05111992 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

28 Regular Meeting May 11, 1992 Page 7 agreement based specifically on job creation. If the abatement was extended, it would be with taxpayer money and would cause difficulty. Mayor Morris stated she figured parkview's abatement would consist of approximately $7,051.00 for this year. Mr. Leutwiler stated he did not think parkview would be able to fill the default in 60 days and requested 90 days. Ms. Kissler asked if the Council just held parkview to 200 employees at the end of the abatement, would it effect the policy. Mr. Gilley stated it would not effect the policy. Ms. Kissler moved to amend the cure period to 90 days. Mr. Taylor suggested the City Manager send the notice out in 30 days after the Resolution which would then be effective 60 days from the day of the notice. This would give Parkview the 90 days. Mr. Moore seconded the motion. On roll call the following vote was recorded: AYE: Moore, Morris, Guerra, Kissler, Plummer NAY: Hernandez ABSTAIN: Hart Mr. Guerra moved to amend that the maximum number of jobs required under the contract be the only trigger regarding the emploYment figures. Mr. Moore seconded the motion. On roll call the following vote was recorded: AYE: Guerra NAY: Moore, Hernandez, Morris, Kissler, Plummer ABSTAIN: Hart Mayor Morris asked Mr. Leutwiler if he thought the 90-day cure period would help considerable? Mr. Leutwiler stated he thought the 90 days would be what they needed. On roll call the following vote was recorded: AYE: Moore, Hernandez, Morris, Guerra, Kissler, Plummer NAY: None ABSTAIN: Hart Mayor Morris introduced for consideration Item 5.C.(4), removed from the consensus agenda, adoption of a Resolution, the caption which was read as follows: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, APPROVING REVISED SALARY SCHEDULES FOR CITY EMPLOYEES WHO ARE NOT SUBJECT TO STATE CIVIL SERVICE STATUTES; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. Plummer moved for adoption of the Resolution and Mr. Moore seconded the motion. Mayor Morris stated she needed some clarification on where the salary ranges originated and if the salary ranges were competitive. Mr. Gilley stated the salary ranges had not been revised since 1986, and that was the purpose of the resolution. He stated a survey was conducted periodically with several competitive cities and the ranges were comparable allowing room for growth. The Council voted unanimously for adoption of the Resolution. Mayor Morris moved to table Item 5.D. until after Executive Session because of a late document received which needed to be read. Mr. Moore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.