The City Council of the City of Abilene, Texas, met for a Special Council Meeting on June 16, 1998 at 9:00 a.m. for the purpose of conducting a public hearing to consider a request to annex 1800 acres located north of I-20 adjacent to city limits, and for a workshop session to include discussion and possible action on: 1) police issues, 2) technology plan, and 3) capital improvements. Mayor Gary D. McCaleb was present and presiding with Councilmen Paul R. Vasquez and Don Drennan, Councilwoman Carol Martinez, Councilmen Rob Beckham and Versie L. Brown, Jr., and Councilwoman Kay Alexander. Also present were City Manager Roy L. McDaniel, Assistant City Manager Mike Morrison, City Attorney Sharon Hicks, City Secretary Jo Moore, and various members of staff.

Mayor McCaleb called the meeting to order, and Councilman Don Drennan gave the invocation.

Jeff Armstrong, Senior Planner, briefed the Council on consideration of a request to annex 1800 acres located north of I-20 adjacent to the city limits. Mr. Armstrong stated that since the June 11 meeting, staff has reviewed the map showing property ownership. Mr. Armstrong pointed out the area indicating the original property studied, and the areas now being recommended for annexation. Council still has the option to annex all of the property or reduce it even further. The property across from the Jones County line is a narrow strip whose owner has asked to be annexed. This doesn't appear to be possible unless the Council annexes the adjoining properties against the will of the property owners. Mr. Armstrong reviewed all areas whose owners have requested annexation and those not wanting to be annexed, and concluded by stating that if Council directs, an annexation Ordinance will be developed.

Roy McDaniel, City Manager, stated of the 51 owners in the area, 27 voiced opposition to the request, with five in favor. Staff has tried to accommodate both those wanting to be and not wanting to be annexed. Mr. McDaniel pointed out on the map specific properties and the requests of the owners.

Mayor McCaleb stated this is the second public hearing on this request with the first public hearing having been held last Thursday, June 11. There is no final action or vote expected today - this is just one step in a series of steps to provide annexation. Mayor McCaleb then opened a public hearing on the request, and the following individuals spoke:

• Hoyt McBryde, #97 & #49 on the map, is interested in only having two of his acres annexed in order to have water.
• Jerry Brokaw, #82 on the map, 2630 FM 3034, stated she is representing herself and her husband. Although the map now reflects their property has been taken out of possible annexation, she still requested to speak in order to ask why the area is proposed for annexation, who requested it, why does the City take in other properties when it is not requested, and how would the property be zoned?

Mr. McDaniel stated the process started last winter with the request of two property owners wanting water to their land. Annexation is established by State law procedures, and is a long process. In annexation, the City considers the continuity of boundary lines with a natural boundary; i.e., a creek being easily recognized, which is beneficial in preparing maps. Usually growth, development, or a need to manage both, is why the city annexes. That does not apply in this case; there is no particular advantage to the City to annex this property. State law allows a decrease in the size of the area to be annexed, but not an increase once annexation has started.

• Richard Wagley, East Lake Road, wants his area reduced because of taxes from approximately 1,000 ft. - 1,200 ft. in the depth of the property as shown on the map to 300 ft.

Steve Burk, #3 to #9 on the map, 4950 Garland, represents all three property owners. Mr. Burk noted taxes affect everyone, and stated his appreciation to staff for re-drawing the lines. Mr. Burk noted that the majority of his land (#3) is in the city limits.

Mayor McCaleb asked if anyone owning the areas shown as #47 and V on the map was present. No one indicated ownership of those areas.

• Buzz Wiley, 11250 West Lake Road, asked who will pay the bill for water lines if the properties are annexed?

Mr. McDaniel stated the property owners would share the cost if the line serves more than one property owner. If only one was being served, they would pay for the line.

• V. H. Chaney, questioned the original northern boundaries, and who the property owners are of #85, #86 & #87.

Mr. Armstrong stated that #85 is the Harts, #86 is the Grissoms, and #87 is the Smiths. The zoning will be Agricultural Open Space, which allows for conditional use and existing businesses would be grandfathered in, but there would be some restrictions with no expansion of land without rezoning. The next step will be to draft the Ordinance for the annexation to include legal descriptions (in which staff would need direction from Council). The public hearing on the Ordinance would be August 13.

There being no one else present and desiring to be heard, the public hearing was closed. Mayor McCaleb thanked those in attendance, and again noted the date of the public hearing for the annexation Ordinance would be August 13.

Mr. McDaniel stated no vote or decision would be made today, but solicited Council comments.

Councilman Drennan stated the State of Texas has strict annexation guidelines and the Council has a responsibility to those in attendance and to the citizens of Abilene; the responsibility to assure Abilene grows in the proper manner. The Council wants the best overall for the citizens of Abilene on a long-term basis. Mr. Drennan stated he is not sure annexing only four or five small areas is the best for Abilene. Abilene may be better served in the years to come by annexing larger areas.

Councilman Vasquez commented on the 1,000' strip of land being considered, stating it seems reasonable that this amount of area be annexed and not reduced. Councilman Vasquez stated reference was made that the City taxes people and these taxes are used for its betterment, but the taxes paid by Abilenians also benefit many others through parks, streets, and other services which are enjoyed by all.

Councilman Beckham questioned how many property owners have businesses domiciled in this area?

Mr. Armstrong stated some businesses are in homes and staff is unsure as to how many there are since there are no records to identify the types of businesses. There are possibly ½ dozen auto related businesses, construction, salvage yard, and body shop.

Mayor McCaleb stated 1) of the five different segments on the latest map; four of those five are eligible to be annexed. #68 is not eligible without other properties being annexed. 2) In every annexation situation the Council has looked at, considering the larger area to begin with is common and appropriate. 3) The procedure itself is spread out over time and is not to be taken lightly because it affects people and property. There are some advantages and disadvantages in annexation for both the city and property owners.

The purpose of the public hearing is to sort through all the information until a decision is reached. What properties staff recommends for annexation will and should be less than the original amount, but in response to Council comments, and in listening to those requesting annexation a second look at what property is affected by that annexation will be taken. Mayor McCaleb encouraged staff to start with the requests, then the properties immediately adjacent to see if there are reasons why it should be annexed and to consider those not wanting to be annexed.

Mr. McDaniel reiterated that the city didn't initiate this request, it came from the property owners needing water.

Councilman Vasquez asked if we could provide water outside the city limits.

Mr. McDaniel stated if you service one outside the city limits a precedent is set and it has been Council's past decision to not do this.

Mayor McCaleb thanked those in attendance, and stated Council will now move to the Basement Conference Room for a workshop session for discussion and possible action on Police Issues, Technology Plan, and Capital Improvements. Upon Council's re-convening in the Basement Conference Room at 10:10 a.m., Mayor McCaleb stated the workshop might possibly conclude by 2:00 p.m., and then turned the session over to City Manager Roy McDaniel.

Mr. McDaniel stated two items are fairly lengthy - the Police Department will give a background briefing and a current status report, along with future needs which involves the Technology Plan, which will be presented this afternoon. The other item is the Capital Improvement Program process, in which staff will be getting feedback from the Council for a possible bond election.

Melvin Martin, Police Chief, briefed the Council on the background of the Police Department, as well as the status of its three bureaus: 1) Support services, comprising four divisions of primarily civilians and headed by Deputy Chief Jim Berry; 2) Investigative Services, comprising of three divisions headed by Deputy Chief Ed Dye. The Department has a large youth division, which makes Abilene unique in the size of this division; and 3) Uniform Services, headed by Deputy Chief Ron Harris.

A status report and future needs on the following was presented:

Maximum Utilization of Manpower - includes consolidation of street crimes, part time versus full time, community policing, and grant funding.

Civilianization 2 property clerks, records management, communications management, impound clerk, crime analysis, and Safety City.

Technology & Equipment Utilization - computers, mobile data terminals, radio tele., and additional portable radios.

Deputy Chief Dye briefed the Council regarding issues in the Department, and noted Supporting Neighborhoods & Parents (SNAP) is not currently in place, stating the citizens previously utilized in that program are now in the "PAL" program.

1. Department Issues

1. Community Policing - defined as the philosophy of management and service delivery.
2. CompStat (computer statistics) - is the process of doing business and analyzing crime.

Councilman Vasquez stated that he wished to encourage the philosophy of contact with & involvement of community leaders.

Ron Harris, Deputy Police Chief, briefed the Council on:

• Statistical data from comparable cities
• Time usage by patrol company (average June 1, 1997 - May 31, 1998)
• Historical perspective
• Effect of additional officers
• Distribution of patrol officers by company

• Profile of the officers we need (problem solvers, communicators, etc.)
• Recruiting issues
• Competition
• Attractions: salary, reputation, size of department
• Minority hiring
• 1997 - Academy Class #38 (# applied vs. # that showed up to be tested)
• 1998 - Academy Class #39 (# applied vs. # that showed up to be tested)
• Seniority breakdown:
• 70% have over 15 years experience
• 11% have less than 5 years

The normal range is 25-30% of a department will have less than five years. Retiring officers will impact the department. We have to be competitive.

Chief Martin summarized the critical needs for the Department as 1) the need for additional personnel in Patrol, 2) technology issues, and 3) recruiting issues.

Councilman Vasquez asked if we have people in the Department from area communities? Chief Martin replied that although that used to be the case, today with the excellent training our academy provides, we're assured that officers meet all the required standards. Chief Martin then distributed a set of statistical information. He stated the drug culture and crime associated with that culture is returning, and although Abilene does have gangs, they are not to the extent of other cities.

The Council took a short lunch break at 11:45.

Mr. McDaniel introduced Cindy Cullen, Technology Liaison and Dr. Hoffman, Technology Advisor, who presented the five-year strategic Technology Plan for the City of Abilene.

Ms. Cullen stated that over the past few years, City staff has worked to inventory and assess the technology needs of the City organization with the expectation of developing a plan for the strategic deployment of technology over the next three to five years. In the course of these processes, it was recognized that the assistance of a third-party consultant would be critical in plan development to provide an impartial assessment and to address more effectively the rapid rate of change in the technology arena.

In January 1998, the City contracted with David M. Griffith and Associates, Ltd. (DMG) to assist in the development of a strategic technology plan. The scope of the project included a review of current systems within the context of computer network structure and organizational structures, analysis of information flows within the organization, the development of strategies to enhance information flows and a plan to implement strategies. The project focussed on answering the following four questions:

• Do current network and organizational structures allow for the most efficient flow of information?
• How do these structures inhibit or enhance clear communication and effective decision making?
• Can technology be exploited to improve and streamline communication and information flows? What technology solutions achieve these objectives? At what cost?
• Is a reorganization of the network and/or organizational structure needed?

The methods used to research these questions included user and department surveys, interviews with Computer Services staff, and observation of the current operational environment. After careful review the following findings are presented:

• The findings of this research project show that the current network configuration and organizational structures do not allow for the most efficient flow of information.
• The following barriers to the efficient flow of information exist:
• Lack of standardization in software, hardware, and network operating systems prevents the easy exchange of information and increases Computer Services staff workload.
• Insufficient network connectivity, particularly for off-site users, limits access to electronic data and inhibits the widespread use of productivity tools such as e-mail and Internet.

The use of paper documents increases the time to access information and discourages trend analysis and proactive planning.

• Because information is not easy to access, many departments have resorted to storing duplicate sets of information for easy retrieval, resulting in duplication of work, the potential for error, inconsistency in the information departments share, and a hesitancy toward collaborative initiatives.
• The lack of user training stunts employee efficiency, effectiveness, and personal growth and increases the required level of support by Computer Services.
• User input into the definition and prioritization of technology initiatives enhances the effective deployment of technology.
• The Year 2000 (Y2K) problem is projected to affect many of the City's mission-critical applications, including the accounting system, payroll system, police computer-aided dispatch and records management systems, the municipal court system, and fleet management/inventory systems in addition to network operating systems applications.

Based on the above findings, the following recommendations are provided to improve the flow of information in the organization:

• Standardize software applications, hardware platforms, and network operating systems for PCs in the organization by 2000.
• Outsource maintenance of non-warranted PCs before the end of the fiscal year to free Computer Services staff time for standardization and productivity-enhancing initiatives.
• Replace VAX-based main frame applications with integrated, networked applications by 2002 to leverage technology investments, increase functionality, and provide a framework for information sharing.
• Improve network connectivity, and productivity tools, and provide an electronic document repository for easy access to information.
• Identify common data needs in the organization.
• Provide user training to increase user efficiency and effectiveness.
• Align Computer Services staff along functional lines and responsibilities.
• Install a user help desk to provide more effective user support.
• Institute user groups to help define and prioritize technology initiatives and expand the effective deployment of technology.
• Plan and address Year 2000 issues by replacing or repairing systems.

The major recommendations are translated into a six-track five-year implementation plan as follows:

1. PCs and Networks
2. Legacy Systems Maintenance
3. Legacy Systems Replacement
4. Global Data Sharing
5. Productivity Tools
6. Plan Organization and Reporting

Anticipated benefits resulting from the implementation of this plan include:

• Containment of technology costs
• Management of dispersed computing
• Better trained and more productive employees
• Maximization of use of existing data
• Increased productivity at the organization, department, and division levels
• Updating of obsolete "stand-alone" systems with integrated systems
• Capitalizing on advances in technology
• Alignment of Computer Services with City needs
• Functionality beyond the Year 2000
• More effective communication
• High quality decision making
• Enhanced service to citizens

Ms. Cullen stated leasing computers is recommended, it is attractive from a cost perspective. The three options in considering computers are to purchase, lease purchase, and lease.

Mr. McDaniel stated the five-year Technology plan to be presented at Budget Work sessions in July will require funding.

Councilman Vasquez commented on the positive aspects of the user help desk.

Ms. Cullen agreed with Councilman Vasquez, stating that once the network is in place the Help Desk technician can sit at a desk and lead the user through the problem.

Mr. McDaniel noted the current budget does provide funding for PC maintenance; and he intends to move ahead in other areas where funding has also been approved. Staff will be back before the Council in three weeks with additional budget issues.

It was also noted the high technology RFPs (Request for Proposals) are competitive proposals, with set standards as established by the city.

Mr. McDaniel stated the Capital Improvement Projects require more financing than the current budget allows in order to meet the many needs, and proposed that the Council consider a process similar to the one outlined in the handout (Capital Improvement Process Calendar of Events), including appointing a Citizens Advisory Committee.

David Wright, Director of Finance, stated the Planning & Zoning Commission is charged by the City Charter to submit recommendations for capital improvements.

Councilman Vasquez voiced a concern about people not being available for input during the summer months. Mr. McDaniel stated there is never a good time to accommodate everyone, and in his opinion people that are interested will get involved.

Andy Anderson, Director of Community Development, stated the original time was geared to the development of the CIP document. What Mr. Anderson envisions for the meetings is to educate as many as possible on what the CIP consisted of, its intent, and to get input from people on infrastructure needs. This information would then be tied into a list of projects for a bond issue.

Mayor McCaleb mentioned this is the first time he's seen a calendar, but is not surprised it has been prepared because he has spoken to the City Manager and understands there is a four-month process from July to October to be completed prior to a final report coming to the Council. The process includes collecting information, and hearing from citizens. Citizens have seven different chances to attend neighborhood meetings, they can also write letters and make phone calls. Citizens can give input throughout the whole process. Mayor McCaleb feels this is a calendar that will work, giving citizens multiple chances to maximum opportunities for input.

Councilman Vasquez voiced his concern with citizens having in the past said they did not have the opportunity to provide input, but since these meetings will not be specific to neighborhoods but are more community based, it will offer citizens more opportunities; he encouraged staff to emphasize to citizens these opportunities.

Councilwoman Alexander recommended for clarification purposes referring to the meetings as "community" meetings rather than "neighborhood" meetings.

Councilman Drennan suggested specific assignments to divisions (i.e., public works look at streets).

Mr. Wright noted that is exactly the purpose of the individual groups.

Mayor McCaleb announced that there is no Council action required today.

Mr. McDaniel stated staff would bring for Council's consideration approval of the plan in the form of a Resolution.

Mayor McCaleb recessed the Council into executive session pursuant to Sections 551.071 and 551.074 of the Open Meetings Act, to seek the advice of the City Attorney with respect to pending and contemplated litigation, and to consider the appointment and evaluation of public officers.

The Council reconvened from executive session and reported no action taken.

There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 2:05 p.m.

_____________________________ ______________________________

Jo Moore, City Secretary Gary D. McCaleb, Mayor