My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
04-01-96 Regular Meeting of La Porte Wrecker Committee
LaPorte
>
City Secretary
>
Minutes
>
Wrecker Committee
>
1990's
>
1996
>
04-01-96 Regular Meeting of La Porte Wrecker Committee
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/8/2022 3:01:52 PM
Creation date
3/21/2025 3:03:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Meetings
Meeting Body
Wrecker Committee
Meeting Doc Type
Minutes
Date
5/3/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Minutes of Public Hearing <br />and Regular Meeting <br />La Porte Wrecker Committee <br />April 1, 1996, Page 3 <br />Mr. Rankin recognized Mr. Gordon again. Mr. Gordon stated, "We are not trying to <br />monopolize any wrecker business in the City of La Porte. We just want representation for our <br />dealership and to serve the community. We are a vital functioning part of this community, and <br />we feel that we need two slots on the rotation." Mr. DeWalt asked what the committee would <br />do if another dealership, such as Joe Camp Ford, should ask for a permit. Mr. Rankin <br />explained, "This is not about dealerships. This is about service. We are not trying to advertise <br />dealerships. We are trying to act in the publics interest." <br />Mr. Rankin asked if any of the commission members had questions. Assistant City Attorney <br />John Armstrong asked if the application had been checked for all the requirements, and does the <br />applicant meet all specifications. Mr. Rankin indicated all requirements have been met. <br />Lt. Corrales indicated the statement by Mr. Tim DeWalt was true. The seventh E-tag has been <br />out of circulation for a year and really has not impacted the service provided. Chief Powell <br />stated, at this time, he could not verify if the number of requests for services had deceased over <br />the past year until he could check the records. <br />Mr. Rankin said that with the opening of the Fred Hartman bridge we do expect the traffic counts <br />to increase, and the number of vehicles traveling in the City will increase and therefore there will <br />probably be more accidents. Whether this will have a greater impact on the seven permits is <br />unknown at this time. He indicated he needed a couple of questions answered before a vote is <br />taken. Mr. Rankin asked the committee members if there was any reason that we should not <br />increase the storage fee to $15.00 a day from the $8.50 which is presently charged. If there are <br />no objections this would be the recommendation to take to City Council. The committee agreed <br />this should be a recommendation for the Assistant City Attorney when he drafts an ordinance <br />change to be taken to City Council for approval. Mr. Rankin asked the committee for a <br />recommendation on the twelve hour charge which is now assessed. He said he disagrees with <br />a charge of $15.00 if the vehicle owner is bonded out in an hour or two after the vehicle has been <br />stored in the tower's storage facility. Chief Powell indicated that a pro -rated by hour charge <br />could be assessed rather than a flat fee of $15.00 if the committee was in agreement. Mr. Rankin <br />asked the committee if there was a recommendation. Chief Powell suggested that we discuss this <br />and the need for the additional permit for the seventh E-tag after investigating the increase or <br />decrease of the number of calls for wrecker service over the past year. Mr. Rankin said the <br />committee would prefer to make a recommendation on the most factual numbers available. If <br />the calls have decreased in a significant amount we might wish to reduce the number of permits <br />from seven to six, but if the figures indicate a stabilization of an increase in calls for service the <br />committee might wish to increase the permits back to seven. <br />Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong reviewed the specifics of the present City ordinance and <br />indicated the number of the permits is determined by public necessity for service. He said there <br />is not a lot of information before the committee at this time for them to be able to make a <br />determination for a need or necessity for the seventh permit. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.