HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN JUL 03 2001 M I N U T E S - CITY OF BEAUMONT
Lulu L. Smith DAVID W. MOORE, MAYOR Guy N. Goodson, Mayor Pro Tern
Andrew P. Cokinos CITY COUNCIL MEETING Becky Ames
Bobbie J. Patterson July 3,2001 Audwin Samuel
Lane Nichols, City Attorney Stephen J. Bonczek, City Manager Barbara Liming, City Clerk
The City Council of the City of Beaumont, Texas, met in a regular session on July 3, 2001, at
the City Hall Council Chambers, 801 Main Street, Beaumont,Texas, at 1:30 p.m.to consider the
following:
OPENING
Invocation Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call
Presentations and Recognition
Public Comment: Persons may speak on scheduled agenda items
Consent Agenda
Mayor Moore called the meeting to order at 1:37 p.m. The Reverend James Blackwell, South
Park Baptist Church, gave the invocation. Mayor Moore led the pledge of allegiance.
Present at the meeting were: Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Tern Goodson, Council members Smith,
Cokinos,Ames, Samuel, and Patterson. Also present were Stephen J. Bonczek, City Manager;
Lane Nichols, City Attorney; and Barbara Liming, City Clerk.
Mayor Moore complimented the patriotic program honoring Mr. Battles held at South Park Baptist
Church last Sunday. The Reverend Blackwell thanked Mayor Moore and Councilmember
Cokinos for being present for the special tribute honoring Mr. Battles for military service and for
their community service.
Presentations and Recognitions - No proclamations were issued.
Public Comment: Persons may speak on scheduled agenda items.
Mr. Allen Lee, 5095 Maddox, addressed Council in opposition to issuance of Certificates
of Obligation for Crockett Street repairs and not improving Sarah, Virginia, and Lela
Streets, spoke of the Justice Department's concern, said if Certificates of Obligation are
issued, the City will be going to court and claimed malfeasance of funds. Mr. Lee
announced that the Justice Department will be in Beaumont on August 21, instructed
Council not to close Fire Station No. 11 because it is located in a minority neighborhood,
stated that a train was stalled in that area during the recent flood, and continued
expressing his opinions on targeting minority neighborhoods, eliminating firefighter
positions by closing fire stations, expressed opinions about Fire Trucks Number's 9 and
4, claimed City financial status is a result of Council action, blamed citizens for voting for
Council, and suggested putting a freeze on travel, suspending Council salaries, and
making management changes.
Consent Agenda
Approval of minutes - None submitted.
Confirmation of committee appointments - No committee appointments.
A) Authorize eminent domain proceedings to acquire property located at 2141 Irving Street
for the Neighborhood Shopping Center near the future Charlton-Pollard Parksite -
Resolution No. 01-159
B) Authorize the acceptance of a ten (10') wide utility easement for the relocation of the
sanitary sewer line now serving the Lisotta Mini Storage Site - Resolution No. 01-160
C) Endorse Lamar University's Texas Department of Transportation - Statewide
Enhancement Program application for the MLK Parkway (Spur 380) Landscape and
Beautification Project - Resolution No. 01-161
D) Approve the purchase of two cab and chassis trucks equipped with a refuse collection
body and knuckle boom loader(from Beaumont Freightliner for$243,380) - Resolution
No. 01-162
Councilmember Cokinos moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilmember
Samuel seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED.
Ayes: Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Tern Goodson, Councilmembers Smith,
Cokinos, Ames, Samuel, and Patterson
Noes: None
GENERAL BUSINESS
1. Consider the Hollywood Avenue Area Rezoning Study to change zoning from HI (Heavy
Industrial) and GC-MD (General Commercial-Multiple Family Dwelling) to HI, LI (Light
Industrial), GC-MD and RCR (Residential Conservation and Revitalization) District
Councilmember Patterson moved to approve Ordinance No. 01-043 ENTITLED AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 30 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF BEAUMONT,TEXAS,AND
IN PARTICULAR THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS,AS INDICATED UPON THE ZONING
MAP OF BEAUMONT, TEXAS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING OF PROPERTY PRESENTLY ZONED HI
(HEAVY INDUSTRIAL) DISTRICT AND GC-MD (GENERAL COMMERCIAL-MULTIPLE FAMILY
DWELLING) DISTRICT TO HI, LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL), GC-MD AND RCR (RESIDENTIAL
CONSERVATION AND REVITALIZATION) DISTRICT FOR THE HOLLYWOOD AVENUE AREA,
BEAUMONT, JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
REPEAL AND PROVIDING A PENALTY. Council member Smith seconded the motion. MOTION
PASSED.
Ayes: Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Tern Goodson, Councilmembers Smith,
Cokinos, Ames, Samuel, and Patterson
Noes: None
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 2
2. Consider a request for a zone change from RM-H (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling-
Highest Density) to GC-MD (General Commercial-Multiple Family Dwelling) District for a
lot in the 2100 block of Washington Boulevard
Councilmember Patterson moved to approve Ordinance No. 01-044 ENTITLED AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 30 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF BEAUMONT,TEXAS,AND
IN PARTICULAR THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS,AS INDICATED UPON THE ZONING
MAP OF BEAUMONT, TEXAS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2185
WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, PRESENTLY ZONED RM-H (RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY
DWELLING-HIGHEST DENSITY)TO GC-MD(GENERAL COMMERCIAL-MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING)
DISTRICT,BEAUMONT,JEFFERSON COUNTY,TEXAS;PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;PROVIDING
FOR REPEAL AND PROVIDING A PENALTY. Councilmember Ames seconded the motion.
MOTION PASSED.
Ayes: Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Tern Goodson, Councilmembers Smith,
Cokinos, Ames, Samuel, and Patterson
Noes: None
3. Consider a request for a zone change from RM-H (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling-
Highest Density) to RCR (Residential Conservation and Revitalization) District and a
specific use permit application to allow a coffeehouse/Internet cafe at the northwest corner
of Alabama and University Drive
Councilmember Cokinos moved to approve Ordinance No. 01-045 ENTITLED AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 30 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF BEAUMONT,TEXAS,AND
IN PARTICULAR THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS,AS INDICATED UPON THE ZONING
MAP OF BEAUMONT, TEXAS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING OF PROPERTY PRESENTLY ZONED
RM-H (RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING-HIGHEST DENSITY) DISTRICT TO RCR
(RESIDENTIAL CONSERVATION AND REVITALIZATION)DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ATTHE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF ALABAMA AND UNIVERSITY DRIVE, BEAUMONT,JEFFERSON COUNTY,
TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL AND PROVIDING A PENALTY
and Ordinance No. 01-046 ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW A COFFEEHOUSE/INTERNET CAFE IN AN RCR (RESIDENTIAL CONSERVATION AND
REVITALIZATION) DISTRICT LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ALABAMA AND
UNIVERSITY DRIVE,IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT,JEFFERSON COUNTY,TEXAS. Councilmember
Patterson seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED.
Ayes: Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Tern Goodson, Councilmembers Smith,
Cokinos, Ames, Samuel, and Patterson
Noes: None
4. Consider a request for a specific use permit to allow the expansion of the Greenlawn
Cemetery located within an RM-H (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling-Highest Density)
District and abutting the existing Greenlawn Cemetery at Gill Street at Scranton Avenue
Councilmember Smith moved to approve Ordinance No. 01-047 ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE
GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMITTO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF THE GREENLAWN CEMETERY
IN AN RM-H(RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING-HIGHEST DENSITY)DISTRICT,LOCATED
AT GILL STREET AT SCRANTON AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, JEFFERSON COUNTY,
TEXAS. Councilmember Ames seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED.
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 3
Ayes: Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Tern Goodson, Councilmembers Smith, Cokinos,
Ames, and Patterson
Noes: Councilmember Samuel
5. Consider a request for a specific use permit to allow a massage therapy establishment in
an RCR (Residential Conservation and Revitalization) District at 2530 Laurel Street
Councilmember Smith moved to approve Ordinance No. 01-048 ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE
GRANTING ASPECIFIC USE PERMITTO ALLOW A MASSAGE THERAPY ESTABLISHMENT IN AN RC-
R (RESIDENTIAL CONSERVATION AND REVITALIZATION) DISTRICT LOCATED AT 2530 LAUREL
STREET IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, JEFFERSON COUNTY,TEXAS. Mayor Pro Tern Goodson
seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED.
Ayes: Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Tern Goodson, Councilmembers Smith,
Cokinos, Ames, Samuel, and Patterson
Noes: None
6. Consider an amendment to Section 26-23 of the code of Ordinances modifying the speed
limits on US 69 frontage roads
Councilmember Smith moved to approve Ordinance No. 01-049 ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING CHAPTER 26, SECTION 26-23 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
BEAUMONT TO ESTABLISH MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM SPEEDS IN CERTAIN ZONES;PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL AND PROVIDING A PENALTY. Councilmember
seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED.
Ayes: Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Tern Goodson, Councilmembers Smith,
Ames, Cokinos, Ames, and Patterson
Noes: None
7. Consider a resolution authorizing publication of notice of intention to issue $8 million in
Certificates of Obligation
After introduction of Item No. 7, City Manager Bonczek responded to Mayor Pro Tern
Goodson's request for a breakdown of $6.5M of the Certificates of Obligation and the
balance of proceeds to be expended. He explained that $600,000 is needed for the
Crockett Street Improvement Project, and there is $350,000 in reserves from the Tax
Increment Fund for a portion of the project. He said funds are available in the General
Improvement Fund Reserves for park improvements and asked the Public Works Director
to elaborate.
Public Works Director Tom Warner explained that the Certificates of Obligation are for the
Concord Road project, the Crockett Street Urban Entertainment District, the Major Drive
extension, and $500,000 for the Delaware project. Responding to further questions by
Councilmember Patterson, Mr. Warner defined allocations to be $6.5 million for the
Concord Road Project; $700,000 available as a 20 percent match for the Delaware Street
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 4
Project; $500,000 for development of the Crockett Street Urban Entertainment District,
and 500,000 for the Major Drive Project.
Budget Officer Andrea Deaton added that the Concord Road project requires
approximately $8M, and there are currently two phases remaining.
Further discussion showed that the full $8M in Certificates of Obligations is not earmarked
for the Concord Road project, the Delaware project is an 80-20 percent match to receive
$2.8M in federal grants, there is $350,000 of Tax Increment Financing for the Crockett
Street Entertainment District, and explanation of contingencies, usage of tax dollars, and
reserves.
Councilmember Patterson questioned remaining participation for the Crockett Street
Entertainment District and the completion date. Mr. Warner responded that$6.5M would
be for Concord Road,$700,000 for Delaware,$500,000 forthe Entertainment District,and
$300,000 for Major Drive. Mr. Bonczek reported that the Entertainment District is
projecting to be partially open by Thanksgiving weekend 2001.
Councilmember Patterson stated she is excited about the Entertainment District, but is
hesitant because streets such as Virginia and 23rd need repairs or reconstruction.
Mr. Bonczek explained that Crockett Street is a special district and certain funds cannot
be used except to serve public improvements in that district and are not available for any
other project. He clarified the initial scope of the project and readjustments because of
available resources and addressed the District's twenty-year approval that will terminate
in November 2002. The City Manager stated that$2.8M in federal funds will be available
for the Delaware Road extension, and we should take advantage of the opportunity
because it will generate development, property tax, potential sales tax, a new elementary
school, and the first 300' is currently being extended by a developer. If matching funds
are not available, the City Manager explained that the City would lose funding
opportunities. He said Congressman Lampson is working on the project with our
Senators, and the match must be identified and available when monies are awarded.
Councilmember Smith added that Congressman Lampson is very encouraged that funds
will be available for Beaumont, and Councilmember Ames interjected that the City is
eligible for almost$3 million for Delaware Street because it connects two highways--Major
Drive and Highway 124.
Councilmember Samuel commented that the Concord Road project also provides
drainage relief to the Hybrook, Lynwood, and Minglewood areas, and it is important forthe
project to continue. The Delaware Street project's value is $3.5M and will only cost
Beaumont $700,000. He stated the City is fortunate that a private developer came
forward with not only the idea, but with over$1 M in funds to support the Crockett Street
project. If it is to work, the City's commitment is critical to the development of the
downtown area, and said he is comfortable with issuing the Certificates of Obligation.
Councilmember Samuel stated he has concerns in delaying capital improvement projects
in older portions of the City. He said it is not an easy decision except that he sees
deplorable street conditions in his Ward that need to be addressed.
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 5
Public Works Director Tom Warner reported an agreement with TxDOT is ongoing for
Concord Road Phase IV. The contract should be completed in a month or so which
would allow proceeding with plan preparation that would indicate needs for rights-of-way
to the Metropolitan Planning Organization so that it could be modeled for quality analysis.
Councilmember Samuel requested establishment of a means to determine priority of street
projects, even those with federal and state funding. He voiced an uncomfortableness with
continued delays of capital improvements that do not qualify for assistance. He expressed
a desire to have a means to measure state or federally funded programs being significant
enough to rise above scheduled non-state or federally funded programs.
The City Manager agreed that local streets are the City's responsibility, said a funding
source needs to be identified, and complimented Council's prioritization efforts.
Mayor Moore commented that constituents are the barometer that determines the
importance of a project, and said projects must continue because it is the responsibility
of day today City operations. However, he said we have no control over federal and state
funding, and we must continue to be aggressive in securing funding and leveraging local
dollars with matching funds. Failure to do so would be negligence in providing expansion
for our community. He commented on major improvements, continued development and
infrastructure growth being wise, and the need to persist in taking care of older
neighborhoods.
Councilmember Ames moved to approve Resolution No. 01-163. Councilmember Smith
seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED.
Ayes: Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Tern Goodson, Councilmembers Smith,
Cokinos, Ames, Samuel, and Patterson
Noes: None
8. Consider approving a contract for the construction of the Crockett Street Urban
Entertainment District (Interlocking Concrete Pavers) Project
Councilmember Smith moved to approve Resolution No. 01-164 authorizing a contract
with Civil Constructors in the amount of$596,513.91. Councilmember Samuel seconded
the motion. MOTION PASSED.
Ayes: Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Tern Goodson, Councilmembers Smith,
Cokinos, Ames, Samuel, and Patterson
Noes: None
WORK SESSION
* Review landfill expansion proposal
The City Manager introduced the opportunity to increase the capacity of the landfill from
4.5 million cubic yards per year to 10.5 million cubic yards and extend its life by 26 years.
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 6
By utilizing vertical expansion, the lifetime of the landfill would be increased from the
current projection of 19 years to 45 years of useful space. Mr. Bonczek asked Mr. Kevin
Yard with EMCON/OWT Solid Waste Services and Clean Community DirectorJohn Labrie
to review and explain a chart distributed to Council (Exhibit "A") showing the benefits of
landfill expansion.
(Councilmember Ames left the Council Chamber at 2:21 p.m. and returned at 2:22 p.m.
during introduction of the item.)
Mr. Yard stated that the landfill is a significant, revenue generating asset for the City of
Beaumont, and said his role for the past 20 years has been to help clients manage landfill
assets. With the implementation of many rules and regulations and timing of his
company's contract, Mr. Yard explained the timeliness of revisiting the landfill's design.
Various discussions with Mr. Labrie led to the possibility of expansion and the return of a
significant expense. Major considerations listed on Table 2 include more than doubling
capacity, potential revenue generation, various costs and long-term benefits for an
approximate $20 million increase. Projected costs will be$1.1 million, if the landfill is not
expanded. If vertically expanded, costs would be approximately$0.45 million, or a short-
term benefit of$0.65 million in savings. Mr. Yard addressed permitting, legal costs, cost
effectiveness, working with the TNRCC, permitting not getting easier and the incentive to
pursue expansion sooner than later, vertical versus horizontal expansion, and
neighborhood changes.
(Councilmember Samuel left the Council Chamber at 2:35 p.m. and returned at 2:37 p.m.
during discussion of landfill expansion.)
Council discussion included proposed height of vertical expansion from 45 feet to
approximately 100 feet, raised elevation maintenance impact or liability on vehicles, basis
of numbers used for estimates, and a request for comparison of rates and volume of
competitors.
Mr. Labrie explained that an access road to the vertical expansion would be built with a
gradual climb and not be steep, that numbers were based on current usage, that a rate
increase has not been necessary for the past 12 years because of revenue generated at
the landfill, and that in his experience, regulations in solid waste have never been
reduced, but have only increased, and that vertical expansion is the trend in solid waste.
Mr. Bonczek informed Council that this item will be brought back for consideration next
week.
* Review and discuss FY 2002 Budget proposals
City Manager Bonczek discussed the revised budget analysis, alternative proposals
(Exhibit"B")and supplementary documentation (Exhibit"C")attachments. Included in the
supplementary attachment are various alternatives to implement a storm water drainage
utility fee based on rates, flat fees, and land use, an update on other Texas cities with
storm water fees, property tax adjustment impact analysis, and a chart of positions
eliminated and filled. The Mayor requested numbering document pages to facilitate
Council discussion.
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 7
Mr. Bonczek reported with the elimination and addition of personnel, an approximate net
savings of$242,000 has occurred in the General Fund, and all funds include an overall
approximate net savings of $185,000. The City Manager stated the list includes an
additional nine employees for the new Construction Management Division for the Water
Utilities Fund with projected savings of$900,000.
The City Manager projected a $4M deficit for fiscal year 2002, and noted if the storm
water drainage fee is to be initiated, a full annual projection of revenue will not be realized,
therefore, six and nine months of revenues are shown in the alternatives.
He reviewed three alternatives and commented there are many options with the storm
water utility fee, and said it is a new revenue source giving the greatest flexibility to
address important community needs.
Mr. Bonczek recapped Department cuts in the Police and Fire Departments, Public Works,
Public Health (elimination of EMS Manager position), Central Services, and the Finance
Department, the Legal Department implementing an aggressive collection process, and
elimination of the Clean Community recycling program.
The City Manager stated that department reductions amount to $2.6 million, more than
discussed on June 28.
In reply to fire protection related matters, Mr. Bonczek stated the City has management
rights to determine fire apparatus, said one consideration is to eliminate use of Truck No.
4 and a Rescue Truck, and said the City is currently in negotiations with the Fire Union to
civilianize six dispatchers.
Mayor Pro Tern Goodson discussed benefits from increased transit fares in exchange for
service, loss of revenue with the elimination of services, acknowledgment of the$170,000
loss in grant funds,and suggested a break down of Alternative No. 3 with exemptions, and
a nine month revenue schedule of storm waterfees measuring residential and commercial
levels. He further discussed a storm water utility fee, stated concerns of realizing only
nine months of revenue during the budget year, suggested a computer program to
facilitate the conversion from a street user fee to a storm water utility fee and expressed
a desire to realize more than nine months of storm water utility revenues.
Further deliberation included legal requirements of establishing a storm water utility fee,
discontinuance of the street user fee and street improvements as future capital budgeted
projects, the affect of an over estimation of sale tax revenues, economic indicators, large
scale borrowing for street repairs or incremental rehabilitation, and storm water utility fee
assessment by impervious surface, flat and tiered rates.
Mayor Pro Tern Goodson requested various rate schedules forcommercial and residential
properties, and he agreed the impervious surface area is the most equitable because
concrete surfaces create the greatest demand on the system. He spoke of the storm
water utility fee not being met with uniform zeal in the community, however, after the
recent storm events, it was proven that storm water management is a large expense to
the City. Mayor Pro Tern Goodson commented it may be viewed by the public that the
$4M will be used to balance the budget;the amount happened to be the same amount as
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 8
the capital improvements, and clarified the two are not linked together. He stated his
concerns are with setting rates, creating a lagniappe image in this budget and future
budgets, and expressed his opinion that the utility fee is needed, but said he does not
want to fund it anymore than absolutely necessary.
City Manager Bonczek explained that the actual impact of the storm water utility is$2.6M,
if implemented by July 31, nine months of revenue could be realized, and he noted costs
for personnel and materials are not expected to decrease in fiscal year 2003.
Mayor Moore spoke of Council difficulty in understanding the documents presented by the
City Manager,the need for more time and opportunity for independent discussions before
a formal meeting, and stated that until matters are simplified to the extent of knowing
exactly what the changes are, there will be a disconnect between Councilmembers
because of their understanding and what must be related back to the community.
Further lengthy discussion included facets of a storm water utility fee, the unknowns of
sales tax revenues, focusing on a balanced budget, the $2.6M cost to maintain ditches,
public perception that the $2.6M will be used for budget deficits, preparation of
alternatives to reflect discussion and direction of Council,further explanation of Alternative
No. 3 reflecting a realistic expectation of$2.6M, fund generation for street improvements,
75 percent of the City's budget used for wages and benefits, $1.5M revenue less with
elimination of the street user fee, and designation of a storm water fee for drainage,
City Manager Bonczek stated rates could be adjusted every year during the budget
process,the current projected reserve and availability of street improvement funds monies
is $280,000, and if $380,000 in Alternative No. 3 was shifted to capital for streets, there
would be $660,000 available for street repairs and suggested review of the storm water
rate fee structures by Public Works Director Tom Warner.
Councilmember Ames questioned different selected reductions on each alternative, and
the City Manager responded that because the budget deficit target is $4M, he tried to
show necessary cuts for each scenario. Councilmember Ames expressed concern that
cuts be consistent with each alternative and that maximum reductions be made.
Councilmember Samuel expressed dissatisfaction with the changes in proposals
immediately before a Council meeting and a desire they remain static.
Additional discussion by Mayor Moore related to difficulty with considering generation of
fees, eliminating the street user fee, infrastructure improvements, choosing the best
alternative, staying on focus, making hard cuts, but continuing to make necessary repairs,
arriving at a number and what must be done to offset the $4M shortfall, and said Council
is projecting that work needs to continue toward hearing concerns of each member to
needs in their ward that must not be neglected.
Councilmember Patterson commented that it is refreshing to hear agreement with her
thoughts and stated when extensive information is presented just before a work session,
it is very, very difficult to have an intelligent discussion. She said information is needed
before the Council meeting to afford ample opportunity to study it,to determine if there are
any questions, or if any explanation is obtainable prior to the meeting that will help make
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 9
decisions. Councilmember Patterson expressed she would like Council support in a
request that late submissions of information cease, and they be received enough in
advance of the meeting to digest, because it is unfair to expect appropriate assimilation
to make crucial decisions. She further discussed her perception that clear direction was
given, concurred with uniform reductions for all alternatives, again solicited Council
agreement with her request for information before a meeting, and time to absorb facts
before communicating with constituents.
Mayor Moore commented he understood Councilmember Patterson's remarks, but
reminded Council that the previous budget session was held just last Thursday and only
allowed the City Manager and staff a short time to compile and produce the report. He
stated that he advised the City Manager he did not think Council could properly discuss
the changes, but needed submission because of the urgency relating to the budget. But,
Mayor Moore said information cannot be force fed. Perusal time is necessary to absorb
suggested rates and adjustments. He said Councilmember Patterson's comments have
not fallen on deaf ears, but said he did not want it to appear as if there was undue delay
in submitting information.
Councilmember Patterson interjected that she understands the shortturn around time,but
this is not the first time, and she is very serious about this not happening again.
Councilmember Samuel responded that his concern is in being handed a memo with
additional exhibits and attachments, similar, but with different information, than those
received for two prior successive weeks. After reading, making notes, and expecting to
discuss certain figures and then be presented with totally different figures to discuss,
Councilmember Samuel said this is the problem with which he is faced. He said his
concern appears not to be the same as that of Councilmember Patterson, but is a result
of being handed information immediately priorto a meeting without adequate time to make
adjustments from previous notes and get a clear understanding to intelligently converse
about the subject in a work session.
Councilmember Patterson stated that if no other Councilmember agrees with her, she will
not belabor the issue now, but each time information is not received prior to a Council
meeting, she will object and during an evaluation, this will be an issue to bring up.
Councilmember Ames commented that she understands the short time frame in receiving
information for a very difficult situation, that perhaps there is too much to absorb or too
many choices, but does not have a problem if she is not asked for a specific decision or
direction. She stated the biggest issue is selective reductions in each option, said they
should be equal,and we should maximize savings. Expenses should be reduced as much
as fiscally prudent and still keep needed services and safety issues addressed.
Mayor Pro Tern Goodson concurred with Councilmember Ames, said this is a result of the
challenge put before staff to find different alternatives, agreed the data is a lot to digest
and that the cuts should be the same in all alternatives. He stated that the street user fee
could be eliminated or retained in either of the three proposed budget alternatives. He
briefly discussed researching the street user fee ordinance, its use, and impact of
elimination, the inability to project revenue streams, looking conservatively at projects,
each proposal reflecting an equivalent amount of debt reduction, and various aspects of
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 10
the storm water fee proposals. He requested that the City Attorney investigate on what
authority cities have exempted the Housing Authority from paying a storm water utility fee.
Mr. Bonczek commented that his commitment was to get information to Council by this
meeting, did not know it would evolve into a two hour discussion, and of his effort to keep
Council knowledgeable throughout the process. The City Manager said he will review the
alternatives and make directed alterations, said the street user fee can be part of any
alternative, that any further discussion would not be productive, and said he appreciates
Council direction.
Mayor Moore encouraged individual Council conversations with the City Manager
regarding budget input, and said no decisions are made in a work session.
City Manager Bonczek stated he would like to implement elimination of Saturday hours,
in addition to Sunday, at the main library the weekend of August 4 and 5, so adjustments
can be made prior to opening of the fall school semester. Branch libraries will continue
to be open. The Library Director has submitted this consideration to the Library
Commission, and there should be a smooth transition.
Councilmember Patterson clarified that she was not trying to attack the staff or the City
Managerwith her previous statements, but to make a point that she repeatedly has asked
that information not be presented with expectations of a decision.
Mr. Bonczek responded that he tries to be very careful, does not look for decisions, just
general direction, at a work session, and will be sensitive to the request in the future.
COMMENTS
* Councilmembers comment on various matters
Councilmember Smith verbalized a desire that weather conditions are favorable for July
4th celebrations at Riverfront Park and extended invitations for everyone to attend.
Councilmember Samuel commended staff for their support and attendance at the Ward
III neighborhood meeting, commented it was a good, productive meeting, said it brought
about a spinoff and creation of the Lynwood Terrace Neighborhood Association, and said
it is a good sign to see individuals in the community coming together to act proactive.
Councilmember Patterson voiced appreciation to the Planning and Zoning staff forworking
with the Task Force of the Hollywood/Crockett area toward rezoning and for their current
efforts on the comprehensive plan.
Mayor Moore commented about the ceremony at South Park Baptist Church last Sunday
honoring Mr. Battles and the Riverfront Park Fourth of July celebration. The Mayor
requested that Public Director Tom Warner contact Ms. Linton,4165 Flamingo, regarding
an easement and undergrowth at the rear of her property and the railroad track. He
complimented Councilmember Samuel for conducting a very good neighborhood meeting
which included FEMA representatives and the Fire Chief as guests, and extended an
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 11
invitation to all neighborhood association leaders to attend Beaumont One Initiatives next
Tuesday at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers for a discussion. Also, he reported
attending the ground breaking for a new home being built in the Avenues.
* City Manager Report-
City Manager Bonczek expressed pride in the recognition the City of Beaumont has
received for the Dannenbaum Transfer Station that was designed by Architect Don
LaBiche. He said it is a great asset to our community and has become eligible for an
award. Mr. Bonczek reported he is following issues of The National Fire Protection
Association which would require four firefighters per pumper aerial truck, said local groups
representing cities are voicing opposition for an effort to take away local government
discretion regarding staffing levels. If this standard becomes effective, he said it would
require hiring an additional 78 firefighters at a cost of$4M.
Mayor Moore clarified that the street user fee was put into place to avoid raising taxes and
to get broader citizen participation by those utilizing water service and not just property
owner tax payers. He voiced a desire to avoid a comment made being misconstrued by
referring to a fee in lieu of a tax, and said it was a fee strictly committed for street repairs
throughout the community.
Councilmember Smith stated it is important to note that street repairs had not been made
because of the$20M loss, capital improvements had not been made and streets were in
terrible condition, and within a year of the street user fee, results could be seen. She
requested percentages information regarding first responders related to fire suppression.
* Public Comment (Persons are limited to three (3) minutes).
Mr. Robert Preston, 1190 Iowa, addressed Council to discuss the accuracy of video tape
counters used to determine of the length of meetings, requested any allegation regarding
re-broadcasting of the Council meetings being censored or portions deleted be reported
to U.S. Attorney Wes Rivers for possible violations of FCC regulations, and commented
on police responsiveness at his residence.
Mr. Stephen Warren, 1005 Sunmeadow, addressed Council to address July 4`h fire works
and to request repair of the lobby pay telephone.
Mr. Jerry Whittington, 2164 Cable, addressed Council to express appreciation for a police
officer acting with dignity and responsibility in handling a situation in the north end of
Beaumont, extended birthday wishes to Councilmember Patterson, and announced the
Swing Out Civic Club will sponsor "Grandparents Raising Grandchildren" program, an
effort to supply school clothing for needy children. Anyone interested in sponsorship or
to report a need may contact him at 838-2671. Applications will be available at the
Holiday Inn next Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 12
Mr. Benny Mendoza, 5655 South Kenneth, addressed Council on behalf of the College
Corridor to express appreciation for Council attendance at the ground breaking ceremony
at Milam and Avenue B.
Mr. Allen Lee, 5095 Maddox, addressed Council to announce the Justice Department will
be at Our Mother of Mercy Church on Tuesday, August 2111 at 7:00 p.m., to conduct an
assessment forum concerning matters in the community such as funding for street
projects, a federal government independent audit, a petition for a Civilian Review Board,
possible closing of Fire Station No. 11, pepper spray deaths, lack of African-American
prosecutors in the District Attorney's Office, and the class ceiling in the Beaumont Police
Department. Mr. Lee suggested Council forfeit their salary and travel allowances to
accommodate budgetary issues and street repairs.
Mr. Jude Paredez, 920 Wisteria, addressed Council to complain of problems with the
Police Department,announced the Justice Department will be available to take complaints
at Our Mother of Mercy Church on August 21, claimed the District Attorney's Office is not
prosecuting police crimes, said he could be contacted at 899-2618, suggested a limit on
Council travel expenditures, addressed potential lawsuits from injuries received from
interlocking concrete pavement, and in opposition to new spending or funding for special
interest groups. Mr. Paredez stated that if Senator David Bernsen has information
regarding the unsolved murder of Kathy Page, he should cooperate with authorities.
Mayor Moore thanked the audience for their attendance and input, spoke of critical
decisions to be made, staying involved in the process, and promised to continue to bring
information forward and work on behalf of the citizens. He added thoughts about moving
forward, reviewing alternatives, making sound financial decisions, having no control over
sales tax revenues, insuring that every portion of the city receive proportionate service
or repair, and giving prudent consideration to certain projects to avoid greater expense at
a later time. He encouraged citizen participation to understand all facts of issues.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
• Consider matters related to contemplated or pending litigation in accordance with Section
551.071 of the Government Code:
James R. Hucker v City of Beaumont
Melinda Benson v. Walgreen Co., et al
Sharon Daeke, et al v. City of Beaumont
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.
David W. Moore, Mayor
Barbara Liming, City Clerk i
Minutes July 3,2001 Page 13
Beaumont Landfill
Expansion Considerations
Table 2a
EXPANSION
1. Remaining Capacity 4.5 MCY 10.5 MCY See item 2
2. Potential Revenue $54 million $126 million $14.4 million
assumes 20% "profit")
Site 3. Cover Soil Requires purchase of off- No purchase of off-site $5 million
Life site cover soil anticipated
Benefits
4. Final Cover Retain standard final cover Gain approval for $ 0.5 million
alternative final cover
5. Remaining Liner Cost/ $1.22/CY $0.52/CY See item 2
Remaining Capacity airs ace
$19.9 million
Summa
Projected Liner $900,000 $0
Construction Costs (assumes permitting will
Years 2002—2005 start in 2001
Short Permitting Costs $100,000 $300,000 to 450,000
Term Years 2002—2005
Benefits Final Cover $0 to 100,000 $0
Years 2002—2005
Summary $1.1 million $0.45 million $0.65 million savings
C:\KDY\EMCON\Cities\Beaumont\I,F-cxpConTbl2a.doc EMCON/OWT Solid Waste Services EXHIBIT «A"
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
CITY OF BEAUMONT, TEXAS
Clean Community
DATE: June 6, 2001
TO: Stephen J. Bonczek, City Manager
FROM: John Labrie, Clean Community Director
SUBJECT: LANDFILL CAPACITY EXPANSION - COUNCIL WORKSESSION
COMMENTS:
I have been discussing the future of the City's Landfill with our consulting engineers,
EMCON/OWT Solid Waste Services. I am in agreement with EMCON, that we should look
to expand the Landfill's capacity at this time. Based on both our involvement and experience
with the TNRCC, it will become increasingly more difficult to gain approval of a permit
amendment that is required to increase waste disposal capacity.
The permit amendment process is similar to obtaining a new landfill permit. It will entail
significant engineering work and possibly legal work. The process also requires legal notification
to surrounding landowners and allows for protest by affected parties. If protestants surface, a
public hearing(s) could result.
I have attached a letter from EMCON/OWT that briefly describes the expansion proposal and
the benefits to the City. The estimated cost for engineering services is currently being
developed. We may or may not incur some legal cost.
I am requesting that we schedule a work session with City Council on June 26, 2001 to inform
them of the benefits to the City and obtain directions as to how we might proceed with this
project during F.Y. 2002.
%If yo have questions or need additional information, please notify me.
Oohn Labrie
JL:ljw
Attachments
i
EMC0: OUI'Solid 11anteSemiees
,0 1 L14 Loop 8'20 �1?1101
I u r ll orrh. T\ -o I I()--ri.i I
81-.1-s.82 1
R 17.1-t;.8 -1
the(tigroup May 21, 2001
Mr. John Labrie
Director, Clean Community Department
City of Beaumont
4955 Lafin Road
Beaumont, Texas 77705
Re: Landfill Expansion Considerations
Dear John:
As you know, there are numerous considerations associated with a landfill expansion
project. The following considerations apply to the possible expansion of the Beaumont
landfill:
Capacity Increase. Based on preliminary estimates (see option C in the attached
table), the expanded landfill would have a remaining capacity of 10.5 million
cubic yards (MCY) vs the estimated capacity of approximately 4.5 MCY that
will remain on 8/31/01. At a gate rate of $6 per gate cubic yard (assuming
compaction ratio of 2.5 gate CY to 1 in-place CY), the potential revenue (in
2001 dollars) from the expanded landfill would be $63,000,000. Of course, the
income to the city from the use of this capacity would be net of the landfill
operating costs and other related costs. [Note: remaining capacity is estimated
assuming that waste inflow will continue through 8/31/01 at the same rate of
232,722 bank CY/year.)
Extended Site Life. Based on the 2000 annual report to the Texas Natural
Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC), the current estimate of the life
of the landfill is 19.2 years (as of 8/31/01). While the exact capacity of the
expanded landfill is not yet known, based on preliminary estimates, the
expanded landfill would have a remaining life of approximately 45 years. [Note:
remaining life is estimated assuming that waste inflow will continue through
8/31/01 at the same rate of 232,722 bank CY/year.)
Eliminate Cover Shortage. The current landfill design is based on a cover
deficit. Plans for expanding the landfill would include increasing the depth of
excavation. Assuming a cost of$3.50/CY of imported soil, the value of the soil
from the deeper excavation could exceed $5 million. [Note: To remedy the
current cover soil deficit, the City has considered modifying the landfill design
to increase the depth of excavation. However, TNRCC advised that increasing
the depth of excavation would require a permit amendment.]
FW\\\FTW OFP 1\PROJEC'RKDY\Lrexpconsider-52101.docV521-01\dlm:1
i
FtiC0_NIOR'T Solid llastc Scriiccq
Mr. John LaBrie
May 21, 2001
Page 2
Delayed Expenditure for Next Cell Construction. Expanding the landfill will
result in increasing the depth of waste over the liners. In turn, the greater depth
of waste over the liners will enable the City to delay the construction of the next
cell. Cell 3, an 18-acre Subtitle D cell was authorized for construction in April
2001. The estimated cost of constructing Cell 3 is approximately S1.3 Million.
This includes construction plans, CQA and construction. ,.If the City were to
begin permitting the expansion in 2001 and the expansion permit were issued by
2003, the City would be able to defer construction on the next cell for a number
of years. Capital costs of future cells would be similarly deferred as each cell
would have a greater depth of waste and, therefor, a longer useful life.
Cost Savings from Additional Design Improvements. The design of the
expansion would incorporate certain cost-effective design enhancements
representing significant savings to the City. For example, the expansion design
could include an alternate final cover design (deleting the FML from the final
cover side slopes), which could save the city an estimated $500,000.
Other Cost Savings from Permit Changes. The City has authorized certain
enhancements to the current permitted design. As discussed, certain additional
enhancements will be needed in the near term. These design and permitting
changes could be incorporated into the permit amendment document at savings
of approximately $40,000.
In summary, based on this preliminary review, it appears that the expansion of the
Beaumont Landfill represents an investment with a significant return to the City. The
return on this investment will be short term and long term. The costs of developing the
permit application for the expansion would be far exceeded by the associated cost savings
in imported cover materials and landfill construction costs. Furthermore, the expense of
constructing the next cell could be deferred for a number of years. This savings in
construction cost will exceed the cost of the permit application preparation.
At your convenience, we would be glad to further discuss the advantages, risks and costs
of pursuing a permit amendment for the landfill expansion. We appreciate the opportunity
to be of continued service to the City of Beaumont.
Sincerely,
>tmcon
Kein D. Yard, P.E.
Director, Solid Waste Services
Attachment
FW\\\FTWOFP 1\PRO)EC7 RKDY\L-expconsider-52101.doc\_521-01\dlm:I
Beaumont Landfill
Design/Permit Alternatives
PRELIMINARY SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES(3/25/01)
Additional
Added Capacity Cover Sail Aesthetics and Net Value
Permit Permitted Landfill Excavation (Airspace) Required ;,( SiteExpigratibg Wet4adrh g tiReEulatory�`ii nor;r
Scenario Procedure Acreage' Height Deplb cy (cy) v ) i
'. 4 k"�a • ;.lesuq •,y{�a p Za.;t Aecepta net cry Public of Option
1 /• ;• Acceptance
A.Ikelxn MIII'm Saw Scone +2 IU It >180O)O Reduces rover 'I HD nn Minor amendnw:m at be cunfirowd: 'INU I-HI)
Excavation Amendml dehcil (•nneide.r airspace I-t by previously
reduced IiwHprun
it Ih•rlx•n Maim same Increase –1011. >J•(NN),IHM) '1 fit) IIII) nu 'I'RI) 'tRl) 'IHU
Excavation Amrndnn >20 It
Increaw
Ileigln
C.Ikepen Malin sunk Incremc –1011. >(,(XM),(NX) '1-11I) THU no Till) Till) "INN
Excavation Amrndnn >10 It
+
Increase
Height
1) Revise Mlwldl s:nne Same No net none No reduction in —_ N A. —__ ---_N.A. --- OK,lwmding mewing with'I'NR('C N A '11SU
Itax• ration change cover del is it
• Ui adrs
hW\\\tTK'f)P!'I\I'RO)IiCT\Khl'\lrennit2opumn dd>L•\521 nlNlnr I (
Memo
To: Mayor and Council Members
From: Stephen J. Bonczek, City Manager
Date: July 3,2001
Subject: FY 2002 Budget Analysis/Alternatives
FY2000 CHALLENGES AND ACH1EVEMENTS
The Mayor/Council and the administration faced many challenges during FY2000.A comprehensive
analysis of operations, programs, services and funding sources resulted in
• control or reduction of the cost of government
• implementation of alternative revenue sources
• adjustment to existing fees/charges, and
• no increase in the property tax rate.
The operation and maintenance of an additional fire station, the addition of a fifth EMS unit created
unanticipated expenditures in the General Fund.This was compounded by the required shift of$.O1
($360,000) in property tax to debt service A rigorous review of vacancies produced savings
opportunities across funds of approximately$850,000 through eliminated positions.This resulted in
productivity improvement as fewer employees meet increased service demands.
Revenue enhancements included an aggressive pilot program in Cash Management which targeted
EMS collections and allowed forthe hiring oftemporary employees with specific medical terminology
backgrounds. This strategy produced an additional $700,000 in collections which boosted the
collection rate from 40`/o to 60%of EMS billings. All City fees were reviewed and increases were
implemented in permitting,public health,civic center rental fees and the institution of fire service fees.
Alarm system renewal fees were reinstated and a late fee added to delinquent water bills.
The combination of the above revenue enhancements and expenditure reductions through budget
discipline and productivity,along with revenue windfalls in Gross Receipts Tax and higher Sales Tax
revenues,produced a remarkable$2 million financial turnaround.The cost reductions and increases
in revenues resulted in an increase in the General Fund fund balance of over$900,000,in comparison
with a projected$1.1 million reduction for FY2000.These actions provided the financial capacity for
the proposed use of$2.1 mullion of General Fund fund balance in the FY2001 proposed budget,
which eliminated the need to increase the property tax rate for FY 2001.
EXHIBIT "B"
FY2001 ISSUES
In the City Manager's FY2001 Budget Message of August 15, 2000, the Administration was
challenged to generate a budgetary impact of increased revenuestreduced expenditures of S4 million
for FY2001. The stormwater management utility concept was discussed as a viable alternative
revenue source for FY2002.
The appropriation of General Fund fund balance was necessary to balance the FY2001 Budget. The
following issues combined to produce a projected$2.1 million deficit for the fiscal year.
• Shift 2 cents of property tax from General Fund to Debt Service
• Six additional firefighters
• Staffing fifth EMS unit
• Funding employee compensation study(phase I)
• Funding the retiree Cost Of Living Adjustment
• Economic Development Incentives
The above issues are compounded by the Sales Tax revenue shortfall which is anticipated to reach
$1.7 million if economic conditions remain the same.
FY2002 ISSUES
The issues that existed in FY 2001 will be recurring in FY 2002. It is unknown whether the Sales Tax
will rebound and experience a surge of growth in the next fiscal period The FY 2002 Budget may
include costs for Phase II of the Compensation Study($160,000)and an additional two cent shift of
the property tax rate from General Fund to Debt Service ($760,000). In FY 2002 one cent is
expected to generate$380,000.
Issue FY2001 FY2002
Shift 2 cents-FY01 $ 740,000 $ 760,000
Six Firefighters 300,000 300,000
Fifth EMS Unit 400,000 40p000
Compensation Study(1) 575,000 650,000
Compensation Study(11) — 160,000
Retiree COLA 175,000 175,000
Economic Development 150,000 150,000
Sales Tax Shortfall 1,700,000 0
Sub-total 4,040,000 2,595,000
Shift 2 cents-FY02 — 760,000
Total 4,040,000 3,355,000
Not included in the preceding table are certain revenues and expenditures assumptions that are made
on an annual basis.This includes slight increases in Sales Tax,Gross Receipts Tax and other revenues
such as fees and charges. Industrial Payments are budgeted at FY 2001 levels as contracts are
currently under negotiation.Expenditure assumptions include the annual merit increase for employees
and increases in health care costs.A wage increase has been included for Fire Civil Service personnel,
however contract negotiations are ongoing. Based on Council discussion and direction on the issues
addressed at the 2001 Budget Summit and a projected$4 million deficit for FY 2002 the following
Budget Alternatives have been prepared.
All departments submitted decision packages which outline opportunities for achieving a 3%or more
reduction from their FY 2001 Budget.Revisions have been made to these decision packages to reflect
Councils review at the June 28,2001 meeting. Items in bold have Council consensus.These budget
reduction strategies,a listing of which follows,will be used to produce a balanced FY 2002 Budget.
If no property tax increase and/or Storm Water Utility Fee is adopted,department reductions would
have to provide the entire amount needed to eliminate the$4 million projected deficit.Critical in the
selection of department reductions is whether layoffs or attrition would be used to achieve the
employee reductions identified,as timing will impact the level of savings.
Alternative 1
Property Taxes-Increase$.02 for Debt Service $ 760,000
Storm Water-Exempt religious,schools and county,
eliminate capital(for 6 months) 1,300,000
Selective reductions in various departments 1.940.000
$4,000,000
The property tax rate will be increased$.02 for debt service as opposed to shifting $.02 from the
General Fund.This would result in a total property tax rate of$.655 (General Fund$33 and Debt
Service$325). The Storm Water Utility Fee,exempting religious, school and county
organizations and deferring all($40.5 million) capital improvements,would raise$2,600,000 to
$4,000,000 annually depending on the extent of the program and exemptions. The timing of
implementation will have an impact on the revenue stream for FY 2002. For purposes here,
administration is projecting six months of revenue. If Council implements the Stormwater Utility
Fee by July 31,prior to adoption of the Budget, an additional 3 months of revenue,or$650,000,
will be realized.
Storm Water Utility
Potential Fee Structure
StorwWater No 50% 100%
Utility Budget Exemption Exemption Exemption
$4,000,000. $3.85 $4.06 $4.29
$2,600,000(no capital) $2.50 $2.64 $2.79
Rates are calculated on a monthly basis per ESU. Exemptions include county, school district and
religious organizations as provided by state law. The potential residential fee ranges from
approximately$2.50 to $4.05 per month for an equivalent service unit(ESL). The impact on non-
residential properties would be based on the amount of impervious surface or some other basis.
Various methods of calculating the fee as well as the impact of exemptions have been presented to
Council.
Alternative 2
The property tax is increased $.05 for the General and Debt Services Funds with no Storm Water
Utility Fee. Department reductions are increased to achieve the $4 million necessary to balance
the FY 2002 budget.
Property Taxes- Increase 2 cents for Debt Service $ 760,000
Property Taxes-Increase 3 cents for General Fund 1,140,000
Selective reductions in various departments 2.100.000
$4,000,000
Alternative 3
An additional one cent of the property tax rate is shifted to Debt Service or dedicated to the
Capital Improvement Fund. This effectively decreases the General Fund property tax rate by three
cents as a two cent shift is proposed to fiord the increase in existing debt service requirements.
The shift of the additional one cent to debt service would allow for the continuation of the Capital
Program
Property Taxes-Increase amount shifted to Debt Service
or dedicate to Capital Improvements equal to 1 cent S (380,000)
Storm Water-Exempt religious, schools and county,
eliminate capital(9 months) 1,950,000
Selective reductions in various departments 2.430.000
$4,000,000
The elimination of the Street User Fee is also a component of alternative 3. The Street Rehab
Program would continue as part of the Capital Improvement Program.
FY 2002 Budget Policy
The Administration will continue to monitor/evaluate FY2001 revenues/expenditures on a daily
basis. The impact of the Industrial District agreements currently being negotiated have not been
included in this analysis.
The Street User Fee could be restructured based on trip generation and would produce an average
cost to residential customers of$.70 per month. There would be increased costs for non-
residential property owners/organizations based on the extent of vehicle access to/from their site.
There is also a moratorium proposed on new capital projects with the exception of local match
($700,000) for the Delaware extension for Federal Funding($2.8 million)that would fund eighty
percent of project costs. This would not be the case if alternative 3, which allows for the
continuation of the capital program,were selected.
The adoption of the proposed compensation/classification plan will be effective July,2002.
Meetings with the Financial Improvement Team and various community leaders will continue
throughout the FY2002 Budget preparation process. There will also be budget meetings in each
ward to solicit citizen input prior to the submittal of the City Managers proposed budget.
FY2002 Department Budget Decision Packages
Departments offered several proposals in order to provide Council options for program/service cutbacks to
achieve the 3%or more target reductions necessary to balance the FY 2002 budget.
3% Potential
FY01 Target Savings/Rev
Decision Packages Budget Amount To=Target
olice $18,997,400 $570,000
1. Budget to reflect vacancy trend $135,000
for sworn positions
Eliminate Secretary I Position 40,000
(vacant)
Budget to reflect vacancy trend
for civilian positions $100,000
Community Resource
Specialist(transfer to CDBG,vacant) 28,000 303,000
Fire 13,964,000 420,000
1. Reduce apparatus level 317,000
(Eliminate 6 positions, 5 vacant)
2. Civilianize Fire Dispatch 57,000
3. Close Station 11 (limit to EMS station activity) 512,000
(Eliminate 9 positions)
The apparatus reduction would entail placing Truck 4 and the Rescue Truck in reserve.Civilianization of
Fire Dispatch is an item which is subject to union negotiation.An analysis of a proposal to transfer EMS
operations to the Fire Department has not been finalized.
Public Works 11,768,100 353,043
1. Increase Transit fares($.25) 144,000
Charge Transit Social Services 179,800 323,800
2. Cut Transit service hours(6-9pm) 170,500
Adopt Transit Saturday schedule on weekdays(ie., longer head-times) 187,000
Eliminate Transit Saturday service 136,000 493,500
3. Eliminate Development Services Manager(Vacant) 65,000
Renegotiate street lighting contract 40,500
General operating-Engineering 30,000
Parks general maintenance 73,300
Streets&Drainage heavy materials 15,200
3% Potential
FY01 Target Savings/Rev
Decision Packages Budget Amount To=Targe
General operating-Transportation 45,100
Increase parking violation fees(from$3/S 10/$10 to S 10/S 15/$20) 44,400 313,500
Increased operating expenses related to the transit system as well as cutbacks in state(20%)and federal
(down to 48%of operating deficit from 501/6) funding contribute to the need for adjustments to this
service. General operating reductions include overtime, operating supplies,telephone, fuel&lube, vehicle
maintenance,part-time and temporary wages, botanical supplies,contract services and equipment
maintenance.
Library& Leisure Services
Library Services 1,908,100 57,000
1. Automated circulation system 16,200
Eliminate Funding Center Librarian(vacant) 40,800
General operating 11.000 68,000
Recreation Services 825,800 25,000
1. Eliminate R.A.P. Program Sites 11,200
Eliminate After School Programs 4,600
General operating 81300 24,100
General operating savings are based on closing the main library on Saturday and Sunday. Both the R.A.P.
and After School programs are underutilized.
Public Health 4,593,200 137,800
1. Increase Charge for Vital
Statistic Records 56,800
Eliminate EMS Manager Position(vacant) 51,500
Increase EMS rates 801000 188,400
A proposal to privatize EMS services is not being considered based on Council direction and market
conditions at this time.
Central Services 6,207,000 186,200
1. Art Museum Grounds Maintenance 3,600
General operating-Purchasing 4,000
IS Contract Maintenance
(Transfer to Enterprise Funds) 39,500
Eliminate Clerk II Convention Facilities 31,000
(vacant)
Defer Capital Purchases 7,500
Eliminate Golden Triangle Directory Listing 2.500 88,100
In an effort to control utility costs,a temperature policy for all City buildings will be implemented
3% Potential
FY01 Target Savings/Rev
Decision Packages Budggt Amount To=Target
Finance 1,219,600 36,600
1. Eliminate Performance Analyst Position(vacant) 69,000
Eliminate Accounting Assistant Position(vacant) 35,000 104,000
Human Resources 649,800 20,000
1. Eliminate Service Awards Program
and 5 yr. gifts 7,500
General operating 10,000 17,500
The Service Awards banquet, including the Doris Johnson Award, would be replaced with a presentation at
Council meeting.
City Attorney 571,900 17,600
1. Aggressive collection for all Departments 100,000
Cfty Clerk 1,148,400 34,452
1. Do not renew Municipal Court
collection contract with
Municipal Services Bureau(MSB) 60,000
Transfer demolition advertising to CDBG 9,600 69,600
Municipal Court will still use OmnibaselDPS Collections to service delinquent accounts.
City Wide
I. Discontinue uniforms for non-field personnel 5,000
Discontinue holiday bonus($20 grocery voucher) 29,500
Travel(10%across the board) 30,000
Eliminate Parks/Rec Administration Division(Director) 100,000
Payment, rather than in-kind, from YMBL 50,000
Delay implementation of Compensation Study Phase H 160,000
Originally scheduled for implementation July 2002
Eliminate Curbside Recycling(Net savings=$234,900 in Solid
Waste Fund, eliminates 6 positions)and reduce funding 50%for
garbage container replacement($200,000)to provide capacity to
increase the Solid Waste contribution to the General Fund by
$50,000 and minimize the need for future rate increases. The sale
of the recycling trucks is estimated to bring in$35,000. 85,000 459,500
3% Potential
FY01 Target Savings/Rev
Decision !Packages Budget Amount To=Target
The FY 2001 contribution from the Solid Waste Fund is $600,000. City Charter limits utility fund
contributions to 20%of operating revenues. This equates to$1.2 million for the Solid Waste Fund.
However,current operating costs would limit the availability of funds for this transfer. Gulf Coast
Recycling has agreed to be a drop off center for recyclable aluminum and paper and to pay the customer
for the product. Items would need to be dropped off at their location at 1995 Cedar St.
TOTAL $62,376,700 1 873 395 3 439 000
Total of Bold Items $2,553,000
.rte.
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
' City of Beaumont, Texas
Executive Offices
Date: July 3, 2001
To: Mayor/Councilmembers
From: Stephen J. Bonczek, City Manager
Subject: FY2002 Budget Preparation Supplemental Information
COMMENTS
Attached you will find the following information to facilitate Council discussion of issues regarding
FY2002 Budget formulation:
1. Stormwater Utility Rate Structure
2. Stormwater Implementation in Texas
3. Property Tax Adjustment Impact
4. Position Eliminated/Added since July, 1999
S. Position Vacancies as of July L 2001
EXHIBIT "C"
STORM WATER UTILITY
POTENTIAL FEE STRUCTURE
Estimated Monthly Rate per ESU
Exemptions
Storm Water Religious
Utility Budget None County Organizations Schools All
$4,000,000 $3.85 $3.86 $4.03 $4.08 $4.30
$200,000* 2.50 $2.51 $2.62 .65 .79
*No Capital
Example Locations
Monthly Fee
No Exemptions Annual Cost
No ' No
Location ESU's Capital Capital Capital Ca ital
Hoffbrau 18.83 $72.48 $47.08 $869.72 $564.90
American Valve and Hydrant 280.87 $1,081.35 $702.18 $12,976.17 $8,426.10
Jefferson County 236.00 $908.(KI $590.00 $10,903.96 $7,080.00
Ritter Lumber 51.51 $198.33 $128.78 $2,379.96 $1,545.30
Central High School 168.05 $646.99 $420.13 $7,763.91 $5,041.50
First Baptist Church 61.69 $237.51 $154.23 $2,850.08 $1,850.70
Harbor Apartments 79.16 $304.77 - $197.90 $3,657.19 $2,374.80
Convenience Store 6.29 24.22 $15.73 $290.60 188.76
City of Beaumont Storm Water Utility Rate Structures
Residential Tiered Rate Structures and Revenue Forecasts
Tiers Tier Range ft2 ISA Est. #of Accounts Rate 1 Rate 2 Rate 3
Small 0-1799 10860 $3.00 $3.50 4.00
Medium 1800-2699 10910 $4.00 14.50 $5.00
Large >2700 11470 $5.00 5.50 $6.00
Revenues $1,602,840.00 1$1,869,980.00 $2,137,120.00
Residential Flat Rate Structures and Revenue Forecasts
Flat Rate Est. #of Accounts Revenues
3.75 33722 $1,517,490.00
4.00 33722 11,618,656.00
4.25 33722 $1,719,822.00
4.50 33722 $1,820,988.00
4.75 33722 $1,922,154.00
5.00 33722 __$2,023,320.00
5.25 33722 $2,124,486.00
Multl-Residential Tiered Rate Structures Capped at$5000.00 per year and Revenue Forecast
Apartment Type Est#of Units Rate 1 Rate 2 Rate 3
Multi-Unit Apts. 7038 $3.00 $4.00 $5.00
Duplex 447 $6.00 $8.00 $10.00
Fourplex 2 $12.00 $16.00 $20.00
Revenues 128S,576.00 $380,768.00 $475,960.00
Multi-Residential Flat Unit Rate Without the$5000.00 Per Year Maximum Fee
Flat Fee Rates Total Units Rates Revenue
Units 8454 $3.00 $304,344.00
Units 8454 $3.50 355 068.00
Units 8454 $4.00 $405,792.00
Units 8454 $4.50 $456,516.00
Units 84541 $5.00 $507,240.00
Commercial Rate Structures and Revenue Forecasts
Commercial Rate Based on Total Impervious Surface Area as Calculated at#0.15 per 100 ft2 ISA
Minimum Monthly Fee of$6.00 and Maximum Monthly Fee of$416.00(;5,000 per year)
Commercial Type Est. #of Accounts Range ft2 ISA Est,Annual Rev
Small$6.00 Min. 598 < 4000 $43,056.00
Medium Calculated 2174 4000-277333 $1,328,508.00
Large$416.00 Max 29 > 277333 $144,768.00
Revenues $1,516,335.00
Commercial Rate Based on Tiered Total Impervious Surface Area Groupings
Minimum Monthly Fee of$6.00 and Maximum Monthly Fee of$416.00(;5,000 per year)
Tiers Est #of Accounts Range ft2 ISA Rate 1 Rate 2 Rate 3
1 560 0-3710 $6.00 $6.60 17.26
2 560 3711-8770 $12.00 $13.20 14.52
3 560 8771-16000 $24.00 126.40 $29.04
4 560,16001-37620 $48.00 152.80 $58.08
5 560 $96.00 $105.60 $116.16
Revenues $1,249,920.00 1 374 912.00 $1,512,403.00
Commercial Rate Based on Calculated Total Impervious Surface Area at$0.15 per 100 ft2 ISA
No Minimum or Maximum Fee
Commercial Calculate I Est#of Accounts Totai ft2 ISA lRevenue
All No Min.or Max. 1 28011 895393801 $1,611,708.84
A B C D ESh setl F G H I
1 Atclt Residential Rate Type Residential Rates Basis Non-Re*dental Rate Tv9e Non-Resldentia tes Exemptions
2
3 San Antonio Flat Fee Residential Tiered? Area All Developed Property Tiered Rates w/lmpact Fee schls/churcheslnon-profits
4 Austin Flat Fee Single Family $5.21 ISA An Developed Property $56.23/Developed Acre Ind.(State Owned)Schl D
5 State of Texas Property
6 City of Austin,
' County
8 Undeveloped!
9 Arlington ISA Residential $1.30 Average Rate? ISA All Developed Property $8.50 to 390.00 Schls./Churches/non-pro
10 Alien - --_ Fiat- --- Residential_ _- --- - $2.75 - _- ISA All Developed Property-Lot Size Up to$50.00- Schls./Churches/non-profit
11 Bedford ISA Residential $2.501ESU ISA All Developed Property _ S2.501ESU Schls./Churches/non-pro
12 Dallas Total Area Residential $1.78 to 13.88 Area According to Land Use $.0555/mo/100 S.F. Schls./Churches/non-proftt
13 $.0555/Mo./100 S.F. - Min.of$1.05 for Commercial&
14 Unimp.Max$13.88 unimp.
15 Euless Flat Fee Residential $2.50/Parcel Area All Developed Property $18.94/100%Impervious acre. Schls./Churches/non-profit
16 Garland ISA Residential-Small(3750) $1.20 ISA All Developed Property $.08/100 S.F.ISA Schis./Churches/non-profIts
17 ISA Residential-Medium(7500) $2.40 ISA
18 ISA Reskkiential_wLarge('1'
11,500) $3.80 ISA
19 Cotlsyvine Flat Fee Single Family $8.00 ISA All Developed Property Total S.F./ESU(M$8.0o/ESU Ischl./Churches/non-pro}tts
20
N' kfitand Hills ISA Resddentlal $3.00 per ESU ISA All Developed Property Based on Land use Ischl./Churches/non-profs
21 519.28/Acre/Mo. j
22 Plano ISA Residential Tiered Fees ISA Developed Property 5.048/100 S.F.ISA..Min. $1. schl./churches/non-proftts
23 Lubbock Flat Fee Single Family $4.99/Resldence Multi-faml Commercial 54.99/unit - Ind.(State owned)Schl Dis
24 Flat Fee Mufti-Family-to 4 units. $4.99/UnR Apartment Complex $33.12 State of Texas Property
25 Flat Fee _ Residential Sprinklers_ Exempt All Non-Residential Sprinklers $33.12 Lubbock County Property
26 Flat Fee Mobile Homes/Parks .$4.99Nntt Private Schools,Churches City of Lubbock Property
27 b Federal Government $33.12 City Housing Authority
28 Fiat Fee Construction-Residential $4.99 Comm-Retail,Serv.&Industrial $33.12
29 Mesquite - _ ISA Single Family-- _.. _. __.--$3.00 - - ISA Developed Property - - $.05/100 S.F.ISA schwctwrches/non-profs
30 - -- _ _. .._..._......_ Muftbfsmll� - $•05/100 S.F./Mo. _
31 Gainesville Flat Fee Single Fami 1895 S Ft. $.50/Mo. ISA Developed_- ...._.. ._ .. _ .._. .._.�---_---. �� 9• .. . . . Property
$.50/1895 Sq.it.ISA Schis./Churches/no
_._. . .
35 •Waco Is studying the feasibility of a Storm Water Fee, i
36 Have scheduled a Committee of the Whole to study the Issue.
Page 1
Texas Cities and Storm Water Utility Budget Components 1/1/98
n° onit yin
Dallas
Arlington
Mesquite
North Richland Hills '
Garland
Plano
Bedford
Euless
Austin
San Antonio
len
Lubbock
olleyville
Page 1
City of Beaumont
Property Tax Adjustment Impact Analysis
2 cent 3 cent 4 cent 5 cent
Property Property Tax Property Tax Property Tax Property Tax
Value Increase Increase Increase Increase
Residential Home 50,000 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00
Residential Home 100,000 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00
Residential Home 150,000 30.00 45.00 60.00 75.00
Residential Home 200,000 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00
Residential Home 250,000 50.00 75.00 100.00 125.00
Small Business:
Epicurean Empire, Inc
dba Carlos Italian Restaurant
2570 Calder 104,620 20.92 31.39 41.85 52.31
JTB Recycling Facility
4895 Romeda Rd. 206,640 41.33 61.99 82.66 103.32
Medium Size Business:
Hoffbrau Steaks
2310 N 11th St. 355,600 71.12 106.68 142.24 177.80
Large Business:
American Valve & Hydrant
Hollywood & 11 th St
(10 accts on tax roll) 1,370,340 274.07 411.10 548.14 685.17
Positions Budgeted in FY99-01 Budget
Designated as "Will Not Be Filled"
Annual Budgetary Impact
Division Vacancy Date Position FY Position Annual Health FICA Pension Worker's Comp. Annual
Occurred In Became Vacant Deleted Salary Per Year 7.65% 10.0% 2.5% Budgetary Impact"
General Fund
Assistant City Manager••• Executive 1999 0 0 0 0 0 0
Accounting Assistant Accounting 6/15/01 2001 23.129 6100 1,769 2,313 578 33.889
Code Inspector I Building Codes 2/19/01 2001 33,956 6100 2,598 3,396 849 46,898
Deputy Chief of Police+ Police Administration 3131/98 2000 63,672 5,300 4,871 6,367 1,592 81,802
Development Services Manager Development Services 5/31/01 2001 49,438 6.100 3,782 4,944 1,236 65,500
Drainage Engineer Engineering 02/02/98 2000 49,345 5,300 3,775 4,935 1,234 64,588
Environmental Health Manager Environmental Health 7/16/99 1999 39,002 4,600 2,984 3,900 975 51,461
EMS Manages Public Health 4130/01 2001 48,468 6.100 3,708 4,847 1,212 64,334
Parks&Recreation Director Parks&Recreation 4/30/01 2001 77,845 6,100 5,955 7,785 1.946 99,631
Program Coordinator Recreation 612/00 2000 30,246 5,300 2,314 3,025 756 41,641
Property Administrator Purchasing 4/28/00 2000 30,708 5,300 2,349 3,071 768 42,196
Public Health Clinician Clinical Services 3/6198 1999 51,040 4,600 3,905 5,104 1,276
65,925
Secretary I Criminal Investigations 4/30/00 2000 24,856 5,300 1,901 2,486 621 35.164
Traffic Engineer Transportation 7/17/98 1999 59,778 4,600 4,573 5,978 1,494
76.423
Internal Auditor/Bud.&Perf.Anal. Budget 1/31/01 2001 51.371 6,100 3.930 5,137 1,284
67.822
Police Captain+++ Police Field Operations 1/31/01 2001(mid) 59,003 5,300 4.514 5.900 1,475
76,192
Secretary I Police Field Operations 6/30/01 2001 27,700 6,100 2.119 2,770 693
39,382
Total Food Savings
S9S2,a47
06/29/2001
Positions Budgeted in FY99-01 Budget
Designated as "New Positions Added"
Annual Budgetary Impact
Division Addition Date Position FY Position Annual Health FICA Pension Worker's Comp. Annual
Occurred In Was Added Added Salary Per Year 7.65% 10% 2.5% Budgetary Impact*
General Fund
Billine Technicians 2 Cash Management 10/01/00 2001 38,272 12,200 2,928 3,827 957 58,184
Paramedics 7 Public Health 3/07/00 2000 128,856 37,100 9,857 12,886 3,221 191,920
Deputy Curt Clerk li Municipal Court 1/22/01 2001 16,640 6,100 1,273 1,664 416 26,093
Equipment Operator 1(5) Clean Community 10/1/99 2000 85,280 26,500 6,524 8,528 2,132 128,964
2000/2001 --
Police Officer(2)++ Police 3/31/98& 1/31/01 (mid 63,264 11,400 4,840 6,326 1,582 87,412
Firefighter(6) Fire Suppression 10/1/00 2001 155,088 36,600 2,250 20,160 4,404 218,502
Total Funds Expended $711,075
Fire Tr2lnlnLy Fund
Maintenance Worker 1 Fire 3/17/00 2000 16,640 5,300 1,273 1,664 416 25,293
Welder Fire 3/17/00 2000 1 20,696 5,300 1,583 2,070 517 30,166
Total Funds Expended
Water Utilities Fund S55,459
Construction Inspectors(2) Water Administration 10/2/00 2001 42,848 12,200 3,278 4,285 1,071 63,682
Construction Foremen(2) Water Administration 10/2/00 2001 48,256 12,200 3,692 4,826 1,206 70,180
Equipment Operator 111(2) Water Administration 10/2/00 2001 41.600 12,200 3,182 4,160 1,040 62,182
Maintenance Worker 111(2) Water Administration 10/2/00 2001 37,440 12,200 2,864 3.744
936 57,184
Maintenance Worker 11(2) Water Administration 10/2/00 2001 35,360 12.200 2,705 3.536 884
54,685
Secretary II Water Production 12/13/99 2000 18,516 5.300 1.416 1,852 463
27,547
Water Utilities Manager Water Administration 9/30/99 1999 66,935 4,600 5,121 6,693 1,673
85,022
WtrJSewer Constr.Supt.(Acting) Water Administration 10/2/00 2001(mid) 48,000 5.300 3,672 4,800 1,200
62,972
Total Funds Expended
5483,454
Grand Total Funds Expended
51,249,988
•Anwal Budgetary fit k calculated by addlng annul salary,health.FICA, perukm, and wrorkefa comp,
"Paitkm were reclassified f1mm Deputy Chief of Polke and Police Captain
07/03/2001
Positions Budgeted in FY99-01 Budget
Designated as "Will Not Be Filled"
Annual Budgetary Impact
Division Vacancy Date Position FY Position Annual Health FICA Pension Worker's Comp. Annual
Occurred In Became Vacant Deleted Salary Per Year 7.65% 10.0% 2.5% Budgetary Impact*
Solid Waste Fund
Equipment Operator I Neighborhood Services 10/01/99 2000 19,364 5,300 1,481 1,936 484 28,566
Recycling Coordinator Administration 9/30/99 1999 34,200 4,600 2,616 3,420 855 45,691
Total Fund Savings 574,257
Water Utilities Fund
Cleric Typist If Water Administration 10/19/98 2000 16,972 5,300 1,298 1,697 424 25,692
Civil Engineer III Water Administration 7/30/99 1999 42,840 4,600 3,277 4,284 1,071 56,072
Equipment Operator 1 Water Production 8/31/99 2000 23,480 5,300 1,796 2,348 587 33,511
Laboratory Technician Water Reclamation 10/01/95 2000 19,864 5,300 1,520 1,986 497 29,167
Res,&Tmg.CoordJOper.Mgr. Water Administration 1/03/00 2000 54,066 5,300 4,136 5,407 1,352 70,260
Water Utilities Director++ Water Administration 9/30/99 1999 81,300 4,600 j 6,219 8,130 2,033 102,282
Total Fund Savings 5316,984
Fleet Fund
Office Supervisor Fleet 4/30/00 2000 33,775 5,300 2,584 3,378 844 45,881
Total Fund Savings
Hotel Occupancy Tax Fund 545,881
Convention Marketing Coord. Convention do Visitors Bureau 9/4/00 2000 33,063 5,300 2,529 3,306 827 45,025
Total Fund Savings
215,025
Grand Total Fund Savings
51,434,995
'A-�a.lgary ret�Y dkotala/�adding annual plaq.tashA,FICA.Penske,sstl weftlara tO111P.
••T1a AssIRaN City Mryw I m W,u was in the FY 1999 Clanifkat M Fla tat was dlminaled fiom the FY20M Claoifkadon Plan.
'T%e Poaidan was ntIdI01 a P0101 Ofaoer(Ner Savings:$34.624)
'•TU I' '"�was nsd"allkd 16 P6Ike Ofaoer(Nw Savings:327,643)
"T%t Msitio6 was ntlauiM1e/M Water Udikin Manager(Net Saviagt 318.577)
06/29/2001
LIST OF VACANCIES
WEEK OF JUNE 25 - JULY 1, 2001
GENERALFUND
Mai :r� ; f^ ~- sine Ft p iD i ���ri vrswn "" '°^Posrtion = " ' - = /acanclesi�tt Postttoii. :w:...
HUMAN RESOURCES CLERK III 1 Eula Smith 04/12/01
MUNICIPAL COURT Juvenile Court Specialist 1 Rita Hurt-Cullums 03/30/01
ACCOUNTING Accounting Assistant 1 Hanh Tran 06 115/01
CASH MANAGEMENT Administrative Assistant 1 1 Wendy Meaux 09/01/00
Billing Technician 1 Tonya Dowden 06/07101
FINANCE Finance Officer 1 Beverly Hodges 0622101
CONVENTION FACILITIES Account Clerk II 1 Phyllis Ceasar 12/01/00
LIBRARY Librarian II 1 Barbara Beard 0522100
BUILDING SERVICES Communications Services Supv' 1 Jose Alvardo 01/31/00
Heating&AC Mechanic 1 Dominick Faraci 05/31/01
POLICE
Police Sergeant 1 Wylie Krttell 01/31/01
Police Officer 1 Douglas Huggins 01104/01
Police Officer 1 Donald Nance 02/13/101
Pogce Officer 1 Anthony Bruzzeze 02/06/01
Police Officer 1 William Gamer 06/05/01
Police Officer 1 Rudy Salerandi 0222/01
Tele.Comm Opr. 1 1 Lisa Beaulieu 0521/01
Juvenile Inf.Specialist 1 Betty Limbdck 03/16101
Community Resource Specialist 1 Donald Russell 05/02/01
PLANNING Seed Coordinator 1 Robert Watkins 05115/01
PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAM LVN 1 Patricia Workey 01/31/01
Health Education Tech 1 Yolanda Poullard 0627/01
EMS Paramedic 1 Richard Herrington 05/31/01
Jay Marsolan 06/01/01
Stormie Reed 06/15/01
FIRE Fire Driver/Operator 1 Henry Hebert 02102101
Fire Driver 1 Lame Wood 04/16101
Fire Driver/Operator 1 Harry Gilley 06101/01
Firefighter 1 James Strothers 0422101
Fire Driver/Operator 1 Dudley Champ 0629101
STREETS& DRAINAGE
Equipment Operator 11 1 John Matthews 05/10/01
Maintenance Worker 111 1 Steven Roberts 05/14/01
TOTAL GENERAL FUND 30
CC:Stephen J. Bonczek,Marie Dodson,Rosa Thomas.Andrea Deaton Jackie-c:Vaclist2 06292001
OTHER FUNDS
..e A71it1e ' 'n ie� .�+�i=:...: 3:::_i_:._:..:isw.:::;.,+..'.•:..xa�:�_:r_;a.�.#•o�:f.•�._.:=:_�:•':':tMz:i�,msye. o fPersort: 01-
1ln ci�.-::�.•
-
acanc othfD 15�GlSp L D
WATER RECLAMATION
Electronics Technician 1 Thomas Williams 05/09/01
Maintenance Worker I 1 Willie Lavergne -05/14/01
Laboratory Supervisor 1 Karin Warren 06/18/01
CUSTOMER SERVICE Meter Reader 1 Vertis Michael 0523/01
PRODUCTION Plant Maintenance Mechanic 1 Autholia Westbrooks 05/11/01
DISTRIBUTION
Maintenance Worker II 1 Charles Phelps 04/02/01
Equipment Operator III 1 James Wilson 04/02/01
Water/Sewer Coordinator 1 Joseph Alexander 05/14/01
YARD WASTE Equipment Operator II" 1 Dexter Jones 09/16199
FLEET Tire Shop Sepcialist 1 Lewis Wilturner 05/30/01
Equipment Mechanic I 1 Creighton Rayon III 05/07/01
Equpment Mechanic 1 1 William DeShayes III 05/30/01
TOTAL OTHER FUND 12
TOTAL ALL FUNDS 42
'Denotes a Change in the Position Vacated
CC:Stephen J. Bonczek,Marie Dodson,Rosa Thomas,Andrea Deaton Jackle-c:Vaclist2 06292001