HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 9, 2005 Agenda AGENDA
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL
February 9, 2005
Joim Meeting of the City of Demon City Council and the Demon Independem School District
Board of Trustees on Wednesday, February 9, 2005 at 12 noon in the Council Work Session
Room, 215 E. McKinney, Demon, Texas at which the following items will be considered:
1. Call to order; announce quorum, introductions.
2. Receive an update and hold a discussion on Denton lSD enrollment.
3. Receive a review and hold a discussion of comparative School District demographics.
4. Receive a review and hold a discussion of multifamily enrollment trends.
5. Receive an update and hold a discussion on tax-exempt properties.
6. Receive an update and hold a discussion on appraisal cap legislation.
7. Receive a review and hold a discussion on legislative positions of the City and Demon
lSD.
Hold a discussion of Denton County Day issues.
o
9.
10.
Determine next meeting date.
Adjourn.
CERTIFICATE
I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the
City of Demon, Texas, on the day of ,2005 at o'clock
(a.m.) (p.m.)
CITY SECRETARY
NOTE: THE COUNCIL WORK SESSION ROOM IS ACCESSIBLE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. THE CITY WILL
PROVIDE SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED IF
REQUESTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED MEETING.
PLEASE CALL THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 349-8309 OR USE
TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING 1-800-
RELAY-TX SO THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED
THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE.
2005 State Legislative Program
State of Texas
79th Legislative Session
As approved by the Denton City Council
January 18, 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Denton Mayor and Council Contact Information
3
City Manager, City Attorney and City Staff Contact Information
4
Denton City Council Resolution Adopting Legislative Program
5
Denton's Highest Legislative Priority
· Continue to urge the Texas Legislature not to adopt school finance reforms or tax changes
that would negatively affect city revenues and economic development efforts.
Erosion of Local Control over City Ri~hts-of-Way
· Support TML in "seeking introduction and passage" of legislation that would require utilities in city
rights-of-way to relocate at their cost for city construction projects and to impose financial penalties
on utilities that fail to relocate. 10
· Support TML in "seeking introduction and passage" of legislation that would limit the Public Utility
Commission's (PUC) jurisdiction to ratemaking. 10
Tax and Finance Issues
Oppose State initiatives that restrict a city's ability to fund necessary local services.
· Oppose legislation that imposes a property tax freeze that can be implemented by any mechanism
other than council action. 10
State Fees/Agreements in Lieu of Fees.
· Support legislation that repeals the drainage fee exemption for state entities.
· Support legislation related to the cost of city infrastructure, fire and police services.
11
11
Regional Transportation
· Support legislation that would permit cities to exceed the two-percent local sales tax cap for
regional transportation revenue purposes.
11
TML Resolutions proposed by the City of Denton
· Support legislation that would provide for a method of road assessment damages or increased fees
paid by heavy trucks in using city, county or state roads. 12
· Support legislation that would provide for funding options for maintenance and operation of
city-owned or city/private partnerships for convention centers, including hotels. 12
· Support legislation that would automatically remove the ad valorem tax exemption, for Higher
Education Authorities, or reduce the ad valorem tax exemption to the ratio of student
occupation. 12
Retain
Local Control over Development Issues and Fees
· Oppose legislation that would erode city annexation authority. 13
· Oppose legislation that would erode city authority in the extraterritorial jurisdiction over
annexation and special districts. 13
· Oppose legislation that will reduce or eliminate development fees, exactions or building permits. 13
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progra~ Page 1 January 18, 2005
Table of Contents (Page Two)
Photographic Red Light Legislation
· Oppose legislation that would restrict a city's ability to implement a photographic red light
enforcement system to use cameras at traffic lights and impose a civil penalty for running the
light.
14
Workers' Compensation Reforms
· Support reform of workers' compensation law to control or reduce health care costs without putting
injured employees at risk, including legislation that would create health care networks, improve
back-to-work programs and establish other cost-reducing programs or procedures suggested by the
Sunset Commission. 14
Financial Disclosure Requirements
· Oppose the expansion of financial disclosure requirements beyond current law.
15
Uniform Election Dates
· Oppose any changes to or elimination of uniform election dates.
15
Support Legislation that directly benefits University of North Texas and Texas Woman's University
· Support full funding formulas for state universities and improved public education programs to
to promote more college graduates.
15
Support Legislation that directly benefits Denton 1SD
· Support increasing state funding for children with special needs, increasing the fiscal capacity
of the school finance system and adding a factor to school funding for exempt state and
federal property.
15
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progra~ Page 2 January 18, 2005
City of Denton City Council Members
Mailing Address for all of Council: 215 E. McKinney, Denton, TX 76201
Voice Mail for all of Council 940-349-8555
Mayor
Euline Brock
1900 Westridge
Denton, TX 76205
E-mail: euline.brock~cityofdemon.com
Office: 940-349-7717
Home: 940-382-2436
Cell: 940-391-4940
Fax: 940-381-0106
Council Member - District 1
Raymond Redmon
1029 E. Hickory
Denton, TX 76205
E-mail: raymond.redmon~cityofdemon.com
Office & Home: 940-323-2301
Cell: 940-390-9475
Fax: 940-323-2300
Council Member - District 2
Pete Kamp
110 Friar Tuck Circle
DeNon, TX 76209
E-mail: pete.kamp~cityofdemon.com
Office: 940-591-0308
Home: 940-566-5557
Cell: 940-390-9485
Council Member - District 3
Jack Thomson
1401 Amherst Dr.
Denton, TX 76201
E-mail: j ack.thomson~cityofdemon.com
Home: 940-382-5176
Cell: 940-390-2296
Mayor Pro Tem- District 4
Perry McNeill
1508 Gatewood Drive
Denton, TX 76205
E-mail: perry.mcneill~cityofdemon.com
Office: 940-565-2364
Home: 940-591-6080
Cell: 940-390-9463
Council Member - At Large Place 5
Bob Montgomery
2329 E. Windsor
DeNon, TX 76209
E-mail: bob.momgomery~cityofdemon.com
Home: 940-891-0051
Cell: 940-391-6545
Council Member - At Large Place 6
Joe Mulroy
124 Hollyhill
Denton, TX 76205
E-mail: j oe.mulroy@,cityofdemon.com
Before noon: 940-380-0652
Home: 940-382-3396
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progra~ Page 3 January 18, 2005
City Manager, City Attorney and City Staff
The Denton City Council and staff would be glad to provide information, research
issues and testify on the City of Denton 2005 Legislative Program.
Municipal Offices:
City of Denton
215 E. McKinney
Denton, Texas 76201
www.cityofdenton.com
Michael A. Conduff
City Manager
(940) 349-8307
Herb Prouty
City Attorney
(940) 349-8333
Kathy L. DuBose
Assistant City Manager/Finance
(940) 349-8228
Ed Snyder
Deputy City Attorney
(940) 349-8333
Howard Martin
Assistant City Manager/Utilities
(940) 349-8232
Jon Fortune
Assistant City Manager/Public Safety
and Transportation Operations
(940) 349-8535
Sharon Mays
Director/Electric Utilities
(940) 349-8487
Betty Williams
Director of Management and
Public Information
(940) 349-8302
If you or your legislative staff needs assistance from Denton or has any questions
concerning Denton's legislative priorities, please contact:
Dorothy Palumbo, Senior Assistant City Attorney/Legislative Coordinator
(940) 348-8393, (940) 382-7923 FAX, or email:
dorothy.palumbo~cityo fdenton, com.
John Cabrales, Public Information Officer
(940) 349-8509, (940) 349-7444 FAX, or email: john.cabrales~cityofdenton.com
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progra~a Page 4 January 18, 2005
RESOLUTION NO. /~/.,~.. O~.5'-O0,fl,
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ADOPTING THE CITY OF
DENTON'S 2005 STATE LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM FOR THE 79TM TEXAS
LEGISLATURE; PROVIDING A REPEALER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the 79th Texas Legislature will commence on January 11, 2005; and
WHEREAS, public school finance issues, general government, and many legislative
issues affecting local government will be considered; and
WHEREAS, the City of Denton desires to adopt its legislative program for the 79th Texas
Legislature, attached as Exhibit "A", NOW, THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES:
SECTION 1. That the City of Denton's 2005 Legislative Program for the 79th Texas
Legislature is adopted as set forth in Exhibit "A", incorporated herein and made a part of this
resolution for all purposes.
SECTION 2. That the Mayor and City Council, City Manager and the City Attorney, or
their designees shall communicate the items included in the state legislative program to members
of the Texas Legislature.
SECTION 3. The City Attorney, or his designee, is directed to draft appropriate
legislation, seek a sponsor, and actively pursue passage of such legislation by providing
testimony from the Mayor and City Council and City staff and through other appropriate means.
SECTION 4. That the Mayor, City Manager and the City Attorney, or their designees are
directed to communicate to the members of the Texas Legislature and actively oppose any
legislation which diminishes the City of Denton's home-rule authority or has a negative impact
on the City of Denton's governmental authority and City of Denton's ability to provide services
to its citizens,
SECTION 5. That all previous resolutions and orders or parts of resolutions or orders in
force when the provisions of this Resolution become effective which are inconsistent or in
conflict with the terms or provisions contained in this Resolution are hereby repealed to the
extent of any such conflict.
SECTION 6. This resolution shall take effect immediately from and after its passage in
accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of Denton and it is accordingly so
resolved.
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progra~ Page 5 January 18, 2005
PASSED AND APPROVED this the
day of ~~ff/~ ., 2005.
EULiNIL,lgROCK, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progam Page 6 January 18, 2005
Denton's Legislative Priorities
The City of Denton has adopted the following legislative issues as priority
issues for the 79th Legislative Session. The City Council of the City of Denton
has met in workshops, participated in legislative seminars and has received
information from city staff and various groups within the community to set
these priorities.
Denton's Highest Legislative Priority
Continue to urge the legislature not to adopt any school finance or tax
system reforms that would negatively affect City revenues and
economic development efforts.
Background: The City of Denton during the 4th Special Session of the
78th Texas Legislature passed Resolution No. 2004-012 urging the Texas
Legislature not to adopt any school finance reform or tax system changes that
would negatively impact city revenues or economic development efforts. Bills
have been introduced in the 79th Texas Legislature on this issue. The City of
Denton continues to urge the legislature not to pass this legislation by adopting
the following resolution:
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progran~ Page 7 January 18, 2005
RESOLUTION NO. ~,Y~d~,~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, CONTINUING TO URGE THE
LEGISLATURE NOT TO ADOPT ANY SCHOOL FINANCE REFORM OR TAX SYSTEM
CHANGES THAT WOULD NEGATIVELY AFFECT CITY REVENUES AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECT~TE DATE.
WHEREAS, on March 23, 2004 the City of Denton, Texas passed Resolution No.
R2004-012 urging the Texas Legislature not to adopt any school finance reform or tax system
changes that would negatively affect city revenues and economic development efforts;
WHEREAS, the Texas Legislature was called into a Fourth SpeciaI Session and failed to
pass school finance reforms; and
WHEREAS, dttring the special session by the Texas Legislature, proposals to li~rdt the
ability of cities to collect property taxes and sales taxes were offered by some members of the
Legislature; and
WHEREAS, additional restrictions on city taxes fly in the face of a history of frugal tax
administration by Texas cities; and
WHEREAS, all Texas cities combined collect only 15.3 percent of all property taxes
collected in the State of Texas, while schools collect more than 60 percent; and
WHEREAS, between 1985 and 2002, the municipal share of alt property tax revenue fell
from 20.3 percent to 15.3 percent; and
WHEREAS, Texas cities rely on tax revenue to build basic infrastructure, to ensure
public safety through police and fire departments, and to provide numerous essential services for
city residents, who are 80 percent of the state's population; and
WHEREAS, Texas cities engage in numerous economic development activities that
produce jobs and revenue for the entire State of Texas; and
WHEREAS, cities must meet the challenges of homeland security and compliance with
state and federal mandates many of which are unfunded mandates; and
WHEREAS, Texas cities have shown over the years that they are fiscally responsible and
good stewards to taxpayers' money; and
WHEREAS, it is the City of Denton, Texas highest priority to continue to urge the Texas
Legislature not to adopt legislation to limit the ability of cities to collect sales and property tax
revenues or to set tax rates that would have severe negative impacts on city services, city
employees, economic development efforts, and ultimately the citizens of the State of Texas;
NOW, THEREFORE,
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Pro[Tam Page 8 January 18, 2005
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES:
SECTION 1. That the governing body of the City of Denton, Texas will continue to
oppose all school finance reforms or tax system changes by the Texas Legislature that
negatively impact the ability of the City to provide basic essential services, conduct econo,rile
development activities, and ensure public safety by limiting our ability, beyond the provisions of
current law, to collect property tax or sales tax revenues.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and
approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the r/¢~A5 day of. ~ , 2005.
. ~INE~dCK, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JENNEFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
tPPR'OVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
HERB PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Program Page 9 January 18, 2005
Erosion of Local Control over City Rights-of-Way
Support TML in "seeking introduction and passage" of legislation that
would require utilities in city rights-of-way to relocate at their cost for city
construction projects and to impose financial penalties on utilities that fail
to relocate.
Support TML in "seeking introduction and passage" of legislation that
would limit the Public Utility Commission's (PUC) jurisdiction to
ratemaking.
Background: Historically, most utilities were required by franchises and state law
to relocate their facilities at their cost when the relocation was required for a public
work's project. Some utility companies are arguing that Chapter 283 of the Texas
Local Government Code (H.B. 1777) altered state law. Denton has experienced
delays in public work projects due to this confusion and a clarification of state law
is necessary.
There are no current federal or state laws that reduce the authority of cities to
exercise police powers for the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the
public in connection with the use of city streets and rights-of-way by
telecommunication companies and other entities providing service. Cities may
impose numerous kinds of regulation on entities that use the city's right of way.
These regulations will withstand legal challenge because they are reasonably
connected to protection of the health, safety, or welfare of the public. Denton
opposes any new legislation that limits the ability of cities to control the right-of-
way.
Cities collect franchise fees as compensation for the use of the right of way. These
fees reimburse the public for the use of the right-of-way. Denton opposes any
legislation that limits cities' ability to collect franchise fees.
TML has placed these issues in their highest category.
Tax & Finance Issues
Oppose State initiatives that restrict a city's ability to fund
necessary local services.
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progra~ Page 1 0 January 18, 2005
· Oppose legislation that imposes a property tax freeze that can be
implemented by any mechanism other than council action.
Background: During the 4th Special Session, the City of Denton adopted a
resolution that urged the Texas Legislature not to adopt school finance reforms that
would adversely affect city revenues and economic development efforts. The city
testified and wrote numerous letters during the session. The city continues to
oppose state initiatives that restrict a city's ability to fund necessary local services.
TML has also placed these issues in their oppose category.
State Fees/Agreements in Lieu of Fees
· Support legislation that repeals the drainage fee exemption for state
entities.
Background: During the 2003 regular session, the legislature enacted legislation
that exempts state properties, state colleges and universities from paying municipal
storm water utility fees. These state entities benefit from the flood prevention and
storm water control provided by city storm water program. All entities should pay
their fair share of the city's efforts to prevent flooding and to respond to costly
federal mandates relating to storm water run-off. When state entities are exempted
from municipal drainage fees, the remaining ratepayers make up the difference.
This issue was placed in TML's support category.
· Support legislation related to the cost of city infrastructure, fire and police
services.
Background: TML adopted this legislative issue by the City of San Marcos.
University communities bear the cost of providing city infrastructure, fire and
police services. Universities make no direct payments to university communities.
State law should expressly provide for state universities to enter into agreements in
lieu of fees with cities in which they are located for the cost of infrastructure, fire
and police services. TML placed this issue in their support category.
Regional Transportation
· Support legislation that would permit cities to exceed the two-percent local
sales tax cap for regional transportation revenue purposes.
Background: The City of Denton participates in the Regional Transit Initiatives,
Regional Transportation Council and the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition. The
City is also a founding member of the Denton County Transportation Authority.
The city will urge the state legislature to amend state law to allow a region wide
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progra~ Page 1 1 January 18, 2005
local option election to increase the sales tax cap, or to boost the gasoline tax on a
regional basis, or provide any other funding source for regional transportation
needs. TML placed this issue in their support category.
TML Resolutions proposed by the City of Denton
Support legislation that would provide for a method of road assessment
damages or increased fees paid by heavy trucks in using city, county or
state roads.
Background: Cities in North Texas are experiencing a tremendous amount of
road damage as a result of gas well drilling in the Barnett Shale. Legislation is
needed that provides for a method of assessing road damages and imposing
appropriate fees to be paid by heavy trucks using city, county or state roads. The
resolution is written broadly enough to apply to all heavy trucks that damage city
roads, not just those trucks related to gas well operations. TML placed this issue
in their support category.
Support legislation that would provide for funding options for maintenance
and operation of city-owned or city/private partnerships for convention
centers, including hotels.
Background: Many Texas cities need funding for the construction, maintenance
and operation of convention centers. State legislation is needed to allow funding
for maintenance and operation of city owned or city/private partnerships for
convention centers, including hotels. TML placed this issue in their support
category.
Support legislation that would automatically remove the ad valorem tax
exemption, for Higher Education Authorities, or reduces the ad valorem
tax exemption to the ratio of student occupation.
Background: Chapter 53 of the Texas Education Code permits a city to create a
higher education authority or a nonprofit corporation to exercise powers similar to
those of an authority. The nonprofit organization could formerly issue tax-exempt
bonds to buy dormitories outside the city that created the corporation. Chapter 53
was amended last legislative session to require these authorities locate their
facilities in the cities that created the authority.
However, existing authorities have already located these dormitories in cities other
than the city that created them. These bonds financing the dormitories are sold to
investors and are paid off from the rent from the dormitories. To qualify under the
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progran~ Page 12 January 18, 2005
law, the dormitories must be rented exclusively to students or others officially
connected with a university. The tax-exempt bonds must be approved by the state
attorney general's office.
Some cities that have created higher education authorities contend that facilities
they have constructed or acquired outside their extraterritorial jurisdiction are not
subject to local ad valorem property taxes. The City of Denton proposes removing
or reducing the ad valorem property tax exemption if these facilities are not rented
to students. TML placed this issue in their support category.
Retain Local Control over Development Issues and Fees
· Oppose legislation that would erode city annexation authority.
· Oppose legislation that would erode city authority in the extraterritorial
jurisdiction over annexation and special districts.
· Oppose legislation that will reduce or eliminate development fees, exactions
or building permits.
Background: During the past five years Denton has allocated major staff recourses
and spent significant sums on creating a development strategy, embodied in the
Denton Plan, 1999-2020, and the Denton Development Code. Denton citizens do
not want these efforts to be undermined by legislation eroding local control. The
city needs to retain local authority over annexation, development fees, and building
permits to implement these plans.
Denton provides water and wastewater to its own citizens and also provides water
and wastewater services through interlocal agreements with many smaller cities in
Denton County. There are 12 fresh water supply districts in Denton County. The
City of Denton has had problems with a fresh water supply district forming inside
the city limits and had to file litigation. Fresh water supply districts frequently
have substandard infrastructure and cannot serve the development that the district
projected at build out. These systems are not required to bid competitively and are
very expensive.
Developers will often structure the debt to include a bond balloon payment. This
balloon payment is usually due around the time the system is failing. Cities are
then pressured to take over the district through annexation and are forced to spend
substantial sums to correct the problem. This is the same problem Houston faced
in the early 80s. Denton will urge legislators to exercise caution when creating
special districts and make sure that special districts notify and receive permission
from cities before forming.
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Prograna Page 13 January 18, 2005
Photographic Red Light Legislation
Oppose legislation that would restrict a city's ability to implement a
photographic red light enforcement system to use cameras at traffic lights
and impose a civil penalty for running the light.
Background. During the 2003 legislative session, SB 1184 passed and amended
the Texas Transportation Code to all cities to use cameras at traffic lights and
impose a civil penalty for running the red light. Each year in the United States
more than 800 people die and over 200,00 are injured in crashes that involve
running of a red light. Texas is ranked fourth in the nation for death rates in red-
light crashes. In one Texas city that implemented right light photo systems, the
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety reported a twenty-nine percent overall
reduction in injury crashes. Other Texas cities have implemented this program.
Denton is in the process of implementing the ordinance. Whether to implement this
type of system should be a local decision that is made by the local government.
Workers' Compensation Reforms
Support reform of workers' compensation law to control or reduce health
care costs without putting injured employees at risk, including legislation
that would create health care networks, improve back-to-work programs
and establish other cost-reducing programs or procedures suggested by the
Sunset Commission.
Background. The House Business and Industry Interim Committee is studying
this issue along with Representative Burt Solomons, who is the chair of the Sunset
Advisory Commission. Denton supports these reforms to contain the costs of
workers' compensation. TML has placed this issue in their support category.
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progra~a Page 14 January 18, 2005
Financial Disclosure Requirements
· Oppose the expansion of financial disclosure requirements beyond current
law.
Background. H.B. 1606 passed last legislative session late in the last day of the
session with a provision added on in conference committee to apply financial
disclosure requirements to cities over 100,000 in population. This bill as sent to
the committee applied only to cities over 350,000. Denton opposes any changes to
financial disclosure requirements. TML has placed this issue in their "oppose"
category.
Uniform Election Dates
· Oppose any changes to or elimination of uniform election dates.
Background. H.B. 1549 (2003 regular session) moved the May general election
date from the first Saturday to the third Saturday. During the 3rd special session
this legislative issue was a TML priority, since moving May elections to the last
Saturday would create significant problems for many Texas cities. Legislation
sponsored by Representative Denny and Senator Nelson passed, returning the May
election date to the first Saturday in May. Denton opposes any modification of the
uniform election dates. TML has placed this issue in their "oppose" category.
Support Legislation that directly benefits UNT and/or
TWU
· Support legislation that directly benefits UNT and/or TWU, if such
proposals do not adversely affect the city's interest.
Support Legislation that directly benefits Denton 1SD
· Support legislation that directly benefits Denton 1SD, if such proposals do
not adversely affect the city's interest.
City of Denton 2005 State Legislative Progra~ Page 1 5 January 18, 2005
3-Year Enrollment Comparison
Denton lSD
Secondary Schools
Calhoun Middle School
Crownover Middle School
McMath Middle School
Strickland Middle School
Total Middle School
% Annual Growth
2002-03 2003-04
1/17/2003 1/20/2004
2004-05
1/19/2005
752 732 824
861 910 941
899 983 977
889 899 953
3401 3524 3695
3,49% ~
Denton High School
Ryan High School
Fred Moore High School
Total High School
% Annual Growth
1865 1862 1871
1915 1995 2258
70 73 58
3850 3930 4187
2.04% ~
Davis School
Juvenile Detention
JJAEP
Total Alternative School
% Annual Growth
58 59 76
31 45 38
3 6 2
92 110 116
16.36% ~
Secondary Totals 7343 7564 7998
% Annual Growth 2,92% ~
DISD Enrollment: January 19, 2005
Day 94
Denton Independent School District
2004-2005
Elementary Enrollment
TK = Transitional Kindergaden
NC = New Comers
PPCD = Pre Kindergarten Special Ed
I SP. SP. DEAF
SCHOOL POPS PREK KINDERGARTEN FIRST SECOND THIRD FOURTH FIFTH ED, ED. TOTALS
2r~d NC~7 BE'~I_8 BE=20 BE' ~7 'B~E~I~91 ~E.:~I5
3~1 ,NC' .~c BE''18' BE~8 BE'*~ BE';:I~ ~E 16 7
122 21119J 121 26 18 118 18 1912012( 22 22 5
EVERS 26 21 ~ 15 1~ ~ 19~ 1~ 21 1
19, 18, 20, 19, 19'~ 17]~21 22 26 22 22' 5
ppcdam 8 ~MI 15 ~E :151 BE'22 IE ,21 BE,i~5I
HODGE I 151 141 15[ 15 13 lS 15 20 S 21 9
22120J201211 21J22J22122 22122122 20121121!22121121 24124122 9
MONAIR 191 221
12~12e ~ 4
2q2~12~12012~ 21122~21 19 19120 21121~21 19120120 12412~
E.P. RAYZOR 201201 20120122 ~9 ~91~9 21121120 201~9~9~ ~26 25
~P 8 BE 121BE 15~ BE '1~ BE~4 BE'~9
~.~YZOR BE ~ 12ola7m2o12o 19118 17 ~7m16 ~7 ~6 17 17 19 18 20 20
iTK 8 221221211221222011912121J20J202212212~ ~8J19118 23 232323 7
..OV,OE.CE 221 122122 2~12°1mI I I 12222 22
BE 201 BE 20 BE_20 BE r20
NSRYAN 22120121120J 22 22 22 2~' 122 22 119[ 20 20 8
WILSON I 18 191191181181 18 19 19 18 19 20 1~ 22 22 18 17 27 27 8
G~DETOTALSI ] 333 ~ 225 ~ 1470 I 1463 [ 1451 ~ 1378 ~ 1315 I 1181 ~ 124 ~ 11 I 8951
CLASSROOM TOTALS 22-1 AS OF JANUARY 19,2005
GRADE K I 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I
CAMPUS
Borman
Evers 1
Ginnings 1 3 1
Hodge 1
Houston 1 5 5 1 1
Lee 1 1
McNair 3 6 4
Pecan Creek 5 3
Providence 6 4 4 4
EP Rayzor 2
N Rayzor
Rivera
WS Ryan 1 4 4 2
Wilson 3
Totals I 18 I 22 I 14 I 17 I 6 I
Grand TOtal All Grades 77 I
Elementary Enrollment Counts
2002.2003 2003.2004 2004-2005
111712003 112012004 1/19/2005
Borman 595 601 626
Evers 554 548 494
Ginnings 575 591 578
Hodge 697 672 441
Houston 626 663 675
Lee 564 558 567
McNair 730 693 734
E.P. Rayzor 470 615 758
Newton Rayzor 638 632 611
Pecan Creek 540 704
Providence 563
Rivera 655 688 636
W.S. Ryan 704 577 599
Wilson 641 666 703
Ann Windle SYC 288 302 289
Totals
7737 8346 8978
7.30% 7.04%
02/09/05
E
~I~ ~i~I~lIiI~I III~
0 O0 OOO O0 0 O O 0 O0 =
c c c ~ ~ ,~.~.~ ~ c c c
...... ~ '~'~-~
~ ~ ooo
I~
Census 2000 Profile of Selected Housing Characteristics
Denton, Selected Denton County Cities and Selected Cities Outside Denton County
Cities in Denton County
Dentor % of The Colony % of Flowe] % of Lewisville % of
total total Moun¢ total total
Tota 1 Housing Units 32,752 8,836 16,97( 31,72(
1999 to March2000 1,682 5.1% 516 5.8°,4 1,76L 10.4°A 2,28~c 7.2~'
1995 to 1998 2,95( 9.0% 939 10.6°,4 5,70t. 33.6% 8,87{ 28.0°/
I990to 1994 2,405 7.3% 495 5.6% 4,33: 25.5% 3,68( 11.6°/
1980to 1989 8,60.' 26.3% 3,227 36.5% 3,61t. 21.3~ 9,302 29.3°/3
1970to 1979 7,232 22.1% 3,481 39.4% 1,12z 6.6°A 5,04~ 15.9%
1960 to 1969 4,485 13.7% 113 1.3% 21.' 1.3V 1,372 4.3%
1940to 1959 3,99,c 12.2% 65 0.7% 14~ 0.9°A 98~ 3.1%
1939 or earlier 1,394 4.3% 13 0.0~ 5~ 0.3~ 171 0.5%
Cities outside Denton County
Arlingtor % of Carrollto~ % of ~ort Wortl % of McKiane % of
total total total total
Total Housing Units 130,822 40,533 211,16.~ 19,422
1999 to March 2000 3,825 2.9% 1,272 3.1°/ 7,78{. 3.7% 2,74.~ 14.1%
1995 to 1998 9,355 7.1% 4,11C 10.1°/ 14,78." 7.0% 6,045 31.1%
1990to 1994 11,81L 9.0% 4,411 10.9% 11,297, 5.3% 2,88[ 14.9%
L980to 1989 45,48( 34.8% 16,348 40.3% 41,971 19.9% 2,675 13.8%
[970to 1979 34,47( 26.3% 10,015 24.7% 29,102 13.8% 1,04~ 5.4%
[960to 1969 14,49~ 11.1% 2,831 7.0% 29,364 13.9% 1,29~ 6.7%
[940to 1959 10,42~ 8.0% 1,392 3.4% 58,362 27.6~ 1,975 10.2%
[939 or earlier 962 0.7~ 15.~ 0.4% 18,497 8.8% 757 3.9°A
Profile of Selected Housing Characteristics
2000 Census and 2000-2005 City of Denton Building Permit Data
Denton Texas
Total Housing Units*
UNITS IN STRUCTURE
Total Single Family Units
Total Multifamily Units
Total Mobile Home Units*
Other (Boat, RV, Van, etc.)**
39,874
21,863
16,202
1,766
43
YEAR STRUCTURE BUILT
April 2000 to January 2005 7,121
1999 to March 2000 1,683
1995to1998 2,950
1990 to 1994 2,407
1980to1989 8,605
1970 to 1979 7,233
1960 to 1969 4,482
1940to 1959 3,999
1939 or earlier 1,394
17.9%
4.2%
7.4%
6.0%
21.6%
18.1%
11.2%.
10.0%
3.5%
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 and 2000-2005 City of Denton Building Permit Data
*Building Inspections through Trak-It does not track individual mobile home units. Only
the number mobile home parks and the number of stands or lots per mobile home park
are tracked. The number of lots does not often translate to the number of units. To date,
there are 2,186 lots. There is no way to track the age of the park or the units contained in
these parks. According to the Interim Building Official, there have been no new mobile
home parks since 2000. Given these issues, this number assumes that the number of
mobile home units has not changed since the 2000 Census.
* * Building Inspections through Trak-It does not track housing.units other than single
family and multifamily. This number assumes that the number of"Other units" has not
changed since the 2000 Census.
Single Family and Multifamily Units in Denton
Since 2000 Census to January 2005
· SF MF
(attached & detached) (includes TF)
Total Units (only No. of % No. of oA
SF+MF) traits units
Census 2000
(taken on April 1, 2000) 30,94~1 16,400 50.07~ 14,54~ 44.41~
Units based on finaled
permits
Apr 2 - Dec 3 i, 2000 31,391 220 52.95~ 222 47.05%
Jan - Dec, 2001 32,89'~ 1,078 53.80~ 42~ 4620~
Jan w Dec, 2002 34,904 1,253 54.29~ 754 45. 71%
Jan - Dec, 2003 35,856 897 55.35~ 55 44.65~
Jan - Dec, 2004 37,982 1063 55.05~ 106~ 44.95~
Total Units (by type) 20,911 17,07~
The adopted Denton Plan calls for a 60:40 ratio of SF to MY housing (excluding others) by the year
2020. By the end of 2004, the SF to MY ratio is 55:45.
SF MF
(a~ached & detached) (includes TF)
Total Units (only No. of % No. of %
SF+MF) units units
Till end of 2004 37,983 20,911 55.3~ 17,07~ 44.7~
Jan 2005 38,065 76 55.1~, 44.9%
Total Units (by type) 20,987 16,93£
The adopted Denton Plan calls for a 60:40 ratio of SF to MY housing (excluding others) by the year
2020. By the end of 2004, the SF to MY ratio is 55:45.
0
0
I--
o
Census 2000 Profile of Selected Housing Characteristics
Denton, Selected Denton County Cities and Selected Cities
Outside Denton County
The Colony 8,836 8,495 96.1% 303 3.4°/`
Flower Mound 16,970 15,997 94.3% 485 2.9°/`
Lewisville 31,720 16,975 53.5% 12,868 40.6°/~
~,rlington 130,822 81,465 62.3% 46,939 35.9°/,
,~arrollton 40,533 28,530 70.4% 11,330 28.1%'
Fort Worth 211,165 145,903 69.1% 61,286 29.3%
McKinne¥ 19,423 14,866 76.5% 4,089 21.1%
Census 2000 Profile of Mobile Homes to Total Housing Units
Denton, Selected Denton County Cities and Selected Cities
Outside Denton County
0.4%
2.7%
5.7%
130,8221 2,262] 1.7%
40,5331 4031 1.0%
211,165 3,786 1.8%
19,423 468 2.4%
Census 2000 Profile of Selected Housing Characteristics
Denton Texas
Total Housing Units
UNITS IN STRUCTURE
Total Single Family Units
Total Multifamily Units
Total Mobile Home Units
Other (Boat, RV, Van, etc.)
YEAR STRUCTURE BUILT
1999 to March 2000
1995 to 1998
1990 to 1994
1980 to 1989
1970 to 1979
1960 to 1969
1940 to 1959
1939 or earlier
32,753
17,276 52.7%
13,668 41.7%
1,766 5.4%
43 0.13%
1,683 5.1%
2,950 9%
2,407 7.4%
8,605 26.3%
7,233 22.1%
4,482 13.7%
3,999 12.2%
1,394 .4.3%
2004-2005 "Inner City" Comparison
CITY TAX BASE PER 04-05 TAX RATE
CAPITA
McKinney $75,450 0.593
Dallas $55,207 0.719
Denton $47,997 0.598
Fort Worth $41,688 0.865
Waco $42,183 0.6997
State Tax,Credit Developments
Pecan Place 302 S Locust St 24
Country Park Apartments 1606 E McKinney 120
The Waterford At Spencer Oaks 2100 Spencer Rd 156
Pebblebrook Apartments 191 Duchess Dr 250
Rosemont (~ Pecan Creed 3500 E McKinney 276
Primrose ~ Sequoia Park 1550 Mingo/University 250
Quail Creek North E of Brinker/N of Colorado 264
Total
* 2.5'1 times the state average per capita
1340
79(R) SB 58 - Introduced version - Bill Text Page 1 of 2
79R1087 SMH-D
By: Nelson
S.B. No. 58
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
relating to the exemption from ad valorem taxation of certain
property used to provide low-income or moderate-income hous·ing.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Section 11.182, Tax Code, is amended by adding
Subsections (b-l) and (i-l) and amending Subsections (c) and (e) to
read as follows:
(b-l) To receive an exemption under Subsection (b) for
improved real property that includes a housing project, the
organization must reserve:
(1) '~t least 50 percent of the total number of dwellinq
unite ih the hous~nq project for low-income or moderate-income
individuals or families satisfyinq the organization's eliqibility
requirements; and
(2) at least 50 percent of the total square footage of
the dwelling units in the housing project for low-income or
moderate-income individuals or families satisfying the
organization's eligibility requirements.
(c) Propert~ owned by the organization that includes a
housing project may not be exempted under Subsection .(b) after the
third anniversary of the date the organization acquires the
property unless the organization is offering to rent or is renting
the applicable number and square footage of dwelling units.in the
project [~rc~erty] without profit to [~] l'ow-income or
moderate-income individuals [±nd~vidul!] or families [~y]
satisfying the organization's eligibility requirements.
(e) In addition to meeting the applicable requirements of
Subsections (b), (b-l), and (c), to receive an exemption under
Subsection (b) for improved real property that includes ~ housing
· project constructed after December 31, 2001, and financed with
qualified 501(c) (3) bonds issued under Section 145 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, tax-exempt private activity bonds subject to
volume cap, or low-income housing tax credits, the organization
must:
(1) control 100 percent of the ·interest in the general
partner if the project is owned by a limited partnership;
(2) comply with all rules of and laws administered by
th~ Texas Department of Housing and community Affairs applicable to
community housing development organizations; and
(3) submit annually to the Texas Department 'of Housing
and Community Affairs and to the governing body of each taxing unit
for which the project receives an exemption for the housing project
evidence demonstrating that the organization spent an amount equal
to at least 90 percent of the project's cash flow in the preceding
fiscal year as determined by the audit required by Subsection (g),
for eligible persons in the county in which the property is located,
on social, educational, or economic development services, capital
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlo/79R/billtext/SB00058I.HTM 2/9/2005
79(R) SB 58 - Introduced version - Bill Text Page 2 of 2
improvement projects, or rent reduction.
(i-l) The amount of an exemption under Subsection (b) for
improved real property that includes a housinq project is 50
percent of the appraised value of the property multiplied by a
fraction the numerator of which is the square footaqe of the
dwellinq units in the housinq project that are reserved for
low-income or moderate-income individuals or families satisfyinq
the orqanization's eliqibilit¥ requirements and the denominator of
which is the total square footaqe of the dwellinq units in the
project.
SECTION 2. Sections 11.1825(g), (p), and (s), Tax Code, are
amended to read as follows:
(g) Property may not receive an exemption under this section
unless:
(1) at least 50 percent of the total number of dwellinq
units in the housinq project are reserved for individuals or
families described by Subsection (f); and
(2) at least 50 percent of the total square footage of'
the dwelling units in the housing project is reserved for
individuals or families described by Subsection (f).
(p) If the organization acquires the-property for the
purpose of constructing or rehabilitating a housing project on the
property, the organization must be renting or offering to rent the
applicable number and square footage of dwelling units in the
property to individuals or families described by Subsection (f) not
later than the third anniversary of the date the organization
acquires the property.
(s) Unless otherwise provided by the governing body of a
taxing unit any part of which is located in a county with a
population of at least 1.4 million under Subsection (x), the amount
of the exemption under this section from taxation is 50 percent of
the appraised value of the property multiplied by a fraction the
numerator of which is the square footaqe of the dwelling units in
the housinq project that are reserved for individuals or families
described by Subsection (f) and the denominator of which is the
total square footaqe of the dwelling units in the project.
SECTION 3. This Act applies only to ad valorem taxes imposed
for a tax year beginning on or after the effective date of this Act.
SECTION 4. This Act takes effect January 1, 2006.
http ://www. caPitol.state.tx.us/tlo/79R/billtext/SB 00058I.HTM 2/9/2005
79(P.) lib 483 ~ Introduced version - Bill Text Page 1 of 2
79R59 MFC-D
By: Isett
H.B. No. 483
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
relating to an exemption from ad valorem taxation of property used
as a child-care facility.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE .OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Subchapter B, Chapter 11, Tax Code, is amended by
adding Section 11.34 to read as follows:
Sec. 11.34. CHILD-CARE FACILITIES. (a) In this sectiont
"child-care facility" has the meaninq assiqned by Section 42.002t
Human Resources Code.
(b) A person is entitled to an exemption from taxation of:
(1) the real property the person owns and operates as a
child-care facility that qualifies as provided by Subsection
and the tanqible personal property the person owns and uses in
connection with the operation of the child-care facility if:
!A) except as provided by Subsection (c)t the
real property and tangible personal property a~e used exclusively
for providinq developmental and educational services for children
attending the facility; and
(B) the real property and tanqible personal
property are reasonably necessary for the operation of the
child-care facility; and
(2) the real property the person owns consistinq of:
(A) an incomplete improvement that is under
active construction or other physical preparation and that is
designed and intended to be used as a child-care facility that
qualifies as provided by Subsection {d); and
{B) the land on which the incomplete improvement
is located that will be reasonably necessary for the use of the
improvement as a child-care facility that qualifies as provided by
Subsection (d).
(c) Use of exempt property for functions other than
providing developmental and educational services for children
attendinq the child-care facility located on the property does not
result in the loss of an exemption authorized by this section if
those other functions are incidental to the use of the property for
providinq those services to those children and benefit: (1) those children; or
(2) the staff and faculty of the facility.
Id) To qualify as a child-care facility for the purposes of
this section, an entityt whether operated by an individual, as a
corporationt or as an associationt must:
(1) meet the Texas Risinq Star Provider criteria
described by 40 T.A.C. Section 809.15(b); or
(2) be accredited by a nationally recognized
accreditinq orqanization for child-care or early childhood
education facilities or proqrams approved by the Texas Workforce
Commission and the Department of Protective and Requlator¥ Services
file://D:~Documents%20and%20Settings~DGP alumb~Local%20Settings\Temp\79(R)%201-I... 2/9/2005
79(R) HB 483 - Introduced version - Bill Text Page 2 of 2
as applyinq criteria for accreditation adequate to ensure the
quality of an accredited facility or proqramI such as the National
Association for the Education of Younq Children or the National
Early Childhood Program Accreditation Commission.
(e) Property is not disqualified from receivinq an
exemption under this section if a portion of the property is used
for functions other than those described by Subsections (b) and
{c). However, the exemption does not apply to the value of the
portion of the property that is used for those other functions.
(f) A property may not be exempted under Subsection (b) (2)
for more than three years. For purposes of Subsection (b) (2), an
incomplete improvement is under physical preparation if the
child-care facility has:
(1) enqaqed in architectural or enqineerinq work, soil
testinqt land clearinq activities, or site improvement work
necessary for construction of the improvement; or
(2) conducted an environmental or land use study
relatinq to construction of the improvement.
SECTION 2. Section 11.43(c), Tax Code, is amended to read as
follows:
(c) An exemption provided by Section 11.13, 11.17, 11.18,
11.182, 11.183, 11.19, 11.20, 11.21, 11.22~ 11.23(h), (j), or
(j-l), 11.29, 11.30, [~] 11.31, or ll.3~t once allowed, need not be
claimed in subsequent years, and except as otherwise provided by
Subsection (e), the exemption applies to the property until it
changes ownership or the person's qualification for the exemption
changes. However, the chief appraiser may require a person allowed
one of the exemptions in a prior year to file a new application to
confirm the person's current qualification for the exemption by
delivering a written notice that a new application is required,
accompanied by an appropriate application form, to the person
previously allowed the exemption.
SECTION 3. This Act applies only to an ad valorem tax year
that begins on or after the effective date of this Act.
SECTION 4. This Act takes effect January 1, 2006.
file://D :kD o cuments%20and%20 S ettingslD GP alumbkLocal%20 S ettings\Temp\79 (R) %20H... 2/9/2005