04081964 Special Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4 special meeting, april 8, 1964, page two Alderman Pool moved the approval of the Resolution. Alderman Moore seconded the motion. In the discussion which followed, Alderman Ruiz stated that he thought the cost of defending City employees should be paid out of City funds, but that Councilmen should procure their own counsel and bear the expense of~heir own defense, with no money being spent for that purpose from City funds. The Mayor said he did not agree. Alderman Pool said; "You would soon have a hard time getting anyone to serve on the City Council under that policy". The City Manager said if City OfficerS were excluded from defense by use of City funds, that he, as a City Official, would also like to be excluded, and provide his own counsel. Upon question, the City Attorney stated the defendants in Case No. 8138 I would have twenty days in which to answer the Citation, which in this case, would mean a period between April 21 and April 27, depending on the day which each individual named had been served with the Citation. Alderman Stokes asked the City Attorney whether, except for a general denial, there were any reason why this business could not be deferred until the new Council took office. Attorney Walker replied that he felt the new Council should have the responsibility of choosing counsel, since the City's involvement would be a long-term matter. Alderman Stokes agreed, saying, "We have to answer the suit, but the new Council should choose counsel". The Mayor asked the City Attorney whether the suit would he answered coHectively or individually. Mr. Walk,er repliedl "The counsel hired will decide that. I don't think the City should pay fOr more than one attorney. Individual defendants may hire the~r own counsel". Alderman Moore questioned .the phrase "or any suit connected herewith" in the Resolution. The City Manager answered that there was a possibility of other suits arising out of this suit, which would be directly connected, in which case, the same counsel employed by the City would defend, as in the rest of the suit. Alderman MOOre asked whether that would apply if he decided to crOSS-sue. The City Manager said no, that would be an individual matter, and would not apply. The question being called for, the fallowing vote was recorded, AYEl Moore, Pool, Stokes NAY; Ruiz The Mayor declared the motion carried, and the Resolution Passed and Approved. I An Ordinance regulating parking on the west side of Academy street was introduced. The Ordinance was read in full, Alderman Pool moved its adoption. Alderman Stokes seconded the motion, and on roll call, the fallowing vote was recorded: AYE. Moore, Pool, Ruiz, Stokes NAY I None The Mayor declared the motion carried, and the Ordinance Passed, Approved and Adopted. Copies of bids for lighting the new softball field in City Park were distributed. The Mayor stated he felt it was the responsibility of the present Council to make a decision on this matter, since it had been under consideration for a long time. He enquired whether the route of the new road through the Park had been considered in selecting the site. The City Manager said the plans had been discussed with the Highway Depart- ment, and the field would be well out of the route of the road. Mr. Fuller called attention to Bid # 2, which would cost the City $4,030 for materials, and $2,100 for labor. He explained that while this"was not,the lowest bid, that LCRA and the contractors had assured him that by using better equipment, the reduced maintenance and energy would overcome the increased cost in I three to five yearS. After a discussion .of the merits of the different bidS, Alderman Stokes moved that Ted Breihap Electric Co. be awarded Bid # 2, and that work be started immediately. Alderman Pool seconded the motion, and on roll call, the following vote was recorded, AYE; Moore, Pool, Ruiz, Stokes NAY, None The Mayor declared the motion carried and the bid awarded to Ted Breihan Electric Co. p.f'~