswell, Hobbs
and elsewhere, in the event that the local inventory
is depleted of any item.
According to Mr. Hutchinson, past performance as
well as and the ability to perform in the future are
the deciding factors regarding recommendation of
awarding the bid, and he took exception to the
allegation that the RFP was inappropriately written.
He acknowledged that the RFP was written
specifically and that response by IBM was difficult;
however, the responses submitted will give the City
the best alternative for its high -availability
system.
Mr. Hutchinson went on to advise that in addition to
maintaining computers, IBM services include problem
management and change management, and personnel who
are able to identify and appropriately address both
hardware and software issues. He then referenced
installations of similar equipment, such as Texas
Tech University, Methodist Hospital, Lubbock County,
PCCA, etc. and in closing, pointed out that even
though IBM is based in New York, the local office
employs 50 citizens of Lubbock.
At this point, Robert Massengale, Assistant City
Manager for Financial Services, advised that the
action in question regarding this RFP was performed
under provisions of the High Tech Procurement
Section of the Local Government Code. Proposals
were evaluated by a ten -member committee composed of
users and operators who have knowledge of the needs
for maintenance of and demands on the system. Mr.
Massengale advised that the evaluation was done
fairly, and the confidentiality of the process is a
policy aimed at bringing closure to this type of
proposal. This policy is standard throughout all
City procurement activities.
July 9, 1992
Page 572
Mr. Massengale stated that the RFP requested all the
information needed for appropriate evaluation and
analysis by the committee. He indicated that the
recommendation is to accept a higher cost proposal,
and this is justified by the offset in the overall
service. Also part of the evaluation process, was a
references check of all submitting proposals. Mr.
Massengale stated that once the bid is awarded, the
information submitted, unless proprietary, may be
discussed with the vendors.
Gene Eads, Purchasing Manager, advised that
information regarding bids for other than High
Technology Procurement, is available. Staff does
provide a list of qualified respondents to those who
have submitted requests.
Councilman Neugebauer asked if RFP's are mailed only
to those deemed to be qualified and Mr. Eads said
that an RFP will be sent to anyone making a request,
as well as any company staff feels may have an
interest in submitting a proposal.
Councilman Neugebauer asked about the comment by Mr.
Pratt that the State of Texas bids computer service
as a commodity, and Mr. Eads replied that he is not
familiar with the State's procedure for bidding
maintenance.
Councilman Neugebauer then asked about the
philosophy behind the secrecy of the process, and
Mr. Eads said that this legislation was passed in
1985 and prior to then, municipalities or counties
could not evaluate bids for high tech equipment.
According to Mr. Eads, this type equipment has many
variables which must be evaluated in order to
determine the best and most responsible offer and in
order to make this determination, it is necessary to
keep confidential the information submitted. Mr.
Eads went on to say that if the committee or staff
request additional information from any of those
submitting proposals, then all respondents must be
given an equal opportunity to respond; however, in
this instance there were no interviews with
respondents as the information submitted was
adequate to make the decision.
Mayor Langston inquired whether or not the City
Attorney had been consulted by Staff regarding the
High Technology Procurement portion of the Local
Government Code and whether or not the City policy
conformed to the provisions. Mr. Eads stated that
the City Attorney had not been consulted.
Mayor Langston then asked if the City Attorney could
make such a determination and render a decision to
City Council, and Mr. Ross advised that he had not
looked in detail at the RFP or at that portion of
the law in light of this particular question. He
stated that sealed proposals are allowed, that
before a proposal is accepted, individual interviews
with respondents are allowed, as indicated by Mr.
Eads. He went on to say that he could not give a
definitive answer as to whether or not this is high
tech equipment, but would guess that it is.
}
July 9, 1992
Page 573
Councilman Cooke pointed out that Mr. Pratt
indicated that the"City'`has not done anything
illegal, and further that Mr. Pratt has asked the
Attorney General for an opinion regarding a
situation in another City, which would change things
state-wide.
Councilman Neugebauer asked if this is the first
time RSI had submitted a proposal, and Mr. Pratt
stated this is the first time on mainframe computer
maintenance, because it is the first time that RFP's
have been sent out. Mr. Massengale confirmed this,
and added that previous maintenance has been awarded
to the manufacturer of the equipment, and that the
change in policy was due to the availability of
additional sources.
John Maria, Account Manager for Digital Equipment in
Lubbock and vendor in this processs, made the
following three points:
1. Digital Equipment employees 12
citizens of the City of Lubbock and
rent office space, etc.
2. Evaluation factors required Digital
not to bid "commodity services", but
to submit a specific proposal
meeting the needs of the City.
3. The system in question dispatches
Police, Fire and other emergency
personnel and twice in the last
three months a problem with the
equipment was detected and repaired
before the equipment went down.
Given that and the ability of
Digital Equipment to detect problems
previous to critical impact, and
because this is a mission critical
application of the 911-E System, Mr.
Maria stated that an RFP process
rather than a commodity bid is
justified.
He then stated the qualifications, experience, and
training of the service engineers regarding the
equipment in question, and that the reference sites
were other mission critical sites, as well as local
users who would experience great monetary losses in
cases of equipment failure.
Councilman Cooke stated his opinion that Council is
not qualified to make a judgment regarding the RFP
issue, but that a judgment regarding that will be
made in the Courts and went on to state his faith in
the work of the Evaluation Committee.
Motion was made by Councilman Cooke, seconded by
Councilman Aderton to support Staff recommendations
on the bid.
Councilman Ince complimented the vendor
presentations but voiced reluctance to award the bid
without additional time to review information
presented. He went on to say that this is not an
inference of wrong doing, but rather is in
consideration that a new procedure is being used.
July 9, 1992
Page 574
Councilman Ince then asked the effective date of the
Maintenance Agreement and Tom Tuning, Information
Services Manager, replied that the contract will be
effective 30 days after the award and the current
vendors will continue with maintenance until then.
Councilman Neugebauer asked for price comparison of
new proposal and the current agreement, and Mr.
Tuning replied that the contract for the IBM
equipment is for the same amount, and there is a 35%
reduction in the cost of the other equipment.
Mayor Langston concurred with Councilman Ince that
this item is not ready for action at this time and
called for a motion to table. Motion was made by
Councilman Ince, seconded by Councilman Neugebauer
to table this item. Motion carried: 5 Yeas;
1 Nay --Councilman Aderton.
92-51B-574-379
(17.) ORDINANCE #9537--Amendment to Zoning Ordinance #7084
to regulate all sexually oriented businesses.
ORDINANCE #9537
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 29 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE
CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS, WITH REGARD TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTION 29-24
TO DELETE SUBSECTION 29-24(26), SECTION 29-24(27) TO ADD SEXUALLY
ORIENTED BUSINESSES, SECTION 29-3 TO INCLUDE VARIOUS DEFINITIONS
PERTAINING TO SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES; PROVIDING A PENALTY;
PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
The public hearing for this item was held June 25,
1992. The Planning staff supported approval of the
Ordinance as amended to require a Specific Use zone
case in any industrial and commercial district to
stipulate either a 500' or 1,000' notice area
subject to discussion by the Council and delete
separation requirements.
Mr. Jones indicated that to include provisions for
notice to those outside the 200' area, and to
include an amortization provision, a separate motion
is necessary.
Mayor Langston called for an explanation of the
effects of a 1000' separation requirement from
schools, churches, etc. and Randy Henson, Senior
Planner, stated that this scenario still places in
East Lubbock the majority of area in which sexually
oriented businesses may be built.
Councilman Cooke then led discussion regarding
deleting retail and office locations. Mayor Pro Tem
Trejo noted that increased notification requirements
will allow input by adjacent owners during the
public hearing. Councilman Ince asked how to keep
sexually oriented businesses out of shopping centers
and Mr. Jones advised that the ordinance would have
to be amended to strike the designation "commercial"
and add "C-3, C-4, M-1, M-2, IHI, and IHC".
At this point, Mayor Langston suggested deleting
Section 4, which contains separation requirements,
from the Ordinance.
July 9, 1992
Page 575
Motion was made by Councilman Neugebauer, seconded
by Councilman Cooke to delete from the ordinance all
zones eligible for location of sexually oriented
businesses and stipulate approval only through a
process of application for a Specific Use Permit in
C-3, C-4, M-1, M-2, IHI, and IHC zones. Motion
carried: 6 Yeas; 0 Nays.
Motion was made by Councilman Neugebauer to amend
Ordinance #9537 by deleting the 1000' separation
requirement from residential and leaving other
-
separation requirements. Motion died for lack of a
second. Mayor Langston stated he will not support
an amendment which will shift sexually oriented
businesses primarily to one area of town.
Motion was made by Councilman Cooke, seconded by
Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to amend Ordinance #9537 by
deleting Section 4. Motion carried: 5 Yeas;
1 Nay --Councilman Neugebauer.
Motion was made by Councilman Neugebauer to amend
Ordinance #9537, adding an amortization period of
two years. Motion died for lack of a second.
Motion was made by Councilman Cooke, seconded by
Councilman Ince to pass on second and final reading
Ordinance #9537 as amended and authorizing an
increase in charge to cover notification costs in
sexually oriented business cases. Motion carried:
6 Yeas; 0 Nays.
• :0
• ORDINANCE .
amend licensing regulations pertaining to all
sexually oriented businesses.
ORDINANCE #9538
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE IX OF CHAPTER 14 OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS, WITH REGARD TO SEXUALLY
ORIENTED BUSINESSES WITHIN THE CITY; SETTING FORTH DEFINITIONS; SETTING
FORTH EXCEPTIONS; PROVIDING FOR PERMITS AND PERMIT APPLICATIONS;
PROVIDING FOR INSPECTIONS; EXPIRATION, SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION OF
PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR APPEALS; PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS;
PROVIDING FOR RECORDS TO BE KEPT; ESTABLISHING AGE REQUIREMENTS;
PROVIDING FOR NOTICE; AUTHORIZING CIVIL SUITS TO BE FILED; REPEALING
SECTION 18-26 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING
A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
Motion was made by Councilman Neugebauer, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to pass on second and final
reading Ordinance #9538 as recommended by Staff.
Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0 Nays.
July 9, 1992
Page 576
92-51B-576-381
(19.)
RESOLUTION #3924
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR IMPROVEMENTS OF PORTIONS OF STREETS,
HIGHWAYS, AVENUES AND/OR ALLEYS IN THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS, AND ALONG
THE BOUNDARY OF SAID CITY AND DIRECTING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
SECTION 1. THAT public necessity exists that the following
portions of alleys in the City of Lubbock and along the boundaries
thereof, be improved as herein provided, to -wit:
Alley (10' Wide)
Name
The East-West alley between 73rd Street and 74th Street
from Slide Road to Zoar Avenue
The East-West alley between 23rd Street and 24th Street from
Canton to 1001 East of Elgin Avenue
SECTION 2. THAT said portions of alleys shall be improved by
raising, grading, and filling same, and by installing a ten (10) foot
wide, 5" minimum depth reinforced concrete strip in the center of the
alley right-of-way.
SECTION 3. THAT the City Engineer is hereby directed to prepare
plans and specifications for such improvements.
SECTION 4. THAT such improvements in each unit shall be paid for
in the following manner:
ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS
(a) The abutting property and owners thereof shall pay and shall
be assessed for a part of the remaining cost of such
improvements in the following manner: All property will be
assessed ninety (90) percent of the total construction cost.
Said abutting property and owners thereof shall pay and be
assessed for the cost of constructing alley paving
improvements as specified above, provided, that if it shall
appear at the hearing to be had before final assessment is
made, that the special benefits to such property by way of
enhancement value thereof by means of such improvements will
not aggregate such proportion of the cost as specified
above, then there shall be assessed and be paid by such
abutting property and the owners thereof, a lesser amount
not to exceed the benefits.
(b) The remaining cost of said improvements after deducting the
sums finally assessed against abutting property and the
owners thereof under subparagraph (a) above, shall be paid
by the City of Lubbock.
July 9, 1992
Page 577
SECTION 5. THAT the amounts assessed,against and to be paid by
the abutting property and the owners thereof shall be payable in five
(5) equal installations, the first of which shall become due on or
before twenty (20) days after completion and acceptance of the
improvements in the unit on which the property abuts by the City
Council; the second, third, fourth and fifth installments shall become
due one, two, three, and four years respectively after completion and
acceptance of the improvements in the unit upon which the property
abuts, by the City Council and shall bear interest from the date of
completion and acceptance until paid, at the rate of eight percent per
annum on alley improvements, payable annually, with provisions that if
default be made in the payment of any installment promptly as the same
matures; then at the option of the holder of such assessment of
certificate issued in evidence thereof, such default shall mature the
entire assessment upon which same is made.
SECTION 6. THAT assessments shall be made and levied, and shall
be a first and prior lien and personal liability for principal,
interest, reasonable attorney's fees and costs of collection, if
incurred, all under and in accordance with the Charter and amendments
thereto, now in force in this City, and in accordance with the
provisions of Article 1105B, Revised Civil Statutes of Texas as amended
by Chapter 281 of the 52nd Legislature, and most recent amended by
Chapter 176 Acts of the 60th Legislature.
SECTION 7. THAT this Resolution shall take effect and be in force
from and after its passage.
Passed by the City Council this 9th day of July, 1992.
Zsl David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Larry D. Hertel
Larry D. Hertel, City Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ J. Worth Fullingim
J. Worth Fullingim, Assistant
City Attorney
July 9, 1992
Page 578
This is the first of five resolutions and one
ordinance (three readings) required to initiate an
assessment paving program and is in response to
petitions presented by the abutting property owners
requesting the construction of alley paving
improvements as follows:
1. The east -west alley between 73rd
Street and 74th Street from Slide
Road to Zoar Avenue. The petition
for this alley was signed by 67% of
the property owners equating to 69%
of the abutting footage.
2. The east -west alley between 23rd
Street and 24th Street from Canton
Avenue to 100' east of Elgin Avenue.
The petition for this alley was
signed by 43% of the property owners
equating to 39% of the abutting
footage.
According to Staff memo, the City is required by
State law to participate in a minimum of 10% of the
construction costs associated with these paving
improvements.
Staff recommended approval of this Resolution.
Motion was made by Councilman Aderton, seconded by
Councilman Ince to authorize Resolution #3924 as
recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0
Nays.
July 9, 1992
Page 579
92-51B-579-382
(20.) Consider Resolution #3925 authorizing the Mayor to
execute a Loading Bridge Maintenance Agreement with
Southwest Airlines Delta Airlines and American
Airlines.
RESOLUTION #3925
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
THAT the Mayor of the City of Lubbock BE and is hereby authorized
and directed to execute for and on behalf of the City of Lubbock a
Loading Bridge Maintenance Agreement with Southwest Airlines Co., Delta
Air Lines, Inc. and American Airlines, Inc., attached hereto, which
shall be spread upon the minutes of the Council and as spread upon the
minutes of this Council shall constitute and be a part of this
Resolution as if fully copied herein in detail.
Passed by the City Council this 9th day of July, 1992.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Bern Case by Rod Paine
Bern Case, Director of Aviation
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Harold Willard
Harold Willard, Assistant
City Attorney
STATE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF LUBBOCK §
LOADING BRIDGE MAINTENANCE FUNDING AGREEMENT
This Loading Bridge Maintenance Funding Agreement between SOUTHWEST
AIRLINES CO., DELTA AIR LINES, INC. and AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.,
hereinafter collectively called "Airlines," and the CITY OF LUBBOCK,
TEXAS, hereinafter called "City," provides for the establishment of a
fund to be used for maintenance, repair and upkeep of five (5) loading
bridges located at the following gates at the Lubbock International
Airport, hereinafter called "Airport," to wit:
Gate 4
Gate 5
Gate 6
Gate 7
Gate 8
July 9, 1992
Page 580
1. Payments by the Airlines as set forth in this agreement shall
begin immediately following execution by the City of a loading
bridge maintenance agreement with a vendor qualified to perform
such maintenance, provided that the following conditions are
satisfied by the City:
a. All deferred maintenance on the loading bridges for the
above numbered gates is completed to the satisfaction of the
Airlines or such other representative appointed by the
Airlines.
b. The standard and level of maintenance performed upon the
loading bridges must meet or exceed the manufacturers'
specifications for loading bridges of the same age, make and
model.
C. The loading bridges must qualify under the manufacturers'
maintenance contract for maintenance at standard rates and
charges.
d. The City, at its sole cost and expense, will be responsible
for satisfying the above conditions. These costs and
expenses will not be recovered by the City through
maintenance and operation costs, depreciation, debt service
or the fund established by this agreement. Once these
conditions are satisfied, loading bridge maintenance,
depreciation and/or debt service will be eliminated from the
Airport's budget and from maintenance and operation cost
calculations.
2. In consideration of the performance of the conditions by the City
described in Section 1, above, the Airlines agree to pay the cost
and expense of maintenance, repair, and upkeep of the airport's
loading bridges, in accordance with the following conditions:
a. The Airlines will establish a fund from which the cost and
expense of maintaining, repairing and otherwise servicing
the loading bridges will be paid and/or reimbursed to the
City by paying a fee of $7.00 for each use of a loading
bridge by the applicable Airline into such loading bridge
maintenance fund. Use of a loading bridge is defined as the
use by the applicable Airline for one arrival and departure
of a flight.
b. In the event repair and maintenance costs, other than those
arising out of negligence or willful misconduct of one or
more of the Airlines, in any year exceed the available
balance in the loading bridge maintenance fund, the Airlines
agree to pay for such repair and maintenance costs pro rata,
based on enplanements as a percentage of total passengers
enplaned by the Airlines.
C. The total cumulative liability of the Airlines pursuant to
paragraphs 2a and 2b above in any fiscal year shall not
exceed $75,000.00 (the "Liability Limitation").
d. In the event costs of maintenance, repair and upkeep of the
loading bridges exceed $75,000.00 in any fiscal year, the
City will promptly pay the excess costs. However, these
excess costs shall not be charged to the Airlines through
maintenance and operation costs, depreciation, debt service,
or any other budgetary process.
e. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, any damage
caused by negligence or willful misconduct of an airline
will be the responsibility of the airline causing the
damage, and will not be subject to or included in the
calculation of the Liability Limitation. The airline last
using a loading bridge found to be damaged will be
considered the airline responsible for that damage.
July 9, 1992
Page 581
f. For use of bridges not covered,by this agreement, the
Airlines agree to pay $25.00 per use, provided, however,
that should such bridges be made available for use by other
parties on terms or conditions more favorable, such more
favorable terms and conditions will be immediately available
to the Airlines.
9. In the event that one or more of the loading bridges covered
by this agreement is unavailable for use due to maintenance
and none of the other bridges covered by this agreement are
available, then the Airlines may use one of the bridges not
covered by the agreement for the same fee described in
paragraph 2a.
3. In the event the Airport elects to move any or all of the Airlines
participating in this agreement to gates which are equipped with
bridges not subject to this agreement, then:
a. The City, at its own cost and expense (not to be recovered
through maintenance and operation costs, depreciation, or
debt service) and prior to such move, will repair or
refurbish the loading bridge at the new gate so that such
bridge (i) qualifies for a standard maintenance contract at
rates not to exceed those incurred for the bridge at the
gate being vacated; and (ii) is in a condition at least as
good as that of the bridge at the vacated gate with respect
to deferred maintenance, serviceability, remaining useful
life, fitness for purpose and appearance.
b. The vacated bridge will no longer be part of this agreement,
but will be replaced hereunder by the substitute bridge upon
written consent of the airlines, such consent not to be
unreasonably withheld.
C. Should the substitute bridge, by reason of its model,
manufacturer or other nonremediable condition, be acceptable
for maintenance service only at a higher rate than the
vacated bridge, the City will pay the difference between (i)
what the Airlines would have paid had the bridge
substitution not occurred; and (ii) what is required to be
paid with the substitute bridge included. The incremental
cost paid by the City will not be recovered through
maintenance and operation costs, depreciation, debt service
or by any other budgetary process from the Airlines.
4. City hereby represents and agrees that:
a. All monies collected under this agreement, with the
exception of monies collected pursuant to paragraph 2f
above, will be set aside, in a separate interest -bearing
account, and used exclusively for maintenance, repairs and
upkeep of the subject bridges. Upon reasonable request of
the Airlines, the records for such account, including but
not limited to deposits and disbursements, will be made
available for inspection or audit by any or all of the
Airlines or their designated representatives. Any and all
interest earned on such account shall become a part of the
fund. The City further agrees that it will cause the
records of such account to be kept in sufficient detail to
enable the Airlines to identify the amount, date, parties
involved, and reason for any deposit or disbursement from
the account.
July 9, 1992
Page 582
b. All monies collected under paragraph 2f above will be set
aside and used exclusively for repairs and maintenance of
the loading bridges at the Airport which are not subject to
this agreement. The City further agrees that it will cause
the records of such receipts and disbursements to be kept in
sufficient detail to enable the Airlines to identify the
amount, date, parties involved, and reason for any deposit
or disbursement.
C. All records required to be kept hereunder will be maintained
for a period of two (2) years from the date of expiration or
termination of this agreement. Should the City default in
its requirement to keep said records, the Airlines have the
right, but not the obligation, to engage, at the City's sole
cost and expense, an independent accountant to audit the
books and records of the airport to re-create said records,
in addition to other remedies set forth below.
d. The City shall use its best efforts to have any of the
covered bridges that may be taken out of service for
maintenance reasons returned to service as soon as possible,
with a maximum down -time of 60 days. If a bridge is out of
service for longer than 60 days, another bridge will be
provided by the Airport for the same fee described in
paragraph 2a until the covered bridge is returned to
service.
5. Should the City default in any of its obligations under this
agreement, the Airlines may, at their sole option, do any or all
of the following:
a. Immediately terminate this agreement and credit, as an
offset against the next period's rent, on a pro rata basis,
the balance in the loading bridge account.
b. Seek remedies for damages and performance under this
agreement in a court of law.
6. Should the Airlines wish to discontinue use of one of the loading
bridges, they may cease to be obligated under the conditions of
this agreement for that bridge with a 60-day notice to the City.
Should any of the Airlines wish to add a bridge to this agreement,
they may do so with 60-day notice to the City. The addition of
bridges to this agreement will raise the Liability Limitation
expressed in paragraphs 2c and 2d by $15,000 per bridge. The
deletion of bridges from this agreement will lower the Liability
Limitation expressed in paragraphs 2c and 2d by $15,000 per
bridge.
7. The City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Airlines,
jointly and severally, and their respective officers, directors,
employees, successors and assigns from any and all damages, claims
or actions arising out of the use, operation, repair and
maintenance of the bridges regardless of when they occur, save and
except where such damages, claims or actions are caused by the
negligence or willful misconduct of one or more of the Airlines,
their respective officers, directors, employees, successors or
assigns.
8. Nothing contained herein is intended to imply or shall imply that
the Airlines have an ownership interest in either the gates or
loading bridges at the Airport.
9. An airline may assign its interest herein only with the prior
written consent of the other airlines and City, such consent not
to be unreasonably withheld.
July 9, 1992
Page 583
10. This Loading Bridge Maintenance Funding Agreement expires
September 30, 1999. Upon expiration, any monies remaining in the
fund, along with accrued interest, will be preserved until
exhausted for payment of the cost and expense of maintenance,
repair and upkeep of the loading bridges which, at the time of
expiration, are subject to this agreement.
11. This Agreement shall constitute the entire understanding between
the parties hereto relating to charges negotiated between such
parties for loading bridge maintenance in accordance with
provisions contained in other leases presently in effect. There
are no other agreements or understandings regarding loading bridge
maintenance funding, either written or oral, which are not
incorporated herein. This Agreement shall supersede any and all
previous agreements and understandings between the parties
relating to loading bridge maintenance funding.
AGREED AND ACCEPTED:
AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.
By /s/ Name Not Legible
Title Specialist -Corporate Real Estate
Date July 9, 1992
DELTA AIR LINES, INC.
By /s/ Harris Morris
Title Vice President -Properties
Date July 9, 1992
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Bern Case
Bern Case, Director of Aviation
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Zs/ Harold Willard
Harold Willard, Assistant City Attorney
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO.
By /s/ James F. Parker
Title Vice President
Date July 9, 1992
CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS
By:/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
Southwest, Delta, and American airlines have agreed
to an assessment fee for the use of the loading
bridges at the Lubbock International Airport for the
exclusive purpose of funding the cost of the Loading
Bridge Maintenance Agreement.
July 9, 1992
Page 584
The agreement requires separate accounting for the
collection and dispersal of these fees subject to
audit by the airlines. This fee is $7 per use by
each airline, not to exceed $15,000 per bridge per
year; however, the fee cannot be collected until a
vendor has been identified by the City and accepted
by the airlines. The City Purchasing Department is
presently seeking a qualified vendor.
Although this agreement covers only Gates 4, 5, 6,
7, and 8, it has provisions for adding other gates
and for use of gates not covered at the rate of $25
per use. Lubbock International Airport is often
used as a reliever airport for Dallas -Fort Worth
International's eastbound approach traffic and at
times all nine loading bridges to be pressed into
service.
This agreement will provide additional annual
revenue to the Airport of $75,000 and $525,000 over
the life of the agreement; however, the agreement
stipulates that these funds can only be used for
maintenance of the loading bridges.
The Airport Board unanimously accepted this
agreement and recommended it to the Council for
approval. Staff recommended approval.
Motion was made by Councilman Aderton, seconded by
Councilman Neugebauer to authorize Resolution #3925
as recommended by the Airport Board and Staff.
Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0 Nays.
July 9, 1992
Page 585
92-51B-585-383
(21.)
RESOLUTION #3926
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
THAT the Mayor of the City of Lubbock BE and is hereby authorized
and directed to execute for and on behalf of the City of Lubbock an
Agreement with Adling Associates Architects, attached herewith, which
shall be spread upon the minutes of the Council and as spread upon the
minutes of this Council shall constitute and be a part of this
Resolution as if fully copied herein in detail.
Passed by the City Council this 9th day of July, 1992.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Jerry Smith
Jerry Smith, Director of
Building Services
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Donald G. Vandiver
Donald G. Vandiver, First
Assistant City Attorney
A copy of the Agreement with Adling Associates Architects is filed with
Resolution No. 3926.
During the 1986 budget year a capital project was
approved for the roof replacement of the Lubbock
Memorial Civic Center. Funds have been set aside
each year so money would be available to start the
roof replacement/repair project during the 1993-94
fiscal year; however, during the recent rains,
numerous leaks caused the interior plaster ceiling
to deteriorate.
To date, $379,000 has been set aside in the General
Permanent Capital Maintenance Fund for this project
and an additional $400,000 has been requested in
1992-93 Capital Projects budget, making the total
project cost $779,000. Depending on the amount of
funds that can be allocated in 1992-93, the roof may
be replaced in phases, with the most critical areas
being replaced first.
According to Staff memo, it was determined that even
though the roof replacement may be done in phases,
it would be more cost effective to have one
architect prepare the plans and specifications for
the entire roof project. The specifications will be
developed by September, 1992, and either the entire
roof or a significant portion of the roof will be
replaced after October 1 in the 1992-93 fiscal year.
July 9, 1992
Page 586
A request for proposals was distributed to ten
architect firms and a committee reviewed the
proposals submitted. Based on evaluation of the
experience of the firms and the individuals
assigned, the committee recommended Adling and
Associates as the best firm to develop drawings and
written specifications of replacement of the Civic
Center roof.
The existing Civic Center roof is comprised of a
gravel topping set into a flood coat of asphalt over
two plies of fiberglass roofing felts and one ply of
base sheet nailed to 2' of gypsum concrete deck.
The existing deck is flat and doesn't allow for
proper drainage. Staff plans to redesign the roof
using a method of tapered insulation sloped to the
existing drains. This design is critical as the
existing roof allows for ponding of water for long
periods and if there is a leak, the gypsum deck
becomes damaged and at this point, Staff estimates
$30,000 in deck damage. Plans are to redesign the
existing built-up type roof to a high quality
granule surfaced modified bitumen system which has a
certain degree of flexibility and elasticity,
cohesive strength, resistance to flow at high
temperature and toughness. This system is being
used by Texas Tech and LISD at a high success rate.
Texas Tech and LISD use Adling and Associates for
redesigning most of their roofing projects. This
redesign requires that a new set of plans and
specifications be developed to accomplish this work.
The original roof specifications cannot be modified
to accomplish this new design.
According to State law, plans and specifications for
any alteration or addition to an existing building
owned by a State agency, a political subdivision of
the State, or any other public entity in the State,
if the building is used or will be used for
education, assembly, or office occupancy, that
construction costs of the alteration or addition
exceed $50,000, and the alteration or addition
require the removal, relocation, or addition of any
walls or partitions or the alteration or addition of
an exit must be prepared by a registered architect
or engineer.
July 9, 1992
Page 587
Staff discussion with four local roofing contractors
indicated that the design work for this project was
beyond their level of expertise and encouraged the
City to use the services of a qualified architect.
The four contractors were all in agreement that
Adling and Associates was the most qualified firm in
the Lubbock area to do roof design. This
recommendation was presented to Council on January
23, 1992 and instructions from Council were to
negotiate a Contract with Adling Associates
Architects with key provisions as follow:
1. Adling Associates Architects will
provide detailed drawings and
written specifications for the
purpose of the City to bid out the
replacement of the Civic Center
roof.
2. Adling Associates Architects will be
present during the pre -bid phase to
answer any questions from vendors
and during construction will conduct
on -site inspections of the work
being performed.
3. The set fee for Adling Associates
Architects services will be $42,500.
4. The agreement may be terminated with
a 7-day written notice for failure
to perform in accordance with the
terms of the agreement.
Motion was made by Councilman Aderton, seconded by
Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to authorize Resolution #3926 as
recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0
Nays.
July 9, 1992
Page 588
92-51B-588-384
(22.) Consider Resolution #3927 by the City Council of the
City of Lubbock, Texas, approval and authorizing
RESOLUTION #3927
A RESOLUTION by the City Council of the City of Lubbock, Texas,
approving and authorizing publication of notice of intention to issue
certificates of obligation and a notice of sale with respect to such
certificates of obligation.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lubbock, Texas, has
determined that certificates of obligation should be issued in
accordance with the provisions of V.T.C.A., Local Government Code,
Subchapter C of Chapter 271, for the purpose of paying contractual
obligations to be incurred for (i) land acquisition and site
improvements including water system and sewer system extensions and
improvements in connection with construction of a correctional facility
(approximately $4,000,000); (ii) solid waste disposal system
improvements (approximately $3,565,000); and (iii) professional services
rendered in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, prior to the issuance of said certificates of obligation,
this Council is required to give notice of its intention to issue the
same in the manner and time provided by law and deems inappropriate to
publish a notice of sale with respect to such certificates; now,
therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS:
Section 1: That the City Secretary is hereby authorized and
directed to cause notice to be published of this Council's intention to
issue certificates of obligation in the prinicipal amount not to exceed
$7,565,000 for the purpose of paying site improvements including water
system and sewer system extensions and improvements in connection with
construction of a correctional facility (approximately $4,000,000); (ii)
solid waste disposal system improvements (approximately $3,565,000); and
(iii) professional services rendered in connection therewith, such
certificates to be payable from ad valorem taxes and a limited lien on
and a limited pledge of the net revenues of the City's Waterworks
System. The notice hereby approved and authorized to be given shall read
substantially in the form and content of Exhibit A hereto attached and
incorporated herein by reference as a part of this resolution for all
purposes.
Section 2: That such notice shall be published once a week for
two consecutive weeks in a newspaper having general circulation in the
City of Lubbock, Texas, the date of the first publication of such notice
to be at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date stated therein for
the passage of the ordinance authorizing the issuance of the
certificates of obligation.
July 9, 1992
Page 589
Section 3: That the City Secretary is hereby authorized and
directed to cause a notice of sale to be published relating to the sale
of the certificates of obligation in the principal amount not to exceed
$7,565,000. The notice of sale hereby approved and authorized to be
published shall read substantially in the form and content of Exhibit B
hereto attached and incorporated herein by reference as a part of this
resolution for all purposes.
Section 4: That the City Secretary is hereby authorized and
directed to cause a notice of sale to be published once each week for a
period of thirty days.
PASSED AND APPROVED, this the 9th day of July, 1992.
/s/ Maggie Trejo
Maggie Trejo, Mayor Pro Tem
for
David R. Langston, Mayor
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
A copy of Exhibits A and B are filed with Resolution No. 3927.
This item is to initiate the financing for the
Psychiatric Hospital and various Solid Waste
projects at a total amount of $7,565,000 in
Certificates of Obligation. One project involves
land acquisition and site improvements in connection
with construction of a correctional facility
(approximately $4,000,000) which would be payable
from ad valorem taxes and a limited pledge of net
revenues of the City Waterworks System. The second
project is Solid Waste Disposal System Improvements
(approximately $3,565,000) which will be payable
from net revenues of the Solid Waste System.
Prior to issuing Certificates of Obligation, the
City Council is required to give notice of this
intention to issue and to give notice of sale.
The next City Council action will be first reading
of the Ordinance authorizing issuance of
certificates on August 13, 1992, with second reading
scheduled for a special called meeting on August 14,
1992. This schedule will require the tax rate
ordinance to be approved on first reading on August
27, 1992 and second reading for September 10, 1992.
According to Staff memo, this is routine action in
the process of the Issuance of Certificates of
Obligation. Staff recommended passage of the
ordinance on first reading and that approval for
second reading be scheduled for August 14, 1992.
Motion was made by Councilman Neugebauer, seconded
by Councilman Ince to authorize Resolution #3927 as
recommended by Staff.
Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0
Nays.
Mayor Langston advised that this action was
obligated by the previous Council and in the future,
he will not support CO issuances not approved by the
voters, unless they address public safety and
welfare projects.
July 9, 1992
Page 590
92-51B-590-385
(23.)
92-51B-590-386
(24.)
the Municipal Building, and enter into record.
The City Council expressed an interest in changing
City Council meetings to locations other than in the
Municipal Building.
This resolution was written to incorporate
appropriate wording to allow Council the flexibility
to have their meetings in alternate locations. The
resolution needs to be entered into the record
during this meeting and will be brought back to
Council on July 23 to be incorporated into the
Council Order of Business Rules and Procedures.
Mayor Langston read the caption into the record and
no other action at this meeting was necessary.
unanimous to a majority vote.
The Council heard recommendations at its June 25
meeting by an ad hoc committee appointed by the
Mayor. The committee was comprised of
representatives from the Committee for Women,
Community Services Commission, League of Women
Voters, and community volunteers, regarding the
appointment process for advisory boards and
commissions. Key points in the report were as
follow:
1. Boards and commissions should
reflect demographics of the people
served.
2. Appointments being made by a
majority vote of Council.
3. Continue current practice of
discussing potential appointees in
executive session and voting in open
session.
4. Procedures outlining requirements
for a complete bio sheet to Council
for each person indicating interest,
contacting potential appointees to
re -confirm interest, conflict of
interest considerations, and
allowing sufficient time in
appointment process to allow
appointees to attend committee
meetings prior to the start of their
term.
July 9, 1992
Page 591
5.Creation of a 15-member committee to
oversee and monitor the appointment
process.
6. Develop and implement a marketing
plan as discussed at the June 11
Council meeting.
7. Develop pre and post -board training
procedures.
Recommendation #2 that appointments to the City
Council advisory boards and commissions be made by a
majority vote of Council rather than a unanimous
vote requires an amendment to the City Council Order
of Business, Rules and Procedures.
This resolution includes appropriate wording to
address this change and amends the following
sections in Volume I Council Order of Business,
Rules and Procedures:
1. Paragraph 12, Page 1-23 of City
Council terms and definitions.
2. Subparagraph III(A)(6).
3. Subparagraph III(B)(11)(a).
The resolution will need to be entered into the
record at this meeting and then be brought back to
the City Council on July 23 for approval of the
amendment in order to incorporate the change into
the Council Order of Business, Rules and Procedures.
Mayor Langston read the caption into the record and
no other action at this meeting was necessary.
July 9, 1992
Page 592
92-51B-592-387
(25.) Consider Resolution #3928 creating a 15-member
Boards and Commissions Advisory Committee.
RESOLUTION #3928
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lubbock finds that it is
desirable to encourage citizen participation in service on City boards
and commissions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems it appropriate to create an
advisory board to encourage greater citizen participation in local
government that is reflective of the community demographics; and
WHEREAS, such board will be able to assist the Council in
assigning members to the boards and commissions of the City of Lubbock,
which membership will accurately reflect the demographics of the City;
NOW THEREFORE:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
SECTION 1. THAT there is hereby created and established a board
to be known and designated as the "Lubbock Board and Commission Advisory
Board" consisting of fifteen (15) members who shall be appointed by the
City Council in the following manner:
(a) Each Council person shall recommend two members for
appointment to the Board by the City Council; and
(b) The Mayor shall recommend three members for appointment to
the Board by the City Council.
SECTION 2. In accordance with Article II, Section 11, of the
Constitution of the State of Texas the term of office of the members of
the Lubbock Board and Commission Advisory Board shall be two years,
except however, of the members first appointed in accordance with this
resolution the term of office of seven (7) of the members appointed
shall be for one year only and thereafter all appointments shall carry a
two year term. To accomplish the above, each Council member shall make
his initial recommended appointments to the Board by recommending one
person for one year and one person for two years. The Mayor shall make
his initial recommendation to the Board by recommending one person for
one year and two persons for two years.
SECTION 3. In the event that a vacancy occurs on the Board for
any reason, then in such event the City Council shall appoint a person
to fill such vacancy for the unexpired term of such appointee. The
Mayor or Council member who recommended the person who is no longer able
to serve and thus creates the vacancy, shall recommend to the Council
the person to be appointed to fill the unexpired term.
SECTION 4. The Board shall appoint one of its members as
chairperson and one of its members as vice chairperson. It shall be the
duty of the chairperson to preside at all meetings of the Board and the
vice chairperson shall preside in the absence of the chairperson. The
City Manager or his designated representative shall act as secretary to
the Board and shall keep permanent records of all proceedings of the
Board, which records shall be delivered to the City Secretary for
retention purposes.
SECTION 5. Any and all recommendations made by the Board to the
City Council shall be made by the concurring vote of at least eight (8)
members of the Board. A majority of the total membership of the Board
shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of all matters to be
considered by the Board. The Board is authorized to establish
subcommittees for specific functions with a chairperson for each.
SECTION 6. The Board may adopt rules for its internal operation
not inconsistent with the terms and conditions of this Resolution.
July 9, 1992
Page 593
SECTION 7. The Board shall meet once each month at a time to be
determined by the Board and may meet at any other times on the call of
the chairperson, vice chairperson or any three members of the Board.
SECTION 8. The Board shall have the following advisory duties:
(a) The development of application forms for all City boards and
commissions.
(b) The responsibility to develop and maintain a data bank of
qualified appointees.
(c) Develop and make public clear written guidelines for the
appointment of persons to City Boards and Commissions and to
update such guidelines annually.
(d) Develop and provide information to all City board and
commission appointees on conflicts of interest.
(e) Oversee the development of a marketing plan for awareness to
the public of board vacancies.
(f) Develop and oversee procedures to insure that new City board
appointees receive training on a regular basis concerning
City policy and procedures and applicable State laws which
may affect their board's operation.
(g) Study and report to the City Council on an annual basis the
relationship of community demographics to the board
appointment process and the work of the Board as set forth
herein.
Passed by the City Council this 9th day of July, 1992.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
IsZ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
Zs/ Bob Cass
Bob Cass, Deputy City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ John C. Ross, Jr.
John C. Ross, Jr., City Attorney
July 9, 1992
Page 594
At its June 25, 1992 meeting, the Council heard
recommendations from an ad hoc committee appointed
by the Mayor to regarding boards and commissions
appointment process. One of the recommendations was
for creation of a 15 member advisory committee to
oversee and monitor the appointment process and
among other activities, the committee will be
responsible for the following:
Overseeing data bank of possible
appointees.
Updating current material and
providing clear written guidelines
for appointment procedures that are
readily available to the public and
updated annually.
Provide education regarding conflict
of interest and other issues.
Oversee a marketing plan for
promoting awareness of upcoming
board vacancies.
Oversee and assist in the
development of pre and post board
training procedures.
Make other recommendations as
appropriate.
The board will be comprised of 15 members, two
appointed by each Councilmember and from their
districts, and three appointed by the Mayor. The
members will be appointed to serve staggered
two-year terms corresponding with the term of the
Councilmember by whom the appointment was made. The
committee will elect its chair by majority vote.
Staff liaisons to the committee will be the
Assistant to the City Manager and Administrative
Assistant to the Mayor and Council. Regular
meetings of the committee will be held once per
month.
July 9, 1992
Page 595
Council instructed Staff to proceed with
implementation of the recommendations and make
recommendations regarding length of terms and
possible term limitations for citizens serving on
City of Lubbock advisory boards as follow:
Boards and commissions should
reflect demographics of the people
served.
Appointments be made by majority
vote of Council.
Continue current practice of
discussing potential appointees in
executive session and voting in open
session.
Procedures outlining requirements
for a complete bio sheet to Council
for each person indicating interest,
contacting potential appointees to
re -confirm interest, conflict of
interest considerations, and
allowing sufficient time in
appointment process to allow
appointees to attend committee
meetings prior to the start of their
term.
Creation of a 15-member committee to
oversee and monitor the appointment
process (two appointed by each
Councilmember from their district,
three to be appointed by the Mayor).
Develop and implement a marketing
plan as discussed at the June 11
Council meeting.
Develop pre and post -board training
procedures.
A resolution has been drafted to require the Council
vote be changed from unanimous to a majority vote
for board appointments and the creation of a
15-member boards and commissions advisory committee.
Additionally, the board member data form is being
sent to those who request or who have expressed an
interest in serving on a board or commission.
Establishment of a computer data base is in the
preliminary stages and should be operational within
the next 15-20 days.
Although the advisory board is charged with
overseeing a marketing plan, staff has begun the
process by posting on the municipal building and
libraries bulletin boards a list of boards and
commissions with upcoming vacancies in the second
half of the year. Staff is developing a more
detailed marketing plan addressing the various
activities mentioned at the June 11 meeting.
July 9, 1992
Page 596
The newly created advisory board will have the
responsibility of helping the Council ensure that
its advisory boards reflect the demographics of the
community. Although the Council has been provided
with numerous statistics and lists regarding the
composition and demographics of its advisory boards,
Staff felt it was important to note that the board
appointment process is extremely dynamic as
appointments to boards occur almost on a monthly
basis. The appointment process was recommended as
follows:
I. Committee is notified by its staff
liaison of upcoming board
appointment three months prior to
expiration of board members term.
An item is placed on the work
session agenda to remind Council of
upcoming board appointment. Council
is provided a current roster,
attendance, and board data
information regarding the
composition of the board.
II. The committee, drawing on the data
base information and other sources,
will compile applications on file or
requests completed application from
interested citizens.
Current appointees who are eligible
and interested in reappointment are
included in the information
forwarded to Council.
III. After all applications from
interested citizens have been
compiled, they will be submitted to
Council 1-1/2 to 2 months prior to
expiration of term for decision on
appointment.
IV. After Council appointment, the
individual staff liaison will be
informed of the new appointee so
discussion can begin regarding
orientation to the specific board.
Although procedure will need to be refined as the
board meets and the process develops, this will be
the starting point for the process.
The Council also asks that staff review the terms of
various boards and commissions to possible term
limitations.
Reference Attachment
logical process, the
as follows:
Active Advisory only:
currently meeting who
capacity.
2. In order to provide a
Boards have to be categorized
Those advisory boards
function only in an advisory
July 9, 1992
Page 597
Active Advisory Officer of City Status: Those active
boards having Officer of City status.
Outside entities created to advise or function as
board of director for an entity other than the City
Council. The Council generally does not appoint
entire boards nor does it have control over
determining length of term or other functions.
Inactive/Temporary: Those boards created to address
a specific issue or who have not met in the past 2
years and to whom new appointments have been made
with the exception of the Citizens Advisory
Committee which was recently re -activated by Council
and the Municipal Board of Sign Control which is
required by State law and is re -activated on an
as -needed basis.
On Attachment 2, Council will note that the terms of
office for 19 of the 27 advisory only and advisory
with Officer of City status is 2 years, with the
Garden and Arts Center Advisory Board being one
year, and the following having 3-year terms.
Human Relations
Board of Health
Library Board
Lubbock 2005 Review Committee
Public Transmit Advisory Board
Civic Center Board
After review, Staff recommended no changes to the
length of term for the active advisory only and
advisory with Officer of City status with the
suggested limit on number of terms served to be for
the 3-year terms and 2 with an additional term if
the board member is serving as Chair at the end of
office should be limited to 3 consecutive terms.
Staff recommended that once the advisory committee
is selected that it conduct an indepth review of
those outside agency boards to determine the
appropriate method for handling.
Motion was made by Councilman Neugebauer, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to authorize Resolution #3928
as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0
Nays.
July 9, 1992
Page 598
There being no further business to
by Councilman Cooke, seconded by C
meeting at 9:45 p.m. Motion carril
Aderton and Mayor Pro Tem Trejo abs
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
Read and approved this the 23rd d
ATTEST:
/s/ Ranette Boyd
Ranette Boyd, City Secretary
re council, motion was made
n U4
n *lm ci a gebauer to adjourn the
� i
4 Yeas, 0 Na-IT---CMhVIlman
nt from he, CounciL-C amber_4,. j