09/20/1976-CC-Minutes-RegularATTESTS
Minutes: City Council Meeting
September 20, 1976
Present: Mayor Cole, Cooper, Enlow, McDaniel, Moore, City Manager,`
City Engineer, Financial Adviser,
Absent: `Coker
1. The minutes of the regular meeting of September 7, 1976 were
approved as printed,
UY
McDaniel and seconded by Cooper to approve July capital improv
ments in the amount of $3,436.020 Motion carried 4.0.
3. Sewer line construction invoice@
Manager
• •_ • •; - • -• • •• • • •-s •-
Enlow to approve payment to Q- •Co. in the amount of
$33,893.28. Motioncarried
The bid received for laying a gravity sewer line from Sanger South
.to the new lift station and under 5th Street to provid
Fagan ' - ++a i t and ► i t
• •respectively.
gravity
rejected. It was desire to work with
urns in
providing him service an• possibly • •ute the cost of 0
feet of 41, line or about $400 toward the road boring cost,
Ordinance quitclaiming certain portions of First & Ely, Strpptqo
stating the desired land exchange.was not feasible as the land
the * wants would cost1 • he was in favor
of quitclaiming to them at no cost due to
their
Cooper and seconded by McDaniel to approve the following ordinance*
• •'- - • : a • • • -economy,r • • •
FUR '
Motion carried 4�0,
U117-oaa company
raiTroaa righ7ofZway fires
They stated they they interviewed the train crew
• conducted
tests on flaresp • it was their opinion
Mayorthe fire. The •them for
Five�year capital i.mprovementAprogram: The City Manager summarized
the tentative projects and asked for Council comments. The
and answered several questions concerning the projects,
0 j The City
Manager then summarized the financial plan stating
that if all the
projects were approved as presenteds.a bond issur of $Itl million
would be needed. This would consist of about $340t000 in tax bonds
• i#� bonds. Almon,/ • •:
stated these bonds would require about a 300 tax increase and about
• ! r• He also stated
needed that initially
the Council should determine exactly what projects are
and
then
_financialcould be changed accordingly.
• •: • - • -•
8. Purchase of fire department equipment: The City Manager summarized
the price quote received for a one ton minibooster truck. The price
quoted was $12,342.55• The City Manager stated the City ocald get
a l/ key rate credit for the truck and recommended purchasing this
truck jointly with the fire department and eliminating the larger
booster truck from the five-year capital improvement program. It
was moved by cooper and seconded by McDaniel to advertise for bids
for the truck. Motion carried 4-0.
9. August budget report: Presented and received®
10. Other matters:
a. It was moved by Cooper and seconded by McDaniel to donate
$25.00 from the City to the Denton County United Way. Motion
carried 4-0.
Present: Mayor Col e® Cooper® Enlows Moores McDaniel, Coker, City
Manager.
boring cost" to "project cost."
October Disbursements: After several questions were asked
by Coker to approve payment. Motion carried 5�0.
#ck number of B. 6hirley Addition,moo' ma
the motion to grant petition #; Coker it. Motion
carri-•
Employee
in the bids and that the budget allowed for the insurance, Coker
made a motion to accept the low bid within specifications submitted
by the Muir Agency r McDaniel secondedn. The motion
rr
#
#
nce policy. Coker motioned to accept the City Manager's recom�
ftehdation
and Enlowmotion,
t
find other cities using the recommended gain and ask for their
evaluation of it,
• . Fivevmyear capital• , program: Y expressed
Tneir
desire to keep the cost of the park to $100,000. The water tower
project and its alternatives wereManagerplain- • to increase the
gallons per minute pumped, After more ..discussion the Mayor stated
his di�sire to finalize the capital• • program by
meeting so it could be available to the public,
♦ • and
the private com pany be allowed a try to see what type of location
plans they can arrive at. The Council
should be s as any developer or •a •-
Councilthe approval
a ittee on _ published report
recommending on County beremoved from the North
RegionalTexas Council of�Governmentsdn Arlington and placed in the Texoma
Planning Commission in Sherman. The Council
Sangerore in common with th- DallasomwFort Worth-
troplex
than it does with the Sherman 'area. Coker made a motion to adopt
the resolution and McDaniel seconded it, The motion carried 5�0-
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the House Subco:�mittee on intergovernmental Affairs
chaired by Representative Al K®riotpi recently iss3ed a report on
councils of governments and
Y .. • a - s s' ..
Regional.Texoma • o and
WHEREAS, Denton County has closer ties with the Dallas-Fo,.v%t
WHEREAS, Denton County is a part of the Dallas Standard Metroo0w
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVE? BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF' BANGER, TEXAS s
That the City of Sanger supports the North Central Texas Council
That the City of Sanger urges the. State Legislature to allow
Fenton County to rea�aain with the North Central Texas Council of
Governments,
PASSED AND APPROVED this 4th day of October, 1976,
9.
Other Matters
ow
+ - • • - •-
the property owner and the Denton County Commissioners Court
allowing the road to remaLn closed. The Mayor- • that
two options were available; condemnation or a utility easenia
routement and if unsuccessful, it will take the •
nationo _ the present
along the road. I
Culvert drainage: The Council approved the request of the
•, - ,
drainage tube at the request of a resid:ento the residemt