City Council members approved a resolution Tuesday evening stating their intention to issue $2 million in certificates of obligation to pay for water, wastewater and drainage system improvements.
Funds raised by the sale are expected to provide $175,000 to match Community Development Block Grant funds for the replacement of a bar screen at the Moore Street Wastewater Treatment Plant, $328,000 to rehabilitate a thickener at the same facility, $81,400 for renovations to water storage tanks at Mussett Street and at the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s William G. McConnell Unit, $800,000 for water system improvements to the city’s west side and $174,500 for improvements to a 300-foot drainage ditch on Kennedy Street.
Once again, Councilman Jimbo Martinez brought up the subject of using the Texas Water Development Board to try to reduce the costs of bar screen project and save taxpayers money. However, after reading a brief report from financial advisor Steve Elliott of Southwest Securities, Martinez conceded that selling certificates through the open bond market would be the quickest and most economical method of funding the improvements.
“The open market would provide the quickest funds at the lowest cost to citizens,” Elliott said.
The most critical element of the project list is the replacement of the bar screen at the Moore Street wastewater plant. City Manager Ford Patton told councilmen at a previous meeting that the mechanical bar screen which automatically removes grit and debris from the wastewater entering the plant had completely failed and the staff at the plant was having to use a manual bar screen system to eliminate the debris before the effluent made its way to the pumps and other equipment in the system.
Patton said the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality was aware of the condition of the bar screen and had wanted to see plans for replacing the device. He urged the council to avoid pushing the situation to the point where the state agency determines that the plant is in violation of state regulations.
“I don’t really want to say it’s okay but it’s being done as best as it can,” Patton said of the manual system of cleaning the bar screen.
“I think it’s a mistake to put this thing off any further,” Patton added. “You asked for my opinion. That’s my opinion.”
Councilman Mike Scotten then asked Patton to explain the impact of the certificate sale on city utility and tax rates.
Patton explained that the sale would result in slight increases in both utility and tax rates. But the city manager has told the council in the past that delaying the repairs and improvements could lead to far greater costs in the future.
He told councilmen in an earlier meeting when addressing the renovations to existing water storage tanks that it would be much cheaper to renovate the existing tanks than it would be to replace them.
Scotten said he would like to see the bar screen replaced as quickly as possible but he also was interested in finding sources that could save city taxpayers money in the future.
Martinez then asked that Patton make another attempt to get someone from the TWDB to attend a future city council meeting to outline the programs the board has available for cities. Patton said he would try again to get someone from the state agency to attend a meeting.
Mayor Pro Tem John Fulghum brought the matter to a vote. “I want to proceed with this,” he said. “It should have been done two years ago.”
Before Fulghum made the motion to approve the resolution, Martinez asked fellow councilmen not to misunderstand him.
“I’m not saying this doesn’t need to be done,” Martinez said. “It has to be done.”
Fulghum then made the motion to approve the resolution and Councilman David Carabajal seconded it. All five councilmen then voted in favor of it.
Councilmen then heard a report from Patton and City Attorney Frank Warner concerning the legality of using the city’s 4B sales tax to pay the local portion of the cost of replacing the Moore Street sewer plant bar screen.
Fulghum had suggested at the council’s June 24 meeting that the city staff look into the matter.
Scotten referred to a letter the city received from Texas Municipal League legal counsel Laura Mueller, dated July 2.
“To me, the letter is clear,” Scotten said. “It’s not a legal expenditure.”
Scotten then said the decision of whether or not to use 4B sales tax money for the bar screen replacement should be a matter for the Beeville Economic Improvement Corporation to consider.
“I know you all want to find ways to fund this repair,” Warner said. “But y’all are going to have to find another way.”
“These funds are not an appropriate use,” Warner continued as he explained that 4B sales tax money is to be used to create or retain jobs or to improve the quality of life in the community.
Warner said if the EIC board were to recommend using 4B sales tax money for the bar screen replacement, he would tell them the same thing.
Earlier in the meeting another local attorney, Tom Healey, spoke against using 4B sales tax money for the project.
However, Mayor Kenneth Chesshir said he had heard a number of different opinions on the use of 4B sales tax funds. When told that such expenditures had to be reviewed by the State Comptroller’s Office, Chesshir said that the city had used 4B sales tax funds for similar projects in the past “and we’ve never gotten anything back that said no.”
Warner reminded Chesshir that there are repercussions for misusing 4B sales tax funds. A citizens group could take legal action and the city could be forced to repay the money. Warner suggested that the City Council would not want to have to explain something like that to taxpayers.
Warner said the bar screen project is not one related to getting a new Wal-Mart, building a park or anything like that.
EIC Board President Jim Crumrine was at the meeting and he commented on the matter, saying that 4B sales tax funds must be used to create or retain jobs or for quality of life issues.
Crumrine reminded councilmen that the EIC already had turned down funding the bar screen replacement once but said the board would look at a request again.
“It’s a real good case for retention of jobs or quality of life,” Crumrine said. “But both are a real stretch.”
“I’m going to go along with what our lawyer says,” Chesshir commented.
“If the law says we can’t do it, I’m not going to say let’s do it,” Carabajal said.
At that point, Patton reminded the council that the previous agenda item, the $2 million certificate sale, included funding for the bar screen replacement and he recommended that the discussion end.
The matter was dropped at that point.
In other business, the council voted to:
—Approve the purchase of two playscapes for the Poesta Creek Park improvement project. The larger of the two will cost $22,000 and the smaller one will cost $12,000.
The cost for each of the playscapes went over budget but Patton said the difference could be made up by changing some smaller line items in the budget for the project.
— Set a public hearing for 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, July 29, to hear comments on a proposed $40,000 addition to the downtown pavilion project. The accepted bid for the project came in $38,000 over budget and the city’s Tax Increment Finance District Board recommended providing the additional money from existing TIF funds.
The City Council must approve spending TIF funds.
Post a Comment