10222001 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

93. Regular Meeting October 22, 2001 Page 8 (Mr. Mihalkanin and Ms. Hughson abstaining, filing disclosure affidavits- business entity and Mr. Montoya abstaining, filing disclosure affidavit- real property). AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, AMENDING SECTION 22.014 OF THE CITY CODE TO ADOPT STANDARDS FOR THE PLACEMENT OF MONUMENTS IN THE CITY CEMETERY, AND TO CLARIFY MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MONUMENTS IN THE CITY CEMETERY; INCLUDING PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, AMENDING SECTION 102.029 OF THE CITY CODE BY ADOPTING THE SECTOR SEVEN PLAN; INCLUDING PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES. Adoption of Resolutions: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A LETTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND PRIESTER SUPPLY COMPANY, INC. TO EXTEND AN ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR THE PROVISION OF OVERHEAD SERVICE CABLE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY; AND DECLARINC AN EFFECTIVE DATE. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, APPROVING THE RESALE OF A PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE 1000 BLOCK OF DAILEY STREET THAT WAS FORECLOSED FOR UNPAID TAXES; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mayor Chiu introduced for consideration Item 15 removed from the consent agenda, approval of an Ordinance on second reading, the caption which was read as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, AMENDING SECTIONS 42.001, 42.076 AND 42.129, AND ADDING AN ARTICLE 5, TAX INCENTIVES, OF CHAPTER 42, HISTORIC PRESERVATION, OF THE CITY CODE TO PROVIDE TAX INCENTIVES FOR THE PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS; AND INCLUDING PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS. Mr. Cox moved for approval of the Ordinance on second reading with the amendments to Section 42.151(D), 42.155(a) and (b), 42.156(c) and 42.157 provided by memorandum of Mr. Taylor dated October 17, 2001 and Ms. Tatum seconded the motion. Ms. Hughson inquired if the tax abatement applied to any work on an historical structure or just historical renovation. Mr. Gilley stated he thought it would apply to anything. Mr. Mayhew stated he is in favor of historical renovation. He stated he is having a hard time with the fact it does not apply to everyone, that no breaks will be offered to others. He stated the savings is not substantial even to those who do historical renovation. There could be significant savings for the downtown area. Mr. Mihalkanin stated he would abstain from consideration,