10081957 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

REGULAR Iv!cET IN'3 8~'~ CCT03Ea B ~ 19:.':i7 ~ /// en '(bis~ the 8th day of CC-~Ob8J', 19;')7, at 2:00 Pi! M. t.he c;ity Co'unc:.l of the:: ", of San l,;'j.;:n'cos, Texas, met in a- regu.lar rrweting 2't the Clty :IaLL in San MaTtoS, the folhiWJ.ng membeI'::-: present and participatitig::. Mayor c. M~ AIJen 'jLlde:rm;J.n ..:::. 11.. BaseToft A1 d e:rffir3.n B.. ~)"" Hi 11bu:rn Alderman H~rman Korff AJ.derman w. M~ Davis f::'.lderman H.. M. S -teaklsy I cthe~'s prf-,sent v'J9x.e: B. 8~ FulleYt City Mar.age~ Carlyn Tatch~ City Secre'tary Mr.. liTexH Hughson, Hughson Locker Plant Mr.. Lee Harrjl San Jv],;:t!'cos Heco,;:'d IJL quorum tei:""q present the me€:ting wa~. called to o:rde:r by C~ M.. iI,lJen, MayoTt and following -transpired: Each membe:r havino been Dr8serr~:ed wlth e_ cony of the aoenda fOT this meeting, t.he fi:r:st topic on the'" agonda' was take~ under di'SGusslon regatding the following il,rnendment to the Slaughte:rhouse O:rdinance whid1 had b~)f)n prepar0d by the ei ty ...'1T.torne}t: I nS(:ction'i,fX (a). All persons, fiTffiS or corpor2.tions operating slaughte:ring, packing or processing busirwss, subject to the provisions herein, and whose plants are located within or wlthou.'i: the City Limits of "t.he City of San Marcos, shall be inspect.ed under th€, superv:i.slon of the Heal tb Department of Ute City Df San IvIa:tco5~ by a meat inspector or assistant meat inspector of the City of San MG:tcos, who has been assign- ed by the Chief M~at Inspector with approval of the Director of the Public Health ~.o such plant~ Th0~ charge for such in,spectiolls of the s:l2ughte~'in9 of cattle and hogs shall be the su;'n of forty cents (40~) per anim01, and the charO::;8 for inspect- ing the slaughtoring of sheep and goats shall be. the sume of twenty-five cents (250 per animal". Mr. "Te;;" Hughson met th~ CouncIl and stated that he felt that he would like to bTiefly give a breakdown of the yearly expenses of his business which he felt vo1ould show his point that an incroase in inspection fees were not j-ustified. He also stated that yea::.ly inspection fees, lncluding State Inspections, etc., were $3,464.03 for the past year and of that amount $3,000.00 was paid to th~ City of San Marcos. He stat~d that he felt that it was unjust for him to pay an IncrEase 5,11 inspection fees ~ihen other packp.rs are aI.so allowed to do business within t.he City limits, ,,\!ithout inspections, therefore, not givlng him a monopoly and asked that consideration be given his requ(}st for the inspection fee price not, to be changed" l'v1rfl Korff suggest0d that the Council leave a decision on the ordinance up to the City Managex and was unanimously ag:reed upon by the Council. I. Due to a previous authorization of the City Council fOT the Mayor to purchase 51t313 aCl.'es of land to ext~nd the N/S rum'llsy at the Municipal Ai:rport, the City Manager informed the Council that a deed of transfer had!::een executed and a check for t.he sum of $1,062.60 Co200.00 per ;;cre) had oe(m delivered to Mrs. Mamie PuIs and Mr. Edwa:rd Puls and requested that the CIty Council ratify the action of the Mayor and accept the deed", Motion ~~as made by Mr. Steakley to accept this deed f:rom the PuIs and was seconded by Mr. Beecroft and received a unanimous vote by all members of the Council in favor of this motion. The next. matter brought. t.o the attent.ion of the Council WaS a request to re- view t.he valuations placed on c:crtaj.n properties within the City of San Marcos.: A. Lots in the' F~ltner and Rio Vista Additions ovmed by Mr. John Stokes. B. Inventory of the .J. c. Penney Company C~ Lots in the Lindsey and Harvey Additions owned by George I. Nashingtoo.. After a full review of the :reques,"t for I'eadju5tmE:~nts, it was the unanimous deci.sion of the City Council tha.t no changes would be made in the Board of Equalizatio:-;~ report, which had previously be~~n appr-oved by tbe Co'Cnci.l, and fmffi which the 1957 Tax Roll had been prepared. If, the Board of EqualizatIDn ftdt that an error had been made, a letter the recommended change shou.ld be fo:rlNarded to thE) City Council Tsquesting that consider 2111 adjustment.