The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09-30-1991 4 i. ,e r Iy s' AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL September 3, 1991 Work Session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, September 3, 1991, at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room of City Hall, 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: 5:15 P.M. Note: Any item listed on the Agenda for the Work Session may also be considered as part of the Agenda for the Regular Meeting. 1. Executive Session: A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17 l V.A,T.S. 1. Hold a discussion regarding in re: Flow. I 2. Consider filing litigation againr.t the State regarding redistricting. B. Real Estate Under Sec, 2(f), Arta 6252--17 "J V.A.T.S. I i ( C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under Sec. 2(g), Art 6252--17 V.A.T.S. 2. Receive an interim report from and hold a discussion } with the Stormwater Utility Committee. t 3. Receive a presentation, hold a discussion and give staff tentative direction regarding the proposed 1991-92 electric rate recommendations and related issues. 4. Receive a presentation, hold a discussion and give staff tentative direction regarding proposed 1991-92 ! solid waste rate change recommendations and related 's issues. 5. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff tentative direction regarding the 1991-92 water/wastewater rate study and related issues. Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, September 3, 1991, at 7:00 p.m, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 215 E. M,,Kinney, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: 7:00 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance r { City of Denton City Council Agenda September 3, 1991 Page 2 2. Consider approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of July 23 and July 30, 1.991. 3. Citizen Reports A. Receive a citizen report from J Dodd rardinr the sign ordinance and a workable compromise. B. Receive a citizen report from Dr. Rosemary ' Killiam regard)ng Loop 288 and the neighborhood situation. 4. Consider a request from Mo Joiner, representing Denton Youth Football, request).ng a release from their past due obligations for 1990, c:rluced fees for 1991 and the institution of a 1)0' nr,L.t schedule for the remaining fees for 1991. 5. Public Hearings A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance amending the bo+indaries of the } Oak/Hickory Historic District to excllzde three t houses on property located at 604 W. H, =y, 602 W. Hickory and 109 Williams. (planning and zoning Commission, at its July 25, 1991 meeting, recommended denial. 4-3 Vote) f' 6, Consent Agenda Each of these items is recommended by the Staff and ! approval thereof trill be strictly on the basis of the Staff i recommendations. Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the City Manager or his designee to implement each item in accordance with the Staff recommendations. Listed below are bids and purchase orders to be f approved for payment under the Ordinance section of the agenda. Detailed backup information is attached to the i ordinances (Agenda item 7.A). This listing is provided on the Consent Agenda to allow Council Members to discuss any item prior to approval of the ordinance. A. Bids and Purchase orders: 11 Bid #1266 - Cleaning of Boiler Electric Production 2, Bid #1272 - Distribution Transformer 3. Bid #1275 Infrared Imaging System 4, Bid #1278 Tire Cutter i rl tS City of Denton City Council Agenda September 3. 1991 Page 3 7. Ordinances A. consider adoption of an ordinance accepting a contract for the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies or services. (6.A.1. - Bid #1266, 6.A.2. - Bid #1272, 6.A.3. Bid #1275, 6.A.4. - Bid #1278) B. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract between the city of Denton and J. Robert McLain relating to consulting services. (The Public Utilities Board recommends approval.) C. Consider adoption of an ordinance retaining the lawfirm of Lloyd, Gosselink, Fowler, Blevins and Mathews, P.C. to represent the City of Denton in connection with the City's contract for water service to the Upper Trinity Regional Water District. (The Public Utilities Board recommends ; approval,) 8. Resolutions A. Consider approval of a resolution to adopting Cable Television Public Access Rules. (The Cable Television Advisory Board recommends approval,) B. consider approval of a revolution leasing parking spaces located on the Williams Trade Square. i C. Consider approval of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement between the City of DeW.on and the cities of Bridgeport, Bryan, Denton, Garland and Greenville, Texas for the sale and purchase of wholesale electric service. (The Public Utilities Board recommends approval.) ` D. consider approval of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement between the Texas Municiapal Power Agency and the cities of Denton, Bryan, Garland and Greenville. (The Public Utilities Board recommends app i a • i City of Denton City Council Agenda September 3, 1991 Page 4 9, Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. A. Consider and discuss possible road projects for the County bond issue and give staff direction. 10. Official Action on Executive Session Items: A. Legal Matters B. Real Estate C. Personnel D. Board Appointments f 11. New Business: i This item provides a section for Council Members to suggest items for future agendas. f 12, Executive Session: 1 A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art, 6252-17 V.A.T.S. I B. Real Estate Under Sec. 2(f), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S. [ j C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under Sec, 2(g), Art 6252-17 V.A.T.S. i NOTE: Following the conclusion of the Regular Session, the City Council will reconvened in the Civil Defense Room at which time the following item will be considered: t 1. Hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding budget issues for the 1991-92 fiscal year, NOTE: THE CITY COUNCLL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO nXECUTIVE SESSION AT ANY TIME REGARDING ANY ITEM FOR WHICH IT IS LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE, i C E R T I F I C A T E I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of Denton, Texas, on the day of 1991 at o'clock (a.m,) (P.M.)~ CITY SECRETARY E 3434C i f f e: 1. v CITY i COUNCII 1 G , t f 1 i i IM p o °00 000 ~ N~ ooo~ t o~ o v0c~'°' °°00°oocacGOOO~°°° ;r t , ii t! September 3, 1991 WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE. CITY COUNCIL FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager RE: Proposed Storm Water Utility ' j Mr, Bob Coplen, Chairman of the Storm Water Advisory i Comrittee, will be in attendance at the Council meeting to present an update, Following is a summary of activities to date, , f SUMMARY { A report was presented to the Public Utilities Board on this advisory committee and its activities on August 14, t 1991. No action was requested or taken by the Board at that time. The Storm Water Utility Advisory Committee did i advise that they will continue to pursue the creation of a drainage utility with the caveat that the current funding method not be precluded, J The Storm Water Utility Committee felt their charge was two 1 fold. Phase I was to determine if the city should continue II to fund-tTie current drainage system operation through the j General Government Fund or establish a utility and collect the revenues by assessing user fees. Phase II was to establish 2relimina14 policy guidelines` w`Ti ch would be attached to the final recommendation if the Committee felt that the city should pursue the Ij establishment of a storm water utility, The Committee has established the following preliminary policy decisions: 1, Residential Properties Charged as single family units Fee assessed to the occupant. If all the utilities are paid by the owner or the property i is vacant, the owner will be assessed the fee. 1 s3 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ITEM PAGE 2 Proposes Storm Water Utility 2, Mobile Homes Charged as single family unit Fee assessed to the occupant, unless all the utilities are paid by the owner, then the owner will be assessed the fee, The owner will be assessed fees on only those lots which are occupied by a mobile home. 3. Apartments/Multi-Family 1 - The fee for each complex will be established by E~ the amount of impervious acreage and the number of units in the complex and will be assessed on a case by case basis. y - Fee assessed to the occupant, unless all 1 utilities are paid by the owner. - If the vacancy rate rises above a certain f4 percentage (to be determined during a later meeting) then the owner will be responsible for, a percentage (to be determined at a later meeting) of those vacancies. E BACKGROUND on October 17, 1990, the Public Utilities Board recommended to the City Council that they create a temporary Storm I Water Utility Advisory Committee to consider the feasibility of establishing a drainage utility. On ' December 18, 1990, the City Council passed a resolution 1 establishing a Blue Ribbon Committee to formulate and City recommendations te Public the need Utilities creatinyBoard a storm the provide water utility. the individuals to the Storm2WaterouUtility AdviseorytCommitteeing Name Representing Bob Cop en, Chairmn Chamber of7ommerce Roland Laney Public Utilities Board Dr. John Thompson Public Utilities Board skip Beard Local Business Mark Hannah, Jr, Local Business Mel Willis Industry fi ~l CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ITEM PAGE 3 Proposed Storm Water Utility I (Storm water Utility Advisory Committee Mbrs- Contd) Roy Appleton, III Planning & Zoning ,lomm. Dorothy Adkins League of Women Voters Dr. Ted Coe Univ, of North Texas Dr. Vera Gershner Texas Woman's UniV, Gloria Stephens DISD George Gibson Residential Interests Dr. Don Michel Residential Interests Dr. Chas, Wahlert Residential Interests Residential Interests Dr. Don Smith R, E. (Bob) Nelson Utility Department Karen Feshari Planning Department Bob Tickner Parks/Recreation Dept, j Bill Angelo Community Serv. Dept. Due to various conflicts, Dr. Wahlert, Gloria Stephens and Ted Ooe resigned. The new appointments were made as follows: t Roger Wright DISD Ralph Morrison Residential Interests Ray McFarlane Univ, of North Texas The Committee has met five times: July 10, 1991 August 09, 1991 f July Of 1991 August 23, 1991 1 July 24, 1991 The Storm Water Utility Advisory Committee did not feel they could make a final recommendation to the Public Utilities Board on the feasibility of establishing a drai,nge utility until they were provided with relatively accurate cost figures for the various classes of rate payers, IRes tfully ~ submitted L ii I a r rr e-LI- City Manager pare erv. Coor . M. S a Nat ToTop'Ten, a rman Storm Water Utility Adv. Comm. 7019U:1-3 t 1 J+~S CITY of DENTON, TEXAS 216 E. McKlnney / Denton, TX 76201 /Phone (817) 588.8230 OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES MEMORANDUM DATE: August 30, 1991 } TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THRU: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager FROM: R.E. Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities RE: Electric Budget and Rate Issues The main items that the staff 'stilly needs 'direction from the 1 Council regarding the Electric budget are: 1. Rate decrease of 3% by reducing the Energy Cost Adjustment frnm 1.9 cents per KWH to 1.7 cents per KWH. 2. Vacant Positions: presently the Department has 13 positions vacant that represent $379,400 in fisc&1 1992. Please refer to Exhibit I Memo of August 22, 1991. Respect, lly submitted, I _ Lloyd V. Harrell, City Hager Prepared by: R.E. Nelson, Executive Director Department of Utilities Exhibit I: Memo of August 22, 1991 111992 Budget Issues" MEMOWTRW:720:01-')lAUG-PG 4 i DEDICATED TO QUALITY SERVICE t =s • n .i# ~ s ITEM 114 ITYof DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 / TELEPHONE (817) $66.81 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 22, 1991 E r TO: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager FROM: R,E. Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities RE:______2992-BUDGET-ISSUES------------ The following is in response to the Council's--questions regarding the Utility budget, plus information on the Utility Board action on rates. 1. Fainting of the 'High School' Water Tower The Council had recommended that the High School Water Tower be painted a single color which could reduce the painting cost from $200,000 to $170,000. The Utility Board, in their work on the water rates; recommended delaying the painting of the water tower to 19934 They further recommended that $100,000 be sPh aside in 1992 in a special maintenance fund to help pay for the painting of this tank in 1993. The delay in painting this tank is an engineering judgement call, and a one year delay is not anticipated to result in any significant deterioration of J the tank. The decision to change from a multi-colored tank to a single color tank can, therefore, be postponed until the 1993 budgets however, we expect some community comment on this, since this multiple color scheme received significant community input when it was initiated in the late 1960's. 2. Vacant Positions in the Electric Department. j The total vacant positions in the Electric Department at ` this time are 13. Listed below are the positions that were vacant in April, when the budget was prepared and which have been filled since that time, The tots! cost of those 13 vacant positions to the 1992 Electric Department budget is $379,027. Y' ,rtd ~kl E ~y I 0250 Utility Administration- Electric Administrative Services Coordinator filled Administrative Assistant Vacant 0251 Electric Production Results Engineer filled Operations Supervisor Vacant $50,37; Electronic Technician filled Relief Operator In process Auxiliary Operator (2) In process Maintenance Worker (1/2 time) vacant $10,755 0252 Electric Distribution Lead Electrician vacant 370478 Senior Engineering Aide vacant 29,653 Electrician Apprentice vacant 127,340 I Heavy Equip. Operator (5 positions) vacant 142,280 Lineman Apprentice II Lineman Apprentice 1 (2) filled filled 025; Electric Metering i Meter Reader vacant $22,429 0256 Electric Engineering Engineering Associate iI vacant $41,569 0257 Energy Management 'i60f&0a Intern (3-1/2 time) filled TOTAL BUDGETED POSITIONS UNFILLED AT THIS TIME- 13ssssrasrrssro TOTAL BUDGETED COST OF UNFILLED POSITIONS- $379,027 ssrsrrsrrrarssr Some of these 13 open positions need to be filled in 1992 in order to perform certain mandated or requested functions. For example, the Public Utility Board has requested a more extensive monthly reporting format, one which will provide better productivity reports for management and board review, In order to accomplish this, it is necessary to fill the Administrative Assistant position in Utility Administration. We do not anticipate filling the Electric Engineering Associate position immediately, but it is important for proper career development of lower level engineering personnel to have this position available, so that these people Nava career opportunities here at Denton, rather than losing qualified employees to higher s paying utility companies in Dallas and Denton. If and when it is determined that one of the lower level engineers is qualified to fill this position, their position would remain open for the remainder of the budget year, PAGE 2 i f~ I ` FI R v f; It is also very advantageous to have an open position available to , hire qualified persons that enter the Denton job market from time to time. For example, because we have had positions available, Denton has been able to hire some very good personnel in the Electric Department whow we might not have been able to hire otherwise. These vacant positions provide benefits of flexibility, but require a division manager to exercise good management responsibility, and not put personnel on staff unless they can be productively utilized. Prudent business judgement is exercised at all times, and we make it a practice to constantly examine our workload and not fill positions if there is not a good benefit/cent ratio result from filling a position, as evidenced by the fact that the utility has kept these positions open for quite some time . For example, we do not plan to fill the Electric Distribution positions or meter reader position and possibly two or three positions in the Power Plant unless development increases in Denton, We have demonstrated this managerial responsibility in the past and pledge to continue so in the future. 3. Long Range Impn,,,ts Resulting from Budget Reductions (or rate reductions). The major long range impacts of budget cuts are: a) Electric; Eliminating the present vacant positions is discussed above, b) Water: Redacin ca ital expenditures in re lacement of miscellaneous water lines put: t We system further beh n n t 1111 program o' rep ac ng`deteriorated and undersized water lines, Most of p the lines being replaced are old cast iron pipes that have corroded and have required numerous patches. Each time one of these lines breaks, water causes damage to the street subsurface by flowing under the pavement in all directions from the break, This causes the asphalt to be weakened and later break down. Also, some of these lines targeted for replacement are undersized and will nom provide sufficient volumes for fire fighting purposes, We presently are not spending enough in this category to even keep up with the depreciation expense being charged, The lower water rates further delays the repayment of the debt to the Electr c Department, The city faces the risk of electric customers seriously questioning the use of their rates to pay for water and wastewater expenses► especially since no interest is being paid on these borrowed funds, (See Lee Allison's attached memo) Wastewater: The ma or risk in the budget cuts and an rate reduction is the delay in completing Texas water Commission an EPA mandated improvements to meet effluent water quality standards, similar concerns exist in the wastewater Wreak as in the water area regarding replacement of deteriorated sewer PAGE 3 i d--- not kee in u r epreciat .on expense acrd getting further in p debt t to fund Electr i c Department each year. (See Howard Martin's memo attached) the 4. Budget Implications of Upper Trinity Regional Water District. The immediate budget implication relating to the UTRWD is the loss: i n 1992 of the anticipated $400,000 that would have been received from Denton Twouldf hrav4e9% continued ong with ithe Joint Ownership concept. This represents an approximate 3,58 increase in water rates for 1992. Preliminary calculat%ons indicate that if Denton sells wholesale water to the UTRWD, Denton's rates could be 59 lower than if Denton does not provide such wholesale service, Also, if Denton sells the UTRWD 498 of the Ray Roberts Plant, Denton's rates could be 10 to 118 lower than if Denton does not sell part of the plant and does not sell wholesale water. I However, if Denton does not sell wholesale or part of the plant, it might be possible to put off plant startup date to 1996 vs the present planned 1995, depending, of course, on the growth of Denton, this delays $1,000,000 of debt service by one year which will rep.esent about a 7% rate increase one year later than if Denton entered into a joint ownership or a wholesale contract with k the Upper Trinity Regional Water District. Board Action on Rates The Public Utilities Board took the following action at their meeting on Thursday, August 22, 1991 relating to rates. Electric: Recommended to reduce the Energy Cost Ad ustment from 1.94/KWH to 1,747K WH. i This results in a 39 or approximately $1,550,000 f. reduction. The Board also requested that the revenues and expenses be reviewed after the first quarter of fiscal 1992 to determine if a further reduction or rebate might be possible, This recommendation was based on the fact that there is some uncertainty about the return of the $2,000,000 of surplus earnings at TMPA, and future cost of natural gas. The natural gas fuel budget was based on an estimate that gas would cost $1.99 per million ETU (mmbtu). If gas continues to stay down at the present $1.35 to $1.65 range, another .1 to .1~%KWH reduction reduction repin the ECA would e resents $780 10 00 in revenues possible. A PAGE 4 r up with funding the uepreciation expense and getting further in debt Department n each p nse and getting further in debt year, (see Howard Martin's memo attached) c 4. Budget rmplications of Upper Trinity Regional Water District, The immediate budget implication relating to the UTRWD is the loss in 1992 of the anticipated $400,000 that would have been received from UTRWD for 498 of the engi,;~orjDenton would have continued onwith the Joiint Ownership concept. This represents an approximate 3,58 increase in water rates for 1992, Preliminary calculations indicate that if Denton sells wholesale water to the UTRWD, Denton's rates could be 5% lower than Dento,i does not provide such wholesale service. Also if sells the UTRWD 498 of the Ray Roberts t to Denton ti , if be 10 to 1 12 lower than if Denton does not sell apart s of rate could and does not sell wholesale water. plant however, if Denton does not sell wholesale or part of the j it might be possible to put off plant, present planned 1995, depending, startup date to 1996 vs the j Denton, This Bela 5 9~ of course, on the growth of will represent about $a,0780.0e a of increase ecneee by one year which Denton entered into a joint ownership or a wholesear at er tn alelcontractawith the Upper Trinity Regional Water District, Board Action on [fates The Public Utilities Board took the following action at their meeting on Thursday, August 22, 1991 relating to rates, Ele`tria; Recommended to reduce the Ener 1.9¢/KWH to 1,7 KWH, Cost Ad ustment from This results in a 38 or approximately reduction, The Board also requested that the lrevenues and expenses be reviewed after the first quarter of fiscal 1992 to determine if a further reduction or rebate might be possible. This recommendation was based i on the fact that there is some uncertainty about the return of the $21000,000 of surplus earnings at TMPA, and future cost of natural gas. The natural gas Fuel budget was based on an estimate that gas would cost $1,99 per million BTU (mmbtu), if down at the gee continues to stay present $1,35 to $1.65 range, another ,l to reduction would in the ECA ,lj'/KWH reductionrepresents $780,000In revenuesfule, P. PAGE 4 x 1 cite Water Department, this Possible any outstanding debt reduction would be affected, possible rebate and/or Water: The Public Utility Board recommended a 108 increase in ` the water rates, but offered the option to the council ` that the rates could be set only at a 58 or 7,58 increase if the Council chooses to cut the repayment of Water Department debt to the Electric Department by $500,000 or $250,000 respectively, The Board noted that the action to discontinue consideration of joint ownership in the Ray Roberts water Plant eliminates $400,000 of 1992 anticipated revenue to the Department and reptesents a 3,58 increase in water rates, Wastewater: The Public Utility Board recommended a 158 rate increase in the wastewater rates and a change in the methodology of calculating wastewater flows. The new methodology would use the four winter months of December, January, February and March as the basis, the Utility to discard ~ 1 the highest month's usage and use the average of the remaining three months as the wastewater volumes f remainin months or the ~ 9 of the year. This methodology will reduce revenues by $1940000, The Board offered that the rate increase could be held down, to an 11,5% increase if the Council chooses to continue wilt, the present methodology of calculating wastewater volumes, which uses the average of the three winter months of December, January and February. In either met odolo of 30,000 gallons per month exists. gyp a ceiling Solid Waste: The Public Utility Board recommended no increase in residential or commercial solid waste rates, but did recommend a 15% increase in the landfill tipping fee to all non-city owned vehicles. This increase would raise the rate from $3/CY to $3,45/CY. E The recommendation to not raise residential and commercial rates is based on Denton taking over all commercial customers in February. If this does not happen residential rates could increase rom t e { resent 9.95/Month to 11 ar 11.25 month. ! Respectfully submitted, R.E a son, xecu verector of Utilities Attachment I: Lee Allison Memo II: Howard Martin Memo 7018U:-1-5 gcr PAGE 5 1 ~ ~a: • Y i 1 f , F.Y. 1992 WATER BUDGET Rate % Proposed Increase Budget Docrease Re uired 1, Fiscal Year 1992 Water Budget 2, loss of U $12,583,459 11.77% pper Trinity Revenue 400,000 3. Return on investment Increase (Hydros) 7,836 F $13,001,295 F.Y. 1992 WATER BUDGET OPTIONS t5.4t;% 1. Shift: Economic Development Flan Lines CH to BF. i $250,000 $250,000 I a. increase: Debt Payment due to Increased Debt 2. Eliminate: Proposed supervisor ($18,750) 13.41% E y position at WTP $35,700 3. Reduce: Painting High School Water Tower. $35,700 - 13.0996 rn s200,000 $100,000. E 4. Postpone: Demolition of 2 Wells 12,2096 $80,000 $90,000 5. Reduce: Misc. Waterline Replacement 11,000 $100 11.61 % 6. Reduce: Replace Waterlines Street Program $2,000-=- 1051 % $216,000 $56,000----_ 10,03% ar 7. Reduce: Repayment to Electric. 8. Reduce; Rea an $500,000 $250,000 y, t to % Rep a Electric 3 ~ $500,000 $500,000 6.69% Bunn`„ c 1 1 1 1 DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO: R.E. Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities FROM: Lee K. Allison, Director of Water Engineering and Operations DATE: August 22, 1991 SUEU: Impact on Operations of No Increase in Water Rates Ei .._Mw.. Y - ICI A zero percent increase in water rates would only serve to compound the problems which have been accumulating for some time. These problems are aggravated by not obtaining the income anticipated with the UTRWD joint development contract. No progress has been made toward alleviating losses due to depreciation. This inhibits our ability to replace deteriorated mains, obtain a favorable bond interest f rate, build a reserve account or accommodate a special need such as attracting a new industry. The water Department must again borrow funds from the Electric Department to cover losses (including depreciation). These losses have increased by one (1) million dollars per year due to the capitalization of water rights in Lake Ray Roberts, i i { i . j No rate increase would also inhibit our efforts to minimize maintenance cost by replacing lines requiring an inordinate amount of repair. Maintenance/repair cost will continue to escalate as needed replacements are postponed. This will present a definite strain on future budgets as we try to continue maintenance, catch up with replacement, attract industry and accommodate growth in any given future budget year, This same phenomenon is true for providing additional ' S capacity necessitated by growth. Denton is still experiencing pressure problems in the UNT, Flow, and McKenna areas due to the growth which occurred in 1985/1986 without the associated system capacity increases. Also, we would not be able to satisfactorily respond to special customer request. Time, equipment and money are necessary to investigate unusual situations such as the recent analysis of odor problems in the Aobinwood area+ i in short, the Water Department is moving toward and locking in a future position of being reactive and playing catch up instead of being proactive and leading growth, an observer of economic development instead of a star attraction LKAilb 5LA0017.DOC 1 1 1~ r M E M O R A N D U M TO: Bob Nelson, Executive Director Department of Public Utilities FROM., Howard Martin, Director Department of Environmental Operations DATE: 8-23-91 SUBJ: Rate Increase for the Wastewater The cost of service study for FY 92 identified $7,009,378 the Wastewater Department. Projected revenues ofat3$6,107c705 are estimated at the current rates, resulting in a net loss of $901,673. The policy decision to change the methodology by which the residential wastewater discharge is determined will add an additional revenue deficit of approximately $194,000 for a total deparmental deficit of $1,095,673 for the FY92 with no rate increase. j If the Wastewater Department is to maintain no rate increase for FY92, approximately $10095,673 must be eliminated from the proposed operating budget and capital improvement Ilan. Several senerios are possible but all senerios will adversely affect the wastewater j operations ability to comply with state and federal regulations and in some cases, drastically limit the quality of services to the customer, if the FY92 departmental expenditures were held to the same level as the FY91 budget, in an effort to maintain a reasonable level of service to the customer, budget reductions amount to $248,159. Substantial reductions would still be Aoquired in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), Currently, the proposed FY92 capital j improvements are funded from both current revenues and bond funds, Capital improvements funded from current revenue total $664,000. Capital improvements funded from bond funds total $41803,000. By eliminating all capital improvement projects, both bond funds and current revenue, the wastewater department could reduce expenses by approximately $851,725 ($6641000 from current revenue, $187,725 from bond fund debt service). By reducing the proposed operating budget by 6.8 1 ($248,159) and eliminating all capital project, the department could reduce expenses by approximately $1,099,884 and maintain a 01 rate increase. Maintaining the annual wastewater operating budget at the FY91 expenditure level will affect the department's ability to provide the same level of service to the customer. Areas that would be adversely affected includes a possible decrease in available manpower, reduced materials and equipment inventory, an increase in the time required to repair problems, decreased assistance to other departments in the city (drainage, wastewater treatment, electric deepiartmcleent, park disrecreation, continuation service troubleshooting nservices } ' r 1 fi ' (7 to citizens experiencing problems with their service line, discontinuation of storm drain flushing activities and discontinuation of the sharing of equipment and associated maintenance costs. In addition, reduced budget funding will not provide the additional positions in the Environmental Services Division to comply with the pretreatment program requirements. The Administrative order issued by the EPA specifically addressed the shortage of manpower to effectively accomplish program goals and objectives, The two additional pretreatment program inspector positions were part of the Denton response to tha EPA's directives. The projected revenues will not support the capital improvement needed in FY92. Many of the proposed capital improvements are required for regulatory compliance. The Wastewater Treatment Plant capital improvements, which amounts to 75.3 t of the total wastewater bond fund expenditures, are a result of the new state and federal discharge permit requirements. New permit limitations require additional facilities to provide for nitrification, dechlorination, flow equilization and additional sludge conditioning and treatment. j Capital Improvement Projects in the Field Services area provide for the maintenance of collection system integrity and public health, As the regulatory agencies continue to increase surveillance and enforcement activities on illegal discharges, it is imperative that municipalities maintain system integrity to prevent possible overflow and wastewater discharges to the environment. Capital program such as infiltration/inflow correction are important in reducing unnecessary flows at the treatment plant, requiring expansions before actually needed. A substancial amount of funding in the Field Services capital improvement program support economic development, extending lines and services to new industrial and I commercial customers. In summary, no rate increase in the wastewater department would i require substancial reductions in the annual operating budget and capital improvement programs. Wastewater system integrity and continued regulator compliance would not be possible without the proposed capital improvements, ; i FILE:Cs\WF'51\CCAGENAA\ZEAO VC f t September 31 1991 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ITEM TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER A REDUCTION OF THE ENERGY COST ADJUSTMENT (ECA) FROM 1.9 CENTS TO 1.7 CENTS/KWH. j j RECOMMENDATION j The Public Utilities Board, at their meeting of August 22, 1991, recommended a reduction of the Energy Cost Adjustment (ECA) from 1.9 cents to 1.7 cents/KWH. SUMMARY/BACKGROUND. Due to the lower natural gas prices, the coat of Denton's fuel j j plus energy purchased from TMPP members, the average cost of energy is lower than the present 1.9 cents per KWH being charged in the Energy Cost Adjustment (ECA) portion of Denton's j electric rate. Denton is estimated to have net energy to they system requirements of 830,895,000 KWH for 1992 which is estimated to cost approximately $13,900,000 which is equal to 1.673 cents per KWH. f Since the purpose of the ECA portion of the rate is to charge only for the actual variable cost of energy, the Public Utility Board and staff recommend that the ECA be reduced from 1.9 cents per KWH to 1.7 cents per KWH. The 1992 budget was prepared in April with an estimated natural gas price of $1.99 per million BTU (mmbtu). Since then, natural gas prices have continued to decline and some natural gas industry representatives have indicated that natural gas prices may be in the $1.50 to $1.65/mmbtu range throughout 1992. Since approximately 35% of Denton's electrical energy is generated from natural gas,and there is the prospect of continued lower gas prices than anticipated at budget preparation time, it may be possible to lower the ECA again later in the fiscal year. The staff will continue to monitor this cost and present this to the PUB and Council on a quarterly basis. i YJ 1 [ 5 it f It might be noted that one other factor in being able to lower the ECA is the fact that it is estimated that the two hydroelectric units will generate approximately 20,000,000 KWHs in 1992 and there is no fuel cost associated with the generation of this electricity. i PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTEDI City of Denton Municipal Utilities, and all electric customers. FISCAL IMPACTt The 0.2 cents/KWH will reduce the total cost of electric service approximately $1,5720000 to the City of Denton electric customers. yespe fully submitted, Lloy Harrell City Manager Prepared/Approved by: R.E. Nelson, Executive Director Department of Utilities i Exhibit It Revised Pro forma i Pro forma 8/7/91 Minutes PUB Meeting of 8/22/91 j RATEECA.60 i i i F ' f< I SCHEDULE ECA ENERGY COST ADJUSTMENT ENERGY COST ADJUSTMENT All monthly KWH charges shall be increased or decreased by an amount equal to "x" cents per KWH, to be known as the energy cost adjustment (EGA), The EGA snaII be computed in the months of April and October to be applied to the following periods of May through October and November through April respectively. The City shah in no case change the energy cost adjustment more than twice in either of the six (6) months periods. The ECA shall be calculated by the following formula: ,I ECA (Winter) Projected energy cost for winter months - - ro ec a sa es or w n er mont s ECA (Summer) = Projected energy cost for summer months roiec a sales or summer mon s The above formula results in Winter 1986/87 and Summer 1987 i EGA's as follows: I ECA (Winter) = 1.700/KWH ECA (Summer) = 1.7UE/KWH In the event that actual cumulative costs of fuel, variable costs of Texas Municipal Power Agency (TMPA) energy purchased energy (excluding TMNA's fixed charges) is greater than or less than the cumulative ECA revenues by $1,00U,UO during the fiscal year, the City may recompute E the Energy Cost Adjustment and re-establish an EGA that collects or returns such difference over the remaining I months of the fiscal year. Such change in ECA shall be t applied evenly to all remaining months' ECA. SECTION II. That if any section, Subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or appplication thereof to any person or circumstances is held #nvalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding sha11 not affect the vadiIity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have enacted such remaining portions despite an such invalidity. EX H I B I T *11 - - e j SECTION III. That the Schedule of Rates herein adopted shall be effective, charged and applied to the First regular billing cycle on or after October 1, 1989. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of 1989.- j CITY OF DENTONO TEXAS ATTEST: JENNIFER WWALTERS, CITY R CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF UENTUN, TEXAS BY: ~ I l I 7016U,2 i 4 kk . F1K .'F.}} 1y~1t ~ l~ 07-Jun-91 ELECTRIC SERVICE PROFORMA 16:06:30 X 1000) ACTUAL BUDGET EST FY FY FY FY FY 1990 1991 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1 Net Sales (MWH) 762,304 772,415 775,722 786,311 797,245 812,586 834,015 856,005 2 Rev cents/KWH 6,97 7.11 6.82 6.75 7.01 7.08 7.35 7.92 REVENUES 3 Residential $19,665 $20,897 $19,829 $19,836 $20,905 $21,515 $22,944 $25,385 4 Commercial 29,816 30,697 29,527 29,648 31,246 32,158 34,293 37,942 5 Government 3,024 2,759 2,989 3,019 3,182 3,275 3,492 3,864 6 St/Highway Light 411 352 351 344 349 356 365 375 7 0-0 Fees 181 143 184 188 191 195 200 205 8 Temporary Service 32 66 30 30 30 31 32 33 9 SUBTOTAL CUST REV $53,128 $54,914 $52,910 $53,065 $55,903 $57,530 $61,326 $67,804 ~ 10 Off Sys Sales 1,708 1,824 1,791 1,641 2,644 2,496 2,148 3,376 11 Wholesale Capacity 1,259 947 1,199 2,046 2,321 2,331 21235 2,190 12 Other El Charges 13 49 49 15 15 15 15 15 13 TMPA Coverage Ret 6,286 5,753 5,625 5,581 5,512 5,345 5,205 5,016 14 TMPA Surplus 0 0 0 2,045 0 0 0 0 15 Reconnect Fees 69 31 54 50 51 52 53 54 82 25 42 38 56 76 16 Aid in Construction 0 47 , 17 Cust Connect Fees 194 205 148 200 204 209 215 221 19 Meter Tampering 4 12 6 5 5 5 5 5 20 Service Center Rent 226 224 224 235 247 259 272 286 21 Sale of Scrap 0 4 Q 0 0 0 0 0 22 Misc Income 157 31 31 31 32 33 34 35 23 Interest (Oper) 1,503 878 878 1,125 1,148 1,171 1,194 1,218 24 Interest (Non-op) 157 228 302 16 27 34 21 17 i 25 TOTAL REVENUES $64,706 $65,147 $62,939 $66,080 $68,121 $69,502 $72,778 $80, 02 EXPENDITURES 26 Payroll $4,344 $5,534 $4,862 $5,630 $6,080 $6,506 $6,961 $7,:t8 27 Supplies 390 433 390 502 522 543 565 8 4 28 Maintenance 1,112 1,934 1,150 2,151 2,259 2,372 21491 2,616 ! 488 909 670 10061 1,114 11170 1,229 1,290 29 Services 30 Ins 6 Sundry 518 465 352 529 555 583 612 643 31 Bad Debt 110 490 330 341 360 370 395 437 32 Admin Transfers 1,802 1,623 1,675 1,677 1,744 1,814 19887 1,962 SUBTOT O&M -$8=764 $11388 -$9,429 $11,891 $12634 $13,358 $14140 $14,984 33 Purchase Pow h Fuel 42,621 45,491 43,495 44,264 46,690 47,454 48,685 53,212 34 NET OPER REVENUES $13,321 $8,268 $10,015 $7,499 $8,033 $7,459 $5,426 $8,218 CAP AND OTHER NON OPER EXPENSES 35 Fixed Assets $1,206 $1,441 $1,454 $1,681 $11916 $1,636 $1,531 $1,755 36 Debt Service 3,967 3,911 3,911 4,191 4,440 4,810 5,790 6,723 37 Other/E• A Reduction 246 400 275 275 275 275 215 275 38 Ret On Inv Trans 1,940 11968 2,043 2,128 20341 2,575 20833 3,116 39 [no in work Cap 0 125 125 125 350 201 468 799 40 W/WW Revenue Return 0 °111 -100 -500 -611 -1000 -1000 -1000 41 TOT NON OPER EXP $7,359 $7,734 $7,708 $1,900 $8,711 $8,497 $9,697 $11,666 42 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 58,144 64,613 60,632 64,055 68,Q35 69,309 72,722 79,864 43 NET GAIN/LO$$(25-41 $5,962 $534 $2,307 $2,025 - $86 $193 $56 -$438 AMC T- _ t Nui l+;r r1 l1 I 1 C~rls.VGt~! 1 ! MINUTES PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD August 22, 1991 2. CONSIDER DECREASING ENERGY COST ADJUSTMENT FROM 1.9 CENTS PER HUH TO 1.7 CENTS PER HUH. Nelson reviewed this item indicating that revenues are such that this decrease in electric rates can be made. He mentioned { that this change will result in decreased revenues of $1.5 million to the city. Nelson commented briefly on the question of whether TMPA will be rebating back to the city $750,000 or j the $2 million he feels is owed. He advised that a meeting will be taking place next Wednesday regarding this issue between the City Managers and Utility Directors. Laney reminded the Board of the TMPA Annual Meeting on September 12, 1991. He asked if this item will be discussed and Nelson replied affirmative. Thompson requested all members of the Board go to Bryan on the 12th for these discussions. j Nelson stated that it is required that the ECA be reviewed at least annually and dependent upon revenues, an adjustment may be made. Actions Frady made a motion to approve the lowering of the Energy Cost Adjustment from 1.9 cents per KWH to 1.7 cents per KWH. Second by Laney. All ayes, no nays, motion carried. j { 3 I 1{ a - E { x.. i ! i r S 1 'R'K?1!:YY A Y ie MIAMC J ~s t 1,4 I i I CITY Of DENTON, TEXAS 216 E. MoKlnney / Denton, TX 76201 / Phone (817) 566.8230 OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF UTIUTIES i MEMORANDUM f DATE; August 30, 1991 I TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM; R.E. Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities t THRUt Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager f REt Solid Waste Budget The main items that the staff still needs direction from the Council regarding the Solid Waste budget arel 1. Increase in landfill rates from $3/CY to $3.45/CY. I, 2. Citywide curbside recycling program. This program could cost t in excess of $1/month per residential customer. i Respectfully, i to d Harrell, City anager Prepared by: R.E. Nelson, Executive Director I Department of Utilities i MEMOWTRW1720tO1-91AU0-pg 3 i f i 3 (I DEDICATED TO QUALITY SERVICE i i t;lt; I September 3,1991 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ITEM TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Lloyd V. Harrel]., City Manager , SUBJECT DISCUSS ESTABLISHING RATES FOR THE USE OF THE CITY'S SANITARY LANDFILL SITE za rw RECOMMENDATIONS The Public Utility Board, at their meeting of August 22, 1991, recommended to the City Council approval of increasing the basic rate for the use of the City's Landfill from $3.00 per cubic yard to $3.45 per cubic yard. BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: f The proposed 1991-92 budget for the Solid Waste Division 1 includes a rate increase of 15% for contract and cash customers at the Landfill. The financial analysis indicated a neod for the increase in order for the Landfill operation to break even. PROGRAM/DEPARTMENT OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Landfill users other than the City Solid Waste Division will be affected by the increase. This includes contract customers such as Texas Waste Management, Texas Woman's University, Texas Highway Department, etc. Customers who pay in cash and bring in more than a pickup truck (without sideboards) will be affected along with other City divisions and departments. I FISCAL IMPACT: The rate increase is expected to generate approximately $260527.00 as follows: I 4N.S.u-a: i z 1 PUBLIC UTILITY BOARD AGENDA ITEM Page 2 Contract Customers 271633 CY $83,499 $96,024 Cash Customers 29,110 CY 87,330 100,429 other City Departments 21007 CY 6,021 6,924 $176,850 $2030377 Respec fully submitted, Lloyd V. Harrell, City Ngr. 1. prep ed b s I Bill Ange it Community Servi es Appro d by r R E. Nelson, 'Executive Director I Department of Utilities Exhibit: Proposed ordinance I 1 _ 1 I i i 4 7 V E 5 r ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON ESTABLISHING RATES FOR THE USE OF THE CITY'S SANITARY LANDFILL SITE AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, THE COUNCIL OF 7HE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS; SECTION i• That the charges for the use of the City's landfill site as authorizeaTy Section 12-5 of Article 1 of Chapter 12 of the Code of Ordinances shall hereafter be as follows: i A. INDIVIDUAL USERS Proposed Charge Per Charge Per F Type of Vehicle Vehicle Per Load Vehicle Per load 1. Automobiles and station wagons, $ 3.00 $ 3.00 pickup trucks less than one-half ton. 2. Motor vehicles with a carrying $ 10.00 $ 10.00 load capacity of 2 cubic yards less than 5 cubic yards such as one-half ton pickups. 3. Pickup trucks with side boards $ 30.00 $ 34,50 and all other vehicles with a carrying capacity in excess of 5 cubic yards but less than 10 cubic yards. 4. Vehicles with carrying capacity $ 45.00 $ 51.75 in excess of 10 cubic yards but less than 15 cubic: yards, 5. Vehicles with carrying capacity $ 60,00 $ 69.00 in excess of 15 cubic yards but less than 20 cubic yards. 6. Vehicles with carrying capacity $ 90.00 $103.50 in excess of 20 cubic yards but less than 30 cubic yards, 7. Vehicles with carrying capacity $120.00 $138,00 in excess of 30 cubic yards but less than 40 cubic yards. 8, Vehicles with carrying capacity $150,00 $172,50 of 40 cubic yards or more, f lw2/080791002/1 l i f j B. REGULAR CCMERCIAL USERS The City Manager may enter into contracts with private commercial collection service companies for regular use of the sanitary landfill site at the following rates: Residential and commercial garbage $3.45 cubic yard or $13.80/ton Rubbish (trash) $3.45 cubic yard or $13.80/ton Uncompacted residential and commercial garbage $3,45 cubic yard or $13.80/ton i All such contracts may contain conditions of operation, disposal and delivery as necessary for the efficient operation of the landfill site and the method of billing and collecting for such use, SECTION 11, That landfill permits issued by the City prior to the effec- tive ate o [ is ordinance may be redeemed for thei.r face value. The customer r must pay the difference between the current rate and the face value of the permit. The customer is not entitled to a refund if the face value of the permit exceeds the current rate, t SECTION III. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage Fig approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1991. ii ff MAYOR j ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY SECRE'T'ARY Il By: J f 1W2/080791002/2 N ' G tGGAA 1 i 3. CONSIDER ORDINANCE INCREASING LANDFILL TIPPING FEES FROM $3 PER CUBIC YARD TO $3.45 PER CUBIC YARD. Nelson reviewed this item stating that the proposed increase is consistent with previous financial reviews of this utility ' during the consideration for sale of the commercial portion of the solid waste department; a rate increase was indicated at ' that time. Nelson stated that it is his belief that if Denton goes to the exclusive franchise, no rate increase in either residential or commercial would be required for some time. Much discussion was held regarding preparations for taking over i the commercial solid waste department in the fall. Thompson I requested this item be placed on the next Board agenda and that the Board be involved in making plans for expenditures, etc. Harrell reiterated that the City Attorney's office has not waivered from their belief that Denton has t;.e authority to have an exclusive franchise and is on strong legal ground. He advised Garland is also taking this route, and outside counsel s for them has supported their right to do this. Action: j Laney made a motion to recommend to the City Council approval of the increase in landfill tipping fees from $3 per cubic yard to $3.45 per cubic yard. Second by Ridens. All ayes, no nays, motion carried. EXCGRP'i' FROM PUB 14MMS OF August 22, 1991 E 1 i I i ; {I s 3 i r ~ JS #`s J I CITY of DENTON, TEXAS 216 E. McKinney / Denton. TX 76201 /Phone (817)666-6230 OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES j i MEMORANDUM I DATE: August 30, 1991 TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THRU: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager R.E. Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities FROM: RE: Water/Wastewater Rates & Budgets The main items that the staff still needs direction from the Council regarding water and wastewater rates and budgets are: { 1, Level of rate increase in water- PUB has recommended a 10% increase, but options for a 5% or a 7.5% increase are available if Council chooses to delay the payment of outstanding debt to the Electric Department by either not funding any repayment in 992 (results 0 a 5% water rate increase) or by funding approximately $215 the repayment in 1992, resulting in a 7.5% water rate } increase. 3 i inverted" Pricing water volume blacks 2. Retaining the _present 1os E at 0-15,000 gallons, 15-30,000 gallons and over 30,Ooh gagree p d month and increasing each of these blocks by n er ~ upon rate increase of either IO$, 7.5$ or 5$. This is i contrast to adding additional blocks such as 0-10,000, 10- 20,000, 20-30,000 gallons, 30-40,000 gallons and over 40,000 gallons and increasing the rates on the larger blocks more than the basic 10%, 7.5% or 5% which would apply to the lowest f volume block of 0-10,000 gallons per month.The rate consultant recommended the latter option which he claimed better fits recovery of costs for the extra water plant capacity required j for water irrigation type customers. The PUB, however, recommended the former option. i i DEDICATED TO QUALITY SERVICE ~ j 3. Setting aside X500.000 from the 1992 budget in a mainte! +nce fund that could be added to additional funds in 1993 for painting of the "High school" water tank. 4. Level of rate increase in wastewater. The PUB recommended a 15% rate increase, but offered an option of an 11.5$ rate increase provided there was no change in the methodology of determining the wastewater volumes. 5. Change in Methodology for Calculating the Wastewater Volume Charge. The PUB recommended a change from the present use of the average of the three winter months the month- b ,oJan ary a and February to a methodology of using January, February and March and discard the highest Tmonth and his new use the average of the remaining three months. methodology results in a reduction of residential revenue of approximately $194,000. ` VLlde1*.jg lly submitted. Harrell, City anager Prepared by: R.E. Nelson, Executive Director Department of Utilities MEMOWTRW:720t0l.-91AUG i I z 44 .1 iM V%Nx<iVl( September 3, 1991 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ITEM TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager REi DISCUSS THE PROPOSED FY 92 WATER AND WASTEWATER BUDGET AND ASSOCIATED RATES. RECOMMENDATION: The Public Utilities Board recommend=oval of the 14$ waterland their meeting of August 22, 1991, app 15% wastewater rate increase. BACKGROUND: At the August 14# 1991, Public Utility Board meeting, the Board received the revised water and wastewater rate study results. After discussion of the cost of service study and projected rate increases by customer class, the Board di,.ected the staff to develop the water cost study and rate design based on a 10% increase and the wastewater cost of service and rate design on a 15% increase over the 1991 rates. i j SUMMARY: The water cost of service study was reviewed to determine the impact of possible reductions in costs to a level that would require a rate increase of approximately 10%. Exhibit I shows the program budget reductions necessary to keep the rate increase to the 10% level. These include shifting the $250,000 Economic Development Plan Line expense item from revenue to bond funds, elimination of a proposed additional supervisory position at the water plant, reducing the cost of repainting a water tower, delaying demolition of Lwo water wells, and reducing the misc. water line replacement program. Exhibit I also lists additional budget reductions that could reduce the rate increase to the 7% and 5% range. Since the main line item reduction is the repayment of debt to the Electric Department, this item can be reduced without reduced service level repercussions to our customers. Exhibit II reflects the revenue targets for the 10% rate increase. i j f The water rate design was redesigned based on new, lower costs allocated to each customer class. Block rates for residential customers were reduced and divided into three blocks instead of four. Based on an overall rate increase of 10.23%, residential j customer facility charge and volume block rates were increased by 10% over existing 1991 rate?. The existing11991 r a d e tial block structure was used for 1992 (0-15, Other customer class rate increases were reduced proportionally based on the cost of service and overall target rate increase. A water $12,411,944 1 compared increase o costs ~of ~ $12u389 350, resulting inoa net gain of $22,594. The wastewater cost of service identified a 15% overall rate increase was required to fund Tthe he proposed FY 92abud et and associated capital programs. FY 92 budget capital program expenses are projected to be $6,817,819. With the proposed rate increase, the expected revenues would be $6,830,177, for a net gain of $23,704 (See Exhibit II I Development of Revenue Targets). The revenue targets were developed on the 15% rate increase utilizing current wastewater volume calculation methodology (i.e., three winter months' average residential water consumption and 80% of commercial water consumption except where metered). At the August 22, 1991, Public Utility Board meeting, the Board recommended a change in the methodology for calculating the residenti~lcustomer's ved takinwastewater bill. he recommended methodology g four winter water consumption (December, January, February and March), discarding the highest month and calculating the wastewater discharge volume on the average of the remaining three winter months. The Board felt that this methodology would remove any water usage due to winter irrigation and was more representative of the actual volume wastewater entering the system. The decision to change the methodology used to calculate wastewater volumes will affect the expected residential revenues. The cost of service was examined to determine the affect of this decision. By utilizing the four month calculation versus the three moth calculation/ will inot be wastewater volume of 114,303,000 gallons per year This results in a loss of revenues from the residential customer class of $194,316. rH ''r I In an effort to maintain the proposed 15% rate increase, the staff identified a list of budget and capital program cuts that would reduce expenses and offset the reduction in revenues as a result of this decision (See Exhibit I, Wastewater Budget Options). If the Council decides not to utilize the recommended calculation methodology, it is conceivable that 1proposed 1.5% would expenditure t the be i requirdo ructions fund FY a92a budget Band of only capital programs. FISCAL SUMMARY: Based on a 10.23% increase in water rates and 15.01% increase ' l in wastewater rates, total projected revenues would cover total j expenditures and produce a net gain of $22,593 in water and ' $12,358 in wastewater. All proposed rate innreases and corresponding ordinances are subject to legal revaQw prior to City Council consideration and action. PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Citizens of Denton, Denton Municipal DeUtilities, partment, General Government, Customer Service, Legal Public Utilities Board, and City Council. j Respec ully submitted, Ll y V. Harrell , Prepared by: City Manager Howard Martinector Environmental Operations/Financial Administration Approved by: l - R,E. Nelson, Executive Director Department of Utilities j t I t t EXHIBITS9 Minutes of PUB Meeting of August 22, 1991 Water Rates: i I Water Budget options ii Development of Revenue Target Q 10% rate increase III Rate Design @ 10% rate increase { IV Cost of Service Summary V Current Versus Proposed Rate @ 10% VI Average Annual Residential Water 8311 Comparison @ 10% a. Low w(Ater usage b. Medium water usage i c. High water usage I Wastewater Rate Exhibits_ I Wastewater Budget Options II Development of Revenue Target @ 15% rate increase ; III Rate Design @ 15% rate increase 1 IV Cost of Service Summary V Current Vs Proposed Rate l VI Annual Residential Wastewater Bill Comparison a. Low wastewater usage b. Medium wastewater usage c. High wastewater usage VII Current vs Proposed Commercial Bills Elertric/Water/Wastewater ExhibitsI_ 1 Total Utility Annual Bill Comparison II Electric Bill Comparison III Water Bill Comparison IV Wastewater Bill Comparison i T T T. ACCERPT FROM PUB MI=,S OF AUGUST 22, 1991 4. CONSIDER ORDINANCE INCREASING WATER RATES. j Nelson introduced this item advising that the city council has had a tremendous number of inquiries regarding the increase in water rates during such a difficult year. Staff originally anticipated a 108 overall rate increase in water; however, the cost of service study indicated an 11.7% increase will be required. The Board asked staff to br,_L:g back a 108 increase. In the midst of this, the City Council ga•-v direction to staff not to proceed with the participation agreema,it with the Upper Trinity Regional Water District, which means the Department will not receive approximately $400,000 in anticipated revenues. This action jumped the increase required to 15.58. Staff has restructured several programs in an effort to provide good service to the community. j Recognizing the City Council and community concerns about rates, if there is an interest in bring the proposed increase down below the s proposed 108 increase, the Department could once again delay repay of the loan to the Electric Department another year, thus bringing the rate increase requirement down to 7.58 or even 58 if the Board and Council are interested in doing so. Nelson continued by advising the Board that the City Council has asked for a report on the bottom line effects of no increase in either water or wastewater. Staff concerns are about wastewater, since the city begins to jeopardize itself regarding regulatory issues involved. However, some flexibility in water rates may be there. Staff has prepared rate increases of 108, 7.58 or 58 for the Board's consideration. l Martin discussed the return on investment stating that the previous E water and wastewater pro formal were based on the transfer of their hydro assets to the Electric Department and this would amount to $70,000 in the Water Department and $90,000 in the Wastewater Department. As a result of new information and researching records back to October 1990, the $1.2 and $1.5 million had not yet been transferred out of the Water and Wastewater Departments and, i therefore, there are still some questions about the transfer of the hydro assets to the Electric Department. Laney commented he thought the hydro was transferred back to the Electric Department some time ago. Nelson indicated that this was j done, however, the Return on Investment (Rol) expenditures for the hydros prior to September 30, 1990. At that point in time, the Utility had not expended the full amount and the department can only transfer the amount that was expended. The difference between the full amount (Rol on that) represents the $70,000. . w . T, pMA.k+:ayYlrryMw i f Martin then reviewed the staff's development of revenue targets, the current versus proposed water rates, and the affect of the proposed 108 increase on annual water bills (low, medium and high), and he indicated that an increase for an annual usage of 70,300 gallons would cause an increase in the bill of $23.16 over an entire years with a usage of 132,400 gallons/year, the annual dollar change would indicate 9 an a $85.59 annual increase in the annual bill. annual basis would Martin indicated that 608 of the Denton customers use less than 10,000 gallons per month. Thompson commented that there are still capital improvements that continue to stress the Utility. The Utility Department is facing increased capital costs for the foreseeable future, including the Ray Roberts payment of $2,069,000 each year, if Denton puts off the 108 rate increase this year, next year it may be necessary to request an even larger increase. Nelson advised this would be so f unless staff goes into some very substantial cuts in the grogram) Thompson stressed that these represent commitments already made and I' the Department cannot reverse them. Martin then reviewed cuts that would be possible to allow a rate reduction below the proposed 108; he indicated that as far as the painting of the water tank is concerned, a fund has been set aside, and half of the money required for this project will be put in this year, half next year; the next item Martin suggested is the reduce t+ the loan repayment of the Water Department to the Electric bond funds. Martinnrequested direction from from i current e revenue Martin Board. Thompson felt the discus&ion was rehashing earlier made decisions; he emphasized that he recalled when economic development plan if were discussed, the Board indicated "pay as you Utility borrows to extend lines it costs double; now at the first sign of economic hard times it is tempting tQ pay out of borrowing instead of income. Laney also mentioned that the $250,000 was to be invested into a fund until there was $2 million established and this was to be done by not selling bonds; to date, as far as the Board knows, none of this money has been expended. There continued extensive discussion regarding "creating debt", i.e., selling bonds to finance economic development. Harrell commented that if a hot prospect comes in, the money will be taken out of bond funds, but if not, it simply won't be there, Ridens stated the Utility really doesn't have the money; Laney commented the Board has always said demand that if the demand was there, the Utility would supply that pq*y.WRnvwexarnw Xa, H I B IT i r J CI Coplen commented that if Denton incurs a requirement as far as picture economic development efar as budgeting; right now there sisfno precedent set land it appears it would not be prudent when no project is before the Board. Thompson emphasized the Board has always said this money would be taken out of earningsf this year the Department does not haveiany earnings; we are saying we will borrow if a prp the Denton area. Nelson commented that staff is co_. '-ned with the difficulty the Council is facing with the possibility of a tax increase; on the wastewater side, staff is very concerned about having revenues be better limitations; from h theawater sufficient to meet looking for flexibility, wo permit side, Coplen asked about the possibility of a $400,000 loss of income j'. coming back to the Utility or is this money gone forever? Nelson stated that Council wants the Department to move foreward with the wholesale water contract, Denton could step out of this and sell a portion of the plant if the Council desires. Coplen asked if the Council is aware they are creating a 5% increase~tes b~C that decision. Harrell assured the Board that this would be em hasized toj the City Council. 1 Coplen stated that, with what staff is offering, and no $400,000 decrease, the city could offer the citizens of Denton no increase. Coplen noted that the Department has a high quality of people, and there is not one of them that is unwilling to take this prudent approach; however, the City Council is putting the rate increase on the community when they made that decision. Action: Laney made a motion to recommend to the City Council that a 10% increase utilizing items on budget options nos. 1-b to reduce the proposed increase, Thompson asked if the Board should make recommendation for the 10% proposal with the understanding if the City Council sees fit for other reasons, they lev5% and el of t service to the believes custom r would not can lower the adversely affectcthesutility's or Coplen commented that the staff is able to operate adequately on any of the three levels of a 10%-7% or 5% increase. lr ~ An.. .44,tw rvwYxw«n~au:,..x E 1 1 i f . ,I I r.. r i i I~~ I~ I r~ ~l 1 1 Frady reiterated the Board recommends the 108 increase, but if the City Council sees fit, the Department can live with a 7%r 5% eas I however, next year's rates must be adjusted accordingly. Frady a If the Finance epartment Department mthe Water Departmentndebtiso thatnitccouldobehpaideoff ia D little at a time. Harrell summarized by stating if you make a major investment, ththe at Department would go sell bonds and the future people would be paywhat the ; athy stated that I debt as opposed to the pepof today pay off that $53 million Department is doing is paying $ $2 debt. The City will own that asset. cost over the life of the assetepreciation is dollars on a 50 year just a way of p y the s, 10% Nelson added that, unlike when ent,Utility other 9%debt representing an sinterest may n on the principal currently, paymeent t) the 108 still c cououp nts as an asset) whereas Depart enttis t Department never gets to count Ray Roberts as an ses~ ti. The n9 to "innovative getting no value back on the equity side) ` financing", Nelson commented that most of the debt owed is due to depreciation on the income statement. 9 Dubois stated that, on a cash basis, the water/Wastewater Department lost $426,000 for 99-90, and has an estimated loss of $243,000 for this year; with this $ .5 million loss of last s is the reason the Water/Wastewater a Department is having troubles this paying ~ hi off the Electric Department. Ridens commented that when this item is preser.twd to the City Council, they should know they have other options, and also they should know of the Board's recommendation of the 10% increase. Actionf } lovote on the % increase wer increase is in order it Alleayes,ino Chairman Thump lwhatherthe of Council to decide nays, motion carried. Thompson emphasized that regarding the accounting proced+xres on depreciation, the Board would like John McGrane to talk with the Board at their next meeting. CONSIDER ORDINANCE INCREASING WASTEWATER RATES t customer recommended Martin reviewed these rates stating cthat billings were gincreiase is 15.018 Examples of the increase For a usage based on_70,300 gallons irsmall), the bill14 ill increase from $115.11 to $130.75 ($16.63) annually representing a For a usage based 32,400 gallons, the bill would increase from $189.90 to $216.63, $26.74 annually; {ti I f y ~3 1 1 1j `f 1 4 I i Nelson pointed out that sewertaff is sBoarduhsi the three adga ked that ataf~er months' uses The average to calculat use four winter months and doing out ,t even iwithta staff testing this method, that by 9 that chap was utility would not collect $194,316 for next year if that policy ga made. that the Laney and Thompson both reiterated out the higheBoard had made the decision to ' go with four months and throw ou 200,000 of Martin reviewed Revenue Targets indicating that approximately $ expense would need to be removed from the cost to make up the anticipated loss in revenues. i { Using the decision to go with thetfo $1m th aseage c sculation, Martin ji showed Budget Options to make up there a) Rescheduling the Wastewater TreatmenonlanDenton Martin stated reduce involved reschedthis ulingophe wastewater treatment plant 1 are risks j approximately $9000 by within the 30 months the Texas Water Commission has alloted the city; if construction is delayed two months and work sppread out over c mp ianceeschedule indicated 24 months, $24,000 can an meet out confident that the City staff does not know if the to us within this period. However, Environmental will giAgency Denton this fullin30themonproposths. has indicated they they permit. the for the he several expenditures hto m.akel upallow Martin also reviewed line a on other ~ department to h i $194,316 anticipated loss. know about the compliance schedule. Thompson asked when stuff i Martin advised this wi?,l be workod out within the next two to three weeks. decision to go to a four month Martin advised that the policy average of water useage for sewer billing requires a 15$ increase in wastewater rates. Coplen stated he would like to consider the four vs the three months Boar otions, recomm commend that and make a tr comet ndation of 11.5%; if the g four months, the rate would be City Council insists on averaging four option, Thompson tptre requested that the Board look at this° four months; Hugh y i'l 13 1 T, I Twill rY . b,.469#4A } RJr i4:'.~f I Coplen made a motion to recommend to council a 158 increase with the understanding that the reason is due to the action of going to four months averaging which has been requested initially; however the Board recommends an 11.58 increase based on the department's operating needs; if the City Council wishes to encourage the Board to go from a three months averaging to a four months averaging basis, the rate will have to increase 158. Nelson asked if the Board would give the council the option of reducing rates another 3.587 Coplen emphasized he wants the council { to be aware they are adding the burden of rate increases to the community. Harrell commented this is more of an equity argument; what we are trying to measure is the amount of water used going down the sanitary sewer system; the argument is that by taking tin four winter months there could be unusual circumstanes that happen the winter months; something it far thep n next 12 one month months. the customer could wind up paying f Ridens stated her recommendation would be to go the 158 with the option of reducing another 3.58. Coplen's motion died due to lack of second. Actions Ridens made a motion that the Board recommend a 158 increase plus the budget cuts as shown by staff. Second by Frady Chairman Thompson requested yea votes; acknowledged by Thompson, Laney, Frady, Ridens; no dissenting vote was requested, however Coplen j wished to go on record as a dissenting vote to this motion. Motion carried. Looking at rate decreases in the electric department and increases in the Water/Wastewater Department, Martin advised the customer's annual bill would go from $19.49 to $14.76 or 1.388 overall; a larger customer (i.e., b3) would go from $1926.59 to $2012,63 overall or a combined increase of $86.04 or 4.478 annually in utility bills. 1 1 ~ pjJa~~q t!' Os', p 1 t~ RfEivr t~4^s n no-r.xw. E [1~3j I i it j i i i P\ n C WATER RATES f I I i j I , j i F.Y. 1992 WATER BUDGET Rate % Proposed Increase Burlgot Decrease Required Fiscal Year 1992 Water Budget $12,683,469 11.77% Loss of Upper Trinity Revenue 400,000 Return on Investment Increase (Hydros) 17,636 $13,001,296 -15.46% F.Y. 1992 WATER BUDGET OPTIONS 1. Shift; Economic Dev. Plan Lines CR to BF. $260,000 $250,000 1 a. Increase: Debt Interest (19,760) 13.41% J 2. Ellminate: Proposed supervisory position at WTP $36,700 $36,700 13.09% 3. Reduce: Painting High School Water Tower. $200,000 $100,000 12.20% 4. Postpone: Demolition of 2 Wells $90,000 $90,000 11.40% 6. Reduce: Misc. Waterline Replacoment $311,000 $100,000 10,6196 6. Reduce: Replace Waterlines Street Program $216,000 $56,000 10.03% i 7. Reduce: Repayment to Electric, f $500,000 $2e6,000 7.49% i 8. Reduce: Repayment to Electric. $500,000 $600,000 6.69% EXHIBIT. , , 'r~r,' ;.~.~+{'t12:1}iti~iA[/s14`risx4:.,w•.wrnN:., a..n._., _ 1 t i City of Denton Water Utility Development of Revenue Targets Description _T Residentlal Commercial Government Corinth LCMUA Total System FY 1992 Expenses $6,682,487 $6,648,655 $254,109 $490,268 $313,817 $12,389,351 I I FY 1992 Revenues @ $5,172,201 $5,058,099 P2-24,931 $490,860 L314.266 $11,260,356 Current Rates FY 1992 Net Gain/(Loss) ($610,286) ($590,466) ($29,178) $592 $448 ($1,128,996) i t Proposed % Increase 10.08% 11.79% 15.08% 0.00% 0,00% 10,23% I. FY 1992 Revenues @ $5,693,561 $5,654.4 03 268 856 490 860 $314,266 $12,411,944 ! Proposed Rates 1 Net Gain $11,074 $5,646 $4,746 $692 $448 $22,593 t i I S a! a lr{ DUMTON MUNICIPAL. U''ILI''IFS u-war, WATER & WAS97:?WA ER STUDY WATHR RA'I'L: DHSION ONIONS PfI41POfi1P0 WAT1M 11A 11. Ift'tilfiN Il6CAt YEAR 1991 1902 - (BiMiMll.wywkl) Ilnnl llnlw0 ~eTddli"d' ~I~( ~unOileTc7a royal riTMrii~-j WI esn n WTi~~fnSUTn--- - -f7iTi!"ir~ ~WIINIJ{Qyl411.lYf__~~ ~llNl_J S Ix~lh_~! _~t~a ll_- rD_.-1 RA'I'L?S, Ilucilll Chur r4.%: _ -Y - - s62r .~96 O.1S Inch le.l5 $11 lb 30a.346 I00 In;h 9.BS 1945 11.40 _ • - - 389114 I,!A inch 1315 27.00 1186 20 1b 1 18,195 2.00 bKh 1hA0 26141 119.504 3.00 hwfl 1245 41.50 24.114 1,00 1W 120.16 l f 0.00 19 /6 6.00 hxh 155.23 123.00 I/bob _ 1,,.•13 ib 16500 a 356,347 1 W Irwh l < ) fir; AvD.1kW5ry f, V44o .124.4. ~Ifi5,00 : X1799¢ Darrwlat CIwr11un11,0u0 0 Cailm: ly Winrur Vulumu Ralcs/I - _ 9989 ;2.20- --1716_ 1230.' 30.80 v 0090 S,DOO .90 to,ooD 14 a9s 22o szAb $2 30 U .W , - - - _ - ago I` 15,000 _ 19A99 - 2.20 ~_--12.0 -_-$2,30 - 090 - 20,000 24099 2fV $2.4b 1230 _ 0.90 090 _ - 2b,000 '29999 2.20 32.44 - 12.30 0.90 nal 0,90 38AN 34,889 220 12A6 39,099 2.20 12A5 $230 090 080 40.000 44099 2,70 1745 1230 - _ - 1230 0.911_ 090 .2ii•• " i 461 481999 '120 1245 _ bo pq OYkI 770 1245 6130 _-090 Q ,w 0011.000 - r v „ •t ,4p rh ' Summa volume Rulcs/I 4,899 1220 17,05 12.30 111.90 4080 c ' !'7E`. I . ` ' q~ ` 6,000 e,e09 2.20 S2.45 $2 30 090 0 90 2.20 1246 1230 0.80 090 rh I' 15,000 19,899 - 3.30 6245 $210 0.90 OW 1 12,30 U B0~ 080 i 1 20.ppD 24.889 330 12 45 25,000 _ 29 999 3.3D $2.45 12 30 080 90 E-- _ 30.000 34 899 1 15 17 45 22~?J 0 911 090 __-]5000 SB~9.9.. C= _ 67.45 ' 090 t AY 40,000 44099 4.15 12.46 _..__12.30 _ _.-.-.._090" OW 46000 49,"0 41b 12,45 $230 _ -D-w_ 0W , Ovl t 4 ,lb 1246 - 1230 090 0~9j0 s 4 y AV011,000 j EXHIBITIE.... r,1 DENTON MUNICIPAL U'I'ILITIHS M114(1N w36. WATIA & WAS'I'FWA'1UR STUDY !'l•rKl=<~1 PROPOSIM WA•I'I:R RA'1.11, DEi ION OPTION P110110S 11) WAIEH ILSI YF. All IILVI NU S' ISGAI YI. Ali IYYI 1497 ((ilvran_wa wkl) Iln:l llapoa `'-T(Ts r1Fi1I1T'}~T'11irnYrlnY~-.[lrnnri ii~Ir lYiTnsi,b WTio I~IA'13.Ylllt~._M.(1~ib'I~N~ESYi11IJ(~4i11kLN}.--1! _S~IBE~iEI ~ _ .E.iMIYIl _~I Jy[YI._ REVE3NULS, 17ucilit Char o Rummest 0.76 Imh 31 376 791 5751 OT/ ffi 663 _ $1,556,319 1.05 150 btclr 33,/88 66 441 7,538 102,683 2.00 Inch 1/640 111,583 10,016. 177,726 - 3.011 Inch 15499 17.851 FiX62 64,869 68 876 - 4.00 Irk:h Tan - 6.0o rich 1 15E 6.00 1101 12,065 IOTOh .....T. - ,Y 645"' ILvnuel Glurllb J1,000 a1 Gr11nArAlr-• $831 37119 $26.11 316500 s1to DO $1 64 AvarQUO HIII VOLUMI; RL+V15NU1?S; Wiulur Rcvcnuos; • 4, $19 !130266 . A2f ib 34 S{_ 1 h000 9,99n 375,189 99,945 {,981 -b 5 47b,114 720.470 ~ 14 YY9 1307.64 _ $5332 1,331 _5 y -55 000 _ 19 998 3/48 / b 361 3821 S 4 - 132,940 _ . 5 6 ?0,000 24,999 26,316 66 000 3. r0! 97a65 25.000 29.099 14,194 62,016 h !981' - 30.000 31899 9,069 61.195 2,1eti 6_. 5 69,148 1 4A9f 63.364 2.569 61,791 35A00 39999 6,952 40.000 3s77 50,136 5,781 .6_. 5AIM 4D89D _ 7,638 51.630 1A1F1 6,023 1 6.635 834 60,050 75 691 !0500 4 831 3b6 ,35 .i.-.r Hubkt58 ~ ..M v 67~ 12,657, Aval9Utl 1101 Summa RtwuiweS 1,988 303s,2IB 3110908.. si 380 ►4 ~_.3S !867,521 6,000 9,989 b11.000 I Dp00 16,000_ 19,999 277,589 ___._.._...--5 385.160 _ - 5 _ 88,888 74899 11760! 79 if6 J/86 h 1 bb 26 000 23,893 119 328 /2 D/ / -3 474 I6255 _ y 1 !4 677 _._b 30.000 34,999 104,494 _ 61.921 3197 5 - S,WS y y 139977 ' 35,000 39899 73.1!.8 63A7/ 0,000 44.993 53;198 49199 7.8/8 6. -t'. 11645 _ se 487 _4bppp 49 _99g1 31,112 5SdN.4 261/ 6 1 3 50000 (1VI`.I 1071/7 1 /58 193 91,426 •^.147517.. r- 279 T2,142S038V I `3uI ktlal =4 AvoiaUs 1101 . TWO Volume Itcvuul('S: 4989 f 1 636 060 _ 3T! 1169 _ _ 313:818 - f4 $9 f 1816 061 9,999 887.199 211 31 6 Itl 651 10,000 14.999 42b,955 164,282 8,711 9 it 19,50 3'!6335 167627 8.110 8 0. 486 120 15 000 1 ' 20000 24.899 207,867 147,Y3d 1,893 3 -9- 369,073 999 25,888 20,.899 134,619 176,037 --8,191 e..__, 8 276.127 3p 34,899 113452 175827 5•~? 246,31b ~JS,000 19699 _78. _308 118./91 6,614 ..__.__.8 40,060 44898 51,325 109,734 5,133 1,610 I {y,ppp 18990__-_ 40,699 102,636 4,659 148.012 60,OW f3VEi1 108.198 3 3.94 O7B._. -1-4-1.4 7fi 1110110 III 135 3 Ri0i58/ fAlhlopJ f1,010,ffi4 $1863087 (218,268 $119050 fIU,8T9 !9,528,438 11 . _.-91719 -=7765-- , 10 I At. H 1 V VN11LS I'i 1s893:ri6T ='_ss6sri459-~ ---s'~336*,51.=._-ti90:688 (,-._--s7 ri,"~SS •j~""~~~;F,iiI3Yi Avar9Bn 01111 j'J'.r-i8- "'{P6T. f8'- - __-3T~67~ !16,905 b'd' t2~,'16675 181"61 IM9aksa two$ 1'd1A Yuri! 1008% $1.16% 1506% 1023% 312,389,3'51 IWal e'uida/Gosl to Service $5882,461 $5,046,!.54 370,,103 6190,706 $313811 Hevm■alGu51N t $11,014 sh,i48 34,146 6697 $448 622,693 .~1 EXHIBIT -'z i x.1.1 y, a • ~>.r a r rss~ r. .x WATER COST OF SERVICE STUDY METHODOLOGY The purpose of the cost of service study is to define total water system costs and to determine the cost of providing service to individual customer classes. Once the cost of service for a particular customer class is known, utility rates can be designed to recover the appropriate cost from that class. For Denton's water system, these classes are divided into residential, commercial, and wholesale customers. There are various rate study models that can be used to allocate costs to the various customer classes. This particular rate study model uses a base-extra capacity cost approach that attempts to differentiate between average and peak demands placed on the system. The first step is to allocate costs to specific functional components defined as base costs, extra-capacity costs, and customer costs. Base costs are those costs that relate to the 1 total quantity of water used annually. Extra-capacity costs are costs that occur to meet peak-day or peak-hour demands. Customer costs are divided into billing and meter related costs. The next step is to allocate these functional component costs 111 to each customer class. Base costs are allocated according to the annual water usage of each customer class. Extra-capacity costs are allocated to each class based on a relationship between average and peak demand, stated as a load factor. Customer costs are based on the number of annual billings for each class and water meter maintenance and related costs. This process completes the cost of j service study and provides the data necessary to develop actual water utility rates for each customer class. I i i' i i { EXHIBIT M ~ fl ry ' 1 (Summws.WR1)-FlnulReport DEWON MUNICIPAL UTILITIES MST-W4 Wales WA,rrR & WASTEWATER STUDY summmy 1)191'RIH(I7ION OF WA111R COS]' 29-Aug-91 'IX) C IJSTO MIiR CLASS! FIC A71 ON S 01;39 PM FISCAL YEAR 1991-1992 s en a ammerc evernmon o osa e o oaa o -Al~lldn ,LWll~wi. iNl 'WW W[7 _Colln I.CMWA TaYI lWee TO'I'AI, WATER COSTS: Cost Allmaled h Both Whoiosale 0 Hatall tie MNCellonsousImome $1,998 $2.4") ( 114 263 ($198T =6,000 117 O&M-13epartmental 2,183,928 21123,006 107,488 310,900 204,006 4,948,167 ~ 110 Ad min leYNlve l n refer 612,743 $1,686 4,669 36 39 699,000 119 Imrsweln Worsirg Capnal 62,764 63,661 3,173 6, 3 3.788 f10,9DB 120 e6tdal : 76r Z ,214 1T_,T 2'd$ 011,491 l b. Ccel Alloaelad to only Flocall 121 _ Olher lmome W~ (24A06) ($20.172) $2,412 122 Bad Otbi Opene 22,631 23,022 1,347 47,000 123 FLy Fk6arta Paymonis 823,073 1,128,427 8.600 - 2,080,000 124 For Hear. D;, IaS Fund 1,106,611 1,351,451 83,311 2,620,390 12U fa to Hav. AM Fleeeovo 126 _Fhsd AsaelslOpiw1sion 371,102 317,693 _ 31,764 720,649 127 04mrsl fund HD 386,115 416,038 30,772 842,726 I 128 MRWD 129 ftoymem to oeclrk 219,324 260,118 12,660 500,000 130 eubtotaL.$3E0}. 'y4r s..~ , u, Coat Allocated to orgy Wh OewW 5,261 - 6,6 00 131 PMNMW Whla__ !:7.764 132 WhDW"Is ROI (40,293(42,832 48,364 133 Whoioaab"al Rented Fees (16,099(15,830 1919,634 2,671 W (0 734 WholewbPILOY ,958 (3,128 3,546 2,771 0 136 DgiHObbm bpemra (28,866 30,939 35,167 0.960 0) 136 sobtotaL S,tl2r $616; 137 Total Water system Costa $8 602 t : s, X046 04 °$2433,617 R a 13e Average Cosill000 Gallons 59.±3 _ $2.79 $_2. 00r_ 6233 $101 _ .9e I. ( 'I O'IAI, COSTS 1'O RECOVER: 139 BASE COSTS - AVO, DAY $4,037,541 _1114,766,396 $145,787 _ $367,462 $266,412 $9,662,721 140 EXTRA CAPACITY - MAX DAY 1 461.403 308,098 49,871 124,042 _ 43,093 1,067,367 I, 141 EXTRA CAPACITY - MAX HOUR _ 273,76311 230,707 ^29,687 0,463 _ 2922 543,422 142 C 6TOMERA~-CCOT(-NTING COSTS_ $42,031 11 66,266 4,651 38 30 $33,214 143 CUSTOMER METERC_OST8r 367,700 187,290 24,003 2,274 1,352 602,627 Total Costs _ $6_-_6R-4S7 ! =6,648,666 109 ~~-$49_0,266 _$313,817 - $12,389,351 ~ Avg. CoaU1,000 Oats, $3,43 $2.70 $2.60 $2.33 $1.91 $2.00 Eatlme!ed Revenues without Revenue lnuense *j.12~ X60 W-37- 32.34 1.91 2.W I nor ease In Revenues-> 9.87% 11107% 12.97% -0.12% --0.14% 10,03% Lf l I E I ~i 3 City of Denton Water Utility Current vs. Proposed Rates 1991--1992 i990-1991 Rate Schedule Proposed _ Current Rates Rates 1 f I Residential Rate WR 314' Meter $8.15 $7.40 1' Meter 9.65 8.75 1 1/2" Meter 13.75 12.50 r Meter 15.40 Gallon 14.00 All Gallons Block Rate - Winter 2.20 Blocks 2.00 First Gallons Block Rate -Summer 2.20 0 15 2,00 Su~+:ond Gallons Block Rate - Summer 3.30 15 - 30 3.00 Third Gallons Block Rate Summer 4.15 30 + 3.75 Commercial/industrialRate WC 314" Meter $18.15 $15.75 1" Meter 19.85 97.25 1 112" Meter 23.00 20,00 2' Meter 25.60 22.25 j 72.45 63.00 ~ 3' Meter 1 4" Meter 120.75 105.00 ~ 6" Meter 155.25 135.00 8' Meter 175.95 153.00 Commodity Charge/1000 gal 2.45 2.20 v Sales for Resale Rate WW11WW2 ' Minimum Charge WWI $155.00 $155.00 Minimum Charge WW2 170.00 170.00 WWI Demand Charge per 1,000gal 20.00 20.00 WW2 Demand Charge per 1,000gal 27.40 27.40 ; EXHIBIT L~ 1 i City of Denton Water Utility Current vs. Proposed Rates 1991-1992 1990-1991 Rate Schedule Proposed Currevt Rates Rates antra-Govt Finished Water Rate WG 3/4' Meter $12.95 $11.25 V Meter 14.40 12.50 1 1/2 Meter 17.85 15.50 2' Meter 20.15 17.50 4• Meter 97.75 85.00 60 Meter 123.00 107.00 I 8 Meter ~ 143.75 .125.00 1 Commodity Charge/1000 gal 2.30 2.00 i Intra- Govt Raw Water Rate WGU Minimum Charge $145.00 $130.00 i Commodity Charge/1000 gal $1.30 1,20 i Standby Fire Service Rate WF 6' Line $0.00 $30.00 8' Line 0.00 40.00 Metered Hydrants Rate WFH Customer Charge Minimum $27.50 $25.00 ; Commodity Charge/1000gal 2.45 2,20 c i 1 Annual Water Billing Comparison rROPOSEO, 2.20 3.30 4,15 8.15 Total Month SSW Daya Consumption 0=16 15 - 30 > 3D 0015 15 - 30 > 30 Facl~ I@ Ilr+d Juty S DO 91076 8,075 0 0 OK 19.87 0.00 0.00 8.15 28,12 Juno a 32 7,e26 7,826 0 0 OK 17.22 0.00 0.00 8.89 25,91 May S 30 6,800 6,800 0 0 OK 12.32 0.00 0.00 9.15 20.47 April w 29 7,200 7,200 0 0 OK 15.84 0.00 0.00 7.86 23.72 March w 31 8,225 8,225 0 0 OK 13.70 0.00 0.00 8.42 22.12 February w 30 8,750 8,750 0 0 OK 14.86 0.00 0.00 0.16 23.00 January w 33 7,625 7,626 0 0 OK 16.66 0.00 0.00 0.97 25.62 December w 29 6,125 6,125 0 P OK 11.28 0.00 0.00 7.00 19.16 November w 29 5,275 6,276 0 0 OK 11.61 0.00 0.00 7108 19.48 October S 29 41776 4,775 0 0 OK 1061 0.00 0.00 7.80 18,38 September a 32 81775 81775 0 0 OK 14.91 0.00 0.00 8189 23.60 August S 30 7,_100 70 0 0 OK 18.28 0100 0000 0.15 24.43 384 78,660 79,550 0 0 p176A1 $O. DO {0,00 =98.89 $273.90 $273.150 CURRENT: 2.00 3.00 3.76 7.40 Total Month AM Daya Consumption 0015 15 30 > 30 0 - 16 1630 > 30 Facillt Billed July a 30 9,075 8,076 0 0 OK 18.16 0.00 0.00 7.10 25.b5 June a 32 7,826 7,026 0 0 OK 15.86 0.00 0.00 7.e9 23.64 May a 30 6,900 5,800 0 0 OK 11.20 0.00 0.00 7.40 10.60 April w 29 7,200 7,200 0 0 OK 14.40 0100 0.00 7116 2155 March W 31 8,226 6,225 0 0 OK 12.46 0.00 0.00 7185 20.10 February W 30 6,760 6,750 0 0 OK 13.60 0.00 0.00 7.40 2040 January w 33 7,625 7,625 D 0 OK 16.05 0.00 01w 8.14 23,19 December W 2P 6,126 61126 0 0 OK 10.26 0.00 0.00 7,15 17.40 November w 29 6,275 5,276 0 0 OK 10.65 0.00 0.00 7.15 17.70 October S 29 4,778 4,775 0 D OK 9.55 0.00 0.00 7,15 18170 September 9 32 6,776 6,716 0 0 OK 13.66 0.00 0.00 7.99 21.44 August 8 30 7,400 7,400 0 0 OK 14.80 0.00 0_DD 00 7.40 22.20 384 19,660 72,550 ~ o o 15-6-. -ID o.oo o. 7e $ $ $e9. $248,8e $710.89 Annual $ Change $25.01 Annual % Chant's 10.06% EE I ! E X H I B I TamLi ~N I r I Annual Water Billing Comparison PROPOSED. 2,20 3.30 4.16 8.16 101111 Mont SLW Day. Camumplbn 0 - 16 16 - 30 > 90 0 - 16 16 - 90 > 30 Facit 611Vod July S 29 21,125 16,000 6,126 0 OK 33.00 20.21 0.00 7.86 81.09 June S 32 13,650 13,660 0 0 OK 2981 0.00 0.00 8.69 38.60 May S 31 9,660 0,&50 0 0 OK 21,23 0.00 OM 0,42 29.65 April Or 31 10,400 10,400 0 0 OK 22.85 0100 0,00 0.42 31.30 March W 2D 9,075 9,075 0 0 OK 10.97 0100 0.00 7.88 27.84 february w 29 7,000 7,000 0 0 OK 16.40 0,00 0.00 7.08 23,28 January W 30 7,100 7,100 0 0 OK 15.82 0.00 0,00 8.16 0)3.77 09comber w 33 7,125 7,125 0 0 OK 15.88 0.00 O.DO 0,97 014.64 November w 29 6,776 6,776 0 0 OK 14.91 0.00 O.On 7.86 2278 Oclober S 20 0,675 0,676 0 0 OK 16.07 0,00 0.00 7.86 26.74 Seplember S 31 10,160 10,160 0 0 OK 22.33 0.00 0.00 8.42 3016 Augual S 31 161626 151000 525 0 OK 33.00 3,06 0.00 8.42 4148 36464 126,150 119,400 6,760 0 $28268 $22.28 $0.00 $98.09 $383.64 $31,3.64 CURRENT: 2,00 3.06 3.76 7.40 Total Month S1W Days, Oonaumpiten 0 - 15 i5 - 30 > 30 0 16 16 - 30 > 30 Faol DOW July S 29 21,126 16,000 6,125 0 OK 3000 199 O.uo ~7.16 65,53 V j June S 32 13,55D 13,660 0 0 OK 27,10 0100 0.00 7.89 34.99 May S 31 9,650 9,650 0 0 OK 19430 0100 0.00 7.65 26.95 April w 31 10,400 10,400 0 0 OK 2060 O.DO 0.00 7.65 28,45 March w 29 9,076 9,075 0 0 OK 1016 0.DO 0.00 7.16 26.30 February w 29 7,000 7,000 0 0 OK 14.00 0.00 0,00 7.15 21,15 January w 30 7,100 7,1DO 0 0 OK 14.20 0.00 0.00 7.40 21,80 December w 33 7,125 7,126 0 0 OK 14.26 0,00 0,00 8.14 22.39 November 1N 29 6,775 6,716 0 0 OK 13.65 0.00 0.00 7.16 20.70 Oclober S 29 81676 0,616 0 O OK 17.16 0.00 0100 7115 24,30 September S 31 10,160 10,160 0 0 OK 20.30 0.00 0.00 7.65 27.95 Auguel S 31 16626 SAIN 625 0 OK N000 1.68 0,00 7.65 3952 364 126,160 118,400 6360 0 $238.60 $20,25 $0,00 $89,79 $349,94 $348.64 Annual $ Change $35,01 Annual % Change 10.03% r ! EXHIBITZ~~,.L r 1 Annual Water Billing Comparison PROPOSED; 2,20 3.90 4.16 8.15 Total Month S/W PalLs Consumption 0 - 15 15 - 30 > 30 0 - 16 15- 30 > 90 Faclll Billed July 6 32 65,900 1o,0D0 15,000 25,900 OK 33.00 49,60 107.49 8.09 198.86 June 8 29 19,233 15,000 4,233 0 OK 3300 13,97 0.00 7.88 $4.05 May 8 33 13,800 13,800 0 0 OK 29.92 0100 0.00 6197 38.89 April w 29 17,887 15,000 2,667 0 OK 33.00 5.07 0100 7.88 48.75 March w 29 8,087 8,087 0 0 OK 17.75 0.00 0.00 7188 25,83 February W 29 28,600 15,000 13,500 0 OK 3100 29.70 0,00 7.88 70.68 January w 32 6,000 8,000 0 0 OK 17,80 0.00 D.00 6.89 26.29 December w 30 7,933 7,933 0 0 OK 17.45 0.00 0.00 8.16 26.80 November w 33 13,033 19,033 0 D OK 28.87 0.00 D.O^ 8.97 37,84 October S 30 23,387 15,000 8,367 0 OK 33.00 27.61 0,00 8.15 88.76 September S 28 60,133 16,000 15,000 20,133 OK 33,00 49.60 83.55 7.6i 173.66 August S 30 40,933 16 000 M22 101933 OK 33,00 40.60 48.37 0.16 136,02 iw 364 286,360 155,633 73,767 66,966 $342,39 $226.85 $236.41 $98.89 $903.34 $903.34 CURRENT, 2.00 3.00 3.76 7.40 Totai - ` Month S7W Deys Conaumptlon 0 - 16 16 - 30 > 3D 0 - 11, 16 - 30 > 30 Facility SHed July S 32 55,800 15,000 15,000 25,900 OK 30.00 46.00 97.13 7.89 18002 June a 29 19,233 16,000 4,233 0 OK 30.00 12.70 0.00 7.15 49.85 Miry 6 33 13,600 13,800 0 0 OK 27.20 0.00 0.00 6.14 35,34 April w 29 17,667 16,000 2,667 0 OK 20,00 6.33 0.00 7.16 42.49 March w 29 8,087 8,067 0 0 OK 1J. 13 0.00 0,00 7.15 20,28 February w 29 28,500 15,000 13,500 0 OK 30,00 27.00 0.00 7.15 64.16 January w 32 81000 8,000 0 0 OK 18.00 0.00 0.00 7169 23.89 December W 30 7,933 7,933 0 0 OK 16.87 0.00 0100 7.40 23.27 November W 33 13,033 13,033 0 0 OK 28.0Y 0.00 0.00 8.14 34.21 October S 30 23,367 15,000 8,367 0 OK 30.00 26.11) 0.00 7.40 62.50 September 8 28 50033 15,000 15,000 20,133 OK 3n.00 46.00 76.60 8191 167,41 August 3 30 40,933 !6()00 15,000 10,933 OK 30 00 45.00 41.00 7,40 229.40 364 286,388 165,633 73,707 56,986 $311,27 $206.1) $213.62 $89.78 $019,81 $9191111 Annual $ Change $03.63 Annual% Chang, 10,19% ; T ~ , EXHI~, BI 1 3 i WASTEWATER RATES i i I 1 1 E i F.Y. 1992 WASTEWATER BUDGET Rate % Proposed Increase Budget Decrease Required $6,107,705 NIA i 6.01 % Fiscal Year 1992 Wastewater Budget 6,107,706 16.01% F.Y. 1992 WASTEWATER BUDGET OPTIONS 1. Reduce: WW - Bond interest $174,676 $79,600 13.71% 2, Reduce: 0471 - Replace Misc. Sewerlines (9114) $160,000 $54,000 $ 0 000 12,87% 3. Reduce: 0471 - Backhoe (9104) $91,000 $10,000 12.01% k 4. Reduce: 0470 - Sludge Improvements (9104) $68,300 $10,000 11.84% 5. Reduce: 0470 - Vehicles (8342) $26,000 $6,OD0 11 ,76% I, S, Reduce: 0472 Special Services (8602) $18,000 $5,000 11.68% 7. Reduce; 0470 - Ace. Elec. Equip (8331) $q 60D $4,600 11.80% 6. Reduce: 0471 -Motor Pool Replacement (860P) $10,000 $3,000 11.66% 9. Reduce: 0470 - OHIM Machines (9103) $7,000 $2,000 11.6296 3 y,. 1 D. Reduce: 0470 Vehicles a Equip (9104) $6,500 $2,000 111.49% 11, Reduce: 0470 - Clearing (8502) I i EXHIBIT l j 4 r ?t 4 t ' r City of Denton Wastewater Utility Development of Revenue Targets Description Resldentlsl commercial TOTAL SYSTEM Reg Comm 8 Eating Equipment Government Industrial Wholesale r f Prettiest 8 Places Servlces Water 4 Metered Sewor FY 1992 Expenee3 $2,833,886 $3,232,834 $187,931 $67,118 $91,907 $97,925 $316,045 $6,817,519 I FY 1992 Revenues L2,470.04 6 178_0,711 $156,763 $47.6 02 $76,84 0 $91,164 $316,66 8 15,938,761 Current Rates FY 1992 NotGoln/(Lose) ($363,841) ($452,123) ($31,178) ($9,616) ($16,067) ($6,781) ($379) ($979,038) Proposed % Increase 15.00% 18.36% 20,38% 20.37% 22.14% 11.07% 0.00% 15.01% i 1992 Revenue p $2,340.61 2 $3,235,418 188 697 57 297 $93,852 $101,26 0 9 3 A $11,11130,1177 Proposed Roles t Net Gain $6,626 $2,594 $766 $179 $1,945 $3,335 ($2,903) $0,369 f; EXH I B I TWMPR,100611~~ r }.tNY'ASIi1.Kls w.wu.... I t t MT ue62.Wlo - FOwI Rpp1 DENTON MUNICIPAL UTILITIES 17tl1104-s2 WATER & WASTEWATER STUDY WASTEWATER RATE DESIGN OPTIONS WASTEWATER RATE StRUCTURE DESIGN FI8006L YEAR 1$H -102 ApuW h11Wn4n1 k~WUiafeyra'~i YNMM GYry tMCN s4w1+. ►,au W41w 11011 1b7N1 . 1sA.6MM1 IBO,BAWI IM0 I I el (EE rI feE l1 ~ ~1 Ui~ rMEM Hai. Annual Billings: 171.044 23,601 70 120 p 1,106 067 rY4 IR 17 ,07,620 Customer Coats t6<1ww. Owl-B4 62.]7 17.20 67.x0 67.x0 17.20 07.20 $190.06 I 6170.22 27.05 Current Facility Charles 61.60 $10.00 NOW IIO.M 8130.00 $10,ou $10,00 i10.m _ 191.00 $125,m $12.05 N,as Increase In Overall =15% Revenue Requirements N.411% _ 56.36% N/A NIA N/A 20.3ex 20. 22 11,0711 0.00% 0.01% 16,01% Facility Charge with Increase $4.10 i1111 $30,00 H0.00 $130.00 $12.01 119,01 $12`az 1107.74 _ $ITb.m Hxs.m 86.01 um6c_ -eO.33a ,9. lL mn 00 I xo oO41. 16 OOS am Dom Suggested Facility Charges N.e6 $,1.90 I11.m 81 L$0 H3o.00 "00 $12.00 $14.60 ho0m Has, 00 $196.00 Administrative/Program Coats 8205.00 I3o.oc Sampling/Analysis Costa H4o.m $41,00 Revenues Ceneraled From These Charges 1126,361 IM.645~ 132,120 19,IYas $6.090 613.M 86,194 $14,413 H.xeo N,6oa $,,eoo i,,,ea,4e4 NHW REVENIM TARCIHT j (Or"OtMduie DWI-84) 03.1101.636 ws I i1M,166 167.096 H10.171 801.8w $310.0OI 00.00 07OOS1s7a Revenues I.ef1 In Collect from Volume Rale/1,000 Oals. 8x,213,103 12,900,142 -,-v~~ H74699 $60,117 W6,76e $Ie,em $3mY6,76 is.so7 $6,/40 7u' F:umaled Volume To Collect i. Revenues (000'x' 8- t 1,190.6ec1 1,30011 69.170 UAW 41,610 100,000 144,011 2.190 2,1w~ I ' Ii4Y4 R40440100 CAP Yo 004000 G@NN 1x461 _ 11,461 IORd VONens 1,2001731 1.341,670 61,470 17,767 41,010 100,000 514.066 x,10 !,001.867 1 100.00% Suggested Vol. Kale/1,0110 Cial 81.70 1x,20 L2.20 12.x0 $2.x0 11.96 2x.96 $1 o 11.00 ax.t I 89.10 $1.ae CIe0n1RawlA00 OWN H.30 61.66 12.60 $2.46 61,90 12.46 $2.46 _$,w b.1o it. 10 is. to 61.75 In0106M WNGxwnt Y9Wnr P&w 13.33% 141.02% -12.00% -10.20% ,6.79% 20.41% x0.41% 141.76% IIA11% 0,002 0,00% 16.461 Volume Revenues Oeneraled 2x046.1641 27061472 I 1116437 160,41U ,n 9,431 Hm,o00 $3Q,6/3 Nsn' r~i.'"i rT' ' Total Revenues Ceneraled 12,',40,612 $3,x36,410 ~~J~ Iue 697 867,297 IY.1867 i101, 8321, 04! $1,x11 is Total Costa/Coat of Service $2,013.800 17,23217 81117,631 $67,116 Sol' 7 40? 8swam 16,01 $a,HroI 1 Reveaue/Cults + - "oe 12,604 pee 3170 $I,W6 111,316 t$2I111 1$1 t1t,l'~ KCVCOnea BCfnrC Increase x,4701746 2,Y00,r11 160.763 _ 41,202 91.104 300,601 4-~ II, 76•i Overall Kate increase 16.00% 141.36% zoaeYC a~os1+~ a 1~x 11.17%-o r% sons 16,614 EXHIBIT~4 t t (3 c WASTEWATER COST OF SERVICE STUDY METHODOLOGY M The purpose of the wastewater cost of service study is to identify total wastewater system costs and to determine each customer's proper share of that cost, Once the cost of providing service to a particular customer class is know,.}, wastewater utility rates can be developed to recover these costs. For. Denton Is wastewater system, these classes are divided into residential, regular commercial, commercial pretreatment, commercial eating ' places, commercial equipment services, government, industrial, metered sewer, and wholesale customers, i The rate study model used in this cost of service study uses a base-extra capacity cost approach, Costs are first allocated to specific functional component costs defined as volume costs, effluent quality treatment costs, and customer costs. Volume costs T relate to the total quantity of wastewater treated. Sffluent quality treatment costs reflect the relative differences in wastewater contaminant levels. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) are used as chemical measures of wastewater quality. Customer costa are defined as billing and administrative costs. The next step is to allocate these functional component costs to the various customer classes. Volume costs are allocated on the basis of annual water usage, Extra-capaoity cost are the BQD and TSS load factors determined by sampling data. Customer costs are allocated on the basis of the number of annual bills. When all costs have been allocated to each customer class, the cost of service study is complete and specific wastewater rates can be I~ designed, I f ,..a i 4 v,40 (y7 C to -11 B 1,1"I)Mz) euMgkM" I ` 770, 4 j i t (summ ws,wkt) - Final Repoll DENTON MUNICIPAL UTILITIES orsr-`J4 Waeeewatel WATER & WASTEWATER STUDY DISTRIBUTTON OF WAS'rI7WA77iR COSTS 29-Aug-91 'ro C(ISTOMSR CLASH FICA" ONS nSCAL YEAR 1991-1902 L'A=_17 Comm"pal Cammiaal u6mmor a, Nelnmn/el Inducirlal Mela ed Wholnle ❑TRWII menl l5fq PkeeeFAUp,9we I ~(%odth _ ~t N~ ~~f eL Lgo TOW Dislrihulion of Costs: '1'b'1'Al, COS'T'S: M. COW Alkeated b Both WhoWWO 6 Retel( 77 P1Mleahner4 PI99fem COete _$37,542 $4,800 - 42,312 78 CAM-flap a n mental 1,431,111 1,811,671 107,fi61 32,177 48,107 34,eW 201,084 0,90:1 3_,07.1,198 1 79 Adminle0alN0 ImMfw 302,444 130,807 i 6,9177 3,020 6,390 85 3,287 _ 1,0Bw 482,000 00 Inorooleln Worxlf9 Gpltel 71,255 28,904 1,894 -471 xt 826 910 14 _ 51,000 Bl _ eubkml 31,783,044 32,009,099 ^ - 3116,137 370.071 353,7M 4136,206 3210,04 1 418,008 34,238,640 D. Ccal Allacatel tooNy Rotall _ (166,wq 82 tithe/ Imome~ (p5,0(5R (325,755) IN,14z) (8320) Y_ pa V3) (41.920) 03 Red Be01 Ftwume 16,!x11 16,453085 198 402 1,162 374700 94 rw Row.04hI 185Fund - We 370 005,9R 39,650 11,0" 10,003 20,309 $,207,833 as Fn to Rev. Oebt KORW 0 - - I 30 Fumd MeeMlOe9fwladon 268,681 -204,111 11,700 3,370 a,2J1 10,087 _ 5"4 ow 1jl 07 Cienafel fund Ra 30o,608 442.000 24.610 7,300 12,88n zt,WZ a39,440 1 eubtOtaL 31,113,802 s1,272,3e1 $75,017 322,279 S,f0,eK1 106367 $2.6a9,2fa Ile ~ - o. Coal Altooeled to only NToloLble e9 wno%mleH(x ($25770) 1329,048) 131,748) (36191 (18051 (411,480) 165,647 _ 37,28 F5I 90 _ Whokelllatilwol Rental Fwls (4.4681 (4,50) (:00) (60) (143) f ~l 9,815 _tne -1I 91 WnnWeele PlLUI - (1,M7) 12,13'll _ U2a) (38) (00) (109) 4,298 760 {q 92 11411MIAL n LKlomw (12,151) (13,439) '601742) (219) 7 ...1410) Vot') 27,616 2,14e (q : 03 sublolaL (343,698) (348,211) 132.9231 ("35) (31,634) (RZ,718) 190,977 41,001 3o 94 TOtel Conte 62,693,992 337.12,010 ---^T $107,031 K57,i 10 _ 604,901 107,92b 3310,010 _ ",007 30,8171813 96 New Avg, 09e111,000 Gallons _ $2.17 32.41 33.10 33.83 y 0)._20 60,00 6216 W174 12.98 90 Eatlmalad Rev0lnled tlnltN01 nL10aeo 32410040 sm,78o,711 3140,762 N1,002 170,840 191,161 sona's67 ",fAO 38,600,781 97 Existing pfnlbr-tod Avg. Rato11,000 Omle _-$1 ea 32.91 _ 32454 _ 1217 31.81 $2.16 r _412.70 91,9? 999hNlInReY0nU9R-> Y 14.7316 10.2896 Is w% T10.0996 10,01% ~M7,42% 0.15% 1,5606 14,00% E X H I B IY' I~ { 3 775;rY~A+7°7~Cst,ttarce.-.4x1.,7. ~h ~ser~f. i t City of Denton Wastewater Utility Current vs. Proposed Rates i f 1991-1992 1990-1991 Rate Schedule Proposed Current Rates Rates RESIDENTIAL SEWER j Facility Charge $4.65 $4.00 Commodity Charge11000gal 1.70 1.50 i REGULAR COMMERCIAL SEWER Facility Charge $11,90 $10.00 Commodity Charge/1 000gal 2.20 1.85 Surcharge - (See Below) PRETREATMENT SEWER Facility Charge $11.90 $80.00 Commodity Charge11000gal 2.20 2,50 Ad min islrativelProgram 260.00 OAO Sampling/Analysis 140.00 0100 Surcharge - (See Below) EATING PLACES Facility Charge $12.00 $10.00 Commodity Chargell000gal 2.95 2.45 Surcharge - (See Below) EQUIPMENT SERVICES Facility Charge $12.00 $10.00 Commodity Charge/1000gal 2.95 2.45 Surcharge - (See Below) ~XHIBIT r r t::l. •l I City of Denton Wastewater Utility Current Vs. Proposed Rates 1991 --1992 1990-1991 i Rate Schedule Proposed Current Rates Rates INTRA- GOVERNMENTALSEWER r Facility Charge $14.50 $10.00 y Commodity Charge/1000gal 1.90 1.60 INDUSTRIAL WATER Facility Charge $105.00 $97.00 Commodity Charge/1000gal 1.00 0.90 RESIDENTIAL SEWER SERVICE TO USERS WITHOUT DENTON WATER SERVICE i, Fac Char Corporate Lmts $4.60 $4.00 Fac Char O Corporate Lmts 6.60 5.75 Commodity r:harge/1000gal Cl 1.70 1.50 Commodity Charge/1000gal 01 2.60 2.25 i METERED SEWER Facility Charge $130.00 $130.00 Commodity Charge/1 000 gal 2.20 1.90 WHOLESALE RATE Facility Charge SS1 $125.00 $125.00 Facility Charge SS2 $125.00 $125.00 Commodity Charge11000gal 2.10 2.10 SURCHARGE BOD 0100159 0.00138 TSS 0.00197 0.00171 lrw f Annual Wastewater Billing Comparison OROPOSFD: Calculate 198%) Winter Monthly Billable 1.70 4.66 Total Month S/W Daye Consumption Avers. Volume Volume Volume Faolllly 0fad July S 30 9,076 8,033 6,913 10.06 4,86 14.70 June a 32 1,825 6,438 6,307 10.72 4.98 t6.88 May 8 30 6,600 8,033 6,913 WAS 4.86 14.70 April w 20 7,200 6,832 6,716 9.72 4.60 14.21 Maroh W 31 6,226 6,226 x .96 81101 10.37 4,81 15,18 February w 30 8,750 81760 x .98 8,616 11.25 4.86 16,90 January w 33 7,626 6,837 8,604 11.08 6,12 16.17 December W 29 6,126 6,126 x .98 6,023 8.54 4.60 13,03 November w 29 6,276 18,100190 6,832 5,118 9.72 4.60 14.21 Oolober 9 29 4,776 201 OPO 6,832 6,716 9.72 4,60 14.21 September S 32 6,776 8,436 8,307 10,72 4.96 16.86 August a 30 7,400 8,033 6,913 10106 4,86 11.70 38.1 79,560 $121.99 $58.42 PAM $178.38 CURRENT; Calculate (98%) Winter Monthly Billows 1.60 4.00 fotat Monlfi etW Days Coneumpli Avers Volume Volume Volume Fecllily Billed July s 30 9,076 8,033 81913 8.07 4.00 12.87 June 8 32 7,826 6,436 81307 9148 4.27 13.73 { May a 30 6,000 8,033 6,913 5.67 4.00 12.97 April w 29 7,200 6,832 6,718 5.67 0.87 12,44 Maroh W 01 6,226 8,226 x .98 8,101 9116 413 13.28 February W 30 6,180 6,760 x w 8,616 9,92 4.00 13.92 January W 33 7,625 8,637 6,504 9.76 4.40 11,18 December w 29 5,126 6J,_126 K ,96 61023 7,63 3,81 14.10 November W 29 6,276 18,100180 61832 0,718 t.57 5.87 12,44 October 8 29 4,778 201 OPD 6,632 6,116 6.57 3,87 12.44 ; September 8 32 6,776 8,431. 6,307 9.46 4.27 13,13 Augual a 30 7,400 6,033 6,913 8.87 41100 122.x7 384 79,650 =101,61 $48.63 $188.14 $158,14 Annual $ Change $22,23 Annum % Change 14.24% i , IT Annual Wastewater Billing Comparison PROPOS50: Calculate (98%) Winter Monthly Hillable 1,70 4.66 Total Month S/W Dee Conaum lon Average Volume Volume Volume FaS44Y Billed July S 29 21,126 6,879 6,742 11.46 4.60 15.98 June 6 32 13,650 7,691 7,439 12.65 4.96 17.61 May 9 31 9,660 7,354 7,207 12,26 4.81 17.06 April w 31 10,400 7,354 7,207 12.25 4,81 17.08 March w 20 9,075 6,679 6,742 11.46 4,50 15.96 February w 29 7,000 7,000 x .98 8,860 11,88 4.60 16.18 January W 30 7,100 7,100 x .98 6,958 11.63 4.86 18.48 December W 33 7,126 7,820 7,672 13.04 5.12 18110 November w 29 6,776 8_1775 x ,99 8,640 11.29 4.60 16.78 October 8 29 8,675 20,975 / 90 6,679 8,742 11.46 4.50 15.98 September S 31 10,160 237 OPD 7,364 7,207 12.26 4.61 17.06 Auquet S 31 16,826 7,364 7,207 12.26 4.61 17.06 384 126,160 =143.66 $68.42 =200,27 6200.27 CURRENT: Calculate (98%) Winter Monthly Billable 1.50 4,00 Total Month !J;-w PM Conaumptlon Avaraos Volume Volume Volume Faolil Billed July S 29 21,126 6,878 8,742 10.11 3.87 13.96 E June 8 32 13,550 7,591 7,439 11.16 4,21 16:43 i May a 31 9,650 7,364 7,207 10,81 4.13 14.94 April W 31 10,400 7,364 7,207 10.81 4,13 14.84 March W 29 8,076 6,679 6,742 10.11 3.07 13.96 February W 29 7,000 7,000 x ,90 81860 10,29 3.87 14.18 January W t3 71100 7,100 x ,08 6,968 10.44 4,00 11.44 December w 33 7,126 7,626 7,672 11,61 4.40 16,91 November W 29 0,776 8, ,775 x ,96 6,840 9190 3.87 13,83 October a 29 6,676 20,675 / 08 8,879 8,742 10,11 3.07 13.90 September a 31 10,150 237 UPD 7,364 7,207 10,81 413 14.04 August 8 31 1.6626 7,354 7,207 10____81 ~.13 14.64 364 126,160 =126.93 $48,63 ;176.48 $175,46 i Annual $ Change $24,01 Annual 9. Change 14,14% EXH I B I Tf-Nzj. 1 i 1H. r. .Aq` f.. r1 pTpI- I k a '~H Annual Wastewater Billing Comparison PROPOSED: Calculate (99%) Winter Monthly Billable 1.0 4.86 Total Month S/W O+ys Consumpllon Average Volume Volume Volume Facility Billed July G 32 66,900 9,767 9,662 16.26 4.96 21,22 June S 29 19,233 8,842 6,666 14.73 4.60 13,23 May 8 33 13,600 10,062 9,661 16,76 6.12 21166 April w 28 17,667 8,842 9,665 14.73 4.50 19.23 March W 29 8,067 6,642 8,666 14.73 4.60 19,23 February W 29 28,600 6,642 8,666 :4.73 4.60 19,23 January W 32 8,000 !1,000 x .98 7,840 13.33 4.96 16.29 December W 30 7,933 7,933 x .98 7,774 13.22 4.05 17,67 j November W 33 13,033 13,033 x .98 12,712 21.71 6112 X6,83 October S 30 23,$67 28,966 195 9,147 8,981 16.24 4.66 19.89 September S 26 60,133 305 OPD 6,637 6,367 14.22 4,34 18.66 August S 30 40 933 9,147 6,964 16.24 4.66 `19.89 364 286,366 $164,90 $G6,42 $241.32 $241.32 CURRENT: calculate (98%) Winter Monthly VON* 4.60 4.00 Total Month 97W Days Ooneumption Average Volume Volume Volume Feclllty Billed July a 32 86,900 9,767 9682 14.34 4.27 18,81 June 8 29 19,233 8,842 6,666 13.00 3.67 16.68 I May S 33 13,600 10,062 9,861 14.79 4.40 19,19 I April W 29 17,667 6,842 6,666 1300 3.87 18,66 Merah W 29 6,067 8,842 6,666 13,00 3,87 18,86 February W 29 26,600 8,842 6,666 13.00 3.87 10.98 January W 32 8,000 8,000 x .98 71840 11.76 4.21 16.03 f Deoembur W 30 7,833 7,933 x Be ,7,774 11.66 4.00 18,88 November W 33 13,033 13x033 x .98 12,712 19.16 4.40 23.66 October S 30 23,387 28,968/ 96 9,147 6,964 13,46 4,00 17.46 September 8 26 50,133 306 OPD 8,637 8,367 12.66 3.73 16.26 E August S 30 40,933 9,147 6,904 13.46 4.00 17.46 ; 364 288,366 $163.16 $48.63 $211.68 $21 1.88 , f, Antr.!al $ Change $29.64 Annual % Change 14.00% r EXHIBIT w , , tl ~ r s. 7 t~ 1 Q I COMMERCIAL WASTEWATER MONTHLY IMPACT OF RATE INCREASE ON COMMERCIAL CUSTOMER PROPOSED CURRENT RATES RATES i. FACILITY CHARGE $11.90 $10.00 2. VOLUME CHARGE 70.40 59.24 3. TOTAL $82.30 $69.24 4. CHANGE is a) In Dollars $13.10 a) In Percent 18.93% f USAGE DATA ; A. Conimsrclal discharge based on average monthly water consumption of 40,000 gallons, and wastewater discharge of 32,000 gallons. EXH I I TA.Lm~ k t~ PRETREATMENT WASTEWATER MONTHLY IMPACT OF RATE INCREASE ON A PRETREATMENT CUSTOMER ' PROPOSED CURRENT RATES RATES 1, FACILITY CHARGE $11.90 $30.00 2. ADMINISTRATIVE/ $260.00 $0.00 PROGRAM COSTS 3. SAMPLING/ANALYSIS $140.00 $0.00 COSTS 2. VOLUME CHARGE $1,650.00 $1,875.00 & TOTAL $29061.90 $1,906.00 4. CHANGE a) In Dollars $158.90 b) In Percent 8.24% i , i USAGE DATA: A. Pretreatment discharge based upon 750,000 gallons. r e p i FA'TIeVG PLACES WASTEWATER ' MONTHLY IMPACT OF RATE INCREASE ON A RESTAURANT PROPOSED CURRENT RATES RATES 1. FACILITY CHARGE $12.00 $10.00 2. VOLUME CHARGE 236,00 196.00 3, TOTAL $248.00 $206,00 4. CHANGE I, a) In Dollars $42,00 Win Percent 20.39% USAGE-RATA.- A. Commercial discharge based on average monthly water consti'mption of 100,000 gallons and wastewater discharge of 80,OW 9,aIlons. ~ ; #XHIBIT i r, EQUIPMENT SERVICES WASTEWATER MONTHLY IMPACT OF RATE INCREASE ON A CAR WASH PROPOSED CURRENT RATES RATES 1. FACILITY CHARGE $12.00 $10.00 H 2. VOLUME CHARGE 590,00 480.00 f j 3. TOTAL $602.00 $500.00 4. CHANGE a) In Dollars $102.00 I' b) In Percent 20.40% I I USAGE DATA A. Commercial discharge based on average monthly water consumption of 250,000 gallons and wastswathr discharge of 200,000 gallaris. ~~s. EXH I B t ! i i I EXHIBITS ! ELECTRIC WATER -(D. WASTEWATER i E f ~ EIn9Y/1'i 4 I l CITY OF DENTON UTILITY RATE COMPARISONS (Actuals) Annual Proposed Current Usage Billing Blllin Low Consumption: Electric (R2) 8,250 KWH $662.37 $678.87 Water 89,900 Gals 296.40 269,34 Wastewater 170 GPD 169.07 139.1 f $1,117.84 $1,087.32 Annual Dollar Change $30.52 Annual Percent Change 2.81% 't iI Medium Consumption: Electric (R2) 15,130 KWH $1,141.28 $1,171,64 Water 156,800 Gals 488.43 426.73 Wastewater 195 GPD 174.41 152.64 $1,784.12 $1,749.91 Annual Dollar Change $34.21 Annual Percent Change 1.95% High Consumption; Electric (1112) 17,850 KWH $1,341.83 $1,377.03 Water 209,000 Gals 641.39 682,69 Wastewater 191 GPD 172.37 150.85 R $2,166.89 $2,110.57 Annual Dollar Change $46.02 Annual Percent Change 2.1396 i Y 5 PROP09E0: Annual Electric BllRng Comparison KWH 0.017 7.50 Total Month 81W O Ls Consumj llon End EOA Faellit DOW July S 29 1,325 72.21 22.53 716 101,99 June a 27 792 43.16 13.48 6.76 63,38 May 6 36 882 37.17 11.59 8,76 67161 April w 29 691 26,78 9,88 7,25 46.89 March w ?0 478 23.88 8.13 7.25 39.04 February w 29 480 23.76 8.18 7.26 39,17 January w 32 819 30.49 10.47 8.00 48,96 December w 31 1,003 49,83 17.05 716 74,43 November w 31 490 24.28 8,33 7.75 40.34 October a 28 332 18.09 5.84 7.25 30,99 September S 29 639 23.38 9.16 7,26 45.79 August S 33 932 60`_79 16u84 8.26 74.89 183 81250 0431.37 $140.25 $90.75 $882,37 1 CURRENT: $882.37 KWH 0.019 7.60 Total Month S/W Uayi Conwm Ion Ensue EOA Facility 801ed July a 28 1,325 72,21 26,18 7.26 104,84 I June 8 27 792 43.18 16.06 8,76 84.96 May a 36 882 37.17 12,96 8176 68,88 April w 29 681 28,78 11,04 7.26 47.05 March w 29 476 23.66 9.08 7,25 39.99 February w 29 480 23.76 9112 7.26 40.13 January W 32 818 30.49 11.70 9.00 50,20 December w 31 11003 49,83 19,06 7.76 78.44 November W 31 490 94.20 9.31 7.75 41.32 October 6 29 332 18.09 6.31 7126 31,86 8eplamber a 29 638 29.38 10.24 7.25 48,87 August a 93 932 60,779 17,71 8.26 78,15 i 383 8,260 $431.37 $166,76 $90,75 $678.87 $876.87 RNs ' R2 Annual $ Change ($16,60) Annual % Ohangs -•2,43% 4h, 1. PROPOSED. Annual Electric BilUng Comparison KW11 01017 7,60 total Month S!W WY• Coneumpllon Energy ECA Facility SAW July 8 30 2,235 121.81 38.00 7.50 107.30 June S 30 1,430 77.94 24.31 7.50 106.75 E May 9 32 939 61.18 15.98 8.00 76.14 April w 29 721 36.88 12.26 7.26 66,20 March w 29 789 38.06 13.41 7.26 59,72 February w 32 880 42.57 14,82 6100 85.19 January w 31 1,561 74.46 28,54 7.76 108,76 December w 29 982 48,61 16.69 7.26 72,66 November w 31 829 41.04 14,09 7.76 October S 29 940 8 45.78 14.26 7,26 87,31 7.31 September s 30 2,071 112.87 35.21 7.50 165.68 Au ual g S 32 11873 f02-1 08 31`84 8.00 11.92 ~ ~ 364 16,130 $793.07 $257,21 $91.00 $1,141,28 i I $1141•29 CURRENT: KWk 0.019 7,60 Total Mwith S/W Gaya Conwmollon Enerw 1CA Faelflty Billed July S 30 2,236 121.81 42.47 7.50 171,77 J May une S 330 2 1030 77.94 27.17 7.50 112.81 51.18 1784 8100 77.02 April W 29 721 36.89 13.70 7.25 58,84 March w 29 789 39,00 14.09 7.26 61,30 February w 32 880 42,67 16.34 8.00 $8.91 Decembu w 29 1,581 74.48 29,68 7.76 111,87 ! mbar w 31 902 48,81 18,89 7.26 74.62 Deco 829 41,04 15.75 7.76 64,54 s October S 29 840 46,79 l6A8 7.26 8849 September s 30 2,071 112.87 39,36 7.60 f59,72 August 9 32 1,,873 102,00 35`_89 800 146,67 16,130 $793.07 $287.47 $91 m { !71,54 ; $1,271,64 Rile R2 Annual $ Change ($30,28' Annual % Change -2.68% EXHIBIT i. PROPOSED: Annual Electric Billing Comparison KWH 0,017 7.50 Total Month S/W Daye Consumptlon Enemy EGA Fachity 9MIed July S 32 3,037 165,72 61,83 6.00 226.35 June S 29 2,387 130.09 40.68 7.25 177.92 May 8 33 11813 87.91 27.42 8.25 123,68 ApPR W 29 894 44.26 15,20 7.26 66.70 March w 29 871 43.11 14.61 7.25 65.17 February w 29 883 43.71 16.01 7.26 66.87 January w 32 801 39.66 13.82 S.DD 81.27 December w 30 987 411,86 16,78 7.60 73.14 November w 33 783 39,25 13.48 6.26 60.98 October S 26 904 48,27 15.37 7.00 71,84 September a 30 21601 136.30 42.62 7.60 186.32 August 9 30 -.d L9 118,76 37.04 7.60 163.30 384 17,850 $948.88 $303,46 $91.00 $1,341.33 l CURRENT: $1,341.33 M KWH 0.019 7.60 Total Month S/W pew Consumption Enet , E(A Faclllly BNled July 8 32 3,037 166.72 67,70 8100 231,42 June S 29 2,367 130,09 46.36 7.25 182,89 May S 33 1,613 87.91 30.86 6.26 126.81 AprN W 29 894 44,25 18.99 7.25 68,49, March w 29 871 43,11 16166 7,26 88,91 j February w 29 $83 43.71 16.76 7.26 67,74 January w 32 601 39,86 15,22 8.00 62,87 December W 30 987 48.00 18.76 7.50 76.11 Novsmbet w 33 793 39.26 16,07 8,26 82.67 Oclober S 28 904 48.27 17.16 7.00 73,44 September 8 30 2,501 136,30 47.62 7.60 191,32 August S 30 ?2119 i16,76 11,40 7.50 187,66 A4 17,860 $9418.88 $339.16 $91.00 $077.03 $1, 377.03 Rate = R2 Annual =Change ($36.70) Annual % Change -2,60% i E )K' H I B I T i ~YYL~~r r\~Etis1[wNFu..u,~a Yy.rvx rre;3!,pr, ~ ICD{ Annual Water Billing Qarnpa0son PROPOSED, 2.20 3,30 4,10 8.16 Total Month S/W D>ys Consumption 0 - 16 15 - 30 > 30 0 - 16 16-30 > 0_0 Faelld 811Ied July 8 29 8,200 8,200 0 0 OK 18.04 0.00 0100 7.98 26,92 June a 29 8,200 6,200 0 0 OK 13.64 0.00 0.00 7.88 21.62 i May S 33 5,900 6,800 0 0 OK 12.78 0.00 0100 9.97 21.73 April w 29 8,000 6,000 0 0 OK 1320 0.00 0100 7.98 21.08 March W 29 6,800 5,900 0 0 OK 12.76 0.00 0.00 7.88 20.84 i Februay w 20 4,600 4,600 0 0 OK 9.80 0.00 0.00 7,88 17.78 January IN A2 6,000 6,000 0 0 OK 11.00 0.00 0100 8.89 19.69 December IN 31 81900 6,900 0 0 OK 18,36 0.00 0.00 9.42 27,78 November W 31 7,900 7,900 0 0 OK 17,38 0.00 0.00 8.42 26.90 October S ?0 6,800 8,800 0 0 OK 14.62 0.00 0,00 7.88 22.40 September 8 29 10,300 10,300 0 0 OK 22,88 0.00 0.00 7.88 30.64 Aupwl 9 33 14,800 14,800 0 0 OK 3232^68 0.00 0_00 8.97 41.63 383 89,800 89,900 b 0 8197,78 $500 =0.011 898.62 8299,40 6299.40 OURRENT: 2.00 3,00 3,76 7.40 Total Month 8LW P_aj! Ooneumptlan 0 15 15- so > 30 0 - 16 1530 > 3Q Facility Billed July S 29 8,200 9, 200 p 0 OK 18.40 5,55 0.00 7116 23.66 June S 29 8,200 6,200 0 0 OK 12.40 0,00 0,00 7.16 18,66 May g 33 51800 6,800 0 0 OK 11.80 0,00 0100 4.14 19,74 April w 29 8,000 8,000 0 0 OK 12,00 0.00 0.00 7.15 10,16 I`I1 March IN 29 6,800 6,900 0 0 OK 11.60 000 0.00 7.16 18.76 f February w 29 4,500 4,500 0 0 OK 9.00 0.00 0100 7.16 16.16 fp January w 32 5,000 8,000 0 0 OK 10.00 0.00 0.00 7.89 17,99 December w 31 8,900 8,800 0 0 OK 17.80 0.00 0.00 7,06 25,26 November w 31 7,900 7,900 0 0 OK 16,90 0.00 0.00 7.85 23.46 October f.0 29 9,800 9,900 0 0 OK 13,20 0.00 0.00 7,15 20.36 September 8 29 10,300 10,300 0 0 OK 20.60 0.00 0.00) 7.16 22.76 August 8 33 14,600 14,600 0 0 OK 20.60 0,00 1th 8.1 MA I 363 09,900 99,900 0 0 8179,80 80.00 80,00 $88.54 8269.34 $269.34 { Annual $ Change $27,06 Annual% Change 10,64% EXH 19 1 TNIZONNI-Owaftow it f~iUS:rY,' r ' F of h I Annual Waier Billing Comparison PROPOSED, 2.20 3,30 4.16 9.15 101e1 Month S/W Days Consumption 0 - 16 IS- 30 > 30 0 - 15 IS- 30 > 80 Fr 114 elllod Juty 6 30 19,200 16,000 4,200 0 OK 33.00 13,96 0.00 8.16 65,01 June S 30 16,700 15,000 1,700 0 OK 33,00 5.61 0.00 8.15 48.76 May S 32 13,100 13,100 0 0 OK 29.82 0.00 0,00 9.89 37.51 April w 29 10,500 10,600 0 0 OK 2110 0.00 0.00 7,09 30.98 March w 20 9,900 9,900 0 0 OK 21.18 0.00 0.00 7.88 29.88 February w 32 4,700 4,700 0 0 OK 10,34 0100 0.00 8.69 19.03 E January w 31 8,900 6,800 0 0 OK 14.96 0.00 0,00 8.42 23,36 December w 29 8.400 6,400 0 0 OK 14.06 0.00 0.00 1.88 21.96 November w 31 12,200 12,200 0 0 OK 28.84 0100 0,00 0.42 36.26 October S 29 11,100 11,100 0 0 OK 24.42 0.00 0.00 7,08 32.30 September S 32 18,100 15,000 3,100 0 OK 33.00 10.23 0.00 0.69 51,92 August a 31 28,100 fg,000 13,100 _0 OK 3300 43.?.3 0.00 8,!12 04.85 365 158,900 134,700 22,100 0 =286,34 $72.93 $0.00 $99.16 $1468.43 $488.43 CURRENT; 2.u0 3.00 3.76 7,40 Total Mold S/W Deye Consumption 0 - 15 16 - 30 > 30 Oo- 116 IS- 30 > 30 Fao II S lied July 8 30 19,200 16,000 4,200 0 OK 30,00 12.60 0.00 7.40 50,00 June S 30 16,700 15,000 1,700 0 OK 30.00 5.10 0100 7.40 42.50 t May S 32 13,100 13,100 0 0 OK 28.20 0.00 0.00 7.09 34.09 t April w 20 10,500 10,500 0 o OK 21,00 0100 0.00 7.16 25.16 I March w 29 9,900 91900 0 0 ON 19,80 0.00 0,00 7.16 26.85 February w 32 4,700 4,700 0 0 OK 9.4n D.00 0.00 7,89 17.29 January w 31 8,800 6,900 0 0 OK 13,60 0.00 0.00 1.65 21.26 December w 29 8,400 6,400 0 0 OK 12.60 0.00 0.00 7.16 19,96 November w 31 12,200 12,200 0 0 OK 24.40 0.00 0.00 7,65 32.05 October P 29 11,100 t1, 100 0 0 OK 22,20 0100 0.00 7116 29135 k September a 32 16,100 15,000 3,100 0 OK 30.00 9.30 0.00 7,119 47,16 7tl~96 i August a 31 26 16,000 1, 3L100 0 ON, $0,00 38_h0 0.00 LI 86 385 156,800 134,700 22,100 0 $289,40 $08,30 $0.00 $90.03 $42619 $525.73 Y Annual $ Change $42.70 Annual % Change 10.03% EXH 18 1 T i 't ' 1q,tv,L'YI4'ii3fYlv4, .iA p. v,..-..... i 1 r Annual Water Billing Comparison PROPOSED; 2.20 3.30 4.16 8.16 Total Month S1W Days Consumption 0 - 16 15 - 30 > 30 0 - 15 16 - 30 > 30 Faaillty Billed July S 32 41,300 16,000 15,000 11,300 OK 33.00 49.60 48.90 B.69 139.09 June S 29 22,300 16,000 7,300 0 OK 33.00 2409 0.00 7,811 84.97 May a 33 16,600 16,000 1,800 0 OK 33.00 5,94 0,00 8.97 47.91 April w 28 18,100 16,000 1,100 0 OK 33.00 2.42 0.00 7.88 43.30 March w 29 11,400 11,400 0 0 OK 25.08 0.00 0,00 7188 32,96 February w 29 8,800 6,800 0 0 OK 14.98 0.00 0,00 7.88 22,84 January w 32 4,100 4,100 0 0 OK 9.02 0100 0.00 8.69 17,71 December w 30 8,500 8,600 0 0 OK 14.30 0.00 0100 8.15 22,45 November w 33 8,600 8,500 0 0 OK 16.70 0.00 0100 8.87 21.67 October S 28 18,800 15,000 3,600 0 OK 33.00 11.88 0100 7.81 62.49 September S 30 31,100 16,000 15,000 1,100 OK 33.00 49.50 4.67 6.15 96.22 August S 80 25,600 15, 10600 0 OK 33.00 34.05 0.00 6,16 75.80 3" 208,000 142,300 64,300 12,400 $313,06 $177.88 %61,46 $99.89 $041.39 $941,39 CURRENT: 2.00 3100 316 7,40 Total Month AM Days Consumpllon 0 - 15 15 - 30 > 30 0 - 16 IS- 30 > 30 Facl Ballad July 9 32 41,300 16,000 16,000 11,300 OK 30,00 46,00 42.38 7.99 126.27 June a 29 22,300 15,000 7,300 0 OK 30.00 21.90 0.00 1.16 59.05 May S 33 18,800 15,000 1,800 0 OK 30.00 6140 0.00 8.14 43,64 1 April w 29 16,100 16,000 1,100 0 OK 30.00 2,20 0100 7115 39.35 Mach w 28 11,400 14,400 0 0 OK 22.00 0.00 0.00 7,15 29,95 February w 29 8,900 6,800 0 0 OK 13.60 0,00 0,00 7.16 20.1E January iM 32 4,100 4,100 0 0 OK 8,20 0.00 0,00 7.89 16.09 December w 30 81500 8,600 0 0 OK 13.00 0100 0,00 7.40 20.40 November tN 33 81600 61500 0 0 OK 17.00 0100 0100 8.14 26.14 October S 28 18,600 16,000 3,900 0 OK 30.00 10,80 0.00 6,94 4711 t September S 30 31,100 16,000 16,000 1,100 OK 30.00 46,00 4.13 7,40 6663 August S 70 26600 15, 10,600 0 OK 30.00 31,60 00.00 740 68"„90 384 209,000 142,300 54,300 12,400 $254,80 $181.80 $48.60 $89,79 $692,09 $68299 j E Annual $ Change $64.70 Annual % Change 10.07% 1 EXHIBIT.~~- r _ 1 7 } Annual Wastewater Billing Comparison PROPOSED: Calculate (96%) Winter Monthly Billable 1,70 4.86 lotal Month S/W Days Conaum Ion Avert Volume Volume Volume Facltlty Billed July S 29 8,200 4,930 4,931 8,21 4.60 12.71 E June S 29 6,200 4,930 4,831 8.21 4,60 12.71 May S 33 6,800 6,610 5,498 9.35 6.12 14.46 k April W 29 6,000 4,930 4,831 9.21 4.50 12.71 March W 29 6,800 6,800 x .90 5,664 8,66 4.50 14.16 February W 29 4,500 4,500 x .98 4,410 7.60 4.60 11199 January W 32 5,000 6,000 x .06 4,900 8.33 4.96 13.29 December W 31 8,600 6,270 6,106 8.78 4.81 13.58 November W 31 7,900 16,300 / 90 6,270 5,166 8,78 4.81 13.66 October 5 29 8,600 170 QPD 4,930 4,831 8121 4.60 12.71 September a 29 10,300 4,930 4,631 8.21 4.60 1211 Au®uel S 33 14,600 5,610 6,498 9135 5.12 14.46 363 89,900 $102.81 $56.27 =169.07 i' $159.07 CUR%N1: Calculate (98%) Winter Monthly Billable 1,60 4.00 Total Month S/W Oaye Coneum Ion AvereQe Volume Volute Volume FaeIIItY Billed July 8 20 8,200 4,930 4,831 7,26 3.87 f 1, i i June a 29 8,200 4,930 4,931 7,25 3.87 11.11 May 6 33 6,800 61810 6,498 8.25 4.40 12.85 April W 29 8,001. 41930 4,831 7.26 3.87 11.11 March W 29 6,800 6,800 x .90 6,684 8,63 3.87 12,39 February w 29 4,600 4,600 X.90 4,410 6.62 3.67 10.48 January W 32 5,000 6,000 x .99 4,900 7.35 4.27 11.62 December W 31 8,800 5,270 6,186 7.76 4.13 11.86 November W 31 1,900 16,3W I 90 5,270 5,165 7,75 4113 11,80 October S 29 8,800 170 GPD 4,930 4,831 7.26 3.67 11.11 I September S 29 10,300 4,930 4,031 7.25 3.97 11,11 August 6 33 14,E 5,010 5,498 9.26 4.40 iR06 383 80,900 $90.71 11148.40 $139,11 $139,11 E Annual $ Change $19.98 Annual % Change 14.36% EXHIBlIff ( i Annual Wastewater Billing Comparison PROPOSED: Coloulale (98%) Winter Monthly Billable 1.70 4.65 Total Month S1W Da a Consum Ion Avers a Volume Volume Volume FaoIII Billed July S 30 19,200 6,837 5,720 9.72 4.66 14.37 June 6 30 16,700 6,837 5,720 9.72 4.85 14.37 May S 32 13,100 6,226 6,102 10,37 4.96 16.33 April W 29 10,600 6,642 5,630 9.40 4.50 13.90 March w 29 9,900 6,642 6,530 9.40 4.60 13.90 February W 32 4,700 4,700 x .96 4,606 7.83 4.96 12,79 k January W 31 6,800 6,800 x .96 6,664 11.33 4.81 16113 December W 29 6,400 8,400 x .96 6,272 10,86 4.60 16.18 i November W 31 12,200 6,032 5,911 10.05 4.81 14.86 October S 29 11,100 17,800192 5,642 6,630 9,40 4,50 1190 September S 30 18,100 19513PD 5,837 6,720 9.72 4.86 14.37 August a 32 28,100 8,226 6,102 10.37 4.96 16.33 384 158,800 =117,69 $66.42 $174.41 $174.41 CURRENT: Calculate (98%) Wlnler Monthly Billable 1.50 4,00 total Mon B! Days Consum2tlon Avery Volume Volume Volum• Faclll Billed July 8 3~0 18,100 6,837 6,120 868 4.00 12.58 June 8 30 18,700 51637 6,720 8.68 4.00 12.66 May 6 32 13,100 6,226 6,102 9.15 4,27 13.42 April W 29 10,600 5,842 6,630 8128 3.87 12.16 Match W 29 9,900 5,642 5,630 8.29 3,87 12.18 February W 32 4,700 4,700 x .98 4,806 8.81 4,21 11,18 January w 31 8,800 6,800 x .98 6,884 10.00 4.13 14.13 December W 29 8,400 6,400 X .N 6,272 9.41 3,67 13.27 November W 31 12,200 0,032 61911 8187 4.13 13.00 1 October 9 29 11,100 17.W1 92 6,842 6,630 8.29 3.87 12.18 September 8 30 16,100 19S OPD 5,831 6,720 8,68 4.00 12,66 1 August 8 32 26,100 6,226 8,102 9.15 L. 2j 1342 ) 364 156, 800 $101.11 $48,63 $162.84 ` $162,84 f , Annual $ Ohangs $21,77 ? Annual % Change 14,26% r EXH I BIT Ali 't(l~fSx'•L64ri 1sarw,mree~„,..,,. t Annual Wastewater Billing Comparison PROPOSED: Calculate (98%) Winter Monthly BOlsble 1.70 4.66 Total Month S/W Da Ls Consum Ion Avera Volume Volume Volume Focill Billed July 6 32 41,300 6,119 6,998 10.19 4.98 15,16 June S 29 22,300 5,645 -,434 9.24 4.50 13.73 May 8 33 16,500 6,310 6,184 10.61 6.12 16.63 April W 29 16,i00 5,646 6,434 9,24 4.50 13173 March W 29 11,400 6,646 5,434 9.24 4,60 13.73 February w 20 8,800 8,800 x .06 6,864 11.33 4.50 15.82 January W 32 4,100 4,100 x .98 4,018 8.83 4.96 11.78 December W 3D 8,600 6,600 x .98 6,370 1013 4.66 16.46 November W 33 6,600 6,310 8,104 10.61 6.12 16.63 Ocloba S 28 iB,600 17,400191 5,354 6,247 8.92 4.34 13.28 September a 30 31,100 191 OPD 6,736 5,622 9.68 4.65 14.21 August S 30 25,600 5,736 6,822 9.66 4.65 14,21 884 209,000 8115.95 866.42 8172.37 $172.37 CURRENT: Calculate (98%) Wlnlar Monthly BNlable 1.50 4.00 Total Month S/W Wys Consumplion vera Volume Volume Volume Facl~ Billed July 8 32 41,300 5,119 6,006 8.09 4.27 13,26 June S 29 22,300 6,646 6,434 6.15 3,67 12,02 May 8 33 16,800 6,310 8,104 0.20 4.40 13.86 1 j AprN W 20 18,100 6,646 5,434 8.15 3.67 12.02 I Much W 29 11,400 5,546 6,434 8.16 3.07 12.0E February W 29 6,800 8,000 x .90 6,884 10,00 3.97 13.08 January W 32 4,1011 4,100 x N 4,016 0.03 4.27 10,29 Donemben W 30 8,600 8,600 x .90 0,370 0.58 4.00 13,66 November W 33 0,500_ 6,310 8,184 0.28 4.40 13,66 Ocloben S 26 18,600 17,400191 8,364 5,247 7.87 3,73 11,80 September 8 30 31,100 191 OPD 5,736 5,022 8.43 4.00 12.43 August a 30 26,500 6,730 6,622 8.49 A. 00 19-40 384 208,000 8102,31 846.53 8150.86 6150.86 Annual 8 Change 821,53 Annual % Change 14,27% E j EXHIBITIL....- ~w T W T 1 fill' ~.°w CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 23, 1991 The Council convened into the Work session at 5:15 p.m, in the Civil Defense Room. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; council members Al.exander, Chew, Perry, Smith and Trent. ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins 1, -rho Council received a report from and held a discussion to h the A Dentn Municipal Airport. various elevant with issues r Rick Woofolk, Chair Advisory A sport history O of the Airport, and the future outlook of the Airport. He stated that the Denton Airport was build in the early 194018 by the Civil Aeronautics Administration to be used as a fighter pilot training facility to replace Hartlee Field. The original runway was 4,150 feet lonq and 150 Poet wide, The war was winding down about the time the field was completed and was j never really used for its intended purpose. The U.B. Oovernment deeded the facilit;• to the City of Denton the about 1945. The City leased the facility for approximately } 15 years for $100 per year. The Airport was primarily used for farming, in the mid 1960's the value of the Airport increaseI slightly and the City entered into a new lease for $100 per month to AeroSmith of Denton. AeroSmith, using approximately $104,000 raised by bond money through the City, committed to building a hanger from which to provide service, The hanger ! which presently houses AirDenton was that facility. AeroSmith 4 did repay a portion of the cost of building the facility before it went bankrupt. In the early 1970's the City Council decided to recognize an increase in the value to the Airport and appointed an Airport Advisory Board to help develop the facility. It was not until 1983-84 that the City took over the airfield operations ns Aviand ation hired Administration a embarked manager. on ge 1974 the Fed a four step program to upgrade the Denton facility, Since 1975 a proximately $2437,000 had been spent approximately Municipal Airport. The City had funded app amount, Today, the Denton Airport was located on 640 acres with a 50150 foot runway, A 1,00 foot extension had been added since it was built. 240 acres located on the west side of the Airport were leased for farming purposes fur $3,500 per year. 60 acres located on the southeast corner were not currently leased, of aircraft the n Airportae e availableties other brought land currentl leased in $30,000 per year. 30% for b 1 I' tl I y~ 1 err,;,; City of Denton city council minutes July 23, 1991 Page 2 land space waa unleased at this point in time. Fuel and fee6 collected from aircraft related activities amounted to approximately $21,000 per year. There were approximately 35 jobs at the Airport generating a payroll of $464,000 per year, The North Texas Council of Governments recently reported on the economic impact of the Denton Municipal Airport which showed that 37,750 visitors entered Denton through the Airport annually, Several businesses such as Texas Health Enterprises had located in Denton due to the Airport. Future developments for the Airport included the hiring of a firm to do a comprehensive new master plan for the Airport. The FAA had recommended that the City undertake the plan and at their direction it was more comprehensive than normal because they want to plan the Denton Airport into a reliever status airport. The cost of the master plan was estimated at $100,000 with the City having to provide $10,000, An application was pending for the purchase of 31 acres of land on the south end of the field to allow an extension of the runway 1,0001, This would allow usage by many additional aircraft which currently could not use the Denton facility. Additionally talka had been held with the FAA to extend the runway 1500 feet to the north which would give a total of 7,650 feet of length, The FAA had asked the City to look 20-25 years ahead in planning, The Airport Zoning Board, which was recently created, was very important to ensure that land use surrounding the Airport was appropriate, The Airport needed the Couneil,s continued support, ideas and backing, The FAA had recognized the Airport as a vital link in the regional transportation system, Council Member Perry asked about the FAA designation of the Airport. Woolfolk replied that the FAA saw the Denton Airport as being a reliever facility to take the private jet traffic away from Love Field and DPW. k Council Member Trent stated that cities the size of Denton 1 without an airport were trying to get an airport. The right ingredients developed at the Airport would be a boom to the economy. 2. The council received presentations and discussed the Hotel/Motel Tax recipients budgets by the Denton Historical Commission Museum and Foundation, Greater Denton Arts Council and the North Texas Fair Association. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that the course of events would be to hear the budget discussions and presentations and later formally approve those budgets, t kf~,; 5 City of Denton City Council Minutes July 23, 1991 Page 3 Robert Edge, Vice-Chair/Denton County'rlistorical Museum, stated that the museum was located in the Courthouse on the Square. The major portion of the Museum's funding came from the County (578) with in-kind provisions for occupancy of the building, utilities, maintenance and custodial, staff and benefits, printing and postage, professional training and office equipment and supplies, other funding came from grants (138), state occupancy tax (248), gift shop and user fees (58) and donations (18). Most expenditures were for personnel with other expenditures for the insurance of the collection and insurance for the Board of Trustees and operating personnel, exhibit cases, environmental controls and contingency funds. Some items in the budget would be worked into a grant to help with the costs. Next year the Museum would need $45,486 from the Lalor funds. Leon D. Callihan, Sr. presented the Historical Foundation budget. He stated that the Foundation was set up as the Denton County Historical commission could not accept money from a group as it was an extension of the county government. if it did accept money, the money would have to go into the county General Fund and would not necessarily be used for the Museum, General .office operations were funded by the County government. A portion of the Lalor funds were used, at times, for the Museum. A detailed listing of expenditures was included in the agenda packet.` The budget for the Greater Denton Arts Council was presented by Herbert Holl, Holl first presented a summary of programs and services which was included in the agenda packet. Financial highlights included grant money from such corporations as Union Pacific, Jostens, Target and Mervyns, The Arts Council was I' $4,800 in the black from the previous budget, The operational budget for the Arts Council was a cash basis and gross figures were used, not net figures. $15,00o was paid out last year for grants to art organizations with $20,000 proposed for next year, The Denton Benefit League provided the Arta Council with grants for replacement of chairs and tables. The end of the year bank balance was $50,000 of which $17,000 was committed to grant payments, $5,000 for tables and chairs. A detailed presentation of the budget was presented in the agenda packet, Bob Powers presented the North Texas Fair Association budget, He reviewed the events which would be happening at the upcoming North Texas Fair, Total revenue for the year was $259,220 of which $181,000 was from the Fair., The Lalor funds included $56,000 with $22,000 of rentals. Total expenditures was $245,575 of which $155,622 was for the Fair. The projected budget for the Lalor funds was $56,000 which was broken down into salary, printing, advertising, travel, postage, and office supplies. T__ T _ ~l t ~I F' aYL1 tq 1 n. ~1 City of Denton City Council Minutes 7 July 23, 1991 Page 9 3r The Council received a briefing and held a discussion regarding House Redistricting. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that the item was on the agenda to continue Council dialog about this subject. Under Council direction, staff made an attempt to encourage the Governor to veto the legislative redistricting plan which would place Denton in three different districts. The Governor did not veto the legislation and there was a hope that the Secretary of Commerce would adjust the census figures which would have allowed the Legislature to take another look at the redistricting plan, The Secretary of Commerce decided not to adjust the figures. With that action, all legislative remedies hLd been exhausted with judicial remedies a possibility. Debra Drayovitch, City Y,ttorney, stated that the first lawsuit contesting the House redistricting had been filed by the Republican Party of Texas. Since then, there had been a number of minority organizations that had filed suit also. She there was interest from Council to pursue questioned if litigation concerning the redistricting. Consensus was to keep the item on future agendas to keep the facts current on this issue, q, The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding a proposed lease agreement between Greater Denton Arts Council and Denton Community Theater for the Campus Theater. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that in October 1990 the City and the Greater. Denton Arts Council signed an agreement regarding the Campus Theater. one of the provisions of the lease was a there arrangement so that the d ylto-dabe some y operation would come management the Community Theater organization, The city needed to approve the management agreement. The City staff had not been involved with the negotiations with the contract and had been furnished a copy of the agreement in the last few days, Herbert Holl, Greater Denton Arts Council, stated that one of the goals of the negotiations was to assure that all of the responsibilities taken on with the City's agreement were met, Another goal was to determine a fair way to balance the fact that the Community Theater would assume the major responsibility of the exlenses of the building. The length of the agreement with the ".ommunity Theater coincides with the i length of the agreement wi.h the City. k i F • i3 .J City of Denton City Council Minutes July 23, 1991 Page 5 Consensus of the Council was to have the City Attorney review the agreement before placing for Council approval. 61 The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the results of the Public Technology Inc. (PTI) Fire Station Location Study. City Manager Harrell stated that one of the major items in the proposed budget was the various options for staffing Fire Station 6 and what the annual costs would be for the various options. One of the major factors to also be considered was the possibility of making adjustments to the fire station locations. Because of that, staff felt it might be helpful to review the history of the City's fire location planning efforts, John Cook, Fire Chief, stated that prior to his appointment as Fire Chief, the City purchased computer software from Public Technology, Inc. to assist in fire station location planning, The construction of Station Five and the new Station six were the results of a study made of the City using the PTI software. For the purpose of the study, 150 Fire Demand Zones were identified, Then, various scenarios were examined to III determine which areas of the City needed an additional fire station. The criteria used was a five minute initial response time based upon the State Board of Insurance Key Rate was also a requirements. Five minutes anticipationtofalthe factor starting of incidents as well. f` construction of Station Six, the PTI survey was updated and included recent changes in streets, highways, new annexations, etc, As a result, two more demand zones were added, Results of the update indicated that overall responses could be improved by one zone when al). six stations were opened. This was a direct result of recently completed street and highway work. Regardless of which of the four new scenarios was examined, there was a net improvement over current conditions. The various scenarios considered included having all six stations open, closing Station One and keeping the rest of the stations open, closing Station Three and keeping the rest of and the stations open, and combining Stations One and Three keeping the rest of the stations open. The worst scenario was to close Station Three and leave Station One open. Response times would improve in all four scenarios if the Opticom System were completely installed, A conclusion of the survey was that there would be almost as good fire protection in terms of the total number of zones by operating five fire stations instead of six. This provided some flexibility to where personnel would be placed and would eliminate some overlap of services. City Manager Harrell stated that the only reason that staff was looking at the possibility of operating with five stations as opposed to six, was the cost of the yearly operation/maintenance costs associated with keeping a station running. it Council felt comfortable with a program of five stations, yearly operation and maintenance costs would be reduced by $100,000 - 2000,000. e~ . 41 City of Denton City Council Minutes July 23, 1991 Page 6 Council Member Smith asked if the area around Station Three was large enough to house the administrative branch of the Fire Department if Station One were closed. Cook re lied that a space study was in the process of probably was not large enough butsother p alternatives might be available. were closed, ouncil c maintained. 1 emergency services sand adequate manpower be one Cook replied yes that if there were a fixed amount of the stations j resources, it was easier to spread them over tive work over six stations. There was no way, given thec same level that quality stations sced that b he operated d do and widelfive stations. City Manager Harrell stated that staff could develop further the option of keeping Station Three open and operate with five stations to add with the other options to consider during the budget process. Mayor Castleberry also suggested the possibility of closing Stations One and Three and opening a new station. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the development of the options. Council Member Trent asked that the Opticom System be looked at during the budget process. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the abatement of dilapidated structures. Jesus Nava, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that its addition to the priority Council had given the issue, the neighborhood organizations in southeast and SiWest nce Denton 1905, there made it a priority for their neighborhoods. had been 85 structures demolished through the CDSd Program at a ' cost of $89,004. That was basically the only aou,roe of money available to pay for demolition. Ninety four demolitions were done by private owners since 1996, The Municipal Judge had asked that before entering properties, the Code Enforcement officers and the Building de Inspectors the a legal ability a to enter et warrant which would provi the property and inspect it, I ~t City of Denton City Council Minutes July 23, 1991 Page 7 Cathorine Tuck, Administrative Assistant, stated thaItthO Cod$ outlined the steps to abate substandard structures. was not proposed to change the Cude but rather develop strategies to enhance the system. Tuck reviewed procedures tinvoprovi i nthefor a substandard building and the The agenda packet contained detailed information concerning structures conduc that information. Pr of procedures priorities$ comprehensive inventory y consent forms and search warrants, notice and order letters and public hearings. i Nava presented considered eci wi pd sides of structures in the City which we 7. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding joint ovship contract Water Distrito elating Denton and the Upper to the Ray Roberts Water Treatment Plant, Bob Nelson, Executive Director for utilities, stated that the eL directive i t enter a Water II main issue was to reaffirm Council's ownership contract with the Upper early and mid 19Aater District. He stated that during several surrounding cities began requesting water service. The Council then took the position that Denton should not be in the wholesale water business, Due to pressing needs, Denton entered into a contract with the Lake Cities Municipal Utilities Authority the that itit dof' id Hickory be At that point, the pointnt, , Council recognized E wholesale water business. The position was that the city would sell water on an interim basis but that as soon as the City built its next water plant, those cities would have to become ! artners in a future Denton water plant, Denton assisted, and p often was the driving force, in the creation of the UTRWD for the purpose of helping the cities in the region get raw water part the owners and to become joint ownership contractbwass good but nit The concept did require Denton to give up some control over it's water production facilities. Denton and the UTRWDre were now finalizing the Joint ownership negotiations. ere two other contracts other than the Joint Ownership contract which were the treated water contract and the water transportation contract. Legal action taken to date was to have the contract reviewed by the City Attorney and the Bond Counsel, The Bond counsel advised that there was no problem with the bonds provided the contract was drafted properly, that there always were risks. associated ith Joint ownershi and that a Water Specialist At o ney. t'The recommended the City y contract was currently under review by Robin Lloyd, a water specialist attorney in Austin who advised that such joint contracttamo nt,legal fees the n present advised ownerships the $9,500 of risk exceed could extensive joint ownership might Staff was prior requesting to Council's thei more affirmation concept be required. , t`! City of Denton City Council Minutes July 23, 1991 Page 8 The main issues regarding the Regional Water District included that water was essential for economic growth of the region and also for Denton, a coordinated development could save money, and the economies of scale were possible in a coordinated/ joint development. Basic options available were to sell wholesale water to the UTRWD, joint ownership with the UTRWD or do neither and Denton would serve only itself plus its present commitments to Cornith and Lake Cities Municipal Utilities Authority. Advantages of selling wholesale were that Denton would retain control of the water plant, it gained economies of scale, and would provide water for the region, Disadvantages would be that Denton would most likely be subject to rate reviews by the Texas Water Commission, Denton's retail customers would have to subsidize the District unless the Council agreed not to charge the 6% return on investment on the wholesale customer's part of the plant. Under joint ownership?, there was no 6% fee. Nelson continued with advantages of joint ownership as opposed to wholesale sales. Denton would not have to pay for plant capacity for other cities, Denton would keep its existing low cost plant for its own retail customers, Denton would recapture 1.2 million gallons of capacity now committed to Cornith and .5 million gallons committed to Lake Cities Municipal Utilities Authority, the District would be able to 'qualify for an additional $6.5 million in water development bond funds to be used for pipelines and would gain economies of scale. Disadvantages included loss of some control, risk of losing controlling interest in the future, may be required to build future expansion before Denton needed any additional capacity, and future sales of excess water treatment plant capacity might not be able to recover 6% return on investment, Advantages of doing nothing included the fact that it was the least risk for Denton, Denton would retain full control of its water, system and avoided possible partnership lawsuits and Water Commission rate cases. Disadvantages of doing nothing included regional cities/water supply corps might not be able to obtain a surface water supply, Denton had led regional cities to believe Denton would share its water plant, Denton would have to r.ede[iiyn its water plant form 10 MOD to 6 MOD which was perhaps a $200,000 engineering cost. Nelson presented a comparative cost of the three options including a savings per year and a savings percentage, Detailed information was included in the agenda backup materials, City Manager Harrell stated that staff needed Council to determine if Denton would maintain its commitment to a joint ownership option, The Pub1S,c Utilities Board felt it was still the best way to go but before more money, was spent in preparing the contract, it was necessary to know the direction the council wanted to go. If Council decided it was the right direction to proceed, it was necessary to make sure that the joint ownership contract wao in the City's best interest and protected Denton. l L 7 i r L' 1 City of Denton City Council Minutes j July 23, 1991 1 Page 9 Council continued with a lengthy discussion regarding the pros M and cons of joint ownership, the changes in philosophy of the Water District, the moving of customers ~ Upper Trinity Regional to the UTRWD from Denton, the philosophy of the 63 fee and the F issue of "interim" water supply versus a "firm" water supply. Mike Blewett, Cornith City Council, stated that the Cornith City Council was divided on the UTRWD and the demand rate. He C felt it was necessary for plan for water 50 years in advance. He personally would vote for the joint ownership contract. Consensus of the Council was to place this issue on another work session to study the issue in further detail. B. The Council was to have received a report and hold a discussion regarding the state budget as it affected higher education, Mayor Castleberry stated that he had polled the Council and that this item was to be moved to another agenda, With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. ~i BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS i JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS 3426C i E i i i lA?k.IH ::i j,1 b f~ f CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 30, 1991 1 The Council convened into the Work Session at 3:30 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry, Council Members Perry, Smith and Trent. ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins, Council Members Alexander and Chew. i 1. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving a compromise settlement and release agreement with Michael Wilson, The foLlowing ordinance was considered: AN ORDINANCE OP THE CITY OF DENTON, APPROVING A COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT WITH MICHAEL WILSON: AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote. Trent "nay," Smith "aye," Perry "ayo," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." The motion failed for lack of a quorum. j The vote was 3-1. I Council Member Perry moved to postpone consideration of the t ordinance until later in the meeting when other Council Members had arrived. Smith seconded the motion to postpone consideration of the ordinance. Debra Draycvitch, City Attorney, stated that the motion would also require a majority vote, Council Member Smith withdrew her second of the motion, and the motion was withdrawn from consideration due to lack of a second, 2. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding joint ownership contract issues between the City of Denton and the Upper Trinity Regional Water District relating to the Ray Roberts Water Treatment Plant and give staff direction. Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, provided a recap of the issues discussed at the previous meeting concerning area regional water concerns and working towards a common goal of a water supply, Nelson stated that the City of Denton wanted to build and operate their own water plant. The joint agreement with the Water District needed to be structured with that goal in mind. Council Member Alexander joined the meeting, Nelson stated the three main issues regarding regional water included water was essential for the economic growth of the region, coordinated development could save money, and economy of scale was possible in coordinated development, i 1 ~s t City of Denton City Council Minutes July 30, 1991 Page 2 Nelson explained that he was using rough dollar estimates when discussing cost versus recovery of the dollar amounts. He also discussed recovery of costs with the option of the sale of water plant resources. Council Member Chew joined the meeting. Nelson explained that several options were available to the council concerning the capital costs of a water treatment plant. He compared the costs of the City of Denton building the water plant with and without the cooperation of the Water District. Further discussion concerning the options was held. Mayor Castleberry asked what further legal requirements would i be required if the City entered into the Agreement. r i Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney stated that most of the legal issues would need to be addressed in Executive session. Mayor Castleberry stated that specific direction could not be given to staff without the information from the Attorney. Council Member Chew stated that he would not be willing to do anything that would be detrimental to the ratepayer of the City i of Denton. council Member Alexander structured stated that he would like to see a carefully drawn contract mutually beneficial. Council Member Chew left the meeting. Ms. Drayovitch stated that contracts could be drawn up which could be compared for savings and cooperation. Council Member Chew returned to the meeting. The Mayor stated that the contract needed to be discussed at the next meeting since no Executive Session was scheduled for this meeting, The consensus of the Council was to continue to pursue ali alternatives and bring different options to the next meeting. Mr. Nelson was al3o instructed to have the attorneys begin pursuing a wholesale contract. 3. The Council received a presentation and held a discussion of the budget for the Denton Convention and Visitors Bureau. George Gilkison, Chairman of the Denton Convention and Visitors Bureau, highlighted to activities of the Bureau as outlined in the agenda back up which included conventions, tourism and work with the film bureau. Mr. Gilkison also outlined the short VA , City of Denton City Council Minutes July 30, 1991 Page 3 term and long term marketing plan goals for the Bureau. These goals motaxa0°Amdetailed budgets wasOprovidedeinetheragenda hotel/motel packet. venter onhI-35 v1d like to see the _ Smith stad that Council eMember The meeting recessed at 4:53 p.m. for dinner, The meeting reconvened at 5:05 P.M. ' The Mayor stated he was going to change the order of the agenda to consider item #1. ance The Council clement and adoption release agreementnwith approving a compromise sett } 1' Michael Wilson. The following ordinance was considered. NO. 91-110 AN ROMINE CE OF THE BETTLEMENT LAND RELEASE DENTON AGREEMENT IN WITH WCOMILSON; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. { MICHAEL AEL W Perry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the h 'ord nance. On atoll vote, Trent "nay, Alexander aYe, "aye." Motion carried with Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry a 5-1 vote. The Council returned to the regular agenda order. The council received a report and mh ld Mercer u onio con 4'ncerning a preliminary report by proposed classification and compensation program for the City. of Denton. Of Tom Klinck# Mercer, Inc. Personnel, tlinei of othe William M. The guidelines obyectives of the employee who compensation study. a revised and the City Presented Merobr were to develop se the comprehensive salary management apr g standardize the Pay for or performance process, simplify nd current Practices were competitive program, and ensure the city's pay p in marketde and t ileduinformation Wasuprtheovided Cain the with current organization. report provided to the Coitnoil as back up . this item. P, l :z City of Denton City Council Minutes July 30, 1991 Page 4 Riley described the current system in place. The City had a step-rate pay system with nine different salary structures including Civil Service. Current outdated job information needed to be updated and the job evaluation process had become cumbersome. The City's fiscal capabilities I'1 also impacted its ability to provide additional funds to pay employees what employees wanted to be paid Riley outlined the project's approach to dealing with the City's objectives. Phase I included internal equity issues or the relationship of current positions across nine different salary structures. Phase II required a market analysis of the positions and salary structure design, Phase III developed a pay for performance program to allow employees to move through the salary structure system, and Phase IV outlined II recommendations for implementation of the new compensation program. Riley outlined the procedures used by the Mercer firm to implement each phase of the study. Council Member Trent expressed his conoarn for the accomplishment of equitable compensation for those at both the high and low end of the pay spectrum. Riley pointed out that the pay for performance plan properly administered within established guidelines would accomplish e uitable compensation over a period of time, Those at the high end of the spectrum would have to realize that their percentage rate of compensation would be less than those at the bottom end. 'Mayor Castleberry stated that the key to the program was management and their evaluation of employees. Riley concurred that the Council would be asking the management to take more direct control of their employees in terms of pay compensation which they have not been able to do under the step plan and across-the-board increases. Council Member Perry questioned the basis of organizations used for market comparison for positions. Riley stated that the entities outlined in the hand out included survey results of the North Texas Region. Because of the many varied positions in the City, it was necessary to match some positions to their counterparts in the private sector. Council Member Trent elaborated that he felt the list of comparison organizations did not provide enough comparison with the private sector. t i City of Denton City Council Minutes July 30, 1991 Page 5 Cathleen Chambliss, William M. Mercer, Inc., stated that in the listing of Sources of Competitive Data, Company C, Company J, Company K and Company BB were private Denton employers who had provided information to the Denton Personnel Association survey which was a confidential survey. Klinck stated that part of the implementation strategy was to start training managers and supervisors on the pay for performance strategy during the first year for implementation in the second year. The City would also be finalizing job descriptions, rewriting policies and rev'.ewing legality, and updating our computer system for the new cnanges in pay plan. The proposed budget outlined the optionn for bringing the 12% below minimum employees to minimum and providing increases for other employees. Council Rember Perry questioned how many actual human beings were effected in the 12% below minimum category. Tom Klinck stated approximately seventy-five employees city wide, Council Member Smith asked how many actual human beings were in, the over 120% category. Klinck stated that he did not have an actual number. ~ Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that there were only two job classifications in the over 120% classification. Council Member Alexander asked how many city's in the area are using the pay for performance program. Klinck stated that he knew Fort Worth and Garland had implemented. Riley stated many cities were trying to implement the system and most problems occurred when sufficient flinding was not allocated for the merit matrix system. Council Member Alexander stated his concern of implementing a pay for performance structure which was not funded sufficiently to keep up with the cost of living. 5. The Council received delivery of 1991-92 proposed budget. John McGrane, Executive Director for Finance, stated that the proposed budget was based on the preliminary tax appraisal roll. The certified appraisal roll was $92 million lose than the preliminary roll. Alternatives to deal with the decrease in the appraisal roll and how it effected tho City would be presented at the next Council meeting. E : Y E i City of Denton City Council Minutes July 30, 1991 Page b b. The meeting adyourned to the Visual Arts Center. The Counoil reconvened into the Special Called Meeting at 8:00 p.m, in the Visual Arts Center., corner of Bell and Hickory, Denton, Texas. 1. The Council ronsidered approval of a resolution of appreciation for retiring Board/Commission members. The following resolution was considered: "RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION" "RETIRING BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS: F 4 WHEREAS, the services performed by the City of Denton's Bt.,rds and Commissions are of great value to the Denton City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to commend the members of the City's Boards and Commissions for the many hours of volunteer service they devote to the betterment of our community; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to public'~y acknowledge its appreciation -o the retiring members of all Denton Boards and Commission; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: That the sincere and warm appreciation to the retiring members of the City's Boards and Commissions, felt by the citizens and staff of the City of Denton, be formally conveyed to them in a permanent manner by spreading this Resolution upon the official minutes of the City of Denton; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the City Council of Denton does hereby officially and sincerely extend its best wishes to the retiring Board and Commission members to continue to serve our community. i :'AOSZD AND APPROVED this the 30th day of July, 1991. BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: i . I' 1 i± .1 City of Denton City Council Minutes July 30, 1991 Page 7 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY BY., Perry motioned, Chew seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. The Mayor distributed plaques of appreciation to the retiring Board and Commission members in attendance. Betty Williams, Deputy City Secretary, administere4 the oath of office to newly appointed and reappointed Board and Commission members in attendance. 2. The Council considered approval of a resolution of appreciation for retiring Council Members. The following resolution was considered: "RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION" RETIRING COUNCIL MEMBERS HUGH AYER, RANDALL BOYD APIs BOB GORTON 1 WHEREAS, the City of Denton has been extremely fortunate in the past four yeas in having enjoyed the dedicated and outstanding contributions of Hugh Ayer, Randall Boyd, and Bob Gorton, and their efforts to make Denton a better city; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton wishes to recognize three of its mr,et valued members who have served with distinction; and WHEREAS, these three individuals always served above and beyond the efficient discharge of their duties in promoting the welfare and prosperity of the city, and have earned the full respect of their fellow Council members and colleagues and citizens of Denton; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: That a sincere and warm appreciation to Hugh Ayer, Randall Boyd, and Bob Gorton, felt by the citizens and staff of the City of Denton, be formally conveyed to them in a permanent manner by spreading this Resolution upon the official minutes of the City of Denton; and r P''` d F,v r'ar { city of Denton city council Minutes 1 July 30, 1991 1 1, Page 8 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the City of Denton does hereby officially and sincerely extend its best wishes to these three retiring Council Members for long and successful careers as members of our community. PASSED AND APPROVED this the 30th day of July, 1991. F BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR j ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTER, CITY SECRETARY " i BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY By The Mayor expressed the City's appreciation for the dedication of the retiring Council Members and presented each with a ` plaque of appreciation. Hugh Ayer, Randall Boyd, and Bob Gorton each expressed their gratitude. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS BLTTY YIILLIAMSo DEPUTY CITY SECRETARY CITY Or DENTON, TEXAS 5459M I i, 5 I CITY of D/NrON, rE"f MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 115 E. McKINNtY / DENTON, TEXAS 76107 M E M O R A N D U M a: a a a s a a a a - - I TOi Lloyd Harrell, City Manager i FROMs Bob Ticknor, Superintendent of Parks DATEi August 30, 1991 i SUBJECTI Denton Youth Football Association Administrative Fees for 1990 and 1991 Seasons r This is an update to Betty McKean's memo dated August 27, 1991, which related her meeting with Mr. Moe Joiner of the Youth Football Association, T spoke with Mr. Joiner today. He confirmed that he wishes to address Council on Tuesday, September 3. However, due to a schedule conflict,, he will be unable to provide a written letter of request for the Council agenda. Mr, y Joiner or Mr. Dennis Engler will be preaent to address Council about the i current situation with the Youth Football Association. Staff feels it is S important to accept his verbal request to facilitate the position Council i' wishes to taip,e pursuant to the payment of overdue fees and permission to use fields for the upcoming season which is scheduled to begin September 14. s After further discussions with Mr, Joiner, we have refined our estimate of the { amount owed by the Youth Football Association to be between $1,250 and $1000. This reflects the amount after the deductions for youth football scholarships. Please feel free to contact me if additional information is necessary. c i i Robart K, Ticknor 8171566.8200 D/PW METRO 434.2529 1 it I i CITY of vemroN`, T'IIXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. McKiNNEY / DENTON, TEXAS 16201 M E M O R A N D U M TO: LLOYD HARRELL, CITY MANAGER FROM: BETTY MCKEAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ' I MUNICIPAL SERVICES/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DATE: AUGUST 27, 1991 SUBJECT: DENTON YOUTH FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION { ADMINISTRATIVE FEES 1990 & 1991 SEASON I I met with Mo Joiner, August 27th, regarding the Denton Youth Football Association. He did inform me that although he is the executive 1111 vice-president and financial officer of the board, Carl Lockhart is the new president. Mr, Joiner is also the President of the Denton Youth Athletic League, the umbrella organization under which all the other special 1t interest groups fall. Mr. Joiner met with me to inform me that the newly formed Football League f board has disavowed any responsibility for actions of the former board. Therefore, they are not expecting to be held accountable for the approximately $1,900,00 they are in arrears for the 1990 seasons' administrative fees. We have been in contact with this board, including Mo i Joiner, over the past nine months in an attempt to collect those fees and f inform them about their responsibility, Mr. Joiner indicated that part of the problem in ascertaining the exact amount owed the City is that no rosters were ever turned in to the City staff although repeated requests had been made. This is a requirement of all leagues at the close of their season so that we can know exactly what fees need to be collected. When I inquired about the rosters, Mr. Joiner indicated that they were nonexistent. According to Mr. Joiner, nobody knows where they are and, in fact, he states that the football league lost j many of their other assets when the board turned over and individuals went their separate ways (including uniforms and equipment). I With respect to the payment of the administrative fees for the upcoming season, Mr. Joiner has insisted he appear before the City Council to discuss the financial straits they are in. He has assured me that, as the new financial officer of the board, he has taken some drastic measures to cut costs and has done some fund raising to pay outstanding bills ($4,200.00) from the former board. 8171566.8200 D/FW METRO 434.2529 i 1 i AA V I Page 2 Memo - Denton Youth Football Administrative Fees August 28, 1991 1 ' j while Mr. Joiner who represents the Football League continues to espouse i philosophical disagreement with having to pay the $5.00 administrative fee, I did make it clear that the City needs to treat all the groups alike. He did say he has the support of the presidents of the other associations in his request for a waiver of a portion of those fees for the upcoming year. He is asking the Council to consider receiving a token amount to keep tho group alive this year and a pay out of the balance over a reasonable period of time. I have explained that staff does not have authority to waive fees. Since the Football League has begun the pro.ess of conducting their registration for the upcoming season it is imperative that a decision be made as soon as possible. I have asked Mr. Joiner to put his request In writing so that Council will know speclfIcally what his request is. Attached is a memo regarding payments received from other associations. Bob Ticknor, Superintendent of Park Maintenance, and I will be available at the September 3rd Council meeting to respond to questions, ~.r Betty McKeanWCc t ive Dlrectar Municipal Services/Economic Development BM/ing 1 16388 1 I ' 1 rClTlr Of MWOM, TU18 MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. McKINNEY / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 August 22, 1991 NO Joinerj President Denton Youth Football Association j 2308 Doublecak Ct. Denton, Texas 76201 Dear Mr. Joiner, f Sincerely, I You have probably received a copy of the letter I sent to Tim Marr regarding our concern about the organizations' administrative feet for Fall 1090. I received a call this morning notifying tee that Tim Karr had resigned and you had been installed as the new president. j We have yet to receive the official rosters for the 1060 ""on, it is my understanding that we are talking about approximately 360 participants which would make your outstanding fees total approximately 61,0pp.00. E ► wanted to write You personally and ask You to call me as soon as you have had a chance to review the contents of the letter dated Auguat 20, 1991, This matter needs to be handled as expeditiously as possible. You can call me directly at 666-4306 so we can settle this issue without further complication. I look forward to working with you in your new LJ leadership role. Sincerely, Betty a Executive Director Municipal Services/Econamic Development SM/lnp 6318 8171566.8200 DIFW METRO 434.2529 i r MTOM TEXAa MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. McKlNNEY / DEN TON, TEXAS 16201 C!T y of DE , August 20, 1991 r f ~ i Mr. Tim Harr, President Penton Youth Football Association 3026 North Bell Avenue t Denton, Texas 76201 Dear Timc 1 ing We have noticed your advertisements in the paper and that yoorganization rhae 1 node for this upcoming Fall season. As you are aware, your rative withadminist990 the other leagues forstheir f1991foseason lwas not paid arrangement City your season. Our r that they could not use the City fields unless they had reconciled their prior ~ year's fees before this year's season started. ; Once again I must make it clear that without this payment, we cannot allow 6 B9 asociion to use or schedule fields for either practices or games. We youfr oal, aesI matsure you must alsoi that it would be most unfair to gat the hopes of these kids and ther parents up unless yciationsppaidabtheir cover 1990 j these coats immediately. All of the other sports also t administrative fees prior to starting the 1491 season. Therefore, it is { difficult to make an exception for one group. acted in good faith by providing you facilities to I feel the City has register and by providing your group the abilit9 to sell concesaiona and signs ill and withou` any reimbursement to the CiCYtiPaul cas Landiediacuea¢d thenmatCor with you Livingston have sent your group no and/or Me joiner personally over the last year dealing with this actuation. We have not had any formal correspondence from your association on how you plan to pay these fees. Oue to your season beginning in October and your need for practice time in September, we feel that we need to request that your association have these 1991 hen al Bob enou fees pate addequatelyhprepareathese fields Andeworktwith yon on ached-iling, enough time q 'I 1 817/566.8200 D/FW METRO 4342519 i E t 1 i { As always, we are open to any discussion or questions your association may have, and we would be happy to most with you to iron out any of these I financial issues before that date. Your bringing this account up to date will F also help us to correct a revenue imbalance which was created by this not being paid at the appropriate time, It is our hope that, ones this payment ' issue is taken care of, we can then have a very successful and enjoyable football season. sine sly, y KcK on, Executive Director kunicipa services/Economic Development i fh I Copy to No Joiner ? ADHO1178 i f 1 I j 1 CITY OI DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. McKINNEY / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 M E M O R A N D U M m a v a a v If 9 a Y f 1 t TO; Botty McKean, Executive Director for Municipal Services and Economic Development FROM; Steve Brinkman, Director of Parks and Recreation DATES June 13, 1991 SUBJECT; Youth Sports Fees This fiscal year to date we have .•eceived the following fees from youth sports i groupst Little Leaguot $20536,00 Received August 12, 1990 Deposited August 31, 1990 4 Soccer; $30360.00 Received February 25, 1991 Deposited February 26, 1991 Boy's Baseballs $10845.00 Received March 12, :.991 (check 1) Deposited April 15, 1991 ; Boy's Baseball; $ 240,00 Received May 14, 1991 (check 2) Deposited May 22, 1991 Boy's Baseball; $ 240,00 Received June 3, 1991 (check 3) Deposited June 4, 1991 Girls' Softball; $ 950,00 Received April 110 1991 Deposited April 15, 1991 Wayne Allen dropped his check off on March 119 1991. He. indicated to us that he hoped he had sufficient funds to cover the check because he had jurt started getting in his registration money, I told him that he would have a little more time because we needed to confirm his rosters before we deposited the check and that usually took us a week or two to look them over and that Paul Leslie was no longer with us. After reviewing the information that he had submitted, we found that his rosters were incomplete. We called him to see if he had a full set of rosters, and he indicated that due to some poor reeordkeeping by his 8171566.8200 01PW METRO 4342529 i i predecessor his records were not complete. I told him to try to get with Bob Tickner and see if Bob had copies of their 1990 rosters, After meeting with Bob, he was able to locate almost all of his rosters, and we were able to confirm his number of participants. This number differed from his initial report so we requested that he provide us an additional payment to cover the difference. We received that second payment on May 14, 1991. l After reviewing the second payment, they still had miscalculated the r non-resident payment, and we asked for another supplemental payment in a letter to them on May 20, 1991. We received this last payment on June 3, 1991. The total payments we have received for Boy's Baseball for 1990 amount to $2,325. Traditionally, each youth sports group submitted their fees and rosters to Paul Leslie immediately after the season was over. He would then have Joy hold the check in the safe while he looked over the rosters to confim the payment was correct. This review generally took a week or two based on the number of rosters to be checked, Paul Leslie would, after confirming the rosters, tell Joy to deposit the check. Because Paul had left the first week in March, I reviewed the Boy's Baseball rosters to try and confirm their numbers. As mentioned above, because of the initial lack of rosters and the time it took us to track them down this process took much longer than normal, and I did not get back with Joy to confirm that she could deposit the funds as Paul had usually done. When Joy received the Girls' Softball check, she remembered that she also had the Boy's Baseball check and asked me if she could go ahead and deposit both checks. She did so on April 15, 1991. In the future Pam Livingston will review these rosters and reports because she is replacing Paul Leslie, We will ask Joy to deposit the checks Immediately and have Pam get back with each group if additional funds or a refund is needed. She will also make sure all requests are done in writing, Steve Brinkman ADNO1112 s, ;'ntr . tY~~eyTtlEf@7 1 jrpp@qt7 { 1 I wry of DBNTON / 215 E, McKinney / Denton, Texas 76201 ME}IORANDU 1 i Tt~r ~Io ,!miner. Denton Youth Football .association Tim Urr. Denton Youth Football Association FRO?: Steve Brinkman, Director of Parks and Recreation DATE: !Iay 9, 1991 1 SUBJECT: Administrative Fees I As you nre aware, the Denton Youth Football association has not paid the City's administrative fees for the 1990 season, and we will not permit tfie association to use or schedule ativ fields until the fee is paid in full. It is my understanding that your practices traditionally start in September so we would rKpect a check and a copy of voar 1990 rosters before that time. I have attached a copy of the proposed administrative Policy dealing with the sale of concessions for your information. This will be approvt;d by the Pars; ` Board at their next. meeting. i I~ Steve Brinkman i Attachment Copy to Betty McKean +Bob'T1ckner-' 4D+101089 1 3 a~ i Cory of otNTOM / 215 E. McK/nney / Denton, rexas 76201 March 29, 1991 { Mr. Bill Rolt 1321 Amherst Denton, Texas 76201 Dear Billr The Administrative Fee was originally established in 1984 after the David M. Griffith Study proposed ti-cat the City should try to recoup a portion of its cost for operating numeroua programs. This study and its recommendations were reviewed and approved by both the Park Board and City Counetl before the fees were instituted. All Parks and Recreation programs and classes were then required to institute a $3.00 Administrative Pee with the exception of the Senior Citizen program. Even though the fee was applied to city-run. athletic programs, other athletic programs wore inadvertently omitted. During the 1988-89 budget process, the Finance Department brought thak I omission to nur attention. Because of the need to treat everyone consistently and to avoid inequities, the administrative fee was then applied to the youth sports associations. j Since the City Council approved the Recreation Fund Philosophy is 19890 the i staff has considered it to be policy and, therefore, used it as part of their departmental budget formula since that time. Also, during the 1989 budget process, the fee was modified from $5.00 to 20 percent of the program cost with a minimum of $2.00 and a maximum of $3.00. At the ears tire, they approved a non-resident fee which is 30 percent of the class cost with a minimum of $7.00 and a maximum of $1.5.00. All youth sports leagues were sent a notice of these charges after they were approved. Stan: Brinkman has also indicated that the associations are not requl "Id to pay this fee for participants who are on scholarships. Yf Tie Karr till present a certified roster of youth on scholarships, he will be Allowed to deduct these from the total amount he owes the City. I 'could be happy to discuss th'cs with you further if you have any questions about this information. Sine rely, etty ad Txscu ivs tractor for Municipal Services and Economic Development ~h REM433 a y X, tj tion 'try of DENTON, TEXAS Civic Centorl 321 E. HOKlnney/ Denton, TX 762< !1 8 M O R A N p p M TO., The Honorable Mayor and Members of the city council PROM; Steve Brinkman, Director of Parks and Recreation DATE; August 110 1989 SUBJECT; Administrative Pee i David M, Griffith and Associates were hired by the city in 1983 t cost/revenue study that would identif o conduct a Y potential revenue sources for departments to recapture certain overhead costs associated with programs, At I;he time Council was concerned about making sure that services such as recreation services were not being subsidized more than they felt wag appropriate, There was also a feeling that all special interest classes and { activities should pay their own way and, to the extent self-supporting, This study recommended fee increases inmany caareas gase1well pr as the establishment of an administrative fee to be charge by the Parks and Recreation Department for each class or This fee was set up to recoup a small that used s City facility, costs for the City as well as defraying aorrt , of h the cperatinc and Maintenance cost I city departments (Finance, Personneetc.). The consultant cameeto us withea recommendation of attaching a fee in the range of $15 to each class or program (see attachment A), The Parks and Recreation staff and Board opposed the amount of this fee because it would have priced most of our classes and programs out of the range of affordability for most citizens, A compromise of ,t5 was suggested by the Park Board (aee attachment B) after a survey of area departments (see attachment c) determined that classes and activities in Denton were at or slightly under those charged by most other communities in the metropler. The ordinance modifying all of our fnas was approved in December, 1983, by Council, and the $9,00 administrative fee was then adopted as An internal policy by out Finance Department with the approval of the City Manager, we added this cost to most of our programs such as swimming lessons, tennis lesson, day carps, stoat beginning in the spring of 1981, when it was institutedt there was a fairly substantial jump in the cost of most clasgest but there was no publ!ee outcry at the times The impact IS still felt Most in s clYa4nal 14pola!t-I~OA&ura u?`0 ► . Denton Parlor and / (d f TJ t~ft•dl7A Rtertat/on / Denton, reicar i , i3 our lowest priced ci.'a is (;5o ;10ange), and we are working with the Finance Department to .om,i up with t a way to r restructure this tee so that it is based on a percentage of the class cost rather than a set tee. The administrative tee usually recoups only a small amount of the overall operation and maintenance costs, in athletics, for example, we would collect approximately :ls,5oo in revenue (see attachment D), and the overall coat of that program is in the range of ;150,000 (see attachment B). in our 1988-89 budget process, the ?inane* Department questioned an inconsistency in that we were not charging the $5 foe to the various sp groups. We asked for clarification from the Pinance Department as to the need to include the new charges due to the potential controversy involved. We were directed by them to include the additional revenue for this charge In our 1988-89 budget. I After the budget was approved by City implementation of the new charge at their November, 1900 r"ark eting.d dOncuNovember 28, 19880 we discussed the new fee w representatives at a meeting to discuss a new youth ts oaf the ssociation~oiatey recommended at that meeting that the fee not be implemented because they felt that it would have an adverse effect on both the youth and adult sports programs. We had a subsequent meeting with two Park Board members and the City Manager to discuss options. Potential budget outs to possibly offset or delay the tee were developed for the Park Board to consider (see attachment P). The Park Board reviewed these cuts at their January, 1989 meeting and decided to table the issue rather than recommend cuts in these areas. The youth sports associations were notified about this fee immediately after the f Boards decision by phone and by letter (aee attachment a). f It looks as if the big impact in terms of lost attendance is not on youth athletics but on the adult athletics area, Attachment B shows our fees for softball as compared to other cities, and we are somewhat higher. We have also noticed a drop in the number of softball teams this year due to that foe being assessed which is shown on attachment Y. There Is a desire on the part of a number of adult softball form an association and handle the coordination of those leagues themselves, thereby avoiding the cost the City builds in for our staff individuals have made a presentation to the Park Board, and the BoardThwas interested in a meeting with this group to discuss the possibility. We are willing to do whatever is necessary to help alleviate the immediate concerns. Some of the options may bet 1) Continue the fee and monitor the impact through this fiscal year a this fee nd the Park Board make a recommendation as to whether to continuo thef next 2) drop the " too afpact tetear's budget. budget cuts in other areas. groups immediately and reconsider 1 4 I%if(C4't f 4 3) Drop the fee for just adult sports which looks like the biggest area of impact and find cuts to cover that revenue loss or turn that program over to an independent adult sports association. 4) Reduce the lee for one or both age groups to $2 or $3 per person and find cuts to accommodate revenue loss. At this time, it is our recommendation to allow an independent adult sports league to form for the 1989 Pail season. The Park Board has also reviewed the fee philosophy during its budgetary considerations and is now recommending some changes which would help modify the impact of these fees (see attachment J). These aret j 1) Change the $5 administrative fee to 20 percent of the class cost { with $5 maximum. j 2) Increase the non-resident fee from $3 per class to 50 percent of the class cost not to exceed $15. 3) create a scholarship fund with $1.00 being used from the administrative tee. - i As a partial solution to the youth and adult sports groups, we would like to recommend (see attachment X) that we drop one of our brochures which would save approximately 810,000 of the $15,500 necessary and use that money to reduce the administrative tee from $5 to $2 for the youth and adult sports groups. we are recommending this due to the great initial impact on these groups and the tight budgets they work under. t I i Steve Brinkman Attachments ADM00070 I I , I` k 1 1 i.-lw,rs:r G&'J' R nuhjpLSPRATIVE Fees TO PROPOSED GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOR 1989-90 1 Coat Center Total Budget Admin. Revenue 7 Percentage 8001 Administration $ 171,699 0 0 R002 Publicity 690447 O 0 R003 Children's Programs 4,099 11840 44,891 R004 Civic Center/Special Events 82,863 I~350 1.631 ROOS Dania 97,713 40390 4,491 8006 Senior Canter 1300565 1,700 1001 R007 Pool i 58,810 0 0 4008 Athletics $4,962 15,500 28.2• E R009 MLR 144,633 1 800 1,241 R010 North Lakes 1040401 4,300 ~ 1.12• . 8011 Goldfield Tennis Ctr, 490092 1 600 ~ 5630% 8012 Golf 1,368 460 33.621 ,013 Therapeutics 35,103 - .600 1.711. $1,007,755 !34,540 3.43% ~ RECR0386 j 1 V4. i SFtisF!.'i. `4~6yi9j~ set K\9 tF 14 Fertilizer f 6,000 G 20 marble gust 1,000 3. masts 2,Od0 4. Goals, Soccer/Football Soo S. water, irrigation 10,000 6. electric 15,0tl0 7. Serbicide 100000 8. Irrigation parts 1,000 90 Infield clay 2.000 i 10. Pence repair 1,000 11. Sods hydrowlch 4000 326 bight repair, bulbs, scoreboards 4,000 13. Trasb bags, barrels 1,000 140 slacher repairs 1,000 15. Mo+iinq 90000 16. Turface 10000 ! ttt 170 Field preparation labor, 2tfu11-time, 3 seasonals 620500 l3. ~'ehialee, tractors, accessories, fuel 4,000 19. ' Ir slSPerVis£on, I/3 of full-time 10,000 j rotas fUS,000 , E M e`L LILY~' LV C17YOf VENTON,TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / omi'ON, TEXAS 70201 / 7ELEPHONE(017) S00-090. Office 01 the city manage:' I November 1, 1989 Mr. Larry Reynolds, President Denton Area Little League 39 Timbecgreeu Denton, TX 76205 Dear Larry: Thank you for your letter of October 23, 1989, in which yo-'I raised a number of conc-acns held by the Board of Directors t,f the Denton Area Little League. Y apologise that it has taken me so long to reply, but i wanted to address each of the concerns mentioned in your .letter. in 1963-84, a study was done by David N. Griffith and Associates to determine the indirect facility maintenance costs incurred by the General F+►nd as a result of the activities and events the city sponsors or co-sponsors. The study recommended a $15.00 administrative fee be charged all participants in these events. The Park Board received the cspoct and recommended to the Council that the tae should be W OU. The Council agreed with the Park Board's recommendation and the $5.00 fee was made a pact of the 1904-65 fiscal year budget. During the. 1908-09 budget process, we discovered that the fee had inadvertently not been charged to athletic league participants. To correct this oversight, the tee was expanded to include athletic league participants in the 1900-89 budget. The administrative tee paid by athl4tio league participants is the same tee paid by participants in all city recreation programs ranging from Country and Western Dance classes at Denia to Pottery classes at Martin Luther King. The tee allows the City's General Fund to recover a portion of its facility maintenance costs from the people who use the various facilities. r i i .~.y .,ryitulds November 1, 1989 Page 2 As You are aware, in 1986, the Denton Area Little League Petitioned the Park Board in order to receive the City's co-sponsorship of the league. At that time, the City was already co-sponsoring a youth baseball league, Denton Boys, Baseball. Our involvement with Denton Boys' Baseball included the City's partial funding of the cost of umpires. The Park Board was concerned about a duplication of services between Denton Boys' Baseball and Denton Area Little League, but because Denton Area Little League assured the board that the use of volunteers would preclude the need for any funding from the City, the Park Board agreed to co-sponsor a second youth baseball league. Youth baseball is the only sport in which the City co-sponsors two leagues that offer the same sport to the same age group. The City's partial funding of officials for Denton Boys' Baseball is similar to our funding of the tackle football, soccer and girls' softball leagues that the City co-sponsors. In our contract with each of these leagues it is stipulated that the City's subsidy can be used for only one purpose, officials' fees. Each of these leagues' participants must the same administrative fees to the City that Denton Area { Little League participants are asked to pay. Our funding of a league does not exempt their participants from the fee. I would suggest that if it is your board's opinion that Denton Area Little League needs City funding to offset some of your umpiring costs that a request be made to the Park Board during the 1990-91 budge{ peocess.::. ~ n:. let* November 1988, the Leisure Services Division of the pp arks Department held a meeting with the presidents of all of the sports leagues co-sponsored by the City. At that westing the City's administrative fee for the upcoming year was announced. in Januacy, Paul Leslie, Leisure Services Administrator, called the presidents of each league to discuss and explain the new administrative fee. That call was followed up in February with a letter further explaining the The administrative fees collected from athletic league participants ace returned to the City's Cener.al Fund, but it is important to note that all field maiatansgqe expenses are paid for t # ,r0eOral Fund, 04ti` 4' !88'•'i! ' lisaaT to mpg Flt' ttili'"`sa e time, he City spin, 12815. approximately $1484000,00 for athletic field maintenance. For fiscal year 1989-90 the City has budgeted $174,260,00 foc the maintenance and operation of its 22 athletic fields. This increase includes a new athletic field maintenance crew authorized by Council for fiscal year 1989-90 in an att6rpt to improve the level of field maintenance. Ya. i Yaia9i+g . t f rage 3 S k The City recognizes the fact that if a child participates in baseball, football and soccer, his parents will have to pay the administrative fee three times. While this may seem unfair, it j ' should be noted that there are nine baseball diamonds, eight soccer fields and three football fields. Each field is used for a specific sport and each field must be regularly maintained. During the recently concluded budget process, we reviewed the administrative fees charged all participants Ln events co-sponsored by the Parke and Recreation Department. We found that our fees and requirements compare quite favorable with the fees and requirements of other municipalities in the area. it was the City's opinion, after reviewing the information, that our fees are both reasonable and fair for everyone involved. i Z hope 1 have been able to answer the concerns held by you and the Board of Directors of the Denton Area Little League. Thank you for bringing these matters to our attention. since ly, EI L oyd V. Harrell City Manager wp cc: Mayor and Members of the City Council t Betty McXoaa, Executive Director of Ecotiomic Development and Municipal services stove Brinkman, Directot oC Parks and Recreation Pilo 12350 i 1 L.8.11p i r``~11 tJ 1 iY K'n P:}yq; L I 1~ Kcreafton CITY of DENTON, TEXAS Civic Center/ 321 E. McKlaney/ Denton, Tx 762 November la, 1989 Mr. Bill Solt Denton Youth Football Association 1321 Amherst Denton, Texas 76201 i ` k Dear Bill: f We would like to inform you of some changes in the administrative fee and i non-resident fee which the City charges to recreation program users. The administrative fee has been modified from $5.00 to 20 percent of the class/program cost with a minimum fee of $2.00 and a maximum fee of $5,00 per participant. The non-resident fee has been modified fram $10.00 to 50 percent of the class/program cost with b minimum fee of $7.00 and a maximum fee of $15.00. A non-resident is defined as someone who: ae does not pay property taxes to the City of Denton for their. home oC business, or b. does not live within the corporate limits of the City of Denton. 3e1OW are several examples of how these lee changes will need to be determined based on your program fee. You also do not charge a non-resident fee unless they meet the definition from above. 3xample: A 3 C D Program Fee $30,00 $25.00 $20.00 $10400 City Administrative Pee 5100 5.00 140 2.00 City :Von-Resident gee 15.00 12.50 10400 1600 if you should have any questLona, please feel free to contact me, Sincerely, stave Brinkman Director of Parke and Recreation 980h ADM00352 r d` ~~'aliarral S~'a~a/~~ltedal ~,~lcouz~al `~'i~wn~rt ,ti ~'k Denton Parka Ind Aocreation / Donton, rexaa / ~Af 7? lftfa~•BZ70 l , l1 : { DATE: 09/03/91 CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT 1 i qp; Mayor and Members of the City Council R FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, city M..nagor SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE TO .'.MEND i THE BOUNDARIES OF THE OAK/HICKORY HISTORIC DISTRICT i 1 I RECOMMENDATION: E The Planning and Zoning commission at its July 26, 1991 meeting, recommended denial. (4-3) With a P Z denial, six ttt council votes are required to approve, a SUMMARY: The ordinance will amend the boundaries of the Oak/Hickory Historic District to exclude three houses located at 609 W. llickory, 602 W. Hickory, and 109 Williams. BACKGROUND : 4 The City has been petitioned by Jim and Sally Mudd to remove From the pair/Hickory Historic District property located at 602 West Hickory, 604 West Hickory and 109 Williams Street. k The area in which these properties are located contains the greatest concentration of architectural and historically significant structures in Denton. "Silk Stocking Row," as it was known, was the residence of many of Denton's early political and d leaders. The area is considered worthy of historic i ,social eC V designation due to its architecturally significant structures and ; its value as part of the social, cultural and historic heritage of the City. i The Mudds have requested that their property be excluded from the ' district because they wish to put aluminum siding on existing wood i'acades. 'their application for a certificate of appropriateness was rejected by the Historic Landmark Commission because the ordinai:,e clearly states that "existing wood facades must be preserved as wood facades" (Sec. 36-276 (9) bi. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Preaervatior: recommend against resurfacing frame buildings with new material which is inappropriate., or was not available when the building was constructed. (See attached Preservation Brief 8 "Aluminum and Vinyl Sidings on Historic Buildings" T,. ) ,I G,.-, exscsrx~~ t I I The ordinance makes provisions to reduce the boundaries of an historic district when one or more of the following conditions have been met: [Sec. 35-254 (d)] (i) when it can be. shown that a particular building, structure, site, area or land has no historic, architectural., archaeological or cultural Importance or value to the viability of the district:; ,I (2) When exclusion of bui.lrtf.ngs, structures, sites, areas or lands is necessary for major new development th-9t would support either the al. ch.itectura.l, 11 is .ocloal, archaeological or cu 1, tit raI character or economic viability of the district. ! (3) When it can be shown that no degradation of the district, either physical, historical, architectural, archaeological or cultural, will result from exclusion of property from the district. Condition (1) is not met bec.t.use the property in question contributes to the district a:d an example of the "Minimal E 'traditional" style of houses popular from the late 1930's and the dominant style of the post-war. 40's and early 60's. A compromise style that followed the economic depression of the 1.930's, this style reflects the form of traditional. eclectic houses, but lacks their decorative detailing, Although most were relatively small one-story houses, occasionally two-story examples are also seen. The examples at 602 West Hickory, 604 West Hickory and 109 Williams Street are one-story examples built in 1944, Because of their contribution as an example of this architectural style, removal of these properties from the historic district: would damage the integrity of the district. Condition l::} is not applicable. Condition (3) is not met because the Oak/Hickory Historic District is more than a collection of significant, individual structures; It is a cohesive neighborhood with each property contributing to the character of the district. One advantage that the historic districts provide is neighborhood stabV.ization; while the zoning ordinance protects newer ctre,s of the city, older parts of town are .ens stable, For example, the uak/Hickory Historic District; has already been , subject to nonconforming uses that predate the zoning ordinance, as well as a number of previously granted variances, Although the j Mudd's property is In proximity to such nonconforming uses and variances, it i.s also adjacent to similar examples. of architectural style and anchors the east, end of the district. Purthermore, the ; district has contributed significantly to the tourism industry in Denton and is a large sourco of community pride. 1 ~i rexas p, ter Flag tfacson, Chief Architectural. Historian for the dmar i hs 986 letter to tile 'a Historical CommisHion~ rtr<lingi t ile1Oak/Hickory Flistoric D3lst rictk CUmmissort commented r. g "while rlar dl ti oral lon the nnat lonalcircgiHterhi Such i as districts were t earlier i'lrsi; t San Antonia King Wii].iam F)iatricearlier 20th century neighborhoods such its i:hese are increasingly recognized as } important, to Tthe hILoy and he Swiss r'Avesuesoart-li}mpor tant butedosnottdrefl.ect r,ammuniCies• j E the tray our rorefathers lived." ecific typo of architecture, Because the property ropresenus a sp sites, and and has it "rel.tti:ionshi), Co other distinet,ive buildings, urea:. which are eligib~e1f o for prec ervainil nacc 'ii[Soctlonlad 2iheb a 3 of the oil arcndet remhis t ((}}jd its rernoveLi would upuet the balance and stability omm esio at its Oak/Ff,antcirory District, the Planning anti Zoning July 2Ei, 1991 meeting recommended denial of the petition. t At:tutchment A is it synopsis of' other citius' standards for boundary ` amendments and how they have handled specific requests for such amendments. i, F RO(FRAMt;, DFIPARTMPNTS, OR GROUPS AVVECTF,t: Ifist:oric Landmark Commission, Oak/llickory liist:oric District fl FISCAL IMPACT: None. I 7 ko specl ally submitted; prepared by% Lloyc} H~+rrell ! City Metnager Jai Bil.es, anager t t Program Ms n Stree Approved: r artk 11. Robb ns, AiCP ri:xecutlve Director k Planning and Development t I i s u PROPOSED EXCLUSION H-91=002 OAK-HICKORY HISTORIC DISTRICT DENTON . TEXAS ♦ F Mon?" `,\1`I,, 1,~`1''R111,\` R ■ R 1 M ■ `I `1 1`,1 `1 \ , R R 1 1 1 ■ N q Q IIp • ,T 1 1, \ 1 1, 1, , 1.1 ` '1 1 \ , ` • 1\ • •1 `1 `1 , \ 1 , ` • ` \ , 1 - t PROPOSED EXCLUSION H-91-002 OAK-HICKORY HISTORIC DISTRICT DENTON, TEXAS °i t "WIT" Kwx N WEVI 1♦ iw • r ®r w r~ r, w ~ w r al I , M M M J! I2 IIb 1 • r a fl D • / 1 { 1 / y / ` 1 ,t`i `~`t t`~ Y ♦ ,1 ,1, r i` I x k i i PRES141ZVATION BRIEFS • Aluminum and Vinyl Sidings 9 J _ ` on Historic Buildings John H. Myers Technical Preservation Services Division Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service This brief. intended primarily for owners of historic properties. prosides u discussion of issues surrounding theappllcation of aluminum and vinyl sidings. The Secretary of Interior's St;mdards ror Historic Preservatlon Projects (and their accom• panytng guidelines) recommend against resurfacing frumc buildings with new material which is inappropriate, or was not available when the building was constructed. The appearance of a historic building is a product of the cultural heritage of Its region, the technology of Its period, the skill and training of its builders and the materials used for its construction. The application of sidings which cover, or cause the removal of, original building features raises some of the fundamental issues of architectural conservation, Thls brief on the use of aluminum and vinyl sidings Is en attempt to present in an objective manner the issues surrounding the use of these substitute materials on historic buildings, The f Information contained herein has been drawn from a varlaty of sources, many of which are listed In the bibliography. This brief Is not an exhaustive, examination of the subject; clearly there Is a need for additional research on the physical con. w- Ot H . Vthoe sequences of siding Installations, !traders are encouraged to advise us of their experiences with the siding materials dla• gat ~y~"'•'+. :yam cussed. particularly when those experiences Involve historic archliecture, As additional information Is obtained andeval• uated. there may be revisions to this brief. . Y r H Historic Character Y ~'~;rw'o t The exterior character of a bullding is largely established by Its "style" and by the degree of decorative detailing. It is also influenced by the choice of materials for the walls-by their' dimensions, details, color and other surface characteristics, hold, HOO C WIND This Is particularly true for wood sided, (tame buildings which are the typical objects of aluminum or vinyl siding appllca• lions. Since wood has always hsen present In abundance In America, It has been a dominant building material In most +....r.ww,~..,~ parts of the country. Early craftsmen could harvest the wood and creole both structural and finish members with their hand tools. The variety of tools used and regional differences In style resulted In the richness and diverslly of wood textures. Later, as technology progressed, weatherboards produced by local mills continued to reflect regional traditions In material, style and dimensions. Although aluminum and vinyl siding materials seek to Impale wood sidings, they cannot capture Photo: 1044 H, ar)en the richness and variety of real wood because they are stand. Mnorlc t+oud Wingi rxhlhlr rlrh and rarfed utrlhre Whores. Thev ordlied, machine-made, mass produced materlals, nmge tforn hanrFtp!!r rlaphoarrdr of Own reNkffn Hiuh 119NJffr•Y!!l'fd Today, a number of communllies are conserving the unique rndt, hr panrnrdl with b anh a hhh ran he heeelvd, rahhrred, nulh•d characteristics of their historic buildings and districts with at headed, r'orjo# Ly the Anptnntrndou or owumeWr, U.d, Uovomment nrtnune omet uIsfidnrton, OX, Mo1 2. r i ~ tiY t, •1 ~.y YVL~ 1- ~ ~1'~ 1 r i I i - s -'Vow ~ 4 a I'Anrn err Rn rn rtmm/! When n budding u en need o/marnrrnanrrl such as she howe on the r!& wild! nr<ds painting, }ome owners consider insralNng aludu lminum or vlnyt siding. The reinlrl like the hover on the tefi, ran be a romplele lot o~arrhireutuel rhdarrrer due to the covering of deiadt tcurnlrel, the removal of features (window nlm), and a change of scale due to inapproprfafe siding dimenuont, archliectural controls, including the regulation of aluminum, siallation which is gaining some acceptance, and which aine. t inyl and other siding materials, One of the reason( for such liorotes tonne of the visual impact. is the application of siding regulation is that the historic appearance of a building may only, retaining original corner boards. sills, jambs and other he visunlly altered by changes in scale, texture, color and trim A related technique involves retaining the Won. but detailing which are inappropriate. The changes are especially removing all existing siding This technique is highly destruc• dramatic where 'clapboard" spacing is increased. shadow tise of original fabric and irreversible, since it Is unlikely that reveals are lost, Won is removed and windows are altered or a property owner will conserve nhe removed material, replaced, Manufacturers and some applicators are attempting As products and applicatlons become more sensitive and to reduce the negative visual impact of both the products and the sisunl impact is ininimited, it becomes important to ar• the installations. Among the more successful efforts is the ticulute the real issue of authenticity of matcrinls and crafts. nsanufacture of narrow panels which approximate the clap. numOup. A structure is historic because its mnicrials and the board widths of some historic wood sidings, Among the least craftsmanship reflected in its construction are tangible and successful efforts are the panels with embossed wood grain. irreplaceable evidence of our cultural heritage, To the degree log, which is supposed to simulate the texture of wood. This that they cooce;il the origioal building fabric, substitute ma. exaggerated ginlning would have been undesirable un read tefi;ds such as aluminum and vinyl sidings will ahvays subtract woad sidings. and is generally found only after excessive from the basic integrity of historicall}I and archileciundlS sie• weathering of raw woad car sandblasting. A technique of ili~ oiticani buildings, l 3. is lit poriill that pr ill tallill oil technulues he useJ w 1 r_,,--."'r~'>w~n.-..,, ~ acmdsagging,hendr+, rakmgandother,q,pearance•relalcJ problems. r T Application of the products is accomlihshcd b% nailing the ell long. exist are usually ghoul tion and one-half feel . .1,~ f~enng.lothecistingsurface.Preparutiucaususisufclinr inatinguneven'ireas squaring up the starter strips and wiling Yom"-'~~ .rN. furring strips where necessary to create a smooth Lind level surface. Generally there is little concern over damage of al. teralion to the wrh+ce of the building. since it is ussunwtl that any damage to the substrate will terrain hidden for many sears. The siding panels are not nailed firmly to the surface. but are hwrg rails. sixteen inches on center. to nellt for expansion. 'l'ain pieces are usrJ tr aril m attachment and connection, and to corer existine tram. hut_such pieces are PAW,, N hl,. 11 P•ra,iu,oi a,11,n usually (tulle dllferent from historic trim. For aluminum sid• Alup"inum and I imt sidings an' modable in a variro of imidlo and ing, caulking is recommended to Will all uueeseeunos ssherc colour,bill rheopuonalii amlgamingit oorchamrferisfirof It'll woorf metalnteCtswand. riding. Removal of Features Products and Inslallallon Although it is soutetimes argued that it siding application is The architectural products of aluminum dad vvyl uhirh are reversible since of can be removed. there is frequently lore. marl(}' used on abler buildings are horizontal lap siJntgs, vc+aible damage to I Motic buddio s "hen deporurise unit Horftonl;d aduininum and 41ny1 sidings are aoallahle m eight. other trim is removed by applicuuvs and diucorded kit de. five and four inch exposures to arnuhue cluphoard vudths, siroyed. The installation process dictues that the existing smooth ;and wood grained textures =and a variety of colors. surface be flat and free of "obstructions" so that the new Ttim pieces are produced to curer existing deluit: at corners. siding will he smooth and even in appearance, Where prop doors. windows and eaves. With both materials the optional cback oingrdetaukhan aPI)eal'. it is ea it r t fall kherin off rut them to atempt time wood grain textures are cxaggeraled. and the calms are gem custom fitting the siding. Aluminum and vinyl siding can be to light to minimise falling problems which uro inherent installed around existing trim, but the application requires in the SdLlirker iding ntutmated.als are produced b y munufucturers who more labor and, therefore, will be more expensive, In ad• The siding ei conduct the major advertising and provide must of the prod. diuon, there may he greater potential for water to penetrate Oct literature. The actual inStallatioos, however. are curried the siding at pops these where- aluminum or -arum tinny woolvinyl in"c is exwaing help keep out by independent contractors or applicators, who arc ire- "um, i ulkng of cut Infiltration om w allows some moisture which quently called "home improvement" co-mchtrs. amt are not would from the wall. affiliated with the munufucturers. Since the manufacturer has vapor to escape fabric is (tither damaged by the nailing no control over the quality of the installation. both the quality The existing wall t of the work 'and the sensitivity of the application are highly necessary to apply siding. The panels may be nailed directly variable (a fact recagnited in that the manufacturer's war- to the building fabric or funing sirlps may be nailed up as a ramies do not cover problems due to faulty instnllutionf, it base, Either technique will lease numerous holes in wood a gg g PhW maw, r w'j oil wo?k coh4 rmoted,l lheydwinefit eorhingfed gabled Lid of le vrnfmwera covered, l'ur her curmprn mul Re herbulfdfng i arrhhe s al fnregelty. d callings »ere 4. J a Some manufacturers, have iftempled to prevent momure problems by sentu eir sidings, Typical venting techniques f include perforated , ,,r, weep ii kent tubes into the call cavity. recommendations to omit caulking or it comhimmon } of These methods. The success of these efforts is inconcluu%c since (here arc numerous variables affecting the moisture % levels within any particular building. The Forest Products Laboratory of the U.S. Department of Agriculture conducted it study of the moisture content of (rime walls during winter. Although they found that an interior vapor barrier was highly ' effective in reducing the moisture Content of the lest call. they found that the exterior vents had little effect on reducing 4 The moisture levels except where wind speeds acre high enough la force ventilation. Such consistent winds ire likely f,f M to occur only on awaN facing the prevailing winds and without adjacent obstructions to reduce the aind-pressure. In addi• Lion, the small weep holes provided are subject to blockage by accumulations of dust and debris, insect activity and paint. - . ing, Another potential source of moisture problems results frorn the application of alurninum and vinyl sidings to buildings in need of repair, When leaking roofs, broken gutters and down. } spouts, or hashing problems are left unrepaired during it cos. melic application of an impermeable siding, quantities of ,h water may be channeled Into the wall behind the siding. In - such cases the water admitted directly to the wall cavity can • _ - exceed the levels produced by molsture migration from the interior. Such excessive moisture levels within the will can contribute to problems with interior finishes such as paint or wallpaper, causing peeling, blistering or staining of the fin. j fishes, Preventlon of Inspection The application of aluminum or vinyl sidings prohibits peri• odic inspection of the underlying hlstorlo building fabric. No,, r„sn rr a, „ Since these sidings are typically marketed as home improve. Thu brick rowherue was covered with vertlcaf and horizontal Ott- merit items, they are frequently applied to buildings in need i tninrmr riding. Such veaimeru It inappropriate /or hlrtorre maionrv of maintenance and repair. The result of this can be the burfdingr• concealing of problems which are the early warning signs of s M deterioration, Minor problems, coneealed and uncorrected, slchngs and will cause irreversible cracking or spalling of ma. can progress to the point where expensive, major repairs to 7 sonry walls, Although this reference to the damage of ma the structure are necessary. 1 sonry is included as a point of fact, (he appilcolion of It cannot be overemphasized that a cosmetic treatment la aluminum or vinyl siding Is highly Kpproprlate to historic hide difficulties such as peeling paint, stains or other date. masonry buildings, rforailon Is no substitute for proper care and maintenance, Aluminum and vinyl sidings are not directly at fault in this Mals(ure Problems case since property owners should determine the nature and source of (heir problems, then make appropriate repairs. The The walls of historic frame buildings are usually uninsulated difficulty arises when owners perceive Ilia sidings as the total so that molsture produced within the structure. (from cook. solution to their required maintenance and forego other re• ing, elcaning. bathing or humidification), ml rates through medial action, the wall cavity to the exterior, particularly in the winter. The amount of moisture generated may be significant. The Amer. VulnerablMy can Society of ((eating. Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) reports that a typical family of four Aluminum and vinyl sidings are often marketed and pur• can produce up to twenty,flve ppounds of molsture per day chased as maintenance sating allernativest there are. how, through normal dally ,activity. If an impermeable layer of ever. certain types of damage to which these materials are siding is applied to the exterior or cold side of a wall, moisture susceptible. Aluminum siding scratches and dents easily, as can be trapped within the wall cavity and create conditions a lypleal thickness k about .020 Inches, The U.S. Navy sus- favorable to deterioration due (o wood rotting or shining pended the use of aluminum siding on its housing facilities fungi, There ore three techniques which will prevent the ace (non historic) for several years after experiencing excessive cumulation of moisture within a wall that has an exterior damage due to the activities of children playing nearby, Now (cold side) vapor barrier; I I) apply an interior (a arm side) siding is permllled only above six feet so that the ptsss(bllity vapor barrier to keep moisture out of the wall. 12) ventilate of frequent Impact is reduced. Other users have had similar the inferior space to remute humid alt dnd (.t) serttilute the experiences and it is now generally accepted that aluminum wall cavity to remove excess moisture. When humidity and Is a g choice for applications where the chances for impact climatic conditions indicalu a need, the added expenw of are highoer, The problem is recognized by manufacturers in that such preventative measures should be considered us part of the backing on some sidings, which is now marketed as in. the installation cost of Inipermeable siding Dyer frame walls, suiation, had Its origin as a reinforcement to prevent denting. 4 5. TT T : '.i and a repainting 0f sir tar scsen sews for the erIstutil wood. They took cost of the sinll siding applicanOn us ~ 7 / Il nrr the total amount of money mailable for all uphuns, <unduhere an alternative Aas inntatly less expensive. They m+csted the r difference or surplus at six percent interest. By using the surplus and the accrued interest. the figures shmaed that the church could he repainted every si.x to sewn years up through the year in which the Onyl Minn! "cold be replaced. At ihut `i time the church would show a uarplus in the pm r ting fund, but a sizeable deficit "ith the vinyl siding due to the replace. meal cost, In this study the cost of aluminum siding uus luund to be similar to that of the vinyl. Practically. +erv few property owners will set aside surplus money in the manner of the study, but the results of the study indicate that lower cost of the maintenance +sould allim the expense to he spread out oyef i longer time perod, ('011' y kersely. the higher expense of it major application of ilu• minum or s nyl siding frequently will require financing so ilim the total cost to the property ow ner nva+ mchide substantial interest in addition to the purchase price. rho" (uu nn, I r'rr.rnnoon Fire Cheracterlitic5 Vinyl aldtn ro~ aroma brrdr when -Ofd. and is r3(urprrbrr re `luny questions have bean raised about the perl'ornrance of - urlrkmq o r r ahar thanurln from amparr. Uuma a like rhU may )101 he Cmered by kmlanry, aluminum and vinyl sidings In fires. Because of the diflerenl natures of these Iwo materials, their fire related character lilies should be discussed sepafntely. While there are some gov:rnmenl agencies which use or Concerns about aluminum siding in u fire may be disided hermit vinyl siding. experience has shown that yinvl sidings into two areas. He first area consists of the normally tested become hritile and suscypdble to shattering in very cold weather. Typical repairs are nmde by cutting out the damaged area and splicing in a new piece of vinyl, but new sections will probably not be an exact color match due to lading of the exposed surface and color variations in product runs. If aluminum or vinyl sidings are damaged and later to, placement Is necessary. It may be difficult or impossible to f obtain an exact replacement, Siding manufacturers can change pproducts, styles, or colors in response to market face if tors withoul any advance notice to owners. Uurahlllly and Cost ` The questions of durnbilily and relative costs of aluminum ifr or vinyl sidings compared to the maintenance coil of original materials are complex, to say The least, It Is Important to carefully consider these questions because both sidings are `r rnarketed as long lusting, maintenance free alternatives. As. suming that the sidings are not damaged, and that they will weather and age normally, there will be inevitable changes in color and gloss as time passes, A normal application of aluminum or +Inyl siding Is likely to cost from two to three times as much as a good paint fob on wood siding. A sensitive I application, retaining existing trim, will cost more. Therefore, to break even on expense, the new siding should last as long as two of three paintings before requiring maintenance, On wood, two coals of good qual ly paint on a properly prepared 1 surface can last from A to 10 years. according To the U.S. Departmenl of Agriculture, If n conservative life of seven `I I years Is assumed for paint on wood, then aluminum and vinyl sidings shouid last Is to 21 Years before requiring additional i,aaintenance )usl to break even with the maintenance cost for painting wood siding. There are reports however, that some painted aluminum sidings may chalk and fade and ap• pear to need painting as early as S to 1 years. Once painted. they will require repainting wish the some Irequency as wood. A New England architectural firm compared the cost of ap. / plying vinyl siding wlih the proIacled coil of maintaining end repalnting the existing wood siding of (t church. For purposes of the study. they. assumed a 21) year life for ylnvi material, a six percent inflation rate. six percent interest on sayings Viuyf ihhng etpu_,d nr Kral bona a lire (arrnir the wager. i G. I i I characteristics such ,is flame spread, ttame penetration ;Ind sidings will not have a r onable payback on an energy wa - smoke accumulation. 1 he Niiunnal Bu or Standards has ing basis alone. r tested alum+nun lop siding for each W th'!![ factors and found r that it performed sery1 well compared to many other siding materials. la more practical tests. the New York City Fire 1Varranlles Department conducted actual burn losis on frame rowhouses covered with alumitltNpl siding. They 4iwosafpd Ihat the ;du. Aluminum and vinyl sidings frequently carry long term war- minum offers some protection from exItfitll fires, Wort 111411 ranlies which make them attractive to property owners; how- underlying original xl4ings sustain less aMaye from inicrmul ever, most of these wari pro-rated. and lifts when rnsered by Idummum siding, 't'he wison for the contain very specific coverage, One technique used to make falter finding is thin the iluminum Is a bntrter betucen the the warramies appear more comprehensive is to guarantee original siding and the lapping daisies which emerge from the products agnotst defects which are not Inherent in the window and door openings and exicmd upward, materials, and therefore cannot possibly occur; for example Anolher concern about aluminurn is the suocullcd "oven both aluminum and vinyl sidings are usually guaranteed nut effect" which proposes that the siding contains and intensifies to "red rust." Such rusting is the reault of the oxidation of the heal of a fire. An oven consists of a metallic lining sur• ron which is not a component of either siding product. ,'lost rounded by insulation so that radiation is reflected hack into warranties will exclude any Change in color or gloss, damage the oven while the insulated shell prevents conductive heal due to accidents, vandalism and exposure to the weather. losses. In reality, this phenomenon should not occur in an damage to the house and till problems resulting from Lruhy aluminum side) house. In a building with aluminum siding installation. Since the manufacturers do not install the sidings. the metal is on the exterior and the "Insulation," which con, the reliability of the applicator is very important in the event silts of the wall cormponents is on the inside. The result Is of future claim. I he distinction between miInufact uring de• that the interior finishes or plaster or gypsum board. the studs teens and problems due to Improper installation can confuse and the original siding insulate the aluminum skin. preventing the issue of which party Is responsible and leave the property radiation from reaching the siding and being reflected Inward, owner with the difficult and expensive burden of proving When vinyl siding is subjected to fires on the exterior of liability, the building, the siding will begin to s;Ig and melt. In the case The prorated warranties limit the liability of the Munn, of internal fires, the vinyl malerlol is shielded from the fire facturer to a decreasing percentage of labor anti materiulcosts by the wall components so that occupants should hove alt as the warranty period progresses. As an example, one forty quate time to exit the building before the siding becomes year warranty covers all labor and material for only three nvolved. The siding would probably melt off tht building as years, and the liability decreases so that after twelve years the heat intensHied thus reducing its involvement in the fire, covered, labor 11 is casts and only thirty percent material costs are [ c probably safe to say that b be ecause of the pnrtlt t margin in the material and the fact that the bulk of any repuir energy cost would be for labor, the property owner would bearmost j of the expense of repairs for the last twenty-seven years of There Is a growing concern for energy conservation, and this warranty, j aluminum and vinyl sidings are being promoted as energy An additional consideration is that warrnnlles cannot guar { saving measures. From a practical standpoint, aluminum and antee that exact replacement products will be available in the vinyl sidings are not good Insulators 11eeal15e they are so thin. future, so responsibility is usually limited to providing the Any energy saving due to a siding application probably results closest match in color, texture and dimension available at the from the creation of an air space between old and new siding, time of repair. This is done because manufacturers can change reduced Infiltration due to the new impermeable skin. the their product lines due to market factors. Color can also Vary installation of some Insulating malerlal behind the siding or from one production run to another, making exact replace. a combination of these three factors, ment difficult, The Federal Trade Commission filed soft against one man, The Important point Io remember concerning warranties is ufacturer of aluminum siding and obtained a consent order that property owners should obtain a copy in advance of any from the company which agreed to refrain from making en purchase and rtad it carefully to determine the extent of orgy conservation claims. The FTC report claimed that both coverage and the degree of liability under any prorated plain aluminum siding Over aluminum foil and Insulated olu. terms. This rtrommendatlon also applies to any wurtantles minum siding have ,little or no Insulallom value." given by local continclom or applicators since these will he Preservation Brle r No. J. "Conserving, Bnergv !n Nfuorle importanl if problems occur with siding installations. fitiddfngs," notes that the primary sources of energy loss In small frame buildings are the doors, windows and roof, It Is property Values therefore, more cost effective to apply storm windows, storm doors and attic insulation than ro treat the side walls of these structures, 'phere are numerous publicatlons on energy re. ''hare is little doubt that the al pllcatlon of aluminum or vlnyi irofliting which explain techniques of determining cost-ell'. siding will affect property valut s. In the case of a nomhisiorlc i fectlveness based on utility costs, R-factors of materials and house of modest cost and In need of repair. the effect will t initial cost of the Irealmenl, f ersom interested in this ap• likely be to increau the propetly value. A different set of proach may wish to read "Retrofitting Existing Nnnsing for factors govern In the case of a historic building, particularly Energy Conservation: An Economic Analysis" published by in a historic district where authenticity In materials and styles the National Bureau of Standards, or the U.S. Depntlment commands a premium, The application of a substitute me. of Housing and Urban Doelopmenl booklet "In the Bank terial such as aluminum or vinyl siding would probably have or lip the Chimney." One such study In Providence, Rhode a negative effect on the resale value of such a building, The Island, determined that for a two story house, twenty-five degree to which property values are affected will vary widely feet squafe, the payback period for twenty-three storm win. due to the quality of the applicatlon, differences In local doves, two storm doors and six Inches of atlle Insulation was attitudes and tastes, the demand for housing and many other d.J years while the payback for aluminum siding with an R. faacors ere Inspection yof d t 1 concern that the musidings, factor of 2.5 was 29,96 years. Most of the Information v hich which oh ying fabric. y is available supports the position that plain aluminum or vinyl concealing problems, Real estate appraistrs and tealtors gen. 6 7. s 1 E erahy evaluate each property ucdtvlduallt. wcignutg both oh- is that the new material is an econumw and long•lmti it ai. , jectite and subjective factors in order r . +etermrne;I property ternauve and that sr lsow the holistic material is irugde. value, The hest method of establishi le effccl of tits alu• shmrl•lived or probleomic, In reality, historic building ma• ninum or sinyl siding application mn I o value of it partleulur terials such as wood, brick and clone usually are not delicate h. property is to consult qualified local read estate professionals. or short-lived,'Their existence. frequently in sound condition, after many decades during which they probably suffered pe• Local Regulation riods of neglect. is proof that they are the original economic and long-lasting alternatives, All materials, including the new focal historic district officials face it dilemma nn the siding sidings discussed above, can fall into disrepair if abused or issue, They are caught between their responsibility for pro. neglected; however the maintenance, repair and relenlion of serving the character and integrity of the buildings :Ind the ..original materials" are always the most architecturally ap• often hostile resistance of properiy owners who reseal ar• proprlate and usually the must economically sound measures chiiectural controls. Although policies vary considerably from for preserving the unique qualities of historic buildings. one jurisdiction Io muoher. such policies usually involve a combination of recommendations. prohibitions. negotiation and compromise. Most local historic district policies on ,it. BIBLIOGRAPHY - f hficial sidings fall into one of the following four categories: I, Complete Prohibition-Artificial siding materials are not ASHRrl' lfnnd6nr+k 1477 Fundamr+u,rb. New York. Anscneoll allowed in the district, but the commission can review Society of lieating. RO(lguroung ;wd Air-Condfltunmp En}I- neen. 1979. 1 special circumstances at its discretion. °Condensurlon Problems in Your I loose, Pres'enliun , nd Solution.- Conditional Acceptance--H certain preset conditions ap. Information Bulletin No 11.1. W. shin,elnn. 1) C U,S Dup,ltl• ply, the sidings may be applied if they meet established menu of Agriculture, 1914. design crhefla involving dimension. texture, color and in. McIcco, Paul, °Sadyand Full Scaly Fire 'I'esls, Row Frame Resl- srallaHon techniques, C'ondlllons may allow for differences denual Buildings in Bushwick, Brooklyn, N Y." Now York. po. in the significance of buildings or the degree of exposure ivtechrue Institute of New York, 1976. of walls to public view, "FTCChallefiging Claim that Siding In,aul'ates A Home," B'uarnrieron 3. Standard A roval-Sidln applications are routinely a Pon, January 17. 1419, pp g p' "In the Bank at up the Chimney'!", Second Edition. Washington, proved If they conform to established design criteria such D.C,: Depaiiment of housing and Urh,m Ocvclopmcnt, 1477. as those mentioned In number two. Kiefer, Mnithew J, -Vlnyl and Aiuminum Siding; Pill and Con." 4, Advisory-Property owners and developers are advised Report to the AshmontHill StuoyCummitleu, I'lteBusomLand. on nppsoprlate techniques of restorallon and rehabilita• marks Commission 1477. tion, but there Is no enforcement authority. "Landmark and Historic District Commission," Vol I. No. Wash. When architectural controls are established for the protec• Inglon. D. C.: Nuliomll Trust for Ilistoric Preservation, October Lion of terrain historic buildings or historic districts, contro 141A, Is inevitable as community needs conflict with individual doisiare Conditions In Walls and Ceilings of A Simulaivd Older vetsY Y Ilome In Winter," Madison, Wisconsin; Forest Products Labu• rights. Communities with a significant architectural herlmge rmory-USDA, 1977, frequently establish strict controls and successfully use the Nielsen Sall), E.. Edilor. "Insulating the Old House." Portland, ppollee power to enforce them. Various court cases have up. Malne, Oicaler Portland Landmarks, Inc.. 1977, # heldrhelocaldecisionsrocontrolartificialsidingapplications, "Performance Criterfa for Exterior Wall Syslems." Woshimison, Communities which have review boards or which are estab• D.C.: National Bureau of Standards, 1969 lishing pollcles on the use of modern sidings in historic dls• ',Rehab Right." Oakland, California: City of Oakland Planning Dc. tricts can contact their Slate Historic Preservation Offices or parumenL I919. i "Retiolliting Existing Housing far Energy C'onsecoi An Em. the Landmarks and preservation Law Division of the Na. nomlc Analysh-•Bolding Science Series Nm 64." Washington, !tonal Trust for Historic Preservation for examples or Infor• D.C.: National Bureau of Standards, 1474. mation on design criteria, methods of enforcement orprecedent Sanderson, Ted. "Harmful Effects of Synlhalc Siding." Providence: E se111ng court cases, Rhode 7a1and HIsrorlcal Preserm loo Commbrron Yeaslrrrrr, In some communilles where original sidings have been coy. Fvhruary 1971, eyed by substllule materials, there are programs which givo Skods, Leopold F. °Performunce of Resldemlal Siding hlateriulx." k property owners financial assistance In removlnp the subsli• Washinggton, D,C,: National Bureau of Stort6rds, 147. tute materials, The most publicized program of this type is "Technical Butlelin, No, 4--Cod Corning Finishes Cumpauutlvu j in Cambridge, Massachusetts where several nod•profll com• Properties and Performance Chart," P fl.udclphiut Nuiiunal Coil munlt or anltalions make grants avallable for siding it. Coaters Associatlon 1471. Y g Wood Oandbookr Wood As An Emtrinenlag Marerlal, Washington, moval, Grants of this type are available In several other titles D.C.,- Forest Products Laboratory. U,S, Department of Aprl. with redevelopment programs, and old property owners and culture. 1974, l communitles in recovering (he earlier character and'charm The Iruwing "A Trthule Ir vinll Sidln~ Ilpluul" tin the trail aver Isrepo,. of (heir historic houses, I laced ham Duval M:+cauluy's "Great . Inmuuts In ,xrthiwctult:," C'upinghl e 1419 by Dacld .Micauiny and reprinted hl iroreihro of Ilouphlon ishlllln Summary C, n,pany, This Prnervattun Brief was wrillen by John W M)ers, Iltsloneut ArchtwO, The Intent of this brief has been to delineate issues which reehniealPretervaunnSewlretbishlna,Vuluahlelnformuannundcrsmmcnus should be addressed when conlem la11n the use of aluminum were received from Clark J. Slrlcklund, of the C'annvokul Hhunhal tbm- p g muulon, and Antoinette F, Downing and Pdwaid F. Sundown, al lhu Ahiule or vinyl sidings on historic buildings, Many property owners land Hhtn,ical Praservatloo commisuon, Ltillao and P(Wtatlon were hl are faced with derislons weighing the historic value of their the Publication Branch of the Notional Rellistcr Ohislna. hulldln and its maintenance cost against the alleged benefit This publlesunn has been developed puNuanl iu Baceuuve Order 11410. g Ptolecoon and Enhanrereent of the Cultural Pash+mmenl,, which directs of aluminum and vinyl sldlng materials, and very little com• the Scuetary of the ImOrior to doelup and make as,iiluhte to FWvial prehensive information has been published to assist them In a'endotand State and locallascrnmenlslnrnrmaunn~unrarnmgpoaesaomal making those decisions, methods and lechniquct for rscrwrvinR, improwall. totuNng .,no m;antaming As stated earlier, the application of aluminum and vinyl Mande propetlict.' Preservation Wivfs: No. a has Iseen developed under hi, technkalcdnnnhipull,colLNuisun,A.LA,TcchnicelPtcsrnuttonticvua's sidlogi Is frequently considered its an alternative to the main. pisman, Her mss: conservuunn and Rucreudnn svnace C S bcp,ulntent oil tenance of the original hisrorlcail material. The implication the lnrarwr. w'ashsnat(in. I) C. :u}4). Auras 1474 rf V.l. 001'UNNexI MINnxO dries i 1911 o-feadll 7 fj . S i ii AirACHMBNT A Historic Districts City Comparisons As of 7/15/91 Austin - Applications to reduce the boundaries of the historic district may be made when one or more of the following conditions have been met; 1) ft can be shown that a particular building, structure, site, area, or land has no historic, architectural, archaeological, or cultural lm ortance or value to the viability of the district. 2) BXCIUSIon of buildings, structures, sites, areas, or land is necessary for major new development that would support either the architectural, historical, archaeological, or cultural character or the economic viability of the district, i 3.) It can be shown that no physical, historical, architectural, archaeologgical, or cultural degradation of the district will result by excluding the property from the district, Application for Inclusion or exclusion may be made when either P' districtdcreatesian economicshardshiprforrroasonablethe continuation of the exterior of the property in its present exterior form, To establish economic hardship, the owner must shown that no reasonable alternative use exists which allows the exterior to remain In its original style, economic return, the Landmark Commission may reqin ev uesaluating documentation of the value, rents, tax burden, or contracts pertaining to the property, In talking with the City of Austin, they stated that they have had no experience with requests to be removed from the district, 1 Fort Worth - Fort Worth allows individuals to be removed from the district with proof, of financial hardship, The process would include R recommendation from the Historic Landmark Commission, a recommendation from the Planning and zoning Commission and final approval from the city Council, Bruce McClendon, Director of Planning and Development, stated that the department has had no experience with individuals requestin to leave the district, Mr. McClendon did add that Fort , Worth has 9. S i~ N i to ric Districts y Comparison 11-0 e' age Two ! incentives for individuals to remain in the district, Those incentives include 1) CDBG Programs, 2) Free paint for the homeowners, and 3) A tax freeze on the value of the home # before improvements, This freeze would apply to all the improvements on the property for ten years. F San Marcos In talking with Jana Green, Planner, she stated that no one has requested to be removed from the historic district since the adoption of the ordinance in 1984. The ordinance does not address the process that would be used to be removed from the district though it would probably come in the form of a petition (letter) to the City Council and they would develop a f1• policy at that time. She added that San Marcos offers no incentives for being in the distrlc~ other than the assurance that the district will be kept up aesthetically and historically. f' qj E 1 t 2739X 10 , ' 1 t yyU) f~ P&z Minutes July 24, 1991 Page 4 v, Hold a public hearing and consider a petition to amend the i boundaries of the Oak/Hickory Historic District to exclude properties located at 602 W. Hickory, 604 W. Hickory, and 109 Williams. Sixteen notices were mailed to property owners within 200' of the site= 2 notices were received back in favor of the petition and 2 were oovosed. Staff Report: Ms. Biles reported that the owners, Jim and Sally Mudd have filed the petition. They own three houses which are wood frame rental units. Two of them front on Hickory and one fronts on Williams. They are in an area of town which has the highest concentration of historic structures. Mr, and Mudd applied to the Historic Landmark commission for certificates of Appropriateness that would allow vinyl siding. Vinyl siding is a preservation no-no. The certificates were denied. The Historic District regulations specifically state that existing wood facades must be preserved. Rather than look at any other options such as painting or doing something other than the siding, the Mudds have petitioned that their property be excluded from the Historic District. Ms. 9iles stated that she has talked with the State office and they said that our historic district is unique because it is more of a genuine reflection of how people actually lived in Texas during that i time. Historic districts provide neighborhood stabilization, it is also important to preserve these historic properties because of their proximity to UNT and TWU. sometimes universities tend to eat into neighborhoods. It is important to preserve every example of historic property that we have in Denton. The Historic Landmark Commission feels like the property in question does represent a specific type of architecture, has a distinctive relationship to other buildings and sites within the Historic District, it positions anchors the east end of the Historic District and its removal would upset the balance of the districts therefore, the Historic Landmark commission at j its July 8, 1991 meeting recommended denial of this petition. Mr. Kamman asked what could be excluded from the definition of historic housing. Ms. Biles said that generally any properties over 50 years old are historic., once past fifty years there are certain styles that are significant. They are even looking at buildings that were built in the 1950s to preserve that particular style of architecture so that example of it will not be lost the way example have been lost in the past. Usually fifty years is the guideline but it goes either way. There are certainly buildings that are older than 50 years old that would not be considered architecturally or historically significant. { F p&7, Minutes duly 24, 1991 Page 5 Mr, Holt asked how the three houses are significant, Ms. Biles said that they are an example of a style of building in that area called minimal traditional. It was very popular in the post war thirties and extended on into the fifties. These particular examples lack a lot of the detailing but they do represent an eclectic style of housing that. was found in mid-America in this particular part of the county during that time. These particular examples are one-story examples and they are important in their relationship to the District as a whole, They were built in 1944 and the Historic Landmark Commission approved a preliminary application for a landmark designation for some buildings on the Square that there facades were built in 1959, This 4 deterioration of the historic value of the properties. In favor: No was present to speak in favor of the petition, Opposed: Mike Cochran, 609 W. Oakonstated that Ms. Biles position of the Historic competantly articulated the Landmark Commission so it is only necessary for him to speak as a citizen and neighbor of these properties and as someone who was involved in the creation of the District. The real question is what are grounds for being removed from the Historic District, not whether or not vinyl sidin appropriate. There is a mechanism for being the Historic District, but he does not think not wanting to paint a house is a good enough reason to destroy the integrity of the Historic District. It has been a matter of i public policy for a number of years that historic neighborhoods and the Historic District are of value to the community, It does require and demand closer scrutiny than l I perhaps some other neighborhoods, This is a fragile neighborhuod because of the economics of the situation, lie does riot feel that the demands of being in the Historic District are an onerous burden on any property owner, He owns two properties in the Historic District and keeps them painted, That is not an onerous burden, it is just an aspect of being a citizen in this community. because he can something that he does not mind doing at all see the value of the neighborhood, Perhaps if he lived someplace else and viewed the neighborhood ewsith less respect riot hink that than he might have another opinion, the integrity of the this is a valid reason for damaging neighborhood. That is the issue He has spoken with the Mudds at length. They are nice people but he never got any other reason out of them other than they don't want to paint ; the houses, To make a decision that will have some reprocussion and create a precedent for other houses on the edge is erroneous, i ? ti~ ~g A P&Z Minutes July 24, 1991 Page 6 Mr. Kamman asked if the Mudds were consulted during the establishment of the Historic District. Mr, Cochran said yes. They were at the meeting and they were opposed to it, as were many of the absentee landlords. All of the boundaries of the district are contiguous except for the relatively new apartment building on Hickory, Mr, Appleton asked if the Mudds qualify for grants or tax breaks, Mr. Cochran stated that any property that obtains an individual historic designation is entitled to 50% off their property taxes for a period of 10 years, That would require some action on the part of the Mudds. They also qualify for either $6700 or $7700 (he can't remember the amount) for each house out of the community development funds for rehabilitations, They are low interest loans and the loans are forgiven in seven years if they continue to rent to low income renters. Mr. Kamman asked if the income of the owners is considered when the funds are applied for. I Mr. Cochran said no, the loan is based on who the housing is rented to, These houses would qualify for funding, f Mr. Engelbrecht asked about the Certificate of Appropriateness process, Mr, Cochran explained that if someone wants to paint their house roughly the same color, there is no process, if there is a dramatic color change or an architectural change, then a Certificate of Appropriateness must be applied for, A special meeting was held for the Mudds. The general rule is whether the alteration can be seen from the street, This is the first case that has been turned down since he has been on the Historic Landmark Commission, Ms. Brock said that there are some houses further down to the west of these properties that have been redone, She asked if they got Certificates of Appropriateness, Mr. Cochran said no because their work was done on the inside and not the outside. One of those people was initially opposed to the Historic District but is not pro-preservation. Mr. Engelbrecht asked if all the members of the Historic Landmark Commission aro residents of Denton and residing in the Historic District. A W. W4 t c P&Z Minutes July 24, 1991 Page 7 Mr. Cochran said that they are all residents of Denton but not of the Historic District, Mr, Engelbrerht asked what proportion of the Commissioners live in the District. Mr. Cochran said 3 out of 7. Mr. Engelbrecht asked why the majority don't live in the District. Mr, Cochran replied that the Historic District is not the only function of the Landmark Commission, Ms, Biles stated that the Certified Local Government status requires that the Landmark Commissioners represent various areas, Brian Morrison, 305 Mounts, stated that he is opposed to the exclusion of the houses for the same reason that he wants to be included - preservation. The houses in question may not be as large or as grand as others but they are worthy of j preservation. Their exclusion would set a bad precedent and a would be a loss to Denton. Chairperson Brock closed the public hearing. Recommendation: Ms. Biles stated that staff and the Historic Landmark Commission recommend denial, Mr. Appleton stated that there needs to be an escape valve but it needs to be tight. There is not a compelling reason to exclude these properties, He moved to recommend denial of H-91-002. Motion was seconded by Ms. Morgan, Mr, Holt stated that the regulation say that properties can be removed from the District if they do not cause any degradation to the District, These properties are on the edge. They only touch the District on one side. West of them are nicer homes. The type of houses in question can be found all over Denton. He does not see any significance to them and does not think their removal would affect the District. He does not think it would set a precedent, He said that lie wants people to modernize and preserve their homes and that does not necessarily mean historic preservation, Ms, Brock said that she will be supporting the motion but it is sticky. she thinks the removal would affect the District. There ought to be a compelling reason for a removal. She is particularly concerned about the properties to the west that have been rehak.Alitated and are nice. p&Z Minutes July 24, 1991 Page 8 They complied with the regulations and and are now more valuable. The difference between these houses and others is that they are a unit. Care must be taken of this area which was trashed after world War II, There is a tendency to think of historic structures as grand or older but there are tax breaks and CDBG funds available to these houses, Mr. Glasscock stated that the Mudds did not want in the District Co begin with and they still don't want to be in it. He is not sure that this would set any precedents. The ds have not had any choice. It they want out, let them MUd out. Ms. Brock stated that there was opposition to the District almost nature impossible creating a to t have when it historic w district created. that i it i is in the hi unanimous agreement. Mr. Appleton agreed that it is tough not to look at the individuals but this would be a whittling away. The big picture must be considered, i Motion carried (4-3). Mr. Glasscock, Mr. Holt, and Mr. Kamman voted no. VI. Hold a public hearing and consider the rezoning of a .413 acre tract of land from Two Family District to planned E Development District and approve a Detailed plan on property located on the east side of Carroll Boulevard, between Maple and pacific for the purpose of a professional office. Fifteen notices were mailed to property owners within used, of the sites 7 were received back in favor, 0 were opposed, and one was received in favor from outside of the 200' radius. Staff Report; Ms, Feshari presented the staff report not part r of the (attached). she technically located i on t the Square, it h in property downtown Urban Center. Petitioner: Dale Irwin stated that he is in the real estate and insurance business and is located out of 515 S, Carroll, He is the prospective owner and developer of this property. His objective is to request a change in zoning from two-family to planned Development District (PD). He will build an office similar to his other office building. Parking will be on the north end. There will be a 25' setback off of Carroll which is the same as his building at Carroll and Highland, The landscaping and structure will be attractive. The entrance will be on Maple. The property is ! currently vacant. It could be developed for duplexes, j,,.., i 47 MINUTES Historic Landmark Commission July 8, 1991 f The regular meeting of the Historic Landmark Commission of the City of Denton, Texas was held at 5:00 p.m, in the Civil Defense Room of the Municipal Building, 215 E. McKinney, on Tuesday, July 8, 1991. Present: Mike Cochran, Judith Abbott, Joe Bailey, W.A. Barker, s~ Gaylen Fickey, John Kimmey, Jr, Mary McCain, and Rita Holcomb i Absent: Janet Shelton Present from Staff: Frank H, Robbins, Executive Director for ; Planning and Development: Jane Biles, Main Stree t J Manager: Joe Morris, Assistant City Attorney: and Donna Baker, Planning Technician k i Chairman Cochran called the meeting to order, i I. Consider approval of the minutes of the meetings of May 20, 1991 and May 28, 1991, Woon the olaver's first name was of the minutes Wayne that ,can1991, stated of may 20 misspelled. Ms. Abbott stated on the second page, the fourth . paragraph, me, Biles commented that 0508" not 0808" of the area should qualify for historic designation, E, It was moved by Ms, Abbott, seconded by Mr. Fickey and unanimously approved (8-0) to accept the minutes of the meetings of May 20, 1991 and may 28, 1991. II, Consider approval of the wording for the site marker for Pleasant Grove Baptist Church located at 107 S. Wood Street. Mr. Cochran stated that he had worked on the wording for the marker and it read as follows: Pleasant Grove Missionary Baptist Church i Pleasant Grove Missionary E~aptist Church was I founded, according to a published account, before 1878. Church tradition traces its origins to a brush arbor on the banks of Pecan Creek. Deacon Marion Mays (1862-1933), a charter member of the church, was one of the first two african-american children born in the City of Denton, July Be 1991 is Page 2 of 4 Lee £ in September of 1885, trustees Gpapers Bpurchasing f Jones and William Wright signed land in old Quakertown (Now Civic center park) for the new church. theePleasanttGrovekMissionarye' in F 's December of 1922, was moved to the Solomon s Baptist church building Hill addition in 1923. The old church sanctuar}P wa raz heebell remainsdin use fromctheeorwas iginal cQuakertown t church. For more than one hundred Years, members of the pleasant Grove Missionary Baptist Church have made significant contributions to the religious and 1 cultural life of this community. Ms. Abbott suggested putting the last paragraph, at the beginning. s Mr. FFickey moved to approve the wording for the marker as as it currently stands. It was seconded by Mr. Kimmey and unanimously approved (8-0). i Reverend Mark Chew stated that he would 1imt. Cochranthe marker presentation on October 20, 1991, stated that he would contact Trinity Metals to begin the sl process. Mr. Cochran asked to consider item IV and then go bark to item 111, IV. Consider petition bincludeiproperties Oak/Y ree~5 Mounts street, 311 Mounts Street, and 403 located at Mounts street, .Mt, Cochran opened the public hearing, STAFF1 Ms, Biles stated the application was acceptable o s aff and that staff recommended approval, Brian Morrison, applicant at 305 Mounts IN FAVORt Mr. S ree and representative of the other property owners, stated that he was in favor of the proposal and asked that the commission approve it as well. { OPPOS ! No one spoke in opposition of the request, Mt, Cochran closed the public hearing. i A s vA, yry.•r iMas di-^Yi llV+ It111U ~1. July Be 1991 Page 3 of 4 DECISION: Mr. Fickey moved to approve the petition to amend t~Tie boundaries of the district to include 305 Mounts, 311 Mounts, and 403 Mounts Street. It was seconded by Ms, Abbott and a roll call vote was taken as fo11Owss Mr. Cochran - aye Mr. Kimmey - aye Mr. Bailey - aye Ms. Holcomb aye Ms. Abbott aye Mr. Fickey - aye Ms. McCain - aye Mr. Barker - aye The vote was unanimously approved (8-0). I the Commission s on would July 24, before 1991, Mr. Robbins szoning that Planning and Barker left. Mr. III, Discuss inclusion structures Historic located DistrictKkway Avenue into the Oak/Hi Me. Abbott stated that she was not able to get in contact with the representatives for the Parkway Avenue inclusion. She asked that the item be placed on the Commission's September agenda. V., Consider a petition to amend the boundaries of the W. r Hickory, District 604 t W. exclude Hickoryproperties . located Oak/Hickory 602 Historic and 109 Williams street. i Mr. Cochran opened the public hearing. STAFF: Ms. Biles stated that staff recommended denial Ff th; request. { i IN FAVORS No one was present to speak in favor of the requ"~" e`eat. OPPOSED: Brian Morrison stated that he wanted to see U55`drSTrict preserved and did not want to ass any properties lost. He asked that the Commission deny the i request. Mr. Cochran closed the public hearing. I l YA, 7 F tE { .1'. l1Ul. I1111U 1. ~%J July 8, 1991 Page 4 of 4 y1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Robbins stated that he spoke with Mrs. Mudd last week. She reque8ted that he make a few points for her since she would be unable to attend the meeting. Mr. Robbins stated that the points were: 1) The Mudd's lost a $1,500 loan that was received for the installation of the siding, 2) One of the bids that were received, for the painting of the house, was $7500 and that the paint would i last approximately eight to ten years. 3) The final point was that the Mudd's did not know the rules of the historic district. j DECISION: Mr. Fickey moved to recommend denial of the li request to be taken out of the district. It was seconded by Ms. Abbott and a roll call vote was taken,as follows: t Mr. Cochran - aye Mr. Kimmey - aye Mr. Bailey - abstained Ms. Holcomb - aye Ms. Abbott aye Mr. Fickey aye Ms, McCain - aye t ~ i The vote was carried (6-0) with Mr, Bailey abstaining. Mr. Fickey left the meeting. VI. Receive a report on the status of the 1990 Certified Local Government (CLG) project - O'Neil Ford brochure preparation. Mr. Cochran stated that he would have the text for the brochure completed by the'end ofvjuly, which is the deadline date. He added that'photrgraphs were completed for the brochure as well, Mr, Cochran st1~ed that for a future CLG project, he would like to see all'of O'Neil Ford's work put on the' National:. & is eg rY. VII. Future A4nda.Items , 113 . •~w ,W. ''a..•I. :J ~ n ,i I Fh x.1'1 .~~w. , Mr. *Cochran, Oarad that 8in,ce thisr, waar"His last meeting, he was very appreciative for the help that he received from all staff members that he was in contact with, It was moved by Mr, Kimmey, seconded by Mr. Bailey and unanimously carried (6-0) to adjourn the meeting at 7145 p.m, 2759x t 3 ei\89172,0 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING THE BOUNDARY OF THE OAK-HICKORY HISTORIC DISTRICT BY DELETING THREE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 602 WEST HICKORY, 604 WEST HICKORY AND 109 WILLIAMS STREET FROM THE DISTRICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the owners of the three properties located at 602 West Hickory, 604 Weqt Hickory and 109 Williams Street have petitioned the City to delete their properties from the Oak-Hickory Historic Districts and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the properties meet one or more conditions for removal as specified in section 35- 254 of the Code of Ordinanceas NOW, THEREFOREI l THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the boundary of the Oak-Hickory Historic Dis- triot is amended by deleting the properties located at 602 West Hickory, 604 West Hickory and 109 Williams Street from the District, the properties being more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached to and incorporated in this ordinance by reference. I ~1 SECTION II. That this ordinance shall become effective im- mediately upon its passage and approval. I PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1991 BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY i i BY: APPROVED AS 110 LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY i i By s r, i T T`- i ll } .r EXHIBIT A 602 West Hickory, 604 West Hickory and 109 Williams Street LEGAL DESCRIPTION All that certain lot, tract or parcel of land, situated in the City of Denton, County of Denton, State of Texas, being a part of the Wm, Neill Survey, Abst. No. 971, and being a part of a certain I tract of land out of said survey conveyed by Sarah MoKennon to Virginia Williams, by Deed dated August 1'71 1877, and recorded in x, Volume F, at Page 259, of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, and more particularly described as follows, to wit: BEGINNING at the Southwest Corner of said lot so conveyed to the said Virginia Williams, a stake for corner) THENCE East along the South Line thereof 113.8 feet to the I Southeast Corner of said Lot so conveyed to the said Virginia I Williams) THENCE North With the East Line of said Virginia Williams lot 158.08 feet for corner in same) i THENCE West 113.8 feet for corner in the West line of said Virginia Williams lot) THENCE South with the West Line of said Virginia Williams Lot, 158.85 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING, I~ -T' li'M X2 a J ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING A COMPETITIVE SEALED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR { SERVICES) PROVIDING FOR THE EXI?ENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the city has solicited, received and tabulated com- petitive sealed proposals for the purchase of necessary materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the procedures of state law and city ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has reviewed and recommended that the herein described proposals are the best i responsible proposals for the materials, equipment, supplies or services as shown in the "Proposals" submitted therefor; and WHEREAS, the City Council, has provided in the City Budget for sufunds to be pplies or used t approved and(accepted the apropriation terials, equipment of herein; NOW, THEREFORE, + THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINSt SEC219N I. That the numbered items in the following numbered bids for materials, equipment, supplies, or services, shown in the E 5 "Proposals" on file in the Office of the City's Purchasing Agent filed according to the number assigned thereto, are hereby accepted t and approved as being the lowest responsible bids for such itemst ITEM AMOUNT' NUMBER NO, VENDOR BID 11266 ALL HALLIBURTON IND. SERV. $26,885.10 BID 11272 1,2, 6 1 WESCO #29,260.00 1 BID 11272 4 TECBLINE $ 60588.00 BID 11275 ALL AGW. INFRARED SYSTEKS $22,500.00 BRISCO TIRE SERVICE. INC. $15,794.00 ~ BID 11278 ALL That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted proposals, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the proposals for ucoritems and sorvices agrees to purchase the materials, equipment, supplies in accordance with the terms, specifications, standards, quantities and for the specified sums contained in the Invitations, Proposals, and related documents. i yd ;i.} ialVft"i~J i 1ry5 .i I k sxCTION IIL. That should the city and persons submitting ap- proved and accepted items and of the submitted proposals wish to utter into a formal written agreement as a result of the accep- tance, approval, and awarding of the proposal, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract which shall be attached hereto; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained in the Proposal and related documents herein approved and accepted. iQN IV. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted proposals, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved proposal or pursuant to a written contract made pursuant thereto as authorized herein. S& T; V. That this ordinance shall become effective imme- diately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of r 1991. t s i BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR f i ATTEST: E JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY f BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY BY: j S &,M: { DATE: September 3, 1991 i c.>:~:Y_~Q~E~143L_B cE45T TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM; Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: BID #1266 - CHEMICAL CLEANING OF BOILER BEQQbE~ED~TQ~y: Council approve award of bid 1266 to the low evaluated bidder, Halliburton Industrial Services, in an amount of $26,885.10. I 5~kJMABY: Bids were received to ohemioally clean Spencer Unit remove iron oxide and Pour boiler, Chemical cleaning should t other scale deposits thereby restoring offioient heat transfer and reducing tube failures. YAScKQ$4ll~tP: Tabulation Sheet and Memorandum from Jim Thune. P8Q9$A~_QFE9HT~fli~l~_QB_Sz~DuE~_LEE~T~: Electric Production j FI~AL_ia94~ Funding has been budgeted under Electric p i Production account 8339 (general repairs), i f Respeo fully submitted: Lloyd V. Harrell City Manager Prepared by: Name: MelM a A. Harden Title: Buyer Approvedc - ' Piamei Denise Harp0Ol ; Titlet Senior Buyer 179.DOc ~~:1 e ' „ FYf341, •1'~ I BID 8 1266 i I I I BID NAME CLEANING OF BOILER 1 HALLIBURTON I DOSJELL 1 ' I I 1 I I JULY 18, 1991 i I 1 OPEN DATE I VENDOA I VENDOR I 1 4 I QTY I ITEM DESCRTPTIUN I ---I_______________I----I I-------------------- 1 I I 1 $16,370.10 I $19,561.00 I. A` i CHEMICAL I I I B I I EQUIPMENT I $3,585.00 k $4,580.00 I I I $6 ' o66,00 1 $5,895.00 I I C PERSONNEL l j. 1 1 I ; D I I MOBILIZATION I $864.00 i $4,272.00 1 1 1 I I I i. l l TOTAL I $26,885.10 I $34008.00 I 1 f } i 1 F s E t i s j i i I i 1 i~ r 1 F7ftl'%<• 1 i I ! I TO: Tom Shaw, Purchasing Agent FROM: Jim Thune, Electric Production Plant Manager DATE: August 14, 1991 SUBJECT: BID 01266 - UNIT FOUR BOILER CHEMICAL CLEANING Bids have been received and evaluated regarding chemical cleaning costs for Unit Four boiler, Low evaluated bid totals $26,885.10 from Halliburton Industrial services. A spread sheet of the evaluation follows, based on an f estimated 48 hours of cleaning with 9 hours of standby and 2 days equipment cost. This represents a conservative estimate and little or no delay due to boiler tube leaks. In the event tube leaks are encountered and the cleaning has to be shut duwn for tube repair, an additional $5,000.00 in j equipment and labor is estimated. This amount would be funded by change order if necessary. A revised requisition has been attached reflecting funding requirements for this work, A sample council agenda has also been attached for your review. Please review the recommendation and process for approaval. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Thank you, une, Plant Manager JT/ks f ~ Attachments: Spread sheet Sample Council agenda E 91d proposals (2) cc: Ernie Tullos Bob Nelson with attachments i i IRV f DATE; September 3, 1991 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECTt BID 01272 - DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS 3iLggt~~Ei~BA~igN; We recommend this bid be awarded to the items evaluated & b 3d and ;Jesoo in amount $$6,588.00 for lowest for item 4. This bid is for Transformers to be used throughout the City of Denton Eleotrioal Distribution system. evaluation of the load losoes of all transformers bid the two low vendors were determined. gAgLtgR.Q.HD: Tabulation Sheet, Transformer Evaluations £HQ9S6~~_pEE~R~ECIT_QS_Siti4!!E~_6EFLS~T`~Ls Budgeted Funds for Eleotrioal Distribution f~ LIZg6L_IMP9g1s 1990-91 Aocount #612-080-RB90-9222 Respeo ful',y submitted; Z!S _r Lloyd Vf Harrell City Manager Pt,epared by; Name; Denise Harpolol Titlet Sinior Buyer 181.DOC f Y yrr:!muCC i i !{Hp3} i BID 0 1272 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I k I I I I 1 I BID NME DMOUTION I TCt~1 E I TMLW c E SRPLY I CENUM MM W i CDCM & CO mum TRMWORns I I 1 I cr al DATE JULY 30, 1991 1 I I 1 { I IM DESCRTPTTON ` VENDOR ! VENDOR ; VENDOR E VE"MOR I VENDOR MWR i; I= ~.i,lr- - I I I 1 1 I ' 1 1 3 k 300 KvA 120/208v I $6,050.00 1 $4,('.3.00 1 N/B I N/B 1 $5,613.49 1 N/B I k 3 PHASE PM I I I 1 I 1 ALTERNATE 1 $6149(.00 4 I 1 I 1 i I I 2 1 3 I 300 KVA 277/480V 1 46,807.00 1 $49802.00 I N/B I N/B 1 0,567.69 1 N/B E 1 I 3 PttASE: PM I I 1 I i 1 ALTMTE E $6,981.001 E ; I I l 1 3 1 1 1 100 KVA 240/480V 1 $1,607.00 1 $1,708.00 I N/B E $1,770.00 ` N/B I N/B E i "a PM I 1 I I € I ALTERMTE 1 $1,955.00 1 I 1 I I I I I N/B I38.ao I N/B I NIB 1 4 1 9 150 KVA 277/480V COIN E $720.00 1 $732.00 I 1 I I I 1 I ALTERNATE 1 $784.001 I 1 1 ! 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1FNiH41fNM1F11Np IHFMN#MMMMiNkMMRl11fillHtMM111fMMMMIHNfMY#it~fil##MfF$-0F%i4#MMAafN##i4NNIHiFYlIMifMWFf!#IIiFM - i 1 I I i k I E I i i I 1 1 I IwRS EI FX rRIC i 4 I SAN Ah'OEW I VAN TRAM PRIFSfF t k FQ FLII~ I 1 I E].E1rTttTC I DID E MPPU E I E I 1 I _J° 1 11 IC1fY 1 1E31 RCN I VENDOR i VENDOR TE VOMOR VENDOR E VENDOR I VENDOR j j 1 13 I 300 KVA 120/208V I t6,7MOO 1 $40620.00 1 $5,994.00 1 $6,096.00 E $5}113.00 E 46AB-00 1 I 3 PHASE PM € 2 1 3 1 300 KVA 277/480V 1 $5,780.00 1 $1,580.00 1 $5,994.00 1 $6,031.00 I i6,043.00 1 95,444.00 3 PHASE M E I E 1 E 1 1 E I 3 I 1 I 100 KVA 240/480V I $1,567.00 I $10660.00 I $1,796.00 E $2,315-00 r ~.00 1 $1,293.00 N/B I 1 1 1 tRIME 1 8.00 1 $742.00 1 $707.00 € $1,048.00 1 $688.00 I $722.00 I 4 k 9 150 KVA 277/480V CONV I $?7 € 1 I I I I I I j 4 i i BID #1272 I TRANSFORMER EVALUATION 09-Aug-91 03;24 PM CRY OF DENTON ` ~i~l)ER AN FAS3Tt QTY -1 96Z + i'RIGI ref L L P 300KVA,1201208,3PH,PM - C, MOLONEY $0.00 NO BID I - LOW BID WESCO_ - - 3 538 - - 2661 - $4,820,00 $28,934.30 TECHLINE HOWARD IND 3 442 _ 2910 1.91$4,663.00 $29,725.37 TEMPLE G.E._ ~3 605 - x 1813 $6,050,00 $30,522,39 POLELINE_ _ PAUWELS _ 3 576 2388 3.22 55 488.00 x,897__ .446 PRIESTER COOPER 3 --510 1i5.00 530,925.59 COMMlNS 3--- 576 2388 3.22-~ x5,613.49 x'31,324.82 -KBS ELECT. FAYETTEVILLE 3 -630 _ 2877 - X5,780.00 ,729,86 VANTRAN 3 _630 ---2600 _215 56 096.00 060.66 SAN ANGELO - - - 3 - - 720 __-4100 - 55,994,00 - $40,339.84 E PLEA G.E. 3 784 3735. $6.457.00 667A9 2 C. MOLONEY 3 0 -2 0 f0.00 $0.00 LOW BID WESCO- 3 - - - 434 _ ----_51 T f 59 54 580.00 577 749.27 TECHL NE HOWARD IND - 3 - 634 - 2433 . 1,87 _4,802.00 ,59128 f'RIESTER COOPER 3 642 _ 2327 $5,043.00 414.18 v-- - - - POLELINE PAUWELS 3 -586 2225 3.08 _55,4W 11f,36 COM NS 3 - 686 2225 3,08 55,567.89 $30,529.42 TEMPLE O.E. - 3 ----610 1610 - ",457.00 1073.18 KBS ELECT, FAYETTEVILLE- 3 - - 530 _267 - $5f7N-000 729.96 VANTRAN _ 3 _ 540 2725 f .3b ^6 03140 986,77 SAN ANGELO 3 720 4100 $5,994,00 ,339.84 TEMPLE A 733 -58,981.00 $431484.26 f Ems- y V BID /1272 TRANSFORMER EVALUATION 09-Aug-91 03,24 PM CITY OP DENTON rr BIDIB m,_ . NIVUFAGTUFi _Q fY __~~L _ W W: _ Ll-- PRiC COSY W 100KVA,2401480,1 PH,PM POLELINE -PAUWELS 1 0 0 $0,00 $0.00 - COMMINS 1 0 0 - - $0.00 $0.00 LOW BID WESCO _ ---176 742 1 36 $1,660.00 $9,43519 TEMPLE _ G.E -1_ 195 - 792 - $1,fi07,00 $9,643,50 - -TECHLINE _.___HOWARD IND 1 241 670 1.6i 51,708 00 $9,668.27 f - C MOLONEY T---- 1-- - -^186 702 - $1,77000 99,568.84 __KBS ELECT_^ - ^~ERMCO _ - _1~_ _ ---232 _ -v _870 _ $1:667,00 $9,887`39 PRIESTER COOPER 1 290 1100 - 51,28300 $10161.08 ` VANTRAN _ _ 1 _-___T_620 1.36-- $2,316,00 $11,240.82 -SAN ANGELO - - - 1 _ - - - 240 ----1400 - -1,788.00 512,902,72 TEMPLE A G.E. 1__.- 255 1431. _$1,965:00 $13,631 78 S~RV _;27 d~bT~V_OH - COMMI_NS _ 9 _ 0 0 ----u;~ t LOW BID TECHLINE HOWARD IND 9 _ 160 _ 392 1.70_ $73200 $4 732,13 TEMPLE G.E. - 9 _ 117 4a4 X720,00477U.73 _WESCO _ --9 105 - - - 468 $742.00 $4,893.08 KBS ELECT. ERMCO 8 117 - 446 T18.00 $4,970.93 POLELlNE~ PAUWELS-- 9 -97 _ 521 3.Q8~ WP&.60 $5_,014.95' C. MOLONEY 8- - _ _ S6 __895 - - $638,00 4$8,4(}5,92 SAN ANGELO 9 160 -600 _ - 707.00 5,5,685_!2 - PRIESTER COOPER 9 176 _ _ 650 688,00 ,782.39 VAMTRAN- - _ -9 _ _1 W _ - 460 - 1.6 $1 048.00_ ! 762.34 _ TEMPLE A G.E. _ 9_ - _ 128 752 $784.00.67 I I . T. 7. Y 1 I 1 1 4 DATE: September 3, 1991 CITY COt~NCIf~_BM~'g0_BT TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager i SUBJECT: BID 181275 - INFRARED IMAOINO SYSTEM 29C,Qb1JB.1APA 1.QN i We recommend this bid be awarded to the luw bid meeting specification of Agema Infrared Systems in the total amount of $22,500,00. 1 ~QNJJABYs This bid is for the purchase of a infrared camera system which will be used by 'the Electric Distribution Department. Inspections made with this camera detect heat generation from excessive current, short circuits and defective components or corrosion in the electric distribution system of the City of Denton. The three lower j bidders did not meet specification due to the fact that their Infrared systems were not solid state. RA9.BQ2Qg4p: Tabulation Shoot and Memorandum from Oeorge Pool dated August 20, 1991. I , ' EB.44BQt7,S~___pFEA,BTtI~SIT---QB___Sifl4ll~,~_....A~,EF~CT~4i Eleotrie Distribution i B1ZQAL-=A1T: Budgeted Funds for Electric Distribution Account #610-080-0252-9232, Respo fully submitted: i ~ L'.o d V. Harrell City Manager Prepared by: Names -DeniseHarpoo - - Titles Senior Buyer 182,DOC 6""All4h' S r I BID # 12(5 i i I I I I I I I SID c1AME ]I MM IIdA M Sy,-)M I ELIR syMM 1~SICS IAGEM4A HARM III GROUP I XEDAR I I CORD I SY57E16 I TNC I 00RP I I I I I I I E MEN DATE AUGUST 6, 1991 U I GfY IM DE5CfaMC J i VE= MWR l VEl~OR 1 VE3IDOR I VE3>DOR I~I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 ';4 , I I k A I I DF = D1AOnc i $18,500.00 1 $13,995,00 ; $22,500.00 i $17,545.00 1 $230.00 j I I I PLUS CAME'IiA I $1,o5o.00 i 1 I I I I I f I I MAM1FACltItiFR i FUR ipMTRCPHYSTGS I AOEMA 1 ~ I EXAAR I ,t I I I I I I DELZM 1 90 DAYS 1 30 DAYS I 4-6 WEMS 1 45 DAYS 1 15-30 DAYS I I II I ~ i ~ E ~ I I I I, I I I I I I I l j 1 4 3 1 i i i , i ~t 1 0.3 CITYotDENTONMUNICIPAL UTILITIES / s01•ATexasStreet/ Denton,TX76201 I f MEMORANDUM TO: Tom Shaw, Purchasing Agent j FROM: George Pool, Electric Engineering Associate I DATE: August 20, 1991 .SUBJECT: INFRARED IMAGE CAMERA The Electric Engineering Department recommends the purchase of the Agema 210 Infrared (IR) Imaging System from the Leake Company for ems such as the 8mm camcorder, video it n. The optional $22rso player, and oclor video printer, will not be purchased from the Leake company, but by a separate p.o. for approximately $4,500. From the five bidders, Agema was the only bid that met, or exceeded, the requirements. I The Electrophysics, ISI and Xedor IR Systems are built using the Pyroelectric Vidicom (PEV) technology. This technology uses a PEV tube as the IR sensor, which can easily be temporarily or permanently damaged by directing the camera at the sun or other high temperature sources such as the boilers at the Power Plant. This PEV tube technology means the camera is not a complete solid state device as requested in the bid specifications. In addition, this PEV tube is very expensive, and can cost as much as 50% of the original price of the camera to replace. The operation of the PEV type camera requires continuous panning of the camera to view an image which makes it awkward and cumbersome to operate. The image with the PEV tube has a tendency of creating trails and shadows, which takes away from providing a good clear output. This PEV technology also makes the camera bulkier and heavier than the pure solid state sensor design. The weight and size is very important to the operation and usability of the IR camera, since this equipment will be operated by one person, for eight hour periods, in 950F we&cher. The Flir system bid did not have the required RS-170 video outp7.tt as requested in the specifications. This output is an interface to a VCR allowing the image to he stored and later viewed for analysis and reporting. This capability is very important to the success and operation of the IR image program. Furthermore, the Flir System is 22 pounds heavier than the Agema 210 System, which would limit it's usability due to the reasons mentioned above. GP:tn 08201271 1 1 t DATE: September 3, 1991 i CITY_CQU_j~Q,?!3_$FEO$T i TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT s BI,) 111278 - TIRE CUTTER We recommend this bid be awarded to the low bidder, Brinco Tire Service Inc,, in the total amount of 1 $15,794.00. UMMA$g: This bid is for the purchase of a Trailer mounted tire outter for use at the City of Denton Landfill. New Federal Regulations will not allow whole tires to be buried in th< landfill, and the cutting of these tires will also save valuable landfill space. @,lM$-Un: Tabulation Sheet ~ $BQQfl6Meg.a.._PF,P6flT~7FNT__QB___Q:B41E8__AE~FiScTFij2s Solid Waste Department $IUAL-IEEAS.Ii Budgeted account 0630-024-0803-8507 bm t edi Ll rreY su ReAO-Y~.-~ ll City Manager f' Prepared bys I Names Denise Harpool Titles Senior Buyer 180.DOc ya. , Sara«,w I c .f I F BTll 6 1278 4 1 r I BID NAME TIRE CUTTER { SRTSCO TIRE I DAVID LANE SERVICE INC I AND SONS I I I OPEN DATE AUGUST 13, 1991 ---------------------I-----"----•----- VENDOR _ VENDOR I #-~-QTy ITEM DESCRIPTION _-I-----i I--------------- I I ; I I $14,949.00 1 $14,985.co I I i I r I I PASSENGER/TRUCK f I I TIRE lUTTER I I I f I I I REPLACEMENT BLADES $845.00 1 $850.00 2 I I I ~ I I I I I DELIVERY I 10 DAYS I 10 DAYS I { k I E i i ' j I E i i t i I, - i September 3, 1991 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager RE: CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO , EXECUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND J. ROBERT MCLAIN RELATING TO CONSULTING SERVICES; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. t RECOMMENDATION: The Public Utility Board recommends to the City Council approval of an addendum increasing the value of the contract between the City of Denton and utility rate consultant, J. Robert McLain, from $9,960 to $14,000. C SUMMARYt 11 The original contract with Mr. McLain, rate consultant for the I FY 1992 water/wastewater rate study, was based on 249 hours of consulting services for $9,960. Due to several factors, the rate study could not be completed within the original contract value. An addendum to the contract of $4,040 is necessary to compensate the consultant for the additional work on both the cost of service study and rate design. The cost of service portion of the rate study required additional time for meetings between the consultant and utility staff to review allocation of costs between base and extra capacity coats, customer costs, and meter costs. Several revisions to the cost of service study were made to develop a more precise relationship between various categories of costs and customer classes. Because the base-extra capacity cost model was different from the model used' in previous years, e more direct comparison between last year's study and this year's study was also required to resolve differences in cost allocation methodology. Additional time was also required to revise both the cost of service study and rate design to address comments or suggestions expressed by the Board during the preliminary review of the rate study, j i i FISCAL SUMMARY: Utility program coats for contract services will increase by $4,040 if the addendum is approved. PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Citizens of Denton, Denton Municipal Utilities, Legal Department, Public Utilities Board, and City Council. Respectfully submitted, Lloyd V. Harrell City Manager Prepared b o, I o Martin ?e2 tor-Environmental operations/Financial A nistration ~ I Approved by: FVE. elso , Executive Dir c Department of Utilities 07 Exhibit I Original Consulting Services Contract between the City of Denton and J. Robert McLain Ordinance Minutes PUB Meeting I i i fin.. w.y„p;aevlrr r C.1144d IIL V 1 1 { ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND J. ROBERT MCLAIN RELATING TO CONSULTING SERVICES; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the City Manager is authorized to execute the attached agreement between the City of Denton and J. Robert McClain relating to consulting services for a Rate Study, i SECTION II. That the City council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds as set forth in the agreement. SECTION IIr, That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY i I BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY I By 3 s 1 +#C@11; j c wpdacs\69109 CONSULTING SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND J. ROBERT MCLAIN This Agreement is made between the CITY OF DE14TON (City), a municipal corporation located in Denton County, Texas, and J. ROBERT MCLAIN, (Consultant) as follows: I. , CONSULTANT'S SERVICES A. Consultant shall provide the following services to City: • I 1. Project water and wastewater revenue requirements for a five-year planning period, using the proposed 1992 budget as the base-year (0), and estimate revenues required from all revenue sources for the five-year planning period. 2. Use the base-extra capacity allocation process to evaluate the existing water and wastewater rate structure(s) in terms of adequate and equitable revenue recovery from the proper sources. i 3. Once inequities have been defined, develop fair and equitable I rate structure(s) which produce sufficient revenues to meet the City's current and future needs and which will recover j proportionately and equitably the costs of services from eaor customer class, including wholesale customers. 4. If requested, present findings to the Public Utilities Board and the City Council, r,. If requested, represent the city in proceedings before any other interested parties. 6. Develop a procedures manual for the City's internal use containing recommendations for future internal annual rate studies. H. The Consultant's services will be provided in accordance the Workplan, attached as Attachment A and incorporated in this contract by reference. C. The consultant shall exercise the same degree of care, skill and diligence in the performance of these services as is ordinarily provided by a professional consultant under sim lar ciroum- stances. ZT. COMPENSATION TO HE PAID CONSULTANT A. The City agrees to pay the Consultant for the services performed at an hourly rate of $40.00 per hour, but the Consultant shall not be paid more than Fourteen Thousand Dollars ($14,000.00) for I all services required to be provided, under this Agreement regardless of the number of hours required to provide those services. B. The Consultant shall bill the City twice a month for the hours worked to the date of billing and the City shall pay each billing within thirty days of receipt of an undisputed bill. ITT. TERM OF AGREEMENT This Agreement shall begin on the: date of execution all continue until all services have been performed and payments made. ` TV. f CONSULTANT IS INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR The Consultant is an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be or considered an employee of the City for the purposes 1 of income tax, withholding, social raeeurit.y taxes, vacation or sick i leave benefits, workers' compensation, or any other City employee benefit. Consultant shall perform the services to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his design6e. INDEMNYFICATION The Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all damages, loss or liability of any kind whatsoever, by reason of injury to property or third persons to the extent directly and proximately caused by the error, omission or negligent act of the Consultant, its officerig, agents, employees, and invitees in the performance of this Agreement, and the Consultant will, at its cost and expense, defend and protect the city against any and all such claims and demands. VI. CHOICE OF LAW AND VENUE This Agreement shall be governed by law of the state of Texas, and venue for its construction and enforcement shall lie in the courts of Denton County, Texas. PAGE 2 i Jw tN7.Miw8 t, i VII. CANCELLATION City reserves the right to cancel this contract at any time upon fourteen (14) days prior notice, but Consultant shall be paid for all services provided up to the date of cancellation. EXECUTED this the day of 1991. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS i I BY: LLOYD V. HARRELL, CITY MANAGER ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY i j BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY BY: J. ROBERT MCLAIN, CONSULTANT ICI [ BYr PAGE 3 T... a, ~(4ppy71~ KoJef'N I 40 dWJ4, 01 1I{ l j EXCERPT FROM MINUTES PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD MEETING August 14, 1991 6. CONSIDER ADDENDUM $1 TO THE UTILITY RATE CONSULTANT CONTRACT, i Martin stated that McLain, the Utility Rate Consultant, i limited his contract participation to $9,960 or 249 hours. He worked a total of 366 hours. Staff was asking to increase his i salary to $14,000 to help recover his costs for additional hours worked. Laney asked if the change of the scope of work was at the direction of the Public Utilities Hoard. McLain's contract states that he would be paid the flat amount no matter how many hours worked. Thompson stated he did believe the PUB members required McLain to put in additional hours; therefore, contributing to the change in scope of work. Action: I Frady made a motion to approve the addendum; second by Coplen, All ayes, no nays, motion carried. j i i 3 t A September 3, 1991 I CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ! FROMi Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: j CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON RETAINING THE LAW FIRM OF LLOYD, GOSSELINK, FOWLER, BLEVINS & MATHEWS, P.C., TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF DENTON IN CONNECTION WITH THE CITY'S CONTRACT FOR WATER SERVICE TO THE UPPER TRINITY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICTS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. i RBCONNIVIDATIONs i The Utilities Staff recommends approval to increase the j maximum fee from $9,500 to $25,000. SUHKARY s tt On July 3, 1991, Denton entered into an agreement for d legal services. Fees were based on hourly rate with a I fee not to exceed $9,500 unless authorized by Denton. The analysis and recommended changes were completed within $9,500 limit. However, as indicated to the City { Council on Tuesday, July 23, 1991, the changes will i require further negotiations with UTRWD. With continued assistance from Denton staff, the adjusted fee should be less than $25,000. BACKGROUND: Denton had. been working to develop a new 10 MGD water plant near Lake Ray Roberts. Denton had been negotiating with the UTRWD to sell up to 49% of that plant to UTRWD to serve the needs of the northwest region of Denton County. The UTRWD plan to develop another plant to serve the southern region. In an effort to address all the issues, a very complicated preliminary contract had been developed. K City council Agenda Item page 2 firm of Lloyd, Gosselink, Fowler, Blovins and p,C „ have been hired to help Denton in its Mathews, j review of this contract. This contract was written whereas it was limited to $9,500, ` On August 13, 1991, the statheYelegal d firm with the Council the issues raised by p,C, The ' and Mathews, Blevina nk, Fowler, Joint Gos seli ; Council expressed concern about entering into i ownership agreement with the UTRWD aointisownership directed the staff to discontinue i contract negotiations but instead, determine from the UTRWD if they would be interested in a wholesale contract. The staff has visited with the General Manager, 4 ' Officers and some other members of the UTRWD, and they have generally expressed that they prefer a joint ownership approach, but would consider a wwasesnot ale contract if a joint ownership contract possible. The City has wholesale water contracts with the City of Corinth and Lake Cities Municipal Utilities, and the staff had already modified those contracts in draft ` process of form in the hadeexisted taepossible interim contract, The Staff since wholesale water pcontract under that believes it is p to seek outside legal assistance I rudent on such a wholesale contract if the Council authorizes the staff to pursue negotiations for the wholesale concept. it is anticipated that the present $9,500 { legal services contract will need to be increased to $25,000 in order to adequately review and assist Denton in any negotiations on a wholesale contract. FISCAL SUWARYt The which additional increases s the r maximum estimated fee from n $9,500 exceed $15,500 to 250500. r i City Council Agenda Item page 3 PROGRAMS, DRpARTMRNIS, OR GROUPS AFFECTEDt Citizens of Denton, Denton Municipal Utilities, Upper Water Fowler,I Blevvinsa& Mathews,Dp.c.) cityLLegal Department. Respec ully submitted, oy V. Harrell City Manager ~i Approved byt 1 ~ E. Nelson Executive Director of Utilities ! i 3 FMIBIT I ORDINANCE ! r II CONTRACT i i E ~ . I i 1 K) LLOYD, GOSSELINK, FOWLER, BLEVINS & MATHEWS, P.C. Attorneys a Law GEORGE C.EALLWIN Post Office Dog 1725 Austin, Texas 78767 01 C"Mm GEORGE V. BASIIAM 111 JACKSON IL TATTLE CHLSLEY N BLEVINS Office (512) 322.5800 GEORGIA N. CRU'MP PAULA K. FISHER FAX (512) 472.0532 ROBERT O. YOWLER STEVE STAGNIR C. ICE FREELAND Covtmm"I U106 M Co Iunl PAUL G. COSSELINK (Not Ik"W to ploWif low) RICHARD L• HAMALA ROBERT N. LLOS'D IIBI MATHEWS KENNETH RAMIPEZ MARTIN RROCHELLE August 8, 1991 ELIZABETH V. RODO ' KERRY RUSSELL LAMBETH TOWNSEND Mr, Lloyd V. Ha ell City Manager City of De on 215 East McKinney Street Denton exas 76201 Rer Employment Contract (106001: Billing File) , Dear Mr. Harrell: II f, Thie will confirm our agreement that *.he firm of Lloyd, j Gosselink, Fowler, Blevins & Mathews, P.C. will represent the City of Denton with respect to the analysis of contracts between the City and the Upper Trinity Regional Water District pertaining to the purchase of treated water from the City and use of its y transmission lines on an interim basis, and the construction of a ' f joint use, jointly owned water treatment plant on Lake Ray Roberts, Lt the present time we will work under the direction of you and the City Attorney, Debra A. Drayovitch. Additionally, we will { represent the City of Denton in any other matter requested, provided we do not have a conflict of interest. Following our evaluation of the facts and estimated costs r associated with this or other matters, upon which we represent you, we may request security against future billings. Failure to ti deliver the requested security within fifteen (15) days after receipt of a written request may result in termination of this firm's representation. r At tha present time our firm has a fee structure ranging up to $195.00 per chargeable hour for attorneys' services, depending on the individual involved and his or her level of experience and expertise. Additionally, we utilize briefing clerks and paralegals to perform those taska not requiring the time of an attorney. Briefing clerk and paralegal time is billed at an amount not to exceed $50,00 per hour. We will submit all out-of-pocket expenses incurred for reimbursement, with a fifteen percent (151) overhead charge added, Usually we ask the client to pay directly all filing fees, charges for consultants, etc, due to the O ze of such fees and to avoid the client incurring our overhead charge. We endeavor 111 Congress Avenue Suite 1800 Austin, Texas 78701 1 I 1 Mr. Robert E. Nelson August 80 1991 Page 2 to have a statement of services rendered and expenses incurred by the 15th of each month. Full payment is due on receipt of the statement. Interest will be chargad at the rate of 10% per annum on any balance not paid 60 days after the statement date. I will be the account representative and the attorney in charge of our representation. Although my time is normally billed at $195 per hour, I have agreed that I will lower my rate to $175 per hour. Georgia Crump will be working with me and her time will be billed at the rate of $115 per hour, From time to time other attorneys with the firm may be assigned to some aspect of our representation, as appropriate. it is the policy of our firm to review our fee structure annually. We will notify you in writing prior to implementation of any change in our fee structure. This agreement may be terminated by you at any time by written I{ notice to us, provided, when applicable, that permission for withdrawal .frcr° employment is granted by the court. This agreement may be terminated by this firm on fifteen (15) days written notice that we are no longer in a position to continue representing you in a particular matter for whatever reason, including nonpayment of fees and expenses within 30 days of receipt of an invoice. i If this agreement is acceptable to you, please have the V 7 duplicate original provided herein signed, and return it to us for our records. we look forward to working with you. P~ sincere y, r d Ro r ~i. Lloy t RHL:mld oct Debra A. Draynvifnh ✓r Robert E. Nelson I APPROVEDI CITY OF DENTON Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager ~ao~ooo.ooi,rHa , s I et wpdocs\Lgflni,: r~5p/~I i i 1 ORDINANCE NO, I AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON RETAINING THE LAWFIRM OF LLOYD, ' GOSELINK, FOWLER, BLEVINS AND MATHEWS, P. C. TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF DENTON IN CONNECTION WITH THE CITY'S CONTRACT FOR WATER SERVICE TO THE UPPER TRINITY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: ' i SECTION I. That the Council of the City of Denton approves the retainer of the lawfirm of Lloyd, Goselink, Fowler, Blevins and Mathews, P. C. to represent the City in the analysis, preparation, review and negotiation of documents relating to the execution of a contract with the Upper Trinity Regional Water District relating to f the sale of water. , 5ECmTON II. That the Council of the City of Denton authorizes , the City Manager to sign the agreement of representation. 9E9TI0'.I .Ljj. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. ; f 19 9 Z.. f PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of i i V I€ BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY., APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY BY: i j i k '1A>1TLPJ1 I 1 ~ I , ' August 27, 1991 CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: Public Access Rules/Cable Television RECOMMENDATION: The Cable Television Advisory Board recommends approval of the l attached Cable Television Public Access Rules. l f E SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: € Section XXII (d), (J) of the City's current franchise agreement with { Sammons communications requires that the city and Sammons ' Communications cooperatively establish rules regarding Cable Television Access Programming. Pursuant to Section XXII. The City's Cable Television Advisory Board and Sammons communications developed and mutually agreed to a set of access rules during the past several months. These rules were approved by the Board at its' July 17, 1991 meeting. PROGRAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: ' S City of Denton, Sammons Communications, and Public Access Users. } FISCAL IMPACT: None Respec lly submitted, /J 1 v ~ Lloyd Harrell City Manager spared by • e Ialenti dministrative Assistant, Community Services } Approved by: t Bill Angelo Director of Community Services r E:\%4pooCs\40RK\PU6U CAY.RES i RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ADOPTING CABLE TELEVISION PUBLIC ACCESS RULES AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE i j i WHEREAS, Section XXII of the Cable Television Franchise Agree- ment between the city of Denton, Texas and Sammons Communications, Inc. provides that the city and Sammons must cooperatively esta- blish rules for the use of studio equipment and production staff for members of the public desiring to use the public access chan- nels; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended adoption of the at- tacked Public Access Rules, which provide for the use of studio equipment and production staff to qualifying members of the public, NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON? TEXAS HEREBY RESOLVES: GFCTION I. That the attached Public Access Rules are hereby adopted by the Council of the City of Denton, Texas. SECT~1 iI. That this resolution shall become effective im- mediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ' 1991. I j BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR 1 ATTEST JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY, APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMS DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY BY: .t. T_...... --erg-~r- li! S l~ It t PUBLIC ACCESS RULES 1 PUBLIC ACCESS DEFINITION: Public Access takes three forms: Individuals, Groups and Users. INDIVIDUAL DEFINITION: Any resident of Denton who comes to Sammons with a program idea of community interest. Sammons will provide a Producer/Director to work on the project and necessary crew. GROUP DEFINITION: Any coer gnized non-profit organization which comes to Sammons with a program idea of community interest. Sammons will provide a Producer/Directur to work with the group and necessary crew. USER DEFINITION: Anyone who has been through a Sammons training course. Users will crew and Sammons Public be allowed to provide their gr own in the Access Users E RULES: i 1. Individuals or groups will be able to apply for a studio production k one time per three months. 2. Each program must have a script outlining proposed production. 3. Each program which is scheduled for onsite production on either Monday or Tuesday between 2:00 PA and 5:00 P.M.: a. Scheduling shall be handled on a first available time basis. b, Scheduling decisions illl b made variations, the Sammons Produc- tion Manager, including any 4. Programs shall be limited to 30 minutes in length. 5. Programs will be scheduled following completion by the Sammons Production Manager. a. Public Access program time slots shall be listed In Channel 25's weekly schedule as: Tuesday - 6:00 P.M. to 6:30 P.M. Thursday - 9:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M. i 1V1/021991055/1 E i C= PUBLIC ACCESS RULES Page 2 r b. Each program shall be scheduled a minimum of two times. I c, Programs will be scheduled on a first available time f basis, d. Scheduling decisions will be made by the Sammons Production Manager, including any variations, r 6. Programs shall be allowed three hours for completion productionat Setup time will be included in production time, 2:00 P.M, on the afternoon of scheduled production. 7, Public Access Users are those qualified to use the equ,.pment by having completed a Sammons training course. t 8. Users will be allowed to use the studio between 6:00 P,M, and , 9:00 PAM, on Tuesday nights, a. Studio will be available on a first come, first serve i basis, b. Users will have one hour to complete program. C, Time will include studio setup. (1) Time will be kept by the Sammons employee on duty to run programs on Channel 25. (2) Sammons employee will not be available to help crew with production. However, employee will have author- ity to remove any group from studio for failure to abide by Public Access Rules. d, Users must provide crew and talent. i 9, Individuals/Groups or Users will be removed from studios and denied access to Sammons facilities for a period of one year if they are found to be using or under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs, 10. Recognized non-profit groups in the Denton Community may apply to Sammons for one remote Public Access production per year, a. Examples of these programs are the festival of Carols, Denton Civic Ballet, North Texas Symphony. b. Scheduling of these productions will be contingent on the Sammons production schedule. (1) Those seeking such a Public Access production are advised to make application for the production at the earliest possible date. 11. Individuals or Users must be 18 or over. Anyone under 18 must be sponsored by a parent or guardian. 12. Access Programs must not contain: a. Libel, slander, or defamation of character. b. Material considered obscene according to community stan- dards, c. Any form of nudity. 1V1/021991055/2 w Tr' r CABLE BOARD `SiNlfiE5, July 17, 1991 Page i Erection of transmission cables where existing cables are deficient. splicing of replacement electronic components into the cables. Disconnecting customers from the old cable and reconnecting them to the new cai,Ae. the r He also presented the mil) which hicalsparts d £ theeCity. Mr,eEnow Sion status among li gave the map to the City andgeo rapromised to produce several reduced-size copies for the Board, The Board questioned Mr, Enlow about various aspects of the rebuild and F expansion. Dlr. Bass stated that upgraded cabl.° service could be avail- { able to the intSouthrzdgehea~ixldetakefplthe aceuthisw1Fa11,ninetYKuiper The rebuild meeublic suggested that the rebuild process would bee e plainedtand that Sa ng at which ting me could also send out a mailer on the subject. I TF7+1 00.. : DISCUSSION REGARDING TELEVISING OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS Bill Angelo stated that he would proceed with the filming of a demon- stration video during the evening of the week of July 24 as soon as the Council Chambers were not in use and he could coordinate the filming with Sammons Communications. The video will be shown at the Board's ` August meeting. i Angelo asked John Kuiper if the use of UNT inte rns would affect the the responded thatt video's qua h greatest effect upon the I video's quality would be lighting and that fib ing would ud take place under various lighting scenarios so that they could be j ged and compared. The interns would be responsible only for camera operation and under staff supervision. Mr. Kuiper suggested that the City Council consider radio brosiastaof its meetings and also the public access implications of tele broadcasting their meetings. ITEM #5: PUBLIC ACCESS RULES AS REVISED BY BOARD the CitydCcunciluwith seconded Puebladoptedic Access Rules xton mod Rules all ayes. 1V1/072391084/2 t 1, .r", t E CITY of ©ENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DEN70N, TEXAS 76201 / TEL EPNONE (817) 566.8200 l MEMORANDUM DATE: AUgUst 30, 1991 TO: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager FROM: John F. McGrane, Executive Director of Finance SUBJECT: WILLIAMS TRADE SQUARE s The Commissioner's Court for the County, during their June 9th an agreement to the city to lease submit meeting, voted to fifteen (15) parking spaces at the Williams Trade Square, The term of the lease is from June 4, 1991 thru September 00) each0, ;T991 he ! at a monthly rate of fourteen dollars ($1 agreement and resolution approving such are attached. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please advise, /af. p 5937F i i . .I l ;~ar.lmgfies.';y 4 i 9;lwpdocs\tradar t 4 A ~ i RESOLUTION NO. I A RESOLUTION LEASING PARKING SPICES LOCATED ON THE WILLIAMS TRADE SQUARE AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Denton has improved and maintained the area known as the "Williams Trade Square"; and WHEREAS, such improvements include paved parking spaces; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton desires to lease parking spaces in order to recover the cost of the maintenance and improvements/ NOW, THEREFORE, : THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOL~7ES: i SECTION I. That the City Manager of the City of Denton, Texas ii is hereby authorized to execute an agreement between the City of Denton and County of Denton to lease parking spaces at the "Wil- liams Trade Square", a copy of which agreement is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION II. That this resolution shall become effective im- mediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED thi 2 the day of , 1991. f BOB CASTLEBERI2Y, MAYOR j i i I ATTEST: j JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY BY., f i 3 I 'i 1 i W; t r THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON i LEASE AGREEMENT This agreement is made and entered into on this _ day of I ' 19 , by and between the City of Denton, Texas, hereinafter referred to as Lessor, and Denton county, Texas, hereinafter referred to as Lessee. WITNESSETH: 1. Lessor leases to Lessee and Lessee leases from Lessor fifteen (15) parking spaces at the Williams Trade Square for a i period of four months commencing on the 4_t= k day of June, 1991, at a monthly rate of Fourteen Dollars ($14.00) each to be occupied as f~ a parking lot only. f ~ 2. Lessee will pay the rent monthly on the tat day of each month. 3. This lease may be extended for a one (1) year period by Lessee giving to Lessor thirty (30) days written notice prior to the ex ease or any renewal thereof of its intent to f the 1 expiration c renew this lease; provided that Lessee shall not have the right to renew for any term subsequent to the term ending on June 3, 1994. 4. Lessee agrees to allow Lessor to have free access to the premises; to leave the premises, on termination of the lease, in good repair; not to assign noc sublet the premises or any part thereof; and to hold Lessor harmless and indemnify Lessor from any claim, damager: or loss resulting from the use of the parking lot as s S fAa wxv.a.r 7 i CNN 5 f r 1 I ! k Lessee. to any use of said premises by members of the Lessor will provide the five (5) 5, Les commissioners Court with a sticker permit authorizing parking in time limit, to be in effect without the courthouse square area i I during the term of this agreement. k I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract 1 da of , 19 l to be effective the y i E CITY OF DEN~'AN ' Building DeE0 We COUNTY, TEXAS j ` West Hickory Municipal Canton, Texas 76201 Denton, Texas 76201 I Sy; gy; - Honorable Bob Castleberry s ~ Honorable Jeff Moseley County Judge Mayor AS LESSOR I AS LESSEE ATTESTS Clerk Tim Hodges, County and Ex-Officio Clerk of the commissioners Court of Denton County, Texas APPROVEM Re S. irris P - l orr'.oy for Denton County i i 1 1 PACE 2 t .~-V r " L}egl~ket-~ S~ 1 1 1 f} IT' V Septauber 3, 1991 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager RE. CONSIDER CONTRACT ENERGY To THE CITY OF BRIDGEPORT,TEXASO SELL POWER AND I ! RECOMMENDATION: The Public Utilities Board, at their meeting of. August 14, 1991, recommended to the City Council approval of subject contract to sell power and energy to the City of Bridgeport, Texas. SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: On July 30, 19910 the City Council of Bridgeport accepted the proposal that the four Texas Municipal Power Agency Cities had I extended to sell power and energy to Bridgeport beginning ! i January 1, 1992. This. is a "full .requirements" contract f (except for power and energy available from jointly awned t facilities with Texas Municipal Power Agency, Texas Municipal Power Agency Cities, cr a local co-generation or renewable resource facility) extending from May 1, 1992, to January 1, 2002. This contract provides Bridgeport the option to become a member of Texas Municipal Power Agency or another joint action entity created by one or more of the Texas Municipal Power Agency Cities. Bridgeport has repeak quirements of 30,296,000 of 9,000 KW and annual electric energy The initial electric rate will be: Demand Charge 311.78/KW/Mo Energy Charge $ 2.00/1000 KW (MWH) Full Charge Average of Cities' Variable Cost Estimate- ;14.55/MWH Ratchet 50% The rate is designed to essentially sell power and energy to Bridgeport at a price equal to the average cost of power and energy of the four Texas Municipal Power Agency Cities. ; V f) City council Agenda item page 2 The Cities will transport the power and energy to Bridgeport p Inc., 69,000 volt via the Srazos Electric Power C g 'ort. Brazos Electric transmission lines located near Brid ep Power Coop, Inc„ will construct a 69,000 volt toto the o the volt stepdown substation which will provide service Wise County Coop, as well as to the City of Bridgeport. estimated construction cost is $2.7 million, variable imcosts to The total. revenue 3 fmillioniswithsale approximately $1 and the remaining $900,000 approximately $800,000, representing demand Dchares enton'swshare iwillebeisinithee rangeeOf i the four Cities. s is no cost $100,040 to ;200,000 per year, Since this repreresen ents the sale of excess capacity that DeRard theecast ofsany energy that is to Denton for the capacity provided will be paid out of the energy sales revenues. PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS, OR GROUPS AFFECTEDt City of Denton Municipal Utilities, and all electric customers, FISCAL IMPACTS $100,000 to $200,400 ; Estimated Annual Revnue y .15 to .3% Effect on Denton's hates R401H fully sub itted, U arrel , City Manager Prepared/A ov?d by, RTE, Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities Exhibit I ltnsolution II Contract for Sale and Purchase of Firm Power and Energy with the City of Bridgeport III Billing History/Comparison IV PUB Minutes of August 140 1991 CC82091101 i i ,I i 655..:; i CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE OF FIRM POWER AND ENERGY i between CITY OF BRIDGEPORT, TEXAS as Purchaser and each of CITY OF BRYAN, TEXAS, I CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, CITY OF GARLAND, TEXAS, CITY OF GREENVILLE, TEXAS, i each acting on its own behalf severally and not jointly, as Seller 'i E dated as of j i j i wpm i ~ r s7 ho TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SECTION 1: Capacity of Parties: Nature and Number of Contracts 2 SECTION 2: Definitions 3 SECTION 3: Sale and Purchase of Firm Power and Energy 4 SECTION 4: Dolivery of Firm Power and Energy 6 SECTION 5: Rites and Charges......... 8 SECTION 6: Meter Readings and Seller's Billing 10 SECTION 7: Meter Testing and Billing Adjustment ............I1 SECTION 8: Payments to Constitute Operating Expenses of Purchaser's System l l SECTION 9: Covenants of the Purchaser ....................•.....•••..12 SECTION 10; Covenants of the Seller •.....12 SECTION 11: Remedies in Event of Default .............................13 t SECTION 12: Payment Due Dates and Delinquency ........................14 SECTION 13: Term of Contract .................•.•.....................14 SECTION 14: Force Majeure .,.16 SECTION 15: Records and Accounts .....................................17 18 SECTION 16. Access.......... j SECTION 17: Assignment.... ...........18 SECTION 18: Successors and Assigns ...................................18 SECTION 19: Governmental Rates, Regulations and Laws ..............•..18 1 ~ { SECTION 20; Notices .................................................18 SECTION 21: S e v e r ab111 ty I..•••,.,.••. 19 1 1f SECTION 22: Entire Contract ...........19 SECTION 23: No Waiver.............. ............................19 SECTION 24t Venue ....................................................19 EXHTB s Exhibit A ...............................................................22 Exhibit 8 ...............................................................23 k Exhibit C ...............................................................24 Exhibit D ...............................................................25 ~ I Exhibit E 26 Exhibit F ...............................................................27 Exhibit G ...............................................................28 Exhibit H ...............................................................29 i i 1 t ff i G~ i CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE OF FIRM POWER AND ENERGY between City of Bridgeport, Texas, as Purchaser and each of City of Bryan, Texas, City of Denton, Texas, City of Garland, Texas, I City of Greenville, Texas each acting on its own behalf severally and not ,jointly, as Seller k This Contract, made and entered into as of the day of 1991 (but effective on the date provided in Section 13 hereof), by and between the City of Bridgeport, Texas (the "Purchaser"), a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of 1'exas, and the City of Bryan, Texas, the City of Denton, Texas, the City of Garland, Texas, and the City of Greenville, Texas, each of which cities is a municipal corporation and a political subdivision of the State of Texas (herein called "Seller" with respect to provisions applicable to each of them and called "Bryan," "Denton," "Garland," I' or "Greenville," as the case may be, with respect to provisions applicable to, them severally). j WITHESSETHs WHEREAS, the Purchaser has need of an economical, reliu,le source of Firm Power and Energy to meet the demands of its customers and has determined to purchase such Firm Power and Energy from the Seller; and k WHEREAS, the Seller owns electric generating facilities cnd transmission lines and purchases Power and Energy from TMPA for the purpose of supplying Firm Power and Energy to its customers; it 1 i t q i , It WHEREAS, the Seller is authorized by Section 402,001 of the Local Government Code to sell electric service to any person outside its boundaries and to contract with persons outside its boundaries to permit them to connect with its System on terms Seller considers in its best interest, and WHEREAS, the Purchaser is a person, within the meaning of that term as t defined in Section 311,005 of the Government Code, located outside the boundaries j of Seller and desires to purchase, and the Seller, having found that the terms i heroin set forth are in the best interest of the Seller desires to sell, Firm Power and Energy on the terms and conditions herein set forth. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings herein contained ' between the Purchaser and each of Bryan, Denton, Garland, and Greenville acting i , on its own behalf severally and not ,jointly, the Seller and the Purchaser agree i j as follows- SECTION is Caac t o Pa ies Kau_re and yumb of Contra s. 4> This instrument is four separate contracts between the Purchaser and each i ` of Bryan, Denton, Garland, and Greenville, respectively. Each of the four separate contracts contain substantially identical terms except insofar as a particular provision is clearly applicable only to one or more of the separate contracts by specifying its application to Bryan, Denton, Garland, or Greenville rather than Seiler, The rights, duties, obligations, and benefits of "Seller" herein apply to each of Bryan, Denton, Garland, and Greenville, severally and not j jointly. This instrument contains no agreements or undertakings and imposes no i duties or obligations between any of Bryan, Denton, Garland, or Greenville to any of Bryan, Denton, Garland or Greenville but this declaration does not affect in any respect the obligations of the Seller to the Purchaser under this Contract, 2 T T r Ea " S A breach or termination of this instrument by one or more of Bryan, Denton, Garland, or Greenville does not in any manner affect the non-breaching or non" terminating parties and does not affect the contracts herein contained of such non-breaching or non-torminating parties with the Purchaser. This Contract shall be binding between Seller and Purchaser, with respect to each separate Contract, on the date both of the Purchaser and the applicable Seller have duly authorized, executed, and delivered this Contract. These Contracts shall terminate as provided in Section 13. The dates which the Contracts are executed and binding may be, but are not required to be, the same, The failure of one or more Sellers to execute this instrument does not affect the formation of a Contract by the Purchaser and Seller that execute this instrument since the Sellers that do execute this Contract are required to provide all of the Firm Power and Energy i j requirements of the Purchaser as described in Section 3(c). s j SECTION 2: Definitions, As used herein; E t' (a) "Bryan" shall mean the City of Bryan, Texas, j (b) "Denton" shall mean the City of Denton, Texas. f (c) "Garland" shall mean the City of Garland, Texas, (d) "Greenville" shall mean the City of Greenville, Texas. (e) "Energy" shall mean kilowatt-hours (kWh). (f) "ERCOT" shall mean the Electric Reliability Council of Texas. I (g) "Firm" shall mean continuous and without interruption (except for an j event of Force Majeure as defined in Section 14.) i (h) "Points of Delivery" shall mean the points on the System of, or available to, the Seller, as determined from time to time by the Seiler and the Purchaser, at which Power and Energy are made available to the Purchaser pursuant 3 1 y :I f, 4 to this Contract, Such Points of Delivery shall be attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and a change therein, approved by the Seller and the Purchaser shall not be considered as an amendment to this Contract, (i) "Power" shall mean kilowatts (kW). b (j) "Purchaser" shall mean the City of Bridgeport, Texas, (k) "Seller" shall mean each of Bryan, Denton, Garland, and Greenville acting on its own behalf, severally and not jointly. (1) "System" shall mean the Sellers' electric utility systems. (m) "TMPA" shall mean Texas Municipal Power Agency, 3 (n) "Uniform System of Accounts" and all other accounting methods and ` terminology contained or referred to In this Section or elsewhere in this Contract means accounting principles, methods and terminology followed and construed, as nearly as practicable, in conformity with the Uniform System of Accounts for Class A and Class B Public Utilities and Licensees and accounting ! , I rules and regulations thereunder prescribed by the Federal Energy Regulatory ! Commission for privately owned power companies which are subject to its f' ! jurisdiction and engaged in business comparable to the business of the Seller t insofaN as the System is concerned, as amended from time to time, or such other system as may be required by any regulatory agency, i SECTION 3; Sale and Purchase, of Firm PEngMy. (a) The Seller agrees to sell and deliver Firm Power and Energy and the Purchaser agrees to purchase and receive the Purchaser's total requirements for the operation of the Purchaser's electric system In excess of (1) any amount generated from facilities which the Purchaser jointly owns with TMPA, (ii) any amount purchased from TMPA after re-creation of TMPA by the addition of one or more of cities including, but not limited to, the Purchaser, (iii) any amount purchased from a joint powers agency created by the Purchaser and by one or more t 1 f~ H I 1 I of Bryan, Denton, Garland, or Greenville, for the purpose of construction of f future generating facilities, (iv) any amount generated by the Purchaser from a ' facility which is jointly owned by the Purchaser and by a joint powers agency created by one or more of Bryan, Denton, Garland and Greenville, (v) any amount purchased from a city other than the Seller which is a member-city of TMPA 1 pursuant to a contract substantially identical to this Contract, (vi) any amount r supplied by renewable resources, provided that Purchaser is an owner of the i supplying facility, (vii) any amount supplied from a facility certified by the j Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as a Qualifying Facility, provided that the ! Qualifying lifying Facility is located in the service area of the Purchaser and is j electrically connected to the electric system of the Purchaser, (vili) any amount supplied by cogeneration or other "on-site" generation associated with economic development activities of the Purchaser, provided that the facility is located in the service area of the Purchaser and is electrically connected to the electric system of the Purchaser, and (ix) any amount supplied by contracts with f governmental agencies for supply of Capacity or Energy to Purchaser as a I preference customer as defined by Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 (16USC Sec. 825s)4 The Purchaser shall provide written notice to the Seller when the Purchaser has taken formal action to accept a potential supply of Power and Energy under items (vi) through (ix) of this section. (b) It is the intent of this Contract that if any Seller, as that term is defined in Section 2 of this Contract, does not rxecute this Contract, then the remaining Sellers who do execute this Contract will be responsible for 1 providing all of the Firm Power and Energy requirements of the Purchaser, as required under subsections (a) and (c), for the term of this Contract, The formula which dictates how much power and energy each Seller is required to I provide is contained in Section 3(c) of this Contract, i 5 I R V~ dl (C) The Seller's obligation to provide Firm Poweti, and Energy under this Contract is limited to a proportion of Purchaser's total requirements for firm Power and Energy, calculated by multiplying Purchaser's total requirements by a fraction, the numerator of which is the difference between Seller's available capacity including its then current entitlement from TMPA's Gibbons Creek Steam Electric Station in Grimes County, Texas, and 1.15 times the Seller's native peak load after excluding other firm or non-firm sales and the denominator of which is the sum of the numerators for all of the Sellers. Exhibit "B" reflects two i examples of calculations of the above formula, (d) In association with the Firm Power and Energy being sold to ' Purchaser, Seller will provide all of the operating and planning reserves required by applicable operating agreements with other members of CRCOT in proportion to its obligation to provide Firtin Power and Energy under Section 3(c) above. (e) On January I of each even-numbered year during the term of this Contrast, the Purchaser shall provide to Seiler (at the addresses set forth in, Exhibit D) a forecast of its requirements for Finn Power and Energy for the next five years and other information reasonably required by Seller to enable Seller to plan for the Firm Power and Energy requirements of Purchaser. SECTION 4; Deliyery of, Firm Power and Energy,, { (a) The Firm Power and Energy to be furnished under this Contract shalt be three (3) phase, alternating current, at a nominal standard voltage of 12,500 volts at the Points of Delivery, and a nominal frequency of sixty (60) Hertz, and subject to conditions of delivery and measurement as hereinafter provided, (b) The Points of Delivery shall be in accordance with Exhibit "A" attached to this Contract, as may be modified by the Seller and the Purchaser from time to time. After commencement of service under this Contract, no I delivery points will be added without permission of the Purchaser, The Seller G 6 I i I t h . i will provide for the construction of all facilities on the supply side of the metering point and for the operation and maintenance of those facilities. Such facilities shall include a transmission line and substation that is required for the delivery of Power and Energy on the Commencement Date specified in Section 13. Within six (6) years following the Commencement Date specified in Section 13, the Seller will provide for the construction of a second transmission line for the purpose of enhancing the reliability of service to Purchaser. (c) The Seller will be responsible for Firm delivery of Finn Power and Energy under this Contract, to the Purchaser at the Points of Delivery, and any costs related to Firm delivery of Firm Power and Energy. (d) The Seller shall cause metering equipment to be furnished, installed and maintained at each Point of Delivery, If transforming equipment is located i ` at the Point, of Delivery, said metering equipment shall be located on the high voltage side of the transformer. (e) The Purchaser shall maintain its electric system such that the power factor at each metering point shall be between 0.90 lagging and 0.90 leading. In the event that the power factor at the time of monthly peak demand is less than 0.90 lagging, the demand for billing purposes will be adjusted by the following formula: Adjusted demand a Actual demand ,x 0.90 Power Factor (f) In order to enable Purchaser to receive Power and Energy at the Point of Delivery specified in Exhibit "A", the Seller shall, after payment by Purchaser to Seller of the amount of $45,000.00, provide for the construction of two 336 MCM three chase 12.5 kV feeder lines by rebuildinq existing Bridgeport lines on existing Bridgeport rights-of-way. (In the event this Contract is executed by more than one Seller, it is the intention of the preceding sentence that Purchaser's payment thereunder to all Sellers will, in the aggregate, equal $4.9,000.) Such facilities, to be owned by Bridgeport, shall connect the 7 l 4~ H B substation described in Exhibit "A" to points near Bridgeport's existing metering point with Texas Utilities Electric Company, as indicated on McCord Engineering drawings attached as Exhibit "G". Purchaser shall have the right to approve the plans for such facilities, Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Seller shall coordinate substation distribution breaker settings with Purchaser. If easements are required, the same shall be obtained by the Purchaser at ' Purchaser's expense. Seller shall provide all other distribution facility additions necessary for Purchaser to receive service from Seller, as shown on Exhibit "N". All of such facilities shall be completed on or before the Commencement Date, { SECTION 5s Rates and Charges. i (a) The rates and charges of the Seller to the Purchaser for Firm Power 1 and Energy and for services supplied shall be; (1) non-discriminatory, (ii) fair and reasonable, and be calculated based upon the average f' costs of providing the Firm Power and Energy or providing the service with j respect to which the rate or charge is based as shown in Exhibit E, and (iii) adjusted annually to reflect the average Energy cost as calculated on an annual basis in the manner described in this section. i (b) Except with respect to adjustments expressly allowed by Section 5(c), the rates and charges set forth on Exhibit "C" are firm until the earlier of January 1, 1994 or such date as the Purchaser receives (i) any power or energy generated from facilities which the Purchaser jointly owns with TMPA, or (ii) any Power or Energy generated by the Purchaser from a facility which is jointly owned by the Purchaser and by a joint powers agency created by one or more of Bryan, Denton, Garland, and Greenville, After such date, the rates and charges in Exhibit "C" shall be amended. The amended rates and charges shall utilize the 8 i 6 a i criteria in subsection 5(a). Further, in the event Purchaser acquires or constructs a suhstation (including the substation described in Exhibit "A") that, at a location agreeable to Purchaser and Seller, connects to transmission facilities constructed by or on behalf of Seller, Purchaser shall receive Power and Energy under this Contract at the transmission rate charged by Seller to k other municipal wholesale customers of all of Bryan, Denton, Garland and C Greenville at the time of the acquisition or construction, In the event I' Purchaser decides to acquire or construct such substation, Purchaser shall ; I 1 provide notice of the decision to Seller within seven (7) days following the date of the decision, (c) On January 1 of each year during any term of this Contract, Seller's I average Energy cost for the preceding year ending September 30 shall be compared with Purchaser's average Energy cost for the same time period under the rates charged in Exhibit "C", The Purchaser's average Energy cost will be adjusted to i reflect Purchaser's average Energy cost at the system load factor. Seller's average Energy cost shall be calculated by dividing the sum of the total ~i production costs of Seller by the combined Energy supplied to firm load by Seller as shown in Exhibit "E". The total production costs of Seller shall be i ca1c~. ,laced by summing the demand charge paid + ~0 1'MPA, the Energy charge paid to b IMPA, the operating and maintenance costs for Power generation incurred by s 1 Seller, debt service for generation paid by Seller, and other associated costs of generation and any cost of additional Power and Energy purchased by Seller pursuant to Section 10(a) of this Contract Incurred by Seller and consented to by Purchaser, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, as shown in Exhibit "E", Purchaser's adjusted average Energy cost will be the actual average Energy cost paid under the rate in Exhibit "C", adjusted to reflect System load factor, An example calculation of the Purchaser's adjusted average Energy cost is shown in Exhihit "F", Ii Purchaser's adjusted avr.rage Energy cost under Exhibit "F" is less than Seller's average Energy cost, no rebate is required. 9 f-t e J ...'jS titJ pal++'-`:~ f If Purchaser's adjusted average Energy cost is greater than Seller's average Energy cost from Exhibit "E", Seller shall rebate to Purchaser on or before January 1 of each year the difference, without interest, between Seller's average i Energy cost and Purchaser's adjusted average Energy cost, multiplied by the Purchaser's Energy billing units. Under no circumstances will the Purchaser be f required to reimburse monies to the Seller if Seller's average Energy cost is more than Purchaser's average Energy cost. From and after the date the Purchaser receives Firm Power and Energy from one of the sources enumerated in ! subsection 3(a), it' a reduction in the Purchaser's demand for Firm Power and 1 Energy from the Seller occurs, the calculation of average Energy cost shall be changed to reflect the lower demand of Purchaser for Firm Power and Energy from the Seller and the Seller's costs at such time. The term "Seller" in this paragraph shall include Bryan, Denton, Garland and Greenville, whether or not {{{j each is a party to this Contract. } SECTION 6: meter Readings and Seller's Billing, 'E The Seller shall read meters or cause meters to be read and submit one combined bill and cause the Purchaser to be billed for Firm Power and Energy i furnished under this Contract at monthly intervals, If multiple Points of Delivery are provided by Seller, then the demand utilized for billing purposes shall be calculated on a coincident peak demand basis, Payment of the bill is due within fifteen (15) days after receipt by Purchaser. Payment of the bill shall be made to the person, at the address, in the manner, specified in the ! bill. Seller may rause billing services to be performed by TMPA or by some other legal entity, and Seller's bill may be aggregated with the bills to Purchaser of any other member city of TMPA. In such event, the Purchaser may pay a single amount to TMPA or to the other entity, as the case may be, for credit to the account of the Seller and the other cities as detailed on the bill. i 10 41 i 7 SECTION 7: Meter Testing and Ri n Ad istnents. The Seller shall test and calibrate meters or cause meters to be tested and calibrated by comparison with accurate standards at intervals of twelve (12) months, or such other intervals as the parties agree. The Seller shall also make or cause to be made special meter tests at any time at the Purchaser's request. The costs of all tests shall be borne by the Salter; provided, however, that if any special meter test made at the Purchaser's request shall disclose that the meters are recording accurately, the Purchaser shall reimburse the Seller for the cost of such test. Meters registering not more than 112 of 1% above or below normal shall be deemed to be accurate. The readings on any meter which shall have been disclosed by test to be inaccurate shall be corrected from the 1 j beginning of the monthly billing period immediately preceding the billing period during which the test was made in accordance with the percentage of inaccuracy found by such test, provided, that no correction shall be made for a longer period unless the Seller and the Purchaser mutually agree thereto. Should any meter fail to register, the Power and Energy delivered during such period of F failure shall, for billing purposes, be estimated by the Seller and the Purchaser from the best information available. The Seller shall notify the Purchaser or cause tha Purchaser to be notified in advance of the time of any meter test so that the Purchaser's representative may be present at such meter test. For the purpose of notifying the Purchaser in advance of a meter test, the Seller is not required to provide written notification as required by section 21. SECTION St Payments to Constitute- Q erg ating Expenses of Purchaser's Sse. The Purchaser reserves the right to pay operating expenses of its electric system from any funds legally available for the purpose, but the Purchaser's obligation to make payments under this Contract shall constitute an operating expense of its electric system payable solely from the gross revenues of such system. 11 1 s f I ` I SECTION 9: Covenants of the Purchaser. A (a) The Purchaser covenants to establish, maintain and collect rates and charges for the electric service of its electric system which shall produce revenues at least sufficient, together with other revenues available to such electric system and available electric system reserves, to enable it to pay to the Seller, when due, all amounts payable by the Purchaser under this Contract. f (b) The Purchaser covenants that Firm Power and Energy supplied under this Contract will be used only to supply Purchaser's retail customers as members of the general public and will not be resold to other utilities at wholesale or i resold to any person or business pursuant to a written contractuO arrangement or other understanding which differs in any respect from sales to the public generally. For purposes of this section 9(b), purchases of Firm Power and Energy i by industrial or business customers pursuant to a rate structure published by the Purchaser and available to any customer meeting the established criteria (size ; of load, load factor, etc.) are treated as sales to the public generally and are f not prohibited by this section. 1 SECTION 10: Covenants of the Sel L . (a) The Seller covenants to use the same degree of diligence it would use ! for its native load to provide Firm Power and Energy hereunder. If by reason of Force Majoure, the supply of Firm Power and Energy shall fail, or be interrupted,` i or become defective as hereinafter provided, the Seller shall not be liable therefor or for damages caused thereby, Pursuant to the Power Sales Contrao:t, as amended, between Seller and TMPA, Seller is obligated to take all of its requirements from TMPA and is prohibited (except in certain limited circumstances) from constructing additional generating facilities. Therefore, no provision of this Contract requires Seller to construct capacity to provide Firm Power and Energy to Purchaser, If Seller does not have sufficient capacity to provide to Purchaser the Firm Power and Energy required under this Contract, Seller shall purchase the additional Power and Energy that is required. 12 ( i (b) The Seller covenants that it will operate, maintain and manage its System or cause the same to be operated, maintained and managed in an efficient and economical manner, consistent with prudent utility practice and is accordance i' with standards normally used by ERCOT utilitie owning and operating like properties. SECTION 11: Remedies in Event of Default. (a) If the Purchaser fails or defaults in meeting the terms, conditions and covenants of this Contract, the Seller shall give notice to the Purchaser. The Purchaser shall from the date of the mailing of such notice, have a period j of thirty (30) days to cure the default; provided, however, in the event the E failure or default is a failure to make payment within fifteen (15) days after j receipt of the bill, the Purchaser shall, from the date of mailing of such I notice, have a period. of fifteen (15) days to cure the default, ~ (b) If the Purchaser does not cure its default within the period specified in subsection (a), then, so long as the Purchaser remains in default, and in addition to any other rights which the Seller has under this Contract and at law and in equity, the Seller may terminate all service to the Purchaser; provided, however, that Seller shall provide written notice to Purchaser prior to the date of termination. In the event the default is a failure to pay a bill for Power and Energy within fifteen (15) days after receipt of the bill, the f l Seller shall provide notice of termination at least fifteen (15) days prior to i the date of termination. In the event of a default by purchaser which does not 1 include a failure to pay a bill within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the bill, { the Seller shall provide notice of termination of least thirty (30) days prior i to the date of termination. The notice of termination may be included in the s j notice required under subsection (a) and, in such a case, the period of time in t which the purchaser may cure the default may also serve as the notice period ~ S prior to termination of service. Termination of service hereunder shall not f 4 reduce or change the obligation of the Purchaser or Seller under the other i provisions of this Contract. l 1 13 ; i ~ I (c) If the Seller fails or defaults in meeting the terms, conditions and covenants of this Contract, the Purchaser shall give notice to the Seller. Following such notice, the Seller shall have a period of fifteen (15) days to cure the default. If the default is not cured in the fifteen (15) day period, then the Purchaser shall have a I I of the rights and remedies provided at law and in equity, including the right to offset any obligations otherwise due Seller and i i the right for mandatory injunction. ! SECTION 12: Payment Due Dates and Delinouen4.y. i In the event that the Purchaser fails to make any payment within fifteen (15) days after receipt of the bill, Purchaser shall pay a penalty equal to one and one-half percent of the delinquent amount. Following the fifteen (15) day period in which Purchaser may cure such default as provided In Section 11, j the Seller may, in addition to any other remedy in this Contract including termination of service and including any other remedy available at law or in ( equity, institute a proceeding for a mandatory injunction requiring the payment of the amount due and interest thereon, such action to be instituted in a court M of competent jurisdiction. i SECTION 13: Temp of C2nW ct' The Sellers duty to commence Firm Power and Energy under this Contract shall commence on May 1, 1992 (the "Commencement Date"). In the event Seller is unable to deliver Firm Power and Energy to Purchaser on this Commencement Date, and the inability to perform is not an event of "Force Majeure", the aeller shall (consistent with its contract with TMPA) make to Purchaser ~ arrangements with another utility to deliver Firm Power and Energy at no additional cost to Purchaser until surh time as Seller is able to deliver Firm Power and Energy under this Contract, ' L1 i 1 i . rl (b) if seller does not request Purchaser to enter into a contract as specified in subsection (c) hereunder, then either party may terminate this Contract by delivering to the other party a notice of termination at least five years in advance of the termination date. However, no such notice may be delivered under this subsection prior to the fifth anniversary of the Commencement Date, (c) During the term of this Contract, G°+ller may in writing, request Purchaser to enter into a contract (1) with TMPA, for the joint ownership of a generating unit with TMPA, (ii) with TMPA, for the purchase of Firm Power and Energy from TMPA, following the re-creation of TMPA by the addition of one or more cities, including Purchaser, (iii) with a joint powers agency, created by Purchaser and by one or more of Bryan, Denton, Garland or Greenville, for the purchase of Firm Power and Energy from the joint powers agency, (iv) with a joint powers agency created by one or more of Bryan, Denton, Garland or Greenville, for the joint ownership of a generating unit with the joint powers agency, or (v) with TMPA for the construction of electric generating facilities for the Purchaser utilizing the proceeds of special contract revenue bonds to be issued ~ "contract of by T14PA. Hereinafter, such a contract shall be referred to as a participation". (d) Within one year after the receipt by Purchaser of a request under subsection (c), Purchaser shall (i) enter into the contract of participation and elect to have this Contract terminate on the date of termination agreed upon by the parties specified in the contract of participation, :r (ii) deny the request and elect to terminate this Contract, effective two years after receipt of the request, or (111) deny the request and elect to have this Contract continue on a "rolling" five year term, If, during the "rolling" five year term, no notice terminating the Contract is recoived before any January 1, then the Purchaser and , the Seiler will he deemed to have continued the Contract for another five year 15 1 ij , III +Jt•r.N.A i r E term commencing on January 1. If, however, during the "rolling" five year term, the Purchaser or the Seller provides written notice to the other before any January I terminating the Contract, then the Contract will terminate at the end of the five year period commencing on January 1. (e) If the Purchaser fails to respond to a request under subsection (c) within one year after the receipt of the request, the request will be deemed automatically denied and this Contract shall continue on a "rolling" five year term as more specifically described in subsection (d). i . SECTION 14: Force Ma.ieure. f (a) If for any reason of "Force Ma,)eure" any of the parties hereto shall be rendered unable, wholly or in part, to carry out its obligations under this Contract, then if such party shall give immediate notice and follow with the full ' particulars of such reasons in writing to the other party as soon as possible ; i after the occurrence of the event or cause relied on: the obligation of the party giving such notice, so far as it is affected by such "force Ma,)eure", shall be suspended during the continuance of the inability then claimed, but for no longer period, and such party shall use the same degree of diligence it would use for its native load to remov:? or overcome such inability with all reasonable dispatch. The term "Force Majeure" as employed herein shall mean acts of God, strikes, lockouts, or other industrial disturbances, acts of the public enemy, orders or actions of any kind of the government of the United States or of the State of Texas or any civil or military authority, regulatory or other litigation, insurrections, riots, epidemics, landslides, lightning, earthquakes, fires, hurricanes, storms, floods, washouts, droughts, arrests, restraints of government and people, civil disturbances, explosions, breakage or accident to dams, machinery, pipelines, ovr canals or other structures or machinery, on account of any other cause not reasonably within the control of the party 16 i a t2 4 i r i j claiming such inability. It is understood and agreed that the settlement of strikes and lockouts shall be entirely within the discretion of the party having the difficulty, and that the above requirement that any "Force Majeure" shall be j remedied with all reasonable disp.-rtch shall not require the settlement of strikes and lockouts by acceding to the demand of the opposing parties when such settlement is unfavorable to it in the judgment of the party having the difficulty. t (b) No damages shall he recoverable from the Seller or from the Purchaser j by reason of Force Majeure. (c) Upon an event of Force Majeure which interrupts the supply of Firm Power and Energy, Seller will use the same degree of diligence it would use for f ~ its native load to secure an alternative temporary source of Power and Energy in I the event of an interruption of the supply of Power and Energy. SECTION 15: eco is a d Accounts. The Seller will keep accurate records and accounts of the System and of the 1 transactions relating to each facility constituting the System as well as of the operations of the Seller in accordance with the Uniform System of Accounts, which shall include depreciation. Within one hundred twenty (120) days after the close of each fiscal year of the Seller, the Seller shall cause such records and accounts with respect to such fiscal year of the Seller to bo subject to an annual audit by an independent certified public accountant, A copy of each such annual audit shall be sent by the Seller to the Purchaser, The Purchaser shall have reasonable access to examine any and all books and records of the Seller which are public records under the Open Records Act and to examine any facility of the System. r 1 17 SECTION 16: Access, The Seiler and the Purchaser will give the other access to the facilities and (when permitted by existing easement) to the easements, rights-of-way and i property of each other at all reasonable times for the purpose of constructing, maintaining, repairing or removing facilities, reading meters and performing work necessary or incidental to delivery and receipt of Firm Power and Energy ! furnished hereunder, To the extent it is necessary to authorize the delivery of the Firm Power and Energy required under this Contract to Purchaser (and not to others), Purchaser consents to and will cooperate with Seller for the extension of Seller's electric lines inside the incorporated boundaries of Purchaser, which cooperation will include the routing of lines and the acquisition of rights of way and easements which Purchaser will acquire at Seller's cost, i I SRTION 17: ssi me , This Contract shall not be assignable without the written consent of the Purchaser and each Seller. SECTION 18: Succe orj.~and Ass s. This Contract will inure to and be binding upon the successors and assi of the respective parties, assigns SECTION 19: ,Givernmental Rates Regulationsjnd Laws, The Contract shall be subject to all valid rules, regulations and laws applicable thereto, as promulgated by the United States of America, the State of i Texas, or any other governmental body or agency having lawful jurisdiction or any authorized representative or agency of any of them. SECTION 20t Notices, Any notice, request, demand, statement or bill provided for in this j contract shall be in writing and shall be considered to have been duly delivered 18 f 1 • ll t i and received when sent by registered or certified mail, addressed as provided in Exhibit "D", unless another address has been designaW, in writing, by the party entitled to receive same. SECTION 21: Severability, The parties hereto agree that if any of the provisions of this Contract should contravene or be held invalid under the laws of the State of Texas, such contravention or invalidity shall not invalidate the whole contract but it shall be construed as though not containing that particular provision, and the right and obligations of the parties shall be construed and in force accordingly. SECTION 22: Entire Co tract, This Contract shall constitute the entire understanding between the parties hereto, superseding any and all previous understandings, oral or written, i pertaining to the subject matter contained herein. No party hereto shall have any relief, or be entitled to rely, upon any representation or information made or given to such party by any representative of the other party or anyone on -its t: behalf. k ` eaive SECTION 23: No W The failure of a party to enforce at any time any of the provisions' of this contract or to require at any time performance by the other party of any of the provisions of this Contract shall not be construed as a waiver of such y provisions or of the right of such party thereafter to enforce each and every provision of this Contract. SECTION 24: Vena. Venue for any cause of action instituted by reason of the existence of this Contract shall lie in Travis County, Texas. i i i 19 i I a~ I 1 j 1 I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed in their corporate names and their corporate seals affixed, all by the proper officer duly authorized thereunto, as of the day and year first hereinabove written. r , ! CITY OF BRIDGEPORT, TEXAS I By: (Seal) j j ATTEST: i Date of By. Execution: City secretary j ! i CITY OF BRYAN, TEXAS i t By: (Seal) Mayor ATTEST: Date of By: c 10vG[~ Execution: C;ty Sec eta y APPI{OVM AS To VORI(II ZO i C i t'y Ate ox`ney, C f Bryan ty o s. i 4 I t CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS , J I By: (Seal) Mayor ATTEST: Date of By. Execution: _ City Secretary i CITY OF GARLAND, TEXAS : By: (Seal) Mayor - - : ATTEST: Date of s k, By: _ Execution: City Secretary E CITY OF GREENVILLE,, TEXAS i i Bys (Seal) Board Chairman ATTEST: Date of k By:_ Execution: _ i Board Secretary ; G1 it I i i i Y.I31R'bSi' f i EXHIBIT "A" POINT OF DELIVERY The ownership of Power and Energy shall transfer to Purchaser at the point where I the Purchaser's conductor connects to the substation. Purchaser, subject to subsection 5(b), shall not own, and shall have no responsibility for the construction of,the substation. The Seller shall either construct a substation, or provide for the construction of a substation, to serve Purchaser under this j Contract. i r i l The substation shall be located near the corporate boundaries of Bridgeport in the vicinity of the intersection of Cates Street (Cuba Road) with Overland Drive i on the east side of Bridgeport. 1 The substation shall have facilities for two feeder bays initially. When Bridgeport's load exceeds 10 MW, then an additional feeder bay will be added, i Future feeder bays will be added to meet Bridgeport's need to provide service to all customers under any first contingency, at no cost to Bridgeport. ' f i i 22 3 1 1 "e lwi2lFt.t~} I t I l I EXHIBIT „B!, Example Calculation of the Proportional Share of Firm Power and Energy to be Provided by each Seller to Purchaser Bryan Denton Garland Greenville R ~ Seller's Available Capacity - MW 310 258 616 144 s k~ Seller's Native Peak Load 153 176 367 83 1.15 times Peak Load 176.0 202.4 422.0 95.4 Difference - Numerator 134,1 55.6 194,0 48.6 t f Denominator - Sum of Numerators 432 432 432 432 Fraction 0.3102 0.1287 0,4488 0.1123 Purchaser's Load - 14083 KW Obligation 4369 1812 6320 1582 If, for example, only Bryan, Denton and Greenville executed this Contract, then I' ii their individual obligations would be calculated as follows: Bryan Denton Greenville Seller's available capacity - MW 310 258 144 j Seller's Native Peak Load 153 176 83 1 1.15 times Peak Load 176.0 202.1 95.4 Difference - Numerator 134,1 55.6 48,6 Denominator - Sum of Numerators 238.3 238,3 238.3 Fraction 0.5627 0.2333 0.2039 Purchaser's Load - 14083 KW Obligation 7924 3286 2873 * The numbers appearing in this Exhibit are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to specify exact obligations to provide Firm Power and Energy under this Contract. I 23 i i WIWI i i EXHIBIT "C" RATES AND CHARGES Demand Charge for Service at 12.5 Y.V..... ...$13.03/KW Energy Charge..... 2/M W li THE DEMAND CHARGE SHALL APPLY TO THE LARGER OF THE ACTUAL MONTHLY METERED DEMAND (AS ADJUSTED BY THE POWER FACTOR ADJUSTMENT, IF NECESSARY) OR 50% OF THE LARGEST MONTHLY METERED DEMAND (ADJUSTED FOR POWER FACTOR) IN ThL LAST ELEVEN MONTHS. A MONTHLY FUEL CHARGE WILL BE MULTIPLIED BY THE METERED ENERGY. THE FUEL CHARGE WILL BE THE AVERAGE COST OF FUEL FOR BRYAN, DENTON, GARLAND, GREENVILLE AND PURCHASER. THE FUEL CHARGE WILL BE CALCULATED ON AN "ESTIMATE AND CORRECT" BASIS. i F j j I j ; yy 24 I I i EXHIBIT "0" NOTICES 3 " All notices, requests, demands, statements or bills shall be mailed to the following: CITY OF BRIDGEPORT Attention: Mayor I 812 Halsell Street Bridgeport, Texas 76026 f I CITY OF BRYAN Attentions City Manager I P.O. Box 1000 i Bryan, Texas 77805 I t l CITY OF DENTON Attention: City Manager 215 E. McKinney a Denton, Texas 76201 CITY OF GARLAND Attention: City Manager P.O. Box 469002 Garland, Texas 75046 i { I CITY OF GREENVILLE Attention: Director of Electric, Utilities P,O, Box 1049 Greenville, Texas 75401 , , 25 H.I. _ ( I~ •n ,t'N1t13N4,1 i LXhibll I Example Calculation of Sellers' Average Cost it $132,483,600.oo TMPA Billings to Gilles 'CMPA Capacity Charge TN1pq pillin~~s to Cities TMPACoverage Refund ($27,836,713.16) $0.00 purrtlased Capacity (Sec 10(a)) City Generation Debt Service $4,175,000A0 City Records Bryan $1,990,000.00 City Records Denton $6,?_86,000,00 City Records Garland Records t $1,635,000.00 City Greenville City Generation Operation & Maintainance $2,000,000 00 City Records Bryan $1,200,000.00 City Records M Denton k Garland $$,200,000.00 City Records f $800,000,00 City Records Greenville i TOTAL. FIXED COST 5124,931,800.84 t MWh Coat s TMPA Energy cost 2,800,000 $34,748,000.00 I 0 $0.00 Purohasod Energy(So010(a)) Cities Gas cost ; Bryan 660,000 $11,826,7.60.00 City Records I 200,000 $4,200,000.00 City Records Denton 860,000 $16;202,260.00 City Records 80,000 $t,880,000.00 City Records Greenville i Economy Purchases { Lignite 2,600 $36,000.00 City t~ecords i ` Gab x00,000 541000,000.00 Clty Records i Economy Sales Lignite (180,000) ($1,986,600.00) City Records I C;as (460,000) ($9,000,000.00) City Records TOTAL. ENERGY COSTS 4,172,600 c6p1604,900,00 1 j TOTAL COST $186,436,786.84 $44.44 j AVERAGE ENERGY COST 080,000 kW I SYSTEM PEAK 48.M% SYSTEM LOAD FACTOR ' The numbers in tills Eylilbit aro for Iliustrativ® purposes only I „ 4t VfW KI 6Sa~~ NYK I 4 J f i EXHIBIT "F" 1. Bridgeport Average Cost kd,iustment Example Calculation 4 2. System Average Load Factor 48,389< 3, Peak Demand 40804 KW From Peak Month's Bi11 t k 4. Demand Billing Units 39.178 Annual KW from Billings I j 5, Energy Billing Units 17,149,800 KWH from Billings r 6. Demand Rate 13.03 per KW 7. Less Distribution Charge $ 1.25 per KW 8. Equivalent Transmission Rate 11,78 per KW (Line 6 minus Line 7) 9. Transmission Demand Bill $461,516.84 Line 8 times Line 4 1 10. Actual Fuel & Energy Bill $2830829.19 From Billings 11. Average Fuel & Energy Cost $0.01655 Line 10 divided by Line 5 i 12. Energy Required to Produce 20,3591810 Line 3 times Line 2 System Load Factor times 8760 I 13, Systein Load Factor Energy $336,954.85 Line 11 times Line 12 Bill 1 14, System Load Factor $798,4)1.69 Line 9 plus Line 13 Total Bill 15, Equivalent Average Cost $0.03922 Line 14 divided by Line 12 * The numbers in this Exhibit are for illustrative purposes only. ?7 j 1. 7 t , 11111 lJ l' L1>.11l~Yis1~V1\1 s; gp 538mcm CIRcurr PROPOSED ROUTING FOR INITIAL 336 mc:rn FEEDER CIRCUITS l ' 1 f ~sT[NC 'ru. METRMG POINT f 12.5/4.18 YY S'1 F~'D0WN n ^ C YWER - rNSTasuzroN r L CM _ 111 cfxcun w SUOVATION SIYE \ J y yMER 3~A 338mem MCUI ~[GEHn Cn=IT No. 1 ~ .,rer.os 5v~. '~Y5 u~a R6ul[ NAGP.W ~ r I `..~r.✓' 1 ~ ...tl~l ~ ACM c 4.~a1~14;f. eA.IIY" 1V4e 1 H 1 fli€dtSl{~j 1 YJyJy1111 i I EXHIBIT H City of Bridgeport 32.5 kV Distribution Feeder Circuit Construction General Description Feeder .1rcuil_No, _1 This shall be a throe-phase feeder circuit constructed with 336 MCM ACSR conduct tar. It shall proceed from (lie proposed Substation Site and extend westward along I Cuba Road and Cates Street to the intersection with Seventeenth Street. It shall then proceed northward on Seventeenth Street to the alley between Stevens and Halsell Street, Prom this intersection It shall proceed westward along the alley to the intersection with Tenth Street. A group operated air switch shall be installed in the feeder circuit between Tenth and Bleventln Streets and another group opera- ted air switch shall be installed on Seventeenth Street between Cates Road and Halsell Street) Feeder Circuit No. 2 71ris shall be a three-phase feeder circull contructed with 336 MCM ACSR conduc- tor. It shall proceed from the proposed Substation Site and extend westward along Cates Road to the intersection with Overland Drive, It shall then proceed north ward aloe Overland Drive to Highway 380, and thence westward along Highway 380 to a line junction just east. of Tenth Street and Highway 360 intersection. At this point, it shall proceed southward to the alley between Davles and Owens f Avenue, then westward to Ninth Street, It shall then proceed southward on Ninth Street through the existing T.U. meter point and extend to Thompson Street, It shall then proceed eastward on Thompson Street for one (1) block to Tenth Strot. It shall then proceed southward on Tenth Street to connect with Feeder No. 1 at the Intorsectlon of Tenth Street and the alloy between Halsell and Stevens Drlve. A group operated air switch shall be histalled on Tenth Street just north of Stevens Drive and another group operated air switch shall be installed in 4he circuit on Ninth Street just north of tho Turkey Creek Trail circuit tap line. Four (4) 500 WA 7200/2400 kV stepdowns, (one for a spare), shall be rack-mounted on Ninth Street off of this elrcult to sirve the existing 4,16 kV feeder elrcuit, 01 .DYN r:~•'3 City of Bridgeport Billing History - 10 time if It DEMAND ENERGY BILL AVERAGE lul, J, 614 3,351,900 1145,049.98 $0,04320 Aug, B1433 30439,800 $155164k25 10.04525 11116 213301100 1118,120.75 40.0569 XHIBI Sep, Oct, 5,265 1,949,400 $100,077.72 10,05134 Nov. 41158 2,148,300 s1061016.77 10104935 Dec. 5, 751 21122,000 1127P320-02 10, 05484 Jan, 4,329 2,581,200 4101,098,34 10,0390 Feb, 4,374 1,958,400 1101,264,70 $0,05171 Aar. 41131 (,)141800 496,341,88 10,05429 Apr, 4,329 211780900 1103,692,95 $0,04759 May 6,705 2,5241500 Wi,472,16 10.04812 Jun, 71614 3,731,400 $156,654,94 $0,04198 Peak Ownd 01433 Total 70,4)9 30,296,700 1114321165,46 0,04129 Load Factor 41,011 Total after Fuel Refunds 0,3851448,92 10.04573 FU ELECTRIC CUSTOMER $215,00 PROPOSED RATE DEMAND-ON PEAK 112.65 j OEMAND•OFF PEAK 19,37 0,141855587 ENERGY s0.0031 FUEL ESL 04050 DEMAND ENERGY CUSTOMER DEMAND ENERGY FUEL TOTAL AYERABE Aug, 11614 3,3511900 1235.00 496,311,10 112,424,23 $68,836,95 11111,813,28 40,05295 Sep. 61433 3,439,800 $235,00 1106,677,45 112,727,26 470,515,90 11190,155,61 $0,65528 1 Oct, 11176 2,330,100 $235,00 $721851,12 18,621,37 141,767.05 $129148414 0,05557 Nov, 5,265 11949,400 $235.00 $630213.77 17,212.78 $39,962.70 1110,624.25 10.05675 Oec, 4,158 2,140,300 1235.00 163,213.77 110948.71 $44,040.15 1115,437,63 10,05373 Jan. 5,751 2,322,040 $235,00 4631213.77 18,591.40 647,601,00 $119,641.11 $0.05153 Feb. 4,329 21581,200 1235.00 163,213.77 19,550.44 152,914.60 1125,913.81 10.04918 Mar. 41314 11958,400 1235.00 1163,213.71 17,246.08 $40,147,20 1110,842,05 $0,05660 Apr. 41131 1,1741800 $235,00 163,213.11 $6,566,16 $36,393.40 0106,398,93 10,05995 May 4,329 21178,900 1235.00 $63,213.77 48,061.93 $44,&61.45 $116,118,11 $0.05332 ' An. 61705 215241500 $235,00 $65,341.96 19,340.65 $51,752,23 1t46,669.86 10,05810 Jul, 7,614 31131,400 1215.00 19-1317.10 113,806.10 116,493,70 1196,851.99 10,05006 Total 70,471 301296,700 $2,820.00 $900,011,11 11129097.79 $621,082,35 $1,636,011.25 10.05400 CoepAritive TRPA Billing I Dowd 111.78 Transeission Rate Encr9Y 12.00 Fuel (ES0 114.55 Ralchot 541 „ DEMAND E10911Y DEMANO BILL ENERGY BILL TOTAL BILL AVERAGE Aug, 71614 Q,3571900 1891692,92 1551573.23 1145,266.11 10,04326 Sep. 0,433 31439,BDO 199,340.74 1561928.69 1156,269,43 10,04543 Oct, 1,176 2,330,100 191,601.28 11381563.16 s130,164,44 10105586 Nov, 51265 1,949,400 162,021.70 $32,262.57 194,284.27 $0,04837 Dec, 411§8 2,1481300 149,670.37 135,5$4.31 $85,224.74 $0.03967 Jan, 5175 n",.,uvu 161,746.78 1136,429.10 1106,115.88 40.04573 Feb, 41 5811200 150,991.62 142,118.86 $93,714,40 $0,03631 Mar, 4,374 11959,400 1510525.72 132,411.32 183,937.24 $0.04286 ' Apr. 41131 1,114,840 149,670,37 129,372.94 $19,043,31 $0.04434 May 4,329 211181900 $50,995.62 $36,060,80 $81,056.42 10.03995 Jun. 6,703 215240500 $78,904.90 141,780.49 .1120,765,38 $0,04784 Jul, 7,614 3,731,400 189,692.92 161,754.67 11151,441.59 $0.0401? , Total 70,479 301296,100 $831,938.94 1501,410,39 41,133,349.33 10,04401 I , OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY MEMORANDUM TO: Robert: E. Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities FROM: Debra A. Drayovitch, city Attorney SUBJECTS Contract with the City of Bridgeport for Lhe Sale of Firm Power and Energy I , DATE: August 12, 1991 I I f, Pursuant to your request of July 2, 1991, I have reviewed the above-referenced contract you forwarded me. As I am sure you are aware, the contract has been substantially amended two times since j then. It is my understanding that you, together with the Utility Directors of the cities of Bryan, Garland, Greenville, agreed to these amendments last month. The changes are of a business nature and do not paesent legal issues. I have attached copies of a letter from Carl Shahady, TMPA General Counsel, to Georgia Crump, the attorney representing Bridgeport, and one Carl wrote to me, which outline most of the changes. Bob, I am a bit concerned about whether allowing Bridgeport to terminate the contract with two years' notice, as set forth in section 13(d), will allow the four cities to recover the costs of constructing the transmission facility. Hopefully it will, as the latest draft confers upon Bridgeport this privilege. i The latest draft deletes the requirement that Bridgeport pay in- terest on any late payments: I find this troubling for two rea- sons. First, it is my understanding that Bridgeport has in the past made late payments to TU. Secondly, the contracts with the cities of Farmersville and Bowie both provide for payment of in- torest with delinquent payments. I believe it ill-advised to begin to vary the terms of the contracts on issues such as these. You are going to end up in it "Let's Make A Deal" scenario on each and every provision each time you wish to enter into such a contract. In order to protect the best interest of the cities, I believe that the four cities should determine what is beat for them and stan- dardize these agreements as much as possible. Finally, I am awaiting e call from Carl regarding the last sentence in Section 11(b) which provides: "Termination of service hereunder shall not reduce or change the obligation of thA Purchaser or Seller under the other provisions of this Contract". I am con- cernnd about what obligations the City must continue to meet even though Bridgeport has not paid and iii not receiving service. It may be that this creates no additional burden upon the City but I would like to verify this. 1 do not believe the City should have 5• r 7 } Ili Robert E. Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities August 12, 1991 Page 2 to carry out the other terms of the contract if Bridgeport is in default. T will advise you of Carl's thoughts in this regard when I hear from him. After you have had an opportunity to review this memorandum, please let me know if you wish to take any action in 1 this regard or whether you wish that T prepare an ordinance sne for tthe City Council's consideration. If you have any que i regard, please let mn know. ` l I Debra A. Drayov td DAD/lkh Attachment xcs Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager i, i j i a bridgem k T. 1 S~ ,}H pktt?4k}f ' I (IIy JUG n July 23, 1941 Serving the cites of Oryan. Denton. Garland & Greenville Mr. Elbert Morrow i Fulbright and Jaworski 2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 2800 Dallas, Texas 75201 I Ms. Diane Callander h City Attorney City of Greenville 1 2821 Washington Street P.O. Box 1049 Greenville, Texas 75401 Mr, Charles M. Hinton City Attorney E" Ms. Shelby A. Beer f Assistant City Attorney Ii City of Garland 200 North 5th St, Garland, Texas 750,,, Ms. Debra Drayovitch City Attorney ; City of Denton 215 E, McKinney Denton, Texas 76201 Mr, Bob Andron City Attorney City of Bryan 300 South Texas Avenue Bryan, Texas 77805 i , Re: Contract for Sale and Purchase of Firm Power and Energy Between City of ' Bridgeport, as Purchaser and each of Bryan, Denton, Garland, and Greenville, as Sellers Dear Elbert, Diane, Charlie, Shelby, Debra and Bob: Enclosed please find a proposed final draft of the Contract, This draft l includes, in addition to minor changes, business terms that were requested by Texas Municipal Power Agency P'O' Box 1000 Bryan, Texas 77805 (409) 873.2013 i f V ' Pr s C} Bridgeport on July 17 and on July 190 1991. The utility directors approved these terms in substance (but did not review the exact language) in discussions held on July 18, 1991. The significant differences between this draft and the previous drafts are as follows: 1. The current plan is for Brazos Electric Power Cooperative to o!l and build the substation. Bridgeport may receive a transmission rate only by purchasing a substation or by constructing its own substation at a location agreeable to Seller. This Contract does not 4rant Brida~ort an option to purchase a substation from Seller. If Bridgeport desires to purchase the Brazos substation, Bridgeport must make the proper I arrangements with Brazos. See Section 5(b) and Exhibit "A" 2. Exhibit "A" has been modified to provide a more detailed description of the substation and its location, and to address the number of feeder bays. i 3. Section 4(f) obligates the Seller to construct certain improvements on Bridgeport's system to enable Bridgeport to receive power from the j substation at the location described in Exhibit "All . Bridgeport must pay $45,000 to Seller e'rare toy be work. on rnewe Exhibhitsa°G°i and ,I~Hnd { a description thereof, 1 respectively. 4. Section 3(a) has been revised to be consistent with thetBowie C ntract. 5. Section 4(b) halbe hin rsi x y arsoafter require the Commencement tDate din orderoto transmission line enhance the reliability of service. l 6. Section 13(a) has been amended to be consistent with ction 13(a) 1 the Bowie Contract. i 7, v Section 12 has been revised to delete the 10% interest provision on late payments (but a penalty of 1.5% on delinquent amounts has been retained). B. Section 13(d) has been revised to be consistent with the Bowie Contract. 7 9, Exhibit "E" is the same as Exhibit "E" in the Bowie Contract. C 10, Section 5(b) provides a standard for the transmission rate. I please review this Contract with your utIiIty director as soon as possibJu. The Bridgeport yuncil discuss the Contract ntract on y 90,1991. 1991. 1 expect geport ' maxbvar i Z if you find any significant problems with the Contract, please let me know by Friday, July 26, 1991. Very truly yours, ! C S Carl J. Shahady ! Agency Attorney CJS/dv 1111 ! j i I1 i i 1 j C r. tiAi1a.I((`y(((( Vrp' Y.Vr~4 iUitV'i4~ f } Serwn9 the cities ,if Aryan. Denton, Garland 6 Greenville i t r July 1991 Ms, Georgia N. Crump ' Lloyd, Gosselink, fowler, Blevins and Mathews 111 Congress Avenue, Suite 1800 Austin, Texas 78701 1 Re: Bridgeport C6ntract (Draft 6.28-91 Dear Georgia: , fi 1 Enclosed please find a new draft contract (dated 6-28-91) and a marked copy of the preceding draft (dated 4-15-91), which, in my handwriting, depicts thi! ? " 1 changes incorporated in the new draft. VThe new draft incorporates the revisions requested in your letter of April 19, s 1991, respecting section 1, 3(c), 4(a), 5(c), and Exhibit "F", l 4. r qq Your other comments are discussed below: F 1, Section 3(e): A forecast is needed for planning Farmersville Contract,did not contain this provision due to ran oversight, As a proposed compromise, I' have amended the provision to require a ( forecast only once\.,every two years, rather than annually. 2. Section 4Of : These rev ~s'ons-were no; made because the business terms have changed. The new proposal involves the construction and ownership of the substation by the Brazos County Electric Cooperative, There would be f no option for Bridgeport to purchase the substation, and no conversion to 3 a transmission rate, Consequently, Sections 4(f) and 4(g) have been f deleted, and Exhibit "A" has been modified accordingly, 3. Section 5(b); The date of January 1, 1994, is referenced because an increase in the Agency's rates to the Cities might occur at that tip., regard to the transmission rate, it has not been spec d'Auld they reasons addressed above. JUL 5 1991 _ reins hluaiclpal Power Agency P.O. Box 7000 Bryan, Texas 77803 CITY 4 f= LEGAL 4• Section 12: The 30 late payment penalty was inserted because the TU invoices Bridgeport sent to Gailord White indicated Bridgeport had occasionally paid late, and was charged by TU a 3% penalty, As a proposed compromise, I have revised the penalty to 1,5%. 51 Section 13(b): The term was negotiated in each case. Here, the term is really a basic ten year term (i.e. a five year basic term, plus a 5 year notice of termination which cannot be giveri during the first five years). It is my understanding that this arrangement was agreed to in negotiations between Joe Jackson and Gailord White, 6. Section 13(d): We purposely did not include the rolling two year term out of concern that such term could allow the contract to terminate prior to amortization of the transmission facility construction costs. Section 14 (mutual aid issue): I believe the of lity directors would be willing to discuss some type of mutual aid arrangement with Bridgeport. My concern, however, is that this type of service is outside the scope of previous contracts for wholesale power involving the TMPA Cities, and that much time would be involved in working something out. Fur thdt reason, and because an executed agreement is needed soon in order to meet the ! proposed Commencement Date (May 10 1992), we would prefer that this issue not be a pert of this agreement. i B. Section 24; Travis County was selected because, in the negotiation of l previous contracts, each party preferred venue in the county in which the f' party was situated. To compromise, a neutral county, Travis County, was { selected. In this case, I picked Travis County at the beginning to avoid i the expected disagreement over venue, if you have any questions or comments in regard to the new draft, please call. Please let us know soon if the new draft is acceptable to Bridgeport. Very truly yours, Carl J. Shahady CJS/dv r' EXCERPT PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD MINUTES August 14, 1991 1. CONSIDER SALE OF POWER AND ENERGY TO THE CITY OF BRIDGEPORT, TEXAS. Nelson reported that the contract has been approved and by May of 1997, power could be served to Bridgeport. Denton would be looking at approximately $110,000 in capacity revenue. Harrell commented that Nelson had to work hard on this I: contract so that all issues would work to Denton's advantage. Action: Ridons made a motion to recommend to the City Counci). approval of subject contract; second by Laney. All ayes, no nays, motion carried. 1 I I I S j 4 Y.•i41~A,y g;\wpdocs\bridger 1 1 i i RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE CITIES OF BRIDGEPORT, BRYAN, DENTLE GARLAND AND GREENVILLE, TEXAS FOR THE SALE AND PURCHASE OF WHOLE- SALE ELECTRIC SERVICEF AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. j THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: 5ECTIOh1 T. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute an agreement between the City of Denton and the cities of Bridgeport, i Bryan, Denton, Garland and Greenville, Texas for the sale and pur- chase of wholesale electric service, under the terms and conditions contained in the agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. SECTION II. That this resolution -shall become effective im- mediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of - 1991. III 4 ~ BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY I BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY / BY: i L'1 fti ` tttilXtif} r I i September 3, 1991 f M h CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM r TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Lloyd Harrell, Ctty Manager FROM: RE: CONSIDER'AL-AotUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR ADMINISTRA- TION OF THE CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF POWER AND ENSRGY TO FARMERSVILLE. RECOMMENDATION: The Public Utilities Board, at their meeting of August 14, 1991, recommended to the City Council approval of the Agreement between the Cities and TMPA for the administration of the contract. c, SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: The four TMPA member cities entered into a power sales contract with Farmersville which was officially executed February 20, 1990, with service beginning September 25, 1990, j and ending January 1, 1998. To date, TMPA has been billing Farmersville without an adminstration charge. This Agreement is to make TMPA the administrator for the billing and to pay TMPA a $300 monthly fee. The Agreement also provides the method for distribution of revenues among the four cities and the method used to amortize the construction cost over a five (5) year period. PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENT>S, OR GROUPS AFFECTED: I City of Denton Municipal Utilities, and all electric customers. 4 FISCAL IMPACTS The Agreement will allow for distribution of revenues collected for the sale of power and energy to Farmersville, It is estimated that the revenue to Denton will be approximately $125,000 annually before expenses of fuel and amortized costs of facilities installed. 3w`I' PkrttYli 1 Y i } City Council Agenda Item Page 2 l Respe tfully submitted, II to d arrel11 City . I Manager s 3 Prepared/Approved by, rLV &Lrie ls o, Director of utilities Exhibit I Resolution II Contract for the Administration of the Farmersville Contract III PUB Minutes of August 14, 1991 'i l i CC82091,01 i i 11.1. i #kN,l l r N}~t~_LN 1 i r Y 1 r r TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY MEMORANDUM TO. Members of Planning and Operating Committee ' ! FROM: Gailord White 1 i DATE: July 25, 1991 SUBJECT: Contract For The Administration Of The Farmersville Contract, Draft 7-9-91 (the "Contract"), i The most recent draft of the Contract is attached hereto. It includes new r I provisions (which are underlined) that ,re based on revisions suggested by l members of the Committee, In gener,,', the revisions: I 1. Require the Agency to furnish, on a monthly basis to the Member Cities, ' records relating to the sale of energy and capacity to Farmersville; 2. Obligate the Agency to pay interest to the Member Cities in the event the Agency fails to distribute revenues to the Member Cities within ten (10) days after the receipt of such revenues from Farmersville. This obligation would be applicable to revenues received from Farmersville both before and after execution of the Contract; and, i 3. Define in greater detail how revenue attributable to energy charges is to be allocated to the Member Cities. i l I i 191 T..~....,, y w. W-,.,,,. i I DRAFT DATE:..' CONTRACT BY AND AMONG TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY " AND THE CITIES OF BRYAN, DENTON, f GARLAND AND GREENVILLE, TEXAS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF POWER AND INERGY BY THE CITIES TO FARMERSVILLE, TEXAS THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of the day of 1991, by and among the Texas Municipal Power Agency ("TMPA") and the Cities of i Bryan, Denton, Garland, and Greenville ("the Cities"), all municipal corporations organized under the laws of the State of Texas. wITNESSETH: I WHEREAS, the Cities have each entered into a contract with the City of Farmersville, Texas ("Farmersville" providing for the sale to Farmersville of j power and energy, which contract (the "Farmersville Contract") is attached hereto P for purposes of identification only, and marked as Exhibit "A". i j WHEREAS, the Cities desire to enter into an agreement among themselves to provide for the administration of the Farmersville Contract by TMPA, and to provide for the distribution of revenues from such sales of power and energy i proportionate to the Cities' respective contributions to such sale. 1 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements of j the parties hereto as hereinafter set forth, the parties do hereby contract and agree s follows: Section I, ADMINISTRATION OF THE FARMERSVILLE CONTRACT' (a) In order to provide for the proper administration of the Farmersville Contract, the Cities each designate TMPA as each City's agent to perform the billing services described in the Farmersville Contract. TMPA shall render statements for the capacity and energy charges which may accrue under said contract to Farmersville in accordance with the terms of the contract, Complete. i and necessary records of all sales of energy and capacity under such contract and all actions taken by TMPA thereunder on behalf of the Cities shall be maintained by TMPA and furnished on a monthly basis to each City, (b) TMPA shall determine the allocation of each City of the amount received from Farmersville for capacity and energy sold to Farmersville by the Cities in accordance with the terms of the Farmersville Contract and with the terms of this Agreement. Such allocation shall be disbursed to the Cities within ten (10) days after the receipt of each payment from Farmersville. For all disbursements made after said ten (10) davs_t"Late Payments"), TMPA shall nay interest to each City (to accrue commencing on the eleventh day following the receipt by the Agency of payment from Farmersville) at the Average Intereet Earnings rate as described in Exhibit "C", The obligation to pay interest on Late Payments shall apply to amounts received from Farmersville both before and after the date of this Agreement. { (c) TMPA will request and the Cities will provide necessary information to allow TMPA to make a calculation of average annual energy cost to determine if Farmersville paid more than such cost, after adjusting for load factor and the effect of delivery at distribution voltage. Any over-collections so identified will be rebated to Farmersville by TMPA. TMPA will be reimbursed for the rebate out of revenues received from Farmersville following the rebate prior to disbursement of the revenues to the Cities, or as otherwise agreed between TMPA and the Cities if, following the rebate, revenues from Farmersville are not adequate to cover the rebate. SECTION 2: COMPUTATION OF CHARGES FOR CAPACITY AND E ERGY (a) DEMAND CHARGES .Each City will receive a percentage share of the demand revenue. This percentage shall be the percentage of each City's capacity above load and required reserves to the sum of the four Cities' capacity above load and required reserves, except that no City's percentage shall ever drop below 1.54. In the event that this calculation yields a number below 1.5% for one or more Cities, that City or those Cities shall receive 1.51.1 of the revenue each, with the balance being allocated to the remaining Cities in proportion to their capacity above their load and required reserves. ~j a A monthly disbursement of the payments received from Farmersville for demand charges shall be made to the Cities, based upon estimates of peak loads, capacity and excess capacity. At such time as the Cities' actual peak loads have been established, TMPA shall compute the variances between the payments based on i estimates, and payments based on actual operating figures, and corrections for such variances shall be reflected in subsequent disbursements. i (b) ENERGY AND FUEL CHARGES t Income attributable to energy and fuel charges shall be allocated to each of the Cities in accordance with the energy supplied to Farmersville by each City. Energy from Gibbons Creek shall be supplied to Farmersville from each City., s Net Energy For Load as defined by the Power Sales Contracts and calcul.ted by TMPA at the beginning of each Fiscal Year Purchased_power shall be supplied to Farmersville in the same manner as the energy from Gibbons Creek. Enerav eg aerated by the Cities for Farmersville shall be allocated among the Cities based on each City's generation as a_~ercenta of the tgtal generation of all of the Cities. SECTION 3; ADDIThO1A FACILITIES (a) TMPA agrees to construct the facilities shown on Exhibit "811. TMPA will own and operate the facilities until the date title to the facilities is `ransferr•ed to the TMPA Cities under s6section (b), Approval by the Cities of the use of proceeds of the Comanche Peak Settlement Agreement for construction of tw; facilities is hereby given, (b) The Cities agree to pay TMPA an administration fee in amounts sufficient to amortize TMPA's construction expense at TMPA's average interest earnlpgs rate over a period beginnii on the first date of power delivery and ending September 30, 1996. The administration fee shall be allocated to each City in the same proportion that revenues frem 'armersville arc: distributed to each City under this Agreement. TMPA's administration fee (including the average interest earnings rate) shall be determined in accordance with Exhibit "C". At the end of the amortization period, title to the facilities shown on Exhibit 18" will be transferred automatically under i•his Agreement to the TMPA Cities, with each TMPA City owning an undivided interest in those facilities in the same proportion that each TMPA City has contributed to the administration fee through { s: September- 30, 1996. If the Cities request, TMPA shall execute a deed which reflects the conveyance of title, in a form acceptable to the Cities and TMPA. Prior, to the conveyance of title to the facilities on September 30, 1996, TMPA shall, in accordance with Section 272.001(b), Local Government Code (the "Statute"), obtain an appraisal of the facilities. The purchase price for the facilities shall be the administration fee, unless a greater, amount is required by the Statute. (c) TMPA shall deduct its administration fee from the revenues paid under the rarmersviIle Contract prior to disbursement to the Cities under Section I(b). (d) TMPA shall, prior to and after conveyance of title to the facilities to the Cities, maintain the facilities (except any facilities conveyed by the Cities to Farmersville or to other's shall not be maintained by 1MPA after such j conveyance to Farmersville or to others). TMPA may maintain the facilities utilizing 1MPA personnel or may cause these facilities to be maintained by contracting with a City , a contractor, or others to provide such maintenance. The maintenance costs shall be deducted by TMPA from the revenues received from Farmersville prior to disbursement of the revenues to the Cities, and shall be allocated to the Cities in the same proportion that the revenues from i Farmersville are distributed to each City under this Agreement. { (e) Notwithstanding subsection (b), revenues attributable to the administration fee shall fir-i be applied to the payment of facilities (not constituting real property) the ownership of which the Cities have agreed, pursuant to the Farmersville Contract, to transfer to Farmersville. On the date j TMPA is reimbursed for those facilities, ownership of those facilities will be transferred to the Cities automatically under this Agreement. SECTION 4: DURATION OF A,RFEMEN, This Agreement shall be in effect concurrently with and for so long as the Farmersville Contract is in effect for all of Bryan, Denton, Garland, and Greenville. This Agreement shall terminate when the Farmersville Contract terminates with respect to any of Bryan, Denton, Garland or Greenville. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year above written, 1 i i CITY OF BRYAN i ATTEST: By:_ f CITY OF DENTON ATTEST: E BY:- CITY OF GARLAND f ATTEST: E By:_ ~ i E ! i fa CITY OF GREENVILLE 1 ATTEST. I By: MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY ATTEST: By: Ed Wagoner, Executive Di-re-c-To-r-aR General Manager i j pf n fi F~Ykl[y i j i 4 i i 1 1 /I 5 EXHIBIT b i E r ~ 1 E 1 i I i i _-T - T f iT3(lTSY~~ 23.x. YV<dr.4 I. . 1 ~ 1 EXHIBIT "B" i I I Olinger Substation Modifications, including 238 KV/25 KV Transformers and related facilities. Olinger-Farmersville 25KV line. } I Farmersville 25KV/4KV transformer and related facilities. Metering, SCADA, Regulation as required. E_ i I 1 , ~ F _I i F,! EXHIBIT "C" I, rofessional sservices, and other cost (includingainterest on suchCcosts r construction and calculated at the Average Interest Earnings Rate) relating to the construction of the facilities described in Exhibit "B" as shown in the Agency's accounting records. i The "Average Interest ratesnshowntinathedAgency'sdOpen a munthly basis, , Repo Investment Account, 11 be culizin zationaperioded bheaadminist9ationsfree shall 3, The administration the eamorti project Costs by also include an interest charge determined as follows: (i) On the date of the commencement of the delivery of power and energy through the facilities described in Exhibit "B", interest on the declining balance of Project Costs shall accrue on a monthly basis at the Average Interest Earnings Rate; TMPA (i i ? fixed order rate forea1 twelve charge month orr lionger speri od, and adjust athe interest charge at a later date to reflect the actual interest accrued each month under the Average Interest Earnings Rate. The ' fixed rate shall be based on the Average Interest Earnings Rate determined on the last day of the month preceding the period during which the fixed rate is to be app i I i j i 1 .Yror eF.ra.:gt i 4s{R[IjSi IMW EXCERPT PUBLIC UTILITli3 BOARD MINUTES August 14, 1991 8, CONSIDER AGREEMENT WITH TMPA TO ADMINISTER PARMERSVILLE POWER AND ENERGY SALES CONTRACT. Nelson reported that this agreement establishes that TMPA will be the interface to the City of Farmersville. At the end of the year, Denton will only provide TMPA with fuel and maintenance costs. Action: Laney made a motion to recommend to the City Council approval of subject contract. Second by Frady, All ayes, no nays, motion carried. I r ~ M181T + 4 E:\NPOOCS\VMPA.RES j I RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY AND THE CITIES OF DENTON, BRYAN, GARLAND AND GREENVILLE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: SECTION That the Mayor is hereby authorized 'to execute an ? agreement between the ^'i'xas Municipal Power Agency arA the Cities of Denton, Bryan, Garlai d and Greenville for the administration of the contract for the sale of power and energy to the City of Farmersville, Texas, under the teems and conditions contained in the agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part j hereof. SECTION II. That this resolu,:ion shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1991. Z : BOB CASTLEBERRY; MAYOR I ATTEST: ! JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY j C ~ i BY: i APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY BY: t j j i ri M~ i I i ! I r 1 I I I I f h f f I TTTTM" f MC= i i Uz= I : . h 111 J. . I ~y 1 IFT. , I 1D CITY of DENTCN, TEXAs MUNICIPAL SUILD1Na / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 / TELEPHONE (817) 6888307 - - - - Of!!oe 0! the City Manager I ' M E M O R A N D U M TO: Lloyd V, Harrell, City Manager FROM: Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager I ' DATE: August 30, 1991 SUBJECT: Possible Road Projects for the County Bond Election i Late this week, the Mayor and you were contacted by k Commissioners asking for input on possible projects for a County bond election this November. We have looked at a number of projects on the outer edges of the city and have recommended the following to Commissioners Hill and Cole. We have also II f listed then, by priority in the following manner: i 1. Mayhill Road - Colorado to Highway 380 i 2. Jim Crystal Road - Masch Branch to 1-35 t 3, Hickory Creek Road - Teasley to F.M. 1380 E _ E 4. Ryan Road - F.M. '.839 to Teasley, i 5, Ferris and Har.tlee Field Roads - Kings Row to f Sherman Drive 4, Underwood Road - Airport Road to F.M. 2449 li 7, Robinson Road Teasley Lane to State School Road 8, Country Club Road - U.S. 377 to F.M. 1830 Also, we have attempted to give the commissioners a rough estimate of the construction costs for these projects. All of the projects would basically be upgraded, widened to two-lane drairage standard as culvertaeCpipes or n bridges cross meet roads include b any would i i i l 1 _ , Pi a r7 ' rs'e,!r:a 4~ t Lloyd V. Harrell August 30, 1991 Page 2 1 with the exception of Mayhill. Mayhill would be built as a four--Lane, divided structure with curb and gutters, and it would match our construction requirements for a secondary arterial kind of road, consistent, with our transportation plan. As you can see from this list, we have attempted to pick roads that either serve as arterials in either our or the Cok.inty's transportation plan. Obviously, there are other streets or F roads that are residential in character that are in need of repair. However, since this will be a countywide election, we thought would be more appropriate to suggest streets that have both county and city uses. Since there is a timing problem for the Commissioners, that is, they need this information by the end of this weer, we have gone ahead and sent the information to the Commissioners. However, we have stipulated in our correspondence that we want y to review these projects with the Council to ensure that they are indeed the priority of the Council, This would allow further input by the Council to recommend other projects in addition to the ones we have focused on. We will be happy to f discuss any and all of these projects or other projects that Council might have Tuesday evening and be ready to forward further information to the Commissioners at the Council's } direction. if you or the Council has further questions, we would be happy to trraanswer them. Deputy City Manager RS:bw 5482M E i i E I! 1 4 r" x r i C/rY of DENTON, rEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. MCKINNEY / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 M E M O R A N D U M T0: John F. McGrane, Executive Director of Finance `J FROM: Kathy Du➢ose, Controller" DATE: August 30, 1991 3 SUBJECT: BUDGET ISSUES ~ , Below I have listed the major budget balancing issues in the ' order in which they were discussed and voted during the August 27, 1991 council session. r Shortfall due to property value $(310,000) Use of additional General Fund reserve 66,84$ ; (243,152) Eliminate General Fund Demolition of Substandard Structures 15,000 (228,152)1 Eliminate increase in Pool Fee Revenue (8,000) f (236,152) Additional funding of SPAN (10,000) (246,152) Additional Tax Roll Supplement 140,000 ; I (106,152) Decrease in Insurance cost 841000 (22,152) Increase in Sales Tax Revenue 48,152 26,000 Flow Hospital Reserve 221000 48,000 Additional 1/4¢ to fund Debt Service 1 for Building improvement bonds (48,000) ~Dgl 81715668200 01F'NMETRO 4342529 l j MEMORANDUM T0: Lloyd Harrell - City Manager r FROM: Thomas W, Klinck, Director Personnel/Employee Relations I DATE: August 30, 1991 f SUBJECT: City Council Request Alternativus to "To Minimum" Implementation _ "Capspl Lloyd, at your request, attached is a report showing the employees by j position and proposed grade from the Mercer Study to be brought to minimum of the new salary grade with alternative "caps" on those amounts, The additional cost savings by implementing various "caps" on higher "to minimum" amounts ($3,000 to $6,000) would allow some savings to the overall costs of implementing the Mercer- recommenued salary management program, Each level of savings at different "caps" ($3,000 to $6,000) are shown at { the end of the report (General Fund). There are also some potential legal and administrative considerations. As an example, at the $3,500 "cap", tnere are 7 multiple incumbent positions in f' which an individual employee would be placed at a salary pelow the proposed minimum of the new salary grade. This could be challenged as a violation of the provisions of the Equal Pay Act. This law stipulates that an employee performing duties and responsibilities of one position must be paid the same E as another employee performing the duties and responsibilities of the same E or, a similar position. ( Additionally, placing "caps" on the amounts to minimum could present some I administrative and employee morale dii1 icultiss. Administratively, each "capped" employee's salary would need to be tracked closely and "flagged" in ( the employee data base, An employee whose salary is "capped" would be placed at a disadvantage to other employees in the same job or all employees in positions in the same grade, Thus, as turnover might occur, a new hire or promoted employee would be placed at a salary groater than the "capped" employee (until the uifference in the capped amount adjusted), f It has been +1 years since the City conducted a comprehensive revlaw of positions and the salary management program. Some of the employees being recommended to minimum have essentially been performing in a position of greater responsibility an(' deserved compensation than how their position was formally assessed. As has been recommended by Mercer, the approximately 12% of employees below minimum are the top priority for movement to bring their positions within an appropriate range to market-based pay. In discussing this with Tom Riley, he suggested one other approach from a cash control standpoint. He offered that we could reccmmand awarding one- half (1/2) to minimum upon implementation, then award the remaining amounts in 6 months or quarterly within this same budget year. In this way, we'd reduce the overall cost impact, and riot be faced with the other full one- i i . i , 1 August 30, 1991 Memo to L. Harrell - Alternatives to "To Minimum" implementation - "Caps" Page 2 half in the 3 year s we recommendation/gn implementingtt,he pay-for-pesrformancenmatrixOrward a r j please let me know if you need further information or clarification on this. Thank you, S j Tom Klinck I lhmemi0.prn 8/30/91 i i 1 1 l t,. 1se1/ez AMTMIHI.MR1 MERCER PROPOSAL EMPLOYEE$ TO MINIMUM ALTERHATIVES AMOUNT AMT LIMIT AMT LIMIT AMT LIMIT ANT LIMIT AMT LIMIT GRAD!/POSITION TO MIN $3,000 $3,500 $4,000 $5,000 36,000 - GRADE 1 ' LIBRARY PAGE 1171 $171 $171 $171 1111 1171 LIBRARY PAGP. 171 171 171 171 174 171 ORAOE 3 440 460 460 440 460 460 CASHIER I 440 460 OANUR I 480 440 460 440 I; 231 284 231 281 231 281 UTILITY DISPATCHER 291 281 281 281 231 UTILITY DISPATCHER 281 I GRADE 4 1'004 4'006 1,008 1,006 1,005 1'OOtl METER READER $!3 696 668 468 033 663 M!T!R READER 688 6!3 488 tlB3 tl!6 tl!8 METER READER METER READER 1'8$8 S'85B 1,866 1, 70 366 1'356 1,7 6 7T$ 776 174 7 774 SECRETARY T7S 770 776 776 778 778 SECRETARY SECRETARY 776 770 776 776 770 76 776 776 718 776 776 1 776 SECRETARY 1 SECRETARY 1'?.54 1,254 41264 1,254 1'264 4'264 1'234 1,254 1,254 11264 1,254 1,264 SECRETARY GR3TONER SERVICE REP 1'264 1r254 1,264 1x2$4 1'264 1,261 1,2tl4 1'254 11254 1,264 1,264 1,254 CWTOWK iBAV106 REP 1,254 1,254 1,264 1464 11254 (,264 CUSTOMER SERVICE REP Page / I 1 f -A a Ne i 1881182 AMTNINI.MMI MERCER PROPOSAL EMPLOYEES TO MINIMl1M ALTERNATIVES ANOlBNT ANT LIMIT ANT LIMIT AMT LIMIT AMT LIMIT ANT LIMIT GRADE/POSITION TO MIN 83,000 83,800 84,000 86,000 $8,000 ` MADE 8 508 506 606 606 508 606 ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER RECREATION LEADER 1,238 +,296 1,236 1.258 1,238 1,296 105 230 RECREATION LEADER 605 605 605 608 805 386 9t8 8t6 386 398 388 REOREATION LEADER RECREATION LEADER 1,236 1,236 11284 1,298 1,296 +,238 , GRAD! 6 _ ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 089 633 889 833 998 699 11963 1,663 +,993 1,839 1,383 1,983 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 622 88z 622 622 822 ADMINISTRATIVE 59CANTARY 822 1,236 1,298 Ir82 1,226 1,236 1,296 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY SENIOR 849 343 843 948 343 949 PER80NMCL REP I40102PAL OT 8R ASST 601 601 849 841 316 60 601 1 5 601 343 01 801 k ! MfIRO PROClbb OP II 348 848 943 343 343 943 048 343 840 +81RD PROCESB OF, II 348 ` 8,000 8,500 4,000 4,819 4~t18 ADMINISTRATIVE A66T i 4,116 1,662 1,892 *WMATXO SPECIALIST I 1,682 1,612 11892 11852 GRADE T _ lk 8,224 3,224 E%E0IIVE SECRETARY lisle 6 1 81,61000 6 31,,51224 1,610 lisle 6 1,518 1,616 NXEWTIV9 SECRETARY PLANNING TECIIMICIAN I,217 11867 1,887 +1897 1,897 1,587 S88 868 663 BOB S68 PLANNING, TEONMIOIAN 868 641 611 541 641 841 11661 1,881 1,661 1,661 SUPEIIVISOR COST SYO 841 4,661 1,663 REOEATIOM SPECIALIST 11 1,102 1,102 1,102 1,102 11102 1,102 ANALY6T j WAREHO~ilER 1,661 1,961 1,561 1,66+ 11661 1,861 i AREMOIISE SUPERVISOR Page 2 , 1 i N 1 1991/92 ANTMIHI,NK1 MERCER PROPOSAL ENPLOYEE8 TO MINIMUM ALTERNATIVES AN"T AMT LIMIT ANT LIMIT ANT LIMIT ANT LIMIT ANY LIMIT $3,600 11,000 $8,000 $0,000 ORAO!/POSITION TO M-- (8,000 ORADE 8 • 1,098 1,088 1,693 1,683 1,693 1,093 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT II 2,090 2,796 2,780 2,780 2,786 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT II 2,79E 1,084 1,884 Ag1INI6TRATIVE ASSISTANT II 1,064 1,664 1,084 1,064 2,234 2,.'34 2,234 2,234 2,284 ASSISTANT CHEMIST 2,234 { 11081 1,631 11631 4,681 1,681 1,631 ELEOTRIOIAH 2,666 2,686 2,868 2,868 21858 ELEOTRICIAN 21668 803 903 lNOINffRINO TECH III 008 903 908 boa Ica 903 603 boa 903 808 EXECUTIVE SECRETARY TO GTY NOR 11716 1,748 5,746 1,740 1,748 10718 iLINEMAN 437 467 457 467 467 467 I LINEMAN 107 487 457 460 457 407 LINEMAN 457 437 457 487 457 437 LINEMAN 467 107 461 457 4 RS NN 457 1,141 1,741 1,741 11741 1,741 1,041 PERSONNEL PlRSONNELPERSONNEL OlNFRALIST 0!N 8,836 8,000 3,500 8,638 81588 3,636 RAI.IeT 762 772 782 782 762 RECREATION CENTER SUPIRVISOR 762 2,192 2,192 2,712 2,52 2,192 2,192 SUPERVISOR SOLID MAST!/RKSIDENTIAL ACCOUNTANT It 1,112 1,112 1,112 11112 1,112 1,112 " 1,213 1,218 1,218 1,218 1,218 1,213 PERSONNEL SPECIALIST 11129 1,121 1,121 1,129 1,121 PLANNER 10,,129 5,249 3,000 3,600 4,040 61000 6,000 I 61ApERVISOR STREETS - 2,773 2,713 2,773 2,173 2,773 2,773 f j SUPERVISORY STREETe.r.._._.."`._ fff ,i ONADE 10 0I$ RATE ADMINISTRATOR 701 731 751 TS9 759 769 KLECTRIO NAINT9NAM FOREMAN 8,650 8,000 31500 3,068 3,058 3,656 3 6,187 3,000 31600 41000 5,000 5,000 ELECTRIC PROOUOTION FOREMAN 672 572 tl72 672 072 ELEOT11I0 PROCIIOTION FOREMAN $12 1,092 1,092 1,172 11012 1,002 1,01)2 SlNIOR SUYlR PA96 b a fi AMTMIMI.H91 1991/92 MERCER PROPOSAL i EMPLOYEES TO MINIMUM ALTERNATIVES AMOUNT AMT LIMIT AMT LIMIT ANY LIMIT AMT LIMIT ANT LIMIT ORAGE/POSITION TO MIN $3,000 95400 $4,000 $6,000 $0,000 GRADE 1t 01018 91000 3,500 4,000 31000 01000 CHEMIST 8,600 1,000 5,000 01000 LEISURE 9CRVCE9 SUPERVISOR 0195$ $1000 1,620 1,920 1,920 11920 1,920 1,920 AOVINISTRATIVE SERVICES MANAGER pRlTREATMENT COORDINATOR 2,440 2,440 2,440 2,440 2,440 2,440 ENGINEERIHO 'IECHHIOIAN SUPERVISOR 3,067 3,000 31600 3,667 31667 8,907 3,007 310OO 31500 3,a67 3,667 3,067 ENUNEERIN TECHNICIAN SUPERVISOR j s GRADE 12 S r 0,279 81000 3,600 4x000 5+000 6,278 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES MANAGER 3,000 3,600 4,000 4,405 4,406 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR 41405 4,494 3,000 3,000 4,000 4,454 4,454 RISK MANAGER r h ORAN 13 81409 3,469 3,459 r' 'f CONTROLLER 5,469 8,000 81469 WATER/WASTEWATER TREATMENT SUPERINTENDENT 11660 1,369 1,309 1,369 4,389 1,38! s ' POLICE 0!7 691 697 691 SST 697 FOLICE^OFFICER- POLICE OFFICER 667 697 as? S97 S97 697 POLICE OFFICER 697 697 067 097 697 097 fOLi13E OFFICER Say 697 691 697 09T 617 !f POLIO! OFFICER 097 097 697 697 097 691 t fIREFIaNTER 100 700 700 700 700 700 Pago 4 Yt(1~4bA r:hrvl.~L a.x A1'. :R•sl ....~,:r•Yv yar ~ 1991/92 AMTNIN1.WKi MERCER PROPOSAL EMPLOYEES TO MINIMUM ALTERNATIVES T ANT AMOUNT ANT LIMIT ANT LIMIT ANT LIMIT AM GRADE/POSYTION TO NYN (8,000 -3-500 $4,000 TOTAL NlM4SER Of EMPLOYEES TO MINIMUM SS 14 12 S S 4 NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES NOT SROUONT TO PULL MINIMUM i *17.752 i11,B59 f8,299 68,401 11,202 I - OEN PUNO DOLLAR AMT Of COST SAVINOS PK99 9 i 1 i C k t I I 1 it i 1 h i I i i i CITY of DENTON, TEXAS 216 E McKinney / Denton, TX 76201 ! Phone (817) 686.8230 OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES D MEMORANDUM i DATE: August 30, 1991 T01 MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THRU: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager FROM., R.E. Nelson, Executiva Director of Utilities RE: E12ctric Budget and Rate Issues The main items that the ) staff still ads direction council regarding the Electr.ic budgetare from the i 1, Rata decrease of 3$ by reducing the Energy Cost Adjustment from 1.9 cents per KWH to 1.7 cents per KWH.. 2. vVacant acant that Positions: presently in fie sl 1992as 13 positions Please refer to Exhibit I Memo of August 22, 1991. Respectfully submitted, } Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager Prepared by: E. N e~so" bhp R,E Nelson, Executive Director Department of Utilities I Exhibit It Memo of August 22, 1991 111992 Budget Issues" MEM0WTRW:720101-91AUG-PG 4 i i DEDICATED TO QUALITY SERVICE i t I r }3 n?3>'stis tf 1{ i TELEPHONE{8171566.8200 DEN TON, TEXAS 76201 CITY of DENTON, TEXAS MUNIUPAL BUILDING - MEMORANDUM August 22, 1991 DATE: Harrell, City Manager [.loyd V, TO: r of Utilities R E. Nelson, Executive Directo i FROM, RE: 1992 BUDGE`--ISSUES------------- -Co-u-n-ci--l'-s-----qu-estions -is in response to the the Utility The following budget, plus information on regarding the Utility Board action on rates. Painting of the "High school" Water Tower School Water 1 had recommended that the High The Council single color which could ThedUtility ; Tower be paintefrom $2001000 to $170,000, recommended painting cost on the water rates, They in their work a tower to 1993, Board, the painting of the water k delaying 100,000 be set aside in 19t92 no£ 3 uether recommended that $o help pay for the pa 1 f special maintenance fund t ainting this tank is an The delay in a one year delay is not on of this tank in 1983 call, and engineering Judgement any significant deter cioolroartied t any .esult anticipated Thto r e decisionito change from a be lpostpohed until the tank, can, therefore, ,t comment to a single color tank we expect some cammun.. y received howeverr cUlor scheme the 1993 budgets this multiple the on this, since input when it was initiated in significant community late 1960's, 2. Vacant Positions in the Electric Dhe aElectric Department at y IIII in ositions that were I The total vacant Listed below are the and which this time are ;hen the budget was prepared Aprilr The total cast of those vacant in Department budget have been £i1 1ed since that 19 time. 3 vacant positions to the 92 1 Electric is $379,027, I I i t i i 0250 Utility Administration- Electric filled Administrative Services coordinator Vacant $27,905 Administrative Assistant 0251 Electric Production filled Results Engineer Vacant $50,373 4 Operations Supervisor filled Electronic Technician In process Relief operator in process f Auxiliary operator (2) vacant $10,755 ► Maintenance Worker (1/2 time) 0252 Electric Distribution vacant 37,478 Lead Electrician vacant 29,653 Senior Engineering Aide vacant 127l340 Electrician Apprentice vacant .142,280 Heavy Equip. Operator (5 positions) filled Lineman Apprentice II filled Lineman Apprentice 1 (2) 0253 Electric Metering vacant $22x429 s Meter Reader 0256 Electric Engineering vacant $41,569 a Engineering Associate ii i i 0257 Energy Management filled Intern (3•-1/2 time) r A TOTAL BUDGETED POSITIONG UNFILLED AT THIS TIME' 13 9,027 W TOTAL BUDGETED COST OF UNFILLED POSITIONS- $379,02 Some of these 13 open positions need to be filled in 1992 in order to perform certain Board mandaterequ d functions. For oextensiveemonthly the Public format, Utility one which will provide better productivity reporting Assistant repol,ts # for management and obofillretlew'Admin order to inistrative accomplish ? th, it is necessary position in Utility Administration, We do not anticipate filling the Electric Engineering Associate is important for proper career position immediately, but it ersonnel to have this development of engineering people have career opportunities position available, so the t these p lified employees to higher when it is l here at Denton, rather than losing qua paying utility companies in Dallas and Denton If and determined tsition,of the lawee level engineers is qualified he thE.ir position would remain open for the fill this Pc year. remainder of the budget yea i I PAGE 2 3 1 1E .;.5 n r F 5 t rr i It is also very ry advansaghats entera then Denton pjob tmarket of roml time hire qualifi p because we have had positions available, time. For example, ood personnel in the tDeo nton has been able to hire some very g Electric Department whom t positions hapeoviden benef is hipE we might not These vacant P to exercise good a otherwise. visio unless flexibility, but require a di and not Cwt personnel on staff management responsibilitYi a ann odutilized. they can be pructively we make exercis at all ti Prudent business Judgement is examine dour workloads,andresult ndnot ffill it a practice to constantly le it/cot rtio positions if ttion as evidenced by Uthef fact sthata the utility has filling a posi quite some time For example, we kept these positions apes for do not plan to fill the Electric Dist rib tposi pions ions the Power reader position dredvelopmenty increases in Denton. We have Plant unless responsibility in the Past and pledge deomcontinuedsohin theafuture, from Hudget Reductions (or rate ' 3. Long Range Impacts Resulting ( reductions). The major long range impacts of budget cuts are: ` a) Electric: i r .urinating the present vacant positions is discussed above. b) Water: enditures in replacement of miscellaneous t 4 Re`Tucing capital exp rther e i water lnn depecis he oratedyandm ndersized wa ernlin s.p1 oMost of piE eas ch tthait me have s rep 1 g one s the lines being replaced are old cas~ iron corroded and have required numerous patches. to the street of these lines breaks, water causes damage subsurface by flowing under the pavement in all directions asph t to from the break. This causes , some heof these lines targeted fodr later break down. Also, provide sufficient lumes for fire fighting purposes. replacement voare are not spending enough in this category to even We presently keep up with the depreciation expense being charged. i i ~ The lower water rates further delays the repayment of the debt tp tTe E ectr c Department The city faces the risk of questioning the use of their seriusl electric custoforSwateroandy wastewater expenses, especially rates to pay paid on these borrowed funds. since no interest is being i (See bee Allison's attached memo) wastewater: e ma or risk in the bud et cuts and an and the delay in completing Texas water quality mandated improvements to meet effluent standards. similar concers replacementt of deteriorated r ewers in the water area regarding ~ PAGE 3 i J gz 4 s °f }3 lines and manholes, in not keeping up with funding the depreciation expense and getting further in debt to the Electric Department each year. (See Howard Martin's memo attached) q, Budget Implications of Upper Trinity Regional Water District. ~ The immediate budget implication relating to the UTRWD is the loss etc e ' ivid Waybeen in 1992 of the anticipated $400,000 that would t have from UTRWD for 498 of the engineering, Denton would have continued on with the Joint Ownership concept. This represents an approximate 3.58 increase in water rates for E j 1992. Preliminary calculations indicate that if Denton sells wholesale h water to the UTRWD, Denton's rates could be 58 lower than if Denton does not provide such wholesale service. Also, if Denton sells the UTRWD 498 of the Ray Roberts Plant, Denton's rates could be 10 to 118 lower than it Denton does not sell part of the plant and does not sell wholesale water. Ii However, if Denton does not sell wholesale or part of the plant, it might be possible to put off plant startup date to 1996 ve the of course, on the growth of present planned 1995 depending, Denton. This delays 1,0001000 of debt service by one year which ' will represent about a 78 rate increase one year later than if Denton entered into a joint ownership or a wholesale contract with the Upper Trinity Regional Water District, - 9 1? Board Action on Rates_ The Public Utilities Board took the following action at their meeting ' on Thursday, August 22, 1991 relating to rates, Electric; Recommended to reduce the Energy Cost Adjustment from s 1.94/KWI4 to 1,74 KWH. j This results in a 38 or approximately $11550,000 reduction, The Board also requested that the revenues and expenses be reviewed after the first quarter of fiscal 1992 to determine if a further reduction or rebate might be possible. This recommendation was based I on the fact that there is some uncertainty about the return of the $2,0001000 of surplus earnings at TMPA, The natural gas fuel and future cost of natural gas. budget was based on an estimate gas that continuesuld stay $1.99 per million BTU (mmbtu). another .1 to down at the present $1.35 to $1.b5 range, ,24/KWH reduction in the ECA would be possible. A .14/KWH reduction represents $780,000 in revenues. PAGE 4 i ff the Council chooses to not repay any outstanding debt from the Water Department, this possible rebate and/or reduction would be affected. Water: The Public Utility Board recommended a 108 increase in the water rates, but offered the option to the Council that the rates could be set only at a 58 or 7,58 increase if the Council chooses to cu` the repayment of Water Department debt to the Electric Department by $500000 or $250,000 respectively. The Board noted that the action to discontinue consideration of joint ownership in the Ray Roberts Water Plant eliminates $400,000 of 1992 anticipated revenue to the Department and represents z 3,58 increase in wai.er rates, wastewater: The Public Utility Board recommended a 158 rate increase in the wastewater rates and a change in the methodology 1 of calculating wastewater flows. The new methodology would use the four winter months of December, January, February and Marc as the basis; the Utility to discard the highest month's usage and use the average of the i remaining three months as the wastewater volumes for the remaining months of the year. This methodology will reduce revenues by $194,000. The Board offered that the rate increase could be held down to an 11.58 increase if the Council chooses to continue with the present methodology of calculating wastewater volumes, which r uses the average of the three winter months of Dece,-,: er, January and February. In either methodology, a ceiling of 30,000 gallons per month exists. solid Waste: The Public Utility Board recommended no increase in residential or commercial solid waste rates, but did { recommend a 158 increase in the landfill tipping fee to all non-city owned vehicles, This increase would raise the rate from $3/CY to $3,45/CY, The recommendation to not raise residential and commercial rates is based on Denton taking over all commercial customers in February, If this does not ha en, residential rates could increase from tF-6 present mon to or mon , Respectfully submitted, /S/ R,E. Nelson Nelson, xecu ve rector of Utilities Attachment I: Lee Allison Memo II: Howard Martin Memo 7018U:-1-5 gcr PAGE l F.Y. 1992 WATER BUDGET Hale oN Proposed increase Budget Decfeaso fieguired 1. Ficcal Year 1992 Water Budget 512,583,458 11,77% i 2. Loss of Upper Trinity Rovenue 3. Return on Investment Increase (Hyd(os) 4x0,000 17,836 F.Y. 1992 WATER BUDGET OPTIONS $13,001,295 15,4696 1. ShitV Economic Development Plan Lines CR to 8F, $260,000 Ia. Increase: Debt Payment due to increased Debt $250,000 2. Eliminate: Proposed supervisory position at WTP 00 ($0 $358,750) 13.49% fff 3. Reduce: Painting High School Water Tower. ,700-~ 13,09% ~ $220000,,0000 $100,000^ 12.20% 4. Postpone: Demolition of 2 Wells 6. Reduce: Misc. Waterline Replacement $90,000 $90,000r 11 51% $311,000 $100000-~ 6 S Reduce: Replace Waterlines Street Program 1% 3216,000 $56,000-; 10.03% 7. Reduce: Repayment to Electric, 8, keduce: Repayment to Electric $500Sb00,000 $00,000 7.61 % ,000 $5500,000 5.59% Q` N , a p k y A DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO. R.E. Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities j FROM: Lee K. Allison, Director of Water EngLieering l j and operations DATE; August 22, 1991 k SUBJ: Impact on Operations of No Increase in Water Rates 1 , f A zero percent increase in water rates would only serve to compound the problems which have been accumulating for some time, These ~ problems are aggravated by not obtaining the a income anticipated with the UTRWD joint development l contract. No progress has been made toward alleviating 9 losses due to depreciation. This inhibits our ability to replace deteriorated mains, obtain a favorable bond interest rate, build a reserve account or accommodate a special need such as attracting a now industry, The Water Department must again borrow funds from the Electrio Department to cover losses (including depreciation). These losses have increased by one (1) million dollars per year due to the capitalization of water rights in Lake Ray Roberts. 1 f j r. 7 e; c~ ! No rate increase would also inhibit our efforts to minimize maintenance cost by replacing lines requiring an inordinate amount of repair. Maintenance/repair cost will continue to escalate as needed replacements are postponed. This will present a definite strain on future budgets as we try to continue maintenance, catch up with replacement, attract r 1 industry and accommodate growth in any given future budget t I year, E This same phenomenon is true for providing additional capacity necessitated by growth. Denton is still experiencing pressure problems in the UNT, Flow, and McKenna areas due to the growth which occurred in 1985/1986 without the associated system capacity increases. t ~ Also, we would not be able to satisfactorily respond to special customer request. Time, equipment and money are ! necessary to investigate unusual situations such as the recent analysis of odor problems in the Robinwood area. I In short, the Water Department is moving toward and locking in a future position of being reactive and playing catch up j instead of being proactive and leading growth, an observer of economic development instead of a star attraction. i LKA:lb 1 SLA0017.DOC i i ti i ' f! 43 1 M E M O R A N D U M T0; Bob Nelson, Executive Director Department of Public Utilities FROM; Howard Martin, Director Department of Environmental Operations DA'L'E; 8-23-91 5UBJo Rate Increase for the Wastewater The cost of service study for FY 92 identified $7,009,378 of cost for the Wastewater Department. Projected revenues of at $6,107,705 are estimated at the current rates, resulting in a net loss of $901,673. The policy decision to change the methodology by which the residential wastewater discharge is determined will add an additional revenue deficit of approximately $1940000 for a total deparmental deficit of $1,095,673 for the FY92 with no rate increase. If the Wastewater Department is to maintain no rate increase for FY92, approximately $100950673 must be eliminated from the proposed operating budget and capital improvement plan. Several senerios are possible but all senerios will adversely affect the wastewater operations ability to comply with state and federal regulations and in some cases, drastically limit the quality of services to the customer, i~ If the FY92 departmental expenditures were held to the same level as the FY91 budget, in an effort to maintain a reasonable level of service to the customer, budget reductions amount to $2480159. Subsrancial reductions would still be required in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Currently, the proposed FY92 capital improvements are funded from both current revenues and bond funds. Capital improvements funded from current revenue total $6640000. s Capital improvements funded from bond funds total $4,8031000. By eliminating all capital improvement projects, both bond funds and current revenue, the wastewater department could reduce expenses by approximately $851,725 ($664,000 from current revenue, $187,125 from bond fund debt service). By reducing the proposed operating j budget by 6.8 3 ($248,159) and eliminating all capital project, the department could reduce expenses by approximately $1,099,884 and maintain a 04 rate increase. Maintaining the annual wastewater operating budget at the FY91 expenditure level will affect the department's ability to provide the same level of service to the customer, Areas thnt would be adversely affected includes a possible decrease in available manpower, reduced materials and equipment inventory, an increase in the time required to repair problems, decreased assistance to other departments in the city (drainage, wastewater treatment, electric department, park and recreation, service center maintenance, vehicle maintenance), discontinuation of troubleshooting services r i [Y ?3 I to citizens experiencing problems with their service line, discontinuation of storm drain flushing activities and discontinuation of the sharing of equipment and associated maintenance costs. In addition, reduced budget funding will not provide the additional positions in the Environmental Services Division to comply with the pretreatment program requirements. The Administrative Order issued by the EPA specifically addressed the shortage of manpower to effectively accomplish program goals and objectives. The two additional p•.etreatment program inspector positions were part of i the Denton response to the EPA's directives) The projected revenues will not support the capital improvement needed in FY92. Many of the proposed capital improvements are r required for regulatory compliance. The Wastewater Treatment Plant (t capital improvements, which amounts to 75.3 % of the ;,otzl wastewater bond fund expenditures, are a result of the new stata and federal discharge permit requirements. New permit limitations require additional facilities to provide for nitrification, dechlorination, flow equilization and additional sludge conditioning and treatment. Capital Improvement Projects in the Field Services area provide for the maintenance of collection system integrity and public health. ' As the regulatory agencies continue to increase surveillance and enforcement activi ,ies on illegal discharges, it is imperative that municipalities maintain system integrity to prevent possible overflow and wastewater discharges to the environment. Capital program such as infiltration/inflow correction are important in reducing unnecessary flows at the treatment plant, requiring f expansions before actually needed. A substancial amount of funding in the Field Services capital improvement program support economic development, extending lines and services to new industrial and commercial customers. In summary, no rate increase in the wastewater department would ; require substancial reductions in the annual operating budget and capital improvement programs. Wastewater system integrity and j continued regulatory compliance would not be possible without the proposed capital improvements. i FILEsC:\WPSl\CCAGENDA\ZERO { 1 I ' A STORM WATER UTILITY COMMITTEE 1 VOTING MEMBERS : ~ BOB COPLEN, CHAIRMAN ROLAND LANEY DR. JOHN THOMPSON SKIP BEARD MARK HANNAH JR, MEL WILLIS { ROY APPLETQN, Hl DOROTHY ADKINS DR. TED COE GEORGE GlBSON ~ DR. VERA GERSHNER DR. CHAS. WAHELERT DR. DON SMITH DR. DON MICHEL CHANGES DUE TO VARIOUS CONFLICTS, THE FOLLOWING NEW APPOINTMENTS WERE MADE ; I , NEW MEMBER OLD MEMBER ~ DR, CHAS. WAHLERT t I RALPH MORRISON ` ROGER WRIGHT REPLACES GLORIA STEPHENS I DR, TED COE RAY MCFARLANE { I STAFF s M NON -VOTING : BOB NELSON gpgTiCKNER LEE ALLISON KAREN FESHERI BILL ANGELO NANCY MOFFAT > IMPORTANT RULES FOR OPERATION ! - QUORUM, 75% OF VOTING MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE (12 MEMBERS) f - MAJORITY VOTE REQUIRED TO APPROVE A MOTION (MEMBERS PRESENT) E STMO903 1, 03--Sep--9i a r..!l:a .,i:n' }:ti...aaW1S3.lat: nn•W',:,ri'.vnY, t i 1 STORM WATER UTILITY COMMITTEE PHASE i t I i PHASE 1: REVIEW AND EVALUATE THE NECESSITY OF ESTABLISHING A STORM WATER MANAGEMENT UTILITY FOR THE CITY OF DENTON AND TO SUBMIT AN EVALUATION TO THE PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD WHICH SHALL INCLUDE A RECOMMENDATION OF WHETHER THE CITY SHOULD t PURSUE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH A UTILITY 1 I k r STATUS MET TWO HALF DAY WORK SESSIONS AND MADE THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS : (VOTE WAS 9 ! TO PROCEED AND 6 UNDECIDED) t i 1. - VOTED TO PURSUE THE CONCEPT OF A STORM WATER UTILITY 2. - RESERVED THE RIGHT TO CONTINUE THE CURRENT FUNDING METHOD r i I STM903 2, 03-Sep-91 ` ' a. _s.rwal.:+N:! n,.~a i~\u a a k{dG~dH. 1 s.c s.y L'i1bi'wt 4p4'rl !1~ S?s:e.iY I ,I i STORM WATER UTILITY COMMITTEE PHASE II PHASE II THE MOST COMMITTEE SHOULD THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SAID SHALL PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD REGARDING FEASIBLE METHOD FOR ESTABLISHING SAID UTILITY r STATUS MET AUGUST 9 AND AUGUST 23 FROM 8 am TO 11 am, THE COMMITTEE MADE THE FOLLOWING PRELIMINARY UECISIONS_;_ I I 1. - RESIDENTIAL CHARGED AS SINGLE FAMILY UNITS FEE ASSESSED TO OCCUPANT IF PROPERTY VACANT, OWNER WILL BE ASSESSED THE FEE I s y b STM903 3,03-Sep-9i f~ e,p, u ...c as^..+nt-+..dNru,llnu;#r>frsL. riaa f.iita=~±,~w M i i V I STORM WATER UTILITY COMMITTEE I PHASE II STATUS : (cont) 2, - MOBILEHOMES CHARGED AS SINGLE FAMILY UNITS E UTILITIES - FEE ASSESSED TO THE INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBLE FOR WILL ONLY BE IF THE OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE UTILITIES, H i r,HARGED FOR THOSE LOTS OCCUPIED BY A MOBILE HOME i 3, - APARTMENTS -FEE WILL BE DETERMINED BY A FORMULA WHICH WILL INCLUDE THE NUMBER OF UNITS WITHIN THE COMPLEX AND THE IMPERVIOUS ACREAGE FEE FOR EACH COMPLEX WILL BE CALCULATED ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS , FEE ASSESSED TO THE OCCUPANT, IF THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE I UTILITIES - FEE ASSESSED TO OWNER, IF OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR UTILITIES, OWNER WILL HAVE A LIMITED LIABILITY REGARDING VACANCIES 1 I i ,gin... STM903 03-Sep-91 Y`j ~~E~. uL114. cn v .so.... tom.. ..A. T + TY„t~~TIXF[M S•'4 M°,!F •3lm ~NIC~'~N.DF . n. . t. STORM WATER UTILITY COMMITTEE 1 PHASE Ii CONTINUED ~ WE PLAN TO MEET ON SEPT 6 AND SEPT 20 TO ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING COMMERCIAL CHURCHES UNIVERSITIES DISD a' k CITY l COUNTY 1 STATE BUILDINGS ti i -Se 91 x STM903 4,03 ` A e 773$tb:s .}~aJ+~hrtT7 :,J a a ,u• >,ai, ua'.R'rx9 r.hiriFo-tzY•f' . a~.: t mot f`Y r' I STORM WATER UTILITY COMMITTEE POLICY ISSUES (OUTSTANDING i EXEMPTIONS - UNIVERSITIES AND SCHOOLS - CHURCHES - CITY / COUNTY 1 STATE BUILDINGS WHAT SHOULD THE FEES COVER: 1 - EXISTING OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND DEBT SERVICE - EXISTING ON & DS, PLUS EXTRA FOR NEEDED ADDITIONAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE AND PROJECT DEBT SERVICE - ANY ADDITIONAL AMOUNTSIFUNDS FOR WATER QUALITY ISSUES DENCES BE ASSESSED THE SAME MONTHLY RATE OR REST SHOULD ALL SHOULD WE HAVE 2 OR 3 TIERS BASED ON LOT SIZE ? - WHAT IS OWNER LIMITED LIABILITY REGARDING APARTMENTS VACANCIES ? WHAT ARE OTHER CITIES DOING ? STM903 5, 03-Se -91 w~M&= ~i t• '.Lr.SSn'U'St~4k6aa~ s`3r:rl.AxuYN!i~:1 Lf .I . f . L. I 3 U 1 1 DRAINAGE UTILITY COMPARISION CHART AUSTIN BEDFORD EULESS GARLANDS AFiLINQTON - _ - ~ _ ION , 000 189,000 45,000 4801000 POPULAT 253,000 AUG 1989 JUNE 1989 38AUG 1990 PROJECT STARTED 1982 SEPT 1991 JAN 1991 IMPLEMENTATION DAT OCT 1990 BY UNIT 8Y UNIT TIERED - - BY UNIT BY UNIT <7000 SO FT f RESIDENTIAL 7000--10,500 SO FT , PER WTR MTR PER UTILITY BILL > 10,500 SO FT _ - - BY UNIT BY UNIT UNIT BY BY UNIT MULTI FAMILY WHO BILLED OWNER OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OWNER OCCUPANT PER WTR MTR PER UTILITY BILL PER WTR MTR PER WTR MTR PER UTILITY. BILL , APARTMENT _COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL _ COMMERCIAL _ COMMERCIAL i WHICH RATE , COMMERC 1 IAL/STRIP pER W1'R MTR _ BY OCCUPANT__ _._BY OCCUPANT PER WTR M1'R BY OCCUPANT , BiL HOSPITAL YES YES YES YES YES HO I CHURCH YES YES YES YES YES I, SCHOOLS YES NO NO YES YES YES NO YES "YES - - GOVERNMENT NO - - NO USE - NO YES NO YES CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY NO UTILITY BILL OTHER NO CHARGE FEES t ~ V STM903 6,WK3, 03-Se -91 -z: d 2: Lt~~}`'.Fs S'F .t ~t!.31,b=7K~1 , h.h } II + :J4.:rY ..r>t.4+t • .,,ter. 4r, .,.r..: .t:•~,.ria, . ;:i4ir ?t/&,J.tt~s~r.~Fi +i+hP Y !~t~j'1~n ct•}n'':"1._ y!:( -i'Jf.[rrsr..tnc(:4 /.S. rr e A. e 1£/6AY-,"EJ I STORM WATER UTILITY COMMITTEE SUMMARY i { t WE HAVE TWO MEETINGS PLANNED FOR SEPTEMBER AND HOPE TO BE FINISHED WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. HOWEVER, EACH DECISION WE f MAKE MUST BE REVIEWED AGAINST PREVIOUS DECISIONS FOR CONSISTANCY AND FAIRNESS TO EACH ELEMENT OF THE CITY. STRONG DISCUSSION ON EACH ITEM COULD DELAY THE PROJECT, i _ i STM903 7 , 03-Se -91 .,,aw!'......•+,F,.,lgJasdaHi.iVriY.rasuL`t')f?z'Ni.FiF.4'vita.'.d:,d~?~:tdrC3nilttii`);A',Mfia::k1'dliiiRr,:kA+$xt'(~rril ~l~Y`t~p9t~.i'il`w6ih'drv;}nF.A«t 1 f