Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/10/1998 - Workshop Minutes City CouncilCITY OF COLLEGE STATION Mayor Lynn Mcllhaney Mayor Pro Tempore David Hickson City Manager George K. Nee City Council Steve Esmond Ron Silvia Swiki Anderson Larry Mariott Anne Hazen MINUTES COLLEGE STATION CITY COUNCIL Workshop Meeting Thursday, September 10, 1998 at 3:00 p.m. · City Hall Council Chambers COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mcllhaney, Mayor Pro Tern Hickson, Councilmembers Anderson, Madott, Hazen, Silvia, Esmond STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Nee, City Secretary Hooks, City Attorney Cargill, Jr., Public Works Director Smith, Assistant City Manager Brymer, Development Services Director Callaway, City Planner Kee, City Engineer Mosley, Public Information Officer Chapman, Management Assistant Broussard Mayor Mcllhaney called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. Mayor Pro Tern Hickson was not present. Agenda Item No. 1 -- Discussion of consent and statutory a.qenda items listed for regular council meeting. The following items were removed by councilmembers for questions to staff. 5a. Contract renewal for dry polymer for the wastewater treatment plant Removed by Councilman Esmond. Wastewater Supervisor Mr. Riley explained that the chemicals cost approximately $70,000-$80,000 annually. The present contract is for $69,000. 6c. Professional services contract for design of Graham Road rehabilitation by Walton and Associates Consultinq Engineers. Removed by Councilman Esmond. City Engineer Mosley explained that the request is for additional work to the project to include sewer lines which can be constructed concurrent with the road improvements. 6d. Professional engineering services for Cherry Street Improvement Project Removed by Councilman Esmond. Mr. Mosley explained that Klotz Associates of Houston is recommended by staff to perform these services. Mr. Anderson asked about the weighting factors. Mr. Esmond stated his disagreement with the staff's recommendation. He noted that he will remove this item from consent for a separate vote. 6b. Payment to Texcon for concrete curb and gutter work on Welsh Street. Removed by Councilman Anderson. Public Works Director Mark Smith explained the reason for this request. Monies are within the budgeted amount for the total project. The project estimate was improper. City Of College Station, Tex~ Providing Customer Servioe Excellence Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 2 Agenda Item No. 2 -- Presentation, discussion and possible action on the Wolf Pen Creek Corridor Implementation Plan. Parks and Recreation Director Steve Beachy presented a revised master plan. He described the site improvements which included removal of silt ponds, installation of traffic signals, and design landscape, parking and bank improvements at Dartmouth/ Holleman. Mr. Beachy outlined tasks associated with several aspects of the plan which included: extension of George Bush Drive, drainage improvements, pedestrian trails, cultural amenities, public information, and designation of a project oversight committee. The council discussed at length the formation of the Oversight Committee. James Massey, Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission emphasized the importance of representation from three entities: Parks Board, Planning and Zoning Commission and Wolf Pen Creek TIF Board. Councilman Silvia made a motion to approve the implementation plan with the recommendation to form an oversight committee and direct the Chairmen of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Parks and Recreation Board, and Wolf Pen Creek TIF Board to work with staff to compile a list for the committee. Motion seconded by Councilman Mariott. Councilman Anderson made an amendment to the motion to appoint Steve Beachy as the city's representative and project manager of this project. Motion seconded by Councilman Esmond. Mr. Beachy noted that he has already been assigned by the City Manager as the project leader for this strategic issue. Motion carried, 4-2. FOR: Mcllhaney, Anderson, Esmond, Mariott AGAINST: Silvia, Hazen The original motion as amended carried unanimously, 6-0, Mayor Pro Tern Hickson absent. Agenda Item No. 5 -- Vision Statement No. 7 Employment/Prosperity Dr. Clare Gunn reported on the status of Tourism Strategies, a grass roots effort by B/CS citizens to develop ideas to promote tourism. Dr. Gunn reported that in the immediate future, the College Station City Council will hear from the management group on ways to implement some of the strategies. One way is to develop an advisory board called the Tourism Council of the Brazos Valley. This recommendation will be brought forth at a future council meeting by Steve Beachy. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 3 Agenda Item No. 3 -- Discussion and possible action on proposal to televise City Council meetings. Public Relations and Marketing Manager Kelley Chapman and Assistant City Manager Tom Brymer presented a proposal to televise City Council meetings. Mr. Brymer referred to the memorandum in the council packet which outlined the history of this issue as follows: On October 9, 1997 city staff presented a comprehensive communication plan for the 1997 Strategic Issue No. 16 (Communications with a Citizens and Youth). Using a budget of $12,000, city staff gave the city council several options for broadcasting the regular meetings. Council agreed to postpone the decision on televising the Council meetings until the next fiscal year. The City Council also decided to use the $12,000 budgeted for televising the meetings on other communication projects. Since that time, when this item has been brought before the City Council, Council consensus has been this item would be dealt with during the budget preparation for FY 1998-99. In the submitted proposal, staff recommended televising only regular meetings at a cost of $13,000-$16,000. This included the contract for service of equipment and two operators. Councilman Esmond remarked that the HOK Comprehensive Plan refers to a goal toward televising council meetings. He supported the proposal because of its beneficial impact to the citizens. Ms. Chapman indicated that she has received feedback from Bryan. Councilmembers suggested that a survey of cities would be a helpful guide to assist in this decision. Councilman Esmond made a motion to implement the televising of regular meetings for the next year. Motion seconded by Councilman Anderson. Councilman Madott did not support the motion. He has received feedback from residents in other cities, They were not in favor of the television of meetings. Mariott indicated that the results of the recent city survey showed that citizens are satisfied with existing services. Councilman Hazen did not support the motion because she does not believe the program is an effective use of the city's money. Following further debate, a vote was taken. Motion failed by a 2-4 vote. FOR: Anderson, Esmond AGAINST: Mcllhaney, Mariott, Hazen, Silvia Councilman Esmond made a motion to televise meetings for three months. Motion seconded by Councilman Anderson. Motion failed by a 2-4 vote. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 4 FOR: Anderson, Esmond AGAINST: Mcllhaney, Mariott, Hazen, Silvia Councilman Silvia made a motion to investigate this matter further by surveying other cities and receive feedback on the pros and cons. Councilman Mariott seconded the motion which carried 5-1. FOR: Mcllhaney, Mariott, Silvia, Hazen, Anderson AGAINST: Anderson Agenda Item No. 4 -- Discussion and possible action on public information brochure for the November 371998 ~leneral obligation bond election. Director of Fiscal Services Charles Cryan presented the public information brochure for November 3, 1998 general obligation bond election. Discussion was held on the future site of the City Hall Complex. Councilman Mariott made a motion to move forward with the printing of the brochure with a change on the last page to clarify the tax rate. Motion seconded by Councilman Silvia which carried unanimously, 6-0. Agenda Item No. 6 -- Committee Reports Mayor Mcilhaney reported that the regional council of governments met on Wednesday, September 9th to approve a regional committee to look at issues of infrastructure, land use, economic development, and designation of members. Agenda Item No. 7 -- Council Calendars 7a: Request from Councilman Esmond to consider policy on councilmembers visiting public facilities. Councilman Mariott made a motion to not consider this item at a future meeting. He noted that the existing policy is fine. No second was made. Councilman Esmond asked if there is a policy on councilmembers visiting public facilities. The Mayor replied that there is not a problem for councilmembers visiting public facilities. She stated that council has a policy that councilmembers in the past have contacted the City Manager to set up an appointment with the respective department. Councilmembers have received a tour with appropriate staff during business hours. This policy is reviewed during orientation. Council may change the policy, if they wish. City Manager stated that the purpose of the agenda item is to decide whether or not this item will be placed on a future agenda. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 5 Councilman Anderson made a motion to bring this item back on a future workshop meeting for consideration. Motion seconded by Councilman Esmond. Motion failed by a 2-4 vote. FOR: Anderson, I:smond AGAINST: Mcllhaney, Hazen, Mariott, Silvia The council recessed for a 10 minute break. The council returned to workshop session at 5:10 p.m. Mayor Pro Tern Hickson ardved to the meeting. Agenda Item No. 8 -- Discussion and possible action reAarding public official Swiki Anderson and possible violations of Section 131 of the City Charter. This item is a transcription of the audio tape. Esmond: Mayor, I'd like to speak to the item and introduce it. First of all, I do have a motion, rd like to move that Councilman Anderson did not violate the City Charter. Anderson: I'll second that one. Esmond: I'd like to ask Councilman Anderson a few questions, if I might, just for the record. Mayor: Before we do that, I would like Harvey to go ahead and again state, open up this agenda item and then go back to Council. Cargill: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers. What I'd like to do is kind of descdbe for the Council and the audience what has transpired since August 12th to date. On August 12th, at a special council meeting, the city council directed me to try to obtain the Distdct Attorney's files and if we were unable to get those, try to get Mr. C.F. Jordan's files. As council of course, recalls, on Aug. 13th we had a regular meeting, which occupied a good part of the day, which they often do. And, on August 14th, Mr. Teddy Peinado came by and talked with the Mayor. He offered to produce the documents related to the investigation and offered to produce the documents that he had produced for them. He behaved, frankly, very much like someone who was innocent and he had nothing to hide. The Mayor asked me to then, contact his lawyer, Mr. Steve AIIbritton and I called him Friday, called him Monday and Tuesday, and finally got through and talked to him on Wednesday of the following week. Steve told me that Teddy wanted to produce the information. I then met with Teddy and Steve Friday of that week on the 21st. We went over and explained what had happened and what the documents were that he had in his possession. And, on September 2nd, the city received the documents that the council has and as part of that agreement that he and I made, we also delivered those directly to Mr. John Hampton, who is standing before Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 6 you. In addition to this effort that we were doing at that point in time, this unexpected source of information, we were also researching and exploring ways that we might obtain the files from the District Attorney's office. We spoke with attorneys in the Attorney General's office, Texas Municipal League, and ultimately on August 24th, we filed an inter-agency request with the Distdct Attorney. Our research indicated that at that point in time, that was the best way that we had of getting the particular information that we were trying to get for the council. On September 4th, the District Attorney sent our request off to the Attorney General's office for an Attorney General's opinion to see whether or not he could provide the information. On the letter that he sent off, he showed that he copied the letter to me and Mr. Anderson. I would guess because of the holidays, we did not get the letter at that point in time. On September 8th, I called the District Attorney, Mr. Bill Turner, and he faxed me a copy of the letter which I will give to you in a few minutes. The letter takes the position that he should not release the records and simply what he's trying to do, is what I would call a fairly prudent course, to try to ensure the sanctity of the grand jury proceedings. The Attorney General may very well hold that these records are privileged and cannot be release, and then again he may not. Like I said, we have copies of the DA's letter to give to the Council. In Mr. Anderson's letter of September 9th, he notes that we did not include in the packet, Items No. 2, 3, and 7. I did not include those to the council frankly, because I did not think they were necessary for your review of the issue at hand. But, I do have copies available and will give to the council those items, 2, 3, and 7. They are the phone log, the calendar, and short memo from C.F. Jordan. Additionally, Councilman Anderson has noted that we did not include in the letter from Mr. Howard or Prodigene. Now, I understand that letter has already gone to the council and it is a very short letter, and what it points out that there was no agreement prior to the vote that Mr. Anderson made on the Prodigene, C.F. Jordan project. Frankly, the letter misses the point. The City Charter prohibits Councilman Anderson from having any financial interest in any contract with the City, period. If there had been a financial interest before the vote, it would have been a criminal violation. On September 4th, I met with Councilman Anderson's attorney, Mr. John Hampton, and gave him a copy of the interim report and we discussed the issues very briefly. That report was also delivered to the council on September 4th, so that the council would have a chance to review the material before the meeting today. At the point in time, if I understand correctly, Mr. Esmond's letter on September 10th, he is asked that the review be concluded. If I understand Mr. Anderson's letter, he is asking we somewhat broaden the review, that we bring witnesses in and put them under oath. He also has some concerns about the fact that Mr. Peinado's information was obtained not after getting a subpoena to him. If we had waited until after we had gotten the letter back from the District Attorney, which we did not receive until September 8th, you at this point would not have any information at all to review. In conclusion, Councilman Anderson and his attorney, at this point in time, have been provided and seen all the material so that there would be no surprises today. Unlike, President Clinton, unlike his impeachment proceedings, Councilman Anderson has seen everything. Additionally, the information has not been released to the media by me, in order to be fair. Although, some of the information has been released by Councilman Anderson. I would respectfully say to the Council, the issue is now in yall's hands. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 7 Esmond: Mayor, may I now ask questions of Councilman Anderson. Councilman Anderson, did you contact C.F. Jordan after the April 9th council meeting, or did you actually respond to an inquiry from them. In other words, who initiated the contact between yourself and C.F. Jordan after the council meeting of April 9th. Anderson: Contrary to the what our City Attorney would suggest to you, I think we all got a thank you letter from Mr. Howard and I responded to that thank you letter. The primary purpose in my opinion, let him know that I had a very good friend, by the name of Chuck Magnuson, who is a citizen of College Station and had no relationship with him. But, yes, I said go to our web page, look at it. I never mentioned his project or anything else like that. Esmond: As I recall, your referencing that you were a city councilmember, were you doing so in order to try to get a job out of him or were you doing so to try to put this in context with who you were. Anderson: In contrast to what's been portrayed here before has been portrayed here before this Council, I was under the assumption that the plans had been drawn for the building and the thing was complete. Which has been done here many, many times here already. I did not know there would even been an opportunity for us. Esmond: Okay, that takes care of Prodigene. What about C.F. Jordan, didn't you wdte a letter to them, also? Anderson: Yes, when the meeting was over, we talked bdefly, and I said, Gee, I got a school design I'm interested in working down on the coast, and we need a good contractor. Esmond: The question is very narrow. Did in fact, you initiate the contact with C.F. Jordan or did they ask you for information about your company through an e-mail or something? Anderson: I think they asked me. As a matter of fact, I know they asked me. I don't know if it was through an e-mail or not. Esmond: As I recall, I think it's stated in your letter, is it not? That they requested info. Anderson: That's true. Esmond: Okay, Now, there was also a notice of intent to hire you for the project, is that correct? Anderson: That is correct. Contrary to what people would lead other people to believe on this council in here, I didn't initiate that letter at all. As a matter of fact, I did not even know about it until Larry Garrett and I in a conversation told me, he said, Hey, we are doing a project, and we want you to work on it. I said boy, that'd be great. What is it. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 8 Esmond: You didn't know in advance. Anderson: I absolutely did not know that. Esmond: Does the Texas Engineering Practice Act regulate your profession? Anderson: Absolutely, and as a matter of fact, the Texas Engineering Practice Act gives me safe harbor on this because the stringent requirements, Harvey, and I'm surprised you haven't looked at these things. The requirements are much more stringent in the Engineering Practice Act than 131 are. Okay. Esmond: Isn't it customary then, for engineers who, and I'm referring to that act, how are engineers are selected on the basis of their qualifications, or is there some other way that there? Anderson: Excuse me. Let me go ahead and answer this. They're always selected, you'd like to think on the basis of qualifications. Mayor: Swiki, excuse me. The Engineering Act has nothing to do with the possible charter violation. Anderson: Yes it does, Mayor, because the Engineering requirements are much more stringent than the city requirements are. Mayor: rm sorry. Esmond: There's no diversion at all, Mayor, we're through with that question. But, let me ask you this. Apart from the Engineering Practice Act, Mr. Anderson, and I should say Dr. Anderson, you have a PhD in Mechanical Engineering, is that correct? Anderson: I do. Esmond: When someone is trying to hire an engineer, don't they generally try to hire the most qualified, just like they would let's say their doctor. Anderson: I would think so. Esmond: So, in your professional niche, the area in which you practice isn't it. Anderson: Ventilation and hydronic systems. Esmond: Okay, and that would be like, laboratories? Anderson: Laboratories, ventilations, cleaning rooms, operating rooms, places like that. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 9 Esmond: Were these people endeavoring then to hire probably one of the most qualified people in the United States to design this. Anderson: Absolutely. I'll put my peer review papers up against anyone else's and the work we've done behind it. Esmond: Okay, aldght, thank you very much. Mayor, I'd like to ask the City Attorney two or three questions as a result of his comments. Hickson: Can I ask questions of Swiki. Would you mind if I ask those? Anderson: Go ahead. Hickson: And, I assume I can talk about these. Anderson: By all means, those are letters that were given to me. I'm not trying to hide anything. I didn't disclose any of the information you sent, Harvey, those are my letters and stuff that I had in my files and I can freely give those to anybody, can't I? Cargill: I think you can. Anderson: Thank you. Hickson: There was a letter sent to you by Ron Vernon, who is the project manager for C.F. Jordan. Anderson: No sir! No sir! Hickson: I'm sorry. Sent to Larry Garrett of Garrett Mechanical. Anderson: Thank you. Let's make sure it was sent to Larry Garrett. I did not know about it until Larry told me. Hickson: In this particular letter, it says that your firm will be working with $wiki Anderson on the project. Anderson: That's correct. Hickson: That to me, is kind of surprising how someone would say that they're going to be working with a particular engineer and that engineer not even know that. Anderson: Be surprised all you want to, David, the fact is that I did not know about that until after Larry Garrett and I had a conversation. If you'll put him up here and swear him we'll find out and prove it. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 10 Hickson: I'm just saying. That's sounds awful suspect, when we have a letter here that says your firm will be working with Swiki Anderson on the project, and yet, you didn't even know it yet. Anderson: What can I say? Esmond: Let's get the people up here and swear them in. I think Dr. Anderson asked for that. Hickson: I'm just making a comment because he said he didn't know it and it shocks me that a letter would be sent out. I'm in business for myself as well and unless we are responding to RFP's or something of this nature, we're not going to be committed to something that we have know idea what we are committing for in financial fiduciary responsibilities, etc. without having prior discussions with that organization, period. Anderson: That's what blows me away because here they came and got a grant from the city and never had a set of plan on which to build the building and yet they got a lump sum amount of money and normally I would not expect that at all. Hickson: I'm sorry. That to me is something like a marker, I guess if you want to look at that, blatantly says to me whether or not there was, it would tell me if I was looking from the outside in that Mr. Anderson did in fact know something about this. Which it may not be the case, according to you. Its not that I'm saying its wrong. I'm just saying, based on looking at this letter, anybody looking at this letter would say, obviously Mr. Anderson before he would commit financial resources and liabilities, and those types of things, would obviously know about a project before he gets involved with it, and is contacted by via another engineering firm. Esmond: David, I think if there's any doubt in your mind. If you can't take his word for it, let's get Garrett Mechanical up here and swear them in and let them tell us what the situation was. Mayor: Well, again, uh. Hickson: That to me is not the issue. I'm just expressing my opinion and concern that was the only thing. Again, that doesn't necessarily violate the Charter. Anderson: This has been an issue and concern of the grand jury investigation, the city investigation, and now your private investigation. Hickson: I understand the grand jury. That has to do with something totally separate, whether or not you voted on it after you knew you had the project, or something like that from a legal perspective. Anderson: I disagree. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 11 Esmond: You know, it's not uncommon. Mayor: Steve, David's asking questions right now. Hickson: The only other question that I had is in regards, Did you have any conversations with any other councilmember about receiving this particular bid. Anderson: No, Councilman Silvia said I did in the presence of Councilman Esmond. That's not so. I don't ever remember that. Hickson: Can I ask Ron, if he could explain what you heard. Anderson: Go ahead and put it out. Silvia: This conversation was a casual conversation dght outside of this reom. It was the day I was sworn in, May 14th. The three of us, Councilman Esmond, Councilman Anderson, and myself. In the context of this casual conversation, Councilman Anderson asked Councilman Esmond if he was going to do any work on the Prodigene project. And, Councilman Esmond answered back '1 don't know". And, he said rm going after the mechanical contract. That was it. Anderson: Sir, I absolutely disagree with you. I don't go after mechanical contracts. I'm an engineer. I'm sorry that you don't understand. Silvia: We discussed this on the phone. Anderson: We did, and I still take the same view and I think you're full of bull. Silvia: You think what you like. This is the conversation I heard. Anderson: Mr. Esmond, if you were there, would you speak to it. Mayor: I am the chair. I will please control this meeting. I will call on those to speak and please do not speak unless I call upon you. Esmond: Mayor, may I have the floor back? Mayor: No, sir. Councilman Silvia was still speaking. Silvia: Councilman Anderson, this is what I heard out there. You said you didn't recall it. Councilman Esmond was there. I have not discussed this with Councilman Esmond. I'm just telling you what I heard and I don't have anything else to say about that and i did not take that to the District Attorney or anyone else. This is just a conversation that we had together out there, but I found it unusual that you would be contracting on this Prodigene project. Mayor: Okay, David you still have some more questions? Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 12 Anderson: Would you let Mr. Esmond now speak to that? Mayor: I have called on David. David was asking questions. When David is through, I will let Councilman Esmond respond and then Larry I will call on you. Hickson: Well, again, from a purely technical standpoint, Swiki, I recognize that I don't think that you have violated the charter from a purely technical standpoint. Anderson: It's a non technical standpoint that I've violated. Hickson: The only issue is that, even if it's ignorance, which I can understand because it took me a while to understand everything in the charter as well. So, from the standpoint of not knowing that in fact you couldn't bid on something that may have conflict Anderson: I don't bid, David, I don't bid. Hickson: Or be involved with, from a financial aspect, being involved with that type of project. Anderson: The question is, did I violate the charter, Section 131. And, I'm going to tell you I did not. I did not violate any other aspect of the Charter. Hickson: From a technical standpoint. Anderson: From a technical or non technical standpoint, I didn't do that. Hickson: I'm not necessarily agreeing with your intent. I agree with you from a technical standpoint. Anderson: Alright. Esmond: Mayor, I've been accused of something here, and I first of all, resent you (Silvia) misrepresenting what happened. It did not happen. Councilman Anderson didn't ask me if I was going to work on the Prodigene project. And, I certainly didn't say I don't know. I don't know where you got that. We need to have some truth and some integrity on this Council. Silvia: Are you implying that I made up this story? Esmond: Somebody did, not me. Mayor: Steve, we're not going to attack individual councilmembers. Esmond: No, I was attacked Mayor, I was accused of having a discussion I did not have. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 13 Mayor: Steve, you are out of order. Esmond: I think he was out of order. Mayor: No, sir. He was responding to a question about what he heard. He did not in any form or fashion attack anybody's integrity and I will not allow this to become. Esmond: What about my integrity, Mayor?. Mayor: He did not, he relayed a conversation that he heard. Anderson: David said you don't have any. That's ok. Hickson: I didn't say that. Esmond: Is that right, David. Hickson: No, I didn't say that. Anderson: No, that's what you just told me. You were going to say it instead of me saying it, okay. Hickson: I said you said that, I didn't say it. Esmond: Would you control the meeting, Mayor?. Esmond: May I have the floor back. I was asking questions. Mayor: If you ask questions, that's fine. If you again, attack any councilmember for their statement. Esmond: When I'm attacked, I have to respond, Mayor. Mayor: Steve, one more comment and you're out of order and I will not recognize you. Now, ask a question, but you will not attack. Esmond: This brings up a different issue, Mayor. Maybe, we should deal with the credibility of councilmembers at a future date. rll move on. I do have questions for Attorney Cargill and that was. I think you mentioned that you withheld items 2, 3, 4 and 7 which is half of the documents that he presented to you. Is that right? Cargill: If you'll let me, I'll give them to you right now. Esmond: Okay Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 14 Esmond: Was there some reason, again. Were these just superfluous or irrelevant to the main question, Mr. Cargill. What was the reason that council did not get these documents. Cargill: The three documents that you're looking at here, when I looked at those, it didn't add anything or particularly help me in trying to find out whether or not there was a charter violation. Mr. Anderson's letter indicated if thought they ought to be distributed. I thought okay, fine. Esmond: I've read your report here. I understand your conclusion to say that Councilman Anderson had no financial interest in a contract with the city either direct or indirect, is that correct? Cargill: That is correct, I say in the report, that I cannot say whether or not the District Attorney has any other documents to show a financial interest. As far as the documents that we have at hand in here, they do not show a direct or indirect financial interest. Esmond: Therefore, based on everything you know and have and have accumulated, Councilman Anderson did not violate the City Charter. Is that correct? Cargill: Based on the information that we have in hand, that's true. Esmond: Just how long do you want this investigation to go on, Mr. Cargill? Cargill: Well, first off, Mr. Esmond, that's a decision the council has to decide. What I was directed to do, was try to get information, which is what I've tried to do and bring it back to you, which is what I've done. And, that's up to the Council. Esmond: I noticed you applauded the sanctity of the grand jury and in fact, complimented the District Attorney on defending the sanctity of the grand jury. Why is the City of College Station trying to pervert the sanctity of the grand jury. Cargill: Well, frankly, I would disagree with perverting the sanctity of anything, Mr. Esmond, and I would not agree with your characterization at all. Esmond: What are we trying to do, then? Cargill: What we were trying to do was to carry out the intention of the council, to get the information, which was not privileged. Esmond: Okay. Mayor, I have a chart that shows the relationships of Prodigene to Mr. Anderson and so forth. Can I use this chart? Mayor: Larry has some questions, and I think. Esmond: I still have a couple more questions of Mr. Cargill. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 15 Mayor: This isn't Mr. Cargill's agenda item. Anderson: It's mine. Esmond: It's really my agenda item, Mayor. Anderson: Yes, it is his agenda. Esmond: This is the chart, this shows Councilman Swiki Anderson, City of College Station, Economic Development Corporation here, College Station Development Group, which is the developer in this case. Down here, we have Prodigene who was actually intending to lease a building from the developer. Then we have C.F. Jordan Construction Company, also the prime principal and developer here is Mr. Jordan. His construction company is here which was the group that was going to build a building. Down here, we have Garrett Mechanical, who was the mechanical subcontractor. Harvey, you have a copy of this? Cargill: I do now. Esmond: And, then we have down here, Swiki Anderson and Associates, Mechanical Engineers. The reason I put them here, Mayor, is not to say they had a relationship, because they had no contract. I think there's no evidence anywhere that dispels that. They had no contract with Garrett Mechanical. But, City of College Station had an agreement, a land transfer agreement with the Economic Development Corporation and then we had a development agreement with College Station Development Group which Prodigene also signed in relation to the tax abatement that they were receiving. But, from this point on down, from the developer on down, this was a private deal. And, they were perfectly free to hire C.F. Jordan Construction Company, or REC, or Brown and Root or anybody else, is that correct, Mr. Cargill? Couldn't College Station Development Group have hired any contractor they wanted to? Cargill: I'm not sure I agree with you on the way this thing is set up. I don't know this to be true. The Development Group was a limited partnership that was set up by C.F. Jordan to do this project. And it was the methodology they were using to limit their liability, which is fine. But I don't know that they had contracted back to do this. You may be dght, but I don't know this to be so. Esmond: So, we didn't have an interest. We did not tell them who to hire. There were no constraints on who they hired. Is that right? Cargill: No, I would not agree with you, that there are no constraints. Mayor: Harvey, I think,okay. Let me, Swiki just a minute. That's what .. Anderson: Where does indirect relationships begin to come in please, that's what I'd like to know. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 16 Mayor: Swiki, excuse me. That is exactly the point I'm trying to ask the City Attorney. if he would please explain what the problem is here in terms of the way I understand it, and try to use layman's terms, you know, as possible. The problem and the reason the Charter exists the way it does is that a councilmember doesn't vote on an issue where they are sifting on both sides of the table. The Prodigene project has certain conditions that have to be met over a certain time period that this council or any future council can pull the agreement or whatever. And, to sit on both sides of the table is where the problem comes in. Now, Harvey, is that it. I'll let you explain it. I think that may help you understand. Anderson: I would appreciate that. I would like to know where the indirect starts and ceases. Cargill: Well, I think it's fair... Tape 2, Side 2 Cargill: If in the eight year time, they fail to meet their criteria, the council can yank its tax abatement, take it away. The challenge always to the council is to stay on that same side of the table that oversight role, and not get on the other side and have an interest in the contract. If you get into the other situation, then I think you run into a conflict set out in 131. Esmond: If there had been. And, so far, there's no evidence to show there was a contract here with Swiki Anderson and Associates. If there had been, would that have been an indirect financial or direct financial interest in a city project. Cargill: think it would be. Esmond: What, indirect or direct? Cargill: I'm not going to try to categorize whether it's direct or indirect. Anderson: But you have. Cargill: Either one are prohibited. That's what is says in the Charter. Esmond: The Mayor said that the problem is, is that Councilman Anderson is sitting on both sides of this transaction. Is that correct? Cargill: No, I didn't tell you that. I told you that he can't sit on both sides. From what we have seen in the documentation, he has not, as you said a second ago, entered into a contract, or agreement, or have a financial interest in the documents that we have seen. Anderson: Okay Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 17 Esmond: I want to show you another chart. This is a chart for Mayor Mcllhaney and Mr. Mariott. Mayor: You are out of order! You are out of order! Steve, you are out of order! Steve! Steve! Esmond: I would like to know if there is a direct or indirect financial interest for the two of them to sit on both sides of the city. Anderson: I think that's a relevant question, is that a direct or indirect relationship? Mayor: Steve! We will take a five minute recess. Discussion continued following a five minute recess. Mayor: You had some questions. Mariott: I would like to ask Harvey some questions, I have a list of them here, so if everybody would be patient with me. Harvey, it's my understanding that C.F. Jordan and Prodigene really, don't really, I mean I know they have something to do with this, but there's really not any problem with the city dealings with C.F. Jordan and Prodigene. Cargill: That's correct. Mariott: So, I guess we probably owe them somewhat of an apology because they've been drugged into this with some negative PR with this. This issue is really between us and Councilman Anderson, not those two companies. So, Harvey would you explain to us, how this really relates and you basically have. But, I want this to go back in the minutes. How this really relates to the Charter on 131 relating to this issue. Cargill: What you have to understand is that 131 is designed to prevent you being in a position where you make a decision as a councilmember and then you have an interest in the decision if you will across the table, where it would affect the decision you would make as a councilman. You can't have that conflict, is what it's designed to prohibit. Mariott: Now, is there any difference in the financial interest if you were to do it before the vote versus after the vote. Cargill: If you had a financial interest before the vote, it would be a criminal violation. If you had it afterwards it would be only a charter violation. Mariott: Okay. So Harvey, basically, if Swiki had a contract for this project, then would he have been in charter violation. If he had had a contract. Cargill: If he had had a contract, I think it would be a violation, yes. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 18 Mariott: Then I have just a few points I want to bdng up and these are somewhat like David's in that they're not accusing but whenever I read these, it makes me think there might have been some intent. Maybe, I'm wrong, but that's the way I feel. This one is addressed on Apd114th to Teddy Peinado of C.F. Jordan. It says, "Thank you for your interest in our portfolio of details, products, advertised and consulting specification engineering, engineering systems and HPAC. And, then down at the bottom, it says "hopefully, the enclosed information will provide you significant information to aid you in your detail buying decision, we look forward to hearing from you". Then, I have a letter, of which, of course Councilman Anderson says he knew nothing of, that is from C.F. Jordan to Larry Garrett, and it says "please allow this letter to serve as a notice of intent to issue a design build contract with your firm for the new 90,000 sq. ft. Prodigene office building in the College Station Business Park. Your firm will be working with Swiki Anderson on the project as soon as conceptual layouts are available, I will forward the information to you. I look forward to working with you on this project." In a summary from C.F. Jordan, it states on Item No. 1, and everybody has this, "Mr. Anderson contacted me on or about April 13, 1998, regarding the project and the unique services that his engineering firm could provide with regard to .." Anderson: I want you to know that I absolutely deny that. I did contact him but not about this project. I didn't know that they had not engaged anybody at that time. Mariott: Okay, "these services related to the design and construction of the laboratories involved in this project. No. 3 on here says, "during the same week, Mr. Anderson hand delivered information about his firm to our offices." No. 5 on here says "sometime during May, 1998, a meeting of all subcontractors who had expressed an interest in quoting the project was held at the offices of C.F. Jordan. Larry Garrett as well as Mr. Anderson attended the meeting". And, then I have a letter from Swiki to Mr. John Howard, President and CEO of Prodigene which says" perhaps you will remember me from your presentation with C.F. Jordan and Company before the College Station Council. Especially as it concerns our discussion in the hallway after the presentation. As I indicated to you, we have considerable experience in design construction and commissioning of laboratories and invite you attention to our web pages as follows. I would invite you to take a few minutes and look over our web pages. Later, I will call you and like to take you out to lunch". Anderson: Why don't you go on and read about Chuck Magnuson. Why don't you read the whole thing in the record? It's on the second page, Larry. Mariott: Where is that? Esmond: Mayor, is this open record? Anderson: Yea,it's open record. Hickson: I asked Swiki. Mariott: He sent it to everybody. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 19 Anderson: You betch ya, these are letters I wrote.. Mariott: I'll read what you ask. Anderson: Thank you. Mariott: "1 think you should also be interested the work that John Goeschl and plant physiologist, Chuck Magnuson, ali initially associated with Texas A&M, which is commonly referred to as the C-11 work. Anderson: And, I sent a copy of his resume. Mariott: And, then a letter from Swiki to City Attorney Cargill, on page no. 3. It said in here, that "1 had no knowledge of the use of my name or my firm on this project in any capacity until so advised by Larry Garrett in a telephone conversation with his receipt of the Apd122, 1998 letter from Ron Vernon. And, more important, I can prove this. I can also prove that you and Nee instructed Peinado not to use me or my firm on this or any other projects with Peinado. In turn, issuing similar instructions to Clark Candy of Garrett Mechanical." Now, clearly to me as I'm reading this, I think Swiki had no financial interest. It's hard for me to understand that the intent was not there. And, in summary I would like to say that the evidence, stuff I'm reading shows is that Swiki made phone calls, he sent letters, he went to the meetings about the job. In fact, it seemed to me that he had the job until it was discovered maybe he shouldn't or whatever, because the intent was there through the things that I've seen here. If it had gone to contract which it did not, he would have been in violation of the City Charter. Anderson: May, I talk. Hazen: I would like to make a motion. Anderson: We have a motion before the floor. Esmond: Mayor, I do have some questions I would like to ask Councilman Anderson, too. May I ask the questions. Mayor: Steve Esmond: Councilman Anderson, Councilman Mariott just read from a letter very selectively, I would like to direct your attention to the second sentence of his letter to Teddy Peinado, April 14, 1998, where it says" In response to your e-mail inquiry.." In other words, this was initiated by them. This is in response to their inquiry. On the April 27th letter to Dr. Howard, yes, he does call attention to "1 met you at council chambers, blah, blah," Nowhere in here does he say we want to work for you. In fact, he points to individuals that are not on his payroll. None of the individuals he mentions in here are on his payroll. These men are independent contractors of physicists, professors, and all that who do research. He was providing information to them and directing them to his website where he has his technical papers about laboratory ventilation. As to this Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 20 letter, the notice of intent from non Vernon of Jordan Construction to Larry Gan'eft. "Your firm will be working with Swiki Anderson on this project". I want to tell you something. I've been involved in a number of deals like this, where I know I'm the prime. I've been hired by the owner to do something and I will present to them in a private meeting, a list of subcontractors. Some MEP, in fact, Swiki worked for me on a project, work went just like that. I presented a list of MEP professionals, they picked him. My client picked him. My client picked an electrical engineer out of the list I gave them. They picked a structural engineering from the list I gave them. This happened recently. He didn't know about it. He didn't know he was even considered. Neither did these other engineers. They weren't even aware, until I got a letter very similar to this one, and evidently they did to. Use this guy, this guy's qualified. That's what this is saying. It's common practice in our field for these kinds of arrangements to take place. As to this summary, again, this is not public record, as I understand it, Mayor. But now, Councilman Mariott, has just read from it. Can we now release this? Mayor: It's my understanding that he did release it. Anderson: Not in here. It was never in the summary I got. Esmond: Mayor, if you're going to let Councilman Mariott read from that summary, I think in all fairness to Councilman Anderson, you ought to release it to the press, and let everybody. Anderson: I second that. Esmond: Mayor, before the break, Attorney Cargill was explaining to us about standing on both sides of a city deal. He had no contract. There's no evidence of that. He had no contract. He had no, there's nothing that can show otherwise because it doesn't exist. But yet, where you have long standing relationships, and you have a voting pattern, and you sit on this council. I'm one of six up here Mayor, and this fellow councilmember was just investigated and is under investigation by the council. I think we have a right to know the correct interpretation of Section 131. That's what rm getting at. I made no effort to impugn anyone. I merely explaining that there are relationships that exist up here, and I would like to have an answer. It's a legitimate concern. Mayor: Again, I think the City Attorney has answered that. This is not the first time this has come up. There is information in your packet where it came up before in terms of what a councilmember can do. All this can be handled very simply. As councilmembers, when you go through orientation, the city attorney makes it very clear that if you have any questions in terms of an issue that's before you, call me_and ask me if you think there's a conflict. That's the City Attorney's responsibility to respond to council's inquiries in terms of whether or not they think there is a problem. That's all this Council has to do. In the future, you have some concerns about whether or not a particular situation occurs, you just need to pick up the phone and ask the city attorney. I believe that he has explained several times today, and what he interprets the section to mean. We do have a motion. Council Workshop 9/10.98 Page 21 Esmond: Mayor, could I close? I just have a couple of closing points, then rm willing to close. I'm sorry, go ahead. I would like to close before the vote if you don't mind. A couple of points I'd like to make. Mayor: Anne. did you have something? Hazen: I guess I have a substitute motion. Mayor: Okay. Hazen: Is that alright? We have, can you quote the motion on the floor right now? Mayor: The motion is to cease the investigation. Esmond: The motion is Councilman Anderson did not violate the city charter. Hazen: I'd like to make a substitute motion. Mayor: Okay. Hazen: And, I would appreciate it if you all gave me the courtesy of not making comments during my statement. Anderson: I'll do that ma'am. Hazen: I personally have reviewed the documents provided to me by City Attorney Cargill dated September 4, 1998 relating to Councilman Anderson's actions. The documents speak for themselves. In my opinion, I admit I'm not an engineer or a lawyer, these documents confirm that Councilman Anderson was violating the city charter by soliciting business from C.F. Jordan Development Group. There is no documentation from Councilman Anderson to C.F. Jordan stating that he could not participate in the project due to his service on the council. In fact, there is documentation that he was to be the engineer for the Prodigene project. I therefore, move, that Councilman Anderson be censored by this council and that any future violations of any section of the city charter or abuse of his official capacity as Councilman be immediately followed by forfeiture of his council position. I'd like to speak to my position. It is time that we all get back to the business we are elected to do. Individuals on this council who have other agendas need to redirect their efforts. I'm fed up with the multitude of nonsense that has been circulated to this council since my election and resent the amount of council and staff time required to handle all the requests for records, information, etc. I consider some requests made by Councilman Anderson and his uncalled verbal attacks against the city manager, city attorney, and the Mayor, an abuse of his official capacity as councilman, which is why I've made this a part of my motion. And, I'm very upset. Silvia: rll second that, Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 22 Anderson: May I speak to the motion, please. Mayor: Yes, sir. Anderson: Thank you. I'm sorry that you're upset. I really am. But, you don't know what you people have put me through. I think you're going to find out. I hope you do. What this really all amounts to is that you don't want Esmond and I being conservative members on your council. This really what it amounts to. We were elected by people to represent them. We represent a conservative view. We wants the streets fixed and the taxes lowered. There's a number of things that we want. On my web page, I still have my campaign issues. It would have been a whole lot easier if you just said, why don't you get off the council? If these memos that we have writing back and forth seeking information, if you resent that, I'm sorry. In terms of going to attorney Cargill. I think if you'll go back and look at the newspaper, I said I'll never violate this. We weren't that far along. I did not even know what the people wanted to build. I did not even know if I was qualified to do the work that they wanted. Because they were doing something, and this is what the gentleman and I talked about out here. They're doing labs for the clean air stations that are FDA certified instead of the chemical fume hoods that we normally work with. And we talked about that. And, we've done very few of those, always in support of someone else. Okay. I'm like Mr. Birdwell. I want to find out whose behind this. I want to find out whether you, Mr. Cargill generated this document and sent it on the Distdct Attorney. I have an open records request in there and I'm going to find out, unless you sanitized the files. Mayor: I would like to respond. Swiki, I don't, I disagree with your statement that this council isn't willing to work with you or with Councilman Esmond. This Council has attempted for a year and a half to stay focused on the issues. We have not, in any form or fashion, created this situation. Anderson: I differ with you. You never called me one time. Hazen: Give her the courtesy. Mayor: I did not interrupt you! I let you speak. Now, I'm asking for you to show the same courtesy. This particular situation was not created by this council, and in a way, it's upsetting that you have not understood the situation that you put this council in. If you remember out in the hallway, I told you that I hated that this was going on. I think that everyone on this council wants to be supportive of everybody. But, when we get put in a situation we also have a responsibility to at least investigate or look into. We didn't do a full investigation. Council at the special meeting, just asked for the possibility of getting some of these records which you had said in your letter that you would try to provide for us at that meeting. I hope that whatever the decision is today with this council, that this is put behind us. I hope that your statement, that you want to work with this council is sincere because I believe this council is willing to put things behind them. They have in the past and keep moving forward. Anderson: May I rebuttal? Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 23 Mayor: No, sir I'm not through yet. There are going to be times that we all disagree and that's okay. Disagreement, there's nothing wrong with that. Disagreement creates healthy debate. Disagreement creates the ability for good policy decisions to be made. But it is important once the vote is over with, that those disagreements and the process does not become, I'm right, you're wrong, and I am going to spend additional time proving why I'm right and you're wrong. That is where the problem lies. Not in the working relationship. At the retreat, we made an agreement as a council that we were going to focus on the issues and keep moving forward. I am asking this council to recommit to that. I am asking this council that whatever the decision is, if the decision is to put this behind us, not do an investigation, not push this thing any further, then that's exactly what happens. That we start new. We've got to be able to do that. We owe it to the citizens of this community to stop bickering, to stop fighting, and to start acting professionally, to begin to address these issues. Agenda items, council agreed at the retreat, those agenda items would be those 22 strategic issues. Those are the items that we need to be discussing. It is the future of this community that are in our hands. If we don't spend the time to do that, then I think we are doing a dis-service to all of us. Anytime, any one of us gets hurt, all of us gets hurt, Mr. Anderson. And, I know that you may not believe that. Anderson: I don't. Mayor: That is the truth. And, all I'm asking is that this council from this day forward be a new council, move forward, and focus on the issues. Anderson: May, I rebuttal, now. Hampton: Mayor, May I speak. I think everybody on the council has had an opportunity to say something. I'd like to say just a little bit, if that's okay. I'll try to confine my remarks to about 60-70 seconds. Mayor: Yes, sir. Hampton: Thank you. I think there are two issues before the council on whether or not Mr. Esmond's original motion should pass. The first question is, was there a financial interest. I think Councilman Hickson and Councilman Mariott, and the City Attorney have concluded, as Mr. Anderson said on August 12th, that he did not violate the city charter. There was no contract, therefore, there cannot be a financial interest direct or indirect. I think that is a matter of fact. That's true. The other question is, if they had entered into the contract, how indirect does the relationship have to be before it violates the city charter. And, I think that's a question that no one has really defined, essentially, until tonight. My understanding of the definition offered by the City Attorney is that if there is a financial interest on both sides of the table, then that would constitute an indirect financial interest that would be precluded by Section 131. My understanding of the way the council works, is the attorney makes the recommendation, does the council adopt that. Will the council adopt that standard as the standard for indirect financial interest under Section 131 of the Charter. You don't Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 24 really have to do that, but as Mr. Cargill knows, each attorney has a differing opinion about what might be a direct or indirect financial interest. If the city council adopts that as the standard, will members of the council be able to live with that standard. In other words, can a spouse have a financial interest or receive benefits from the city, or can an owner of a business vote on a project that he trades or does business with either before or after the vote. I think that in some senses, the standard that Mr. Cargill illicits would actually disqualify many people on the council. But, the council doesn't really have to address that issue tonight. The issue tonight really is was there a financial interest? The answer is no. Mr. Anderson said no on August 12th. Every corner of the transaction has said no. Prodigene has said no. Jordan has said no. Garrett Engineering has said no. Everybody has said there is no financial interest. So, clearly, with due respect, Councilman Hazen, there is no evidence that there was a financial interest and all the evidence shows that there is no financial interest. So, I would ask the council to adopt the motion made by Steve Esmond. And, on August 12th, I asked the council to not conduct the investigation. Because what Swiki Anderson said on August 12th, was "1 have not violated the charte¢'. We've now spent three weeks with some investigation and we've come to the point to where, yes, Swiki Anderson did not violate the charter, there was no financial interest. I agree with you that there's no purpose served by continuing to hash the old hash. I think the council should move forward. I think the council should say that Councilman Anderson did not violate the city charter. I feel like personally, Mr. Anderson should be also owed an apology along with Garrett Engineering, along with Prodigene, along with C.F. Jordan. That's what I think. Mayor: Maybe it's something we all ought to do. If we are going to start fresh, maybe we all ought to apologize to everybody. Thank you. Anderson: May I speak to your comments. I called a press conference here for an hour. The whole theme of this press conference because this attorney had said, let it go, let it be for the good of the city, don't do that. Let it go. And, that's what I offered to do. That was the theme of the whole press conference. And, I've got it taped, if you want to look at it. You chose not to do that. Instead, what you've chosen to do is to try me for a crime I never committed, and I found that very unusual and very strange in the annals of justice. That just blows my mind. I can think of only one other situation and that was the Morrow boys up in Graham County. They killed three young brothers for no reason at all. And, they had them chained up when they did it. I think, Wow. Esmond: Mayor, I. Mariott: Call for the vote. Esmond: May I make a couple of comments. Mayor: We've had a motion to call for the vote.. Those in favor of the substitute motion. Further discussion. Those in favor of the substitute motion. FOR: Hazen, Silvia, Mariott AGAINST: Hickson, Mcllhaney, Anderson, Esmond Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 25 Mayor: I'll vote against the substitute motion. Motion failed 3-4. Back to the odginal motion which is to cease any investigations and Esmond: Councilman Anderson did not violate the city charter. Mayor: There was no proof that Councilman Anderson had any financial interest. Anderson: No that's not the motion. Read the motion again, Steve. Esmond: I wrote it down, Mayor. Councilman Anderson did not violate the city charter. Mayor: Okay. Esmond: Mayor, could I speak to that motion, or is there some.. Call for the vote. Mayor: Okay., David. Hazen: I'd like to hear it again, the motion. Mayor: The motion is basically just that Councilman Anderson did not violate the city charter. Esmond: Councilman Anderson did not violate the city charter. Mayor: Okay, David you had wanted to speak? Hickson: No, Steve said Mayor: Steve Esmond: Mayor, you commented that you hated that this was going on. Yet, you voted for this. Councilman Anderson has had to spend approximately $10,000 in legal fees to defend his good name and character and yes, you've said that disagreement. Why, go back in time to these things that happened before this council. Mayor: Steve, that's not, Steve, that is not addressing the motion. Esmond: Mayor, don't we need to move forward. You brought this issue up. I know you're sorry that he walked the petitions on the garage. But, we need to deal with the Mayor: Steve, you're out of order! David. Anderson: Call for the vote. Mayor: David, I've already recognized him before Steve. Then we'll call for the vote. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 26 Hickson: Swiki, I'm going to agree with your attorney as well. Is that again, technically, I feel that you did not violate the charter. You didn't have a contract or no financial interest. But, again I want to go on record as saying, and I'm going to vote for the motion. But, I also want to say that there are things such as intent. And, based on the information I have here. As a matter of fact, there was a notice of intent. That there was initially some intent to procure an agreement in some form or fashion. Even though, that did not happen, I just want to go on record as saying, that I hope we all understand as councilmembers that ethics, especially in today's environment, with our wonderful and glodous president, is probably one of the most important values that we all can have. And, whether or not, we actually proceed in doing something willfully wrong, I think our intent and our own ethical backgrounds are probably the most important things that we can have. And, I hope that all of us as councilmembers remember that. Thank you. Mayor: Okay, I'll call for the vote now. Those in favor of the motion, say I. Those opposed. FOR: Mcllhaney, Hazen, Mariott, Anderson, Esmond, Silvia, Hickson Motion carried unanimously. I would like to say again for the record that if there are any councilmembers that any concerns or questions in regards to any issues that may be coming before this council, that it is your responsibility to contact the city attorney and ask the city attorney whether or not the city attorney feels that there is a problem with that. And, then I would like to encourage each councilmember to follow the city attorney's advice. I think if that was done in this case, this would not be on the agenda today. Thank you. Do we have an executive session? Cargill: Yes Esmond: Is this 8a and 8b. This was waived by Councilman Anderson. Is this the other executive session. Mayor: Yes, we are not going to executive session on the issue with Councilman Anderson. The issue with Councilman Anderson is over. Agenda Item No. 9 -- Council Calendars Citizen Recognition Banquet, 6:30 p.m. Pebble Creek, Tues. 9/15 Council Workshop and Regular meetings, Thurs. 9/24 TML Region 10 Meeting, Georgetown, Thurs. 9/24 A,qenda Item No. 10 -- Executive Session Staff and Legal Reports {LGC 551.075} a. Cafe Eccell Lease Pending and Contemplated Litigation {LGC 551.071} Mayor Mcllhaney announced that the council would convene into executive session at 6:20 p.m. pursuant to Sections 551.071 and 551.074. to seek advice from the city attorney with respect to pending and contemplated litigation, to consider the appointment and evaluation of public officers, and to consider staff and legal reports. Council Workshop 9/10/98 Page 27 The council moved into executive session at 8:20 p.m, The workshop and executive sessions will adjourn following the regular meeting. PASSED AND APPROVED this the 24th day of September 1998. APPROVED: May~r Lynn Mcllhaney / ~,~ES~T: . CiB' Sccretap! Connie Hooks