Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-05-1983 Public Hearing La Porte City Council' MINUTES C OF THE PUBLIC HEARING OF THE LA PORTE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 5, 1983 1. The public hearing regarding annexation of the Spenwick Place M.U.D. and the College View M.U.D. and all the acreage lying between them was called to order by Mayor Virginia Cline at 7:00 p.m. Members of the City Council Present: Mayor Virginia Cline, Councilpersons Norman Malone, J~.in Longley, Ed Matuszak, Lindsay Pfeiffer, B. Don Skelton, and Linda Westergren • • Members of the City Council Absent: Deotis Gay Members of City Staff Present: City Attorney Knox Askins, City Secretary Administrative Services Bob Herrera, Robert Ha11, Graduate Engineer John Public Works Jerry Hodge Councilpersons Kevin Graves, Manager Jack Owen, City Cherie Black, Director of Assistant Police Chief Joerns, Director of Others Present: Linda Castleberry, Bayshore Sun-Broadcaster; Sherri Carver, Baytown Sun; approximately 10 citizens Before asking for public input, Mayor Cline requested the City Attorney to review the proposed service plan for the area to be annexed. City Attorney Askins reviewed the service plan point by point. Mayor Cline then asked if there were any questions regarding the service plan. There were none. 2. Mayor Cline asked for anyone wishing to speak in favor of the annexation to address the Council. Mr. Jim Sullivan spoke in favor of the annexation. He is president of Kay Homes and is developing a tract in the area to be annexed and would be grateful for the services the City would provide. He has two problems he wished to address. When he purchased College View Estates 17 months ago, there was no Homeowners Association, and the previous developers were some $2,700. in arrears to Houston Lighting and Power. Subse- quent to that, he had tried to form an association to pick up those payments.- They were unsuccessful and the lights were turned ofd. He wanted to know if the lights will be turned on; he believes Houston Lighting and Power is willing to forgive and forget the amount that is owed them at this point in time. Number 2, the present development (Hunter's Trace) has two commercial reserves. in front. He would like to know what zoning those pieces of property will be, because he does not want a Minutes, Public Hearing, La Porte City Counc~ December 5, 1983, Page 2 • honky-tonk or anything like that put there in front of 200 homes--that would be ruinous to them. Mayor Cline replied to the second inquiry that all property coming into the City limits will be zoned R-1, residential-one. Any commercial establishments coming in would have to be rezoned before planning and zoning and public hearing. City Manager Jack Owen replied to the street lighting problems that is was the City's anticipation to immediately take over, and request that those lights be turned back on. Mr. Cary Burnley spoke in favor of annexation. He feels that Brookglen community, which is part of College View M.U.D., will be an asset to the City of La Porte. Their tax growth is such that they will be able to carry their own weight. He thinks it is time the City exercises their powers of annexation and request that they do so. B. Mayor Cline asked that anyone present who wished to speak in opposition to the annexation of Spenwick and College View to address the Council. Mr. Harold Trahan, 8707 Collingdale, addressed the Council. He had several questions for Council regarding annexation.. • 1. Why is it, that after several years of being neglected, College View M.U.D. has suddenly become so attractive for annexation? Mayor Cline replied that it had not been right to do the annexation before now. In order to annex College View, we had to annex Spenwick first. So we had to do them both. To get College View we had to do Spenwick, so we're doing both at .one time. And, I think the City of La Porte is just now in a position to be able to do that much annexation. • Councilperson Skelton added that from what he'd been told through the years, the City fathers have had this in mind for a number of years and when the Municipal Utility Districts were formed they still had it in mind sometime in the future and they talked in generalities of 15 or 20 years away. And that time has well passed and it's time that we either annex you or turn you loose and somebody else will. I feel you're all part of La Porte; you. use the La Porte schools, we should all be trading here if we get the shopping centers and things that we're looking forward to, and we have a lot of new commer- cial things that will be coming in shortly, and I think there will be a lot more things to offer all the citizens of La Porte. And when you get a few more numbers in there, well you have more people to come in with better stores and better prices, and I think we'll all gain from that. >{ Minutes, Public ring, La Porte City Coun~ December 5, 1983, Page 3 Councilperson Westergren: It is important to remember that • since we have our new charter type of government, by 1985, we will have to look into a more permanent redistricting, and this is the most opportune time if we are ever to annex Spenwick and College View so that they, too, can be represented in the redistricting. That's something that really made it pressing for 1984--that you~be a part of the City by 1984. Councilperson Pfeiffer: My main reason for the annexation is the protection of the City of La Porte in having us have control over the growth in that area.. That's going to be very important in the near future, to have a growth set up to be more conforming with the area in residential and to entice businesses in that we would like dot to see trailer parks or to see any type of industrial businesses coming into that area. 2. What wa$ our status on being annexed by Pasadena before and after annexation of the rodeo grounds? What agreement was made between Pasadena and La Porte at that time? Mayor Cline''replied that La Porte and Pasadena didn't even discuss the annexations of the Municipal Utility Districts out there at the time oflthe rodeo thing. There was never any discussion between the'two cities as far as that .annexation of those two districts. City Attorney Askins: The City of La Porte and Pasadena have • always had ~iarmony on annexation boundaries. About 10 or 12 years ago, ~he City of La Porte and the City of Pasadena entered into a written agreement that provided for under the Municipal Annexation .}pct which is called formal division of extraterri- torial jurisdiction. At that .time it was very important to the City. of Pas~.dena that San Jacinto College be in Pasadena-and have a Pasa~ena post office address. The college is tax exempt property anal it is closer to Pasadena than to La Porte, and La Porte hail no objection, so it was agreed to start the. line down the east boundary of the college, which happens to be the west bounda~y of College-View M.U.D., then the line dropped on down into t e Bayport area and divided up the industrial acreage there. Then Pasadena, just in the last few years, purchased some land from Friendswood Development Corporation on which to build a Civic center. It so happened that that tract of land was on the La Porte side of the line that had been drawn about a decade earllier. And again, La Porte and Pasadena representatives sat down inia very amicable way and La Porte gave up about 40 or 80 acres„ something like that, for the Civic center and Pasadena ex'~changed some of the property that had been in part of its industrial area to La Porte. And so the Pasadena Civic center you ~Isee being constructed is in the Pasadena City limits. Pasadena at~no time claimed jurisdiction or any desire to annex. this water 'district, and it's never-been an issue between the two cities. The matter that was most discussed .was the industrial • area because cities make a very substantial tax off of industrial areas. y.. ... ~-~..~-w<,~-: Minutes, Public wring, La Porte City Coun~ December 5, 1983, Page 4 3. Till very recently the residents in our district have been told that there was no chance for annexation until 1985. We were told that the Justice Department would not approve any such annexation because it would dilute the Black vote. What happened to change this? City Attorney Askins: Those representations were not made by this City Council, so I don't believe we could speak on them. I don't know what was told to you out there. I will say I'm quite familiar with the voting rights act, I've already drafted the preliminary draft of the application on this annexation. It could have been some confusion on the 1985 date, because I did a memo- of .this City Council more than a year. ago urging that any major annexations be completed this year because during calendar '84 a redistricting committee would have to work on a redistricting which is required under our charter on the publication of every federal census, which is every 10 years and then halfway in between, which would be 5 years, which would be 1985. And to have that. done in time for 1985 elections and approved by the Justice Department, as Mrs. Westergren has pointed out, you pretty well have to do and complete in 1984 and get it approved. Certainly there will be from the preliminary statistics I have seen, there will be a somewhat of a dilution of the black vote in the. City at large as a result of this annexation because there is not a very great minority population there. Now under the charter of the City of La Porte, there is a provision that annexation be- tween redistrictings the annexed areas shall become a-part of the • district to which it's contiguous. .That means that this annexa- tion, if completed by Council, will be a part of Council district number two,. which is what we call the west Fairmont district. Councilman Longley is the elected representative from that district and will remain a part of district two till the redistricting in -1985. At that time the entire City will have to be redistricted to a population tolerance between district of no more than plus or minus five percent, and that's the outer limit; they like for it to be less than that. The City of La Porte has a burden of proof, as any City does when each annexation we have to file with the Justice Department, and that's already in draft form, to be submitted to them the day after the annexation is completed for their approval under the Voting Rights Act. The Justice Department will study that brief, maps that are submitted with it, statistics, demographics that are submitted with it. They will contact key minority leaders in this community to get their comments, and they have 60 days to study it and they can ask for a 30 day extension to give their approval. If the Justice Department would feel that the annexation would have a negative effect on minority voting rights, they can disapprove it. In the states that are under the. Voting Rights Act, which Texas and most of the other southern states are, the Justice Department requires this clearance--what's called pre-clearance. And we are hopeful this can be accomplished before the April election, and we believe that it can.. On your voting question, if this • annexation is completed in 1983, the residents of the annexed areas will be eligible to be candidates immediately for City office and be eligible to vote in the City election in April. Minutes, Public ~aring, La Porte City Coun~ December 5, 1983, Page 5 4. Why aren't the people of our districts being given fair • notice of these hearings, and why are both hearings scheduled the same night? I polled a few of the residents around my house and none of those who signed this sheet which I have here, subscribe to the Bayshore Sun. This again would be directed primarily to our utility district. Mayor Cline: I can't answer your question as to why the people out there were not made aware of it any more so than the people in La Porte.. We of course complied with the requirements in publishing the notice. It's possible that your board out there should have made an effort to notify all the people. I can't answer that; maybe your board members can. City Attorney Askins: The provisions of law say that a notice should be published once in a newspaper having general circulation in the City and in the area to be annexed. The official designated newspaper of the City of La Porte is the Bayshore Sun,. and that is where our legal notices. are published. I would say, from feed- back which the City in various departments have had, that there seems to be a pretty good awareness in the two districts of the pendency of the annexation, other .than the formal, bareboned legal notice, the Bayshore Sun and the Baytown Sun, particularly . have carried a lot of front page articles, backgrounding this and news stories on the hearings and the deliberations of Council. I would regret if there's anybody who feels like they did not • have sufficient notice, but we have published the notices that the law requires. Mayor Cline: Mr. Trahan, I daresay there's very few people in the City of La Porte-that are aware of the public hearings being held, and a lot of them probably do take the local paper, which is our official papers, as Mr. Askins pointed out. But they might read about it, but not retain it. Councilperson Longley: Were these people unhappy about the annexation? Trahan: No, I don't think that many .people are unhappy about it; quite a few of the residents would have preferred to be annexed by Pasadena, and over the years we've been led to believe it was possible. Another thing, a few people fear some of the services will be, when we're first annexed, will possibly be reduced. Several of the residents feel why, after so many years, are we now being annexed. I understand.(?) had a lot to do with it. Councilperson Longley: I can assure you that you're certainly coming into the best city. Mr. Trahan: There's some concern about the fire service. At present, Deer Park responds and some .people fear that possibly • once we switch to La Porte we may not get as quick a response out of La Porte as we did out of Deer Park. Minutes, Public ~aring, La Porte City Coun~ December 5, 1983, Page 6 Councilperson Westergren: I think you'll find that La Porte's • Fire Department is certainly as capable as Deer Park's, any day, and I don't believe you're that much further from La Porte than you are from Deer Park's nearest fire station. I don't think that should be a concern. Councilperson Skelton: I was curious--why, other than the fire, is there anything other than the fire protection. that you would want Pasadena to annex the area? And especially since it's been in La Porte's ETJ all these years? Mr. Trahan: Well for one thing, La Porte has not developed the status of Pasadena for shopping and stuff like that, and with the development .around the rodeo grounds and such, some of us felt that Pasadena would be more likely to provide better police protection and fire protection to that area in a shorter period of time . Mayor Cline: That may very well be true, since Pasadena's got there Civie center out there. All I can say, Mr. Trahan, is, I think our police department and our fire department are both outstanding departments in their field, and. I'm sure they'll make every effort to give the service in that area as they have here in town. Councilperson Skelton: Well, contrary to what this sounds like, I've had a lot of people say that we go to La Porte schools, we • do so many things, that we want to be in the City of La Porte. So I'm kind of astonished when I heard that, and that's why I asked. 5. If annexed what dollar figure changes can we expect to see in our taxes and utilities and when do these changes go into effect? Mayor Cline: I don't believe you'll see any difference, really, dollar-wise in your taxes. This has been discussed and didn't we come up with just about the same figure on that? City Manager Jack Owen: One penny. Mayor. Cline: One penny difference? City Manager Jack Owen: Yes. At the present time, College View has a 71G per $100 valuation; La Porte .has a 72G per $100 valuation. I have not made a comparison of the water and sewer rates; there would be a difference there, though. Councilperson Westergren: Do they have an exemption? A home- stead exemption? Mayor Cline: You-can't have them in water districts. • Councilperson Westergren: OK, then it would be-less for the homeowners, because you get a 20 percent exemption off your home- stead, so its less for a homestead than it would be now. _ ~: . _ Minutes, Public ~aring, La Porte City Coun~ December 5, 1983, Page 7 Mayor Cline: La Porte City Council recently passed our home- . stead exemption, which we did not have prior to this time. Also, we do have an over 65 exemption. City Manager Jack Owen: To answer your question as to when, of course it would be the 1984 taxes. That property on the rolls January 1, 1984.. The water rates would become effective the date the board is dissolved and the district goes out of existence. Mayor Cline: This would be taxes that you'll pay like in November of '84, January of '85. Mr. Trahan: That still doesn't answer my question. I asked for a dollar figure. What you gave me was the tax rate. I understand that we did not have the same percent valuation on our property that you have over'here,.and I understand that that will make a considerable difference in our taxes. Councilperson Skelton: You will, as soon as the Harris County Appraisal District starts in our next appraisal units, we'll all have the same, because it's all going to be done through the Harris County Appraisal District. Councilperson Malone: If your taxes go up, that will be the reason. • Mayor Cline: The central appraisal district sets the rate; not us. Mr. Trahan: Thank you, Mayor Cline and Councilmembers for giving me this time to speak to you. Mayor Cline: Is there anyone else who wishes to address Council in opposition to the annexation? No one came forward. Mayor Cline then asked if there was anyone who had any questions at all or if any member of Council had any comments. Councilperson Malone: I think I know how Mr. Trahan feels in this. I came here through Lomax. The Council in Lomax came to the decision that this was the very best thing Lomax could do because of fire protection, police protection, the Public Works department- everything that La Porte had we felt was a lot better than other cities. We had .the opportunity to do the same thing with Deer Park. We didn't feel we'd be treated by Deer Park as good as we'd be treated, and have been treated, by La Porte. I think if this goes through, you'll be proud of the things you'll. see with this City. We have a City Manager form of government, and Mr. Owen is -doing probably as good a job as anybody in the State. Being from one city and coming into this one. I'm really proud of what we did and I hope if this goes through, you will be. • Minutes, Public wring, La Porte City Coun~ December 5, 1983, Page 8 Mayor Cline: Does anyone else have any cotmnents? If not, • I will declare the public hearing closed and we will convene in public hearing at 8610 Bandridge at 8:30. The public hearing adjourned at 7:42 p.m. Respectfully submitted.: ~~~~ Cherie Black City Secretary Passed & Approved this the 28t day of December, 1983 46Z~ Vi inia Cline, Mayor • c: