The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2006-10-09 Regular Meeting and Workshop Meeting of La Porte City CouncilM MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING AND WORKSHOP MEETING OF THE LA PORTE CITY COUNCIL October 09, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Alton Porter at 6: 05 p.m. Members of City Council Present: Mayor Alton Porter, Mayor Pro-Tem Tommy Moser, Councilmembers Chuck Engelken, Mike Clausen, Mike Mosteit, Louis Rigby, Peter Griffiths and Howard Ebow. Members of Council Absent: Barry Beasley Members of City Executive Staff and Citymployees Present: City Consultant/Advisory Debra Feazelle, Interim City Manager John Joerns, Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins, Police Chief Richard Reff, City Secretary Martha Gillett, Secretary III Susan Felty, Records Technician/Deputy Clerk Bonnie Garrison, Planning Director Wayne Sabo, Patrol Sergeant Matt Daeumer, Purchasing Manager Susan Kelley, Purchasing Technician Cherell Daeumer, Downtown Revitalization Coordinator Debra Dye, Parks & Recreation Director Stephen Barr, Fire Marshal Cliff Meekins, Public Works Director Steve Gillett, Assistant Fire Chief Champ Dunham, Emergency Management Coordinator Jeff Suggs, Assistant to City Manager Crystal Scott, Operations Manager Marlene Rigby, Human Resources Specialist Nicole Hatter, and Human Resources Manager Robert Swanagan. Others Present: Monique Moser, Aleesha Burbach, Alexandria Velez, Barbara Norwine, Thomas Park, Darwin Presley, Trent Wise, Carlos Martinez, Rodney James, Brain Reyes, Shar Bingham, Brian Adams and other citizens. 2. Thomas Park of Fairmont Park Baptist Church delivered the invocation. 3. Mayor Porter led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. PRESENTATIONS / PROCLAMATIONS A. Mayor Porter and Debbie Wilmore presented Employee of the 3`d Quarter award to Mike Kirkwood. B. Mayor Porter presented a Fire Prevention Week proclamation to Cliff Meekins and Champ Dunham C. Mayor Porter read the National Cancer Awareness Months proclamation. 5. Consent Agenda A. Consider approving Minutes of the Regular Meeting and Workshop Meeting held on September 25, 2006. City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 2 *Councilman Rigby noted corrections to the minutes. B. Council to consider approval or other action regarding an ordinance approving and authorizing a contract between the City of La Porte and Effective Environmental. Inc. for the Lead Remediation of the Detention Pond and Outfall Channel at the Fire Training Facility. * Councilman Moser had questions on item B. C. Council to consider approval or other action regarding the purchase of 30,000 rolls of 1.5 mil, 30 gallon plastic garbage bags from Dyna Pak Inc, in the amount of $126,000.00. D. Council to consider approval or other action regarding an ordinance granting a permit under Ordinance 2004-2755, being Chapter 102, Natural Resources, Article IV, "Pipeline Transportation" of the Code of Ordinances of the City of La Porte to construct a 12-inch pipeline for the transportation of natural gas liquids. * Councilman Moser had questions on item D. E. Council to consider approval or other action regarding a resolution authorizing the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, or their designated representative the authority to obtain pricing and contract terms and enter into an agreement with an electricity provider through H-GAC Energy Purchasing Corporation. F. Council to consider approval or other action instructing the City Finance Director to amend the various operating budgets for outstanding purchase orders. This is a routine annual transaction to validate open purchase orders. * Councilman Moser had questions on item F. Motion was made by Council member Engelken to approve consent agenda as presented with noted corrections to the minutes. Second by Council member Ebow. Motion carried. Ayes: Mosteit, Moser, Engelken, Rigby, Clausen, Ebow, and Mayor Porter. Nays: None Abstain: Griffiths item A 6. PETITIONS, REMONSTRANCES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND CITIZENS AND TAX PAYERS WISHING TO ADDRESS COUNCIL ON ANY ITEM POSTED ON THE AGENDA. Darwin Presley — 302 South I", La Porte Texas — addressed Council regarding a possible pooper scooper law. 7. Council to consider approval or other action regarding an ordinance amending Ordinance 2004-2781 authorizing change in language which defines Premium cost allocated by the City of La Porte each year. City Council needs to take action on Chapter 172 recommendations from 8/ 10/06. City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 3 Human Resources Manager Robert Swanagan presented summary and recom ndation and answered Council's questions. * There are numerous times Robert Swanagan's voice is not picked up cle rly on the tape due to speaking from the middle of the room rather than the podium. These instances will be noted below by an *. Section 5 Premiums — The term total plan cost was inserted in place of what w s premium cost. On the second line the word contribution was changed to total plan cost. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins covered other clarification points. Interi City Manager John Joems requested Clark to provide overview so Council could vote on Exhibit A. Clark Askins covered the following points: Items in bold are what was added last May, 2005. The original Exhibit — Section 9A which outlines the entire retiree health plan was added approximately two years ago n October 2004. Subsequent to that, Council requested it be amended to provide special consideration for those retirees with 30 years or more tenure where they could continue on N rith the City of La Porte's plan as a secondary even with going primary with their subsequent employer. It was noted that is what is in bold that was added in May 2005. Area highlig ited is what was added in the last few weeks due to recommendations Council requested t the Chapter 172 Board. It was noted other bolded sections is the one time deferral issue where an em loyee/retiree can subsequently gain employment with another employer and have a one ti a option to come back to the City's plan and participate as a retiree. That is highlighted i Sections A, B&C. Additional changes were made on the third page, paragraph three. Interim Ci Manager John Joems suggested we change this section which was a part of the originaI document specified that retirees who work for another employer could not participate i the City of La Porte health plan as a retiree but with the changes that were made, or are pro osed to be made, were the one time deferral. For clarification purposes, a sentence has een added at the end. It now reads "except in the case of retirees exercising the one time eferral option". This makes all language consistent. Also, immediately above that, paragraph 2, there was an end of a sentence th t needed deleting because it was not correct. It was what was added in May 2005 and bolded. It says retired and dependent coverage will be secondary for retirees with 30 or mor years tenure with the City of La Porte who have an employer sponsored health coverage vailable through their new employer, or who are re-employed with the City. The last part that refers to being re-employed with the City would be incorrect. If someone is re-employed they would have coverage as an active employee so that was erroneously made a part of the change in May 2005. That was deleted due to being incorrect. It was noted the only other change that was made for clarification purposes was on the last page, Section 5. A sentence was added to clarify that when referring to eligible dependents when you have a retiree who is participating in the one time deferral option, that again we City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 4 have proposed, in those cases they couldn't bring dependents only their spouse. This Council had directed that in the case of a retiree who gains subsequent employment elsewhere and decides to re -participate in the City of La Porte health plan as a retiree, Council directed if you had a spouse when you retired you could add a spouse when you re- enter the plan. It was noted it would be limited to that dependent. This sentence clarifies that where in general any eligible dependents would include beyond a spouse but also children. In that case, if they are participating in the plan, under the one time deferral (which is under consideration) they would be limited in terms of dependents to their spouse. This is if they had a spouse when the left the program with La Porte. That outlined the changes that were made. Robert Swanagan advised Council the next issue being discussed has to do with the cost of retirees over/under 65. * The next item discussed was the letter from Barry Beasley regarding the 80 point issue. Robert Swanagan discussed active employee costs vs. retiree costs. Robert Swanagan discussed fund subsidy issues. * Robert Swanagan advised Council why a person retiring is paying more than an active employee. * Councilmember Louis Rigby inquired as to why certain costs on diagram were being added together. Robert Swanagan advised they were added together because that was the subsidy amount and they have to pay both.* Councilmember Rigby noted if you are a single employee you have to pay both or the City is paying both for employees. Robert Swanagan noted the City is paying both for employees. When you retire Councilmember Rigby inquired as to why the City would be placing money in the plan for a spouse that a single employee did not have. Robert Swanagan advised he did not know who did the calculation. Councilmember Rigby noted the person who did the calculation should be doing the presentation. Robert Swanagan noted the Welch Group was not available this evening. Councilmember Moser noted concerns with the numbers not being accurate due to two people being factored in rather than one person. Robert Swanagan noted each one depends on the plan. Mayor Porter noted this example was just an example that includes a spouse. City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 5 Interim City Manager noted this was just an example with a spouse. Councilmember Clausen noted if the example would have been just an employee without a spouse that number would not be so big. Robert Swanagan noted no *. Councilmember Griffiths wanted clarification in looking at the charge there is a 39.18 subsidy for employee only. Robert Swanagan advised this was correct. Councilmember Griffiths noted there would be 8.71 difference in costs between retiree and active employee. He noted this causes confusion because in exhibits it notes annual contributions by retirees to the health plan will be based on current active employee dependent rates. He noted if it is based on their current active rates, he was getting different numbers. He noted he was getting one number $8.71 different cost between retiree and active and staff is advising the fund subsidy is $39.18 with one employee. He inquired as to what was the discrepancy. Robert Swanagan responded *. Councilmember Griffiths inquired if the retiree cost the City is still paying a certain amount. Robert Swanagan noted yes. Councilmember Griffiths noted this is where he needs additional clarification in looking at our premium and contribution projections. He noted he was looking at a $500.00 deductible for employee only. The total premium costs indicates $550.23. In exhibit C: PPO 500.00 deductible employee only $550.00 Total Cost City pays $500.00. He inquired if you area a retiree, the City still pays $500.00. Robert Swanagan noted yes. Councilmember Peter Griffiths inquired as to whether employee contributions would be $50.23. Robert Swanagan advised yes. Councilmember Peter Griffiths wanted confirmation that the retiree cost would be $58.94. Robert Swanagen responded *. Councilmember Griffiths noted he could not get the numbers to work out. If it is 10% of the $550.00 it should be $55.00. City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 6 Robert Swanagan responded no *. Councilmember Griffiths noted he was calculating fund subsidy of $39.18 and wanted clarification that retirees did not benefit from the subsidy. He asked Mr. Swanagan if that was correct. Robert Swanagan advised that was correct. Councilmember Griffiths noted he figured the amount to be $39.18 difference instead of $8.00 something different. Robert Swanagan noted what they did with the calculations was go back and use the formula. That would be 15% it was $88.00 and something. When you got to 10/1/06 it changed the formula by 10%. This is where the change comes in. *. Councilmember Griffiths noted he was still confused and wanted to know how he came up with the $8.71. He asked if anyone else understood or could explain. Robert Swanagan made comments *. Councilmember Griffiths inquired if the calculation is on 10% would it be X times 10% _ 50%? Robert Swanagan made comments * Councilmember Griffiths clarified staff was saying it is based on the active rate. It is not saying you are going to pay the same amount but it is just based on that figure. He noted he now understood the calculations. He noted he wanted to go over it one more time. He noted if you go to the very last column, total premiums with contributions and subsidy's. He inquired if this was correct. Robert Swanagan indicated that was correct. Councilmember Griffiths noted if he takes $589.41 total premium contribution and multiply by 10% that would equal $58.94 but the cost of employee contribution is $50.23. That is the first part, you then subtract the $8.71. Robert Swanagan made comments *. Councilmember Griffiths noted that if you have 27 years of service, you would multiply by the $589.41 X 25%. The 25% comes from the scale. He noted he understood the calculation. Robert Swanagan noted he would attempt to answer Barry Beasley's question outlined in the letter he provided to Council for discussion this evening. *. Robert Swanagan noted the next item came through the Chapter 172 Board regarding retirement incentives and discussed examples provided in handout included in the Council packet. *. Robert Swanagan discussed 5 year vesting * City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 7 Councilmember Engelken inquired if there was a problem with drawing the line at age 40. He noted concerns regarding age discrimination. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins noted he did not believe there were any concerns but he would double check. Councilmember Mosteit noted the age limit would just make them not available for the incentive. He further noted it was just a qualifier. Robert Swanagan *. He further noted these items were at the discretion of the City Council. Councilmember Rigby noted concerns that he wanted ensure new people coming in don't get something more in way of incentives than existing employees. Robert Swanagan made comments *. Councilmember Rigby noted again he wanted to see current employees receive incentives as he had indicated at previous meetings. Robert Swanagan made comments *. Councilmember Rigby noted concerns that Mr. Swanagan's interests on incentives was in the area of recruitment. Robert Swanagan made comments * Councilmember Rigby noted he gave up. Mayor Porter inquired if anyone had any comments. Robert Swanagan briefed Council on costs in certain contributions were frozen on active and retirees for 2006 and freezing contributions after 2007. *. Robert Swanagan discussed the last item regarding employees with 30 years of service paying the same amount as an active employee *. Interim City Manager John Joerns briefed Council on the budget impact. He noted he was not in attendance at the last meeting but it was his understanding in addition to the language changes staff was to look at impact of freezing costs to retiree rates. He directed Council to the schedule 4 and to look at the affect of that. Under the 2007 active and retiree subsidy column, you come up with $253,993.00. $83,000.00 of that council had requested staff absorb the night the budget was reviewed at the Public Hearing. $83.000.00 was backed out at that time. He noted if staff gets the direction to freeze retiree costs, an additional $170,000.00 would be needed for the next plan year. Additionally, staff would need to come back with a budget amendment at a future meeting. To get to the bottom line you take $253,000.00 minus the $83,000.00 already absorbed. Mayor asked Council if they had any questions. City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 8 Councilmember Howard Ebow wanted to clarify that the amount he understood it to be was $183,000.00. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted no, because at the budget hearing, staff had proposed at 15% increase on the employee and City side. Council directed staff at that time to absorb the 15% employee increase. That amount was $83,000.00. Mayor noted of employee and retiree costs. Interim City Manager John Joerns indicated yes. Mr. Joerns noted he understood the question from last weeks meeting to be what would the impact be if we froze retiree costs. He noted the impact was the additional $171,000.00 for this plan year only. The costs would continue to increase in future plan year. Councilmember Moser inquired as to if the $171,000.00 for retirees was for the next plan year. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted that would be the amount if retiree rates were frozen. Councilmember Moser inquired if the $170.000.00 was for the retirees if we freeze the 15%? Mayor Porter indicated no it was the increase if we froze retiree rates. Councilmember Griffiths noted in 2008, we either freeze the retirees or they would receive a huge increase at that time. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted the increase would be to keep the plan solvent. In addition, he reminded Council there would continue to be increases each plan year. Councilmember Griffiths noted it would be great to freeze retiree rates but it would be very costly and costs would continue to increase in future plan years. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted if Council directs staff to freeze retiree rates, we would start off a $253,000 subsidy before we look at any other medical trends. Councilmember Moser inquired we are up to $253,000.00 now. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted he jumped ahead to the next plan year. We are already $253,000.00 in the hole from the recommended funding levels for this year. Councilmember Moser inquired recommended by? Interim City Manager John Joerns noted when we started off on the budget, when the administration provided that recommendation. Next fund year you are starting off $253,000.00 before the recommended funding level. It gets back to what we discussed the night of the public hearings. It is targeting the health fund with the number of working days capitol and having a healthy fund balance. You would always be starting off that much in the hole for the next plan year. City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 9 Mayor Porter noted we made a pretty significant adjustment based on the initial compensation study or wage study to the budget. We are pressing $400,00.00 or $450,000.00 since we adopted the budget on those issues. The money has to come from somewhere. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted he knew Council was dealing with and wrestling with some difficult decisions. He noted the timeliness needed on this item due to open enrollment activities and deadlines in November and December. Mayor Porter — We would have to prepare an ordinance for future action of we want to freeze retiree rates for the 06 levels. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins confirmed it would take an additional ordinance at a future meeting because the ordinance this evening did not address freezing retiree rates. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted the ordinance being passed this evening addresses plan eligibility and not budget. Mayor Porter noted there will be a budget impact if retiree rates are frozen. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted yes, if you freeze the retiree rates, we have to come back with that budget adjustment at the next Council meeting in the amount of $171,000.00 Mayor Porter noted that to accomplish no increase for retirees or employees it would have to be frozen at cities contribution level for 2006. Interim City Manager John Joerns indicated yes. Mayor Porter asked if that would accomplish that. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted for the next plan year. Mayor Porter noted again at an approximate cost of $200,000.00 dollars Councilmember Clausen asked if that was the way the ordinance was written? Interim City Manager John Joerns noted, no the ordinance language is a separate item from the budgetary action. The ordinance does not lock you into budgetary dollars it talks about access to the health plan and under what conditions and access to the health plan with the one time deferral now. Councilmember Rigby inquired clarification that there is no action this evening on the budgetary consideration. Councilmember Clausen requested the same clarification. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted we do not have an action item this evening on the budgetary items. He stated if Council directed staff to freeze retiree costs, he would bring back at a future meeting for action. Mayor Porter stated but in effect that is the trigger mechanism for the budget City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 10 Interim City Manager John Joerns noted like at the public hearing, we made the amendment from the floor because we had that number of $83,000.000. Staff would have to come back with a budget amendment based on what direction Council provides this evening. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins clarified another way. The ordinance by adopting Exhibit A, amends the personnel policy handbook. That will make changes to the policy. Mayor inquired as to whether or not the one time deferral was included. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins indicated yes. Councilmember Rigby inquired whether that was all they were voting on. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted that is all exhibit A does in that ordinance. City Secretary Martha Gillett inquired and reminded everyone the agenda was posted to approve or deny the recommendations of the Chapter 172 board previously tabled. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted he believed Council had already voted on these items. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins noted he believed the Council had already voted on these items. City Secretary Martha Gillett noted she believed based on previous discussions that the Chapter 172 items still needed to be voted on but would defer to the Attorney's advise. Mayor Porter noted he was not aware there was a vote on the deferral. He indicated he thought that was a part of the action tonight. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins noted the deferral is a part of Exhibit A being voted on this evening. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted he thought there still needed to be a vote on the one time deferral and incentives but that staff had been provided direction on the other items. He noted we could review the minutes for clarification. Councilmember Engelken wanted to confirm the only issue being voted on this evening was changes noted in Exhibit A. Interim City Manager John Joerns stated yes that is the only item being voted on this evening. He noted if Council wanted to give staff direction for freezing the retiree group then staff would need to come back with a budget adjustment at the next meeting to take care of the impact. Councilmember Griffiths — wanted confirmation to freeze retiree cost would cost an additional $ 170,000.00. Interim City Manager John Joerns indicated yes over what you have already appropriated. City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 11 Councilmember Griffiths noted we have already appropriated $83,000.00 and would need and additional $171,000.00. Interim City Manager John Joerns noted that was correct. In addition, he noted to Clark that Councilmember Rigby just noted the agenda was posted to vote or deny the Chapter 172 Board recommendations. Clark Askins noted again he believed those to have already been taken care of with the exception of the incentives. He noted we would just not vote on the second part of the caption. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins noted his plan was to read the caption of the ordinance so it would not include the second part of approving or denying the Chapter 172 changes. However, it would include the deferral and Exhibit A. Councilmember Rigby noted according to the ordinance all we are doing is changing the language in the personnel policy and adding the deferral option. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins noted that was correct. Mayor Ported noted any other action other than the definition would require a budget adjustment. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins noted they would not be taking any action on anything except what is noted in Exhibit A. Mayor Ported asked the Council if the understood or had any questions Councilmember Griffiths noted that Council still needed to provide direction on retiree freezes and the incentive option. Interim City Manager confirmed that after Council voted on the ordinance, they need to let staff know if they want to move forward the retiree freezing and the incentive package. Mayor Porter informed Council he would entertain a motion. Motion was made by Councilmember Moser to approve ordinance 2781-C as presented by Mr. Swanagan. Second by Councilmember Griffiths The motion carried Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: Ordinance 2004-2781-C — AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF LA PORTE EMPLOYEE POLICIES HANDBOOK BY AMENDING SECTION 9A, "RETIREE MEDICAL COVERAGE"; PROVIDING FOR THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF RETIREE MEDICAL COVERAGE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF SAID AMENDMENT CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Mayor Porter made the following comments: I am voting for the ordinance. I have some serious reservations about what we are doing and the financial impact to the City with accounting rules. We are having to deal with funding and the impact on our funding balance. At some point we are going to have to stop City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 12 absorbing all of this. It is not happening at other places and is going to be a serious impact on us. On the defense, I think with us being a self insured pool, allowing a deferral without having some kind of umbrella or cushion to catch up at 65 that we have the potential on our comp loss coverage to get out of hand with catastrophic results. This self insured pool could get in worse damage than it is now. Again, I agree with the deferral and I have serious reservations about it if your options are before 65 where medicare would provide us a cushion. I plan on voting for it but have serious reservations. We better do a lot of soul searching before we come back here next year on how we are going to handle this problem. It is not going to stop here tonight. With no other discussions, I will take a vote. Ayes: Mosteit, Moser, Engelken, Rigby, Clausen, Ebow, Griffiths and Mayor. Nays: None Abstain: None Interim City Manager John Joerns advised Council we are looking to answer the questions that were raised regarding the retiree class. We are taking direction for a future budget amendment or do we stand to pass on the retiree freezes. Councilmember Griffiths noted he thought it is way too expensive and too much of a burden on the citizens to take on the $170,000.00 and look to increase that amount in following years. He was of the opinion, we should not look at freezes. Mayor Porter noted that the extra pool of funds is something that has always been pulled from the General Fund. That should have been in the City's contribution always. It provides a better grasp of what we are doing with the funds. He noted we want to take care of the employees but somewhere down the road it is going to get out of hand. Citizens will start to question what we are doing. Mayor Ported asked the Interim City Manager if he had clear direction. Councilmember Mike Clausen noted he was not in favor of the extra $170,000.00, He noted he wants to take care of employees but we have the rest of the citizens to take care of as well. Councilmembers Ebow, Mosteit and Engelken agreed with not funding the $170,000.00. Councilmember Moser made the following comments: He noted he has been on Council for over two years and has looked at the budgets. He has been part of the budget process. He noted what comes to his mind real quick is, like Councilmember Rigby indicated, before we subsidize three other enterprise funds. We also just got through installing $262,000.00 in entry markers with only one bidder. He noted it is hard for him to understand just where the budget impact is at. When he sees the kind of stuff going on. He has been called out tonight on this. He wasn't going to say anything, but decided to until he sees constraints and controls with other departments. He noted it was hard for him to punish employees or ask them to fund these markers that are coming into the City. He has issues with that and that is just the way it is. City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 13 Mayor asked the Interim City Manager if he had any idea where we were going and did he have what he needed. Councilmember Griffiths inquired about where we were headed with the recruitment incentives. Interim City Manager John Joerns asked Council if they have any particular directions or notions. If not, he saw a couple of things in there he thinks can be massaged and continue that conversation. Councilmember Griffiths noted as stated earlier, he has reservations with people coming to work for the City getting something more than current employees. Councilmember Ebow he thought that too, but we are looking at brining in a new City Manager. During those times, we have no reservation in getting the right person. We are looking for incentives to make the job attractive. That is what we are looking for in other areas of the City. He doesn't believe people outside the City are more qualified than staff currently employed, but we need to enhance tools to make it attractive to come to the City. This will enable us to take advantage of skills and years the person brings with them. Incentives are nice to have in the recruiting process. Councilmember Clausen would like to see some incentives but they need tweaked. Mayor Porter noted that should not be pressing at this point. 8. Council to consider approval or other action regarding an ordinance appointing members to various Boards and Commissions, and adopt the ordinance of choice regarding the Zoning Board of Adjustment Chairman. There was no action taken. Item pulled due to legal questions. 9. Council discussed November and December meeting dates and considered changes. Special Called Regular Council Meeting November 6, 2006 and Regular City Council Meeting December 11, 2006. It was the consensus of Council to change the meeting dates to November 6, 2006 and December 11, 2006. 10. Councilman Engelken Chairman of the La Porte Development Corporation provided a report to City Council. 11. Close Regular Meeting and Open Workshop at 7:35 p.m. 12. Workshop Discussion Items A. Mayor Porter discussed Centerpoint Rate Schedule Adjustment. Councilman Engelken abstained from discussion on this item. The Centerpoint Rate Schedule Adjustment will be effective November 3, 2006. City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 14 B. Interim City Manager John Joerns discussed Capital Improvement Projects and Bonds and requested Council provide direction on projects and the appointment of a Blue Ribbon Committee. Staff will move forward with project. C. Director of Parks Stephen Barr provided an overview of Sylvan Beach Erosion/Nourishment Project. Closed Workshop and reconvened Regular Meeting at 7:50 p.m. 13. Administrative Reports Interim City Manager John Joerns reminded Council, the Bay Area Heritage Society Fish Fry Fundraiser Bill Bailey Roast October 10, 2006 6:00 p.m. at Sylvan Beach Pavilion, the Barbous Cut Meeting October 12, 2006, 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Cynthia Alexander -Pearson retirement party, October 17, 2006, 4:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. at Sylvan Beach Pavilion and the TML Conference October 25-27, 2006 in Austin, Texas. 14. Council Comments Clausen, Rigby, Moser, Griffiths, Ebow, Engelken, Mosteit and Mayor had comments. Councilman Griffiths read a letter announcing his decision not to run for a fourth term as Councilman. 15. EXECUTIVE SESSION — PURSUANT TO PROVISION OF THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW, CHAPTER 551.071 THROUGH 551.076, 551-087, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE (CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY, DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY, DELIBERATION REGARDING PROSPECTIVE GIFT OR DONATION, PERSONNEL MATTERS, DELIBERATION REGARDING SECURITY DEVICES, OR EXCLUDING A WITNESS DURING EXAMINATION OF ANOTHER WITNESS IN AN INVESTIGATION, DELIBERATION REGARDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS) A. SEC. 551.071— (PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION) MEET WITH INTERIM CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO DISCUSS 200 GARFIELD, L.L.0 B. SECTION - 551-087 — (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT) MEET WITH INTERIM CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO DISCUSS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT JOINT VENTURE Council retired to Executive Session at 7:58 p.m. and returned to the Regular Meeting and reconvened at 8:25 p.m. 16. There was no action taken during Executive Session. City Council Regular and Workshop Meeting —October 9, 2006 Page 15 17. There being no further business to come before Council, the Regular Meeting and Workshop was duly adjourned at 8:26 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Martha Gillett, TRMC, CMC City Secretary ' ssed and approved on this 23rd day of October 2006 Mayor Alton E. Porter F5,91 AS, REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: 10/23/2006 Requested By: Jeff Suggs Department: Einergency Management Report: Resolution: Ordinance: Exhibits: HA-L L 19e- ZOIVUL Exhibits: Ite? 11e O Exhibits Budeet Source of Funds: CIP Account Number: GEN799 Amount Budgeted: S35,000 Amount Requested: -$3? cdn Budgeted Item: YES X NO SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION Consider approving the quote as supplied for the replacement a warning tower. This project is a continuation of our commitment to upgrade the existing siren system replacing the obsolete rotating towers with Omni directional. AWT is a master Whelen dealer and has installed, replaced and maintained our towers since they were put in almost 20 years ago. Action Required by Council: Consider approval to accept quote. Date Page 1 of 1 Harris, Sharon From: Suggs, Jeff Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 9:38 AM To: Gillett, Martha; Harris, Sharon; Felty, Susan; Garrison, Bonnie Subject: FW: AWTI Please add this to my council agenda for the Whelen Tower purchase. This is a sole purchase situation as usual with a tower purchase. 9# s Emergency Management Coordinator City of La Porte Texas 281 471 3607 orrice 281 470 8523 fax 281 639 9258 cell From: MAX A. WRIGHT [mailto:maxawright@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 9:33 AM To: Suggs, Jeff Cc: Max Wright; TIP FOREMAN Subject: AWTI Jeff, This email is to inform you that AWTI is the only Whelen Master Distributor for the Gulf Coast area and the City of LaPorte, TX area. Should you have any further questions do not hesitate to give me a call anytime. Thanks, Max Wright Regional Manager Whelen Engineering Co., Inc. 870-688-9109 Cell 800-316-7497 Office 10/13/2006 A I A /T ALLIANCE WIRELESS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. /W%V V Date: 9/21 /2006 To: Jeff Suggs Company: City of LaPorte Fire Administration 124 South 2nd Street La Porte, TX 77571 Re: Whelen Siren Addition Business 146 & S. Broadway Quote: 20060921-City of LaPorte Quoted by: Marty Yudell Quote is valid for 30 days 1 Whelen WPS-2909 Omni -Directional Siren $ 21,750.00 $ 21,750.00 1 SBC-280 Solar Panel w/Regulator $ 1,975.00 $ 1,975.00 4 Interstate 31 MHD 12vdc Batteries $ 160.00 $ 640.00 1 INTRU, Intrusion Alarm $ 150.00 $ 150.00 1 Byte[ CP200 Radio Modem $ 1,550.00 $ 1,550.00 1 Polyphaser $ 95.00 $ 95.00 1 Field Antenna $ 140.00 $ 140.00 1 Lift Truck, Bucket Truck, Conduit $ 3,950.00 $ 3,950.00 1 Lot Misc Hardware $ 300.00 $ 300.00 Materials $ 30,550.00 Supervision, Final Hookup $ 1,040.00 Estimated Freight $ 950.00 Total System $ 32,540.00 6001 Stonington, Suite 170 * Houston, Texas 77040. 713.690.4100 Fax: 713.690.5800 City of LaPorte Scope of Work: 1) AWTI will provide and install the equipment listed on the quote. 2) AWTI will demo the existing WPS-3000 rotating siren. 3) AWTI will test the new WPS-2909 upon completion. AWTI Terms: 1) The price quote is valid for 30 days. 2) Equipment software and services are Net 30 Upon Completion of the project. 3) There is a 26% restocking fee for any product returned. If you have any questions or require more information, please call me. Regards, Marty Yudell Security Division AWTI Page 2 6001 Stonington, Suite 170 • Houston, Texas 77040 * 713.690.4100 Fax: 713.690.5800 C REOITEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: 10/23/2006 Requested By: Jeff Suggs Department: Emergency Management Report: Resolution: Ordinance: Exhibits: Grant award package Exhibits: Exhibits Budget Source of Funds: Account Number: Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: — Budgeted Item: YES UC SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION Consider approval of accepting grant award. Grant will go towards purchase of new dispatcher communication consoles for the new police building. Remainder of grant will be for software and equipment for the new EOC. This award package consists of Urban Area Security Initiative grant and Homeland Security. Action Required by Council: Consider approval to accept award. D O Date RICK PERRY Governor E O �F w i � c� x DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Office of the Governor Mailing Address: PO Box 4087 Austin, Texas 78773-0220 The Honorable Alton Porter Mayor City of La Porte 604 W. Fairmont Parkway LaPorte, TX 77571 Dear Mayor Porter: Contact Numbers: Phvsical Address: 512-424-2138 Duty Hours 5805 N. Lamar Blvd. 512-424-2277 Non -Duty Hours Austin, Texas 78752 512-424-2444 Fax September 29, 2006 STEVEN MCCRaW Director Office of Homeland Security JACK COLLEY Chief Your jurisdiction is being awarded a sub -grant to carry out designated homeland security activities as part of the federal 2006 Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP). As you are aware, the FY 2006 HSGP appropriation approved by Congress and signed by the President almost a year ago included $500 million less than was available for the 2005 program. Overall the State's homeland security grant funding in Texas was reduced by almost 31 percent from last year. While the State has concerns about the Department of Homeland Security's new funding formula, with your demonstrated leadership and support, the State of Texas will continue to lead the nation in prevention and preparedness to meet the challenges of very real and present threats. The package you are receiving includes the following documents: 1. Notice of Sub -recipient Award. A. The enclosed Notice of Sub -recipient Award for the 2006 HSGP is being sent to you, the chief elected official for your jurisdiction. An individual authorized by the governing board of the jurisdiction or organization to accept grants must sign the Notice of Sub - recipient Award in order to accept the grant, after proper approval by the governing body. At the local level, individuals authorized to accept grants typically include county judges, mayors, city managers, or chief financial officers. Other signatures will require an accompanying statement from the senior elected official authorizing the individual to sign for the jurisdiction. For other agencies and organizations, authorized individuals typically include executive directors or directors. 2. Information Regarding Statewide Local Homeland Security Projects. A. There is a need to continue a long-term homeland security exercise program to test local and regional plans, procedures, equipment, and facilities in realistic terrorism preparedness, natural disaster, and other scenarios through Regional Exercises. Additionally, The Texas Homeland Security Strategic Plan — 2005- 2010 identified a need for the expansion of two key terrorism prevention projects to benefit all local governments: the Texas Data Exchange (TDEx), a law enforcement information sharing capability across all levels and jurisdictions, and Live Scan, an electronic fingerprint system which enables rapid identification of known or suspected criminals and terrorists using the fingerprint biometric. B. This year the Office of the Governor has prioritized the statewide implementation of TDEx and Live Scan to address critical information sharing gaps. These three programs are being pursued as statewide local projects. The attached Information Regarding Statewide Local Homeland Security Projects provides additional information on each of these initiatives. 3. Election Regarding State Use of HSGP Funding for Statewide Local Projects. A. As noted above, the State plans to oversee three essential statewide capabilities during this grant cycle: Regional Exercises, TDEx Implementation, and Live Scan Implementation. The Governor's Office of Homeland Security has requested that cities, counties, and regions support the use of a portion of local homeland security grant funds for these initiatives that directly benefit all local governments in Texas. Acquiring these capabilities under a state contract will achieve a significant cost savings, since the State can obtain these systems and services at a reduced rate. B. In order for the State to utilize local homeland security grants funds to fund these statewide local projects, U.S Department of Homeland Security grant guidance requires us to obtain your approval in writing. The attached form titled Election Regarding State Use of HSGP Funding for Statewide Local Projects is the means by which you give GDEM your approval. Please review the Election form and approve the elections for each program by checking the appropriate block. The form must be signed by an authorized official. C. The State will not take any portion of the grant funds allocated to a jurisdiction unless that jurisdiction agrees and executes the attached form titled Election Regarding State Use of HSGP Funding for Statewide Local Projects for one or all of the statewide initiatives. D. If a jurisdiction elects not to allow the State to acquire Live Scan booking stations for their jail facilities, they may acquire them on their own, now or in the future. E. If a jurisdiction elects not to support TDEx, the State will still pursue an enterprise license and provide the law enforcement officers in that jurisdiction access to the system in the interest of public safety and national security. However, if local law enforcement records or jail management systems have not already been adapted by the State, then such adaptations will not be able to be completed until the State can acquire additional funds. 4. Direct Deposit Authorization. A. GDEM must have a current Direct Deposit Authorization from your jurisdiction in order to transfer grants funds electronically to a designated bank account to reimburse you for grant -funded expenses. A hard -copy form is included as an attachment to this letter and additional copies are available from the Texas State Comptroller's website at: http://www.window.state.tx.us/taxinfo/taxforms/74-158.pdf. An appropriate local official, typically your finance officer, must sign the Direct Deposit Authorization. B. If you submitted a completed Direct Deposit Authorization form with your 2005 Homeland Security Grant Program acceptance, you need not submit another unless your bank account information has changed. 5. Grant Management Highlights for Executives This document includes helpful information for homeland security grant management. Please send the original signed Sub -Recipient Agreement, signed Election Regarding HSGP Funding for Statewide Local Projects, and signed Direct Deposit Authorization (if applicable) to GDEM at the following address: Mail: Division of Emergency Management Attention: SAA Section PO Box 4087 Austin, Texas 78773-0270 Please retain a copy of each form for your records. Courier: Division of Emergency Management Attention: SAA Section 5805 N. Lamar Blvd. Austin, Texas 78752 The deadline to return the signed Notice of Sub -recipient Award, signed Election Regarding Use of HSGP Funding for Statewide Local Projects, and signed Direct Deposit Authorization (if applicable) is November 1, 2006. These materials must be postmarked by the due date. The GDEM offer of a homeland security sub -grant will be withdrawn if the required materials are not returned by the due date. Extensions to this date cannot be granted because we must provide DHS data on all local sub -grants shortly thereafter. Once the signed Notice of Sub -Recipient Award and Election Regarding Use of HSGP Funding for Statewide Local Projects have been received by the SAA, sub -recipients may begin data entry for approved FY 2006 projects in the SPARS grant management system. If you have any program questions regarding the HSGP, please contact Ben Patterson, SAA Section Manager at (512) 424-7809. Sincerely, Jack olley Chief Enclosures: 1. 2006 Notice of Sub -recipient Award 2. Information Regarding Statewide Local Homeland Security Projects 3. Election Regarding State Use of HSGP Funding for Statewide Local Projects 4. Direct Deposit Authorization S. Grant Management Highlights for Executives Governor's Division of Emergency Management at r�rAt 5�$�C 2006 Sub -Recipient Agreement ems` k^C for VEC.sG City of La Porte Date of Award 9/29/2006 1. Sub -Recipient Name and Address 2. Prepared by: GDEM/SAA 3, Award Number: 06-SR 41440-01 4. Federal Grant Information Federal Grant Title: Homeland Security Grant Program Mayor Alton Porter Federal Grant Award Number: 2006-GE-T6-0068 City of La Porte 604 W. Fairmont Parkway Date Federal Grant Awarded to GDEM: June 30, 2006 La Porte, TX 77571 Federal Granting Agency- Office of Grants and Training U.S. Department of Homeland Security S. Award Amount and Grant Breakdowns Note: Additional Budget Sheets (Attachment A): No Tota I Award Amount CCP LETPP MMRS SHSP UASI Other 97.053 97.074 97.071 97.073 97.008 $347,732.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $90,000.00 $257,732.00 $0.00 Performance Period: 7/1/2006 To 2/28/2008 6. Statutory Authority for Grant: This project is supported under Public Law 109-90, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2006. 7. Method of Payment: Primary method is reimbursement. See the enclosed instructions for the process to follow in the submission of invoices. S. Debarment/Suspension Certification: The Sub -Recipient certifies that the jurisdiction and its' contractors/vendors are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded by any federal department or agency and do not appear in the Excluded Parties List System at http://www.epis.gov. 9. Agency Approval Approving GDEM Official: Signature of GDEM Official: Jack Colley, Chief Division of Emergency Management Office of the Governor 10. Sub -Recipient Acceptance I have read and understand the attached Terms and Conditions. Type name and title of Authorized Sub -Recipient official: Signature of Sub -Recipient Official: 11. Enter Employer Identification Number (EIN) / Federal Tax Identification Number: 12. Date Signed 13. DUE DATE: � Signed award and Direct Deposit Form (if applicable) must be returned to GDEM on or before the above due date. TERMS AND CONDITIONS PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW Sub -grant funds provided shall be used to provide law enforcement and emergency response communities with enhanced capabilities for detecting, deterring, disrupting, preventing and responding to potential threats of manmade, natural disasters and acts of terrorism as described in the federal program guidelines, specifically: planning, equipment, training and exercise needs. All costs under these categories must be eligible under OMB Circular No. A-87 Attachment A, located at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/index.html. 1. AWARD ACCEPTANCE The Notice of Sub -recipient Award is only an offer until the sub -recipient returns the signed copy of the Notification of Sub -recipient Award in accordance with the date provided in the transmittal letter. 2. GUIDANCE This Sub -recipient is subject to the program guidance contained in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) FY 2006 Homeland Security Grant Program Guidelines and Application Kit. The Program Guidance and Application Kit can be accessed at http://www.oip.usdoi.gov/odp/grants programs.htm. G&T periodically publishes Information Bulletins to release, update, amend or clarify grants and programs which it administers. Office of Grants and Training (OGT)'s Information Bulletins can be accessed at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/docs/bulletins.htm and are incorporated by reference into this sub -grant. This sub -award is also subject to any Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) grant guidance .issued by GDEM. 3. COMPLIANCE A. Sub -recipient hereby assures and certifies compliance with all applicable Federal statutes, regulations, policies, guidelines, and requirements, including OMB Circulars A-21, A-87, A-102, A-110, A-122, A-133; Ex. Order 12372 (intergovernmental review of federal programs); and 28 C.F.R. parts 18, 22, 23, 30, 35, 38, 42, 61, and 63, 66 or 70 (administrative requirements for grants and cooperative agreements). B. Sub -recipient will comply with the organizational audit requirements of OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non -Profit Organizations, as further described in the current edition of the Office of Grant Operations (OGO)'s Financial Management Guide (Jan 2006) at www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interweb/assetlibrary/Grants Financial ManagementGuide.pdf. C. When implementing Office of Grants and Training (OGT) funded activities, the sub -recipient must comply with all federal civil rights laws, to include Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, as amended. The sub -recipient is required to take reasonable steps to ensure persons of limited English proficiency have meaningful access to language assistance services regarding the development of proposals and budgets and conducting OGT funded activities. D. Sub -recipient agrees to comply with the applicable financial and administrative requirements set forth in the current edition of the Office of Grant Operations (OGO) Financial Management Guide located at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/oc/. 2006 HSGP Terms and Conditions Page 2 of 9 E. Sub -recipient will assist the awarding agency (if necessary) in assuring compliance with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. § 470), Ex. Order 11593 (identification and protection of historic properties), the Archeological and Historical Preservation Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. § 469 a-1 et seq.), and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. § 4321). (Federal Assurance) F. Sub -recipient must comply (and must require contractors to comply) with any applicable statutorily -imposed nondiscrimination requirements, which may include the. Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. § 3789d); the Victims of Crime Act (42 U.S.C. § 10604(e)); The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. § 5672(b)); the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000d); the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 7 94); the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 12131-34); the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. §§1681, 1683, 1685-86); and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. §§ 6101-07); see Ex. Order 13279 (equal protection of the laws for faith -based and community organizations). (Federal Assurance) G. If the sub -recipient is a governmental entity, it must comply with the requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. § 4601 et seq.), which govern the treatment of persons displaced as a result of federal and federally -assisted programs; and (Federal Assurance) H. If the sub -recipient is a governmental entity, it must comply with requirements of 5 U.S.C. §§ 1501-08 and §§ 7324-28, which limit certain political activities of State or local government employees whose principal employment is in connection with an activity financed in whole or in part by federal assistance. (Federal Assurance) The sub -recipient will cooperate with any Federal, State or Council of Governments assessments, national evaluation efforts, or information or data collection requests, including, but not limited to, the provision of any information required for the assessment or evaluation of any activities within this project. J. Sub -recipient agrees to comply with any additional requirements set by their Council of Governments (COG) in the project notes area on the SPARS website for each project, i.e. mutual aid agreements and UASI working group approvals, if applicable. K. Drug Free Workplace As required by the Drug -Free Workplace Act of 1988, and implemented at 28 CFR Part 67, Subpart F, for grantees, as defined at 28 CFR Part 67 Sections 67.615 and 67.620. The sub - recipient certifies that it will or will continue to provide a drug -free workplace by: 1) Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the grantee's workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violation of such prohibition; 2) Establishing an on -going drug -free awareness program to inform employees about the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; the grantee's policy of maintaining a drug -free workplace; any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and the penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace; 3) Making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of the grant be given a copy of the statement required by paragraph 3(K)(1); 2006 HSGP Terms and Conditions Page 3 of 9 4) Notifying the employee in the statement required by paragraph (3)(K)(1) that, as a condition of employment under the grant, the employee will abide by the terms of the statement; and Notify the employer in writing of his or her conviction for a violation of a criminal drug statute occurring in the workplace no later than five calendar days after such conviction; 5) Notifying the Governor's Division of Emergency Management/State Administrative Agency (GDEM/SAA), in writing, within 10 calendar days after receiving notice under subparagraph 3(K)(4), from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. Employers of convicted employees must provide notice, including position title, to GDEM/SAA. Notice shall include the identification number(s) of each affected grant; 6) Taking one of the following actions, within 30 calendar days of receiving notice under subparagraph 3(K)(4), with respect to any employee who is so convicted a) Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination, consistent with the requirements of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; or b) Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency; 7) Making a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug -free workplace through implementation of paragraphs 1), 2), 3), 4), 5), and 6). (Federal Certification) 4. FAILURE TO COMPLY GDEM/SAA may suspend or terminate sub -award funding, in whole or in part, or other measures may be imposed for any of the following reasons: failing to comply with the requirements or statutory objectives of federal law, failing to make satisfactory progress toward the goals or objectives set forth in the sub -award application, failing to follow grant agreement requirements or special conditions, failing to submit required reports, or filing a false certification or other report or document. Satisfactory Progress is defined as accomplishing the following during the performance period of the grant: deciding what purchases will be made, ordering the equipment, ensuring the equipment is shipped and received, and training is accomplished with the equipment (or readied for deployment). All of the aforementioned task must be accomplished in a timely manner. Special Conditions may be imposed on sub -recipient's use of grant funds until problems identified during grant monitoring visits conducted by GDEM audit and compliance personnel are resolved.. 5. CONFLICT OF INTEREST The sub -recipient will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using their positions for a purpose that constitutes or presents the appearance of personal or organizational conflict of interest, or personal gain. 6. LOBBYING As required by Section 1352, Title 31 of the U.S. Code, and implemented at 28 CFR Part 69, for persons entering into a grant or cooperative agreement over. $100,000, as defined at 28 CFR Part 69, the sub -recipient certifies that: 2006 HSGP Terms and Conditions Page 4 of 9 A. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the sub - recipient, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the making of any Federal grant, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal grant or cooperative agreement; B. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal grant or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form - LLL, "Disclosure of Lobbying Activities," in accordance with its instructions. 7. DEBARMENT, SUSPENSION, & OTHER RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS As required by Executive Order 12549, Debarment and Suspension, and implemented at 28 CFR Part 67, for prospective participants in primary covered transactions, as defined at 28 CFR Part 67, Section 67.510. (Federal Certification) The sub -recipient certifies that it and its principals and vendors: A. Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, sentenced to a denial of Federal benefits by a State or Federal court, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency; sub -recipients can access debarment information by going to www.epls.gov . B. Have not within a three-year period preceding this application been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (Federal, State, or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property; C. Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (Federal, State, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (1)(b) of this certification; and D. Have not within a three-year period preceding this application had one or more public transactions (Federal, State, or local) terminated for cause or default; and E. Where the applicant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, he or she shall attach an explanation to this application. (Federal Certification) 8. MONITORING A. Sub -recipient will provide GDEM, State Auditor, or DHS personnel or their authorized representative, access to and the right to examine all paper or electronic records related to the financial assistance. B. Sub -recipient agrees to monitor their program to ensure that federal awards are used for authorized purposes in compliance with laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements and that the performance goals are achieved. In addition, Councils of Governments will perform periodic monitoring of grant recipients to ensure compliance. 2006 HSGP Terms and Conditions Page 5 of 9 C. GDEM/SAA may perform periodic reviews of sub -recipient performance of eligible activities and approved projects. These reviews may include, without limitation: performance of on -site audit and compliance monitoring, including inspection of all grant -related records and items, comparing actual sub -recipient activities to those approved in the sub -award application and subsequent modifications if any, ensuring that advances have been disbursed in accordance with applicable guidelines, confirming compliance with grant assurances, verifying information provided in performance reports and reviewing payment requests, needs and threat assessments and strategies. 9. REPORTING A. A-133 Reporting Requirement — All sub -recipients must submit an audit report to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse if they expended more than $500,000 in federal funds in one fiscal year. The federal Audit Clearinghouse submission requirements can be found at http://harvester.census.gov/sac/. A report must be submitted to GDEM/SAA each year this grant is active. B. Sub -recipient agrees to comply with all reporting requirements and shall provide such information as required to GDEM/SAA for reporting as noted in the 2006 Federal Grant Guidelines and/or in accordance with GDEM/SAA guidance. C. Sub -recipient must prepare and submit performance reports to GDEM/SAA for the duration of the grant performance period or until all grant activities are completed and the grant is formally closed. Sub -recipient may also be required to submit additional information and data requested by GDEM/SAA. 10. USE OF FUNDS A. Sub -recipient understands and agrees that it cannot use any federal funds, either directly or indirectly, in support of the enactment, repeal, modification or adoption of any law, regulation or policy, at any level of government, without the express prior written approval of OGT. B. The sub -recipient agrees that all allocations and use of funds under this grant will be in accordance with the Homeland Security Grant Program Guidelines and Application Kit for that fiscal year and must support the goals and objectives included in the State Homeland Security Strategic Plan and the Urban Area Homeland Security (UASI) Strategies. C. The sub -recipient official certifies federal funds will be used to supplement existing funds, and will not replace (supplant) funds that have been appropriated for the same purpose. Sub -recipient may be required to supply documentation certifying that a reduction in non-federal resources occurred for reasons other than the receipt or expected receipt of federal funds. 11. REIMBURSEMENT A. Sub -recipient agrees to make no request for reimbursement prior to return of this agreement and signed by the authorized sub -recipient representative. B. Sub -recipient agrees to make no request for reimbursement for goods or services procured by sub -recipient prior to the performance period start date of this agreement. 2006 HSGP Terms and Conditions Page 6 of 9 12. ADVANCE FUNDING A. If a financial hardship exists, a sub -recipient may request an advance of grant funds for expenditures incurred under this program. Requests must be made in writing by the chief elected official and submitted to GDEM/SAA. This will be accomplished using the SPARS website by following the instructions for generating hardship letters. GDEM/SAA will determine whether an advance will be made. B. If a sub -recipient is approved for an advance, the funds must be deposited in a separate interest bearing account and are subject to the rules outlined in the Uniform Rule 28 CFR Part 66, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments, at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_04/28cfrv2_04.html and the Uniform Rule 28 CFR Part 70, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements (including sub -awards) with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Nonprofit Organizations, at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/28cfr70_03.html. Sub - recipients must report any interest earned to GDEM/SAA. Any interest earned in excess of $100 must, on a quarterly basis, be remitted to: United States Department of Health and Human Services Division of Payment Management Services P.O. Box 6021 Rockville, MD 20852 13. TRAINING/EXERCISE Sub -recipient agrees that, during the performance period of this grant, any and all changes to their sub -recipient agreement regarding planning, training, equipment, and exercises must be routed through the appropriate reviewing authority, either the local Council of Governments or Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) Working Group. 14. EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS A. Sub -recipients must maintain an updated inventory of equipment purchased through this grant program in accordance with Uniform Grant Management Standards — III, State Uniform Administrative Requirements For Grants and Cooperative Agreements, Subpart C - Post -Award Requirements, Reports, Records, Retention, and Enforcement, .32 Equipment and the Office of Grant Operations Financial Management Guide. B. The sub -recipient agrees that any equipment purchased with grant funding shall be prominently marked as follows: "Purchased with funds provided by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security." Exceptions to this requirement are limited to items where placing of the marking is not possible due to the nature of the equipment. 15. UASI A. If the sub -recipient is a participant in a UASI program, during the performance period of this grant, sub -recipient agrees to adhere to the UASI strategy, goals, objectives, and implementation steps. B. Sub -recipient agrees that, during the performance period of this grant, all communications equipment purchases must be reviewed and approved by the Regional Interoperable Communications Committee and the UASI points of contact (voting members), if applicable. 2006 HSGP Terms and Conditions Page 7 of 9 16. REQUIREMENTS -MISCELLANEOUS A. During the performance period of this grant, sub -recipient must maintain an emergency management plan at the Basic Level of planning preparedness or higher, as prescribed by GDEM. This may be accomplished by a jurisdiction maintaining its own emergency management plan or participating in an inter -jurisdictional emergency management program that meets the required standards. If GDEM identifies deficiencies in the sub -recipient's plan, sub -recipient will correct deficiencies within 60 days of receiving notice of such deficiencies from GDEM. B. Projects identified in the State Preparedness Assessment Report System (SPARS) (www.texasdpa.com) must identify and relate to the goals and objectives indicated by the applicable 15 approved project investments for the period of performance of the grant. C. During the performance period of this grant, sub -recipient agrees that it will participate in a legally -adopted county and/or regional mutual aid agreement. D. During the performance period, the sub -recipient must register as a user of the Texas Regional Response Network (TRRN) and identify all major resources such as vehicles and trailers, equipment costing $5,000 or more and specialized teams/response units equipped and/or trained using grant funds (i.e. hazardous material, decontamination, search and rescue, etc.). This registration is to ensure jurisdictions or organizations are prepared to make grant funded resources available to other jurisdictions through mutual aid. E. Sub -recipients must implement the National Incident Management System (NIMS) at the local level. The requirement to train personnel on the IS-700 course, National Incident Management System (NIMS), An Introduction, has been extended into FY 06. Grant recipients must have formally recognized the NIMS and adopt the NIMS principles and policies. 17. CLOSING THE GRANT A. The sub-receipiant must have all equipment ordered by December 30, 2006. The last day for submission of invoices is February 28, 2008. B. GDEM/SAA will close a sub -award after receiving sub -recipient's final performance report indicating that all approved work has been completed and all funds have been disbursed, completing a review to confirm the accuracy of the reported information, and reconciling actual costs to awards modifications and payments. If the close out review and reconciliation indicates that the sub -recipient is owed additional funds, GDEM/SAA will send the final payment automatically to the sub -recipient. If the sub -recipient did not use all the funds received, GDEM/SAA will issue a Grant Adjustment Notice (GAN) to recover the unused funds. 18. PUBLICATIONS A. Sub -recipient acknowledges that OGO/OGT reserves a royalty -free, non-exclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and authorize others to use, for Federal government purposes: (1) the copyright in any work developed under an award or sub - award; and (2) any rights of copyright to which a recipient or sub -recipient purchases ownership with Federal support. The Recipient agrees to consult with SLGCP regarding the allocation of any patent rights that arise from, or are purchased with, this funding. 2006 HSGP Terms and Conditions Page 8 of 9 B. The sub -recipient agrees that all publications created with funding under this grant shall prominently contain the following statement: "This Document was prepared under a grant from the Office of Grants and Training, United States Department of Homeland Security. Point of view or opinions expressed in the document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of U.S. Department of Homeland Security." 19. RESTRICTIONS, DISCLAIMERS and NOTICES A. Approval of this award does not indicate approval of any consultant rate in excess of $450 per day. A detailed justification must be submitted to and approved by GDEM/SAA prior to obligation or expenditure of such funds. B. In cases where local funding is. established by COGS, release of funds by GDEM is contingent upon regional funding allocation approval by the sub -recipient's COG governing board. C. Notwithstanding any other agreement provisions, the parties hereto understand and agree that GDEM's obligations under this agreement are contingent upon the receipt of adequate funds to meet GDEM's liabilities hereunder. GDEM shall not be liable to the Sub -recipient for costs under this Agreement which exceed the amount specified in the Notice of Sub -recipient Award. D. Notice. All notices or communication required or permitted to be given by either party hereunder shall be deemed sufficiently given if mailed by registered mail or certified mail, return receipt requested, or sent by overnight courier, such as Federal Express, to the other party at its respective address set forth below or to such other address as one party shall give notice of to the other from time to time hereunder. Mailed notices shall be deemed to be received on the third business day following the date of mailing. Notices sent by overnight courier shall be deemed received the following business day. Jack Colley, Chief Division of Emergency Management Office of the Governor PO Box 4087 Austin, TX 78773-0270 2006 HSGP Terms and Conditions Page 9 of 9 Homeland Security Prevention Projects Information Sheet In 2004 and 2005, the Governor asked cities and counties statewide receiving Homeland Security grant funding to allocate a part of their funding to Interoperable Communications Systems. As a result, Texas is on schedule to achieve statewide radio interoperability by January 2007, a significant accomplishment in a state the size of Texas. For this year's grant cycle, the Governor' Office is asking cities and counties to earmark homeland security grant funding to support two statewide local homeland security prevention projects, Texas Data Exchange (TDEx), Live Scan and a statewide program of regional emergency exercises. TDEx The Texas Data Exchange System (TDEx), a web -based secure information sharing network will connect more than 2,200 law enforcement databases in the state, including federal law enforcement databases. The TDEx is already operational but not all law enforcement officers have access to it at this time. Homeland security grant funds will be used to pay the licensing fees so that each of the more than 70,000 police officers in Texas can be provided access to the criminal background and law enforcement information they need, and that all appropriate local law enforcement databases can be accessed through the TDEx network. Law enforcement agencies with TDEx access will be able to quickly search subject or incident information locally, statewide, and nationally. Users can place "watches" on wanted subjects or those of interest and receive notification when a subject is booked by a participating agency. TDEx will provide users with access to the Texas Rangers Criminal Information Database; the DPS Criminal Law Enforcement Records and Information Systems; DPS Highway Patrol Database; the Texas Department of Criminal Justice prisoner data; county jail incarceration records (of those in custody and those who have been released) including photos, aliases, dates of birth, and charges; and multi jurisdictional reports, including incidents, bookings and traffic citations. Sharing this data by use of this timesaving resource will further protect the citizens of Texas. There are several information technology initiatives around the nation that co -locate multiple law enforcement databases and connect systems in various cites, but Texas is the first state to connect databases statewide. TDEx also has an alert feature so that police officers are immediately notified as soon as information related to their investigations is added to the database. Live Scan Live Scan is a fully integrated electronic identification system that allows a jurisdiction to capture fingerprints, mug shots, and data at one integrated booking station. This equipment allows the user to scan fingerprints electronically. The system is much cleaner and faster than the old ink process. Because the system allows users to capture, print and transmit clear records, it will eliminate common errors that cause the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) to reject traditional ink fingerprints. Live Scan will also save time and money by shortening both bookings and background checks. The system enhances the speed and accuracy of criminal identification by dependable direct electronic transmission of records to an AFIS bureau. This technology enables law enforcement to submit fingerprint data and receive results in seconds rather than days, ensuring that dangerous felons and fugitives using fictitious names are not released back into the community. Live Scan also enables law enforcement Page 1 of 2 to identify and locate subjects of unsolved crimes, and it ensures that individuals identified as known or suspected terrorists are not released when they are detained for criminal violations. A number of law enforcement agencies in Texas have already benefited from the use of this technology, rapidly identifying suspected violent criminals. By prioritizing the use of homeland security dollars on this technology, the State will extend this capability to the 184 Texas counties that currently do not have it. Jurisdictions statewide will benefit from this equipment. It will provide a fast, efficient method to determine a suspect's identity and criminal history. This will protect our citizens by keeping criminals off the streets once they have been apprehended for a crime. State procurement of this system for large numbers of local governments is substantially less costly than individual local procurement. Regional Exercises As outlined in the state Homeland Security Strategic Plan, the State plans to continue to make available regional emergency exercises that include critical assessments of government capabilities and performance in responding to homeland security threats. Emergency exercises test plans and procedures, coordination and communications, training, equipment, and facilities in demanding scenarios. The State plans to continue its association with the National Response and Rescue Training Center (NERRTC) to provide high quality regional Terrorism — Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) exercises and related training designed to help prepare jurisdictions to deal with the for the consequences of a terrorist WMD attack. NERRTC works with local governments and regional entities to develop emergency exercise objectives and scenarios to test them, provides specialized training in advance of each exercise, plans exercise activities, and provides highly trained emergency response specialists to conduct exercises. When an exercise is complete, NERRTC conducts a Post Exercise After -Action Review and disseminates a detailed exercise report to each participating jurisdiction which highlights needed improvements in planning, training, equipment, and facilities to enhance the response to terrorist incidents, natural disasters, and technological emergencies. These exercises will add another dimension to the emergency preparedness in the State of Texas. The regional homeland security exercise program is conducted as part of a long-term statewide emergency exercise plan that is updated annually with inputs from local governments, regional entities, state agencies, and other participants. The regional exercise program has been historically funded with homeland security grant funds. Page 2 of 2 Election Regarding State Use of Homeland Security Grant Funding For Statewide Local Projects on Behalf Of City of La Porte This agreement is authorized under the provisions of Chapter 791 (Interlocal Cooperation Act) of Texas Government Code. The parties to this Agreement are the State of Texas and the City of La Porte. The purpose of this agreement is to describe the terms by which the State of Texas shall expend Homeland Security Grant Funding on behalf of City of La Porte for certain statewide projects designed to benefit local governments. § 421.072(a)(1) of the Texas Government Code provides that the Office of the Governor shall allocate available federal and state grants and other funding related to homeland security to state and local agencies that perform homeland security activities. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued grant number 2006-GE- T6-0068 to the State of Texas for the 2006 Homeland Security Grant Program. The State of Texas proposes to allocate grant funding to City of La Porte as a sub -recipient of this grant. Jurisdictions receiving homeland security grant funds may elect to authorize the State of Texas to use grant funds on their behalf during the period of performance of the grant to implement multi -agency projects. Under the rules established by DHS for this grant, this election must be in the form of a written agreement. City of La Porte authorizes the State of Texas to use local homeland security grant funds in the amount indicated for the statewide local projects indicated by a check mark below. (Check all that apply). ❑ Regional Emergency Exercises Grant Funds = $27,263.54 ❑ TDEx Implementation Grant Funds = $0 ❑ Live Scan Implementation Grant Funds = $0 The State of Texas shall provide one or more TDEx licenses to City of La Porte during the period of the grant. The State of Texas shall purchase LIVESCAN licenses and equipment and provide license and equipment to surrounding counties during the period of the grant. The State of Texas will utilize pre -allocated funding from City of La Porte for local and regional exercises. Points of Contact: State of Texas: City of La Porte: Jack Colley Alton Porter Chief Mayor Governor's Division of Emergency Management 604 W. Fairmont Parkway PO Box 4087 La Porte, Texas 77571 Austin, Texas 78773-0220 This agreement does not intend to conflict with the current laws or regulations affecting the State of Texas or City of La Porte, including provisions of Texas Government Code §791.025. If any part of the above agreement is inconsistent with such authority, then the terms and agreed upon statement in writing shall be invalid. The terms of this agreement are effective on the date of signature by the State of Texas. This agreement may be modified upon the mutual written consent of the parties. The terms of this agreement, if modified, will remain in effect until grant ending date February 28, 2008. 7PCIL_ For the State of Texas For City of La Porte Date: Date: *Memorandum must be returned to GDEM by November 1, 2006, in order to receive grant funding I •J REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested October 23, 2006 Requested By: City Attorney Department: Q4, Attome3's Office Report: Resolution: Ordinance: X Exhibits: Proposed Ordinance Appropriation Source of Funds: Account Number: Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: Budgeted Item: YES NO Exhibits: Copy of Statute I I SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION In the process of issuing citations to motor vehicle operators for parking violations, it is frequently the case that the vehicle itself is unattended and it is thereby impossible for the officer to locate the offender and personally issue the vehicle operator a citation to appear in court. In these situations the current practice of the City is to issue citations to "owner/operator" and to leave a copy of the citation attached to the vehicle. While this policy is legal it can complicate efforts at prosecuting parking violators, particularly when a case is contested in court and the State must proffer evidence that a particular person, whether it be the registered owner or not, was actually culpable. Section 545.308 of the Texas Transportation Code addresses this potential problem by providing that the governing body of a local authority can by ordinance or other order establish that in prosecutions of parking offenses there is a legal presumption that the registered owner of the illegally parked vehicle was the operator of the vehicle when the offense was committed. This is a relative new statute, added by the Legislature in September of 2001, and as worded should help make prosecution of parking violations more effective — and efficient — by shifting to ticketed parking offenders the burden of overcoming the presumption that the registered owner was the actual violator. ID Proposed for your consideration is an ordinance amending Chapter 70, "Traffic and Vehicles",of the Code of Ordinances to add a section creating the presumption that the registered owner of a vehicle was the operator at the time of the offense, in the case of parking violations under the Subchapter G of the Transportation Code, as prescribed by Section 545.308 of the Transportation Code. Action Required by Council: Recommendation is to approve ordinance amending Chapter 70 of the Code of Ordinances establishing presumption as to operator of illegally parked vehicles. A rov or C' ncil A enda r e rim City Manager ate ORDINANCE NO. 2006-�,qq� AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE AMENDING CHAPTER 70, HTRAFFIC AND VEHICLES", ARTICLE V, "STOPPING, STANDING AND PARKING", OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, BY ADDING NEW SECTION 70-182, ESTABLISHING LEGAL PRESUMPTION AS TO OPERATOR OF PARKED VEHICLES IN PROSECUTION OF PARKING OFFENSES, AND AMENDING SECTIONS 70-182--70-210, "RESERVED"y PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION OF THE CAPTION HEREOPy FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAWy AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: Section 1. Chapter 70, "Traffic and Vehicles", Article V, "Stopping, Standing and Parking", is hereby amended by adding new Section 70-182, which shall hereafter read as follows, to -wit: "Sec. 70-182. Presumed operator of parked vehicles. In a prosecution for an offense prohibited under Texas Transportation Code Chapter 545, Subchapter G, and relating to the stopping, standing and parking of unattended motor vehicles, it is presumed that the registered owner of the vehicle is the person who stopped, stood, or parked the vehicle at the time and place the offense occurred. State law reference - authority of city to create presumption as to operator of parked car established by State law, V.T.C.A., Transportation Code §545.308." Section 2. Chapter 70, "Traffic and Vehicles", Article V, "Stopping, Standing and Parking", "Sec. 70-182--70-210. Reserved.", is hereby amended and shall hereafter read as follows, to -wit: "Sec. 70-183--70-210. Reserved." Section 3. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites, and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. Section 4. This Ordinance shall be effective fourteen (14) days after its passage and approval. The City Secretary shall give notice to the passage of the ordinance by causing the caption to be published in the official newspaper of the City of La Porte at least twice within ten (10) days after the passage of the ordinance. PASSED AND APPROVED, this ATTEST: Martha A. Gillett City Secretary APPROVED: i T / Clark�T. Askins Assistant City Attorney day of , 2006. CITY OF LA PORTE By: Alton E. Porter Mayor 2 �Rpm -�q lol-rq Sec. 545.307 , TEXAS CRIMINAL AND TRAFFIC LAW Stats. 2003 78th Leg. Sess. Ch. 1034, effective September 1, 2003. Sec. 545.307. Overnight Parking of Commercial Motor Vehicle In Residen- tial Subdivision. (a) In this section: (1) "Commercial motor vehicle" means: (A) a commercial motor vehicle, as defined by Section 522.003, and includes a vehicle meeting that definition regardless of whether the vehicle is used for a commercial purpose; or (B) a road tractor, truck tractor, pole trailer, or semitrailer, as those terms are defined by Section 541.201. (2) "Residential subdivision" means a subdi- vision in a county with a population greater than 220,000: (A) for which a plat is recorded in the county real property records; and (B) in which the majority of lots are sub- ject to deed restrictions limiting the lots to residential use. (b) After 10 p.m. and before 6 a.m., a person may not park a commercial motor vehicle or leave the vehicle parked on a street of a residential subdivision for which signs are posted as pro- vided by Subsection (c) unless the commercial) motor vehicle: (1) is transporting persons or property to or from the residential subdivision or performing work in the subdivision; and (2) remains parked in the subdivision only for the period necessary to complete the trans- portation or work. (c) The residents of a residential subdivision may petition a county or municipality in which the subdivision is located for the posting of signs prohibiting the overnight parking of a commer- cial motor vehicle in the subdivision. The petition must be signed by at least 25 percent of the owners or tenants of residences in the subdivi- sion. Not more than one person for each residence may sign the petition, and each person signing must be at least 18 years of age. Promptly after the filing of a petition meeting the requirements of this subsection and subject to Subsection (d), the county or municipality receiving the petition shall post the signs. The signs must: (1) be posted at each entrance of the subdi- vision through which a commercial motor vehi- cle may enter the subdivision or within the :. subdivision if there is not defined entrance to the subdivision; and (2) state, in letters at least two inches in height, that overnight parking of a commercial motor vehicle is prohibited in the subdivision. (d) A county or municipality receiving a peti- tion under Subsection (c) may condition the post- ing of the signs on payment by the residents of the residential subdivision of the cost of providing the signs. (e) A person commits an offense if the person parks a commercial motor vehicle in violation of Subsection (b). (f) This section does not limit the power of a municipality to regulate the parking of commer- cial motor vehicles. (g) For the purposes of this section, contiguous subdivisions that are developed by the same entity or a successor to that entity and that are given the same public name or a variation of the same public name are considered one subdivision. Separation of one of the subdivisions from an- other by a road, stream, greenbelt, or similar barrier does not make the subdivisions noncon- tiguous. Leg.H. Stats. 1997 75th Leg. Sess. Ch. 173, effective September 1, 1997; Stats. 1999 76th Leg. Sess. Ch. 731, effective September 1, 1999, Ch. 1419, effective June 18, 1999. rSec. 545.308. Presumption. The governing body of a local authority, by ordinance, order, or other official action, may provide that in a prosecution for an offense under this subchapter involving the stopping, standing, or parking of an unattended motor vehicle it is presumed that the registered owner of the vehicle is the person who stopped, stood, or parked the vehicle at the time and place the offense occurred Leg.H. Stats. 2001 77th Leg. Sess. Ch. 1080 effective September 1, 2001. SUBCHAPT.,ER H SPEED RESTRICTIONS Sec. 545.351. Maximum Speed Re- quirement. (a) An operator may not drive at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the circumstances then existing. (b) An operator: (1) may not drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the con- Zj- REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: October 23 2006 Requested By: Michael Dolby Department: FINANCE Report: Resolution: XX Ordinance: Exhibits: Resolution 2006- Exhibits: Exhibits: Appropriation Source of Funds: N/A Account Number: N/A Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: N/A Budgeted Item: SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The City of La Porte intends to issue Certificates of Obligation Bonds for the following projects: Waste Water Treatment Plant Aeration Improvements $ 6,000,000 While preliminary work has begun on these projects, it is not desirable for us to issue debt at this time. However, because we are moving forward with further design, we recommend the City Council approve a resolution that allows the City to reimburse itself from future bond proceeds for expenditures that are made prior to the issuance of the debt. This is a position that we have taken on several other projects in the past as recommended by bond counsel and required by federal law. The attached resolutions give us the option to reimburse ourselves from future bond proceeds for certain costs associated with the above -mentioned projects. Action Reguired by Council: Approve resolutions declaring intention to reimburse certain expenditures with borrowing proceeds. D /� 06 Date RESOLUTION NO. 2006- RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENTION TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES WITH BORROWING PROCEEDS WHEREAS, the City of La Porte, Texas (the "Issuer") desires to pay expenditures in connection with the planning, acquisition, construction, equipping, and/or renovating the project or facilities described as the Waste Water Treatment Plant Aeration Improvements (the "Project"). WHEREAS, Article 717k-6, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, as amended ("Article 717k-6"), permits the Issuer to use the proceeds of obligations to reimburse the Issuer for costs attributable to the Project paid or incurred before the date of issuance of such obligations; and WHEREAS, the Issuer finds, considers, and declares that the reimbursement of the Issuer for the payment of such expenditures will be appropriate and consistent with the objectives of the Issuer's programs and, as such, chooses to declare its intention, in accordance with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations, to reimburse itself for such payments at such time as it issues obligations to finance the Project. NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. This Resolution declares the intent of the Issuer to reimburse the expenditures for the Project with the proceed of obligations. The Issuer presently intends to reimburse the expenditure by incurring obligations issued under Texas law, the interest on which is excludable from gross income under Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Section 2. The Issuer reasonably expects to incur debt, in one or more series of obligations, in an aggregate maximum principal amount now expected to be equal to $6,000,000 for the purpose of paying the costs of the Project. Section 3. The Issuer intends to reimburse the expenditures hereunder not later than 18 months after the date of the original expenditure is paid or the date the Project is placed in service or abandoned, but in no event more than three years after the original expenditure is paid unless the Project is a construction project for which the Issuer and a licensed architect or engineer have certified that at least five years are necessary to complete the Project in which event the maximum reimbursement period is five years after the date of the original expenditure. Section 4. The Issuer intends that this Resolution satisfy the official intent requirement set forth in Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations and evidences its intentions under Article 717k-6. Section 5. This resolution shall be liberally construed to evidence the intent of the Issuer to comply with state law and federal income tax law in the issuance of tax-exempt obligations for the Project. PASSED AND APPROVED this the ,4)4d day of OJ , 2006. ATTEST i City S6cretary CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS Alton Porter, Mayor APPROVED: City Attorney H REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: October 23, 2006 Requested By: Michael Dolby �c Department: FINANCE Report: Resolution: XX Ordinance: Exhibits: Resolution 2006- Exhibits: Exhibits: Appropriation Source of Funds: N/A Account Number: N/A Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: N/A Budgeted Item: SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The City of La Porte intends to issue Certificates of Obligation Bonds for the following projects: Spenwick Water System Upgrade $ 700,000 While preliminary work has begun on these projects, it is not desirable for us to issue debt at this time. However, because we are moving forward with further design, we recommend the City Council approve a resolution that allows the City to reimburse itself from future bond proceeds for expenditures that are made prior to the issuance of the debt. This is a position that we have taken on several other projects in the past as recommended by bond counsel and required by federal law. The attached resolutions give us the option to reimburse ourselves from future bond proceeds for certain costs associated with the above -mentioned projects. Action Required by Council: Approve resolutions declaring intention to reimburse certain expenditures with borrowing proceeds. Vr `�.-....A�// 7 i.rManager Date RESOLUTION NO.2006- A RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENTION TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES WITH BORROWING PROCEEDS WHEREAS, the City of La Porte, Texas (the "Issuer") desires to pay expenditures in connection with the planning, acquisition, construction, equipping, and/or renovating the project or facilities described as the Spenwick Water System Upgrade (the "Project"). WHEREAS, Article 717k-6, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, as amended ("Article 717k-6"), permits the Issuer to use the proceeds of obligations to reimburse the Issuer for costs attributable to the Project paid or incurred before the date of issuance of such obligations; and WHEREAS, the Issuer finds, considers, and declares that the reimbursement of the Issuer for the payment of such expenditures will be appropriate and consistent with the objectives of the Issuer's programs and, as such, chooses to declare its intention, in accordance with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations, to reimburse itself for such payments at such time as it issues obligations to finance the Project. NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. This Resolution declares the intent of the Issuer to reimburse the expenditures for the Project with the proceed of obligations. The Issuer presently intends to reimburse the expenditure by incurring obligations issued under Texas law, the interest on which is excludable from gross income under Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Section 2. The Issuer reasonably expects to incur debt, in one or more series of obligations, in an aggregate maximum principal amount now expected to be equal to $700,000 for the purpose of paying the costs of the Project. Section 3. The Issuer intends to reimburse the expenditures hereunder not later than 18 months after the date of the original expenditure is paid or the date the Project is placed in service or abandoned, but in no event more than three years after the original expenditure is paid unless the Project is a construction project for which the Issuer and a licensed architect or engineer have certified that at least five years are necessary to complete the Project in which event the maximum reimbursement period is five years after the date of the original expenditure. Section 4. The Issuer intends that this Resolution satisfy the official intent requirement set forth in Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations and evidences its intentions under Article 717k-6. Section 5. This resolution shall be liberally construed to evidence the intent of the Issuer to comply with state law and federal income tax law in the issuance of tax-exempt obligations for the Project. PASSED AND APPROVED this the ),Wday of Vbk, 2006. ATTEST City Secretary CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS �) Alton Porter, Mayor APPROVED: Z1� T_ City Attorney I REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: October 23, 2006 Requested By: Michael Dolby 1N Department: FINANCE Report: Resolution: XX Ordinance: Exhibits: Resolution 2006- Exhibits: Exhibits: Appropriation Source of Funds: N/A Account Number: N/A Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: N/A Budgeted Item: SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The City of La Porte intends to issue Certificates of Obligation Bonds for the following projects: Sens Road Utility Relocations $ 2,200,000 While preliminary work has begun on these projects, it is not desirable for us to issue debt at this time. However, because we are moving forward with further design, we recommend the City Council approve a resolution that allows the City to reimburse itself from future bond proceeds for expenditures that are made prior to the issuance of the debt. This is a position that we have taken on several other projects in the past as recommended by bond counsel and required by federal law. The attached resolutions give us the option to reimburse ourselves from future bond proceeds for certain costs associated with the above -mentioned projects. Action Reguired by Council: Approve resolutions declaring intention to reimburse certain expenditures with borrowing proceeds. 0 X06 Date RESOLUTION NO.2006- a 1 RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENTION TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES WITH BORROWING PROCEEDS WHEREAS, the City of La Porte, Texas (the "Issuer") desires to pay expenditures in connection with the planning, acquisition, construction, equipping, and/or renovating the project or facilities described as the Sens Road Utility Relocations (the "Project"). WHEREAS, Article 717k-6, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, as amended ("Article 717k-6"), permits the Issuer to use the proceeds of obligations to reimburse the Issuer for costs attributable to the Project paid or incurred before the date of issuance of such obligations; and WHEREAS, the Issuer finds, considers, and declares that the reimbursement of the Issuer for the payment of such expenditures will be appropriate and consistent with the objectives of the Issuer's programs and, as such, chooses to declare its intention, in accordance with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations, to reimburse itself for such payments at such time as it issues obligations to finance the Project. NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. This Resolution declares the intent of the Issuer to reimburse the expenditures for the Project with the proceed of obligations. The Issuer presently intends to reimburse the expenditure by incurring obligations issued under Texas law, the interest on which is excludable from gross income under Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Section 2. The Issuer reasonably expects to incur debt, in one or more series of obligations, in an aggregate maximum principal amount now expected to be equal to $2,200,000 for the purpose of paying the costs of the Project. Section 3. The Issuer intends to reimburse the expenditures hereunder not later than 18 months after the date of the original expenditure is paid or the date the Project is placed in service or abandoned, but in no event more than three years after the original expenditure is paid unless the Project is a construction project for which the Issuer and a licensed architect or engineer have certified that at least five years are necessary to complete the Project in which event the maximum reimbursement period is five years after the date of the original expenditure. Section 4. The Issuer intends that this Resolution satisfy the official intent requirement set forth in Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations and evidences its intentions under Article 717k-6. Section 5. This resolution shall be liberally construed to evidence the intent of the Issuer to comply with state law and federal income tax law in the issuance /of tax-exempt obligations for the Project. PASSED AND APPROVED this thr�2J'((,I day of 2006. ATTEST COF LA PORTE, TEXAS Alton Porter, Mayor APPROVED: T ZZW4,�, City Attorney Il REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: October 23, 2006 Requested By: Michael Dolby ;YI Department: FINANCE Report: Resolution: XX Ordinance: Exhibits: Resolution 2006- Exhibits: Exhibits: Appropriation Source of Funds: N/A Account Number: N/A Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: N/A Budgeted Item: SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The City of La Porte intends to issue Certificates of Obligation Bonds for the following projects: Golf Course Cart Paths and Tunnel Improvements $ 386,166 While preliminary work has begun on these projects, it is not desirable for us to issue debt at this time. However, because we are moving forward with further design, we recommend the City Council approve a resolution that allows the City to reimburse itself from future bond proceeds for expenditures that are made prior to the issuance of the debt. This is a position that we have taken on several other projects in the past as recommended by bond counsel and required by federal law. The attached resolutions give us the option to reimburse ourselves from future bond proceeds for certain costs associated with the above -mentioned projects. Action Required by Council: Approve resolutions declaring intention to reimburse certain expenditures with borrowing proceeds. Approved for Citv CauncilAgenda D / OcS Joh oer , nt m rty Manager Date RESOLUTION NO.2006- ,d, d RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENTION TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES WITH BORROWING PROCEEDS WHEREAS, the City of La Porte, Texas (the "Issuer") desires to pay expenditures in connection with the design, planning, acquisition, construction, equipping, and/or renovating the project or facilities described as Golf Course Cart Paths and Tunnel Improvements (the "Project"). WHEREAS, Article 717k-6, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, as amended ("Article 717k-6"), permits the Issuer to use the proceeds of obligations to reimburse the Issuer for costs attributable to the Project paid or incurred before the date of issuance of such obligations; and WHEREAS, the Issuer finds, considers, and declares that the reimbursement of the Issuer for the payment of such expenditures will be appropriate and consistent with the objectives of the Issuer's programs and, as such, chooses to declare its intention, in accordance with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations, to reimburse itself for such payments at such time as it issues obligations to finance the Project. NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. This Resolution declares the intent of the Issuer to reimburse the expenditures for the Project with the proceed of obligations. The Issuer presently intends to reimburse the expenditure by incurring obligations issued under Texas law, the interest on which is excludable from gross income under Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Section 2. The Issuer reasonably expects to incur debt, in one or more series of obligations, in an aggregate maximum principal amount now expected to be equal to $386,166 for the purpose of paying the costs of the Project. Section 3. The Issuer intends to reimburse the expenditures hereunder not later than 18 months after the date of the original expenditure is paid or the date the Project is placed in service or abandoned, but in no event more than three years after the original expenditure is paid unless the Project is a construction project for which the Issuer and a licensed architect or engineer have certified that at least five years are necessary to complete the Project in which event the maximum reimbursement period is five years after the date of the original expenditure. Section 4. The Issuer intends that this Resolution satisfy the official intent requirement set forth in Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations and evidences its intentions under Article 717k-6. Section 5. This resolution shall be liberally construed to evidence the intent of the Issuer to comply with state law and federal income tax law in the issuance of tax-exempt obligations for the Project. PASSED AND APPROVED this thq,/_94 day of , 2006. ATTEST 1-1� , oy�/� City S cretary CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS i Alton Porter, Mayor APPROVED: City Attorney K REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: October 23, 2006 Requested By: S. Gillett 29dv;�;� - Department: Public Works Report: Resolution: Ordinance: XX Exhibits: Ordinance Exhibits: Professional Services Agreement Exhibits: Appropriation Source of Funds: Fund 047 Account Number: 047-9892-938-1100 Amount Budgeted: S360,,000.00 Amount Requested: $358,348.00 Budgeted Item: YES SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION Phase I Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements (solids handling improvements) were completed in 2002. The Study recommended the replacement of existing aeration equipment (funded under a separate Project) and begin the design of a new treatment aeration train to increase the capacity of the plant to 5.5 MGD. Phase II of the Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements included the examination and possible improvements to the aeration process of the Plant. The firm of PBS&J, Inc. was selected to perform the Study for Phase II Improvements at the Plant at a cost of $58,090. Subsequently, PBS&J was authorized by Council on October 24, 2004 to perform a Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) at a cost of $99,125. The PER established the final scope of work for final design, examined various aeration alternatives and recommended the most cost-effective alternative, and provided a detailed cost estimate for consideration of a future debt issue. Total estimated cost for the Project is $6,000,000. In anticipation of the issuance of debt, the FY 2006-2007 CIP allocated $360,000 for final design of the proposed improvements. PBS&J has submitted a proposal to provide professional engineering services for final design and construction -phase services. The Professional Services Agreement (attached) outlines the scope of services and the cost. Costs associated with design are as follows. Final Design Phase $329,803 Prequalification/Bidding Phase 12,465 Total Design $342 268 Survey $ 11,230 Geotechnical 4,850 Total Additional Services $ 16,080 Total Design Phase Services $358,348 Estimated Construction -Phase Services total $72,480 — estimated Construction Inspection Services total $57,270. These cost for these services will be finalized and brought back to City Council for approval when funding is available for the actual construction of the Project. Action Required by Council: Approve an Ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Service Agreement with PBS&J to perform Final Design for the Little Cedar Bayou Wastewater Treatment Plant in an amount of $358,348.00. Approved fo Cit nci enda O /7 lox Jo oe ity Manager Date ORDINANCE NO. 2006- 0 56 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA PORTE AND PBS&J, INC., TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES TO FINAL DESIGN FOR PHASE II IMPROVEMENTS AT THE LITTLE CEDAR BAYOU WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTi APPROPRIATING THE SUM NOT TO EXCEED $358,348.00, TO FUND SAID CONTRACTI MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT] FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW1 AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: Section 1. The City Council hereby approves and authorizes the contract, agreement, or other undertaking described in the title of this ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Secretary. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute such document and all related documents on behalf of the City of La Porte. The City Secretary is hereby authorized to attest to all such signatures and to affix the seal of the City to all such documents. City Council appropriates the sum not to exceed $358,348.00 from the City of La Porte CIP Fund 047, Project No. GEN938, to fund said contract. Section 2. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites, and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. Section 3. This Ordinance shall be effective from and after its passage and approval, and it is so ordered. PASSED AND APPROVED, this 23rd day of October, 2006. ATTEST: ar ha . Gillett City Secretary APPROVED: ark T. Askins City Attorney CITY OF LA PORTE By: t Alton E. Porter Mayor 2 Rev. 10/00 PBS1 Public Client PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into September 29, 2006 , by and between Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. (PBS&J) and the Client identified herein, provides for the Professional Services described under Item 2 of this Agreement. PHONE NUMBER: (281)471-9650 CLIENT: City of La Porte FAX NUMBER: (281) 470-5129 ADDRESS: 604 West Fairmont Parkway CONTACT PERSON: Mr. Steve Gillett La Porte Texas 77572 PROJECT NUMBER: SHORT TITLE: Little Cedar Bayou WWTP 1. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT SITE: Qly of La PnrtP'g I IHIc radar Rayau Wastewater Tr .atment Plant 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY PBS&J (if additional pages are necessary, they are identified as Attachment A): Provide Phase I - Basic Design Phase professional engineering services as described in Attachment A 3. THE COMPENSATION TO BE PAID PBS&J for providing the requested services shall be (If additional pages are necessary, they are identified as Attachment B): ❑ Direct personnel expense plus a surcharge of %, plus reimbursable costs.* ✓❑ A Lump -Sum charge of $ 358,348.00G"t_6f_p68ltet* ❑ Unit CostMme Charges identified in Attachment B, plus reimbursable costs.* ❑ Other - See Attachment B. * See explanation under Item 5 below. 4. IF PBS&J's SERVICES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT ARE DELAYED for reasons beyond PBS&J's control, the time of performance shall be adjusted appropriately. Except where the services provided are under a continuous service contract for more than one year, if the services under this Agreement are delayed for a period of more than one (1) year from the beginning date (as above provided), the fees shall be subject to renegotiation; any change in such fees shall apply only to the unfinished services as of the effective date of such change. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is accepted on the date written above and subject to the terms and conditions set forth above. (SIGN WITH BALL POINT PEN) CLIENI SIGNEI TYPED TITLE: DATE: POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN, INC. SIGNED:--- TYPED NAME: Robert T. McCarty TITLE: Sr. Program Mgr./Assoc. Vice President DATE: Distribution: Copy 1 - PBS&J; Copy 2 - Client; Copy 3 - PBS&J Accounting Public Client Rev, 10100 5. COMPENSATION: Direct personnel expense shall be defined as: the cost of salaries and fringe benefit costs related to vacation, holiday, and sick leave pay; contributions for Social Security, Workers' Compensation Insurance, retirement benefits, and medical and insurance benefits; unemployment and payroll taxes; and other allowed benefits of those employees directly engaged in the performance of the requested service. Reimbursable costs include: fees of Professional Associates (whose expertise is required to complete the project) and out-of-pocket expenses, the cost of which shall be charged at actual costs plus an administrative charge of 18% and shall be itemized and included in the invoice. Typical out-of-pocket expenses shall include, but not be limited to, travel expenses (lodging, meals, etc.), job -related mileage at the prevailing Company rate, long distance telephone calls, courier, printing and reproduction costs, and survey supplies and materials. In the event the requested service involves the use of electronic measuring equipment, computers, plotters, and other special equipment such as boats, swamp buggies, etc., an additional direct charge shall be made for the use of this equipment. It is understood and agreed that PBS&J's services under this Agreement are limited to those described in Item 2 hereof (and Attachment A, If applicable) and do not include participation in or control over the operation of any aspect of the project. Compensation under this Agreement does not include any amount for participating in or controlling any such operation. 6. INVOICE PROCEDURES AND PAYMENT: PBS&J shall submit invoices to the Client for work accomplished during each calendar month. For services provided on a Lump Sum basis, the amount of each monthly invoice shall be determined on the "percentage of completion method" whereby PBS&J will estimate the percentage of the total work (provided on a Lump Sum basis) accomplished during the invoicing period. Monthly invoices shall Include, separately listed, any charges for services for which time charges and/or unit costs shall apply. Such invoices shall also include, separately listed, any charges for Professional Associates and reimbursable costs. Such invoices shall be submitted by PBS&J as soon as possible after the end of the month in which the work was accomplished and shall be due and payable by the client upon receipt. The Client, as owner or authorized agent for the owner, hereby agrees that payment as provided herein will be made for said work within 30 days from the date the invoice for same is mailed to the Client at the address set out herein or is otherwise delivered, and, in default of such payment, hereby agrees to pay all costs of collection, including reasonable attorney's fees, regardless of whether legal action is initiated. The Client hereby acknowledges that unpaid Invoices shall accrue interest at the maximum retailed by law after they have been outstanding for over 30 days. PBS&J reserves the right to suspend all services on the Client's project without notice if an Invoice remains unpaid 45 days after date of invoice. This suspension shall remain in effect until all unpaid invoices are paid in full. It is understood and agreed that PBS&J's services under this Agreement do not include participation, whatsoever, in any litigation. Should such services be required, a supplemental Agreement may be negotiated between the Client and PBS&J describing the services desired and providing a basis for compensation to PBS&J. 7. COST ESTIMATES: Client hereby acknowledges that PBS&J cannot warrant that any cost estimates provided by PBS&J will not vary from actual costs incurred by the Client. S. LIMIT OF LIABILITY: The limit of liability of PBS&J to the Client for any cause or combination of causes shall be, in total amount, limited to the fees paid under this Agreement. 9. CONSTRUCTION SERVICES: It, under this Agreement, professional services are provided during the construction phase of the project, PBS&J shall not be responsible for or have control over means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work; nor shall PBS&J be responsible for the Contractor's failure to carry out the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents or for the Contractor's failure to comply with applicable laws, ordinances, rules or regulations. 10. INSURANCE: PBS&J shall at all times tarty Workers' Compensation insurance as required by statute; commercial general liability insurance including bodily Injury and property damage; automobile liability coverage; and professional liability coverage. insurance certificates will be provided to the Client upon request. Client agrees to require that PBS&J be named as an additional insured on insurance coverages provided by contractors on the project. 11. ASSIGNMENT: Neither the Client nor PBS&J will assign or transfer its interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other. 12. SUSPENSION, TERMINATION, CANCELLATION OR ABANDONMENT: In the event the project described in Attachment A, or the services of PBS&J called for under this Agreement, islare suspended, cancelled, terminated or abandoned by the Client, PBS&J shall be given seven (7) days prior written notice of such action and shall be compensated for the professional services provided up to the date of suspension, termination, cancellation or abandonment in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement for all work performed up to the date of suspension, termination, cancellation or abandonment, including reimbursable expenses. 13. ENTIRETY OF AGREEMENT: This writing, including attachments and addenda, if any, embodies the entire agreement and understanding between the parties hereto, and there are no other agreements and understandings, oral or written, with reference to the subject matter hereof that are not merged herein and superseded hereby. No alteration, change or modification of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing signed by both parties hereto. 14. DOCUMENTS: Any reuse by the client or others of documents and plans that result from PBS&J's services under this agreement shall be at the Client's or others' sole risk without liability to PBS&J. 15. WAIVER: Any failure by PBS&J to require strict compliance with any provision of this contract shall not be construed as a waiver of such provision, and PBS&J may subsequently require strict compliance at any time, notwithstanding any prior failure to do so. 16. DISPUTE RESOLUTION: If a dispute arises out of or relates to this Agreement or the breach thereof, the parties will attempt to settle the matter between themselves. If no agreement can be reached the parties agree to use mediation with a mutually agreed upon mediator before resorting to a judicial forum. The cost of a third party mediator will be shared equally by the parties. In the event of litigation, the prevailing party will be entitled to reimbursement of all reasonable costs and attorneys' fees. The parties mutually agree that a similar dispute resolution clause will be contained in all other contracts executed by Client concerning or related to this contract and all subcontracts executed by PBS&J. 17. HAZARDOUS WASTE, MATERIALS OR SUBSTANCES: Unless otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement, PBS&J shall not be responsible for or have control over the discovery, presence, handling, removal, transport or disposal of hazardous waste, materials or substances in any form on the project site. 18. GOVERNING LAW: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed according to the laws of the State where the situs of the work is located. 19. LIMITED COPYRIGHT LICENSE: PBS&J grants Client a paid -up, non -transferable, non-exclusive license to make or have made copies of any copyrightable materials delivered under this Agreement and specifically marked by PBS&J as "Reproduction Authorized". 20. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: With the sole exception of specifically marked reproducible materials subject to the Limited Copyright License herein, all worldwide right, title and interest in and to any and all Intellectual Property conceived, invented, authored or otherwise made by or on this Agreement shall remain the sole and exclusive property of PBS&J, its successors and assigns unless licensed or assigned by PBS&J pursuant to a separate written instrument. The term "Intellectual Property shall be construed broadly to include all forms of intellectual property including without limitation all inventions, discoveries, designs, plans, improvements, trademarks, service marks and copyrights in drawings, Computer programs, architectural works and in all other original works of authorship. ATTACHMENT- Scope of Services ATTACHMENT B-Compensation ADDENDA A (If required) PJE:441 An employee -owned company ATTACHMENT A September 29, 2006 Mr. Steve Gillett, Director of Public Works City of La Porte 604 West Fairmont Parkway La Porte, Texas 77572 RE: City of La Porte Proposal for Little Cedar Bayou Wastewater Treatment Plant 1.0 MGD Phase 1 Expansion Dear Mr. Gillett: PBSU is pleased to submit this proposal to the City of La Porte (City) for providing professional engineering services in regard to the above -referenced project. In general, the project scope consists of preparing plans, specifications and contract documents, permitting, and providing construction related services for the expansion of the City of La Porte's Little Cedar Bayou Wastewater Treatment Plant, 1.0 MGD Phase 1 Expansion, based on the recommendations and provisions provided in the Preliminary Engineering Report prepared for the City of La Porte by PBSU and dated July, 2005. The expansion shall include the following items: A. Influent Lift Station Expansion B. Headwork No. 1 Decommissioning C. Headwork No. 2 Expansion D. Proposed Activated Sludge Aeration Basin E. Proposed Final Clarifier F. Proposed Chlorine Contact Basin G. Proposed RAS Pump Station H.' Proposed Sputter Box I. Proposed Electrical Service and SCADA J. Proposed Eastern Property Drainage Pipeline K. Proposed Interconnecting Piping This proposal will also include design surveying services, geotechnical services, and limited construction inspection services. The PBSU project team is prepared to provide engineering services immediately upon your formal request. Mr. Robert McCarty, P.E., DEE, will be the project manager. He will ensure all aspects from design through permitting and construction will be given the highest attention. Mr. McCarty will also be responsible for management of the schedules and budget, making sure that PBSU 6504 Bridge Point Parkway - Suite 200 - Austin, Texas 78730 - Telephone 512.327.6840 - Fax 512.327.2453 - www.pbsi.com Mr. Steve Gillett, City of La Porte Proposal for Little Cedar Bayou WWTP - 1.0 MGD Phase 1 Expansion September 29, 2006 Page 2 progress tracks time restrictions and budget requirements. He will also be responsible for subcontractor management. SCOPE OF SERVICES A. DESIGN PHASE SERVICES 1. Data Collection PBSU will review all available information and documents on the City's wastewater treatment plant, including plans, specifications, maps, reports, existing utility maps, and other records. PBSU will also inspect the facilities with the City's operator and engineer to evaluate the general condition and operation of the facilities, and the City's preferred design parameters. 2. Design Engineering and Surveying The design phase shall include preparation of detailed plans, specifications and construction documents, initial application of local and state permits, and bid phase services. The scope of design phase services will also include design surveying services consisting of identifying existing easements and rights -of -way (ROWs), providing ground elevations, locating planimetric features and limits of roadways, and an investigation of existing utility information necessary for design. Temporary construction easements may be necessary. PBSU will identify and provide easement acquisition surveying which includes sketches and instruments for all those temporary construction easements necessary to complete the construction. Design phase services shall include geotechnical engineering to assist with design recommendations for structures, pavement, foundation, and dewatering. Design phase services shall include assisting the Owner with advertisement for bids (the City will actually advertise the project), attending the pre -bid meeting, preparing a pre -qualification document for bidders and evaluating pre - qualifications for bidders, prepare and distribute to bidders any addenda, bid opening meeting, distribute plans, specifications and contract documents to bidders, and provide a recommendation of contract award. PBSU will be assisted by the following subcontractors: • Structural Engineering — Stiver Engineering, Inc. • Electrical Engineering — To Be Determined • Geotechnical Engineering — Terracon Consultants, Inc. The scope will establish any scope of any additional geotechnical investigation, if necessary, or any special surveying not included in this proposal. PBSU will provide 5 (five) sets of plans, contract documents and specifications. PBSU will provide to the City upon request computer CAD files of the design plans. Mr. Steve Gillett, City of La Porte Proposal for Little Cedar Bayou WWTP - 1.0 MGD Phase 1 Expansion September 29, 2006 Page 3 B C. PERMITTING PBS&J will provide necessary information and plan revisions to assist the City in obtaining regulatory permits necessary to construct this project. Approvals anticipated include the City of La Porte and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICE Construction is anticipated to last 12 months. The following is a description of the construction administration phase services which PBS&J shall provide. Shop Drawing Review • Review and process submittals for structural, mechanical, electrical, instrumentation and civil shop drawings. • Review and process all test procedures, test reports. • Review factory and on -site test reports. • Review Operation and Maintenance Manuals. 2. Construction Administration Services • Manage the Pre -construction Meeting. • Manage monthly construction meetings with Contractor, Owner and Engineer • Evaluate and process monthly pay estimates. • Evaluate and assist with construction scheduling. • Review for completeness with respect to the requirements of the Contract Documents. • Review and respond to all Requests for Information (RFIs). • Review and prepare any Change Orders. • Interpretation of contract intended scope. • Evaluate and approve any field changes. • Preparation of As -built Drawings. • Preparation of Contract Closeout Documents and Agency Closeout Documents. D. CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND CONSTRUCTION MEETINGS In -an effort to limit our inspection scope, PBS&J will provide only a limited inspection role, relying on the City forces for the day-to-day inspection. The following is a description of the construction administration phase services which PBS&J shall provide. ♦ PBS&J is planning to provide 12 hours a week for 52 weeks for inspection of structural, mechanical, and electrical and instrumentation. ♦ Testing and start-up will require 2 visits, 2 people. ♦ Final Punch List preparation — 2 visits, 2 people. ♦ Final Inspection — 1 visit, 1 person. Mr. Steve Gillett, City of La Porte Proposal for Little Cedar Bayou VWVTP - 1.0 MGD Phase 1 Expansion September 29, 2006 Page 4 E. PROJECT MANAGEMENT ♦ Coordination and management of PBS&J project personnel, budget and schedule. ♦ Coordination with City staff; preparation of correspondence, meeting notes, progress reports, etc. ♦ Quality assurance review by Technical Advisory Committee. F. MEETINGS PBS&J will meet with the City Council for approval of this proposal outside the scope of chargeable meetings. PBS&J anticipates four (4) meetings with the Client or field site visits. Meetings are anticipated to take eight (8) hours, including travel time. The meetings projected are as follows: ♦ Kick-off meeting/data acquisition/site visit with engineer and City staff. ♦ Staff review meeting. ♦ Pre -bid meeting with Bidders. ♦ Bid opening. G. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Additional services not included in the scope of services described above, but available upon request, are as follows: 1. Full-time Residential Project Representative (RPR) services at the request of the City. 2. The project will be designed such that the Contractor will be responsible for construction staking. If the Contractor or City would like PBS&J to provide this service, it can be provided under a separate proposal. H. SCHEDULE Upon acceptance of this proposal, PBS&J is prepared to begin this Scope of Services immediately. The proposed schedule for this project will take approximately five (5) months to prepare the draft plans and specifications for City review and, depending upon the City's comments, should take approximately three additional weeks to provide the final plans and specifications. Construction is anticipated to take twelve (12) months. Mr. Steve Gillett, City of La Porte Proposal for Little Cedar Bayou WWTP - 1.0 MGD Phase 1 Expansion September 29, 2006 Page 5 1. COMPENSATION Compensation will be on a fixed fee basis. Attachment A provides a table of compensation. Thank you for your consideration of this proposal and for this opportunity to work with the City of La Porte. Should you have any questions or desire additional information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Robert T. McCarty, P.E. Assoc. Vice President JST/lah K:1ProjectsWiI\LaPorte - LCB WWTP Expansion\Proposal-LaPorte Little Cedar Bayou WWTP Expansion, Ph 1,City of LaPorte-Trainer-092806.doc L REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested;October 23 2006 Requested By: S. Gillett Department: Public Works Report: Resolution: Ordinance: XX Exhibits: Ordinance Exhibits: Agreement for Professional Services Exhibits: Appropriation Source of Funds: Fund 003 Account Number: 003-9890-934-1100 Amount Budgeted: $350,000 Amount Requested: $50,850 Budgeted Item: YES SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The City of La Porte has selected the firm of LJA Engineering & Surveying, Inc. to design the installation of various waterlines in the Spenwick area. Phase I of the Project will complete the installation of new waterlines for the area, including lines along Bayer, Hillsdale, Montgomery, Catlett, Belfast and Creel Court. Phase II (scheduled for FY 2007-08) will reroute water services from the rear to the front of each residence. The Engineer (formerly Wayne Smith Engineering) recently designed the Bay Area Blvd. Trunk Sewer Project. Additionally, the firm has municipal experience with rerouting private service lines for public agencies. The Agreement with the Engineer is as follows: Preliminary/Design Phase $31,120 Bidding Phase 2,460 Construction Phase 2,770 Total Basic Services $36,350 Additional Services (Survey) $14,500 TOTAL ENGINEERING $50,850 Action Required by Council: Approve Ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with LJA Engineering & Surveying, Inc. to provide professional engineering services for waterline installation in the amount of $50,850. Approved for City Council Agenda ('.�47 - " O l? p Jo Joern , rim ity Manager Da e ORDINANCE NO. 2 0 0 6- Aq 5 l AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA PORTE AND LJA ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, INC., TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE INSTALLATION OF WATERLINES IN THE SPENWICK AREA1 APPROPRIATING THE SUM NOT TO EXCEED $50,850.00, TO FUND SAID CONTRACTI MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECTI FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAWy AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: Section 1. The City Council hereby approves and authorizes the contract, agreement, or other undertaking described in the title of this ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Secretary. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute such document and all related documents on behalf of the City of La Porte. The City Secretary is hereby authorized to attest to all such signatures and to affix the seal of the City to all such documents. City Council appropriates the sum not to exceed $50,850.00 from City of La Porte Utility Capital Improvement Fund (Fund 003), to fund said contract. Section 2. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites, and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. Section 3. This Ordinance shall be effective from and after its passage and approval, and it is so ordered. PASSED AND APPROVED, this 23rd day of October, 2006. ATTEST: Ma t a A. Gillett City Secretary APPROVED: r c Z4�) Knox W. Askins City Attorney CITY OF LA PORTE l Alton E. Porter Mayor 2 WA Engineering & Surveying, Inc. `LA 11821 East Freeway Phone 713.450.1300 Suite 400 Fax 713.450.1385 Houston, Texas 77029 www.ijaengineering.com October 4, 2006 Mr. Stephen L. Gillette Director of Public Works City of La Porte P.O. Box 1115 La Porte, Texas 77572-1115 Re: Assignment for Engineering Services City of La Porte Waterline Replacement Spenwick Subdivision LJA Project E170-003 Dear Mr. Gillette: LJA Engineering & Surveying Inc. is pleased to submitthis assignment letterto provide engineering services to the City of La Porte. The City desires to install new waterlines within the City's street right-of-ways of the following streets within the Spenwick Subdivision: • Bayer Street between Carlon Lane and Montgomery Lane (6" along the west side of road right-of-way) • Creel Court between Carlon Lane and End (4" along the east side of the road right-of-way) • Hillsdale Road between Ridgefield and Spencer Highway (6" along the east side of road right-of-way) • Belfast Lane between Andricks Road and Underwood Road (6" along the south side of road right-of-way) • Catlett Lane between Andricks Road and Crandall (6" along the north side of road right-of-way) • Montgomery Lane between Andricks Road and Underwood Road (6" along the south side of road right-of-way) Except for the Scope of Services, Basis of Compensation, and Schedule of Work set forth below, the rights, duties, and obligations of LJA Engineering & Surveying and the City of La Porte shall be as provided in the attached general services agreement which agreement is otherwise incorporated herein and made a part of this assignment letter. Acceptance by the City of this assignment letter shall constitute an amendment to said general services agreement. The Scope of Services, Basis of Compensation, and Schedule of Work are outlined in the following paragraphs: SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services can be divided into Preliminary and Design Phase, Bidding Phase, and Construction Phases. The scope of each phase and/or services is defined as follows: ao Mr. Stephen L. Gillette City of La Porte October 4, 2006 Page 2 BASIC SERVICES Preliminary/Design Phase a. Prepare detailed drawings and specifications and provide two complete sets to the city for review and comment. b. Furnish copies of the construction drawings, where applicable, to federal, state, county, and municipal agencies, pipeline companies, and utility companies, and obtain all necessary approvals. C. Prepare and deliver to the city detailed final estimate of probable construction cost, construction drawings and project specifications for final approval. Bidding Phase a. Assist the City in the pre -qualification of contractors. The pre -qualification investigation is limited to the investigation of the Contractor's statement of equipment and experience. b. Assist the City in obtaining bids. Supply ten sets of Plans and Specifications for the Contract and Construction sets. C. Assist in the tabulation and analysis of bids, and furnish recommendations on the award of the construction contract. Construction Phase a. Attend and assist the City in the preconstruction conference. b. Make periodic visits (only upon request by City), as distinguished from the continuous services of a resident project representative, to the construction site. The purpose of the visits is to familiarize generally with the progress of the work, to determine in general the progress and quality of the work, and to determine if the work is proceeding in accordance with the contact documents. C. Consult with and advise the City during construction. Engineer will issue all instructions to the contractor requested by the City and prepare, sign and issue routine change orders for City approval. Mr. Stephen L. Gillette City of La Porte October 4, 2006 Page 3 d. Review shop, laboratory and mill test of material and equipment and promptly report to City any deficiencies noted. e. Review shop and working drawings, furnished by contractors, for compliance with design concepts and specifications and with the information given by the contract documents. f. Generate monthly and final estimates for payments to the contractor based upon information supplied by the City. g. Participate in company with the City's representative in a final inspection of the project. EXTRA SERVICES a. Field surveying COMPENSATION LJA Engineering and Surveying Inc. proposes the compensation for the preliminary and design, bidding, and construction phases be based upon lump sum fee as follows: BASIC SERVICES Preliminary/Design Phase Bidding Phase Construction Phase Total Basic Services Cost EXTRA SERVICES Extra Service item compensation would be as follows: Service Basis of Compensation a. Surveying Invoice plus ten percent service charge $ 31,120.00 2,460.00 2,770.00 $ 36,350.00 Estimated Cost $ 14,500.00 Total Extra Services Estimated Cost $ 14,500.00 Mr. Stephen L. Gillette City of La Porte October 4, 2006 Page 4 SCHEDULE LJA Engineering and Surveying Inc. is prepared to begin work as soon as authorized and proceed with the work in conjunction with the City's schedule. The preliminary and design phases can be undertaken concurrently. A draft of the proposed plans and specifications will be provided to City staff for review comment within 120 calendar days of the authorization to proceed and final plans can be provided within 30 days of receipt of review comments. LJA Engineering and Surveying Inc. appreciates the opportunity to prepare this proposal for the City. Should you have any questions, please advise. Very truly ours, Char es W. Beere , P. . Senior Project Manager Attachment: General Services Contract ACCEPTE By: TITLE: DATE: L AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES The State of Texas < Know All Men by These Presents: County of Harris < THIS IS AN AGREEMENT MADE AS OF thez< of0* in the year of Two Thousand and Six by and between the City of La Porte (hereinafter called OWNER) and LJA Engineering & Surveying, Inc. (hereinafter called Consulting ENGINEER). OWNER intends to retain the services of an ENGINEER for services that may be required by the OWNER within the jurisdiction of the City, including, but not limited to, public works as found necessary (hereinafter called the Project). OWNER AND ENGINEER in consideration of their mutual covenants herein agree in respect of the performance of professional engineering services by ENGINEER and the payment for those services by OWNER, as set forth below. ENGINEER shall serve as OWNER's professional engineering representative in those phases of the Project as assigned by OWNER and accepted by ENGINEER, and will give consultation and advice to owner during the performance of his services. The OWNER, jointly and severally, and the ENGINEER, jointly and severally, bind themselves to faithfully and fully execute and perform all of the duties and obligations hereof respectively as OWNER and ENGINEER. The authorized representative of the ENGINEER in all matters pertaining to this Contract Document shall be as designated by an Officer of LJA Engineering & Surveying, Inc. The authorized representative for the OWNER shall be as designated by the City Council. -1- SECTION 1 - BASIC SERVICES OF ENGINEER 1.1 General 1.1.1 ENGINEER shall perform professional services as hereinafter stated which include normal civil, structural, mechanical, electrical engineering services and other Engineering disciplines as appropriate and normal architectural services incidental thereto. 1.1.2 Advise OWNER of need for services of subcontractors for performance of special services, as required from time to time during the Project; he shall detail these needs and present proposals thereon to the OWNER for approval. 1.2 Preliminary Phase- after written authorization to proceed, ENGINEER shall: 1.2.1 Consult with OWNER to determine his requirements for the Project and review available data. 1.2.2 Attend preliminary conference with the OWNER and other interested parties regarding the Project. 1.2.3 Prepare a preliminary engineering study and report on the Project in sufficient detail to indicate generally the problems involved and the alternate solutions available to the OWNER, to include preliminary layouts, and engineer's estimate of probable construction cost for the Project, and to set forth clearly the ENGINEER's recommendations. 1.2.4 Review reports of previous engineering studies made for the OWNER pertaining to this Project, collect other relevant data including existing facilities. ENGINEER shall analyze such data and OWNER's needs and shall generate alternative plans to physically satisfy the OWNER's needs. Detailed cost analysis shall be made of each alternative and benefits analyzed and -2- quantified where practical. A report of these studies and the ENGINEER's recommendations thereon shall be prepared. The ENGINEER will furnish sufficient copies of the report, present, and review it in person with the OWNER. 1.3 Design Phase- after written authorization to proceed with the design phase, ENGINEER shall: 1.3.1 On the basis of the accepted preliminary documents prepare for incorporation in the contract documents, final drawings to show the character and scope of the work to be performed by contractors on the Project and specifications. 1.3.2 Establish the scope of any soil and foundation investigations or any special surveys and tests which, in the opinion of the ENGINEER, may be required for design; arrange for such work to be done for the OWNER'S account. 1.3.3 Furnish to the OWNER, where required by the circumstances of the assignment, the engineering data necessary for applications for routine permits by local, state, and federal authorities (as distinguished from detailed applications and supporting documents for government grants-in-aid, or for planning advances). 1.3.4 Prepare detailed specifications and contract drawings, in pencil or ink on paper or plastic film, for construction authorized by the OWNER. 1.3.5 Prepare detailed cost estimates of authorized construction. The ENGINEER shall not be required to guarantee the accuracy of these estimates. 1.3.6 Furnish to the OWNER all necessary copies of approved plans, specifications, notices to bidders, and proposal forms. All sets of plans in excess of agreed number are to be paid for separately. -3- 1.4 Bid and Negotiation Phase- after written authorization to proceed with the Bid and Negotiation Phase, ENGINEER shall: 1.4.1 Assist the OWNER in the advertisements of the project for bids. 1.4.2 Respond to questions regarding the project during the bidding process. If required, issue addendums to clarify any questions regarding the project. 1.4.3 Conduct a Pre -bid Conference between the ENGINEER, prospective bidders, suppliers, etc., to make certain that the scope of the work is fully understood. 1.4.4 Assist the OWNER in the opening of bids for construction of the project. Tabulate and evaluate bids, and prepare a recommendation letter for OWNER action. 1.4.5 Prepare final contract documents for execution by the Contractor and the OWNER. 1.5 Construction Phase- after written authorization to proceed with the Construction Phase, ENGINEER shall: 1.5.1 Consult with and advise OWNER as to the acceptability of subcontractors and other persons and organizations proposed by the prime Contractor(s) [hereinafter called "Contractor(s)] for those portions of the work as to which such acceptability is required by the contract documents. 1.5.2 Consult with and advise OWNER as to the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by Contractor(s) when substitution is permitted by the contract documents. 1.5.3 Consult with and advise OWNER and act as his representative as provided in the -4- Standard General Conditions of the Construction Contract, the extent and limitations of the duties, responsibilities and authority of ENGINEER as assigned in said Standard General Conditions shall not be modified without ENGINEER's written consent; all of OWNER's instructions to Contractor(s) will be issued through ENGINEER who will have authority to act on behalf of OWNER to the extent provided in said Standard General Conditions except as otherwise provided in writing. 1.5.4 Make periodic visits as required by the OWNER to the site to observe, as an experienced and qualified design professional, the progress and quality of the executed work and to determine in general if the work is proceeding in accordance with the contract documents; he shall not be required to make exhaustive or continuous onsite inspections to check the quality or quantity of work; periodic visits shall be a maximum of two (2) per month, additional site visits will be considered as Additional Services per Section 2; he shall not be responsible for the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction selected by Contractor(s) or the safety precautions and programs incidental to the work of Contractor(s). His efforts will be directed toward ascertaining and determining for OWNER that the completed Project will conform to the Contract Documents, but he shall not be responsible for the failure of Contractor(s) to perform the construction work in accordance with the contract documents. During such visits and on the basis of his onsite observations he shall keep OWNER informed of the progress of the work, shall endeavor to guard OWNER against defects and deficiencies in the work of Contractor(s) and may disapprove or reject work as failing to conform to the contract documents. ENGINEER shall attend all District meetings as required during the construction phase. 1.5.5 Review and approve shop drawings (as that term is defined in the Standard General Conditions) and samples, the results of tests and inspections and other data which any Contractor is required to submit, but only for conformance with the design concept of the Project and compliance with the information given in the contract documents; determine the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by Contractor(s); and receive and review (for -5- general content as required by the specifications) maintenance and operating instructions, schedules, guarantees, bonds, and certificates of inspection which are to be assembled by Contractor(s) in accordance with the contract documents. 1.5.6 Issue all instruction of OWNER to Contractor(s); prepare routine change orders as required; he may, as OWNER's representative, require special inspection or testing of the work; he shall act as interpreter of the requirements of the contract documents and judge of the performance thereunder by the parties thereto and shall make decisions on all claims of OWNER and Contractor(s) relating to the execution and progress of the work and all other matters and questions related thereto; but ENGINEER shall not be liable for the results of any such interpretations or decisions rendered by him in accordance with accepted engineering practices, procedures, and design criteria. 1.5.7 Based on his onsite observations as an experienced and qualified design professional and on his review of Contractor(s) applications for payment and the accompanying data and schedules, determine the amounts owing to Contractor(s) and approve in writing payments to Contractor(s) in such amounts; such approvals of payment will constitute a representation to OWNER, based on such observation and review, that the work has progressed to the point indicated and that, to the best of his knowledge, information and belief, the quality of the work is in accordance with the contract documents (subject to the evaluation of the work as a functioning Project upon substantial completion, to the results of any subsequent tests called for in the contract documents, and to any qualifications stated in his approval), but by approving an application for payment ENGINEER will not be deemed to have represented that he has made any examination to determine how or for what purposes any Contractor has used the moneys paid on account of the contract price, or that title to any of the Contractor(s) work, materials or equipment has passed to OWNER free and clear of any lien, claims, security interests or encumbrances. 1.5.8 Provide, from the field prints maintained by the ENGINEER's Resident Project Representative and information supplied to ENGINEER from Contractor, one set of record drawings. These shall be reproducibles and shall be delivered within three months of completion of last construction contract. 1.5.9 Conduct an inspection to determine if the Project is substantially complete and final inspection to determine if the Project has been completed in accordance with the contract documents and if each Contractor(s) has fulfilled all of his obligations thereunder so that ENGINEER may approve, in writing, final payment to each Contractor. 1.5.10 Services after completion of the construction phase, such as inspections during any guaranteed period and reporting observed discrepancies under guarantees called for in any contract for the Project. 1.5.11 ENGINEER shall act as the OWNER's agent in obtaining necessary routine approvals and routine permits from all governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project and such approvals and consents from others as may be necessary for completion of the Project. Routine permits include items such as highway or road crossings but do not include items requiring services in addition to design, such as Waste Discharge Permit, Corps of Engineers Permit, Environmental Impact Statements, etcetera. SECTION 2 - ADDITIONAL SERVICES OF ENGINEER 2.1 General. If authorized in writing in separate instrument, by OWNER, ENGINEER shall furnish or obtain from others, additional services of the following types which are not considered normal or customary basic services; these will be additionally paid for by OWNER as indicated in Section 5. 2.1.1 Services resulting from significant changes in general scope of the Projector its design -7- including, but not limited to, changes in size, complexity, OWNER's schedule, or character of construction; and revising previously accepted studies, reports, design documents or contract documents when such revisions are due to causes beyond ENGINEER's control. 2.1.2 Provide master plans, planning, studies, reports, as-built/record drawings, renderings or models and/or other services for OWNER's use. 2.1.3 Preparing documents for alternate bids requested by OWNER for work that is not executed or documents for out -of -sequence work. 2.1.4 Investigations involving detailed consideration of operations, maintenance, and overhead expenses; and the preparation of rate schedules, earnings and expense statements, feasibility studies, appraisals, and valuations; detailed quantity surveys of material, equipment and labor; and audits or inventories required in connection with construction performance by OWNER. 2.1.5 Furnishing the services of special consultants for other than the normal civil, structural, mechanical and electrical engineering and normal architectural design incidental thereto such as consultants for interior design, selection of furniture and furnishings, communications, (excluding instrumenting incidental to Project), acoustics, kitchens, and landscaping. 2.1.6 Services resulting from the involvement of more separate prime contract for construction or for equipment than are contemplated. 2.1.7 Services in connection with change orders to reflect changes in the work which increase the contract price if the resulting change in compensation for basic services is not commensurate with the additional services rendered, and services resulting from significant delays; changes or price increases occurring as a direct or indirect result of material, equipment or energy shortages. Deductive change orders shall not diminish the compensation. 2.1.8 Services during out-of-town travel required of ENGINEER other than visits to the Project site as required by Section 1 or the state agencies to solicit permits. 2.1.9 Additional or extended services during construction made necessary by (1) work damaged by fire or other cause during construction, (2) a significant amount of defective or neglected work of any Contractor, (3) prolongation of the contract time of any prime Contractor by more than sixty days, (4) acceleration of the work schedule involving services beyond normal working hours, and (5) default by any Contractor. The cost for these services will be negotiated should the need arise. 2.1.10 Preparing to serve or serving as a consultant or witness for OWNER in any litigation. 2.1.11 Additional services in connection with the Project, including services normally furnished by OWNER and services not otherwise provided for in this Agreement. 2.1.12 Services as right-of-way agent for the OWNER. 2.1.13 Services furnished by others on a subcontract basis to the ENGINEER; subject to prior approval of the OWNER. 2.1.13.1 The services of a Registered Public Surveyor for property, boundary, easement, right-of-way, topographic, control points, and utility surveys and property descriptions. 2.1.13.2 Materials testing services, in one or more subcontractors. 2.1.13.3 Professional interpretations of the material testing results. 2.1.14 Title search services. 2.2 Resident services during construction. 2.2.1 If requested by OWNER or recommended by ENGINEER and agreed to in writing by the OWNER, a Resident Project Representative and assistants will be furnished and will act as directed by ENGINEER in order to provide more extensive representation at the Project site during the construction phase. OWNER will pay for such services as indicated in paragraph 5.1.4.4. 2.2.2 Through more extensive onsite observations of the work in progress and field check of materials and equipment by the Resident Project Representative (if furnished) and assistants, ENGINEER shall endeavor to provide further protection for OWNER against defects and deficiencies in the work, but the furnishing of such Resident Project Representation will not make ENGINEER responsible for construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures or for safety precautions or programs, or for Contractor(s) failure to perform the construction work in accordance with the contract documents. 2.2.3 The Resident ENGINEER and any assistants shall be subject to approval by the OWNER and subject to an interview with OWNER's representative for determination of qualifications. The OWNER shall have the right to order removal of an ENGINEER representative from the work for stated cause provided one week's notice is given. SECTION 3 - OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES 3.1 Provide full information as to his requirements for the Project. 3.2 Assist ENGINEER by placing at his disposal all available information pertinent to the Project including previous reports and any other data relative to design and construction of the -10- Project. ENGINEER may rely on the accuracy and veracity of said information reports and data supplied by OWNER without independently verifying same. 3.3 Guarantee access to and make all provisions for ENGINEER to enter upon public and private property as required for ENGINEER to perform his services. 3.4 Examine all studies, reports, sketches, drawings, specifications, proposals and other documents presented by ENGINEER, obtain advice of an attorney, insurance counselor and other consultants as he deems appropriate for such examination and render in writing decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time so as not to delay the services of ENGINEER. 3.5 Provide such legal, accounting, independent cost estimating and insurance counseling services as may be required for the Project, and such auditing service as OWNER may require to ascertain how or for what purpose any Contractor has used the moneys paid to him under the construction contract and render in writing decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time so as not to delay the services of ENGINEER. 3.6 Designate in writing a person to act as OWNER's representative with respect to the work to be performed under this Agreement. Such person shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define OWNER's policies and decisions with respect to materials, equipment, elements and systems pertinent to ENGINEER's services. 3.7 Furnish, or direct ENGINEER to provide, necessary additional services as stipulated in Section 2 of this Agreement or other services as required. 3.8 Bear all costs incident to compliance with the requirements of this Section. -11- SECTION 4 - PERIOD OF SERVICE 4.1 The provisions of 4.2 through 4.8, inclusive, and the various rates of compensation for ENGINEER's services provided for elsewhere in this Agreement have been agreed to in anticipation of the orderly and continuous progress of the Project through completion of the construction phase. ENGINEER's obligation to render services hereunder will extend for a period that may reasonably be required for the design, award of contracts and construction of the Project including extra work and required extensions thereto. 4.2 The services called for in the preliminary phase will be completed and the report submitted within a reasonable time following the authorization to proceed with that phase of services. 4.3 After acceptance by OWNER of the preliminary documents and revised opinion of probable Project cost, indicating any specific modifications of changes in scope desired by OWNER, and upon written authorization from OWNER, ENGINEER shall proceed with the performance of the service called for in the design phase, so as to deliver contract documents and a revised opinion of probable Project cost for all authorized work on the Project within a reasonable time after the authorization to proceed with that phase of services. 4.4 ENGINEER's services under the preliminary phase and design phase shall each be considered complete when OWNER has accepted the submissions for the phases. 4.5 After acceptance by OWNER of the contract documents and ENGINEER's most recent opinion of probable Project cost and upon written authorization to proceed, ENGINEER shall proceed with performance of the services called for in the construction phase. The design phase shall terminate and the services to be rendered thereunder shall be considered complete upon commencement of the construction phase or upon cessation of negotiations with Contractor(s). -12- 4.6 The construction phase will commence with the advertisement of the Project or any part thereof, and will terminate upon written approval by ENGINEER of final payment on the last prime contract to be completed. Construction phase services may be rendered at different times in respect of separate prime contracts if the Project involves more than one prime contract. 4.7 In the event that the work of the Project is to be performed under more than one prime contract, OWNER and ENGINEER shall, prior to commencement of the design phase, develop a schedule for performance of ENGINEER's services during the design and construction phases in order to sequence and coordinate properly such services as applicable to the work under such separate contracts. This schedule is to be prepared whether or not the work under such contracts is to proceed concurrently. 4.8 If OWNER has requested significant modifications or changes in the scope of the Project, the time of performance of ENGINEER's services shall be adjusted appropriately. 4.9 If OWNER fails to give prompt written authorization to proceed with any phase of services after completion of the immediately preceding phase, or if the construction phase has not commenced within sixty calendar days after completion of the design phase, ENGINEER may, after giving seven days notice to OWNER, suspend services under this Agreement. 4.10 If ENGINEER's services for design or during construction of the Project are delayed or suspended in whole or in part by OWNER for more than three months for reasons beyond ENGINEER's control, ENGINEER shall on written demand to OWNER (but without termination of this Agreement) be paid as provided in Section 5 for services delayed or suspended. If such delay or suspension extends for more than one year for reasons beyond ENGINEER's control, or if ENGINEER for any reason is required to render services more than one year after substantial completion, the various rates of compensation provided for elsewhere in this Agreement shall be subject to renegotiation. -13- 4.11 TERMINATION/SUSPENSION: Either party may terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. The OWNER shall pay ENGINEER for all Services actually rendered prior to termination. Copies of all completed or partially completed designs, drawings, specifications, reports or any other document prepared by ENGINEER pursuant to this Agreement shall be delivered to the OWNER within fourteen (14) days of the effective date of termination, at no additional cost to the OWNER. In the event either parry defaults in its obligations under this Agreement (including the OWNER's obligation to make the payments required hereunder), the non -defaulting party may suspend performance under this Agreement after seven (7) days written notice stating its intention to suspend performance under this Agreement if sure of such default is not commenced and diligently continued. SECTION 5 - PAYMENTS TO ENGINEER 5.1 Compensation for all services by the ENGINEER shall be in accordance with one of the methods outlined below and specifically noted in each written assignment detailed in accordance with this agreement. 5.1.1 Percentage of Construction 5.1.1.1 In this method of arriving at the ENGINEER's compensation, the fee shall be based on a mutually agreed fee percentage of the construction cost or ENGINEER's estimate of probable construction cost. The fee is obtained by multiplying the fee percentage by the construction cost. 5.1.1.2 For project(s) that involve a greater degree of complexity, utilities coordination and design consideration, such as work within existing treatment facilities, the percentage shall also be multiplied by an adjustment factor as mutually agreed by the OWNER and ENGINEER. -14- 5.1.1.3 When the entire Project is awarded on the basis of multiple contracts, fee percentage for the additional effort for entire Project may be adjusted. Both parties recognize that it may be advantageous to divide the Project into two or more parts for bidding construction. 5.1.2 Salary cost times a multiplier plus direct non -salary expenses. 5.1.2.1 In this method of arriving at the ENGINEER's compensation, the salaries to be used shall be the current hourly salary of the individual(s) engaged in performing the service for the OWNER. 5.1.2.2 The total compensation under this method shall be the product of the salary cost in performing the service for the OWNER times 2.50 multiplier. 5.1.2.3 Direct non -salary expenses such as travel, subsistence, materials purchased, tests required, and special miscellaneous needs shall be invoiced at cost times a multiplier of 1.10. 5.1.2.4 ENGINEER's direct labor costs and the factor applied in determining compensation payable to ENGINEER will be reviewed by OWNER and ENGINEER annually. If approved by OWNER the labor costs and/or factor shall be adjusted. 5.1.3 Lump Sum Charge 5.1.3.1 This method of arriving at the ENGINEER's compensation may be used where it is possible to define with reasonable accuracy the scope of the work to be performed. 5.1.3.2 The lump sum is determined by applying an appropriate percentage of the estimated construction cost of the Project; this approach is justified only on design type Project of conventional characteristics. -15- 5.1.4 Additional Services. OWNER shall pay ENGINEER for additional services rendered under Section 2 as follows: 5.1.4.1 General. For additional services rendered under paragraphs 2.1.1 through 2.1.14, inclusive (except services covered by paragraph 2.1.5 and services as a consultant of witness under paragraph 2.1.10, on the basis of salary) cost times a factor of 2.5 for services rendered by principal and employees assigned to the Project. 5.1.4.2 Special Consultants. For services and reimbursable expenses of special consultants and subcontractors (surveyors, testing labs) employed by ENGINEER pursuant to paragraph 2.1.5 or 2.1.14, the amount billed to ENGINEER therefore times a factor of 1.10. 5.1.4.3 Serving as a witness. For the services of the principal and employees as consultants or witnesses in any litigation, hearing or proceeding in accordance with paragraph 2.1.10, at the rate of $750 per day or any portion thereof (but compensation for time spent in preparing to appear in any such litigation, hearing or proceeding will be on the basis provided in paragraph 5.1.4.1). 5.1.4.4 Resident project services. For resident services during construction furnished under paragraph 2.2.1, on the basis of salary costs times a factor of 2.5 for services rendered by principals and employees assigned to field offices in connection with Resident Project Representation. 5.1.5 Reimbursable Expenses. In addition to payments provided for in paragraph 5.1.4, OWNER shall pay ENGINEER the actual costs of all reimbursable expenses incurred in connection with all additional services except those services provided in 5.1.4.4. 5.1.6 As used in this paragraph 5.1, the terms "construction cost", "salary costs" and "reimbursable expenses" will have the meanings assigned to them in paragraphs 5.3.1, 5.3.2, and 5.3.3. -16- 5.2 Times of Payment. 5.2.1 ENGINEER shall submit monthly statements for basic and additional services rendered and for reimbursable expenses incurred. When compensation is on the basis of a lump sum or percentage of construction cost, the statements will be based upon ENGINEER's estimate of the proportion of the total services actually completed at the time of billing. Otherwise, these monthly statements will be based upon ENGINEER's salary cost times a factor. OWNER shall make prompt monthly payments in response to ENGINEER's monthly statements. 5.2.2 Where compensation for basic services is on the basis of a lump sum or percentage of construction cost, OWNER shall, upon conclusion of each phase of basic services, pay such additional amount, if any, as may be necessary to bring total compensation paid on account of such phase to the following percentages of total compensation for all phases of basic services. Of the total fees due, the percentages to be paid under the various phases of work are as follows: preliminary phase 30%, design phase 53%, bid and negotiation phase 2% and construction phase 15%. The OWNER shall approve invoices on a monthly basis for work performed under the basic service fee and also for special services rendered. The OWNER will promptly pay monthly invoices as submitted by the ENGINEER in accordance with this Agreement. 5.3 General 5.3.1 The construction cost of the entire Project (herein referred to as "construction cost") means the total cost of the entire Project to OWNER, but it will not include ENGINEER's compensation and expenses, the cost of land, rights -of -way, or compensation for or damages to properties unless this Agreement so specifies, nor will it include OWNER's legal, accounting, insurance counseling or auditing services, or interest and financing charges incurred in connection with the Project. When construction cost is used as a basis for payment, it will be based on one of the following sources with precedence in the order listed: -17- 5.3.1.1 For completed construction, the total cost of all work performed (excluding work by OWNER) as designed or specified by ENGINEER; the total cost shall include all added change order costs. No deduction from ENGINEER's fee shall be made for deductive change orders. 5.3.1.2 For work not constructed, the lowest bona fide bid received from a qualified bidder for such work; or if the work is not bid, the ENGINEER's final estimate of probable cost shall be used as basis for payment. 5.3.1.3 For work for which no such bid or proposal is received, ENGINEER's most recent opinion of probable project cost. Labor furnished by OWNER for the Project will be included in the construction cost at current market rates including a reasonable allowance for overhead and profit. Materials and equipment furnished by OWNER will be included at current market prices except used materials and equipment will be included as if purchased new for the Project. No deduction is to be made from ENGINEER's compensation on account of any penalty, liquidated damages, or other amounts withheld from payments to Contractor(s). 5.3.2 The "salary costs" used as a basis for payment mean the salaries and wages paid to all personnel engaged directly on the Project, including, but not limited to, engineers, architects, survey men, designers, draftsmen, specification writers, estimators, other technical personnel, stenographers, typists and clerks; plus the cost of customary and statutory benefits including, but not limited to, social security contributions, unemployment, excise and payroll taxes, workmen's compensation, health and retirement benefits, sick leave, vacation and holiday pay applicable thereto. For the purposes of this agreement the amount of customary and statutory benefits of all other personnel will be considered equal to 40% of salaries and wages. 5.3.3 Reimbursable expenses mean the actual expenses incurred directly or indirectly in connection with services provided under 5.1.4 (excluding 5.1.4.4) of the Project for: transportation and subsistence incidental thereto; obtaining bids or proposals from Contractor(s); 130C toll telephone and similar related items in addition to those required under Section 1; computer time including an appropriate charge for previously established programs; and, if authorized in advance by OWNER, overtime work requiring higher than regular rates. 5.3.4 If OWNER fails to make payment for monthly invoices due ENGINEER for services and expenses within 30 days after receipt of ENGINEER's bill; therefore, the amounts due ENGINEER shall include a charge at the rate of 1.5 percent per month from said 30th day, and in addition ENGINEER may, after giving 7 days' written notice to OWNER, suspend services under this Agreement until he has been paid in full all amounts due him for services and expenses, except where detailed in paragraph 5.2.1. If contract is terminated by reason of nonpayment of fees as set out in this paragraph, a lump sum payment will be made for all salary costs times a factor of 2.5 and all direct expenses times a factor of 1.10. This stipulation is applicable to payments due ENGINEER during the Project period. 5.3.5 Included in the basic fee are the following miscellaneous expenses such as but not limited to telephone, reproduction, printing, et cetera, that are related to performance of basic services. SECTION 6 - GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 6.1 Re -use of documents. All documents including drawings and specifications furnished by ENGINEER pursuant to this Agreement are instruments of his services in respect of the Project. They are not intended or represented to be suitable for re -use by OWNER or others on extensions of the Project or on any other Project. Any re -use without specific written verification or adaptation by ENGINEER will be at OWNER's sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to ENGINEER, and OWNER shall indemnify and hold harmless ENGINEER for all claims, damages, losses and expenses including attorney's fee arising out of or resulting there from. Any such verification or adaptation will entitle ENGINEER to further compensation at rates to be agreed upon by OWNER and ENGINEER. -19- 6.2 Estimate of Cost. 6.2.1 Since ENGINEER has no control over the cost of labor, materials or equipment, or over the Contractor(s) methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, his opinions of probable Project cost or construction cost provided for herein are to be made on the basis of his experience and qualifications and represent his best judgment as a design professional familiar with the construction industry, but ENGINEER cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or the construction cost will not vary from opinions of probable cost prepared by him. If prior to the bidding or negotiating phase, OWNER wishes greater assurance as to the construction cost, he shall employ an independent cost estimator as provided in paragraph 3.6. 6.3 Arbitration. 6.3.1 All claims, counter claims, disputes and other matters in question between the parties hereto arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof will be decided by arbitration in accordance with the construction industry arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association then obtaining, subject to the limitations stated in paragraphs 6.3.3 and 6.3.4 below. This Agreement so to arbitrate and any other Agreement or consent to arbitrate entered into in accordance therewith as provided below, will be specifically enforceable under the prevailing law of any court having jurisdiction. 6.3.2 Notice of demand for arbitration must be filed in writing with the other parties to this Agreement and with the American Arbitration Association. The demand must be made within a reasonable time after the claim, dispute or other matter in question has arisen. In no event may the demand for the arbitration be made after the time when institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on such claim, dispute, or other matter in question would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. -20- 6.3.3 All demands for arbitration and all answering statements thereto which include any monetary claim must contain a statement that the total sum or value in controversy as alleged by the parry making such demand or answering statement is not more than $200,000 (exclusive of interest and costs). The arbitrators will not have jurisdiction, power, or authority to consider, or make findings (except in denial of their own jurisdiction) concerning any claim, counter claim dispute, or other matter in question where the amount in controversy thereof is more than $200,000 (exclusive of interest and costs) or to render a monetary award in response thereto against any party which totals more than $200,000 (exclusive of interest and costs). 6.3.4 No arbitration arising out of, or relating to, this Agreement may include by consolidation, jointer, or in any other manner, any additional party not a party to this Agreement. 6.3.5 By written consent signed by all the parties to this Agreement and containing a specific reference hereto, the limitations and restrictions contained in paragraphs 6.3.3 and 6.3.4 may be waived in whole or in part as to any claim, counter claim, dispute, or other matter specifically described in such consent. No consent to arbitration in respect of a specifically described claim, counter claim, dispute, or other matter in question will constitute consent to arbitrate any other claim, counter claim, dispute or other matter in question which is not specifically described in such consent or in which the sum or value in controversy exceeds $200,000 (exclusive of interest and costs) or which is with any party not specifically described therein. 6.3.6 The award rendered by the arbitration will be final, no subject to appeal and judgment may be entered upon it in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 6.4 Successors and assigns. OWNER and ENGINEER each binds himself and his partners, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns to the other party of the Agreement and to the partners, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns of such other party in respect to all covenants of this Agreement; except as above, neither OWNER nor ENGINEER shall assign, -21- sublet, or transfer his interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other. Nothing herein shall be construed as creating any personal liability on the part of any officer or agent of any public body that may be a party hereto, nor shall it be construed as giving any rights or benefits hereunder to anyone other than OWNER or ENGINEER. SECTION 7 - SPECIAL PROVISIONS 7.1 OWNER and ENGINEER agree that this Agreement is subject to the following special provisions which together with the provisions hereof and the exhibits and schedules hereto represent the entire Agreement between OWNER and ENGINEER: they may only be altered, amended or repealed by a duly executed written instrument. 7.1.1 The OWNER shall have right of approval and removal of Resident Project Representative. 7.1.2 The OWNER shall receive written copies of all correspondence from the ENGINEER related to the Project including daily construction progress reports. 7.1.3 ENGINEER shall have final responsibility for maintaining and preparing accurate record drawings of all construction; said record drawings will be based on information supplied by Contractor. Record drawings will be submitted to the OWNER (originals or sepias) within three months after completion of construction contracts. 7.1.4 Both parties recognize that it may be advantageous to divide the Project into two or more parts for bidding and construction. 7.1.5 The Engineer agrees to carry out and perform the services herein agreed to in a professional and competent manner exercising usual degree of care and judgment of an ordinarily -22- prudent Engineer in the same or similar circumstances and conditions. 7.1.6 Insurance: ENGINEER shall procure and maintain throughout the term of this Agreement standard insurance policies with their respective minimum coverage amounts as follows: 7.1.6.1 Commercial General Liability (CGL) General Aggregate: $1,000,000.00 Products & Completed Operations: $1,000,000.00 Personal & Advertising Injury: $1,000,000.00 Per Occurrence: $500,000.00 7.1.6.2 Automobile Liability Combined Single Limits: $1,000,000.00 a. Coverage for "Any Auto." 7.1.6.3 Workers' Compensation Insurance Statutory Limits Employer's Liability $500,000.00 7.1.6.4 Errors & Omissions (E & O) Limit: $500,000.00 7.1.7 ENGINEER shall indemnify and hold harmless OWNER from loss, cost, expense, or liability that the OWNER may incur or suffer as a result of any infringement incurred by a decision made by the ENGINEER of the patent or copyright laws of the United States or other country for which the OWNER is held liable. ENGINEER shall protect, indemnify and save the OWNER harmless from and against all claims, -23- losses, damages, and causes of action, suits and liability of any kind and character including all expenses of litigation, court costs and reasonable attorney's fees on account of injuries or damages to any person or property in any way arising out or relating to the work under this agreement caused by or resulting from the intentional, willful, or negligent acts or omissions by ENGINEER, anyone directly or indirectly employed by ENGINEER or anyone for whose acts ENGINEER may be liable. -24- 7.1.8 It is hereby declared to be the intent of the maker hereof to create and covenant each separate provision hereof independently in its operative effect of all other provisions, and the fact that any article, section, paragraph, sentence, clause, word or part of this instrument shall be declared invalid or unconstitutional by final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction shall in no event effect any other article, section, paragraph, sentence, clause, word, or part of this instrument, and it is hereby declared to be the intent of the maker hereof to have created and covenanted each article, section, paragraph, sentence, clause, word, or part thereof irrespective of the fact that any other article, section, paragraph, sentence, clause, word or part thereof may be thus declared invalid or unconstitutional. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have made and executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. OWNER: CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS Interij/City Manager ATTEST: By: -:�R r&I Martha Gillette City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Knox Askins City Attorney (Seal) -25- ENGINEER: LJA ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, INC. By: J J mg��A John S. Cargi Vice President By. lbarrell Morrison, P.E. Vice President al REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: October 23, 2006 Requested BGillett Department: Public Works Report Resolutione Ordinance* XX Exhibits: Ordinance Exhibits: Engineering Contract Exhibits: Appropriation Source of Funds- Fund 045 045-9892-936-1100 Account Number: 045-9892-937-1100 Amount Budgeted:$450,000 Amount Requested: $64,010 Budgeted Item: YES SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The City of La Porte has selected the firm of Claunch and Miller, Inc. to design the rehabilitation of Lift Station No. 8, located in Creekmont, and Lift Station No. 32, located on Underwood Road. The Project is the second round of five (5) lift station rehabilitation projects planned in the next few years. Claunch & Miller has performed professional engineering services for the rehabilitation of two (2) previous lift station projects (L.S. No. 9 and L.S. No. 40). The Agreement with the Engineer is as follows: Design Engineering Phase Total $47,100 Construction Phase Cc,,) r / Total $16,910 TOTAL ENGINEERING $64,010 Action Required by Council: Approve Ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Claunch and Miller, Inc. to provide professional engineering services for rehabilitation of Lift Station No. 8 and Lift Station No. 32 in the amount of $64,010. ©6 Date ORDINANCE NO . 2 0 0 6 - AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA PORTE AND CLAUNCH & MILLER, INC., TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE REHABILITATION OF LIFT STATION NO. 8 AND LIFT STATION NO. 32y APPROPRIATING THE SUM NOT TO EXCEED $64.010.00, TO FUND SAID CONTRACT] MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT: FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW1 AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: Section 1. The City Council hereby approves and authorizes the contract, agreement, or other undertaking described in the title of this ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Secretary. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute such document and all related documents on behalf of the City of La Porte. The City Secretary is hereby authorized to attest to all such signatures and to affix the seal of the City to all such documents. City Council appropriates the sum not to exceed $64,010.00 from City of La Porte Utility Capital Improvement Fund (Fund 045), to fund said contract. Section 2. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites, and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. Section 3. This Ordinance shall be effective from and after its passage and approval, and it is so ordered. PASSED AND APPROVED, this 23rd day of October, 2006. ATTEST: Martha A. Gillet City Secretary APPROVED: Knox W. Askins City Attorney CITY OF LA POrF,.,,, By: Alton E. Porter Mayor �A AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES This Agreement entered into as of the a-34 day of , A.D., by and between Claunch & Miller, Inc. hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant", and the City of La Porte, Texas, hereinafter referred to as the "Client". WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the Client has requested various services of the Consultant with respect to engineering design and construction administration services associated with the construction of the proposed Lift Station #8 and #32 Rehabilitation (hereinafter referred to as the Project). NOW, THEREFORE, Client and Consultant hereby agrees as follows: 1. Engagement of Consultant - Consultant hereby agrees to perform the services required under the scope of services related to the Project, and to provide Client with copies of the information, opinions, design calculations and contract documents made the basis of the scope of the services, which is set out in Attachment "A" and made a part of this contract. Consultant agrees to initiate services upon receipt of an executed copy of this Agreement. 2. Availability of Information - Client agrees to provide Consultant with all available information pertinent to the Project. Client will also provide copies of reports, drawings, and other data, and will, at Consultant's request, provide written authorization to review Client's files relative to the Project which may be in possession of third parties. Consultant agrees to return all original documents to Client upon completion of the Project, but reserves the right to make and keep reproducible copies of all such material. 3. Access to Facilities - Client will provide access for the Consultant to enter the property and facilities of Client, as necessary for Consultant to perform services as required under the Project. 4. Instruments of Service - All documents prepared in accordance with this contract including exhibits, field notes, laboratory data, original drawings, and specifications are the property of the Client. The Consultant is given the right to use any of this data in connection with future engineering projects. The Consultant may retain copies or reproducibles of any information prepared for this Project. 5. Determination of Fees - The fees for the scope of services as stated in Attachment "A" provided by Consultant under this agreement will be based on a Not -To -Exceed Amount of $64,010 for design and construction administration. 6. Payment and Fee Schedule - The Consultant will submit a monthly invoice for services rendered. The invoice will be based upon the Consultant's estimate of the proportion of the total services actually completed at the time of the invoice for design and construction administration. Services will be invoiced using the following fee schedule: Design Engineering Phase: $47,100 Construction Phase Services: $16,910 Total Project: $64,010 7. Terms of Payment - Payment of fees as determined under Paragraph 5 herein above shall be due and payable by Client within thirty (3o) days following receipt of Consultant's monthly invoice. 8. Additional Services - Additional services beyond those described in the Scope of Services will be invoiced on the basis of direct labor cost times a factor of 3.05 and direct cost plus 10%. 9. Termination - The Client may terminate this contract at any time by giving seven (7) days' notice in writing to the Consultant. In that case, all finished or unfinished documents and other materials produced under this contract, shall become the Client's property. If the contract is terminated by the Client in accordance with this provision, Consultant shall be paid for all services performed to the date of termination. Consultant may terminate this contract upon seven days' written notice in the event of substantial failure by the Client to perform in accordance with the terms hereof through no fault of the Consultant. 10. Governing Law - This Agreement shall be deemed to have been made under, and shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. The venue of any suit for enforcement or construction of this contract shall be in Harris County, Texas. 11. Dispute Resolution - The parties will attempt in good faith to resolve any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this agreement promptly by negotiation between senior executives of the parties who have authority to settle the controversy. The disputing party shall give the other party written notice of the dispute. Within ten days after receipt of said notice, the receiving party shall submit to the other a written response. The notice and response shall include (a) a statement of each party, s position and a summary of the evidence and arguments supporting its position, and (b) the name and title of the executive who will represent that party. The executive shall meet at a mutually acceptable time and place within twenty days of the date of the disputing party' s notice and thereafter as often as they reasonably deem necessary to exchange relevant information and to attempt to resolve the dispute. If the controversy or claim has not been resolved within thirty days of the meeting of the senior executives, the parties shall endeavor to settle the dispute by mediation under the Construction Industry Mediation Rules of the American Arbitration Association. If the matter has not been resolved pursuant to the aforesaid mediation procedure within ninety days of the commencement of such procedure, (which period may be extended by mutual agreement), or if either party will not participate in such procedure, the controversy shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with American Arbitration Association Construction Industry Arbitration Rules by a sole arbitrator. The arbitration shall be governed by the United States Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.0 & 1-16, and judgment upon award rendered by the Arbitrator may be entered by any court having jurisdiction thereof. The place of arbitration shall be Harris County. The arbitrator is not empowered to award damages in excess of actual damages, including punitive damages. ENTERED INTO AND AGREED by the parties hereto as the day and year first written. ATTEST: ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY CLAUNCH & MILLER, INC. Consultant BY: �K' E KV0 --N CHRISTOPHER E. CLAI CH, P.E. President CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS Client CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS Client BY: CITY ATTORNEY CLAUNCH & MILLER, INC. Engineering Consultants EXHIBIT "A" September 22, 2006 Mr. Steve Gillett Director of Public Works City of La Porte 2963 23ra Street LaPorte, Texas 77571 Re: Proposal for Engineering and Construction Phase Services For Wastewater Lift Stations #8 and #32 Rehabilitation Dear Mr. Gillett: Claunch & Miller, Inc. (CMI) is pleased to submit this proposal for performing engineering and construction phase services for the above referenced project. The proposal is based on our understanding of the project provided in the Manning Preliminary Evaluation and our site visit on September 15th. The tasks include engineering design services and construction phase services for the rehabilitation of Lift Station No. 8 and Lift Station No. 32. For your convenience this proposal consists of General Overview, Scope of Services, and Schedule. GENERAL OVERVIEW Based on information and data provided by the previously developed Manning investigation and our field visit, Lift Station No. 8(L.S.#8) receives flow from the Creekmont Subdivision and commercial development along Myrtle Creek, Underwood and Spencer Highway. We understand that there are approximately 508 existing equivalent connections, an average daily flow of approximately 177,800 gpd and a peak flow of approximately 494 gpm. Ultimate build - out of the service area will provide approximately 618 equivalent connections, an average daily flow of approximately 216,300 gpd, and a peak flow of approximately 601 gpm. Lift Station No. 32(L.S.#32) is located on Underwood Road and receives flow from Spenwick Subdivision and the commercial areas along Underwood and Spencer Highway. L.S.#32 also receives flow from Lift Station No. 33. The lift station serves approximately 394 equivalent connections currently with average daily flows of 137,900 gpd and a peak flow rate of approximately 383 gpm. Future growth in the area will ultimately increase connections to 512 equivalent connections with average daily flows of approximately 179,200 gpd and a peak flow of approximately 498 gpm. These lift stations are currently wet well/ dry well type stations with Gorman Rupp suction lift pumps. We understand the City desires to rehabilitate the existing lift stations by removing the existing mechanical equipment, backfilling the existing dry wells, and installing new submersible pumps and associated mechanical equipment. The electrical controls and control Page 1 of 7 4635 Southwest Freeway, Suite 1000 • Houston, Texas 77027-7169. 713-622-9264 • Fax 713-622-9265 panel will be replaced. The wet well tops will be replaced and modified with sealed hatches. Our assumption at this time is that the rehabilitation can be performed. If during the design process we uncover factors that will require a complete reconstruction of the lift station, a proposal will be provided for services associated with the change in project scope. The wet well walls were briefly examined during the site visit and indicated light to moderate deterioration of the wet well walls, however the walls are dirty and blast cleaning during the rehabilitation process will provide additional information as to the wet well wall condition and the need for grouting prior to applying any spray on coatings. The control panel will require replacement as well as all controls and electrical components. SCADA and remote alarm or information controls are not a part of this project. From preliminary information supplied in the Manning report, it appears that there will be sufficient depth to allow for acceptable pump cycle time and operation and at the same time maintain adequate water levels over the submersible pump volutes. Run times and pump level settings will be determined with the selection of the pumps during the design phase. Access to L.S.#8 is provided by a newly constructed concrete driveway from King Williams Drive with a concrete turn around near to the lift station. Additional site work and paving will be required for access to the station and to improve site drainage and maintenance requirements. L.S.#32 is accessed from a driveway from Underwood Road which appears adequate and additional significant site work and paving is not anticipated. The City has budgeted $225,000 and $200,000 for the construction cost and engineering for the rehabilitation of lift stations No. 8 and 32 respectively. These budgets appear adequate based on our previous experience with similar projects and will be evaluated and updated as the project progresses. This proposal addresses the engineering services that CMI will provide the City of La Porte during the Design and Construction Phases. CMI will utilize an electrical subconsultant for the electrical components and control system designs. Since it is anticipated that all work will be confined to the existing station, no survey or geotechnical work is included for this project. SCOPE OF SERVICES I. DESIGN ENGINEERING PHASE A. Perform field reconnaissance and partial survey of the site and immediate vicinity to obtain information on surface features and any other information that would impact construction. A detailed topographic survey will not be performed. A geotechnical evaluation will not be performed. B. Research and gather existing relevant data on the project such as existing utility information. Page 2 of 7 C. Obtain estimated population and land use data for the project area from the City. D. Obtain estimated flow information data for the proposed development from the City. E. Determine the service area for the lift station and anticipated flow rates in coordination with the City. F. Coordinate with the City of La Porte and apprise the City of CMI's findings and analysis, and obtain input from the City. G. Prepare project specifications, drawings, bid documents and construction drawings based on the anticipated improvements. H. The lift station rehabilitation design shall include the site plan, demolition, bypass pumping, mechanical and piping details, structural details, site work, and electrical/control systems. No SCADA is part of this project nor are any remote alarm or information processes. CMI will endeavor to apprise the City of La Porte of the anticipated construction cost as the project progresses. I. Prepare final cost estimate for the project. J. Complete coordination with other governmental entities or utility agencies in regard to the project. Assist the City in obtaining and/or securing approvals required by all governmental authorities with jurisdiction over the design and/or the operation of the project and all public and private utilities including pipeline transmission companies affected by this project. This assistance will involve the usual expected coordination and approval process. When the process involves work beyond the expected, such as special submittals, designs, appearances at special meetings, coordination of utility/pipeline excavation efforts, permitting applications, etc., such work would be considered under the Additional Services portion of this proposal K. Coordinate with the City of La Porte during the final design process and provide draft documents for the City to review and comment upon. Incorporate appropriate comments with the final bid documents. L. Coordinate with Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) during the design phase. Furnish necessary documentation to TCEQ for their review and approval. M. Incorporate appropriate comments into the final bid documents. N. Furnish five (5) sets of construction documents to the City. Page 3 of 7 II. CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES This phase will be entered into after the acceptance of the Design Phase documents by the City of La Porte. Bid Phase Services A. Assist the City in obtaining bids for the project. The City of La Porte will advertise the project and will absorb all related advertising costs. CMI will coordinate with the City and will assist in developing the wording of the advertisement. B. Dispense construction documents from CMI's office to potential bidders. C. During the bidding process, provide information to and answer questions from potential bidders concerning the Project's construction documents and prepare addendums as necessary. D. No pre -bid conference is included in this scope. E. Evaluate the bids and the qualifications of the apparent low bidders and advise the City as to the acceptability of the apparent low bidder. Construction Administrative Services A. Act as the City's Project Representative during the construction phase. B. Review and respond accordingly to all submittals as required by the contract specifications. C. Prepare change orders necessitated by field conditions. D. Review the contractor's pay estimates, evaluate the completion of work, and make payment recommendations to the City. E. Visit the site at various stages of construction to observe the progress and quality of executed work and to determine in general if such work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. Full time site representation is not included as part of the Construction Administration tasks. Page 4 of 7 F. Claunch & Miller, Inc. (CMI) will not be responsible for the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction selected by the Contractor(s). CMI's effort will be directed toward providing a greater degree of confidence for the City of La Porte that the completed work of Contractor(s) will conform to the Contract Documents, but CMI will not be responsible for the failure of Contractor(s) to perform the work in accordance with the Contract Documents. During site visits and on the basis of on -site observations CMI shall keep the City informed of the progress of the work, shall endeavor to guard the City against defects and deficiencies in such work and may disapprove or reject work failing to conform to the Contract Documents. G. Conduct a final inspection of the Project and make a recommendation for Final Payment on the Project. III. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Additional services are those services that are beyond the services provided for in the scope portion of this proposal. The following are items which are included but not limited as items to be considered additional services. These items will only be provided when authorized by the City. A. Surveying (boundary, topographical and any other survey where a licensed survey is required). B. Right-of-way research, deed research, and abstracting. C. Site Easement and Right of Way Acquisition work such as: preparation of metes and bounds; verification of ownership of property; preparation and submitttal of title report or title commitment; initial contact with property owner(s) to gain right-of- way entry in order to conduct field surveys and geotechnical testing. D. Geotechnical Investigations E. Environmental Site Assessment F. Traffic Control Planning and Design G. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) H. Printing of Final Plans, Specifications, and Reports beyond those copies to be provided to the client as noted in the scope of services. Cost of plans and specifications ,and bid documents for use by potential bidders will be charged to the potential bidder and not to the City. Page 5 of 7 I. Extra Construction Phase Services in the event the project extends beyond its designated contract period. (If required) J. Other miscellaneous tasks that the City of La Porte desires CMI to perform. K. Assist the City as an expert witness or factual witness in any legal proceedings or litigation arising from the development, permitting or construction of the Project. L. Assist the City in making arrangements for the work to proceed in the event that the construction contractor is declared in default for any reason. M. Prepare supporting data and other services in connection with change orders in the event the scope of services is changed or modified. N. Services and costs associated with any special efforts or studies involving this project such as State Revolving Fund applications, reports, trips to Austin, or associated work. O. Assist the City in securing any special licenses or permits (USACOE, etc.) which may be required for the completion of the project, it being understood by the parties of this agreement that the fees for said special licenses and permits will be paid by the City. P. Provide any other services related to the project not otherwise indicated in the Scope of Services and not customarily furnished in accordance with generally accepted engineering practices. Q. Re -packaging of bid documents to provide multi -bid packages and/or rebidding the project. R. The provision of the construction site representation and associated supervision and administration and associated costs. S. Preparing the bid document so that it can be bid in two packages with two contracts. T. Conducting and attending a pre bid conference. Page 6 of 7 IV. FEE The fee is separated into: Design Phase, and Construction Phase. Any Additional Services requested by the City will be invoiced and paid for at the direct cost plus 10% and CMI labor costs at raw labor cost times a factor of 3.05. Such tasks and costs will only be performed upon authorization from the City. DESIGN ENGINEERING PHASE Design Phase Services: Electrical Subconsultant: The lump sum cost of: $ 38,300.00 The cost plus 10% cost o£ $ 8,800.00 Total of Design Engineering phase: $ 47,100.00 CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES Bid Phase Services: The lump sum cost of: $ 3,430.00 Construction Administration services: The lump sum cost of: $ 11,100.00 Electrical Subconsultant cost: The cost plus 10% cost of: $ 2,380.00 Total of Construction Phase: $16,910.00 Total Fees associated with the above described scope of work is: $ 64,010.00 Claunch & Miller, Inc. appreciates the opportunity to submit this proposal and we look forward to working with the City of La Porte on this very important project. Our project manager for this project will be James E. Thompson, P.E. and he can be reached at the number below if you have questions or need further information. Sincerely, CLAUNCH & MILLER, INC. �,� Z��Z Christopher E. Claunch, P.E. President Page 7 of 7 Claunch & Miller, Inc. City of La Porte Lift Station #8 AND #32 Rehabilitation Total 8 1 68 1 20 1 180 1 94 1 56 Rates $ 201.50 $ 135.00 $ 135.00 $ 90.00 $ 65.00 $ 45.00 Total Labor Costs $ 1,612 $ 9,180 $ 2,700 $ 16,200 $ 6.110 $ 2,520 850.00 Total Direct costs $ 850,00 Total Labor & Direct Cost 39,172.00 10/4/2006 - 2:57 PM LS 8&32 schedulemanhours.xls CM FIRM. CLAUNCH AND MILLER Project Name: City of La Pone - Litt Station #8 and 32 Rehabs station PROJECT NO. GFS NO. CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES MANAGER IDESIGNENGNR. IMANAGER (ASSISTANT TOTAL CM&I LABOR COSTS $14,630.00 COSTS $0.00 TOTAL CMI LABOR AND COST $14,530.00 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PRICE $350,000.00 % CONTRUCTION COST 4.15 N REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: Requested By: Stephen L. Barr Department: Parks & Recreation Report: Resolution: Ordinance: X Exhibits: Bid Tabulation Sealed Bid #06506 Appropriation Source of Funds: 001-9080-552-1010 $35,230 Acc't Number: 001-6146-515-5002 Amount Budgeted: $50,000 Amount Requested: $85,230 Exhibits: Notice to Bidders I Budgeted Item: YES X NO Exhibits: SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION As directed by City Council in the City Council Retreat and budget hearings, the City has issued a bid for grounds maintenance services for various non -park sites in the City of La Porte. Sealed Bid #06506 for Grounds Maintenance Services, various sites was sent to fourteen potential bidders. Bids were opened on September 28, 2006 with three vendors responding. The low bidder, Camp Landscape Services submitted a bid of $90,630 in total for the various sites. Some sites will be deferred (i.e. Police Headquarters, Fire Station #3 and EMS Station) until the expected completion of these facilities in April - May. Reduction of the contract for these deferments is expected to reduce the contract by $5,400, to $85,230 for the year. Council authorized $50,000 for the contract; the balance of the funding will come from the Parks Maintenance Division personnel budget, through attrition. If the savings from attrition do not equal the additional estimated cost of $35,230, Council would be asked for a budget amendment to take the difference from contingency or the Council discretionary funds. Staff recommends acceptance of the bid from Camp Landscape Services in the amount not to exceed $90,630 for landscape/grounds maintenance services at various sites throughout the City of La Porte, as low bidder meeting specifications for this project. r Action Required by Council: Consider award of bid to Camp Landscape Services in the amount not to exceed $90,630 for landscape/grounds maintenance services at various sites throughout the City of La Porte, as low bidder meeting specifications for this project. Approved for City Council Agenda JohVX. Joe 7—,erim City Manager '),12/ 7 OL We ORDINANCE NO.2006- % 3 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING A SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA PORTE AND CAMP LANDSCAPE SERVICES TO PROVIDE GROUNDS MAINTENANCE AT VARIOUS SITES THROUGHOUT THE CITY AS PROVIDED BY TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT; APPROPRIATING THE SUM NOT TO EXCEED $90,630.00; MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: Section 1. The City Council hereby approves and authorizes the contract, agreement, or other undertaking described in the title of this ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Secretary. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute such document and all related documents on behalf of the City of La Porte. The City Secretary is hereby authorized to attest to all such signatures and to affix the seal of the City to all such documents. City Council appropriates the sum not to exceed $90,630.00 from the City of La Porte General Fund 001, to fund said contract. Section 2. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites, and declares that a sufficient written notice ofthe date, hour, place, and subject ofthis meeting ofthe City Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves, and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. Pagel of 2 Section 3. This Ordinance shall be effective from and after its passage and approval, and it is so ordered. PASSED AND APPROVED, this 23rd day of October 2006. ATTEST: Martha Gillett, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Z,Z�'kZ 7-- C rk Askins, Assistant City Attorney LOW Page 2 of 2 CITY OF LA PORTE Alton E. Porter, Mayor BIDDER'S LIST SEALED RFP #06506 — GROUNDS MAINTENANCE SERVICES September 28, 2006 Camp Landscape Services 1506 Atlanta Deer Park, TX 77536 Biotech Landscape Services 409 East Pasadena Freeway Pasadena, TX 77506 Hysco Landscaping 2388 Austin St. League City, TX 77573 All Season Nursery 4901 Vista Pasadena, TX 77505 La Porte Lawns 1410 S. 8t" Street La Porte, TX 77571 Budget Landscape P.O. Box 1316 Kemah, TX 77565 K & K Tractor Service 3012 Randolph Road Pasadena, TX 77503 Shear Cuts Lawn Service 5202 Barton Creek Dr. Pasadena TX 77505 Nasa Wholesale 20934 Gulf Freeway Webster, TX 77598 Bay Area Design 2702 Red Bluff Seabrook, TX 77586 EDS -Landscape 1420 Lawrence Rd. Kemah, TX 77565 Lacy Hollow 2221 E. Lawther Deer Park, TX 77536 Earth Works 211 League City Parkway League City, TX 77571 Zuriel Enterprises Services Bayshore Sun Published Dates P.O.Box 670865 September 10, 2006 Houston, TX 77267 September 17, 2006 Bid Tabulation Bid # 06601 Grounds Maintenance Mnndr Sanlamhar 7S 9rMY: DESCRIPTION Camp H sco Grounds Shear Cuts Landscape $ S 350.00 13 300.00 $ 80.00 $ 3,040.00 2. La Porte Citv Flail, 604 W. Fairmont $ $ 350.00 13 300.00 38 $ 265.00 Totall $ 10 070.00 $ 240. 0 $ 9120.00 3. Fire Station #2 710 W. Main $ $ 50.00 19W.00 38 Total $ 100.00 $ 800.OD $ 40.00 $ 1,520.00 $ $ 75.00 2 860.00 # .80 $ 80.00 $ 3,040.00 5. Fire station t14 2900 S. Broadwa $ $ 75.00 2,850.00 38 Total $ 100.00 $ 3,800 $ 75.00 $ 2,850.00 6. Archive Storage Building001 S. 4th Street $ $ 35.00 1,330.00 38 Total $ 60.00 $ 2,280.001 40.00 $ 1,520.00 $ 50.00 1900.00 $ 40.00 $ 1,520.00 8. Porte Community Ubrary 600 S. Broa dwa $ $ 200.00 7 600.00 38 Total $ 200.00 $ 71600.00 $ 240.00 $ 9,120.00 . Water Plant #7 8210 Bandrid e $ $ 200.00 7 60p,00 38 Total $ 125.00 $ 4,760. 10 $ 40.00 $ 1,620.00 10. NCI 1000 Shore Drive $ $ 300.00 11AN.00 38 Total $ 200.00 $ 7,W0.00 $ 50.00 $ 1,900.00 11. Fairmont Parkway Esplanades $ $ 300.00 11 400.00 38 Total $ 150.00 $ 5,700.00 $ 400.00 $ 15 200.00 12. Bay Area Boulevard Esplanades $ $ 300.00 11400.00 38 Total $ 150.00 5,700.00 $ 240.00 $ 9,120.00 13. Canada Road Esplanades $ $ 100,00 3,800.00 38 Total $ 100.00 $ 3 800.00 $ 200.00 $ 7,600.00 14. Canada Rd. East Right of way $ $ 100.00 3,800.00 38 Total 'Right $ 100.00 $ 3,8W.00 $ 160.00 $ 6 080.00 15. Canada Road West of Way $ $ 100.00 S 8W.00 38 Total $ 100.00 I $ 3 8W.00 1 $ 160.00 $ 6,080.00 16. Farrington Boulevard Es nades $ $ 300.00 11 400.00 38 Total $ 150.00 $ 61700 .00 $ 560.00 $ 21,280.00 17. Luella Road Eades s lan $ $ 150.00 6.700.00 38 Total $ 150.00 $ 5,70C .00 $ 160.00 $ 6,080.00 18. le Creek Es lanades $ $ 75.00 2,850.00 Total $ 75.001 $ Z860.00 1 $ 80.00 $ 31040.00 19. Valley Brook Esplanades $ $ 35.00 1330.00 38 Total $ 60.00 $ 280.00 $ 45.00 $ 1710.00 $ 111,340.00 $ 119,510.00 Grand Total, minus deferments Grand total from bid 86::00 $ 90 630.00 Difference $ 5,400.00 Information reflects pricing only and other factors may be considered during the evaluation process Bid Tabulation Bid # 06601 Grounds Maintenance Q nnc DESCRIPTION V camp Hysco, Grounds Shear Cuts Landscape 1. La Porte Police H uarters 8 EOC, 3001 N. 23rd Street $ $ 350.00 13 300.00 x 38 Visits Total 100.00 $ 3,800.00 80.00 $ 3,040.00 2. La Porte CityHall, 604 W. Fairmont I arkw $ $ 350.00 13 300.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 265.00 1 $ 10,070.001 $ 240.00 $ 9,120.00 3. Fire Station #2 9710 W. Main $ $ 50.00 1900.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 100.00 $ 3,800.00 $ M.00 $ 1,520.00 4. Fire station #3 2234 Sens $ $ 75.00 2,850.00 z 38 Visits Total $ WOO $ 3,800.00 $ 80.00 $ 3,040.00 5. Fire station #4 2900 S. Broadwa $ $ 75.00 2,850.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 100.001 $ 3,800.001 $ 75.00 $ 2,850.00 6. Archive Stora a -BU-11,Ylng 10W S. 4th Street $ $ 35.00 1330.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 60.00 $ 280.00 $ 40.00 $ 1,520.00 7. EMS Station 10428 W Main $ $ 50.00 1900.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 100.00 $ 3,8W.00 $ 40.00 $ 1620.00 Lib 8. ra S. Broadway $ $ 200.00 7,600.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 200.00 $ 7 WO.00 $ 240.00 $ 9.120.00 9. Water Plant #7 8210 Bandri e $ $ 200.00 7 fa00.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 125.00 $ 4,750.001 $ 40.00 $ 1,520.00 10. NCI 1000 Bayshore Drive $ $ 300.00 11400.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 200.00 $ 7,WO.00 $ 50.00 $ 11900.00 11. Fairmont Parkway E lanades $ $ 300.00 11400.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 150.00 $ 400.00 $ 6,700-001 $ 15,200.00 12. Say Area Boulevard Espfan2des $ $ 300.00 IIAM.00 x 38 Visits Total 150.00 $ 5,700.00 $ 240.00 $ 9,120.00 13. Canada Road Esplanades $ $ 100.00 3.800.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 100.001 I $ 5,800.00 $ 2W.00 $ 7.600.00 14. Canada Rd. East Right of Way $ $ 100.00 3 800.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 100.00 $ 3,800.00 $ 160.00 $ 6 080.00 15. Canada Road West Right of Way $ $ 100.00 3,800.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 100.00 $ 3,8W.00 $ 160. $ 6.080.00 16. Farrington Boulevard Esplanades $ $ 300.00 11400.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 150.00 $ 5,700.001 I $ 560.00 $ 21,280.00 17. Luella Road Esplanades $ $ 150.00 5,700.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 150.00 I $ 5,700.00 $ 160.00 $ 6,080.00 18. Myrtle Creek Esplanades $ $ 75.00 21860.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 75.00 $ 2,850.00 $ 80.00 $ 3,040.00 19. Valley Brook Esplanades $ $ 35.00 1,330.00 x 38 Visits Total $ 60.00 $ 21280.00 $ 45.00 $ 11710.00 Grand Total $ 90,630.00 $ 111,340.00 $ 119,610.00 Information reflects pricing only and other factors may be considered during the evaluation process Lel REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: Requested By: Stephen L. Barr Department: Parks & Recreation Report: _Resolution: Ordinance: X Exhibits: Bid Tabulation Re -Bid #06032 Exhibits: Bidder's List Exhibits: Appropriation of Funds: Fund 15 Acc't Number: 015-9892-876-1100 Amount Budgeted: $230,700.00 Amount Requested: $218,983.20 SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION As Council is aware, staff has been working toward development of the "Pond to Park" project on property obtained from the East Fairmont Park Homeowner's Association for the past several years. Phase I of the project was delayed due to HCFC drainage work in the B106 channel. Phase I was initially bid (Sealed Bid #06014) in April, 2006. Information regarding the plans and specifications were delivered to six vendors, and there were no bidders. The project (Sealed Bid #06032) was re -bid in September 2006. Information regarding plans and specifications were sent to seven contractors. Bids were opened on September 25, 2006 with two contractors submitting bids. The low bidder meeting specifications, Mar -Con Services, L.L.C., submitted a bid of $218,983.20 for the project. East Fairmont Homeowner's Association has contributed $35,000 toward the project and there are sufficient funds to complete the project. Staff recommends acceptance of the bid from Mar -Con Services, L.L.C. in the amount of $218,983.20, plus a contingency of $11,700.00, to construct Phase I of the Pond to Park project for La Porte according to the plans and specifications for the project, as low bidder meeting specifications. Action Required by Council: Consider Authorizing the Interim City Manager to execute a contract in the amount of $218,983.20, plus a contingency of $11,700.00, to construct Phase I of the Pond to Park project for La Porte according to the plans and specifications for the project, as low bidder meeting specifications. Approved for City Council Agenda John . Joe s, ri ity Manager Dat Bid Tabulation # 06032 Pond to Park - Rebid Monday, September 25, 2006 Information represents pricing only, and other factors may or may not be considered during the evaluation process Pond to Park Rebid #06032 Bidders List September, 2006 Associated General Contractors, Houston Chapter Dodge Reports Slack & Co 10622 South Main Houston, Texas 77025 SER Construction Partners 2230 Pansy Pasadena,Texas 77503 ALCON 355 C.R. 6881 N. Dayton, TX 77535 Oates Industries 2900 East X La Porte, TX 77571 R.L. Utilities P.O. Box 1154 La Porte, Texas 77572 Patak Construction, Inc 1927 SH146 Kemah, TX 77565 Mar -Con Services, L.L.C. 1410 Preston Avenue, Suite H Pasadena, TX 77503 ORDINANCE NO.2006- A q5 V AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA PORTE AND MAR -CON SERVICES, L.L.C. TO PROVIDE NECESSARY SERVICES TO CONSTRUCT PHASE I OF THE CITY'S POND TO PARK PROJECT ACCORDING TO PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDED; APPROPRIATING $218,983.20 TO FUND SAID AGREEMENT AND $11,700.00 IN CONTINGENCY FUNDING; MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: Section 1. The City Council hereby approves and authorizes the contract, agreement, or other undertaking described in the title of this ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Secretary. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute such document and all related documents on behalf of the City of La Porte. The City Secretary is hereby authorized to attest to all such signatures and to affix the seal of the City to all such documents. The City Council appropriates the sum not to exceed $230,683.20 for the project identified herein, from the City of La Porte CIP Fund 015, Project No. GEN876, to fund the City's share of said Agreement. Section 2. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites, and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place, and subject ofthis meeting of the City Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereofhas been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves, and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. Pagel of 2 Section 3. This Ordinance shall be effective from and after its passage and approval, and it is so ordered. PASSED AND APPROVED, this 23rd day of October 2006. ATTEST: Martha Gillett, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: ZZ,0UG _i�/lG'a - Clark T. Ask'ns, Assistant City Attorney Page 2 of 2 CITY OF LA PORTE Alton E. Porter, Mayor REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: October 23.2006 Requested By: Wa ne I S o Department: Planning Report: Resolution: Ordinance: X Exhibits: Ordinance Aerial Map Zoning Map Staff Report Public Notice Response Appropriation Source of Funds: N/A Account Number: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A Amount Requested: N/A Budgeted Item: N/A SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission, during their September 21, 2006 meeting, held a public hearing to receive citizen comments regarding Rezone Request #R06-001. This request involves 0.65 acre of land located in the 200 Block of North Iowa Street, further described as lots 1 thru 9, Block 412, Town of La Porte, Johnson Hunter Survey, A-35, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. The applicants, Judy & Roelof Nieuwenhuis, seek a zone change from General Commercial (GC) to Main Street District (MS) for a mixed use residential and commercial development. As per current zoning designation, the property does not meet the City's commercial area requirements, e.g. building setbacks, lot coverage, parking, and detention etc. The subject property is in the vicinity of Main Street District mixed with residential and commercial uses. Keeping in view of its size and location, the property will be better served when zoned as Main Street District. Staff suggests extending the same zoning classification over to the adjacent property on block 411 for consistency with the zoning district boundaries on the zoning map. Land Use Map shows this area developing as public use, however, the subject site is within close proximity to mixed use developments, i.e. residential, commercial, and industrial activities. The property may well be utilized for mixed use residential/commercial development as intended by the owners. Current ordinance requirements allow relaxation for front setback as an average of the existing structures on the side of the street and maximum lot coverage up to 60%. As required by ordinance, notices of public hearing were mailed to 12 property owners within 200' of the subject site. The City received one response favoring the rezone. By unanimous vote, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends Council approval of rezone request to include both blocks 412 and 411. Action Required by Council: 1. Conduct public hearing. 2. Consider taking action on a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve Rezone Request #R06-001 rezoning the referenced property from General Commercial (GC) to Main Street District (MS). Approved for City Council Agenda Jo oerns, ;06im City Manager U) p ate ORDINANCE NO. 1501- 16 L) 1 - -15' AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, CHAPTER 106, MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO MAIN STREET DISTRICT AS REQUESTED FOR THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1 THRU 9, BLOCK 412 AND LOTS 1 THRU 23, BLOCK 411 HEREIN DESCRIBED; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT RELATED TO THE SUBJECT; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: "Section 1. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby finds, determines and declares that heretofore, to -wit, on the 21st day of September 2006, at 6:00 p.m. a Public Hearing was held before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of La Porte, Texas, pursuant to due notice as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code, to consider the question and the possible reclassification of the zoning classification of the hereinafter described parcels of land. There is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit "A", and incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof for all purposes, a copy of Notice of Public Hearing which the City Council of the City of La Porte hereby finds was properly mailed to all owners of all properties located within two hundred feet (200) of the properties under consideration. "Section 2. The publisher's affidavit of publication of notice of said hearing is attached hereto as Exhibit "B", incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof for all purposes. "Section 3. Immediately following such public hearing on September 21, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of La Porte met in regular session to consider changes in classification, which were the subject of such public hearing. The City Council of the City of La Porte is in receipt of the written recommendations of the City of La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission, by letter ORDINANCE NO. 1501-375 Page 2 dated September 25, 2006, a true copy of which letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "C", incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof for all purposes. "Section 4. Subsequent to receipt of the recommendation of the City of La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council of the City of La Porte called a public hearing on the proposed classification changes and the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission on the 23rd day of October, 2006, at 6:00 p.m., and pursuant to due notice, to consider the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the possible reclassification of the zoning classification of the hereinafter described parcels of land. There is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit "D", incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof for all purposes, a copy of the notice of public hearing. "Section 5. The publisher's affidavit of publication of notice of said hearing is attached hereto as Exhibit "E", and incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof for all purposes. "Section 6. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby accepts the recommendation of the City of La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission, and the zoning classification of the hereinafter described parcels of land, situated within the corporate limits of the City of La Porte, is hereby changed from General Commercial (GC) to Main Street District (MS)." The description of said parcels of land rezoned to Main Street District (MS) is as follows, to -wit. "Lots 1 thru 9, Block 412 and Lots 1 thru 23, Block 411, Town of La Porte, Johnson Hunter Survey, Abstract 35, La Porte, Harris County, Texas". "Section 7. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby finds, determines, and declares that all prerequisites of law have been satisfied and hereby determines and declares that the amendments to the City of La Porte Zoning Map and Classification ORDINANCE NO. 1501-� Page 3 contained in this Ordinance as amendments thereto are desirable and in furtherance of the goals and objectives stated in the City of La Porte's Comprehensive Plan. "Section 8. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. ,,Section 9. This Ordinance shall be in effect from and after its passage and approval. Passed and approved this theAd day of (�-r�' �r 2006. CITY OF LA PORTE By: ALTON PORTER, Mayor ATTEST: By: ,—Olywi, Jvj11,1 MARTHA GILLETT, tity Secr tary APPROV D: By: CL58rRK ASKINS, Assistant City Attorney THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF HARRIS CITY OF LA PORTE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING In accordance with the provisions of Section 106-171 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of La Porte, and the provisions of the Texas Local Government Code, notice is hereby given that the La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission will conduct a public hearing at 6:00 P.M. on the 21" day of September, 2006, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 604 West Fairmont Parkway, La Porte, Texas. The purpose of this hearing is to consider Rezone Request #R06-001, for a parcel of land described as Lots 1 thru 9, Block 412, Town of La Porte, Johnson Hunter Survey, A-35, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. Roelof K. and Judy F. Nieuwenhuis, the property owners, are seeking a rezone from General Commercial (GC) to Main Street District (MS) for residential and business purposes. In addition, the City of La Porte is seeking a zone change from General Commercial to Main Street District for the properties on adjacent lots within Block 411, to be consistent with the said zoning district. A regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission will follow the public hearing for the purpose of acting upon the public hearing items and to conduct other matters pertaining to the Commission. Citizens wishing to address the Commission pro or con during the Public Hearing will be required to sign in before the meeting is convened. CITY OF LA PORTE Martha Gillett, TRMC, CMC City Secretary A quorum of City Council members may be present and participate in discussions during this meeting, however, no action will be taken by Council. This facility has disability accommodations available. Requests for accommodations or interpretive services at meetings should be made 48 hours prior to the meeting. Please contact the City Secretary's office at (281) 471-5020 or TDD Line (281) 471-5030 for further information. FHE STATE OF TEXAS BOUNTY OF W&RRIS JITY OF LA PORTE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 120 S. 8th Street Dorte, Texas 77571 In accordance Nith the provisions of Sec- ' :ion 106-171 of the Code �f Ordinances of the City �f La Porte, and the proviIle - Bions of the TexasLocal j Government Code, notice is hereby given that the La Porte Planning and Zoning ' Commission will conduct a public hearing at 6:00 P.M. on the 21st ,day of Sep y of La Porte tember, 2006, in the Council .Chambers of the Unty of Harris City Hall, 604 West. Fair `ate Of Texas mont Parkway, La Porte, Texas. The purpose of this hearing is to consider Rezon 'Request, #RO6-, Ore me, the 281-471-1234 Fax 281-471-5763 undersigned authority, on this date came and 001, ford v parcel land descr' ed Lot , ru 9,y eared Lisa Godfrey, a dui authorized representative of The. P c , , 1oh on ;te yshore Sun, a semi -weekly newspaper published and generally Survey, = -L orte,, tributed in the City of La Porte, Harris County, Texas and who Harris Cou I es , Judy dy is F g y , Roelof K. nd er bein dui sworn swears the attached notice was published in a Nieuwenhuis, the prope", a �ayshore Sun dated owners, are seeking this f rezone request from Gen- eral Commercial (GC) to' . Main Street District (MS)' for residence and business purposes. In addition, the," City of La Porte is seeking a Zone change of the adja a Godfrey cent property from General y Commercial to Main Street District for the lots within Block 411 to be consistent with the said zoning" dis- trict. i A regular meet- j ing of 'the Planning and brn and subscribed before me this Zoning Commission , will,1� 2006. follow the public hearing `�11it1.1 , for -the purpose of., acting upon the public hearing items and to conduct other matters pertaining to the 0< LJd Commission. AID Citizens wishing to address the Commis- olyn Kellogg sion pro or con during the Public Hearing will be re- ,ary Public quired to sign in before the rls County, Texas meeting is convened. CITY OF LA PORTE Martha Gillett, TRMC, cnnC Commission Exprires April 11, 2010 City Secretary day of r�lq KAROLYN KELLOGG MY COMMISSION EXPIRES if p; April 11, 2010 H1B �.� Cityof La Porte Established 1892 �"' TEXAS September 25, 2006 Honorable Mayor Alton Porter and City Council City of La Porte Re: Rezone Request #R06-001 Dear Mayor Porter and Council: The La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission, during its September 21, 2006, meeting, held a public hearing to consider Rezone Request #R06-001. Judy F. and Roelof K. Nieuwenhuis, are seeking this rezone request from General Commercial (GC) to Main Street District (MS) for mixed use residential/commercial development proposed for the property located in the 200 block of North Iowa Street. The property is further described as Lots 1 thru 9, Block 412, Town of La Porte, Johnson Hunter Survey, A-35, LaPorte, Harris County, Texas. In addition, the City of La Porte is seeking a zone change from General Commercial to Main Street District for the property on Block 411 to be consistent with the zoning district boundaries on the zoning map. The Planning and Zoning Commission, by unanimous vote (6-0), has recommended approval of Rezone Request #R06-001. R spectfully submitted, P4"46--1-2 Pat Muston Chairperson, Planning and Zoning Commission c: Debra B. Feazelle, City Manager John Joerns, Assistant City Manager John Armstrong, Assistant City Attorney Planning and Zoning Commission 604 W. Fairmont Pkwy. • La Porte, Texas 77571 • (281) 471-5020 HIB THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF HARRIS CITY OF LA PORTE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING In accordance with the provisions of Section 106-171 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of La Porte, and the provisions of the Texas Local Government Code, notice is hereby given that the La Porte City Council will conduct a public hearing at 6:00 P.M. on the 23rd of October, 2006, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 604 West Fairmont Parkway, LaPorte, Texas. The purpose of this hearing is to consider Rezone Request #R06-001, for a parcel of land described as Lots 1 thru 9, Block 412, Town of LaPorte, Johnson Hunter Survey, A-35, LaPorte, Harris County, Texas. Roelof K. and Judy F. Nieuwenhuis, the property owners, are seeking a rezone from General Commercial (GC) to Main Street District (MS) for residential and business purposes. In addition, the City of La Porte is seeking a zone change from General Commercial to Main Street District for the properties on adjacent lots within Block 411, to be consistent with the said zoning district. A regular meeting of the City Council will follow the public hearing for the purpose of acting upon the public hearing items and to conduct other matters pertaining to the Council. Citizens wishing to address the Council pro or con during the public hearing will be required to sign in before the meeting is convened. CITY OF LA PORTE Martha Gillett, TRMC, CMC City Secretary A quorum of City Council members may be present and participate in discussions during this meeting, however, no action will be taken by Council. This facility has disability accommodations available. Requests for accommodations or interpretive services at meetings should be made 48 hours prior to the meeting. Please contact the City Secretary's office at (281) 471-5020 or TDD Line (281) 471-5030 for further information. Rezone Request #R06- 001,. for a na�nf hand described as Lots 1 thru 9, Block 412, Town of La Porte, Johnson Hunter 820 S. 8th Street Survey, A-35, La Porte, 2 - 81 47 - 1 1H Harri s County, Texas Judy. F - Roel Fax of 2 81 K. 47 and F. N' ie uw en hui st he pro perty r own ers, rs are are- zone ' - n r z one from Gen eral C om - to Mai nGCmercial tStreetDistn'ct (MS for res-identealand.bu 'messPur-eposes. 'addition, the City of La Porte is seeking azo ne cha nge e"from Gen - 'Serving - o n Serving The"Brz"area Since 1947' era[ Commercial to Main Street District for the prop- erties on adjacent lots within Block 411, to be City of La Porte consistent with the said County of Harris zoning district. State of Texas A regular meet- ing of the City Council will follow. the public hearing 'for the purpose of acting Before me, the undersigned authority, on this date car" upon th"e'•public hearing items and to conduct.other appeared Lisa Godfrey, a duly authorized representative' matters Pertaining to the Bayshore Sun, a semi -weekly newspaper published and gCouncil. distributed in the City of La Porte, Harris County, Texas a citizens wishing to address the Council pro after being duly sworn, swears the attached notice was publ or con during the public The B :shore Sun dated lt� -� r-Qt p ' hearing will be required to .'sign in before the meeting is convened. THE STATE OF TEXAS " ' CITY OF LA PORTE COUNTY OF ,HARA18 Maltha Gillett, TRMC, CM& CITY OF LA PORTE City Secretary Lisa Godfrey A quorum of City Council NOTICE OF PUBLIC members may be present HEARING and participate in discus- sions during this meeting, In accordance however, no action will be with the provisions of Sec- taken by Council. i,tio2 106 171 of the Code Sworn and subscribed before me this of Ortlmances of the City This facility has disability — of La Porte and the " rovi- accommodations availa- -- P %� > ,2006. sio�s FoT, Texas ;Local ble. Requests for accom Go�lernmen. Go otice,- modations ; or interpretive is h r' t ,La services at meetings Port o 1 n-' should be made 48 hours duct' li eari �.It ;Prior to the meeting. 6:00 on t 23rd of Please contact the .City October, a 2006, .in the: :Secretary's office at (281) s. Council Chambers' of .the 471-5020 or TDD Line rolyn Kellogg ,City Hall h0. West Fair- (281) 471-5030 for further A. mont Parkway` La Porte, information. otary Public g Texas = The �.purPose; of "this hearinis"to'co Harris County, Texas g nsider-- My Commission Exprires April 11, 2010 Staff Report September 21, 2006 Zone Change Request #R06-001 Requested by: Judy F. & Roelof K. Nieuwenhuis Requested for: Lots 1 thru 9, Block 412, Town of LaPorte, Johnson Hunter Survey, A -5, LaPorte, Harris County, Texas. Location: 200 Block of North Iowa Street Present Zoning: General Commercial (GC) Requested Zoning: Main Street District (MS) Surrounding Zoning: North — Planned Unit Development (PUD) South — Main Street District (MS) East — General Commercial (GC) West — General Commercial (GC) Background: The property in question consists of approximately 0.65 acre of vacant land, described as Lots 1 through 9 in Blocks 412, Town of La Porte, Johnson Hunter Survey, Abstract No. 5, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. The property is located one block east of North Broadway and Iowa Streets. The subject tract is adjacent to the Main Street/Overlay District, a Zoning District created in November 2004. The area identified as the District is one block deep both north and south of Main Street from State Highway 146 to Broadway (referred to as Five Points) and extending one block north to First Street and one block south to Avenue A with the inclusion of Virginia and Broadway two blocks south to Avenue B. Within the district is an overlay portion that extends from SH 146 to Kansas and includes one half blocks north to the alley between First Street and Main Street to one half blocks south to the alley between Avenue B and Main Street. (Map attached) The Main Street District needed regulations that had more flexibility than any of the zoning classifications allowed. The end result was a mixed -use zone allowing commercial and residential activities. The interior of this district, however, had some unique characteristics that needed additional #R 06-001 P&Z 9/21 /06 Page 2 of 5 considerations, so an overlay district was created where residential activities were allowed only above the first floor. In addition, the intent was to preserve the value and character of the original Main Street area of La Porte and keep single-family detached intact within the boundaries of the Main Street District, but outside of the overlay. Almost all of the uses allowed in the General Commercial District were also permitted in the Main Street District. The main difference is the mixed use of the district. Within the Main Street District, residential activities would be allowed to coincide with commercial activities. There would be a prohibition of mini storage warehousing and laundry plants within the district and special conditional use permitted activities would still be required as in commercial and residential districts. Some examples are churches, special clubs or civic organizations, hospitals, clinics, etc. While reviewing this request, staff discussed the following: • Shape of the tract • Setbacks & lot coverage • Parking & detention • Rezoning The subject tract is triangular shape. Standard setbacks applicable in the General Commercial zoning district are 20' front, 10' rear, and 10' sides, if adjacent to public right-of-way. In addition, the maximum lot coverage allowed is 40%. In order to have a commercial establishment, parking would be required in compliance with Section 106-839 of the Code of Ordinances, and the number of parking spaces would be determined subject to the commercial use. The number of parking spaces required for any business is a minimum of four regardless of building or use size. The City's drainage criteria requires on -site detention. The tract in question comprises only 0.65 acre. If rezoned to the Main Street District, the tract will have a better chance to develop as residential/commercial with the flexible zoning regulations applicable to the Main Street District. The City is including adjacent block 411 to this proposed zone change in order to provide for the grouping of land parcels for development as an integrated unit and to sustain consistency with the Zoning Map. It is further intended that the Main Street District boundary will be extended just one block north adjacent to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zone. Using this scenario, the applicants are requesting to rezone the property from General Commercial (GC) to Main Street District (MS), where residential (single-family detached) and commercial uses of the property are permitted. #R 06-001 P&Z 9/21/06 Page 3 of 5 Analysis: In considering this request, Staff reviewed the following elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Land Use — The City's Land Use Plan indicates this area developing with public uses. Conformance of a zoning request with the Land Use Plan is one consideration among several criteria to be considered in approving or denying a rezoning application. Other criteria may include: • Character of the surrounding and adjacent areas; • Existing use of nearby properties, and extent to which a land use classification would be in harmony with such existing uses or the anticipated use of the properties; • Suitability of the property for the uses to which would be permissible, considering density, access and circulation, adequacy of public facilities and services, and other considerations; • Extent to which the designated use of the property would harm the value of adjacent land use classifications; • Extent to which the proposed use designation would adversely affect the capacity or safety of that portion of the road network influenced by the use; • Extent to which the proposed use designation would permit excessive air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, or other environmental harm on adjacent land use designations; and, • The gain, if any, to the public health, safety, and welfare due to the existence of the land use designation. The subject property is surrounded by mixed use developments (residential, commercial, and industrial). Based on the criteria established for the Main Street District and the applicant's intent, request of the subject tract has merit. Public use as per Land Use map is made in error. Streets — The subject tract is at the northeast corner of Iowa and Polk Streets. A portion of these streets are unimproved. The main access to the property will be through these streets to be improved by the applicant once the frontage is determined. All streets and alleys within and around the blocks are open. The property being located near Main Street and North Broadway provides more than adequate accessibility for circulation of traffic. Utilities — Public facilities and services are sufficient to handle the supply of potable water and fire protection in the area. Provisions will have to be made to ensure that all on -site infrastructure or improvements can #R 06-001 P&Z 9/21 /06 Page 4 of 5 Conclusion / Recommendation: accommodate the water and sanitary sewer needs of the property development. The storm water drainage issue will be reviewed with the site development plan. Development Strategy — One of the tenets of the Comprehensive Plan is to encourage new construction of vacant properties. It is also important that the City consider action to attract new developments using an effective development process. One way this may be achieved is by encouraging in - fill development within existing infrastructure service areas. Here, it is noted that the property may no longer be able to be used for commercial use due to site constraints mentioned above. A residence, business or combination of the two on the property, as allowed in the Main Street District, will be an appropriate use. The best use review option by the applicant reveals that the subject site would be better served by the proposed rezone, which would blend into an existing use of property to the east, west, and south of this tract. In addition, the applicant's existing business is adjacent to this property along East Main Street. Based on the above analysis, staff finds the requested change conforms to the Main Street District zoning and uses of nearby properties and is suitable for the requested change to the Main Street District, allowing mixed use development. Development within the subject tract should not negatively impact the surrounding properties nor harm the value of nearby properties. The zone change should not have a significant impact on traffic conditions in the area and utilities can support future developments. From the information provided by the applicants, the requested zoning would represent the highest and best use of the property. Granting the requested change should not be contrary to the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds the requested change is compatible with the zoning and uses of nearby properties and recommends changing the zoning designation of this tract from General Commercial to Main Street. In addition, the Planning and Zoning Commission may choose to extend Main Street zoning to adjoining property on Block 411 for consistency with the district boundaries on the zoning map. Actions available to the Commission are listed below: • Recommend to Council approval of this rezoning request, for lots 1- 9 of block 412 from General Commercial to Main Street District. #R 06-001 P&Z 9/21 /06 Page 5 of 5 • Recommend to Council approval of a rezone request to include both blocks 411 and 412 from General Commercial to Main Street District. • Recommend to Council denial of this rezoning request from General Commercial to Main Street District. • Table this item for further consideration by the Commission. A Meeting of the La Porte Planning & Zoning Commission (Type of Meeting) Scheduled for September 21, 2006 (Date of Meeting) to Consider Rezone Request #R06-001 (Type of Request) I have received notice of the above referenced public hearing. I am in FAVOR of granting this request for the following reasons: The size and location of the property is better suited for the Main Street District than General Commerical. The property is located behind our current location, Roelof's Antiques & Restoration, and we are considering future development of the property within the guidelines of the Main Street District. I am OPPOSED to granting this request for the following reasons: Roelof Nieuwenhuis nd J ieuwenhuis Name (please tin W Signs e 319 E. Main St. Address aPorte, TX 77571 City, State, Zip LaPorte, TX 77571 U ti SEP 2 1 R-2 R-1 R-1 R-1 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: October 23 2006 Requested By: Wayne Sa Department: Planning Report: Resolution: Ordinance: X Exhibits: Ordinance Aerial Map Zoning Map P&Z Staff Report Public Notice Response Appropriation: Source of Funds: N/A Account Number: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A Amount Requested: N/A Budgeted Item- NIA SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission, during their September 21, 2006, meeting, held a public hearing to receive citizen comments regarding Rezone Request #R06-002. This request is for the property located north of Avenue P in Lomax area between Harris County Flood Control Drainage channel F 101 and southern boundary line of Louisiana Chemicals and Philip Services along State Highway 225. The subject tract comprises approximately 9.37 acres of land, described as TRS 3 5 1 A and 352A, TR 8D-1, Lots 350 & East '/z of Lot 331, and TR 8C-1, F.A. STAASHEN Subdivision, Enoch Brinson Survey, A-5, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. Currently, the property is zoned Large Lot Residential. Industrial facilities, e.g. Philip Services, Louisiana Chemicals, and Sulzer/Hickham are abutting to the north of these tracts. The adjacent properties to the south are single-family Large Lot Residential along North P Street. The applicant, Joseph E. Brown, is requesting a rezone from Large Lot Residential (LL) to Light Industrial (LI). The purpose of this rezoning is to provide for parking and storage of truck trailers and chassis. As per physical location of the site, the property can be considered landlocked and difficult to develop. The only access would be through a bridge constructed over the drainage easement. In the future, F101 may be expanded to 130'wide as per study criteria. The developer shall be subject to dedicate additional drainage easement required for the widening of this channel. A 1.75 acre parcel of this tract is located just south of the drainage easement, which has been recommended by P&Z to be excluded from the requested rezoning. The drainage ditch, a berm with landscaping and some mechanism of screening will serve as a natural buffer between residential and industrial facilities. Proposed development shall be screened from view of adjoining residential district in compliance with Section 106-444(a) of the ordinances. Staff will ensure that all lighting in the parking lot shall be hooded and arranged so as to deflect light away from the adjoining residential zone in compliance with Section 106-521(a). In addition, the Planning and Zoning Commission has desired to review the site plan at the time of development of the subject tract. Being in the vicinity of several industrial establishments, and given the difficulty of access from the south over the F 101 channel, the property in question is suitable for the requested change to LI. As required by Ordinance, twelve notices of public hearing were mailed to property owners within 200' of the site. The City received one response opposing the rezone. The Planning and Zoning Commission, by a vote (4-2) recommends to City Council approval of Rezone Request #R06-002. Action Required by Council: 1. Conduct public hearing. 2. Consider taking action on a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve Rezone Request #R06-002 rezoning the referenced property from Large Lot Residential (LL) to Light Industrial (LI). Approved for City Council Agenda n Jo�� ,Interim City Manager D e ORDINANCE NO. 1501� AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, CHAPTER 106, MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM LARGE LOT RESIDENTIAL TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AS REQUESTED FOR THE PROPERTY OUT OF LA PORTE OUTLOTS 350, 351, AND 352, LOTS 8C-1 AND 8D-1, F.A. STAASHEN, IN THE ENOCH BRINSON SURVEY; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT RELATED TO THE SUBJECT; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: "Section 1. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby finds, determines and declares that heretofore, to -wit, on the 21st day of September 2006, at 6:00 p.m. a Public Hearing was held before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of La Porte, Texas, pursuant to due notice as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code, to consider the question and the possible reclassification of the zoning classification of the hereinafter described parcels of land. There is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit "A", and incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof for all purposes, a copy of Notice of Public Hearing which the City Council of the City of La Porte hereby finds was properly mailed to all owners of all properties located within two hundred feet (200) of the properties under consideration. "Section 2. The publisher's affidavit of publication of notice of said hearing is attached hereto as Exhibit "B", incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof for all purposes. "Section 3. Immediately following such public hearing on September 21, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of La Porte met in regular session to consider changes in classification, which were the subject of such public hearing. The City Council of the City of La Porte is in receipt of the written recommendations of the City of La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission, by letter ORDINANCE NO. 1501-5 Page 2 dated September 25, 2006, a true copy of which letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "C", incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof for all purposes. "Section 4. Subsequent to receipt of the recommendation of the City of La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council of the City of La Porte called a public hearing on the proposed classification changes and the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission on the 23rd day of October, 2006, at &00 p.m., and pursuant to due notice, to consider the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the possible reclassification of the zoning classification of the hereinafter described parcels of land. There is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit "D", incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof for all purposes, a copy of the notice of public hearing. "Section 5. The publisher's affidavit of publication of notice of said hearing is attached hereto as Exhibit "E", and incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof for all purposes. "Section 6. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby accepts the recommendation of the City of La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission, and the zoning classification of the hereinafter described parcels of land, situated within the corporate limits of the City of La Porte, is hereby changed from Large Lot Residential District (LL) to Light Industrial (LI)." The description of said parcels of land rezoned to Light Industrial (LI) is as follows, to -wit. "TRS 351A, 352A, 8C-1, 8D-1, Lot 350, La Porte Outlots, F. A. STAASHEN, the Enoch Brinson Survey, A-5, La Porte, Harris County, Texas". "Section 7. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby finds, determines, and declares that all prerequisites of law have been satisfied and hereby determines and declares that the amendments to the City of La Porte Zoning Map and Classification ORDINANCE NO. 1501-c, Page 3 contained in this Ordinance as amendments thereto are desirable and in furtherance of the goals and objectives stated in the City of La Porte's Comprehensive Plan. "Section 8. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. "Section 9. This Ordinance shall be in effect from and after its passage and approval. Passed and approved this the day of ,, 2006. CITY OF-YLA PORTE By. ALTON PORTER, Mayor ATTEST: By: MARTHA GILLETT, ity Secretary APPROVED: By. T CLA K SKINS, Assistant City Attorney THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF HARRIS CITY OF LA PORTE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING In accordance with the provisions of Section 106-171 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of La Porte, and the provisions of the Texas Local Government Code, notice is hereby given that the La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission will conduct a public hearing at 6:00 P.M. on the 21" day of September, 2006, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 604 West Fairmont Parkway, La Porte, Texas. The purpose of this hearing is to consider Rezone Request #R06-002, for 9.37acres of land described as TRS 351A & 352A, TR 8D-1, Lots 350 & East '/2 of lot 331 & TR 8C-1, F. A. STAASHEN Subdivision, Enoch Brinson Survey, A-5, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. Mr. Joseph E. Brown of Philip Services, on behalf of Air Products, L.P., is seeking a rezone from Large Lot District (LL) to Light Industrial (LI) for parking and enlargement of existing trucking yard at I 1 110 State Highway 225. A regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission will follow the public hearing for the purpose of acting upon the public hearing items and to conduct other matters pertaining to the Commission. Citizens wishing to address the Commission pro or con during the Public Hearing will be required to sign in before the meeting is convened. CITY OF LA PORTE Martha Gillett, TRMC, CMC City Secretary A quorum of City Council members may be present andparticipate in discussions during this meeting, however, no action will be taken by Council. This facility has disability accommodations available. Requests for accommodations or interpretive services at meetings should be made 48 hours prior to the meeting. Please contact the City Secretary's office at (281) 471-5020 or TDD Line (281) 471-5030 for further information. THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY 6F HARRIS CITY OF LA PORTE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING j In accordance with the provisions of Sec- tion 106-171 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of La Porte, and the provi-. sions 'of the Texas Local Government Code, notice is hereby given that the La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission will conduct a public hearing at 6.00 P.M. on the 21 st day of Sep- tember, :: 2006, in the Council. Chambers of the City Hall, . 604 West Fair- mont Parkway, La Porte, .Texas. The purpose of this hearing is to consider" Rezone Request #R06- 002, for 9.37acres of land described as,TRS 351A & 352A, TR 8D-1, Lots 350 & East 1/2 of lot 331 & TR 8C-1, F. A. STAASHEN Subdivisi , .Enoch Brin-`, son Surve A-5, La Porte, s. Mr. Joe ilip Se ces; on ehalf Air J Products,' 'L.P. is eking this rezone r uest from Large Lot District (LL) to Al Light Industrial (LI) . , for parking and enlargement of existing trucking yard at 11110 State Highway225. 8th Street Texas 77571 'Servin Porte Harris exas 281-471-1234 Fax 281-471-5763 re Sun ce 1947' the undersigned authority, on this date came and Lisa Godfrey, a duly authorized representative of The Sun, a semi -weekly newspaper published and generally in the City of La Porte, Harris County, Texas and who duly sworn, swears the attached notice was published in ore Sun dated q- a :]� rey Sworn and subscribed C4 l n p ,2006. Y Karolyn Kellogg Notary Public Harris County, Texas before me this 9 % day of My Commission Exprires April 11, 2010 KAROLYN KELLOGG i *? MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Apd 11, 2010 U ® 1 A s, may. City of La Porte W NIMM -,� Established 1892 "re AS September 25, 2006 Honorable Mayor Alton Porter and City Council City of La Porte Re: Rezone Request 4R06-002 Dear Mayor Porter and Council: The La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission, during its September 21, 2006, meeting, held a public hearing to consider Rezone Request 4R06-002. The subject property is located north of F 101 drainage channel near Avenue P and south of Louisiana Chemicals and Philip Services along State Highway 225. It,is further described as TRS 351A, 352A, 8D-1, Lots 350 & East 1/2 of Lot 331, and TR 8C-1, F. A. STAASHEN Subdivision, Enoch Brinson Survey, Abstract 5, LaPorte, Harris County, Texas. The applicant seeks to have this property rezoned from Large Lot Residential (LL) to Light Industrial (LI). The purpose of the rezone request is to provide parking and storage of truck trailers and chassis. The Planning and Zoning Commission, by a (4-2) vote, has recommended approval of Rezone Request 4R06-002. Respectfully submitted, 4a.� � Pat Muston Chairperson, Planning and Zoning Commission c: Debra B. Feazelle, City Manager John Joerns, Assistant City Manager John Armstrong, Assistant City Attorney Planning and Zoning Commission 604 W. Fairmont Pkwy. • La Porte, Texas 77571 • (281) 471-5020'!, THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF HARRIS CITY OF LA PORTE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING In accordance with the provisions of Section 106-171 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of La Porte, and the provisions of the Texas Local Government Code, notice is hereby given that the La Porte City Council will conduct a public hearing at 6:00 P.M. on the 23rd day of October, 2006, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 604 West Fairmont Parkway, La Porte, Texas. The purpose of this hearing is to consider Rezone Request #R06-002, for 9.37 acres of land described as TRS 351A & 352A, TR 8D-1, Lots 350 & East '/2 of lot 331 & TR 8C-1, F. A. STAASHEN Subdivision, Enoch Brinson Survey, A-5, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. Mr. Joseph E. Brown of Philip Services, on behalf of Air Products, L.P., is seeking a rezone from Large Lot District (LL) to Light Industrial (LI) for parking and enlargement of existing trucking yard at I 1110 State Highway 225. A regular meeting of the City Council will follow the public hearing for the purpose of acting upon the public hearing items and to conduct other matters pertaining to the Council. Citizens wishing to address the Council pro or con during the public hearing will be required to sign in before the meeting is convened. CITY OF LA PORTE Martha Gillett, TRMC, CMC City Secretary A quorum of City Council members may be present and participate in discussions during this meeting, however, no action will be taken by Council. This facility has disability accommodations available. Requests for accommodations or interpretive services at meetings should be made 48 hours prior to the meeting. Please contact the City Secretary's office at (281) 471-5020 or TDD Line (281) 471-5030 for further information. s rHE STATE OF TEXAS BOUNTY OF HARRIS CITY OF LAPORT 20 S. 8th Street `'NOTICE_O PUBLIC` r)Orte, Texas 77571 HEARING In : accordance i viththe proylsions tlf, Sec i ion 106]�a1 p h4 Code >f Ordinances of the City �f La Porte, and the provi ;ions of the Texas Local ,lie 3overnmopt .Code, noticed 281-471-1234 Fax 281-471-5763 re Sun iCavy ven marine La' ► one City until wiu con- Serving The ay= '" `Irea Since 1947' uct a ub ink at TIM rb da ¢eit Ctia ersof the y of La Porte ity Hall, s0�4°UHestY4Pair;; Unt Of Harris font Parkway, La Porte, y �xas The purpose . of, to of Texas is hearing' is to consrier ezone, .Bequest #Fit06- lz,%r s 37 acres of and ?scnbe'fore me the thority, d as TRS 36JA & e undersigned au , on this date came and ast 1 /TR $1 Lois°'35o` eared Lisa Godfrey, a duly authorized representative of The E2 of f -lot 331 & TR, °,; F.A. STAASHEN y p shore Sun, a semi -weekly newspaper published and generally Survey,' A ion, ;Ey o -5La Po , Harris noch stributed in the City La Porte His County, Texas and who Surrte, arris county. Texas hn�.: er being duly sworn, swears the attached notice was published in seph E 13rowrl of F? ilip' ices,Eon ehaif�5ot1'p+i[ e 0ayshore SNn dated i n �- g r ©(n oduGts Pr is eeking, e r nlargement of existing' u U ,ucking yard at 11110 Mate Highway 225. A ,regular meet Isa Godfrey f ig of the City Council:wil )Ilow the public hearing' )r the purpose, of acting pon. the public hearing ems and to conduct other Sworn and subscribed �jtxoAxA ,2006. arolyn Kellog Notary Public Harris County, Texas before me this My Commission Exprires April 11, 2010 q IUy, '#��'"� t° KAROLYN KELLOGG =' ` MY COMMISSION EXPIRES N. t�".• April 11, 2010 day of Staff Report September 21, 2006 Zone Change Request #R06-002 Requested by: Joseph E. Brown, Manager, Transportation Projects, Philip Services, on behalf of Air Products, L.P., the property owner Requested for: 9.3817 acres, part of lots 331, 350, 351, and 352, La Porte Outlots in the Enoch Brinson Survey, Abstract 5, LaPorte, Harris County, Texas. Location: State Highway 225 & North P Street Present Zoning: Large Lot Residential (LL) Requested Zoning: Light Industrial (LI) Surrounding Zoning: North — Light Industrial (LI) South - Large Lot District (LL) East — Large Lot District (LL) West — Large Lot District (LL) Background: The property in question is a 9.37-acre tract of undeveloped land, described as TRS 351A, 352A, TR 8D-1, Lots 350 & East ''/Z of lot 331 and TR 8C-1, F.A. STAASHEN Subdivision, Enoch Brinson Survey, A-5, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. The subject tract is located just south of Louisiana Chemical and Philip Services along State Highway 225. A 7.63 acre tract of land bisecting a 40' wide pipeline easement is located north of an existing 40' wide drainage easement running east and west. In addition, the 1.75 acre tract is located to the south a of drainage easement. The property is surrounded by Exxon Pipeline to the East, an undeveloped tract of land owned by Louisiana Chemical to the West, Louisiana Chemical and Philip Services along State Highway 225 to the North, and a drainage ditch with large lots owned by various private owners along North P Street to the South. The property is strategically landlocked and located in the vicinity of industrial developments. City Council created the Large Lot Zoning District in 2005. All of the properties previously zoned Low -Density Residential (R-1) and Medium Density Residential (R-2) in the area are now classified as the Large Lot District (LL). The Large Lot proposal was submitted as a method to keep the area rural in nature and as a protection of the privilege to own and keep large animals. In addition, there was a fear that animal grazing or breeding activities would be lost if normal residential were allowed. The Large Lot District designation for the subject tracts were assigned to undeveloped land. #R 06-002 P&Z 9/21 /06 Page 2 of 4 The applicant is seeking this rezoning to Light Industrial for parking and enlargement of the existing facility at I 1110 State Highway 225. The intent here is to extend the requested zoning up to the drainage ditch to enlarge/expand trucking yard for storage of trucks and chassis. The Light Industrial zoning should be compatible with the existing zoning designation of the present facility. The subject tract has natural buffers: an existing drainage ditch to the west, and south, and an Exxon Pipeline to the east. However, staff suggests that a portion of the subject tract (1.75 acre) south of the drainage ditch not be included as part of this rezoning, thereby allowing the drainage ditch to serve as a natural buffer between the residential and industrial zoned properties. Analysis: In considering this request, Staff has reviewed the Development Ordinance as well as elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Land Use — The Land Use Plan indicates this area is envisioned as developing as low density residential. The tract in question is within the vicinity of various industrial establishments along the State Highway 225. Conformance of a zoning request with the Land Use plan is one among several criteria to be considered in approval or denial of an application. Other criteria may include: • Character of the surrounding and adjacent areas; • Existing use of nearby properties, and extent to which a land use classification would be in harmony with such existing uses or the anticipated use of the properties; • Suitability of the property for the uses to which would be permissible, considering density, access and circulation, adequacy of public facilities and services, and other considerations; • Extent to which the designated use of the property would harm the value of adjacent land use classifications; • Extent to which the proposed use designation would adversely affect the capacity or safety of that portion of the road network influenced by the use; • Extent to which the proposed use designation would permit excessive air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, or other environmental harm on adjacent land use designations; and, • The gain, if any, to the public health, safety, and welfare due to the existence of the land use designation. Streets — The property is located approximately 1500' south of State Highway 225 and nearly 1000' north of North P Street. Currently, this #R 06-002 P&Z 9/21 /06 Page 3 of 4 Conclusion/ Recommendations: property is landlocked and has no street access. The only access is from the adjoining properties to the North. Access from North P Street could be provided via bridge constructed over the drainage ditch. Feasible development of this tract is only through north properties along State Highway 225. Traffic circulation and parking will be reviewed with the site development plans submittal. Since trucking movement is the primary function of this facility, internal roadway and parking shall be designed and constructed in conformance with the City Standards. Utilities — Public facilities and services are sufficient to handle the supply of potable water and fire protection along State Highway 225. Provisions will have to be made to ensure that all on -site infrastructure or improvements can accommodate the water and sanitary sewer needs of this development. The storm water drainage issue will be reviewed with the site development plans. There is an existing 40'wide drainage easement for the F101 drainage Channel that is planned to be expanded to 140' wide. Dedication of additional drainage easement shall be required through a separate instrument or platting. Development Strategy — The highest use analysis presented by the applicant reveals that the subject site would be better served by the proposed use, which would blend into an existing use of property to the north and east of this tract. Based on the above analysis, staff finds the requested change should conform to the zoning and uses of nearby properties. The tract in question is suitable for the requested change to LI. Development within the subject tract should not negatively impact the surrounding properties nor harm the value of nearby properties. It should not have a significant impact on traffic conditions in the area and utilities should not be affected. The applicant has demonstrated that the requested zoning would represent the highest and best use of the property. Granting the requested change should not be contrary to the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds the requested change is compatible with the zoning and uses of nearby properties and recommends changing the zoning designation of this tract from Large Lot to Light Industrial. In addition, staff suggests a 1.75 acre tract south of the drainage ditch not be included with this rezone request. Actions available to the Commission are listed below: • Recommend to Council approval of this rezoning request from Large Lot to Light Industrial as submitted. #R 06-002 P&Z 9/21 /06 Page 4 of 4 • Recommend to Council approval of the request excluding the 1.75 acre tract. • Recommend to Council denial of this rezoning request from LL to LI. • Table this item for further consideration by the Commission. A Meeting of the La Porte Planning & Zoning Commission (Type of Meeting) Scheduled for September 21, 2006 (Date of Meeting) to Consider Rezone Request #R06-002 (Type of Request) I have received notice of the above referenced public hearing. I am in FAVOR of granting this request for the following reasons: I am 9PPOSED to granting this request for the following reasons: Q 7-1 Am �,, o, �, c , v, e --e Name (p ase p t) dyes �77 S' e City, State, Zip SEP 14 2006 IUI MONUMENT a z SAN JACINTO D R-1 z a DEAF SMITH BOIS DARC Legend 2.u. 4.ui CityLimits DrainageChannels Zoning Zoning (R-1) Low Density Residential (R-2) Medium Density Residential (R-3) High Density Residential (MH) Manufactured Housing - (GC) General Commercial ® (NC) Neighborhood Commercial (PUD) Planned Unit Development (BI) Business Industrial (LI) Light Industrial (HI) Heavy Industrial ® (MS) Main Street District (MSO) Main Street District Overlay (LL) Large Lot District PROPOSED REZONE FROM LL to LI F101-00-00 r BAY VISTA m R-1 m R06=002 1 REOUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: 10-16-06 Requested By: Robert Swanagan R. L Department: Human Resources Report: X Resolution: Ordinance: Exhibits: N/A Exhibits: Original from Neal Welch presentation 8-10-06 Exhibits: 172 FRIAR Recommendations Appropriation Source of Funds: Account Number: Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: Budgeted Item: YES NO SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION Approve 172 Chapter Employee Retiree Insurance and Benefits Board recommendation made to to Council at the August 10'h meeting and brought back to Council at the Monday, September 11, 2006 meeting. Action Required by Council: Vote on the seven (7) ERIBB recommendations for official Council approval. G' X.4' ate CHAPTER 172 EMPLOYEE RETIREE INSURANCE AND BENEFITS BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL FROM THURSDAY, AUGUST 10, 2006 MEETING: Recommends that Flexible Spending Accounts with the Debit Cards be added to our plan. 2. We do not recommend the Individual Child Premium Load. We could make a 5cn tier in a 4 tier structure with specific language that says dependent children can remain on the insurance to age 25 if they are a student and not married. 3. We do not recommend the 10% Cost Savings with Plan Design Changes 4. Recommends a one-time deferral at the discretion of the Retiree with a spousal provision as outlined in COBRA. Which is: If a Retiree is carrying their spouse at retirement then the spouse could re-enter when the retiree re-enters. 5. Recommends that Retiree Over/Under 65 Calculation not be used and remain as it is. 6. Recommends both Incentive Plans as potential Recruitment Incentives with the City Council determining which one it wants to adopt, or a combination of both. 7. Recommends the current method of making the Retiree Calculations continue with clarification of language regarding City budgeted cost and that the coverage % discount amount applies only for retirees, not dependents. Also, the proposed Calculator that Neal is developing be implemented to allow any employee to be able to get an estimate of their insurance cost and their dependents cost at the current year budgeted City cost and for one additional year. CHAPTER 172 EMPLOYEE RETIREE INSURANCE AND BENEFITS BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL FROM THURSDAY, AUGUST 10, 2006 MEETING: Recommends that Flexible Spending Accounts with the Debit Cards be added to our plan. YES Approved 2. We do not recommend the Individual Child Premium Load. NO We could make a 5cn "' in a 4 tier structure with specific language that says dependent children can remain on the insurance to age 25 if they are a student and not married. YES APPROVED 3. We do not recommend the 10% Cost Savings with Plan Design Changes NO 4. Recommends a one-time deferral at the discretion of the Retiree with a spousal provision as outlined in COBRA. Which is: If a Retiree is carrying their spouse at retirement then the spouse could re-enter when the retiree re-enters. YES Approved 5. Recommends that Retiree Over/Under 65 Calculation not be used and remain as it is. YES Approved 6. Recommends both Incentive Plans as potential Recruitment Incentives with the City Council determining which one it wants to adopt, or a combination of both. YES Approved did not determine which method will be used 7. Recommends the current method of making the Retiree Calculations continue with clarification of language regarding City budgeted cost and that the coverage % discount amount applies only for retirees, not dependents. Also, the proposed Calculator that Neal is developing be implemented to allow any employee to be able to get an estimate of their insurance cost and their dependents cost at the current year budgeted City Cost and for one additional year. YES Approved REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: October 23, 2006 Requested By: Michael Dolby Department: Finance Report: Resolution: Ordinance: XX Exhibits: Ordinance 2006-2918-A Exhibits: Excerpt from FY 2007 Adopted Budget & Amended Budget Exhibits: Award Notification/Agreement Appropriation Source of Funds: N/A Account Number: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A Amount Requested: N/A Budgeted Item: YES NO SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 2006-07 Budget on September 11, 2006. The Summary of Funds, which is shown below, represents an amendment to the FY 2006-07 Budget. (*denotes funds with current changes) Previously Proposed Original Budget Amended Budget Amended Budget General Fund $ 28,245,299 $ 28,245,299 $ 28,245,299 Grant Fund 347,491 347,491 695,223 Hotel/Motel Occupancy Tax 454,346 454,346 454,346 Community Investment 138,000 138,000 138,000 La Porte Development Corporation 832,180 832,180 832,180 Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone 36,720 36,720 36,720 Utility 6,798,512 6,798,512 6,798,512 Sylvan Beach 208,360 208,360 208,360 Airport 190,248 190,248 190,248 La Porte Area Water Authority 1,631,110 1,631,110 1,631,110 Golf Course 1,193,500 1,193,500 1,193,500 Motor Pool 1,457,154 1,457,154 1,457,154 Insurance Fund 4,376,091 4,376,091 4,376,091 Technology Fund 1,289,149 1,289,149 1,289,149 General Capital Improvement 402,950 402,950 402,950 Utility Capital Improvement 1,230,000 1,230,000 1,230,000 Sewer Rehabilitation Capital Improvement 330,000 330,000 330,000 1998 General Obligation Bond Fund 6,000 6,000 6,000 2000 General Obligation Bond Fund 170,000 170,000 170,000 2005 Certificate of Obligation Bond Fund 675,000 675,000 675,000 2005 General Obligation Bond Fund 459,400 459,400 459,400 2006 Certificate of Obligation Bond Fund 260,000 260,000 260,000 General Debt Service 2,798,294 2,798,294 2,798,294 Utility Debt Service 494,328 494,328 494,328 La Porte Area Water Authority Debt Service 760,700 760,700 760,700 Total of All Funds $ 54,784,832 $ 54,784,832 $ 55,132,564 Action Required by Council: Adopt Ordinance Amending Fiscal Year 2006-07 Budget for the Grant Fund for the Homeland Security Grant award of $347,732. A ro r o cil A enda P117kkI _ Jo66 Joerns, erim City Manager Date ORDINANCE NO. 2006-2918-A AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS, FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 1, 2006 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2007; FINDING THAT ALL THINGS REQUISITE AND NECESSARY HAVE BEEN DONE IN PREPARATION AND PRESENTMENT OF SAID BUDGET; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. WHEREAS, the Charter of the City of La Porte, Texas, and the Statutes of the State of Texas, require that an annual budget be prepared and presented to the City Council of the City of La Porte, Texas, prior to the beginning of the fiscal year of said City, and that a public hearing be held prior to the adoption of said Budget; and WHEREAS, the Budget for the fiscal year October 1, 2006, through September 30, 2007, has heretofore been presented to the City Council and due deliberation had thereon, was filed in the office of the City Secretary on July 24, 2006, and a public hearing scheduled for September 11, 2006 was duly advertised and held. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: SECTION 1: That the Budget for the City of La Porte, Texas, now before the said City Council for consideration, a complete copy of which is on file with the City Secretary and attached hereto by reference as Exhibit "A", is hereby amended per Exhibit "B" as the Budget for the said City of La Porte, Texas, for the period of October 1, 2006, through September 30, 2007. SECTION 2: Be it FURTHER ORDAINED, that the said City Council finds that all things requisite and necessary to the adoption of said Budget have been performed as required by charter or statute. SECTION 3: The City Council officially finds, determines, recites and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this Ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. SECTION 4: This Ordinance shall be in effect from and after its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the)nnday of OCAPfl� , 2006. STY OF LA PO TEXAS f \ Alton Porter, Mayor ATTEST: Martha Gillett, ity Secretary APPROVED: mow/ 7- 116"', nox Askins, City Attorney EXHIBIT A (ORIGINAL BUDGET) City of La Porte Consolidated Summary of All Funds Working Working Capital FY 06-07 FY 06-07 Capital 09/30/06 Revenues Expenses 09/30/07 Governmental Fund Types General Fund 9,634,199 28,163,288 28,245,299 9,552,188 Grant Fund 374,900 347,491 347,491 374,900 Hotel/Motel Occupancy Tax 336,927 334,500 454,346 217,081 Community Investment 634,075 180,809 138,000 676,884 Section 4B Sales Tax 3,788,056 1,340,886 832,180 4,296,762 Tax Increment Reinvestment 171,304 46,280 36,720 180,864 Total Governmental Types 14,939,461 30,413,254 30,054,036 15,298,679 Enterprise Utility 42,176 7,503,541 6,798,512 747,205 Sylvan Beach 129,038 208,360 208,360 129,038 Airport 337,875 45,228 190,248 192,855 La Porte Area Water Authority 1,687,721 1,344,916 1,631,110 1,401,527 Golf Course (57,847) 1,193,500 1,193,500 (57,847) Total Enterprise 2,138,963 10,295,545 10,021,730 2,412,778 Internal Service Motor Pool 2,016,511 1,853,966 1,457,154 2,413,323 Insurance Fund 847,924 4,478,020 4,376,091 949,853 Technology Fund 869,776 1,051,699 1,289,149 632,326 Total Internal Service 3,734,211 7,383,685 7,122,394 3,995,502 Capital Improvement: General 290,392 245,000 402,950 132,442 Utility 1,722,152 644,070 1,230,000 1,136,222 Sewer Rehabilitation 31,400 315,000 330,000 16,400 1998 GO Bond Fund - 6,000 6,000 - 2000 GO Bond Fund 174,607 - 170,000 4,607 2002 GO Bond Fund (23,621) 24,000 - 379 2004 C/O Bond Fund 1,268,081 50,000 - 1,318,081 2005 C/O Bond Fund 802,453 20,000 675,000 147,453 2005 GO Bond Fund 457,947 50,000 459,400 48,547 2006 C/O Bond Fund 161,903 100,000 260,000 1,903 2006 GO Bond Fund 4,000 12,000 - 16,000 Other Infrastructure 657,819 41,500 - 699,319 Total Capital Improvement 5,547,133 1,507,570 3,533,350 3,521,353 Debt Service: General 1,702,319 2,697,580 2,798,294 1,601,605 Utility 1,111,540 50,000 494,328 667,212 La Porte Area Water Authority - 760,700 760,700 - Total Debt Service 2,813,859 3,508,280 4,053,322 2,268,817 Total All Funds 29,173,627 53,108,334 54,784,832 27,497,129 EXHIBIT B (AMENDED BUDGET) City of La Porte Consolidated Summary of All Funds Working Working Capital FY 06-07 FY 06-07 Capital 09/30/06 Revenues Expenses 09/30/07 Governmental Fund Types: General Fund 9,634,199 28,163,288 28,245,299 9,552,188 Grant Fund 374,900 695,223 695,223 374,900 Hotel/Motel Occupancy Tax 336,927 334,500 454,346 217,081 Community Investment 634,075 180,809 138,000 676,884 Section 4B Sales Tax 3,788,056 1,340,886 832,180 4,296,762 Tax Increment Reinvestment 171,304 46,280 36,720 180,864 Total Governmental Types 14,939,461 30,760,986 30,401,768 15,298,679 Enterprise: Utility 42,176 7,503,541 6,798,512 747,205 Sylvan Beach 129,038 208,360 208,360 129,038 Airport 337,875 45,228 190,248 192,855 La Porte Area Water Authority 1,687,721 1,344,916 1,631,110 1,401,527 Golf Course (57,847) 1,193,500 1,193,500 (57,847) Total Enterprise 2,138,963 10,295,545 10,021,730 2,412,778 Internal Service Motor Pool 2,016,511 1,853,966 1,457,154 2,413,323 Insurance Fund 847,924 4,478,020 4,376,091 949,853 Technology Fund 869,776 1,051,699 1,289,149 632,326 Total Internal Service 3,734,211 7,383,685 7,122,394 3,995,502 Capital Improvement: General 290,392 245,000 402,950 132,442 Utility 1,722,152 644,070 1,230,000 1,136,222 Sewer Rehabilitation 31,400 315,000 330,000 16,400 1998 GO Bond Fund - 6,000 6,000 - 2000 GO Bond Fund 174,607 - 170,000 4,607 2002 GO Bond Fund (23,621) 24,000 - 379 2004 C/O Bond Fund 1,268,081 50,000 - 1,318,081 2005 C/O Bond Fund 802,453 20,000 675,000 147,453 2005 GO Bond Fund 457,947 50,000 459,400 48,547 2006 C/O Bond Fund 161,903 100,000 260,000 1,903 2006 GO Bond Fund 4,000 12,000 - 16,000 Other Infrastructure 657,819 41,500 - 699,319 Total Capital Improvement 5,547,133 1,507,570 3,533,350 3,521,353 Debt Service: General 1,702,319 2,697,580 2,798,294 1,601,605 Utility 1,111,540 50,000 494,328 667,212 La Porte Area Water Authority - 760,700 760,700 - Total Debt Service 2,813,859 3,508,280 4,053,322 2,268,817 Total All Funds 29,173,627 53,456,066 55,132,564 27,497,129 Governor's Division of Emergency Management O Y Yt 2006 Sub -Recipient Agreement eF for e City of La Porte Date of Award 9/29/2006 1. Sub -Recipient Name and Address. 2. Prepared by: GDEM/SAA 3. Award Number: 06-SR 41440-01 4. Federal Grant Information Mayor Alton Porter Federal Grant Title: Homeland Security Grant Program City of La Porte Federal Grant Award Number: 2006-GE-T6-0068 604 W. Fairmont Parkway La Porte, TX 77571 Date Federal Grant Awarded to GDEM: June 30, 2006 Federal Granting Agency: Office of Grants and Training U.S. Department of Homeland Security S• Award Amount and Grant Breakdowns Total Award Note: Additional Budget Sheets (Attachment A): No Amount CCP LETPP MMRS SHSP UASI Other 97.053 97.074 97.071 97.073 97.008 $347,732.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $90,000.00 $257,732.00 $0.00 Performance Period: 7/1/2006 To 2/28/2008 6. Statutory Authority for Grant: This project is supported under Public Law 109-90, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2006. 7. Method of Payment: Primary method is reimbursement. See the enclosed instructions for the process to follow in the submission of invoices. S. Debarment/Suspension Certification: The Sub -Recipient certifies that the jurisdiction and its' contractors/vendors are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded by any federal department or agency and do not appear in the Excluded Parties List System at http://www.epls.gov. 9• Agency Approval Approving GDEM Official: Signature of GDEM Official: Jack Colley, Chief Division of Emergency Management Office of the Governor 1O• Sub -Recipient Acceptance I have read and understand the attached Terms and Conditions. Type name and title of Authorized Sub -Recipient official: Signature of Sub -Recipient Official: 11. Enter Employer Identification Number (EIN) / Federal Tax Identification Number: 12. Date Signed 13. DUE DATE: C= Signed award and Direct Deposit Form (if applicable) must be returned to GDEM on or before the above due date. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested October 23, 2006 Requested By: Mayor Alton E. Porter Department: Mayor's Of4ce Report: Resolution: Ordinance: X Eyhihitge Ordinance Exhibits: Exhibits: Appropriation Source of Funds: n/a Account Number: n/a Amount Budgeted: n/a Amount Requested: Budgeted Item: YES NO SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION City Council to approve appointing positions on Boards and Commissions for vacant slots. Chapter 172 Employee, Retiree Insurance and Benefits Board: Citizen Position 2 - Term Expiration 8/31 /2006 — vacated by Tina Fregia due to resignation. Citizen Position 1 — Term Expiration 8/31/2007 — vacated by Pat Rothermel Alternate Position 2 — No Term Expiration — position has never been filled La Porte Development Corporation Board — 4b Corporation Deborah Johnson — Term Expiration 2007 — resigned from board position vacant Youth Advisory Council Crystal Scott advised there will be no changes to the Youth Advisory Council until after school begins in the fall. Advise staff if any other changes regarding positions Council desires. Action Required by Council: Consider approving Ordinance appointing members to various Boards and Commissions and determine alternate positions to Chapter 172. Approved for Citv.Council A enda .r John , I anager Date ORDINANCE NO. 2004-2782-N AN ORDINANCE APPOINTING MEMBERS TO VARIOUS BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES, OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; CONTAINING A REPEALING CLAUSE; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: • Indicates reappointment Section 1. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Airport Advisory Board for the City of La Porte Municipal Airport, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Position 1. - Debra Rihn 2007 Position 2. - Nick Hooke 2007 Position 3. - *Hector Villarreal 2009 Position 4. - *Tucker Grant 2009 Position 5. - Steve Gillett 2007 Position 6. - Eliminated by City Council on 7/13/98 by Ord. 98-2265 FAA Representative - William Gray No Term Airline Representative - Dan Myhaver No Term Section 2. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Board of Directors of the City of La Porte Reinvestment Zone Number One, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Position 1 - Peggy Antone 2007 Position 2 - *Dave Turnquist 2008 Position 3 - Alton Porter 2007 Alternate to Employee Participant - Vacant No Term Citizen Position Alternates 1 and 2 are entitled to vote only in the absence of Citizen Position 1 and 2 members, respectively; Retiree Position Alternate may vote only in the absence of the Retiree Participant member; Employee Position Alternate may vote only in the absence of the Employee Participant member. Section 4. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Fiscal Affairs Committee, without term, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Date Appointed Chairman - Chuck Engelken 1998 Committee Member - Barry Beasley 2004 Committee Member - Howard Ebow 1998 Alternate Member - Louis Rigby 2004 Alternate Member - Tommy Moser 2004 Section 5. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Fire Code Review Board of the City of La Porte, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: District 1 - Tim Bird 2008 District 2 - *Jeff Brown 2009 District 3 - *Woodrow Sebesta 2009 District 4 - *Floyd Craft 2009 District 5 - Jim Bridge 2006 3 District 6 - Lester Clark 2008 At Large -A - *Bryan Moore 2009 At Large-B - Paul Vige 2008 Mayor - *Lynn Green 2009 Section 6. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the La Porte Area Water Authority, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Position 1 - Robert Roy 2007 Position 2 - Dennis H. Steger 2007 Position 3 - Steve Valarius 2007 Position 4 - *Chester Pool 2008 Position 5 - *Paul Berner 2008 Section 7. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby appoints the following named persons, all of whom are residents of the City of La Porte, and no more than four of whom are elected city officials or city employees, to serve as directors of the City of La Porte Development Corporation without compensation, but with reimbursement for actual expenses, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Chuck Engelken 2007 *Mike Clausen 2008 Tommy Moser 2007 *Bill Love 2008 Ed Matuszak 2007 I *Pat Muston 2006 Vacant 2007 Section 8. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the La Porte Health Authority, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Health Authority - Abdul R. Moosa, M.D. 2008 Alternate - Robert D. Johnston, M.D. 2008 Medical Advisor/EMS - Oscar Boultinghouse Contract Section 9. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the La Porte Redevelopment Authority, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Position 1 - Peggy Antone 2007 Position 2 - *Dave Turnquist 2008 Position 3 - Alton Porter 2007 Position 4 - *Horace Leopard 2008 Position 5 - Douglas Martin 2007 Position 6 - *J. J. Meza 2008 Position 7 - Dr. Say 2007 Position 8 - *Chester Pool 2008 Position 9 - Lindsay R. Pfeiffer, Chairman 2007 Section 10. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Main Street District Committee, an "ad hoc" committee, without term, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: 61 Position 1 - Bill Manning, Chairman No Term Position 2 - Robert Schlenk, Vice Chairman No Term Position 3 - Deborah Johnson No Term Position 4 - Douglas Martin No Term Position 5 - Vicki Campise No Term Position 6 - Paul Berner No Term Position 7 - Pat Muston No Term Position 8 - Gloria Lair No Term Position 9 - Brenda Brown No Term Section 11. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Main Street Advisory Board, a new Board required by the Texas Historical Commission, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Position 1- Vacant 2008 Position 2- Vicki Campise 2008 Position 3- Vacant 2008 Position 4- Vacant 2009 Position 5- *Jerry Carpenter 2009 Position 6- Vacant 2009 Position 7- Michaelyn Dunaway 2007 Position 8- Claire Zaborowski 2007 Position 9- Lawrence McNeal 2007 Position 10 Position 10 Eliminated by Ordinance 2004- 2782-L on August 28th, 2006 by City Council action. Position 11 Position 11 Eliminated by Ordinance 2004- 2782-L on August 28th, 2006 by City Council action. 0 There are also three (3) Ex Officio members of this Board: 1 - the City of La Porte's Main Street Coordinator 2 - the City Manager of the City of La Porte, or her designee 3 - the Manager of the La Porte-Bayshore Chamber of Commerce Section 12. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the City of La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Chairman - *Pat Muston 2009 District 1 - Doretta Finch 2008 District 2 - *Nick Barrera 2009 District 3 - *Kirby Linscombe Jr. 2009 District 4 - Dottie Kaminiski 2007 District 5 - Paul Berner 2007 District 6 - Claude Meharg 2008 Alternate 1 - Hal Lawler 2007 Alternate 2 - Les Bird 2008 Section 13. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Southeast Texas Housing Finance Corporation Board of Directors, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Director - *Patricia Muston 2009 Section 14. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Youth Advisory Council, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Position 1 - Shelby Barnett 2005 Position 2 - Hiba Haroon 2005 Position 3 - Chaise J. Merritt 2005 Position 4 - Laura J. Low 2005 Position 5 - Amanda Gass 2005 Position 6 - Brandy C. Hickey 2005 Position 7 - Clemea J. Donaldson 2005 Position 8 - Brandon C. Lunsford 2005 Position 9 - Pierre N. Castillo 2005 Position 10 - LaSadra M. Hillman 2005 Position 11 - Margo R. Curette 2005 Position 12 - Marc R. Vanderbrink 2005 Position 13 - Carol Parmer 2005 Position 14 - Mia Parisi 2005 Position 15 - Taylor Ryan Rowan 2005 Position 16 - Ashley N. Weddle 2005 Section 15. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Position 1 - Sidney Grant 2007 Position 2 - Bob Capen 2007 Position 3 - Rod Rothermel 2007 Position 4 - Charles Schoppe 2007 Position 5 - George (Bill) W. Maltsberger 2007 Alternate 1 - *Lawrence McNeal 2008 Alternate 2 - *Gilbert Montemayor 2008 Section 16. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby appoints the following named persons, all of whom are resident electors of the City of La Porte or non-resident individuals owning or operating a business within the City of La Porte, duly verified by proof of an applicable tax statement or utility account for such business, and each of whom the City Council deems competent to serve on such Board by virtue of their experience and training in matters pertaining to building construction, and none of whom are employed by the City of La Porte, to serve as members of the Building Codes Appeals Board for terms expiring on August 31st of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Position 1 - Tom Campbell 2007 Position 2 - Terry Bunch 2007 Position 3 - Paul Larson 2007 Position 4 - Ron Holt 2007 Position 5 - Ken Schlather 2007 Position 6 - John Elfstrom 2007 Position 7 - Bruce Compton 2007 Section 17. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointment to the Fire Fighters Pension Board 0 of Trustees, to serve without term or until his successor shall have been duly appointed and qualified: City Council Representative - *John Joerns 2007 Section 18. If any section, sentence, phrase, clause or any part of any section, sentence, phrase, or clause, of this ordinance shall, for any reasons, be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance, and it is hereby declared to be the intention of this City Council to have passed each section, sentence, phrase or clause, or part thereof, irrespective of the fact that any other section, sentence, phrase or clause, or part thereof, may be declared invalid. Section 19. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed to the extent of such conflict only. Section 20. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites, and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. 10 Section 21. This Ordinance shall be effective from and after its passage and approval, and it is so ordered. PASSED AND APPROVED, this,;?"`d day of � � 2006. .ATTEST: Martha A. Gill6lty City Secretary APP VED: ar Askins Assistant City Attorney CI5 OF LA PORTZ By: Alton E. Porter Mayor 11 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: 10-23-06 Requested By: Matt Novncad Department: Rocca I -PROS Report: Resolution: Ordinance: Exhibits: Petition for Meet & Confer Exhibits: Exhibits Bud et Source of Funds: Account Number: Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: Budgeted Item: YES NO SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION In compliance to the requirements of Texas Local Government Code, Section 142, Subchapter B, "Local Control of Police Officer Employment Matters in Certain Municipalities". The La Porte Police Officers Association is presenting a petition signed by all of the eligible officers requesting Meet and Confer. This petition allows the La Porte Police Officer Association (LPPOA) to be the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of all police officers employed by the municipality for Meet and Confer negotiations. Action Required by Council: Receive the petition requesting Meet and Confer from the La Porte Police Officers Association (LPPOA). Approved for Ci ee' enda b 17 D6 John Joe , Inte nr ty Manager Date To: City Council City of La Porte Harris County, TX The petition attached to this letter is an official document signed by all eligible members of the La Porte Police Officers Association. Each signature represents a yea to allow the LPPOA to be the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City o wig so tion 142.053(aI ach signature is a current and active member of the LPPOA designatey the LPPOA Constitution and By -Laws. The only active po e officer emyed by the City of La Porte that has not signed is Cadet Bre Salter as he is ncom la o en a not a him eligible toa ber o OA. ti o ed in s letter theti presents parti ti igib bers. Matthew. President PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.063(a). Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 2. 2 c - z Printed Name Employee/Badge # Sig ature Date Signed 3. c3vc_ C. Y 141 ail Cot Printed Name Employ a/Badge # ature Date Signed 4• Iff Empl /Badg ature Printed Name Date Signed Printed Name I "'Emulovee/ a3' ee # -ZO-06 Date Signed 6. /1/461-- Cqfe4 3Zq 1641 0 0g-zz-06 Printed.Name Employee age # Signature Date Signed 7. Printed Name Employee/Badge # Date Signed 8. *Wf) //& 643 4-,Z)- � Printed Name Employee/Badge # SignayVe Date Signed 9. Dow; S (5) so 1/3 3 (DSO ..z,Z-o Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 10. EVE CXr1EL .58o ( (nl% 09 22a. Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). 11. _rank Ix F..11bn kka- S/S /G 7S F-4'o. - Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature 13. 17. 111 Printed Name Emplovee/Badge # %tie /3/ �: Printed Name Employee/Badge # etc Printed Name Printed Name I '"TmnWee/� # awe y e age �.I'j-�"gss rolJZ� 1a Name Employee/Badge # 0 Signature CI-2-2-O4 Date Signed "2 - U6 Date Signed Date Signed n$Z-5-D Date Signed-' Date Signed Date Signed O1-11-f-46 Date Signed _ / 9'hOed Name Employee/Badge # / SVn9eure Date Signed 19. PAV1_5 Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 20. Printed Name Employee/Badge # Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). 21. & d t t C, e S6av- t 1 4, 6, Printed Name Employee/ adge # Signature Date Signed 22. 41MC-44 S 01At Z Printed Name Employee/Badge # Siena re Da ft.. signPr� 23. t -ifas.. I_01A Printed Name 24-ZN4,v*4a J Printed Name WM'iiRd.'T�llf.-A Printed Name �7, Printed Name 1('61 --, mployee/Badge # 1.�"61 Badge # Signature Date Signed Date Signed Employee7Badge # / Signature Date Signed I L1 53 Z ZS- c� Employee/Badge # Sign re Date Signed Name ` Employee/Badge # Printed Name 30. K4A, Pavr I J� Printed Name Employee/Badge # )3S 6ST Employee/Badge # Signature fir>-6/ Date Signed Date Signed ay)sa Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). 31.-ZE�--F KvM,4r Printed Name '12. / ` (-,,+ T b c, e,(A, AA.C/(- Printed Name 33• 1 f Printed Name 34• Printed Name 35• ��' L Printed Name 36. R. F—, J I Al Printed Name 37• t4• 14AC-04 Printed Name 38. 0A _ Printed Name Printed Printed Name i a S I 3-Z Employee/ adge # 0a(1/1 # Signature 6.�/Ce/ Employee/Badge # *jot% J ItorlGZY Employee/Badge # Q2� (PW Employee/Badge # �33 Employee/Badge # \57, Employee/Ba ee # 4-1 Signature Signature !�, .2 S O (0 Date Signed 06 Date Signed Date Signed 9 2-I.�-ec Date Signed 0 wsdt'p Date Signed Z(. -0 (o Date Signed a f.1(-0L Date Signed Date Signed �z&- t96 Date Signed Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). 41. a -Jzr-c. Hba:aw Sal / (o yS , l.1''.t4�/6(2 Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature ate Signed Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed a 43.— A05 �eZj � d` Printed Name Employee/Badg # Signature 16ate Migned 44•— Printed Name Empl /Badg a r Date ign' d Printed Name mployee/Ba ge # S ature Date Sign 9 4� a6 Printed Name Employed/Badge # ignature Date Signed' 47• A L(..101j - 7 Z-4 p Printed Name Employ a/Badge # Signature ate Signe 48. 0) Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed V�G 49• L_ lLQitJL� L�13 /CO Zs 3O/Uro Printed Name Employee/Badge # ASignat Date Signed o. L�- (�A/ L{30 (3 5 .3 a I � z 06 Printed N me Employee/Badge # Sig Lure Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). Printed Name Empl yee/Ba e # Signature Date Signed Printed Name 53. A v •D 1A1 Printed Name 54. 900Ao10 w. _ Printed Name Prirl*d Name Printed Name 57. _ motif /�- Printed Name 58. f n,N� t fF� 1/1/q Citl Printed Name 59-- 0A ✓I D R - J-AY Printed Name 6o. 0S-.../ 63G Employee/Badge # -) 3 1 G.26 Employee/Badge # U mploye6/Badge # .3 W IZ5`7 ;mplo,fee/Badge # q39%Io Signature W'� Signature 1 Employee/Badge # Signature .lo 'e"p 'A O Z -04 Date Signed `Dat6 Signed f o Id ��- Date Signed %Q 2 OG Date Signed 0 Date Signed Date Signed i47�o 3/06 Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). 61.?�Yte n;P � � n �� ' �� jvo30 Pd Name Employee/Badge # Sign a re Date Signed 62. S. EF�R�o?�FF D 3 $ (loo l0 a3,p Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 63. �. ' cc / 3 L eta �> aG Printe Name Employee/Badge # Signatur Date Signed 6 . 6 /D- Q.3 -D� _ Printed Name Empl /Badg afore Date Signed 6 5• .1. _ Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 66. �� 0• C/- d� _ Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signa Date Signed 67. turd ��18 Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed -61, Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 70. Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed ; ili 1 117I �!: r I r1 I j ri To: City Council City of La Porte Harris County, TX The petition attached to this letter is an official document signed by all eligible members of the La Porte Police Officers Association. Each signature represents a yea to allow the LPPOA to be the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). Each signature is a current and active member of the LPPOA as designated by the LPPOA Constitution and By -Laws. The only active police officer employed by the City of La Porte that has not signed is Cadet Brett Salter as he is not a commissioned law enforcement officer, therefore not making him eligible to be a member of the LPPOA. With the information provided in this letter the petition represents 100 % participation of all eligible members. Matthew Novosad President LPPOA PETITION TO.. City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). 1. / %ta h Cv f �dos�d Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 2. Q Z Printed Name Employee/Badge # Sig ature Date Signed 3. �3ivcr 1= . 1 tT 0( �t %z J Printed Name Employ e/Badge # ature Date Signed 01 4 Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 5. / )�MDPI� Printed Name Employee/Badge # (/SigAature Date Signed 6. /10at1�aw Gufe5, 37-`( /641 Og-27-06 Printed,Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 61 3qS=>a! zzl ate. Printed Name Employee/Badge # > Date Signed .56J.') &T 1/6 643 Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signa a Date Signed btv i ci S U')a $ Printed Name Al 3 3 Cn Employee/Badge # �� Signature y-L2.-O Date Signed lo. '� >r' EVE ERMEL Jso / 1o1? — 09 22a. Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 12.-/5/u-y Printed Name 13. M,+rrA/ � Printed Name Printed Name s 66o 1(6o zz- 06 -{ 13r Employee/Badge # / M uG # 15. eft to O S Printed Name Emplo ee/Badge # 16. 1< rinted ame Employee/Badge # 17. Signature Date Signed %,;Z-2 - Date Sign Date Signed' Date Signed Date Signed Prip ed Name Employee/Badge # 7j ature Date Signed Imo:; ee Ofip ed Name Employee/Badge # SlYnAre Date Signed 19-yt7 PAV1-5 Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 20. — 10 rt-J r;'Zu Printed Name Employee/Badge # Z" -CPUE; Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). 21. E C� t t Le e S6& f 14,v16.91 Printed Name Employeeftfadge # Signature Date Signed 22. /jj7« s tAWe.G Z / l Printed Name Employee/Badge # Sign re Date,Signed i.n 2qL/�S' �j 2S did 23. e Printed Name mployee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 24. /C CZ S tom 6 3.I (,-/ W7-A5 _ 4:9� _ Printed Name Employee/Badge # ignature Date Signed p _ Printed Name Employe /Badge # ig_natu'vLf Date Signed 26 _ Printed Name Employe Ba ge # Signature Date Signed 27.11itl��/Ls,�I Printed Name Employee/Badge # SignxKre Date Signed :4 29. �v ,, IA) Print d Name 30. 9f r I I - Printed Name # /7V � 5� Employee/Badge # J3S 6S Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed Date Signed d1�5a Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). 31.7Zrz Kom,4G� Printed Name Printed Name 33. �r.._-�%5--, Wi Printed Name &Ujce-e- I5s 3z Employee/ adge # oa(0/Jl 4-1 # Signature /D�/Ce/ Employee/Badge # 14J� 67�4 Printed Name Employ a/Badge # 35• ✓r;�r� �z iDce�'�3g _ Printed Name Employee/Badge # 36. R. F-1 clme-�5 4 244 Wr _ Printed Name Employ e/Badge # 37• M. M*t-1261 *a r A a 9 Printed Name Employee/Badge # 38. �61ZK94 ICI tOOtzC, C�2� ty Z� _ Printed Name Employee/Badge # 39. I t Printed N, 40. " \ S--wNV4 Printed Name Signature Employee/Badge # t'Signature Employee/Ba ge # Signature f 2 -Is-- 4 (0 Date Signed S-Z�a©f Date Signed Date Signed Date Signed U 942'50-('o Date Signed 9 --z( --0 6 Date Signed a f. 'g -aL Date Signed Date Signed Date Signed V_Z'Vv� Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). 41. Printed Name Printed Name 43•�R�%, S� Printed Name 44• Printed Name 45• 2 Printed Name 40 �• 1 Printed Name Printed Name 48. J04) IJ (��U1 Printed Name 49• v _c �t LR� Sal � y5 lovee/Badge # o./ _Gr'j- Employee/Badge # Employee/Badge # q ! )� G. _3L Employee/Badge # Empoove /Badge # mploy e/Badge # �N/6(-i9 Employee/Badge # %,.13 /co z£6 Printed Name Employee/Badge # o. L-4- (f ,� 14 3;o 3 5 �3 Printed N me Employee/Badge # Signature P :�41 7z. Signature Signature 9�/ Ob Date Signed G Date Sign d t4 d Date Sign c d� Date Sinew"—" l6rL05-J(�06 Signature Date Signed o� 1 BV /C)r., Signat Date Signed /a aZ06 Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). 51, 444c e t.od `C Y?6 3 I Printed Name Empl yee/Ba e # Signature Date Signed Printed Name 53. A 0 •ID �k4 Printed Name Rd_ ?-00kLb w. Printed Name Di Name Employee/Badge # D `13. / G.26 Employee/Badge. # os5q ty'? Employee/Badge # Ilv /(.S4i Employee/Badge # Print,6d Name Emplo ee/Badge # 57. - )�� 4 CaAa � - Printed Name Employ AZXe�--( .3 Printed Name Employ Printed Name M ge # 5-7 1�39/oo Employee/Badge # Elm Signature Signature Signature Signature !C) ,�o o Z -04 Date Signed bath Signed V o /4 Date Signed IcAlzoe Date Sinned Date Date Signed Date Signed /��0 3/49G Date Signed PETITION TO: City Council City of La Porte, Texas We the undersigned Police Officers employed by the City of La Porte hereby request that the La Porte Police Officers Association represent us as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all the police officers employed by the municipality, excluding the head of the Police Department and the exempt employees, for meet and confer negotiations with the City of La Porte in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Section 142.053(a). 6i. WA /1� J ^01n a? �/.3 /003# P ' ted Name Employee/Badge # Signa ure Date Signed 62. -S. A� �R�o� 039 14.011 1 D C)3.Q Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature it V Date Signed 63. 6+e�L�i9 _ Printed Name 65.i. C00 Printed Name 66.. 1 -1 Printed Name 67.drd Printed Name 68. Printed Name 69. Printed Name 70. Employee/Badge # Employee/Badge # /(o o - Employee/Badge # Employee/Badge # Date Signed FA� Signature Date Signed Signat Date Signed / - � Ir %r a Signature Date Signed Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed Printed Name Employee/Badge # Signature Date Signed 20/21 0 City of La Porte Interoffice Memorandum To: Mayor and City Council Knox Askins, City Attorr From: John Joerns, Interim City Date: October 9, 2006 Subject: Contracts/Bids - Award The question of when an ordinance is required has been raised because of some inconsistencies. The Charter is not absolutely clear for all occasions regarding the need for an ordinance. It is clear on debt issuance — Section 2.09(b) — an ordinance is needed. In Section 2.11(b), it states any "expenditure of funds or for the contracting of indebtedness shall be by ordinance." — remember the budget and amendments are approved by ordinance. I have drafted a proposed policy to address certain situations. Additional comments are in italics for Council consideration. My preference is to not use ordinances unless required — because they become permanent record (perhaps a selfish motive). The law office feels that at "some level" Council may desire an ordinance (although not specifically required). If Council prefers, this policy format and the final decisions could be converted to an ordinance. This will be on future workshop. JJ/ml c: Clark Askins Martha Gillett DRAFT POLICY MANUAL Date: October 2006 Revised Approved: Subject: Responsible Agency: Policy Objective: Authority or Authorizing Legislation: Policy: Authority of city manager to contract for expenditures; limits. a) pursuant to the provisions of Charter Section 5.02 (attached) and Section 2-81 of the Code of Ordinances (attached) regarding purchase procedure, the city council hereby confers upon the city manager general authority to contract for expenditures, without further approval of the city council, for budgeted items not exceeding $25,000.00. All contracts for expenditures involving more than $25,000.00 must be expressly approved in advance by city council. b) in the case of contracts for expenditures involving more than $25,000.00 and which expenditures city council has previously approved by budget ordinance or amendments thereto, such expenditures may be approved by city council on its agenda, and the passage of ordinance shall not be necessary to meet the requirements that all such expenditures be expressly approved by council. c) an ordinance is required for the contracting of indebtedness or the issuance of bonds. The above items will meet the City charter requirements. The City Attorneys office feels that Council may want an "ordinance approval" for the larger expenditures. If this is the case, then one or both of the following could be added; d) construction contracts greater than (pick a level —suggestions are provided) $25, 000 agrees with the current State statute level and City ordinance authority requiring City Council approval (exceeds signature authority of the City Manager). DRAFT $25,000 to $]00,000 agrees with state statute and local ordinance the projects within this range may have performance and payment bonds waived, at discretion of City Council, upon written recommendation from City Manager (or designee). $100,000 agrees with the current State statute level requiring both performance and payment bonds. $300,000 agrees with the current level which requires formal pre - qualification by City of La Porte ordinance. e) all other contracts for expenditures in excess of $ , must be expressly approved in advance by city council, by passage of an ordinance authorizing such expenditures. No particular suggestions here as we have purchased, fleets of vehicles, fire trucks, dump trucks, etc. with just Council approval of bids and issuance ofpurchase order (no ordinance). f) professional services and/or other similar services (AIE agreements, auditors, depository services, financial advisors, etc) in excess of $ shall require ordinance approval. NOTE. If Council chooses to do items (c), (d), and (e) by ordinance, the ordinance has to be kept forever as a permanent record. The standard approval ordinance (attached) is only two pages long and has been re -worked to refer to contracts as being on file. Therefore, the contracts (and PO's) can be destroyed but the two page ordinance is retained permanently. Exhibits: 0PXZa-Z>CLQ- V 0o 100 e-P P W) D d/ 000 �.rZ4%2rt AZ Ct- IO0Pct R UJIP—C=4 CITY OF LA PORTE ADMINISTRATION § 2-81 -01 Historical/symbolic criteria. Facilities may be named for individuals, families, organiza- tions or entities who, for historical or symbolic reasons, have contributed to the community. Nominated individuals shall have been deceased for a minimum of five years. When considering individuals or families under this category, criteria will include their character, service to the community, leadership and inspiration to others. inated according to the same criteria. (Ord. No. 2000-2443, § 1, 10-23-00) Secs. 2-2-2-30. Reserved. ARTICLE II. CITY COUNCIL* Sec. 2-31. Meetings. (a) The city council shall hold two regular monthly meetings. The first such regular monthly meeting shall be held at 6:00 p.m. on the second Monday of each calendar month. The second such regular monthly meeting shall be held at 6:00 p.m. on the fourth Monday of each calendar month. (b) All regular meetings and all special meetings of the city council shall be held at the city hall. (Code 1970, § 2-1) Charter reference —Regular meetings and special meetings, § 2.07. State law reference —Public meetings act, V.T.C.A., Government Code § 551.001 et seq. Secs. 2-32-2-60. Reserved. ARTICLE III. FINANCE- DIVISION 1. GENERALLY Secs. 2-61-2-80. Reserved. DIVISION '2. PURCHASES AND CONTRACTSt Subdivision L In General Sec. 2-81. Authority of city manager to contract for expenditures; limits. Pursuant to the provisions of Charter section 5.02 regarding purchase procedure, the city council hereby confers upon the city manager general authority to contract for expenditures, *Charter references —City council, art. II; recall procedure, § 6.08. 'Charter references —Compensation of councilmembers, § 2.05; finance department, § 3.02; signatures for checks, § 5.06; audit, § 5.07. ' Cross references —Taxation, ch. 66; water and sewer service charges, § 74-221 et seq.; mobile home park fees, § 98-71 et seq.; fees, app. A. State law reference —Financial matters, V.T.C.A., Local Government Code § 101.001 et seq. $Charter reference —Purchase procedure, § 5.02. State law reference —Purchasing and contracting, V.T.C.A., Local Government Code § 252.001 et seq. Supp. No. 10 CD2:3 § 2-81 LA PORTE CODE without further approval of the city council, for budgeted items not exceeding $25,000.00. All contracts for expenditures involving more than $25,000.00 must be expressly approved in advance by the city council. (Ord. No. 1700, § 1, 5-7-90; Ord. No. 2004-2736, § 1, 5-10-04) Editor's note —The city manager has purchasing authority for budget items not exceeding $15,000.00, pursuant to Ord. No. 95-2063, adopted September 25, 1995. Charter references —City manager, § 3.01; purchasing procedure, § 5.02. Sec. 2-82. Provisions of state law to supersede city Charter provisions. The city council hereby elects to have the provisions of V.T.C.A., Local Government Code § 252.001 et seq., 'Purchasing and Contracting Authority of Municipalities," supersede the provisions of the city Charter that relate to the notice of contracts, advertisement of the notice, requirements for the taking of sealed bids based on specifications for public improvements or purchases, the manner of publicly opening bids or reading them aloud or the manner of letting contracts that are in conflict with V.T.C.A., Local Government Code § 252.001 et seq. (Ord. No. 95-2063, § 1, 9-25-95) Charter reference —Purchase procedure, § 5.02. State law reference -Authority to elect to have state law supersede the Charter, V.T.C.A., Local Government Code § 252.002. Sec. 2-83. Purchases by city from delinquent debtors. (a) The city council hereby determines and declares that it shall be the policy of the city not to make any expenditure. of any kind for goods or services by the city, from any person, firm, or corporation, owing any delinquent.indebtedness to the city. (b) No officer or employee of the city shall contract for the purchase of any goods or services by the city from any person, if such officer or employee knows or reasonably believes that such person owes any delinquent indebtedness to the city. (c) The purchasing division shall cause all bid proposal forms used by the city to include a written certification, by any person submitting a bid to the city for the furnishing of any manner of goods or services, to the city at the time of submitting such proposal, which indebtedness is delinquent, or, if such person is unable to make such certification, then, and in that event such person, at his option, in order to qualify as a bidder, shall include in such proposal a tender to assign to the city from the proceeds of any such contract, should he be the successful bidder, an amount at least as great as the total sum of such delinquent indebted- ness, or the total proceeds of such contract, whichever is the lesser amount. (d) For the purposes of this section, the term "delinquent indebtedness" shall mean any indebtedness due and owing to the city, including, but not limited to, ad valorem taxes on real and personal property, which property is in fact owned by and is legally subject to taxation, by any person covered by the terms of this section, whether or not the same may have been property rendered to the tax assessor -collector by any person. Such term shall also include, but not be limited to, charges for penalties, interest and costs on any such ad valorem taxes; charges for water, sewer, garbage and other services rendered or goods furnished by the city to • Supp. No. 10 CD2:4 2.07 LA PORTE CODE f b. Rules. City council shall determine its own rules and order of business. c. Journal. City council shall keep a journal of its proceedings. Such journal shall be open to public inspection. State law reference —Public meetings, V.T.C.A., Government Code § 551.001 et seq. 2.08. Duties of mayor. The mayor shall preside at meetings of council and shall be entitled to vote upon all matters it considers. The mayor shall exercise such other powers and perform such other duties as are or may be conferred and imposed upon him by this Charter and the ordinances of the city. He shall be recognized as the head of the city government for all ceremonial purposes, by the courts for civil process, and by the government for purposes of military law. In times of public danger ,or emergency, the mayor shall take command of the police, maintain order and enforce the law. If a vacancy occurs in the office of mayor or in the case of his absence or disability, the mayor pro..tem shall act as mayor until a successor is elected and has qualified or until the mayor is again able to assume his duties of office. 2.09. Powers of council. Ail powers of the city and the determination of all matters of policy shall be vested in city , council. Council shall execute the laws and administer the government of the city. Without limitation of the foregoing and among the other powers that may be exercised by council, the following are hereby enumerated for greater certainty: a. Adopt budget of the city. b. Authorize the issuance of bonds by a bond ordinance. c. Inquire into the conduct of any office department, a gencyor officer of the city and make investigations as to municipal affairs, and for that purpose may subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, and compel the production of books, papers and other evidence. Failure to obey such subpoena or xo produce books, papers or other evidence as ordered underf the provisions of this section shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable .by fine Council shall enact an ordinance to enforce this provision. d. Establish and appoint the members of the planning commission. e. Adopt plats.. f. Adopt and modify the official map of the city. g. Adopt, modify and carry out plans proposed by the planning commission for the clearance of slum districts and rehabilitation of blighted areas. h. Adopt, modify and carry out plans proposed by ,the planning commission for the replanning, improvement and redevelopment of neighborhoods and for the replanning, reconstruction or redevelopment of any area or district which may have been destroyed in whole or in part by disaster. CHTAO CHARTER 3.01 1� least once within ten (10) days of its passage according to the provisions of V.T.C.A., Local Government Code § 52.011. He shall note on every ordinance, the caption of which is hereby required to be published, and on the record thereof, the fact that same has been published as required by the Charter, and the date of such publication and promulgation of such ordinance; provided, that the provisions of this section shall not apply to the correction, amendment, revision and modification of the ordinances of the city for publication in book or pamphlet form. Except as otherwise provided in Article VII of this Charter, it shall not be necessary to the validity of any ordinance that it shall be read more than one time or considered at more than one session of city council. Every ordinance shall be authenticated by the signature of the mayor and city secretary and shall be systematically recorded in an ordinance book in a manner approved by council. It shall only be necessary to record the caption or title of ordinances in the minutes of journal of council meetings. 2. Codifications. Council shall have power to cause the ordinances of the city to be corrected, amended, revised, codified and printed in code form as often as council deems advisable. Such printed code, when adopted by council, shall be in full force and effect without file necessity of publishing the same or any part thereof in a newspaper µ_ and shall be admitted in evidence in all courts and places without further proof. b. Additional ordinances. In addition to such acts of council as are required by statute or by this Charter to be by ordinance, every act of council establishing a fine or other penalty or _ - providing' for" the expenditure of funds or for the contracting of indebtedness shall be by ordinance. c. Enacting clause. The enacting clause of all ordinances shall be "BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE." ARTICLE M. ADMINISTRATION 3.01. City manager. a. Appointment and qualifications. City council shall appoint a city manager, who shall be chosen solely on the basis of his executive and administrative training, experience and ability. No. -member of city. council shall, during the term for which he is elected, and for one year thereafter, be appointed city. manager. b. Term and salary. The city manager may be appointed and removed at the will and pleasure of city council by a vote of the majority of the entire city.council. The action of city council in suspending or removing the city manager shall be final, it being the intention of this Charter to vest all authority and fix all responsibility of such action in city council. Council shall set a salary for the city manager as it deems appropriate. CHT:13 ORDINANCE NO. 2006Aq—P—L - AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA PORTE AND TEXCOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES CO., FOR PAVING AND EXTENSION OF NORTH 2ND STREET; APPROPRIATING $113,133.41 TO FUND SAID CONTRACT; MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN METTINGS LAW; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: Section 1. The City Council hereby approves and authorizes the contract, agreement, or other undertaking described in the title of this ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Secretary, as set forth in this section. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute such document and all related documents on behalf of the City of LaPorte. The authority given to the City Manager to execute the contract or agreement approved by this ordinance shall expire sixty (60) days from its passage and approval. The City Secretary is hereby authorized to attest to all such signatures and to affix the seal of the City to all such documents. City Council appropriates the sum not to exceed $113,133.41 from the City of La Porte Grant Fund No. 032, to fund said contract. Section 2. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council is posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the city for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and f� confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. Section 3 This Ordinance shall be effective from and after its passage and approval, and it is so ordered. Passed and Approved this 260- day of S�� 2006. CITY OF LA PORTE Alton E. Porter, Mayor ATTEST: Martha A. Gillett, City Secretary APPROVED: l C ark T. Askins, Assistant City Attorney Wo REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: 10-23-06 Requested By: Champ nnnham Department: EirDe t Report: X Resolution: Ordinance: Exhibits: Executive Summary Exhibits: Exhibits Budget Source of Funds: Account Number: Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: Budgeted Item: YES NO SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The Fire Department to brief City Council on preliminary report fromISOconsultant including recommendations. A copy of the complete report will be available in the City,�&stiage�'s office for your review. Action Required by Council: None Approved for City Council Agenda John erns, teri ity Manager T% Date Executive Summary Based on information obtained during my recent field survey of the City of La Porte the fire department has sufficient numbers of engines and ladder trucks in-service available to respond to first alarm structural fires. The existing engine and ladder trucks are adequately equipped based on ISO's rating document. The four (4) existing fire stations are properly located to maximize ISO rating credits. Therefore, no additional fire stations or apparatus are required based on the standards within ISO's rating document. A reserve engine and a reserve ladder truck will also be required. A reserve engine is provided and an apparatus that will receive very little credit as a reserve ladder truck is also provided. Due to the fact that ISO's Fire Suppression Rating Schedule places very little emphasis on reserve apparatus I would not even consider providing a reserve ladder truck unless an in-service ladder truck was scheduled for replacement. Areas of deficiency within the fire department section are proper testing of the older aerial device, staffing of the in-service apparatus, and training of the firefighters. The water supply section demonstrates a very good grading point total (34.53 out of a possible 40). The only item that has a significant deficiency is the hydrant inspection program. Fire service communications had several areas of deficiency. These were the lack of a secondary dispatch method, monitoring for integrity of the primary dispatch circuit, and proper phone listings for both the fire department emergency and business number. Fire Safety Control has two serious areas of deficiency. These are the absence of an up to date Fire Prevention Code adopted by ordinance and lack of sufficient numbers of inspector/investigators in the Office of The Fire Marshal. At present the City of La Porte has an ISO Public Protection Classification of 4. My study indicates that the City of La Porte would achieve a Class 3, with La Porte's existing fire defense infrastructure (please see the accompanying information at the conclusion of this report), if the support data required by ISO was properly formatted and presented to the Field Representative by my company. The current classification is costing the commercial property owners within 5 road - miles of a City of La Porte fire station and 1000 feet of a fire hydrant a possible 9 per cent on their property insurance. The residential property owners within 5 road -miles of a City of La Porte fire station and 1000 feet of a fire hydrant would save approximately 3 per cent on their homeowner's insurance if an ISO PPC of 3 were attained. If enough of the suggested improvements were implemented so that an ISO PPC of 2 were attained the commercial property owners within 5 road -miles of a City of La Porte fire station and 1000 feet of a fire hydrant would save a possible 11 per cent (effect of lowering the PPC from a 4 to a 2) and the residential property owners within 5 road -miles of a City of La Porte fire station and 1000 feet of a fire hydrant would save a possible 10 per cent (effect of lowering the PPC from a 4 to a 2). It is obvious that an ISO PPC of 3 is critical to the commercial property owners and an ISO PPC of 2 is critical to the homeowners. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 7 Since the City of La Porte is presently a Class 4 this would result in a two -class (4 to a 2) improvement if an ISO PPC of 2 was attained. Normally, all improvements two classifications or more are edited in New York (much more severe edit) not Austin. I know this as a fact; I edited these gradings for over eleven years. It has been my experience that an improvement of two classifications or better needs to move well into the new class in order to remain in that class after the review is complete. I would not feel comfortable submitting a grading less than 83.00 to New York if a Public Protection Classification of 2 was the mission of the City of La Porte. If the mission of the City of La Porte were to achieve a Public Protection Classification of 1 the grading point total would need to exceed 93.00. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 8 A Report From MIKE PIETSCH, P.E. CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. To THE CITY OF LA PORTE Concerning a Possible Improvement in The City of La Porte's ISO Public Protection Classification August 10, 2006 Submitted by: W. Michael Pietsch, P.E. Civil Engineer Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. 3101 S. Country Club Rd. Garland, TX 75043-1311 Phone: 972-271-3292 Fax: 972-840-6665 E-Mail. wmpietsch@comcast.net A Report From MIKE PIETSCH, P.E. CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. To THE CITY OF LA PORTE Concerning a Possible Improvement in The City of La Porte's ISO Public Protection Classification What is Insurance Services Office, Inc. (ISO)? To help establish appropriate fire insurance premiums for residential and commercial properties, insurance companies need reliable, up-to-date information about a municipality's fire protection services. Insurance Services Office, Inc. (ISO) provides that information through the Public Protection Classification (PPC) program. What is the Public Protection Classification (PPC) Program? ISO collects information on a community's public fire protection and analyzes the data using their Fire Suppression Rating Schedule (FSRS). ISO then assigns a Public Protection Classification from 1 to 10. Class 1 represents the best public protection, and Class 10 indicates less than the minimum recognized protection. By classifying a community's ability to extinguish or control a structural fire, ISO assists communities in evaluating their public fire protection infrastructure. The program provides an objective, countrywide standard that assists communities in planning and budgeting for facilities, equipment, and training. By securing lower fire insurance premiums for communities with better public protection, the PPC program provides incentives and rewards for communities that choose to improve their firefighting services. ISO has extensive information on more than 47,000 fire -response jurisdictions. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 2 "- Explanation of the Fire Suppression Rating Schedule (FSRS) The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule is the manual ISO utilizes in reviewing the firefighting capabilities of individual communities. This schedule evaluates the three major items comprising a community's fire suppression infrastructure and develops a numerical grading called a Public Protection Classification (PPC). The items considered are Fire Alarm, Fire Department, and Water Supply. Fire Alarms Ten percent of the grading point total is based on how efficiently calls for emergency service are received and dispatched. ISO Field Representatives will evaluate the communications center. They consider the number of operators at the center, the telephone service, including the number of telephone lines coming into the center, and the listing of emergency numbers in the principal telephone directory. Field Representatives will also evaluate the number of dispatch circuits and how the center notifies firefighters of an emergency. Fire Department Fifty percent of the grading point total is based on the infrastructure of the fire department. ISO reviews the distribution of fire companies throughout the graded area and verifies which apparatus will respond to structural alarms of fire. The ISO Field Representative will inventory each engine, ladder and service company, both in service and reserve, to verify the existence of nozzles, hose loads, breathing apparatus, and other major equipment. ISO also reviews the fire -company records to determine: • type and extent of training provided to fire -company personnel • number of people who participate in training • firefighter response to emergencies • maintenance and testing of the fire department's equipment • number of engine, ladder and service companies available for response to first alarm structural fires • the location of these companies to minimize response times to fire emergencies Water Supply Forty percent of the grading point total is based on the community's water supply, distribution system, and proximity of fire hydrants to existing structures. This item focuses on the community's ability to provide sufficient water supply for fire suppression beyond maximum daily consumption. ISO surveys all components of the water supply system, including pumps, storage, and filtration. Field Representatives will observe fire -flow tests at representative locations in the community to determine the rate of flow provided by the distribution system. Last, they count the distribution of fire hydrants no more than 1,000 feet from the location of all needed fire flows (targeted structures). Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 3 I- Texas Addendum Unique to the State of Texas is a document titled the Texas Addendum (sometimes called the Texas Exception). This document analyzes the effectiveness of the Fire Marshal and Building Code Offices and assigns additional credit for compressed air foam systems on in-service engines. A second section of this document assigns credit to communities that allowed a certain percentage of their firefighters to attend Fireman's Training School and volunteer firefighters that have obtained at least the basic firefighter certification. Mathematically, this section could add an additional 11.39 points to a grading point total. Normally 4 to 7 additional grading points are achieved via the Texas Addendum. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 4 The Effect of PPC Code on Fire Insurance Premiums All insurance companies (whether they admit or not) utilize ISO's PPC classes in establishing premiums for both commercial and residential property policies. Here's how it works: PPC and Commercial Fire Insurance Premiums Insurers determine insurance premiums for commercial properties after analyzing size, construction type, occupancy, protection (such as fire extinguishers and automatic sprinklers), and exposure to adjacent structures. For individual properties, either class rating or specific rating applies. In class rating, the insurer develops rates for similar types - or classes - of buildings, such as small churches, schools, or motels. Specific rating includes an on -site survey and analysis of conditions at the particular property to determine the premium rate. Insurers use specific rating for buildings protected by automatic sprinklers, buildings with specific hazards or processes, or other properties that do not meet the criteria for class rating. Both class rating and specific rating consider the Public Protection Classification at the property. Insurers develop their rating systems in order that the lower (better) the PPC at a given commercial property, the lower the insurance rate. ISO's Methodology A community may request an ISO survey anytime they wish. At that time an ISO Field Representative will be assigned the survey. He will contact the community and set a time convenient to both the community and ISO. He will analyze the community's fire defenses as outlined under the "Explanation of the FSRS". An extensive amount of support data will be required to verify answers to specific questions that are utilized to analyze the three major items that comprise a community's grading point total. When all the questions are answered and the support data is properly formatted the Field Representative will return to his office and complete the grading. When he completes the grading he submits it for review. After the review is complete the grading is then submitted to the State Fire Marshal's Office for their approval. Once the State Fire Marshal's Office approves the grading the community is notified via a letter to the City Manager or Mayor of their new rating. This entire process normally takes around one year. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 5 Explanation of La Porte's Study In this report I will analyze a grading scenario that should result if the City of La Porte requested a rating review by ISO. This scenario will require that the City of La Porte operate the existing apparatus fleet out of the four (4) in-service fire stations. After this scenario is presented a list of suggested improvements will follow which, if implemented, would improve the ISO Public Protection Classification for the City of La Porte. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08/10/06 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 6 Executive Summary Based on information obtained during my recent field survey of the City of La Porte the fire department has sufficient numbers of engines and ladder trucks in-service available to respond to first alarm structural fires. The existing engine and ladder trucks are adequately equipped based on ISO's rating document. The four (4) existing fire stations are properly located to maximize ISO rating credits. Therefore, no additional fire stations or apparatus are required based on the standards within ISO's rating document. A reserve engine and a reserve ladder truck will also be required. A reserve engine is provided and an apparatus that will receive very little credit as a reserve ladder truck is also provided. Due to the fact that ISO's Fire Suppression Rating Schedule places very little emphasis on reserve apparatus I would not even consider providing a reserve ladder truck unless an in-service ladder truck was scheduled for replacement. Areas of deficiency within the fire department section are proper testing of the older aerial device, staffing of the in-service apparatus, and training of the firefighters. The water supply section demonstrates a very good grading point total (34.53 out of a possible 40). The only item that has a significant deficiency is the hydrant inspection program. Fire service communications had several areas of deficiency. These were the lack of a secondary dispatch method, monitoring for integrity of the primary dispatch circuit, and proper phone listings for both the fire department emergency and business number. Fire Safety Control has two serious areas of deficiency. These are the absence of an up to date Fire Prevention Code adopted by ordinance and lack of sufficient numbers of inspector/investigators in the Office of The Fire Marshal. At present the City of La Porte has an ISO Public Protection Classification of 4. My study indicates that the City of La Porte would achieve a Class 3, with La Porte's existing fire defense infrastructure (please see the accompanying information at the conclusion of this report), if the support data required by ISO was properly formatted and presented to the Field Representative by my company. The current classification is costing the commercial property owners within 5 road - miles of a City of La Porte fire station and 1000 feet of a fire hydrant a possible 9 per cent on their property insurance. The residential property owners within 5 road -miles of a City of La Porte fire station and 1000 feet of a fire hydrant would save approximately 3 per cent on their homeowner's insurance if an ISO PPC of 3 were attained. If enough of the suggested improvements were implemented so that an ISO PPC of 2 were attained the commercial property owners within 5 road -miles of a City of La Porte fire station and 1000 feet of a fire hydrant would save a possible 11 per cent (effect of lowering the PPC from a 4 to a 2) and the residential property owners within 5 road -miles of a City of La Porte fire station and 1000 feet of a fire hydrant would save a possible 10 per cent (effect of lowering the PPC from a 4 to a 2). It is obvious that an ISO PPC of 3 is critical to the commercial property owners and an .- ISO PPC of 2 is critical to the homeowners. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08/10/06 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 7 Since the City of La Porte is presently a Class 4 this would result in a two -class (4 to a 2) improvement if an ISO PPC of 2 was attained. Normally, all improvements two classifications or more are edited in New York (much more severe edit) not Austin. I know this as a fact; I edited these gradings for over eleven years. It has been my experience that an improvement of two classifications or better needs to move well into the new class in order to remain in that class after the review is complete. I would not feel comfortable submitting a grading less than 83.00 to New York if a Public Protection Classification of 2 was the mission of the City of La Porte. If the mission of the City of La Porte were to achieve a Public Protection Classification of 1 the grading point total would need to exceed 93.00. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08/10/06 Mike Pietsch, P. E Consulting Services, Inc. Page 8 -- Analysis of the Grading In this report I will analyze a grading scenario that should result if an ISO Public Protection Survey was requested. For this scenario a point total to two decimal places will result. This point total should occur if an ISO Public Protection Survey was requested. In 1995 the point total developed by ISO for the City of La Porte was 64.73 (ISO PPC 4). My study indicates that the point total would be 74.55 (ISO PPC 3) if an ISO survey commenced with the City of La Porte's fire defense infrastructure, as it existed on August 1, 2006. Please see the accompanying grading summary at the conclusion of this report for the development of this point total. At the conclusion of this scenario will be a list of suggested improvements, which, if implemented, would allow the City of La Porte to improve its ISO rating to a Public Protection Classification of 2 or 1. All of the suggestions are prioritized by their importance and tempered by their cost. These suggested improvements relate only to fire insurance classification for the City of La Porte. They are not for property loss prevention or life safety purposes and no life safety or property loss prevention suggestions are made. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 9 Grading Scenario The Basic Fire Flow will be 3500-gpm. Based infrastructure of the City of La Porte the point total Class 3). Please see the grading summary at the more detailed explanation. The grading point total for improving this classification to 83.00 (Class suggestions are as follows: General on the existing fire defense for this scenario is 74.55 (ISO conclusion of this report for a of 74.55 will be the benchmark 2) or 93.00 (Class 1). The 1. An excellent map exists that demonstrates the streets and existing fire hydrants within the city limits of the City of La Porte. Making sure each hydrant (public and private) available to the La Porte Fire Department is plotted on this map is critical to improving the ISO Public Protection Classification of your community. This suggestion is an absolute. No point total will be demonstrated. 2. A second map must be developed that demonstrates the built -upon and non built -upon area with the desired graded boundary served by the La Porte Fire Department. This map must also demonstrate the areas within the city limits of La Porte that cannot be built upon (flood plain, golf course, lake, etc.). This suggestion is an absolute. No point total will be demonstrated. Please wait until phase 2 (preparing the pre -survey packet) before developing this map. By that time it may not be required based on the possible adoption of the 2003 International Fire Code. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 10 Fire Department For a community to provide a reasonable level of protection under the analysis system used, a fire department should have suitably located apparatus of proper types. In general, the maximum response distances for the first due engine company should not exceed 1.5-miles and for the first due ladder/service truck company should not exceed 2.5-miles. Critical to the quick suppression of a fire is the need for sufficient firefighters arriving with the first responding apparatus. A comprehensive training program for these firefighters is essential for effective fire ground operations. At the present time, the apparatus needs of your community under the ISO rating document are satisfied. Consideration should be given to implementing the following suggestions: 1. Properly preplan all commercial structures within the boundaries of the City of La Porte and update them semi-annually. This would add 0.93 points to the grading point total. At present 60% of the commercial structures are preplanned. They are not updated on a semi-annual basis. 2. Provide each member of the La Porte Fire Department with 20-hours of company training per month. These drills must be a minimum of 1-hour in duration. This level of company training is hard to achieve in combination or volunteer departments, however, if this training were provided to each member (both paid and volunteer) of the La Porte Fire Department 1.64 points would be added to the grading point total. This item can be pro -rated therefore any additional company training will improve the grading point tota 1. 3. Properly format the training records to maximize all available training credits within the ISO rating document. If these records were available 0.41 points would be added to the grading point total. In most communities the extensive amount of effort and time is not worth the fractional credit. 4. The oldest ladder tower should undergo a visual dye test once every five years. ISO requires that all aerial ladder or elevating platform apparatus undergo a non-destructive test once every 5 years. Since the ladder tower (1983) is over five years of age one visual dye test is required prior to an ISO evaluation. If this level of testing were performed 1.90 points would be added to the grading point total. 5. The single most deficient item within the entire rating process for the City of La Porte is the lack of firefighters responding to structural alarms of fire. The ISO Rating Document requires that 6 firefighters per company be on duty with each of the existing engines and ladder trucks. This level of staffing is needed at the fire site for optimum utilization of the apparatus, and when the staffing level drops below 4 firefighters per company, the ability to utilize the apparatus effectively is seriously impaired. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08/10/06 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page I I .-- I would deem this report incomplete unless I point out that no fire department in Texas maintains 6 firefighters per company on -duty (paid staffing) with each of the first due apparatus. However, many communities strive to maintain a minimum of 4 firefighters on duty with each of the existing companies. An increase in the paid personnel on duty by one firefighter will increase the grading point total by 0.64 points. An increase in the volunteer response to structural alarms of fire will increase the grading point total by 0.21 points. Please note that there exists a possible 15 points available for manpower. The City of La Porte received only 3.33 of these 15 available points. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 12 Receiving and Handling Alarms of Fire In order to assure a timely response to fire emergencies a communications center must have adequate telephone facilities (emergency and business circuits) for the public to report emergencies, sufficient operators on duty, and the facilities to dispatch fire department companies without interruption. Consideration should be given to implementing the following suggestions. 1. Provide a second independent method to dispatch fire department emergency calls for service. With a fire department call volume of approximately 2000 calls for service annually two independent dispatch methods are required by the ISO rating document and NFPA 1221. If this second independent method were provided 1.75 points would be added to the grading point total. 2. Provide monitoring for integrity of the primary dispatch circuit in accordance with NFPA 1221. This will add 1.50 points to the grading point total. 3. Properly list the emergency and business number for fire emergencies in the business white pages or government pages of the primary phone directory under the title "Fire Department" and under the title "City of La Porte". If these listings were provided 0.20 points would be added to the grading point total. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 13 Water Supply For a water supply works to be considered adequate under the analysis system used, it should be able to deliver the basic fire flow (maximum of 3500-gm) for a 3-hour period and during that period provide consumption demands at the maximum daily rate. The arterial mains and secondary feeder mains should be of sufficient capacity to deliver the needed fire flows throughout the community. The arterial mains should extend to all areas of the community; they should be looped for mutual support and spaced at approximately 3000-foot intervals or less. The minimum size distribution main should be 6-inches (8-inches is preferred) in diameter and this size used only in widely spaced residential areas when the gridiron is such that there is not over 600- feet between connections to other mains. A 6-inch dead-end main is not considered satisfactory for supplying fire hydrants. A minimum size of 8-inch pipe (10-inch is preferred) should be used in commercial and high -density residential areas and this size pipe should be limited to areas with an excellent gridiron. This will help insure meeting the corresponding fire demand throughout the community. Before the water supply available can be fully utilized by the fire department, there must be sufficient fire hydrants in the vicinity of the subject buildings. The number of hydrants required varies with the fire flow demand but when the spacing is not over 300-feet in commercial, industrial, and institutional areas and not over 600-feet in one and two family dwelling areas, sufficient hydrants normally will be available. Hydrants should conform to the American Water Works Association Standards. The connection from the distribution main to the hydrant should be not less than 6- inches in diameter. All hydrants should be inspected twice per year with a pressure test (a pressure test is not a flow test); complete records should be kept of all inspections. Consideration should be given to implementing the following suggestions: Improving arterial looping, distribution system gridirons, and hydrant distribution will help improve the water supply item of the grading (35 points are available within this item). This is the most heavily weighted item within the development of the grading point total. There exists a possible 4.41 points available within this grading item. The results based on a flow -testing program throughout the city limits of La Porte will be the single most critical item within the entire grading process for the City of La Porte. A quantitative method does not exist to analyze prospective improvements in this aspect of the grading until such improvements are implemented; therefore, no additional point total will be shown. 2. Fire hydrants should be inspected semi-annually with proper records maintained throughout the city limits of the City of La Porte. Each hydrant should be pressure tested semi-annually (a pressure test is not a flow test) as part of the hydrant inspection process. This would add 1.06 points to the grading point total. At present the hydrants are inspected annually. Records documenting these tests are not complete. Pressure testing is performed but not documented in every case. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 14 Fire Safety Control The consistent, systematic application of fire safety control regulations combined with a good public education program in fire prevention can be an important factor in reducing the overall incidence of fire and the consequent fire losses. Successful execution of such programs necessitates that a sufficient number of properly trained personnel be provided. A nationally recognized body of model fire prevention, building and safety codes represent the combined knowledge of many experts in this field and, when adopted with little or no modifications, afford a community the opportunity for reasonable control of hazardous materials and building construction. Consideration should be given to implementing the following suggestions: Provide two additional full-time inspector/investigators to the Office of the Fire Marshal. This would add 1.18 points to the grading point total via the Texas Addendum. Each additional inspector/investigator provided will add 0.59 points to the grading point total. 2. Adopt the 2003 or 2006 Edition of the International Fire Code by ordinance and enforce it throughout the city limits of the City of La Porte. This would add 0.71 points to the grading point total via the Texas Addendum and assist with improving the grading point total with the ISO rating document. 3. Provide a compressed air foam system will require that one engine equipped respond to all structural alarms of fire Porte. A second ISO requirement compressed air foam must be available fires for each three engines in service. with compressed air foam 1.50 points total via the Texas Addendum. This is that cannot be prorated. No credit will are compressed air foam equipped. For two of the existing engines. ISO with a compressed air foam system vithin the city limits of the City of La s that one engine equipped with to respond to first alarms structural If these two engines were equipped would be added to the grading point one item within the rating document be received until at least two engines Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08/10/06 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 15 Summary of Suggested Improvements When enough of the suggested improvements are implemented so that the point total exceeds the number 83.00, I would feel comfortable requesting a future survey if the mission of the City of La Porte is to obtain an ISO Public Protection Classification of 2. The point total to exceed is 93.00 if the mission of the City of La Porte is to obtain an ISO PPC of 1. Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E Consulting Services, Inc. Page 16 1 Plan of Action 1. Complete the suggested improvements that are economically feasible within the budget constraints of the City of La Porte. 2. Request a survey from ISO. Once a Field Representative is assigned to the City of La Porte the City of La Porte should initiate a request for a pre -survey packet. This packet is extremely time consuming and tedious to complete. I know as I designed this packet in 1997 for all Field Representatives throughout the United States. My assistance will save City Officials a considerable amount of time in filling out this packet. Also the ISO Field Representative will have the extensive amount of required support data properly formatted to maximize La Porte's ISO rating. 3. Set a mutually convenient time for the City of La Porte and the ISO Field Representative to complete the ISO rating survey for the City of La Porte. The information transfer will proceed effortlessly since I will be assisting the City of La Porte throughout the survey process. This will save your City Officials a great deal of time and allow them to continue their normal daily activities. Plus the ISO Field Representative will receive the exact information he requires. Conclusion Accomplish as many improvements as possible that will have a significant impact on the emergency response and the ISO Rating for the City of La Porte. When these are implemented, request an ISO survey. I appreciate the opportunity afforded me by the City of La Porte and look forward to working with your community in the future. Sincerely, W. Michael Pietsch, P.E. Civil Engineer WMP/sp Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P. E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 17 Grading Summary Sheet The City of La Porte Classification 3 - 74.55 I. Receiving & Handling Fire Alarms: Total 6.55, Maximum = 10 a. Item 414 - 1.80 2 b. Item 422 - 3.00 3 C. Item 432 - 1.75 5 II. Fire Department Total 34.02, Maximum = 50 a. Item 513 - 10.00 10 b. Item 523 - 1.00 1 C. Item 532 - 5.00 5 d. Item 549 - 4.04 5 e. Item 553 - 0.37 1 f. Item 561 - 2.58 4 g. Item 571 - 3.33 15 h. Item 581 - 5.94 + 1.76 (CTT) 9 Ill. Water Supply Total 34.53, Maximum = 40 a. Item 616 - 30.59 35 b. Item 621 - 2.00 2 C. Item 631 - 1.94 3 IV. Divergence* -3.66 V. Addendum Total 3.11 Maximum = 6.50 La Porte's Total. 74.55 Maximum = 106.50 THE CITY OF LA PORTE GRADING SUMMARY Page 1 Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08/10/06 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 18 VI. Total: Maximum Credit: Fire Alarm 6.55 10.00 Fire Department 34.02 50.00 Water Supply 34.53 40.00 Divergence* -3.66 Addendum Credit 3.11 6.50 La Porte's Total 74.55 106.50 Class 3 Credit Relative Classification 90.00 - 100.00 1 80.00 - 89.99 2 70.00 - 79.99 3 60.00 - 69.99 4 50.00 - 59.99 5 40.00 - 49.99 6 30.00 - 39.99 7 20.00 - 29.99 8 10.00 - 19.99 9 00.00 - 9.99 10 *Divergence is a reduction in credit to reflect a difference in the relative credits for Fire Department and Water Supply. THE CITY OF LA PORTE GRADING SUMMARY Page 2 Report to the City of La Porte Concerning Possible Improvement in ISO Public Protection Classification 08110106 Mike Pietsch, P.E. Consulting Services, Inc. Page 19 C REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: October 23, 2006 Requested By: Susan Kelley, Purchasing Manager Crystal Scott, Asst. to the City Manager Department: Administration Report: Resolution: Ordinance: Exhibits: Bidders List/RFQ #06301 Exhibits: Appropriation Source of Funds: Account Number: Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: Budgeted Item: SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION Staff first made a presentation to City Council at the February 13 meeting. City Council requested some additional information on the presentation which was presented to City Council at the March 27 meeting. At that meeting City Council directed staff to solicit Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to seek a qualified consultant. Purchasing distributed 5 RFQ's and received 2 responses. Responses to the RFQ were received from Ameresco and Seimens. Both companies did a walk through of City Hall, Wastewater Treatment Plant, and the Fitness Center. Staff reviewed the RFQ's and formed a committee to interview the companies. A full copy of the RFQ and responses are in the City Secretary's Office. The committee selected Ameresco as the most qualified. The next phase of the project is for Staff to negotiate a contract with Ameresco for a Utility Assessment Report. Staff would then return to City Council to seek approval of the contract. If the final proposal of the Utility Assessment Report is accepted by City Council, Staff would proceed with the final design and installation/construction and detail of the performance contract. If the final proposal of the Utility Assessment Report is not accepted by City Council, the contract would be terminated and the City required to pay the negotiated amount. Action Required by Council: Consider recommendation of Staff to move forward with negotiating a contract with Ameresco for a Utility Assessment Report. Approved for Citv Cwmcil Agenda ")11// 7 D Jon '.1 im City Manager Date CITY OF LA PORTE SPECIFICATIONS RFQ #06301 CITY-WIDE ENERGY AND OPERATIONAL SAVINGS PROGRAM 1. Purpose of Solicitation This solicitation is a Request for Qualifications (RFQ). The purpose is to solicit qualifications from Energy Service Companies (ESCOs) that describe their capabilities to identify, design, install, maintain, monitor, and arrange financing of a comprehensive utility conservation program. This program includes the services listed in this request pursuant to the provisions of Texas law. For the purpose of this RFQ, "ESCO" refers to any entity that is qualified to provide a turnkey utility conservation program that includes the services listed in this request and meets the requirements of the Texas Energy Performance Contracting Requirements. Owner intends to select an ESCO and to award a single or multiple contract(s) to perform cost-effective utility conservation retrofits. 2. Owner Background The City of La Porte is the oldest incorporated town in East Harris County and is located 25 miles east of downtown Houston. The City of La Porte is a vibrant community with award winning schools, a state-of-the-art library, spacious parkland, and easy access to Houston Ship Channel, Galveston Bay, and downtown Houston. The City of La Porte serves as the hometown of nearly 33,000 residents. 3. Services Requested Owner proposes to address all utility' consumption in all of its facilities for this conservation program. Additionally, Owner intends to upgrade outdated and obsolete building equipment and perform facility improvements through the program. Ow-ner-articipates-a-m-ajaFreduction-in-aanual-utiiity-and-operational - — costs through the implementation of this utility conservation program. As part of the process, a contract must include provision for monitoring and verification of utility savings and any guaranteed operational savings. A bond for guaranteed energy and water savings is optional. If requested, the ESCO shall arrange financing or assist the Owner in procuring the most cost effective funding for the project. The term is not -to -exceed fifteen (15) years from the final date of installation. Owner intends to structure the program's implementation schedule in a manner to minimize its financed capital needs. Respondents to this RFQ shall identify their experience and qualifications to perform analysis, design engineering, preparation of engineering plans and specifications, installation, commissioning, monitoring and verification of savings, and management of a major utility conservation project that has involved utility conservation measures (UCM) which address building components and applications. Such components and applications shall include: lighting, space heating, ventilation, air-conditioning, building envelope, heat recovery, energy and water management systems, environmental system controls, motors, domestic water heating, fuel switching, air distribution systems, or other energy and water conservation related improvements or equipment including improvements or equipment related to renewable energy. Owner also requires a description of the Contractor's qualifications and experience related to training building occupants and maintenance workers in energy and water conservation awareness. 4. Buildings/Project Description It is the owner's intent to have the ESCO facilitate in the development of the final scope of work and associated UCM's. 5. Procurement Process a. Owner Publishes RFQ The Request for Qualifications (RFQ) is the first step in a multi -step process aimed at identifying one or more qualified ESCOs. b. Selection of Qualified Provider or Short-list of Providers A committee of Owner staff will be formed to review responses submitted. Based on the selection criteria described in this document, the committee will select a short-list of the most qualified respondents. The Owner also retains the right to select only one respondent at this stage and skip the next two stages to negotiate a contract. The Owner may also determine that no qualified submittals have been received and reject all submittals. C. Walk-through Site Visit Led by Owner (Optional) The owner reserves the right to allow short-listed respondents an opportunity to separately walk through one or more facilities with the Owner to develop an understanding of those facilities and the opportunities for improvements in energy and water efficiency equipment or practices if necessary. d. Oral Presentation (Optional) Oral presentations may be required by each of the interested short-listed respondents covering their general qualifications in the field of performance contracting for utility efficiency improvements if the owner feels it is necessary. e. Negotiate Utility Assessment Contract The Owner will select one respondent to provide detailed utility audits of one or more facilities (or all facilities). f. Prepare Utility Assessment Report (UAR) for Final Project Proposal The Owner and the selected respondent will negotiate a contract in which the Owner assigns facilities for the respondent to audit and, in the event the proposal is rejected and contract terminated, agrees to pay a negotiated fee for performance of this work. The selected respondent agrees to perform the detailed audit according to the Energy Performance Contracting and UAR Guidelines. The UAR must be performed and sealed by a licensed Texas Professional Engineer working for a firm that is registered with the Texas Board of Professional Engineers. g. Submittal of Final Proposal The selected respondent will provide a final proposal for the Owner's utility efficiency improvement project. The final proposal will include the completed Utility Assessment Report, documentation of potential utility and operational savings, and all associated implementation costs. It must also include the Measurement and Verification Plan and a Sample Periodic Savings Report. h. Review and Recommendation of Final Proposal The Owner will review the final proposal and either accepts the proposal, accept the proposal with exceptions or modification, or reject the proposal. If rejected and the contract is terminated, the City agrees to pay a pre - negotiated fee for performance of the UAR. i. Negotiate Master Performance Contract After the final proposal is accepted, the selected respondent and the Owner will negotiate a master contract. The Contract will include authority to proceed with final design and installation/construction and detail the payment schedule to the ESCO. j. Contract Approval and Review State law requires that the State Energy Conservation Office (SECO) develop an approval process for the ESPC, and the UAR be reviewed by an independent, licensed third party engineer prior to contract execution. As part of SECO's approval process, a third party review of the M&V Plan, a Sample Periodic Savings Report, and the Contract is also required. 6. Evaluation Criteria Hess entities that respond to this solicitation, including any subcontractors to be utilized, will be evaluated in the following areas: a. Business Qualifications b. Personnel Qualifications C. Financial Qualifications d. Project Management Qualifications e. Experience RESPONDENT'S SUBMITTAL This RFQ will be due Monday, June 26, 2006 at 2:00 p.m., CST. One original and three (3) copies shall be delivered to Susan Kelley, Purchasing Manager, at 2963 North 23' Street, La Porte, Texas 77571. Faxed copies are not accepted. Owner reserves the right to reject any and all responses resulting from this RFQ. Late responses will not be accepted and will be returned to the submitting company unopened. Owner is not liable for any cost incurred by any person or firm responding to this RFQ The Owner requires the following information to be included in each respondent's proposal. Owner reserves the right to reject as non -responsive any responses that do not contain the information requested in this RFQ and in the form outlined in this RFQ. Additionally, Owner reserves the right to reject any responses that are not organized and formatted as described in this RFQ. All questions shall be written and emailed to Crystal Scott at scottc@laportetx.gov. Items to be provided include: 1. Corporate Background and Experience • Describe your firm's organizational structure, including any limited partnerships and how they are applied to this proposed project. . How many years has your firm been in business under its present name? • Indicate all other names by which your firm has been known and length of time known by each name. • Include the address of your firm's website, if applicable. • Describe your firm's general approach to energy performance contracting. • List the equipment manufactured by your company. • List any past or present litigation in which your company is a party. • List any contracts terminated prior to completion. • List above information related to any previous business names. 2. Key Project Personnel Provide information regarding capabilities and experience of personnel directly assigned to this project that include the following: • Professional resumes for key personnel and their responsibilities for the duration of the Contract. • Indicate the education and professional licensing of each person as it relates to this project. Include a list of previous projects, similar in size and complexity, in which each team member has played a significant role. • Clearly identify who will have primary technical responsibility for utility analysis, engineering and design work, contract negotiations, construction management, training, and performance monitoring. • Provide an organizational chart that clearly describes your firm's project organization with supervisory reporting. 3. Energy Performance Contracting Experience . State how many years your firm has been in the energy/water performance contracting business. • Describe the complete range of utility services and capabilities your firm offers: such as engineering, design, auditing, energy and water equipment selection and installation, operation and maintenance, commissioning, monitoring and verification, and training. • List all services that your firm performs with your own employees. • What types of services are usually subcontracted? • Describe the process of subcontractor selection. 4. Project Team Organization • Identify the services, name of the firms involved, and the principal contact for each service subcontracted for this project. • Provide a project organization chart listing each subcontract team member and his or her area of responsibility to deliver this project. • Include a description of projects that the firm and its proposed subcontractors have jointly performed. 5. Project Management Plan Include a plan describing how your firm will manage subcontractors. Describe the processes that will be used for the assignment of tasks, project scheduling, and budget control, as well as capability to provide all services required for construction and implementation of retrofit projects on a performance contracting basis. Provide specific information on management of the following project phases: • Detailed utility audit . Engineering and design • Procurement • Construction • Submittal drawings, equipment manuals, and warranties . Commissioning . Monitoring and verification • Operations and maintenance, if required Provide a timeline indicating necessary activities with a suggested schedule for implementing the detailed audit and project development plan through the procurement process, as referenced in the Owner Supplied Information. 6. Corporate Financial Information The ESCO will provide audited financial statements including income statements, balance sheets, and statements of changes for the three (3) most recently completed fiscal years. If audited financial statements are not available, provide evidence of the level of third party review of the financial statements. ESCOs shall also provide documenting source(s) and levels of financing (e.g., a letter from a financial institution describing a relationship with the ESCO). The ESCO shall provide a letter from its surety company demonstrating willingness to provide a payment and performance bond associated with construction projects equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the estimated total implementation cost of this project. This cost includes construction costs and equipment purchased under this solicitation of an estimated [$] million project. Provide a copy of an actual bond if available. The Owner may require a savings guarantee bond (optional). The ESCO shall provide a letter from its surety company demonstrating willingness to provide a utility savings guarantee bond guaranteeing the annual project utility cost savings over a maximum fifteen -year term. Provide a copy of an actual bond. 7. Risk Mitigating Strategies Describe any risk minimizing strategies intended to protect the Owner. 8. Performance Contracting References Discuss your project team's experience with utility efficiency retrofit projects at similar facilities. List references within the past five years indicating experience in conducting comprehensive utility efficiency and guaranteed savings programs of a similar nature to this project (at least two years of guarantee performance must be demonstrated). Include the following specific information for each project: . Project title and location • Name, address, and phone number of Owner's representative • Trade references from subcontractors • Nature of your firm's responsibility • Scope of work including types of utility conservation measures evaluated and installed with type of equipment used • Total dollar contract amount and term in years • Type of contract (guaranteed savings, shared savings, direct cost, etc.) • Source of project funding • Projected and actual project start and end dates • Projected annual utility savings (dollars and kWh or BTUs and kW; kgallons) • Actual and measured annual utility savings (dollars and kWh, kW, Mcf., etc.; kgallons) 9. Utility Savings Verification Changes to the estimated utility savings can occur as a result of installation of additional mechanical, natural gas, and lighting equipment, expansion of operating schedule, and weather fluctuations. Explain how you will account for this and include an actual Utility Audit Report, Measurement and Verification Plan, and Periodic Utility Savings Report that your firm developed for a facility of similar size and scope. Describe the methodology for calculating baseline utility consumption for a similar facility. If proprietary software is used, provide a copy of the manual. If the actual savings exceeds the guaranteed savings, they belong to the Owner. 10. Operational Savings Verification If operational (non -utility) savings are to be incorporated within the proposed project, address the following questions: Do you use any of the following types of cost savings to help repay the financing of your project? . Deferred Maintenance . Man Power . Materials . Administrative Costs • Scheduled.or Unscheduled Equipment Replacement • Outside Contracts • Parts • Equipment Repairs • Other Explain how these savings are calculated. Any savings used to calculate the payback must be guaranteed. Explain how you monitor and verify that operational savings have been realized. In the event that operational savings are not realized, what actions would be taken to rectify the shortcomings? 11. Financial Guarantees Explain in detail how you will guarantee the savings associated with this project. Discuss the following areas in detail: . Frequency of reconciliation • Repayment of missed savings • Specifically how your bond for savings (optional) protects the Owner • Treatment of "Operational" (non -utility) savings as they pertain to the guarantee • Any situations that would void the guarantee • If measured specific guarantees are or are not used, explain how and to what extent . If stipulated savings are to be used, explain how and to what extent 12. Equipment and Training Demonstrate expertise in building operations and maintenance training in terms of successfully completed projects. Specifically discuss the following areas: • Types of training . Location of training . Frequency of training . Training provided by your personnel • Training provided by others Identify and describe any business associations with equipment manufacturers or suppliers that might be specified for this project. 13. Project Financing and Incentives Financing capability and lines of credit will be evaluated. The ESCO will provide information that documents sources of proposed financing and specific projects that have used proposed financing sources. The ESCO shall also describe in detail how they intend to secure the annual savings project guarantee. Identify alternate financing options or incentives that may be available to the Owner for funding this project. Disclose any relationship, fee, or incentive the ESCO might have or receive related to this financial institution or transaction. 14. Contract Terms and Conditions While the Owner expects respondents to adhere to their standard contract terms and conditions, identify any contract provisions that the ESCO may take exception. (Note: Owner must provide terms and conditions with the RFQ.) State any additional terms and conditions that your firm would include, particularly any the ESCO considers non-negotiable. 16. Respondent's Questions Please list any questions you have of the Owner that have not been addressed up to this point. BIDDERS LIST SEALED BID RFQ# 06301 ENERGY & OPERATIONAL SAVINGS CHEVRON ENERGY SOLUTIONS A Division of Chevron U.S.A., Inc. 12980 Foster Drive, Suite 400 Overland Park, KS 66213 SIEMENS BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES 8850 Fallbrook Houston, TX 77064 SEMPRA ENERGY 101 Ash Street San Diego, CA 92101 WE CONSERVE 4615 Gulf Blvd. # 214 St. Pete, FL 33706 AMERESCO 9801 Westheimer, Suite 302 Houston, TX 77042 MEETING HANDOUTS City of La Porte Accepting Applications for Volunteers to Serve on Various Boards & Commissions The City of La Porte's Boards and Commissions are made up of concerned citizens who wish to make a difference in their community by volunteering their time and knowledge. For city government to be effective, it must have participation in its affairs by citizens who are interested in programs, projects, and services that affect all of its citizens. Your volunteer service on this committee would show that you are interested in the present and future activities and progress of our City. If you would like to make a difference in the City by volunteering your time and knowledge, you may want to consider serving on one of the City's Boards Commissions/Committees. To obtain more information, and/or an application, call the City Secretary's Office at 281- 470-5022 or download the application from our website at www.ci.laportetx.gov %(oM C ��i 's (fie bs, CHAPTER 172 EMPLOYEE, RETIREE INSURANCE AND BENEFITS BOARD Purpose: Under Chapter 172 Rules the purpose of the Trustee is to supervise the operation of the Risk Pool. Term: No established terms. Eligibility Requirements: Must be a citizen of La Porte, City of La Porte Employee or an appointed Attorney. Meeting Time: On an as needed basis. Members: Patricia Rothermel Tina Fregia Buddy Jacobs (Retiree Representative) Karen Beerman Michael Dolby Robert Swanagan Clark Askins Karen Beerman (EE Representative) George Van Dyke Staff Liaison: Human Resources Manager Term Expires: 09/30/2007 09/30/2006 08/31 /2008 No Term No Term No Term No Term No Term No Term CHAPTER 172 EMPLOYEE RETIREE AND INSURANCE BENEFITS COMMITTEE Purpose: Under Chapter 172 Rules the purpose of the Trustee is to supervise the operation of the Risk Pool. Term: Staggering 2 and 3 year term Citizen 1— 2 year term Citizen 2 — 3 year term Eligibility Requirements: Must be a citizen of La Porte, City of La Porte Employee or an appointed Attorney. Meeting Time: On an as needed basis. POSITION REPRESENTATIVE TERM EXPIRATION Citizen Position 1 Vacant Position September 30, 2007 Citizen Position 2 Vacant Position September 30, 2006 Citizen Position 3 Buddy Jacobs/Retiree Representative September 30, 2008 Finance Staff ichael Dolby/Finance Staff No Term H.R. Staff Robert SwanagwHuman Resources Staff No Term 1w Legal Staff Claris Askins/Legal Staff No Tenn l� r EE Rep Karen BeermaNEmployee Participan No Term 5 Retiree dy Jacobs 8/31/2008 Alt to Citizen George Van Dyke No Term Position 1 Alt to Citizen Vacant No Term Position 2 66