HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-22-1996 s
R
F
a
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET
October 22, 1996
...1
F
r
AGENDA Agenda No. q6 ~.Uy3
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item
October 22, 1996 Date
_J
Closed Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, October 22, 1996 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:
NOTE: THE CITY COUNCIL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO CLOSED
MEETING AT ANY TIME REGARDING ANY ITEM FOR WHICH IT IS LEGALLY
PERMISSIBLE.
5:15 p.m.
1. Closed Meeting:
A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.071
1. Consider settlement of GTE South wastIncorporated vs Citv of
Denton, et al.
B. Real Estate Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.072
C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec.
651.074
Special Called Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, October 22,
1996 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 215 E. McKinney, Denton,
Texas at which the following i+, n vill be considered:
6:00 p.m.
1. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the payment of the $79,461.98
judgement in City of Denton vs. John Karvouniaris.
2. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute on behalf
of the City of Denton a settlement agreement and release of all claims with GTE
Southwest Incorporated relating to the settlement of the cases styled GTE
Southwest Incorporated vs City of Denton, et al., and City of Rusk, et al. vs.
GTE Southwest. Inc. and the City of Denton. Texas at al complaint against
GTE Southwest Incorporated before the PUC.
Following the completion of the Special Celled Session, the Council will convene into
a Work Session to consider the following:
NOTE: A Work Session is used to explore matters of interest to one or more City
Council Members or the City Manager for the purpose of giving staff direction into
whether or not such matters should be placed on a future regular or special meeting
of the Council for citizen input, City Council deliberation and formal City action. At
a work session, the City Council generally receives informal and preliminary reports
and information from City staff, officials, members of City committees, and the
individual or organization proposing council action, if invited by City Council or City
7
i
City of Denton City Council Agenda
October 22, 1996
Page 2
Manager to participate in the session. Participation by individuals and members of
organizations invited to speak ceases when the Mayor announces the session is being
closed to public input. Although Work Sessions are public meetings, and citizens have
a legal right to attend, they are not public hearings, so citizens are not allowed to
participate in the session unless invited to do so by the Mayor. Any citizen may sup-
ply to the City Council, prior to the beginning of the session, a written report
' regarding the citizen's opinion on the matter being explored. Should the Council direct
the matter be placed on a regular meeting agenda, the staff will generally prepare a
final report defining the proposed action, which will be made available to all citizens
prior to the regular meeting at which citizen input is sought. The purpose of this
procedure is to allow citizens attending the regular meeting the opportunity to hear
the views of their fellow citizens without having to attend two meetings.
1. Receive and discuss an update from the Airport Advisory Board.
2. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding a curfew
ordinance in the City of Denton.
3. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding an update
on the infill policy.
4. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction with regard to the
proposed annexation of 11.40 acres located south of Robinson Road and east
of Nowlin Road. (A-74)
6. Receive a report and give staff direction regarding nomination(s) to the Denton
Central Appraisal District's Appraisal Review Board.
6. Hold a discussion regarding possible Council proicas for "Make A Difference
Day".
CERTIFICATE
1 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 , 1996 at
o'clock (a.m.! (p.m.)
CITY SECRETARY
S
v
F
City of Denton City Council Agenda
October 22, 1996
Page 3
NOTE: THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS IS ACCESSIBLE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH,rHE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. THE
CITY WILL PROVIDE SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOR THE
HEARING IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE
OF THE SCHEDULED MEETING. PLEASE CALL THE CITY SECRETARY'S
OFFICE AT 566.8309 OR USE TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR
THE DEAF JTDD) BY CALLING 1.800-RELAY-TX SO THAT A SIGN
LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED THROUGH THE CITY
SECRETARY'S OFFICE.
ACCO0345
i
S
F
`u
I
V
EAWPDDCS\oRD\RAAv"jARIS
#~1
ORDINANCE NO. -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT
OF THE $79,461.98 JUDGMENT IN CITY OF DENT ON V. J HN V IAR ;
AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I That the payment of seventy nine thousand four
hundred sixty-one dollars and ninety-eight cents ($79,461.98) in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the Judgment in the
case of S tv of Denton v John K rvouniaris is hereby authorized.
SECTION =Ir That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1996.
JACK MILLER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY
BY: &4k ,F~[,r
T
CITY OFDENTON TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING DENTON, TEXAS 76201 TELEPNON----- 66
Office of the City Secretary
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 18, 1996
' TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Jennifer Walters, City Secretary
SUBJECT: Special Called Agenda Item 12
The Legal Department is completing work on the settlement agreement
ordinance with GTE. A copy of the final ordinance will be placed
on your desks Tuesday evening.
n er ters
Ci Secr tarry
ACCOOOF4
I a
I
"Dedicated to Quatity ScrAce"
q
F
L
J:\MPDOCS\ ORDNaMSEITL. ORD
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF DENTON A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE
OF ALL CLAIMS WITH GTE SOUTHWEST INCORPORATED RELATING TO THE
SETTLEMENT OF THE CASES STYLED GTE SOUTHWEST INCORPORATED VS. CITY
OF DENTON, T AL.. AND CITY OF RUSK. ET AL. VS. GTE SOUTHWEST. INC.
AND THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS. ET AL., COMPLAINT AGAINST GTE
SOUTHWEST -INCORPORATED BEFORE THE PUC; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I. That the Mayor of the City of Denton is hereby
authorized to execute on behalf of the City of Denton a Settlement
Agreement and Release of all Claims with GTE Southwest Incorporated
relating to the settlement of the cases styled GTE SOUTHWEST
INCORPORATED VS. CITY OF DENTON, ET AL., and CITY OF RUSK. ET AL.
VS. GTE SOUTHWEST. INC. AND THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS. ET AL..
COMPLAINT AGAINST GTE SOUTHWEST INCORPORATE before the PUC, in
accordance with the attached Settlement Agreement, which is
incorporated herein and made a part hereof for all purposes. In
the absence of the Mayor, the Mayor Pro Tem is hereby authorized to
execute the attached settlement agreement.
SECTION II. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1996.
EULINE BROCK, MAYOR PRO TEM
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY
BY: J
S
v
s
F
CITYOFDENTON. TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING DENTON,TEXAS76201 TELEPHONE(a17)566-8307
Office of the City Manager
CITY CO:.NCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ted Benavides, City Manager
DATE: October 18, 1996
SUBJECT: Denton Municipal Airport
RECOMMENDATION:
None.
SUMMARY:
Rick Woolfolk, Chairman of the Airport Advisory Board, has asked
for an opportunity to brief the Council regarding the airport.
The Board meets on the second Wednesday of each month for the
purposes of reviewing and recommending approval of lease agreements
to Council, providing a public forum, and receiving information
from Staff concerning Airport activities.
BACKGROUND:
The Denton Municipal Airport resides on land purchased on the west
side of the City in September, 1943. Construction was completed
in 1947. The present site is a City owned, 640 acre facility
featuring a 6,000 foot runway and associated taxiways. It provides
aviation services to the entire community and uses range from
business and commercial (other than commuter/air carrier) to
instructional and recreational.
In addition to numerous lighting and navigational aids, the Airport
is the first facility west of the Mississippi to feature the Global
Positioning System (GPS). Also, an Automated Surface Observation
System (ASOS) was certified on July 261 1995 and provides pilots
with information about weather patterns in and around the Airport.
There are two flight based operator's (FBO's) at the Airport, Air
Denton and Fox 51. Both offer 24 hour fueling services and
sublease space to several aviation related businesses. There are
presently 22 tenants at the Airport and the two newest leasees are
Avionics International (relocated from Addison Airport) and Nebrig
& Associates (relocating from Dallas Love Field).
"Dedicated to Quality Servke"
b
r
f
A detailed Airport Master Plan was completed by Coffman Associates,
Inc., Airport consultants, in November, 1994. The plan was funded
in part by the City of Denton and the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA). Federal grant assistance from 1975 to 1994
totals approximately $4.7 million. The most recent airport
improvement program (AIP) grant totaled $1.475 million and was
responsible for the 1,000 foot runway extension.
Although the Airport Master Plan addresses the future uses of the
Airport, no formal strategic plan existed that tied future budget
requests and funding priorities to the master plan. Consequently,
Staff facilitated the development of a five year strategic plan.
The strategic plan allows the Airport Board and Staff to prioritize
development of infrastructure assistance to maximize funding
opportunities.
Staff believes that the Airport will continue to be a gateway to
the City of Denton and thereby stimulate economic development and
contribute to the overall quality of life.
PROGRAMS. DEPARTMENTS. OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Businesses, tenants, and citizens of Denton.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Revenues for last fiscal year exceeded projections due to fuel
flowage increases and new tenants. The addition of the 6,000 foot
runway has significantly contributed to the prospects for economic
development.
Please advise if additional information is needed.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Ted Benav des
City Manager
Prepared by:
d /
AJos,.~h~Vttugal
Porssant to the City Manager
T
C,
CITY OF DENTON
DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
OVERVIEW
ECONOMIC IMPACT
• Five Year Strategic Plan
• Fuel Flowage
• New Leases
• Antique Fly-In
• Texas International Raceway
• INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
• Lone Star Gas
• Paint City Owned T-Hangars
• New Entranceway Signage
• Terminal Building Enhancements
• Overlay Interior Roads
ISSUES
• Reliever vs. General Aviation
• State vs. Federal Funding
• Legislative Agenda
• Marketing/Public Relations
0 Intergovernmental Relations
r
F
DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD
FIVE YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN
MAJOR PROJECT/FAA FUNDING
I Ramp expansion
IA Helipad
_2 Land purchase north extension 1,500'
Terminal
_A Land acquisition for relocation of Masch Branch Road (entrance to Airport
consideration)
5 North 1,500' expansion
_ 6 West 2,00(Y to 5,000' runway to take slow and/or student traffic off primary runway
7_ Ramp extension on south end
Fencing of property
9_ Taxiway straightening
.10 North end and sound end fencing relocation (need to move to edge of hill for more clear
area)
CITY/ONE TIME ONLY
_I Fuel farm relocation
_ 2 _ Tower considerations
3_ Public parking
ANNUAL BUDGET PACKAGES
- Budget for continual preventive maintenance needs (runway striping, light main-
tenance, and other repairs and needs)
2 Upgrade appearance and overall aesthetics
3 _ Drainage problem on Mustang Road
4._ Improve entrance ways '
_5 Tractor with associated equipment.
_ 6 Address fire station opportunities
_L Address fire equipment opportunities
Address opportunities to build water retention ponds for eventual irrigation needs
V
1
F
i
Denton Municipal Airport Advisory Board
Five Year Strategic Plan
Page 2
STAFF SUPPORT FUNCTIONS
Business development on east side of field
_I Assistance to existing tenants
_I Keep a record of users of the airport, especially transients, FAA would like a survey
form developed (facilities used verses facilities needed)
_ I Marketing Opportunities:
• Contact Bruton Smith group to see if we can fill any aviation needs
• Work with Denton Chamber of Commerce on new marketing effort
• Work with Denton Visions groups to be included in marketing and planning
• Work with Denton County as they help business relocate or expand here
• Letters to users thanking them for using airport and inviting them to coma here rrote
often
• Work with existing tenants to see if they know r,ner business needing to relocate
(80% of future growth will come from exis#-.g tenants)
LRevenue Enhancement:
• Encourage all tenants to paint T- Han,- is
• Encourage all tenants to expand T•Hnngars
• Encourage all tenants to expand freight operaticns
• Encourage all tenants to build out lease space
_ I Increase visibility when any group has a major function utilizir.,, port facilities (e g.,
Antique Airplane Association, etc.)
._I Address the council in work sessions at least annually
. I Address community service clubs and groups frequently
_L_ Airport facility tours to elected officials within 90 days of their election, including when
the Denton Chamber hosts officials to town
_I Interact with NTCTOO and TxDOT on aviation matters
_.2.__ Host a meeting sponsored by FAA for regional airports
_2 _ Regional cooperation (DFW, Alliance, Meacham, Redbird, Grand Prairie, Arlington,
McKinney, Decatur, Gainesville)
._Z_ _ As military bases are closed, explore opportunities for any aviation related equipment:
• Portable fire extinguishers
• Asbestos fire lighting equipment (bunker coats, pants, gloves, etc.)
• Address tower equipment opportunities
3_ Through the fence operation
_ 3 Landing fee questions
_-3 _ Passenger service (between 4,500 and 10,000 passengers special category, 10,000 to
100,000 guaranteed $450,000 FAA money per year)
stratpin, rat
yL
Y
<00 75c aE,,
f f
CITY OF DEN TON, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF POLICE
Denton Police Department Memorandum
Date: 10118/96
To: Honorable Mayor Jack Miller and Councilmembers
CC: Ted Benavides, City Manager
From: Michael W. Jez, Executive Director of Public Safety
Subject- Juvenile Curfews
In July of this year you were provided with what I think was a rather comprehensive report regarding
juvenile curfews. The report concluded that some curfew enforcement programs appear to be effective in
reducing juvenile crime and victimization rates and are receiving a good deal of support from citizens.
However, I would caution against any kind of curfew legislation that was not accompanied by a
comprehensive, community based program as modeled in the seven cities profiled in the report. Further,
the actual legislation, if desired, should be modeled alter Dallas', since it has been upheld in Texas courts.
The critical component in juvenile curfew enforcement programs is an effective juvenile processing center
that allows police officers to rapidly return to the streets and applies a multidisciplinary approach to
processing thejuvenile after detention. Obviously, these kind of centers can not be made operational
without significant operational costs. However, curfew enforcement programs must operate in conjunction
with programs designed to assist youth and families to solve underlying individual or family problems if
we are to enhance positive youth development, prevent delinquency and reduce the victimization of
children. In short, lets do It right or not do It at all I
!f the council derides to more fonvand on some sort of rurfewlegislation ,1 would recommend shat a
multidisciplina?y laskforce be assembled to ensure that theplan is comprehensive andcommrnity based,
enlist both support and participation, draft the legislation based upon the Dallas Ordinance, and ensure
that the legislation does not unnecessarily remove police officers from the street.
Please let me know if 1 can be of further assistance to you on this important issue.
601 E. HICKORY STREET SUITE E DENTON, TEXAS 76205 I
DUTY OFFICER (817) 566.8181 FAX (817) 383.7968
r
r
F
x.
1
To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
From: Michael W. Jez, Executive Director of Public Safety
Re: Juvenile Curfews
Issue: Should the City of Denton enact Juvenile Curfew legislation?
Background: With juvenile crime on the rise in communities across the country, increasing numbers of
city and county jurisdictions are passing curfew ordinances, either independent of an overall anticrime and
community safety program or as one component of such a program. The Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention has seen a growing trend of these ordinances being accompanied by
comprehensive, community-based curfew enforcement programs that are receiving a good deal of support
from citizens.
This report provides an overview of the legal challenges to curfew and presents profiles of seven
jurisdictions with comprehensive curfew enforcement programs that both address the factors that place
these youth at risk for delinquency and victimization and promote the development of healthy behavior and
tries to examine the local issues. Comprehensive curfew enforcement programs often bring together the
law enforcement community and juvenile and family court judges with representatives from the social
services and the education, recreation, religious, and medical communities. This collaborative,
community-based approach to curfew enforcement has demonstrated thatjuvenile delinquency and
victimization can be decreased when communities work together to implement a comprehensive curfew
program.
I am pleased to provide you with this information on curfews, from the court challenges to the success
stories, and hope it will assist in your decision -making process on whether and how to use ajuvenile
curfew. I would, however, caution against anything short of a comprehensive, community-based approach.
Curfew: An Answer to Juvenile Delinquency and Victimization?
Traditionally, the determination of a minor's curfew has been considered to be a family issue, within
P determined by government. Nevertheless, public curfews have
parental purview, rather than a matter to be P
been enacted and enforced throughout the Nation's history in reaction to increased juvenile delinquency,
decreased parental supervision, and social trends. Recent increases in juvenile crime and victimization
have prompted local communities in many States to once again consider evening curfews (e.e , from I I
p.m. to 6 a.m. on school days and from midnight to 6 a.m. on non-school days) as a viable means to
enhance the safety of the community and its children. Although most curfew ordinances apply to juveniles
under 16 years of age, some include 16 and 17 year-olds.
In a recent study of curfew ordinances in the 200 largest U.S. cities (population of 100,000 or greater in
1992), Ruetle and Reynolds found a dramatic surge in curfew legislation during the first half of the
1990's. Of the 200 cities surveyed, 93 (47 percent) had curfews in effect on January 1, 1990. Between
2
,
F
i
°
January 1990 and the spring of 1995, an additional 53 of these 200 cities (27 percent) enacted juvenile
curfew ordinances, bringing the total of those with curfew laws to 146 (73 percent). During the same
period, 37 of the 93 cities with an existing curfew ordinance revised that legislation.'
Legal Challenges
The question of curfews has raised a variety of legal issues and divided numerous communities, as the
following sample of newspaper headlines illustrates: "The Trouble With Curfews," "Cities Deciding That
Its Time for Teen Curfews," "Curfew Needs to Be Stronger,"' Limiting Kids' Time on the Streets Elicits
Both Relief and Resentment," "Curfews: A Fad that Solve No Real Problems of Youth." J_Differences in
opinion have led individuals and civil rights organizations in many communities to challenge the legality of
juvenile curfew ordinances. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the most vocal opponent, has
challenged the constitutionality ofjuvenile curfew ordinances in jurisdictions across the country, either
directly or by providing assistance to individuals who wish to test such laws in court
Legal challenges to the constitutionality of curfew ordinances are most often based on the Ist, 4th, 5th, 9th
and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The first amendment guarantees the right to freedom of
speech, religion, and peaceful assembly. The forth amendment protects persons against unreasonable
searches and seizures and has been interpreted to include protection against unreasonable stopping and
detainment of individuals. The fifth amendment guarantees the citizens right to due process under the law.
The ninth amendment has been interpreted to include a right to privacy, including the right to family
autonomy .3 The 14th amendment protects persons against the deprivation of their liberty without due
process of law and includes the right to travel, which is embodied in the privileges and immunities clause.
In 1975, the first federal case concerning the constitutionality of juvenile curfews was heard by the U.S.
District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. In the Bykofsky v. Borough of Middletown, the
court upheld a juvenile curfew that was challenged on the grounds that it violated ajuvenile's 1st and 14th
amendment rights and encroached upon parents' rights to raise their children, which is embodied in the 9th
amendment and the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th amendment' In its opinion, the
court found that the regulations on juveniles' 14th amendment due process rights were "constitutionally
permissible." The court further declared that the curfew ordinance did not suppress or impermissibly
regulate juveniles' right to freedom of speech or parents' rights to raise their children as they saw fit. The
court stated, " The parents' constitutionally protected interest which the ordinance infringes only
minimally, is outweighed by the Borough's interest in protecting immature minors..."
Fourteen years later, in 1989, Simbi Waters challenged ajuvenile curfew ordinance in the District of
Columbia on the grounds that it violated her first, fourth, and fifth amendment rights s The U.S. District
Court for the District of Columbia, in Waters v. Barry, found the juvenile curfew law to be unconstitutional
on the grounds that it violated the first and fifth amendment rights of the juveniles in the District: "The
right to walk the streets or to meet publicly with one's friends for a noble purpose or no purpose at ail--and
to do so whenever one pleases is an integral component of lift in a free and ordered society. "7 However,
the court did not find that the curfew violated the fourth amendment rights of District juveniles: " So long
as the officer could reasonably have believed that the individual looked 'young,' the search, seizure, or
arrest would take place on the basis of probable cause and no fourth amendment violation would occur. Although the district court invalidated this particular curfew, in July
1995 the District of Columbia enacted
another juvenile curfew ordinance modeled after one enacted in Dallas, Texas, that had survived
constitutional scrutiny by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in 1995.9
The seminal issue of the State's authority to restrict the constitutional rights of minors is consistently raised
in juvenile curfew cases. In the Bykofsky case cited above, the court held that "the conduct of minors may
be constitutionally regulated t,) a greater extent dAn those of adults." 'O The U,S. Court of Appeals for the
3
a
Fifth Circuit, in upholding the Dallas curfew, applied the reasoning of the Supreme Court of the United
States in Hodgson v. Minnesota, which held that a parental notification requirement of the State's abortion
statute passed constitutional muster because States have"... a strong and legitimate interest in the welfare
of (their) young citizens, whose immaturity, inexperience, and lack of judgment may sometimes impair
their ability to exercise their rights wisely,'
The Strict Scrutiny Test
In order to pass constitutional muster, laws that impinge on fundamental constitutional rights must pass a
rwo-pronged strict scrutiny test that requires jurisdictions to (1) demonstrate that there is a compelling State
interest and (2) narrowly tailor the means to achieve the law's objective. The Dallas curfew p-wides an
excellent example of an ordinance that has been held by a Federal court to satisfy both prongs of the strict
scrutiny test.
The Dallas City Council adopted its curfew ordinance in 1991 after hearings that included testimony of
increased incidences of late-nightjuvenile violence. Challenged by the ACLU, Dallas' curfew ordinance
was upheld in 1997 by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Qutb v. Strauss." The Fifth
Circuit held that the Dallas curfew satisfied the strict scrutiny test because the city had demonstrated a
compelling State interest in reducing juvenile crime and victimization and because the ordinance was
properly aimed, that is, narrowly tailored to allow the city to meet its goals while respecting the rights
of the affected minors."" A subsequent appeal was refused by the Supreme Court of the United States
without comment in May 1994,14 However, this ruling neither guarantees protection from future
constitutional legal challenges to curfews in other circuits under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution or
State constitutions, nor forecloses challenges based on non-constitutional grounds.
Jurisdictions that seek to enact curfew laws may want to examine how Dallas laid the groundwork needed
to pass the strict scrutiny test. Data on juvenile crime and victimization helped meet the compelling State
interest test. The city provided the following statistical information:'s
a Juvenile delinquency increases proportionally with age between the ages of 10 and 16years.
a In 1989, Dallas recorded S. 160 juvenile arrests, and in 1990, there were 3, 413 juvenile arrests,
including 40 murders, 91 sex offenses, 133 robberies, and 230 aggravated assaults, From January
through April 1991, juveniles were arrested for 11 murders, 30 sex offences, 128 robberies. 107
aggravated assaults, and an additional 1,041 crimes against property,
a The most likely time for the occurrence of murders by juveniles was between 10 p.m, and I a. m.; the
most likely place was in apartments and apartmentparking lots and on streets and highways.
a Aggravated assaults byjuveniles were most likely to occur between 11 p.m. and 1 o.m,
a Rapes were most likely to occur between I a.m, and 3 a.m., and 16percent of rapes occurred on
public streets and highways.
a Thirry one percent of robberies occurred on public streets and highways.
The court relied on these data in holding that the City of Dallas provided sufficient evidence to establish
that the ordinance was in keeping with the State's compelling interest in reducing juvenile crime and
victimization. (See attachments for a distribution ofjuvenile offender and victimization rates of the City of
Denton).
4
a
!4
I
Second, the Dallas legislation was narrowly tailored to address the specific needs enumerated by the
jurisdiction by the least restrictive means possible. The Dallas curfew was applied to youth under the age
of seventeen and in effect from I I p.m. through 6 a.m. Sunday through Thursday and from midnight to 6
a.m. Friday and Saturday. The statute exempted juveniles who were:
• Accompanied by an adult.
• Engaged in activities related to interstate commerce or protected by the first amendment.
Traveling to or from %ark
• Responding to an emergency.
• Married,
• Attending a supervised school, religious, or recreational activity.
The Fifth Circuit found in Qutb v. Strauss, that the exemptions under the Dallas ordinance, which
permitted juveniles to exercise their fundamental rights and remain in public, demonstrated that the
ordinance was narrowly tailored to meet the city's legitimate objectives.
Other challenges to juvenile curfews have been based on the concept of vagueness and overbreadth. A
statute is void for vagueness if it is too general and its standards result in erratic and arbitrary
application based on individual impressions and personal predilections."'' A statute that broadly restricts
fundamental liberties when less restrictive means are available may be void on the grounds ofoverbreadth.
Therefore, when constructing juvenile curfew ordinances, in addition to considering constitutional issues
that involve fundamental rights, jurisdictions should ensure the legislation is both precise in its language
and limited to necessary restrictions.
In addition to constitutional and structural challenges tojuvenile curfews, jurisdictions enacting curfew
laws should also bear in mind the core requirement of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
(JJDP) Act of 1974 as amended, which addresses the deiristirutionalization of status offender and non-
offenderjuveniles(DSO).'' In general, this JJDP Act core requirement prohibits a status offender (i.e, , a
juvenile who has committed an offense that would not be a crime if committed by an adult, such as truancy
or curfew violations) or non-offender( i.e. , a dependent or neglected child) from being held in secure
detention or confinement. However, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP)
regulations allow for detentions for brief periods in ajuvenile detention facility--not to exceed twenty-four
hours exclusive of weekends and holidays-necessary for pre- or posicourt appearance, processing, release
to a parent or guardian, or transfer to court or a non-secure facility. The statute also makes exceptions that
allow detention or confinement of status offenders who violate a valid court order or who violate State law
provisions prohibiting the possession of a handgun. Status and nonoffender juveniles cannot be detained or
confined in an adult jail of lockup. To comply with the DSO core requirement of the JJDP Act Formula
Grants Program and to reduce the burden on police Dallas, and many other cities, have established
comprehensive, community-based curfew programs that provide local sites, such as community and
recreation centers, where police officers can bring curfew violators for temporary detention pending
released to their parents are other appropriate disposition. These sites provide an atmosphere conducive to
investigation, processing, prerelease counseling, and planning for appropriate follow-up services,
5
;
1
4
1
Representative Curfew Programs
Local governments have enacted juvenile curfews pursuant to their general police powers or State Statutes
specifically authorizing such ordinances. The seven cities whose curfew programs are discussed below
enacted their ordinances pursuant to specific authorizing State legislation.
Law enforcement professionals generally view a curfew ordinance as an effective means to combat late
evening crime. However, curfews are also intended to protect youth from becoming victims of crime, The
curfew ordinances described below were enacted in the context of a comprehensive, communiry•based
program designed to protect both the community and the juvenile from victimization and to serve as a
constructive intervention against developing patterns of delinquency.
Each of thejurisdictions described below collected statistical data on juvenile crime and victimization prior
to passing a curfew ordinance. This activity also laid a foundation for formulating a curfew ordinance that
addressed the jurisdiction's unique juvenile crime and victimization problems. Although juvenile crime is
not restricted to evening hours, the data analysis done by these cities demonstrated that their rates of
juvenile crime and victimization were serious enough to warrant a carefully crafted evening curfew
program.
Each of these seven cities has its own unique and innovative approach to addressing the problem of
juvenile crime and victimization through a curfew ordinance. The approaches demonstrate a range of
community partnerships and nonpunitive strategies designed to promote early intervention to prevent the
development of delinquent behavior and to address the issue of parental responsibility, discipline and
family dysfunction. The strategies have been credited with helping to prevent juvenile crime and
victimization and repeated curfew violations while providing protection and safety to the community.
White the comprehensive, community-based curfew programs implemented by the seven cities employ a
variety of strategies, each program includes one or more of the following common elements:
• Creation of a dedicated curfew center or use of recreation centers and churches to receive juveniles
who have been picked up by the police for violating curfew.
4
1
• Staff:ngofcurfewcenters with social service professionals andcommuniryvolunteers,
• Intervention, In the form of referrals to social service providers and counseling classes, for the
juveniles and theirfamilies.
• Proceduresfor repeat offenders, including fines, counseling, or sentences to community service.
Recreation and job programs.
• Antidrug and andgang programs.
• Hotlines for follow-up services and cwis intervention.
The cornerstone of each of the seven programs is creative community involvement that works to transform
the juvenile curfew from a reactive, punitive response to a proactive intervention against the root cause of
juvenile delinquency and victimization.
A summary of the statutory provisions relating to curfews in U.S. cities with a population of more than
100,000 can be found in the Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistic-,— 1994, published by the Bureau of
Justice Statistics.
's
6
S
F
,
Dallas, Texas
In developing a curfew for Dallas, government officials and the police department worked together to
create an appropriate and effective curfew program. The curfew which went into effect on May I, 1994,
applies to all youth under the age of seventeen, Prior to the effective date of the ordinance, the Dallas
Police Department engaged in a media campaign to promote curfew awareness. The multicomponent
campaign included public service announcements on radio, posters in English and Spanish that were
distributed at recreation centers and schools, and a well covered press conference. Also, one week before
the curfew took effect, warning fliers were handed out by police officers to youth in public during the
hours of the curfew. `9
When Dallas police apprehend juvenile curfew violators, they may give them a verbal warning, take them
home, issue a ticket with a fine as high as 5500.00, or take them into custody. In cases of repeated curfew
violations, a child's parents may be fined up to 5500.00. Business establishments may be cited for
allowing minors to remain on their premises after curfew hours. In addition to these enforcement
mechanisms, the Dallas curfew program features comprehensive youth programs that address juvenile
crime and victimization. including Law Enforcement Explorers, a School Liaison Unit, Law Enforcement
Teaching Students, supeq ised midnight basketball(with a curfew exception on tournament nights), and a
Police Athletic League:
During the first three months of the curfew implementation, warnings and citations were issued to curfew
offenders, and eight tickets were written to adults for permitting curfew violations. No arrests were made
for curfew violations, but 15 juveniles were arrested and taken into custody on other charges. The Dallas
Police Department conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of thejuvenile curfew after three months
of enforcement. The Department found that juvenile victimization during curfew hours dropped 17,7
percent, from 1,950 during the period from May to July 1993, to 1,604 during the same period in 1994.
Further, juvenile arrests during curfew hours decreased 14.6 percent, from 294 during the period from May
to July 1993, to 251 during the same period during 1994. These initial statistics indicate that the efforts of
the Dallas Curfew Enforcement Program have reduced juvenile crime and victimization x
Phoenix, Arizona
In Phoenix, a multifaceted approach has been developed to implement the city's curfew ordinance. A
review of the city's original curfew legislation, enacted in 1968, found it ambiguous and unenforceable.
New legislation was enacted in 1992, and a new partnership was established between the Police
Department and the Department of Parks, Recreation and Libraries (PPL).u The curfew ordinance is
designed to impact crimes in which the suspect, victim, or both is a juvenile.
PRL allows the Phoenix Police Department to use four of the city's recreation centers as reception centers
for juvenile curfew violators. Once paperwork is processed by police officers, thejuveniles are supervised
by recreation specialists until their parents arrive. The administrative requirements for police officers are
kept to a minimum in order to allow officers to return sooner to patrol duties.
When a curfew violation is charged, the juvenile and the parents have an option of attending a diversion
program that includes classes in parenting, interpersonal communications, conflict resolution training, and
community service. When the police department receives notification that the juvenile and parents have
completed the program, the charge is dismissed. If the diversion program is not completed, a petition is
filed injuvenile court, where the outcomes can include a fine for thejuvenile, counseling for both the
juvenile and the family, and community service. A parental responsibility provision in the curfew law
could also result in a fine to the parents.
7
t
j ~
(r~
~i
PRL personnel conduct prediversion follow-up contacts with the curfew violators and their families to
determine if additional referrals to other agencies, such as health and social services, are needed. These
follow-up procedures have been favorably received by the community.
Twenty-one percent of Phoenix's curfew violators are gang members.'t The curfew ordinance provides the
police with a legal basis to separate minors from gangs, at least temporarily. Gang members are taken to
the reception facility, where they receive special counseling and exposure to positive alternatives to gang
affiliation. The Phoenix Police Department reports statistics that bear out the fact that the curfew appears
to be working. A comparison made since the citywide implementation of the curfew program in May 1993
showed a 10 percent decrease in juvenile arrests for violent crimes (homicide, sexual assault robbery,
aggravated assault) during the 1 l month period from June 1993 through April 1994 as compared with the
period June 1992 through April 1993."
Community leaders and parents strongly support the curfew ordinance because of its comprehensive,
community-based character. According to the Phoenix Police Department, the ordinance is an effective
component of Phoenix's citywide crime prevention and reduction program. In addition to the curfew
enforcement program, Phoenix has strengthened its commitment to crime prevention and reduction through
community policing, newly enacted weapons laws, and police led programs in elementary andjunior high
schools.
Examples of these programs include Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE), Gang Recognition and
Education Training (GREAT) both supported by Federal grants. The Police Department's Cease Violence
Program-- a unique partnership with other agencies, the private sector and various elementary, junior and
senior high schools--employs traditional and nontraditional methods to address the crime problem. This
program produced a video on gang and teen pressures entitled "Wake Up" geared to youth 7 to 17 years of
r age. Another Police Department program, Project Interact, seeks to promote better relationships between
at risk youth and the department. In monthly 90 minute workshops, patrol officers meet with the youth to
share information and ideas, with the goal of establishing a code of conduct for both offrccrs and youth.
The program is facilitated by a police supervisor; students attend at a ratio of two students to one offcer.'6
Chicago, Illinois
Chicago passed its first curfew ordinance in July 1948. It has been amended several times, most recently in
June 1992. in April 1993, the Chicago Police Department initiated the Chicago Alternative Police Strategy
(CAPS) program. CAPS is a community policing initiative that started in 5 of Chicago's police districts
and is now operating in all 20. In 1994 the Chicago Police Department's Bureau of Investigative Services
supported an experimental research project, "Operation Timeout," a summer curfew project under the
direction and management of a 20 member Youth Division Strike Force. The Fourth Police District CAPS
site aggressively implemented Operation Timeout by getting community support for sending curfew
enforcement teams of officers from the Department's School Patrol Unit into targeted areas within the
fourth district with a single mission: to enforce the city's curfew ordinance vigorously.'
The Operation Timeout curfew enforcement program is designed to reduce juvenile crime and
victimization and to foster communication between the Patrol Division, the Youth Division, and the
commur.4y. To support the program, the Chicago Police Department's Neighborhood Relations sergeants
work with communities to prevent curfew violations. When special events are held, for example, they
encourage sponsoring organizations to comply with curfew hours when developing the event schedule.
The city advocates a "no-tolerance" policy for curfew violators through aggressive enforcement and the
required involvement of a parent or guardian when a juvenile is picked up for a curfew violation. The
specialized curfew enforcement teams utilize "Care-O-Vans" to pick up curfew violators. Teams using the
8
Sµ
V
L
r•
i
vans process all curfew violators in the district on a given evening, including those picked by beat
lip
officers. This approach reduces the down time of beat patrol officers, who can turn over the e curfew
violators to the team shortly after they are apprehended and can return immediately to beat patrol duty.
First time offenders are returned to their homes, and a parent orguardian is issued a warning notice.
Parents or guardians of a first time offender may also be charged with "contributing to the delinquency of a
minor" if it is determined that they "....,.willfully or knowingly permitted, caused, aided, abetted, or
encouraged the child to commit a violation of this or any ordinance" and fined 3200 to $500.
Repeat offenders are taken to the Chicago Police Department's Fourth District Station. Parents are
required to pick up their child, are issued a nontraffic citation for the ordinance violation, and are required
to appear in court to answer the complaint. Children whose parents are working, cannot be reached, orare
I unwilling to pick up their children are returned home by district personnel. A follow-up investigation is
conducted when the officer is unable to locate the parent at the time of the curfew violation, and the parent
is issued a citation. Parents who refuse to appear in court or refuse to pay a fine may have ajudgment
entered against them. For the parents of repeat curfew violators, special assistance, such as parenting
classes andjoint counseling sessions may be provided. In addition, parents of" children requiring
authoritative intervention" under State law may be given court appointed assistance.
The Fourth District reports that a comparison of data from 1993 to 1994 demonstrated a decrease in the
number of serious juvenile crimes reported. The most notable decreases were in burglaries ( from 304 in
1993 to 269 in 1994), vehicle theft (from 255 in 1993 to 177 in 1994), and theft (from 522 in 1993 to 177
in 1994)• Operation Timeout appears to be an effective curfew initiative, and community support for its
continuation remains high. As a result of the success of the Fourth District program, four additional police
districts have been added to Operation Timeout. All 20 police districts are expected to become pan of
Operation Timeout in the near future.
New Orleans, Loufslana
Based on an assessment of juvenile delinquency in New Orleans, a comprehensive and collaborative
prevention strategy was initiated by Mayor Marc Morial. A dusk to dawn curfew ordinance was part of the
Mortal Administrative Crime Initiative (MACI) that began in May 1994. To manage and implement the
curfew program the city opened the Central Curfew Center (CCC), which is staffed with trained
professionals from government agencies and the religious and medical communities. The sheriff's office
assigned 30 deputies and several other staff to the CCC and provided 15 two man units to patrol the streets.
Each night the New Orleans Police Department has more than 30 police officers on the streets and 5 to 6
officers from the Juvenile Bureau on site at the CCC. A local group of ministers, All Congregations
Together, has several ministers at CCC each night to counsel juveniles and their parents orguardfans on the \
ramifications of the curfew violation. Also on duty at the center to provide counseling are staff from the
Louisiana State University Medical Center's Department of Psychiatry and from the City of New Orleans
Truancy Center. In addition, a 24 hour curfew hotline has been set up to respond to questions about the
curfew policy and its enforcement.t'
Curfew violators brought to the CCC are screened by counselors, and their parents or guardians are
contacted. Parents are required to pickup their children at the center and to participate in counseling
sessions with trained volunteers. Parents of repeat offenders are issued a court summons and nsk being
fined for failure to keep their children from violating the curfew. These steps are designed to help promote
and support dialog between parent and child, establish parental accountability, and set new ground rules
within the home.
Summer youth progr2uns are a key component of MACE. A 3500,000 city funding reallocation was
provided to the New Orleans Recreation Department (NORD) to increase summer programs such as
evening swimming and volleyball. The number of NORD summer camps increased from f7 to 41, serving
9
d
r~
F
r
more than 100,000 youth. The number of swimming pools increased from 4 to 14. Additionally, the city
created 1,300 new summer jobs for youth under a local public-private partnership and also received S1.8
million in Federal funding from AmeriCorp's Youth Action Corps to provide year round employment for
youth in local education, parks, and recreation programs.''
The combiiation of curfew, the summerjobs program, and the revitalization of recreation programs
resulted in a 27 percent reduction injuvenile crime during curfew hours in 1994, compared with the
previous year.New Orleans Sheriff Charles Foti calls the curfew program a coordinated effort, of
unprecedented proportions„ between public and private agencies across the City, to a unified end-- to
reduce crime and protect the young people of this City" and reports the Program has earned the
unqualified support of the New Orleans Community,"
Denver, Colorado
During the summer of 1993, a group of 2,500 citizens in Denver met in a Safe City Summit to discuss their
concems about youth crime, violence and safety. Their recommendations included establishing a program
to authorize police to take youth in violation of Denver's amended curfew law to a safe place and
increasing parental involvement with and responsibility for children under the age of 18. Mayor
Wellington E. Webb responded to the citizens' recommendation with a 10 point Safe City Plan, one
component of which is the SafeNite After Curfew (SafeNite) program, developed in collaboration with
community groups, parents, police, recreation and social services staff. SafeNite, which was launched in
July 1994, provides a safe place--either a recreation center or a church-- where youth found on the streets
during curfew hours are taken by the police to wait for a parent or guardian"
Youth taken to SafeNite locations are processed and served a citation from police officers onsite. SafeNite
staff contact the youth's parents or guardians to pick them up. The parent may also receive a ticket, at
police discretion. The youth and parent are seen onsite by a professional counselor who helps address
family issues and obtain social services if needed. Counseling services are also available on a variety of
issues, as are workshops on conflict resolution and interpersonal skills.
On nights when SafeNite sites are not in operation, curfew counselors in the municipal courtroom
interview and offer diversion to the ticket youth and their families. Currently, SafeNite locations are open
Friday through Sunday. However, the program is flexible, and the days of operation may be changed to
respond to shifting patterns of youth activiry. For example, when youth began to gather "en masse" on
nights when the SafeNite center was closed, the center's operating schedule was altered to reflect this
change.
The Denver curfew program enjoys a collaborative partnership with 234 community programs to which
children and their families are diverted. Of these programs, 80 percent are at no cost to SafeNite or the
client. (The program leverages community service providers by providing referrals and data to assist them
in grant procurement)" Through this collaboration, the curfew program has become a revolving door of
information, linking "demand" with "supply" by identifying citizens' needs, noting gaps in service for
identified problems, and connecting citizens with existing resources.
As indicated above, youth and parents are given the option of participating in appropriate diversion
programs rather than going to court. If they successfully complete the program, the case is dismissed.
Youth and parents who do not elect to participate in or complete a diversion program go to court and may
be required to pay a fine or complete court ordered community service. Repeat curfew violators and'or
their parents are dealt with on a case by case basis, and incremental sanctions apply. These sanctions may
include a court appearance with assessed fines, community service or a more intense diversion program or
probation status. ;
10
r
r
I
Denver officials credit the SafeNite program with fostering a more consistent enforcement of the city's
curfew ordinance and with providing a secure and safe environment forcurfew violators until they are
reunited with their families. The only time required of the police officer is the time needed to drive to and
from the SafeNite site. The enforcement of SafeNite is credited with helping to deter graffiti, vandalism,
car theft, and more violent crimes while decreasing juvenile victimization, increasing parental involvement,
and assisting families.
Initial statistics on SafeNite from the Denver Police Department for the period from July 1994 through
December 1995 are encouraging: More than 168 cases were dismissed per month, alleviating court
congestion; 61 percent of the 4,676 youth served by the program and their families have completed or are
in the process of completing diversion, and the recidivism rate is down to 7 percent from 56 percent at the
start of the program. The law enforcement community also believes SafeNite has contributed significantly
to the I I percent drop in serious crime during each of the first two years of curfew implementation.
Specifically, the category of motor vehicle theft, which is often a juvenile crime, 17 percent in 1194 and 23
percent in 1995. Plans are under way to apply the SafeNite diversion model tojuveniles who commit such
offenses as shoplifting, petty theft, and giving false information."
North Little Rock, Arkansas
In North Little Rock, community life was adversely affected in the late 1980's by organized juvenile gangs
that trafficked in drugs and whose members carried high-powered weapons on city street comers. In 1991,
the local police department, Neighborhood Watch groups, elected officials, and city administrators joined
together to organize a collaborative response to increased serious crime in general, and juvenile crime and
victimization in particular. One of their first proposals was to establish a curfew law. With strong support
from dozens of neighborhood organizations, the city council passed a curfew ordinance in July 1991. In
creating a practical and effective curfew ordinance, particular attention was given to two important issues:
increasing parental supervision of children and keeping the police process simple.rr
The North Little Rock Police Department recognized that its limited resources required a curfew process
that was straightforward and simple as possible. A concentrated effort was made to simplify the extensive
reporting requirements for a juvenile arrest by creating a I page forth for a curfew violation that required
the officer to complete just 10 items of information. When ajuvenile is picked up for a curfew violation,
he or she is taken to police headquarters and turned over to a juvenile officer. Thejuvenile is detained in a
nonsecure area of the police department designated for curfew violators while arrangements are made with
a parent or guardian to return thejuvenile home following a review of the curfew ordinance and the
circumstarces of the violation with the parent or guardian and the child. The North Little Rock ordinance
provides that a juvenile's second curfew violation can result in charges against the parents. Generally, a
fine is imposed but suspended for 1 year and dismissed if no further curfew violations occur. After three
curfew violations, a referral to the State's Department of Human Services for consideration of a juvenile in
need of supervision petition is required. However, such referrals have been necessary in only a few cases.
Keeping curfew enforcement and processing simple has kept police support high. The North Little Rock
curfew ordinance is a key element in a multifaceted set of solutions.that are a part of North Little Rock's
overall community policing plan. With the cooperation of city administrators, the police department was
able to increase its personnel to provide additional officers in schools, facilitating the development of joint
programs by the police department and the school district. Programs include a school resource officer
program to reduce in school conflicts, school crime, truancy, and dropping out, and introduction of the
DARE program for students in kindergarten through sixth grade. The local school district also created an
alternative school to provide a place to which juveniles who are truant or suspended for disruptive behavior
could be brought rather than being sent home.
11
F
is
With the support from 10 corporate sponsors, Nortis Linle Rock also instituted a midnight basketball
program to provide at-risk youth with an alternative to being on the street This program, which serves
boys and girls ages 12.18, combines athletic activity with academic tutoring, mentoring, and an
employment orientation program that covers the importance of a good work ethic, how to complete a job
application, and the development ofjob interview skills. The program is held at the local recreation
facility, Sherman Park, on Friday and Saturday evenings from 8 p.m. to midnight. Participants are
instructed to return directly home because the curfew goes into effect at midnight. On tournament nights,
the program runs until I a.m., with a I hour exception made to the curfew. Periodic follow-up checks with
the recreation and police departments have indicated that participants are adhering to the program
guidelines.
To monitor the impact of the comprehensive curfew enfc; :ement program, the North Little Rock Police
Department completes daily reports that track the location of curfew apprehensions, along with statistical
information on age, sex, and race. Statistics from 1992, the first full yearof curfew enforcement, showed
a significant reduction in crimes against persons. Compared with 1991, the city experienced an average 12
percent reduction in the categories of homicide, rape robbery and assault and a 10 percent reduction in
burglaries. 6 Local law enforcement officials attribute these crime reductions in great measure to the
curfew enforcement program. Based on these initial results, other jurisdictions in Arkansas have begun
similar curfew enforcement programs.
s
Jacksonville, Florida
In response to high rates of juvenile crime and victimization, the City of Jacksonville instituted ajuvenile
curfew ordinance in April 1995, giving police officers the auth)nry to stop and question suspected curfew
violators.
When a juvenile is stopped on suspicion of curfew violation, the officer first determines whether he or she
falls under a curfew exemption. Ajuvenile who is found to be in violation of the curfew may either be
taken home by the officer or brought to the Juvenile Assessment Centar (JAC), at the discretion of the
officer. While each of the cities described in this report provides a range of services to curfew violators,
Jacksonville is one of the few cities with a centralized intake and assessment facility forjuvenile offenders,
including juvenile curfew violators."
JAC is a centralized, multiagency facility with multidisciplinary staffing. By coordinating law enforcement
and social, educational, and mental health services at one location, JAC provides juveniles and their
families with easy access to a comprehensive range of services. By providing acces4 to needed services at
the earliest possible time, JAC hopes to provide early intervention that will avert a pattern of at-risk and
delinquent behavior.
Curfew violators that are brought to JAC are also screened to determine if they have committed additional
violations that require court review. Those who have are moved to the secure section of the facility for
further screening and assessment. Curfew violators are held in the nonsecure section of JAC and screened
to determine whether they are experiencing problems relating to drug and alcohol abuse, mental health, or
family dynamics, Parents are then contacted to pickup their child. If the home situation appears too
volatile and unsafe for the child, a temporary housing arrangement is secured until a further evaluation is
completed. Depending on the nature of the services warranted, either a letter is presented to the parents
recommending follow-up services, which they can accept or reject on a voluntary basis, or a court referral
is made for a "family in need of services." Services available include counseling, parenting training,
treatment for drug and alcohol abuse, treatment for mental illness, and training in family dynamics and
interpersonal communication skills. Repeat offenders are also taken to JAC to be screened to determine
what services may be provided the youth and their families to help address the situation.
12
3
S
F
r
Florida State law allows local jurisdictions to assess both the parent and the child a $50 fine for a curfew
violation. However, Jacksonville's curfew ordinance did not adopt this portion of the State statute, and
fines for curfew violations are not levied.
In support of the curfew ordinance, the Jacksonville Police Department the Duval County Parks,
Recreation and Entertainment Department, and the Duval County School Board provide a range of
community based delinquency prevention programs. One innovative program supported by all three
organizations is the combined Safe, Accessible, Flexible Enrichment and Teaching for
Educational Achievement through Math and Science (SAFE/TEAMS) program. This multi-agency
program includes teachers, recreation specialists, and school resource officers. These officers provide
guidance, counseling, mentoring, and overall program security. The SAFE/TEAMS program is available 2
hours each school day and on Saturday mornings for children in Duval County's 23 middle schools. It
provides juveniles a place to receive tutoring on school work, with an emphasis on math and science, and
an opportunity to participate in arts and crafts, horseback riding, field trips, clubs, recreation, and athletics.
It is too early to determine the impact of Jacksonville's comprehensive curfew program. However,
community support has been strong, and State Attorney Harry L. Shortstein has expressed his office's
support, stating that "The curfew program is viewed as one component of a comprehensive crime
prevention program that can help fightjuveniie delinquency and protect our youth from victimization. rt
Summary
The initial evidence offered by the seven communities profiled in this report is that community-based
curfew programs that offer a range of services are more easily and effectively enforced, enjoy community
support, and provide a greater benefit in preventing juvenile delinquency and victimization.
Communities that develop and implement comorehenilve, community-based curfew ordinances in
conjunction with programs designed to assist youth and families to solve underlying individual or family
problems have an opportunity to enhance positive youth development, prevent delinquency and reduce the
victimization of children.
So the question remains, is an curfew the answer to juvenile delinquency and victimization in
Denton, Texas.
I would encourage each of you to examine the data regarding juvenile crime and victimization in Denton
that has been provided with this report It appears that curbing youth activity between the hours of 1 I p.m.
and 6 a.m. might have a positive effect However, I would caution against any kind of curfew that was
not aceompanled by a comprehensive, community based program as modeled In the seven cities
prorded.
If the council decides to move forward with some son of curfew legislation. I would recommend that a
multidisciplinary task force be assembled to ensure that the plan is comprehensive and community based,
enlist both support and participation, draft the legislation and ensur: that the legislation does not
unnecessarily remove police officers from the street
IRueae, W,, and Reynolds, K.M. (In Press). "Keep Them at Home: Juvenile Curfew Ordinances in 200
American Cities." American Journal :.`Police.
t Hood, J. (May 28, 199I), "The Trouble W;th Curfews," The (San Francisco) Daily Journal. Potck, M.
(June 6, 1994). "Cities Deciding That It's Time for Teen Curfews," USA Today. "Curfew Not A Good
Idea"(July 6, 1994). Sentinel 6t Enterprise. Kane, T. (July 14, 1994). "Curfew Needs to be Stronger,"
The Leominster (Massachusetu)Times, "Limiting Kids' Time or the Streets Elicits Both Relief and
13
c
Y
{
Resentment," (August 20, 1994). Dallas Morning News. "Curfews: A Fad that Solve No Real Problems of
Youth." Editorial, Denton Record Chronicle, (June 9, 1996).
See Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510(1925); Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972).
Bykofsky v. Middletown, 401 F. Supp. 1125 (1975).
► 6 Id. At 1264.
° Watersv. Barry, 711 F. Supp. 1125 (1989).
' Id. At 1134.
° Id. At 1138.
° See Qutb V. Bartlett. I l F. 3rd 494 (5th Circuit, 1993)
t 10 Bykofsky, 401 F. Supp. 1242,1254 (1975)
11 Qutb v. Bartlett, 11 F.3rd.488, 492 (5th Cir.1993) citing Hodgson v. Minnesota,497 U,S, 417,444
(2 990)
Qutb v. Strauss, 11 F. 3rd. 489 (5th Cir„ 1993).
id. At 494.
" Qutb v. Bartlett, 114 S. CL 2134 (1994).
15 Qutb v. Strauss, I IF.3rd 488, 494 (5th Cir. 1993).
`6 Bykofsky v. Middletown, 401 F. Supp. 1242, 1249 (1975) citing Interstate Circuit v. Dallas, 390 U,S. at
684.685.
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, as amended ( Public Law 93415), Section
223 (a) (12) (A). NCI 036136.
° Maguire, K., and Pastore, A.L. (Editors). (1995) Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics (1199154591.
Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Washington, D.C.: USGPO, pp 124-129. r° Click, S.R. (1994). "Statistics in Dallas Encouraging." The Police Chief 61(12);
33-36.
Youth Programs for the Dallas Police Department, 1995 (Brochure)
Click, BR., "Statistics in Dallas Are Encouraimg," p.36
"Garrett, D.A., and Brewster, D. (1994). "Curfew: A New Look at an Old Tool." The Police Chief 61(12)
:29.33.
n Ibid., pp.31.33.
Garret, DA,, (June 15, 1994). "Comprehensive Review of the Citywide Juvenile Curfew Program."
Phoenix, AZ: City Council Report, p.2.
ib Cherrick, J. (June 1996) Phoenix Police Department Personal Communication.
'6 Bartik, R.M., Commander, Youth Division, Bureau of Investigative Services, Chicago Police
Department (June 1996) Personal Communications.
" Wilson, P. (October 12, 1994). "Visit to Curfew Center Reveals Value of Program." The (New Orleans)
Times Picayune, p. B-7.
i1 Morial, M.H. (January 30, 1995). "Our Juvenile Curfew is Working." The Washington Post
`s Moria), M.H. (June 2, 1995).., Mayor Morial Reports Juvenile Crime Down on Anniversary of
Curfew" New Orleans, LA: Office of the Mayor (press release)
w Foti, C.C., Jr. (Summer 1994). "Juvenile Curfew Center Operational." The Louisiana Sheriff, 7(l):8.
n Safe City Initiative. (1994) Denver, CO.: Office of the Mayor (Fact sheet)
t' Barnett, M.C. (January I5, 1996). "SafeNite After Curfew Quarterly/Cumulative Report and Statistical
Composite Addendum." Denver, CO: SafeNite Program, p.8.
u SafeNite After Curfew. Denver, CO: Office of the Mayor
t" Browne, S. (September 6, 1995) "Safety Effectiveness fc foSa edNim)Curfew Program." Safety Office of
Policy Analysis, Denver Police Department, pp
s° Nolan, W. P., (1994). "Innovative Curfew Enforcement" The Police Chief 61(12) : 59-61.
14
T
va+.g
1
4
36 " .61.
Nolan, W.P. "Innovative Curfew Enforcement.P
37 Shorstein„ H.L. (June 13, 1995). "Statement on Juvenile Justice." Jacksonville, FL: State Attorney's
Office. _
st Ibid., p3
z
i
,
1
15
i
A
F
t
JUVENILE OFFENDERS - (all times)
1996 1996
1992 1993 1994 1995 Estimate thru May
Assault 34 66 69 60 55 23
Burglary 40 22 24 16 26 11
Criminal Mischief 29 28 41 29 22 9
Disorderly Conduct 27 s0 123 104 149 62
Liquor Law Violation 38 21 57 14 34 14
Narcotics 4 12 17 24 31 13
Robbery 9 1 5 6 12 5
Runaway 99 111 126 142 180 75
Sex Offense 2 11 6 12 7 3
Theft 124 134 195 215 216 90
Weapon Possession 6 15 12 7 12 5
Al Others 66 76 93 103 125 52
TOTAL 476 577 766 734 ee9 362
JUVENILE OFFENDERS - (crimes occurring between 11 pm and 6 am)
~ 1996 1996
1992 1993 1994 1995 Estimate thru May
Assault 0 0 2 2 5 2
Burglary 8 1 13 5 2 1
Criminal Mischief 2 2 10 6 2 1
Disorderly Conduct 11 4 14 5 12 5
Liquor Lew Violation 17 13 35 7 26 11
Narcotics 2 4 5 5 5 2
Robbery 2 0 0 5 5 2
Runaway 20 25 35 37 22 9
Sex Offense 0 0 0 1 0 0
Theft 10 15 15 29 19 8
Weapon Possession 0 1 2 4 2 1
All Others 6 8 17 22 41 17
TOTAL 80 73 148 126 142 S9
JUVENILE OFFENDERS (percentage occurring between 11 pm and 6 am)
1996 19%
1992 1993 1994 1995 Estimate thru May
Assault 0% 0% 3% 3% 9% 9%
Burglary 20% 5% 54% 31% 9% 9%
Criminal Mischief 7% 7% 24% 21% 11% 11%
Disorderly Conduct 41% 5% 11% 5% 8% 8%
Liquor Law Violation 45% 62% 61% 50% 79% 79%
Narcotics 60% 33% 29% 21% 15% 15%
Robbery 22% 0% 0% 634A 40% 40%
Runaway 20% 23% 26% 26% 12% 12%
Sex Offense 0% 0% 0% 8% 0% 0%
Theft 8% 11% 6% 13% 9% 9%
Weapon Possession 0% 7% 17% 57% 20% 20%
All Others 12% 11% 18% 21% 33% 33% .
TOTAL 17% 13% 10% 17% 16% 16%
16
c
ir• . c
5
t
JUVENILE VICTIM3 - (all times)
1996 1996
1992 1993 1994 1995 Estimate thru May
Assault 164 207 226 202 202 84
Burglary 1 3 5 6 31 13
Criminal Mischief 8 9 6 11 58 24
Oisorderly Conduct 32 33 33 44 60 25
Robbery 4 7 4 8 24 10
Sex Offense 58 86 69 65 84 35
Theft 65 87 85 103 302 126
All Others 24 45 29 24 230 98
TOTAL 356 459 437 463 991 413
JUVENILE VICTIMS - (crimes occurring between 11 pm and 6 am)
1996 1996
1992 1993 1994 1995 Estimate thru May
Assault 23 9 8 18 12 5
Burglary 0 1 0 0 5 2
Criminal Mischlef 3 1 2 1 12 5
(Disorderly Conduct 1 1 1 3 5 2
Robbery 1 2 0 0 5 2
Sex Offense 8 10 8 6 7 3
Theft 4 2 2 7 29 12
All Others 3 5 4 1 36 15
TOTAL 43 31 25 34 110 48
JUVENILE VICTIMS - (percentage occurring between 11 pm and 6 am)
1991 1991
1992 1993 1994 1995 Estlmste thru May
Assault 14% 4% 4% 8% 6% 6%
Burglary 0% 33% 0% 0% 15% 15%
Criminal Mischlef 38% 11% 33% 9% 21% 21%
3% 3% 7% 8% 8%
Ohordery Conduct 3%
Robbery 25% 29% 0% 0% 20% 20%
Sax Offense 14% 11% 12% 9% 91% 9%
Theft 6% 3% 2% 7% 10% 10%
All Others 13% 11% 14% 4% 16% 16%
TOTAL 12% 7% 5% 7% 11% 11%
17
t
6
4
F
i„
October 21, 1996
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
j FROM: Ted Benavides, City Manager
SUBJECT: HOLD A DISCUSSION AND PROVIDE STAFF DIRECTION ON THE
PROPOSED INFRASTRUCTURE INFILL POLICY
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to the staff concerning the Infill Policy.
SUMMARY:
The Public Utilities Board and the staff have attempted to develop a policy that would provide
infrastructure extension into areas interior to the water and wastewater service area that do not
have city water and wastewater service (infill). The Board has reviewed various options and
approaches only to find a multitude of problems associated with each approach, The Board's
primary concerns with the development of a workable infill policy involves: 1) the basic
concept of utilizing existing rate payers monies to fund infrastructure extensions for those citizens
that have chosen to move or to build their homes remote from existing water and sewer facilities
and 2) the legal limitations under state law to use public funds for the extension of infrastructure
for the benefit of private parties.
The Public Utilities Board reviewed and discussed the proposed infill policy concepts at various
meetings over the past year. Included in Exhibit II are pertinent issues involving the infill policy
development. The Board members could not agree with all of the policy provisions and/or the
concepts as presented in Exhibit I. They did recognize that the infill policy concepts represented
the staff's best efforts to develop a workable policy under the constraints of state law.
The Public Utilities Board voted to present proposed infill policy to Council, but recommend
against approval of the policy..
PROGRAM/DEPARTMENT OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Citizens of Denton, City of Denton, Water and Wastewater Operations
T
;t
Page 2
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of the proposed infrastructure infill policy is limited to not more than $250,000
per year in water and $250,000 per year in wastewater. The funding level identified by the
Development Plan lines represents approximately 1.67% rate impact in water and 2.5% rate
impact in wastewater.
Respectfully submitted,
Ted Benavides, City Manager
Pre aced by 44
Howard Martin, Dir r
Environmental Operations
Approved yo
R. E. Nelson
Executive Director of Utilities
I
Exhibit 1: Proposed Infill Policy Outline
It: Infifl Policy Issues
Fite hAA-%p1`pubTCInfi1%,S10
S
F
s
ITEM 10
August 19, 2996
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD
AGENDA ITEM
TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC U FT
ITIES HOARD
FROM: R. E. Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities
SUBJECT;
HOLD A DISCUSSION AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF TEE INFRASTRUCTURE
INIML POLICY CONCEPTS
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to the staff concerning the Wll Policy.
SUMMARY:
At the June 7, 19% meeting of the public UtiUtita
provided the Board with clarification on several Beard, the stiff with assistance from the City Attorney
W11 Policy. The legal isms resulting 6bm the
mechanisms s cello Pte' imin discussed at this meeting addressed the legal ity of the g
an area
The under state law and the oooditiom under which inSstructure may sh$ with assistance from the City Attorney, has revirted the infill be extended into
Proposed iefill Policy aooommodste the ini asttucq~ extension wanted with the wing oortcetrai The
state law. The PmPosed policy concepts are included in Exhibit A. g corstaints of
PROGRAM/DZPARTM>LrNT OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Citizens of Denton, City of Denton, Water and Wastewater Operations
FISCAL 11MPACTt
The fiscal itnpact of the proposed lnfruMX.Wm infill Policy is
in water and $250,000 per yew in water. The hilted to not more than O$2 50, pmen00 per year
t Plan lines
teprcserlts approximately 1.67% rate impact in water.5% trattee h impact in wastewater.
RespectfWly sub
R.E. Nelson, Executive Director
Prepared by,
Depattinent of Public Utilities
Howard Martin, Director
Environmental Operations
Exhibit I: Revised Drag Of Infill Policy Concepts
FILE:C: WP5ITUBAGENDUWM%E
3 EXH1BlT' 1
i
F
t
PROPOSED INFILL POLICY OUTLINE
The primary purpose and benefit of the infill policy is to promote compact growth in
the City of Denton.
Options to utilize public funding for infill projects is limited by state law and must
promote one or more of the following areas:
public health
public safety
economic development
services for economically depressed areas
• Funding utilized for the in611 projects will be established from the unused
infrastructure financing (Development Plan Line) monies.
• Funding allocation would be established at the end of the fiscal year and reserved
specifically for infill projects in the subsequent year.
infrastructure Exteruion (Development Plan Line) reserve would MM be utilized to
fund infill projects.
RESIDENTIAL INFELL PROJECTS
• Existing residents living inpde the City limits of Denton.
• Extensions of infrastructure required to protect public health, safety, and/or provide
services to economically depressed areas.
• Projects are funded on a first come, first serve basis.
Requires a majority participation from customer base receiving service.
City pays for 100% improvements.
• Customers reimburse the City for 25% of total project costs.
If the customer's 25% share of the total project exceeds 90% of
the estimated cost of on-site improvements, then infrastructure is
not extended to the area.
4
- r
v
Define on-site versus off-site improvements.
Cusiomer levied assessments follow provisions outlined in Section 402.061-402.075
(Texas Local Government Code)
Non-voluntary program
Establishes a mechanic lien on the property
Provides for Repayment program options
A connection fee wilt be established for those citizens that do not participate within
project Unlit$ (citizen share of project costarnumber of citizens receiving the
improvements).
COMMERCIAL MUL PROJECTS
Projects must be within the City limits of Denton.
• Projects must demonstrate economic development potential.
projects arc interior to Loop 288 and 135.
• Staff' identified areas„ PUB recommended, City council approved.
• Developer pay 1001% of the up front funding.
City reimburses 301/1o of project cost to the developer after project atxepted by City.
• For finding levels above 30%, and Economic Development Ordinance wilt be
developed
Candidates must meet similar criteria utilized for Development Plan Line funding.
h `"'`"Pk0MP'MWIWln fiNPUB.A 19
5
r
sr:~
R
F
i
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD TciNe `t~ ~aR(p
AGENDA ITEM
TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD
FROM: R.E. Nelson, Execudve Directov of Utilld w
SUBJEC'T': HOLD A DISCUSSION ON LEGAL ISSUES AND PROVIDE STAFF D . }
CONCERNV G THE ~'RASTRUCTURE TNFILL POLICY ~~`ITON
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to the staff concerning the Infrastructure Infili Policy.
SUMMARY:
The City staff requested clarification on several key issues concerning the
Inf=structun Infll Policy. The pry, issues proposed
payment mechanic addressed the legality of the heading and
and is included in proposed by the policy. The legal.. opinion addresses species policy Lsues
Exhibit A. Herb Prouty, City Attorney, will be present to answer questions
concerning the legal opinion.
PROGRAWDEPARTMENT OR GROUPS AFFEMD,
Citizens of Denton, City of Denton, Water and Wastewater Operations
FISCAL FACT:
Fiscw impact of the Infrastructure Infin Policy unknown at present.
R.E. Nelson, Executive Director
Department of Public Utilities
Prepared b
~Qaf
Howard Martin, Director
Environmental Operations
Exhibit I: Legal Opinion
6
EXHIBIT II
ti
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald Cosgrove, Engineering Administrator
FROM: Wayne Paul Frank, Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT: City Attorney Opinion No. 96-1A On proposed Infi1) Policy
DATE: April 2, 1995
You have requested a legal opinion as to the legality of the proposed "infill policy". The "infill
Policy PMP0Wd provides that the City will pay 75% of the cost for extension to developed
residential areas and 25-50% of the cost for commercial arm The "infill policy" for eomrnarcW
operations provides that the commercial entities requesting infill pay all costs up frost with
custombur~xment by other entities as they tie on to the line. The "in6ll policy" for reW a tW
Provides that the City will front all the costs and the residential customers will pay
back the City pursuant to a payment plan. You have asked us to review the follo
wing 9ueatiooa:
Is the redo. ed cost of the extension considered to be a "gift" in violation of the
Texas Constitution?
2. Section 402.061 - 402.075 of the Local
Government Code makq provisions for
Program. Do we have to follow this or can we strtrcttrt,e otu
proorm
3. Can we do a payment plan?
4. Is there a difference between on-site versus off-site costs?
I. IS THE REDUCED COST OF THE EXTENSION CONSIDERED TO BE A "GUrt
IN VIOLATION OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION?
ARTICLE Ill, SECTION 52
Article III, Section 52 of the Texas Constitution prohibits a municipality from leading its credit
or granting public money or things of value in aid of, or to any individual, association or
corporation whatsoever. The purpose of this provision is to prevent gratuitous application of
funds to private use. Section 52 does not invalidate expenditures which incidentally benefit
private interest if it is made for the direct accomplishment of a legitimate public purpose.
Gerald Cosgrove, Engineering Administrator
April 2, 19%
expwditure of fiio 537 S.W.2d 89 (Civ.App.I976). The ddarminsdon t3at ao
accomplishes a public purpose is within the .
governing body, subject to judicial review. A
Beerier 52-a dates an OP• Atty. Gen 1990, No JM-122
exocphon to the prohibition against
lending of credit created PMUM a thing of valftAi6
by the Texas Constitution. Op.Atty.Gen 1990, No. 1M-1227. lids
exception allows a City to Brant funds which benefits a private inter*84 provided the
economic development and divwWfic WOM Section 52-a q=Wc aUy deck. the
grub of public money for the development aqd diveeifiexrtion of the 10
for otter specified eoonom a development purposes are publf: Purposes. economy
Section of 380. Loco the ~6d
0p1'of tlbe
Government Code authorises the city council to establish a program for Pub of public money for local economic development. As a result, the in611 Policy mug either
accomplish a public purpose or provide for economic development,
In TexAtty.Gen.Op. LO 94-078, the Attorney General ("AG") discusses whetha a
municilmlity
may use public funds to pay for the lighting of private streets. In this discussion, provide substantially equal sesvi~ to all citizens of the city,, does not
the AO swim
adequately to state a public purpose". Fortunately, the AO also issued Tex.Atty.(ka sea m to us
Lo 9S.
072. In LO .95-072, the AO was asked whether a municipality may use sales MW l
evied
Ptwtuant to section 48 of article 5190.6, V.T.C.S., to construct aanibry a MW MW
is as 03
residential subdivision. The analysis of this question did not focw on the public AttP "ill s:
Due to the rngulrments of section 4H of article 5190.6, V.T.C.S., the AG had to delsaufoe
whether the expeUditure for the sewer line aoeomplished economic develops W by
itmdeveloping Inew or expanded business eatapriaa. In the opinion, the AO staled,
y that the construction of sewer facilities In a residential suhdivision ~
promote or develop new or expanded business enterprises, we cannot exclude the posaibility as
a matter of law."
A8
The answer to your first question which asks whether the infrll policy eonstitupea an
im ble gift pursuant to the Texas Constitution is not an easy one. 11e lath policy for
commercial customers would clearly contribute to economic development. As a merit, the Iafill
Policy for commercial customers would not be a violation of the Texas Constitution. A
residential infill policy that is put in place simply to provide substantially equal services to all
citizens of the City might not adequately state a public purpose related to eeommic development.
As a result, a residential infill policy Put in place to provide substantially equal services could
constitute a violation of the Texas Constitution. Fortunately, other purposes could exist for the
residential infill policy. These Other Purposes should be examined and included in nay ordinance
which creates a residential infill policy. In addition, the infill policy should be examined to sec
if it promotes economic development. If the residential Mil policy promotes economic
development, economic development or the other public purpose should also be expressed in the
, 8
v
Gerald Cosgrove, Engineering Administrator
April 2. 1996
ordinance as a reason for creating the policy. It should be noted that the determination of
whether a public purpose exists is within the discretion of the Council. Any review of this
determination by the courts would be subject to an abuse of discretion standard. As a result, a
court is unlikely to overturn a public purpose finding by the Council provided the
for the residential infill policy are well thought out. public pwpows
2• SECTION 402,061 - 402.075 OF TAE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE MAKES
PROVISIONS FOR AN ASSESSMENT PROGRAM. DO WE AAVE TO FOLLOW
TAUS OR CAN WE MUCTURE OUR PROGRAM D97EREN7LYt
STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION AND HOME RULE AUTHORITY
Only two provisions of the Texas Local Government Code authorize a municipality to assess
costs for water and sewer lines. Section 402.061 - 402.075 of the Local Government Code
creates an assessment Procedure for water and sewer Penes similar to the assessment procedure
for the notorious paving liens. Chapter 372 of the Local Government Code authorizes the
creation ofa Public Improvement District. The Public Improvement District is authorized to levy
van assessment
Authorizes fora improvements such as water and sewer lines. I have found no other provisions
panty to levy assessments for water and sewer lines.
Although the City may not have beers expressly granted the power to Ievy an assessment for
waft and sewer outside of Sections 402.061 - 402.075 or through the creation of a Public
Improvsnum District, it Is porible that the City may have the power to contract with property
owe to obtain the equivalent of an assessment for the extension of water and sewer lines. As
a home
anything the n city. the City has the full power of self-government, that is, full authority to do
legislature could have authorized it to do. EW= v. City of TMd~G 214 S.W.2d
282, (Tax 1M). 7% City looks to the Legislature not for
limitedoes on its power. sib of power, but only for
City of riallas
852
S.W.2d 489, (Tex. 1993). The powers of the city are subject to and
charters or by the Constitution or by general law. may be limited only by its
Mm=L 523 S.W.2d 641 (Tex. 1975). If the Legislature chooses to usually encompassed by the broad powers of the City, it must do so with un a mistakable able
claritymatter
Dallas Merchants & Concessionaires Ass'n, 852 S. W.2d 489, (Tex.1993 . Nothing I have .
would specifically prohibit the City from contracting with individual property owwnerss to obtain
the equivalent of an assessment against the individual. As a result, the City appears to have the
power to contract with individual property owners for the extension of water and sewer lines and
possibly obtain a lien against the property.
Even if each property owner executes a contract for the extension of sewer lines, Section 402.061
- 402.075 may limit the provisions of the contract. Section 402.061 - 402.075 sets forth a very
detailed procedures for levying an assessment for water and sewer lines. Also, several limitations
% 9
1
7
Gerald Cosgrove, Engineering Administrator
Awil 2, 1996
Sze placed upon the City regarding such assessments. Some of tbese limitations might not. be
waivable by the property owns even if a contract is Cemented. No can Isty plop at thUi d ire
staling: what is and is not waivable by the execution of a contract creating an
property owners. As a result, some risk exists that portions of the contract would be 6@1d if
the limitations contained in 402.061- 402.075 are ;got followe3.
S
contract ection 402.065 (c) enables the City to obtain a fast lien upon the property :aseawd. If a execwed with
the mooed 6i contract would be property owner, -any lien created Wright not be a first lien. Alien
created
ads to assure subordinate to any other liens previously Pied
Won the proporty.
that the lien is valid and takes priority over subsequent lien:, th
e contract when
municipality executed by the property owner should be recorded immediately. Secxion 402.068 provides a
Pity additional leverage to obtain payment for water or sewer line extension. Section
402.068 allows a city to refuse water or sewer service until the property owner
fit. Under contract, the City may not have the option of re pays the
sutboriz Lion exists for the refusal of service based upon the r fuaurg pay an ay an ouat d
pursuant to a contract Although City may have this authority to refuse service a to a ftdt
in a contract, nothing clearly gives the city the right to refuse service. The refusal of service
t
may subject the City to litigation in order to determine this issue.
ANMR
Although the home rule authority of the City may authorize the City to contract with custom
to extend water and sewer lines, such action may be subject to attack,
not been tested yet and no case law exists. ' This area of the u Jxw
has
nterpreting the by contract. A court may fwd the assounft invalid City's ability ~ aili to to cmWw on such as
the Hmiladaoa set fords in Sections 402.061 - 402.075. Aasasam a! meomias
will probably be difficult if not impossible to collect if ameawmeat by cooked in lzed. It in
probable that such residential customers would have little or no nonexempt assets to exiscm upon
in case a just in taken. In addition, the City might not have the additional leverage of
refusing service as provided by Sections 402.061 - 402.075. Although the City may be able to
make an aaesament for water and sewer line extension by contract, risk exists that such an
assessment may be held invalid or may be uncollectible.
3. CAN WE DO A PAYMENT PLAN?
An assessment made pursuant to Sections 402.061 - 402.075 may be paid over time. Section
402.065 (a) (2) authorizes the City to provide the time, terms, and conditions of paymeat In
addition, an assessment made by the creation of Public Improvements District could also be paid
over time. Section 372,017 allows a Public Improvement District to provide that assessments be
paid in periodic installments.
10
Gerald Cosgrove, Engineering Administrator
April 2, 1996
No specific authority exists for allowing an assessment by contract to be paid over
y probebly has such authority as a result of its home rule authority, In
~ addition, s-'
r
assessment by contract to be paid over time would not eonfllot with Sections 402.060 S
or Secdoms 372.017. One problem which may exist Is the limitation previous y
"
regarding Article III Section 52 of the Texas Constitution. This provision not only prevft"* the
granting of money in aid of any individual. Article III Section 52 also P"ents the
leading its are& in aid of any individual. 7'he lending of credit pitrlt `
purpose and be aeoompaoied by controls that ensue the use of
public credit for pubUb
to be valid, Op.Atty.Gem 1990, No. IM-1229. 7be landing of credit may also be v td iE'Is
for economic development. Tex. Coast. art. III, Sec. 52(a). If so assessment by oontraof L ~ptiid
over timej a public purpose should be articulated in the ordinance creating the aseeatmeot by
eoctram In addition, any economic development purposes which may be accomplished by the
payment plan should also be articulated
4. IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ON-SITE VERSUS OFF-SITE C'OST'S?
Section 402.061 through 402.075 does not authorize the City to assess the cast of off-site
improvements. In the definition of "water system improvements" and "sewer system
impr'ovemeoW contained in section 402.062, off-silo appurtenances required to owned, do
improvements to the existing system we specifically excluded Section 402.062 defines sco of
construction of improvements to the "w s system fees, and other expenses to the
Improvemente Section 402.064 im oapsovdmmts and sewux system
(b) authorizes a municipality to assess the "oot# of
improva nests" against the benefited property. Since the definition of cost of improvements does
not include off-site improvements and off-site improvements are specifically excluded ftm. the
definition of "water system improvements" and On ow system improv mends", sactiouoa l .
402.075 does not authorize an sssaaneat for off-site improvements. This llmitwoa & nn
assament pursuant to Sections 402.061 - 402.075 would probably also apply to an
,sseaarneat
by contria
Chapter 372 does not define the "costs of improvements" which are the basis for the o' 0 - r ant
authorized by this Chapter. The argument exists that "costs of improvements" may be hdarpreted
to include off-site improvements. This argument Is very weak. 7be definition used to define
"costs of improvements" in Section 402.062 will probably be used to defined the "oosts of
improvements" contained in Chapter 372. As a result, Chapter 372 probably does not authorize
an assessment for ofd site improvements.
Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code (The Impact Fee Statute) creates the risk that any
assessment for off-site improvements for "New Development" will be invalid. Section 395.001
(4XB) excludes costs of on-site water distribution and waste water collection from its definition
of impact foes. By implication, off site improvements are included in the definition of an impact
t
f
Assn! 2, 1996 CoWove, ~ Administrator
fee "
MM they rcdeWe toed development If an assessment is made go"
Of Y tmdevrloped
improvea>e a gaod argument ads0;posed ts that the a and developed p WW,Y Impact has not yet SM ftousb the detailed Procedure for calculating fee.
The City1f
.011 prohibits the City tram enaCtlog or Imposing Impact ~ .
Section ffigborizod by Chapter 395. As a result„ any such assessment would be invalid spedappy
The Will policy which you ps,ovided does not follow the prooedises set forth is the stet b roc
such m useaameot In addition, the im$ll policy is not limited to on-site In"O Hemet,
ACcordjq*, say assesamsot attempted by the aeon Mended. 1n81l policy will Probably be void.
71e Will policy should be redraftd. 7be safest course of scan is to simply folbw, the
Prooedw" set forth in Section 402.061 - 402.075. If Ibis is not pomble, an sssesona t by
Conti ct is an option but Contains ns Mw ane sment by eonuvct should micron sad=
402.061 - 402.075 as closely as possible. In addition, any payment pIM C#WAidwd should be
evsluded closely to determine the eollectaability of the foods which are the =Woct of the payment
Plan. In aaddidon, a public purpose or economic development
the payment plan and poll, itself; Providing mabstaaaWy eq 1 should b i arms s oed for
nor Got
be p6k Ppwpon. Finally, o6fsite improvraaambahould not be included wi
the
ins
W Fad Funk
WFF/cd
All
PC: Rick Svehla, Acting City Manager
12
a
l:
C,
CITY OF PENTON, TEXAS CITYNALL WT • 211 N. ELM • DENTON TEXAS 76201 • (81n 566.8350 • DFIN MEW 434.2526
Planning and Development Department
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
FROM: Ted Benavides, City Manager
DATE: October 22, 1996
SUBJECT: Receive a report and give direction to staff a7 '
th regard to the proposed annexation
of 11.40 acres located south of Robinson Road and east of Nowlin Road. (A-74)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City proceed with annexation.
SUMMARY:
The owners of the tract, Timberglen Company petitioned the City to annex the property into the
City limits of Denton. The 11.40 acre tract is located south of Robinson Road and east of
Nowlin Road, being a tract of land in the Berry Merchant Survey, Abstract 4800 and shown on
site map (attachment #3) The Timberglen Company has also petitioned the City for the zoning
of the tract to residential single family "SF-7" zoning district classification upon the completion
of the annexation process. An annexation study in accordance with Section 34-35 of the
Subdivision and Land Development Regulations is included in attachment #1.
BACKGROUND:
Section 34-36 of the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations states as follows:
"if a tract of land in the extraterritorial jurisdiction is contiguous to the city limits and the
owner of the said property desires that it be annexed in order to be qualified to receive
city services when available and to be afforded zoning protection, the owner may
petition the city for annexation".
1
"Dedicated to Quakly Service"
F
i
The regulations further requires staff to conduct a preliminary assessment of the area to be
annexed and for the City Council to make a determination whether or not formal study, public
hearings and annexation proceedings should be initiated.
PROGRAMS DEPARIMENT,SORGROUPS AFFECTED:
All city service departments including Police, Fire and EMS, Engineering, Utilities, Solid Waste,
Parks and Recreation, Library, Planning and Development, Animal Control and Environmental
Health.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Two methods have been used to calculate the fiscal impacts of annexing this tract. The
marginal cost which is the additional cost that each City department will incur in extending
municipal services to the tract is given in attachment 41. The analysis shows that there is no
additional cost to the City at least in the five to ten year time frame, as infrastructure needs will
be addressed by the developer and City departments will extend services using existing budget
resources. The tract has a current appraised value of $34,650 allowing for an estimated $183
of tax revenue per year if no development occurs.
A fiscal impact calculation using the per capita method which is the average cost of providing
municipal services per person is included in attachment #2. The calculations for a ten year
period 1998-2007 ( assuming that development occurs as planned) shows that the City will
collect a total of $79,656 in tax revenues and expend $62,205 for municipal services with a net
gain of $17,451.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Ted Benavides
City Manager
Prepared by:
Harry N. ersaud, NIRTPI, AICP
Senior Planner
App oved by:
Frank 11. Robbins, AICP
Director, Planning and Development
2
T
rsJ r:
H
F
i„
ATTACHMENTS
Annexation study
(2) Fiscal impact calculations
(3) Site map
(4) Proposed annexation schedule
h
3
y6
M
I
•.,tl
ATTACHMENT # 1
ANNEXATION STUDY (A A)
Name and address
of Owner/devcloper: Timberglen Company, 5910 N. Central Expwy. # 1470, Dallas
Texas 75206.
I
f Location and size: 11.40 acres abutting the city limits and located south of Robinson
Road and east of Nowlin Road being a tract of land in the Berry
Merchant Survey, Abstract #800 and shown on attached site map.
Existing land use: Vacant
Surrounding land use: East- Vacant, pasture; City of Corinth
West- Vacant, pasture
North- Vacant, pasture
South- Vacant, zoned PD-1 I l:Cluster homes, 6 du/ac
Single family, 3.5 du/ac; Golf Course
Proposed development: Following annexation the owners intend to apply for permanent
zoning of the tract to accommodate single family SF-7
development.
Analysis:
The owners of this tract, the Timberglen Company has petitioned the City requesting annexation
of 11.40 acres into the City limits of Denton. The Subdivision and Land Development
regulations require staff to conduct an annexation study and present the findings to the City
Council for a determination to be made as to whether the City should proceed with annexation.
This analysis follows the guidelines as set out in Section 34-35 (c ) 1-5 of the code of ordinances.
(1) The ability of the City to furnish normal city services equal to other comparable areas
inside the city limits. Water and sewer system capabilities are considered, but lines for
individual areas are normally not the City's financial responsibility.
When development occurs in this area, the City will provide the following services at the
same level of service as are currently furnished to comparable areas within the City.
A. Police services
B. Fire and EMS services
C. Water and waste water services in accordance with section 34-18 of the code of
ordinances. The developer will extend water and waste water lines to serve the
proposed development.
Attachment #1, page I
~ttttttttttatta
s
F
r'
D. Solid waste collection
E. Maintenance of streets and roads: Developer will construct streets in accordance
City specifications to serve the proposed development
F. Environmental health and code enforcement
G. Planning and development
H. Organized recreation and athletic programs
I. Miscellaneous street names and signs: Developer will furnish street signs initially
to serve the proposed development.
Use of publicly owned facilities: libraries etc.
J. Capital Improvement program
(2) The reliability, capacity and future public cost, if any, of current and planned provisions
for community facilities such as roads, drainage, utilities etc. Private facilities will be
considered.
Additional cost
for providing services
A. Police services will be provided using existing resources
Average response time is estimated at 6 minutes for emergency
and 13.0 minutes for non-emergency. $0.00
B. Fire and EMS services will be provided using existing resources
Site to be serviced from Station #6. Average response
time is estimated at 4 - 5 minutes. $0.00
C. Water and sewer services: The De eloper will be required to
extend water and sewer lines to serve the proposed development.
An existing 8" water line runs along FM 2181 approx. 3,500 feet
west of this site. A 27" sanitary sewer line exists approx. 920 feet
north of Robinson and 180 feet east of Spring tree.
D. Solid waste collection will be extended to this site
using existing equipment and personnel. $0.00
E. Maintenance of streets and roads. The developer will be required
to construct streets to serve the proposed development in accordance
with City specifications. Minimal cost for maintenance of streets
is anticipated in the first 10 years. $0.00
F. Environmental health and code enforcement will be provided using
existing resources $0.00
G. Planning and development services will be provided using
existing resources $0.00
Attachment #1, page 2
q
F
H. Organized recreation and athletic programs will be provided
using existing resources $0.00
1. Miscellaneous services incl. the use of publicly owned facilities $0.00
J. Capital improvement program. The CIP plan will include
this area upon annexation. $0.00
All additional costs $0.00
3) The need and quality of land use and building controls. Private controls will be
considered.
Upon annexation zoning, land use development and building controls will be initiated in
accordance with the policies of the Denton Development Plan and other development
standards as required by the code of ordinances.
(4) Impact on City, both current and long range, including at a minimum
(a) Fiscal cost and benefits:
The developer will be required to address the infrastructure needs on this site at
the time of platting to include water, wastewater, drainage, access, perimeter street
improvements and sidewalks. The tract currently has an appraised value of
$34,650. If no development occurs the city tax benefit is estimated at $183 per
year, It is expected however, that as this tract is developed in the future, the
revenue benefit will exceed costs for municipal services. A fiscal impact
calculation for a ten year period 1998-2007 ( assuming that development occurs as
planned) shows that the City will collect a total of $79,656 in tax revenues and
expend $62,205 for municipal services with a net gain of $17,451. (See
attachment #2)
(b) Traffic:
The proposed single family development will not create a traffic problem. The
thoroughfare plan shows the proposed Loop 288 traversing this property. Right-
of-way dedication and sound barrier may be required at the time of zoning and
platting of the property.
(c) Roads, utilities and other community facilities:
The developer will be required to comply with the Subdivision and Land
Development regulations with regard to the quality, size and type of roads and
utility services.
Attachment fl, page 3
rr? a,
K
(d) Saiety or health:
The City codes and ordinances including land use zoning, environmental health
and code enforcement services will be applicable to the development of this tract
after annexation.
(e) Building and development quality:
The City codes and ordinances including the uniform building and fire codes will
be applicable to the tract after annexation.
(f1 Aesthetic quality:
Single family development is proposed.
(g) Community character:
This issue will be addressed at the time of zoning and platting.
(S) Conformance with or need to ensure conformance with the officially adopted master
plans of the City.
Upon annexation of this tract zoning and land use development will need to
conform with the policies of the Denton Development Plan.
Attachment #1, page 4
it
S
y~
F
ATTACHMENT 2
FISCL IMPACT CALCULATION FOR THE PROPO D AA'NFv~miOXY 11.40
ACRES L.OCATFD SOUTH OF ROBINSON ROAD AND EAST OF N.^,.1/i IN
METHODOLOGY:
The per resident costs of municipal services are computed based on a total City budget
expenditure figure of $33.1 million. The $33.1 million represents only that portion of total
expenditures which are attributable to the provision of city services through the general funds.
I' The total general fund expenditure includes general debt service and motor pool costs but
excludes utility transfers.
(a) Cost of municipal services per resident:
Impacted general fund expenditures: $33,076562
Expenditures allocated to residential tax payers (72.41/o) $23,947,431
Estimated total population of City (1996) 70,450
Municipal costs per resident $339.92
(b) Cost of municipal services per single family home:
Current average household size for single family homes 2.76
Cost of municipal services for the average single family home $938.18
(c) Assessed value for "break even" in municipal cost/revenue:
Current tax rate per $100 of assessed value .5284
Assessed value of single family home for " break even" $177,551
ASSUMPTIONS:
(a) The calculations are based on an average household size of 2.76
(b) The current tax rate of .5284 per $100 assessed value has been used in calculating the
"break even" in municipal cost/revenue for a single family home.
(c) It is assumed that the site will accommodate 32 single family homes to be constructed
over a period of five years commencing in 1998. The average assessed value is
estimated at $225,000 per unit.
I
t,wt•
r~
Y
I
FISCAL IMPACT CALCULATIONS FOR 10 YEARS 1998 - 2007 EXHIBIT I
REVENUE CALCULATIONS
YEAR -:E-I12& 11999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2W4 2005 2006 2007 TOTAL
ASSESSED VALUES 000 1350000 1575000 1575000 1575000 1575000 1575000 1575000 1575000 1575000 15075000
CITY TAXES SEE NOTE 1) 5945 7133 8322 8322 8322 8322 8322 8322 8322 8322 79656
i
i
MUNICIPAL COSTS
YEAR 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 TOTAL
MUNICIPALCOSTf 4759 5779 6458 6458 6458 6458 6458 6458 6458 6458 62205
NET GAIN (LOSS) 1186 1355 1864 1864 1864 1864 1864 1864 1864 1864 17451
Notes:
(1)The current tax rate of .5284 is assumed to be constant through the period 1998 -2007
(2) A per capita cost of $339.92 multiplied by estimated population as development is phased. Average household size is 2.76
I
4 ATTACHMENT a Proposed Annexation
A - 74
Oy sp f
X00_, Od 6, 6~_...~P4Adfi1o0 • J,
- i'
a° o ET
O
SITS 1
a \
t101MlM RMp
/
10
° PD 111 '
v ET) i~
f ~ iO
O ~
i
ti furl
V
R
ATTACHMENT 4
ANNEXATION J ni IT F_ AZQ
October 22, 1996 City Council receives a report and give direction to staff with
regard to the proposed annexation.
November 5, 1996 City Council considers approval of a schedule for public hearings.
November 22, 1996 Notice published in Denton Record Chronicle for first public
hearing. Service plan is prepared,
i
December 3, 1996 City Council holds first public hearing.
December 6, 1996 Notice published in Denton Record Chronicle for second public
hearing.
December 11, 1996 Planning and Zoning Commission holds a public hearing and
consider making a recommendation to the City Council with regard
to the proposed annexation.
December 17, 1996 City Council holds second public hearing.
January 7,1997 City Council institutes annexation. First Reading of
annexation ordinance.
January 10, 1996 Publication of Annexation ordinance in Denton Record Chronicle.
February 18, 1997 Final action by City Council. Second reading and adoption of
the annexation ordinance.
Meetings in bold require 6 out of 7 votes at City Council
f
4
C1TY of DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING @ 2 J 5 E McKINNEY s DENTON, TEXAS 76201
M 17) 566.8200 • DFW METRO 434.2529
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 11, 1996
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Jon Fortune, Chief Finance Officer
SUBJECT: NOMINATIONS TO THE DENTON CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT'S
APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD
The Board of Directors of the Denton Central Appraisal District has requested that the
City nominate a candidate for possible appointment to the Appraisal Review Board.
Please do not confuse the nominee for the Appraisal Review Board with the election
for the Appraisal District Board of Directors.
Members of the Appraisal Review Board serve two year terms. As you are aware, the
Appraisal Review Board hears all appeals that are presented to the Appraisal District
during the months of May through July and throughout the rest of the year as appeals
are requested. Since this is a very time consuming process during May through July,
the individual who serves on the board should be available full-time during these
months. Though the Appraisal Review Board members are nominated by taxing
jurisdictions they are appointed by the Appraisal District Board of Directors.
Attached is a list of current Appraisal Review Board members and their terms. Please
note that terms for both Appraisal Review Board members representing the City of
Denton expires at the end of this year. You may recall that City Council chose not to
nominate anyone to the Appraisal Review Board last year. However, Council may
want to seriously consider a recommendation this year due to the fact that the terms
for both local representatives will expire soon.
Nominations are due to the Appraisal District by November 1, 1996. The Board of
Directors is scheduled to make their selection during their November meeting. 1 have
attached information from the Appraisal District concerning the qualifications,
appointment, and compensation of members of the Appraisal Review Board.
JF:N
AFF01327
"Dedicated to Quality Senice"
S
r
VII*:
4 .
DENTON CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT
3911 MORSE STREET
P.O. BOX 2816
DENTON, TEXAS 76202-2616
817-566-0904
i MEMO
TO: All Jurisdictions
FROM: DCAD Board of Directors
DATE: September 27, 1996
SUBJECT: Nominees For Appraisal Review Board
The Board of Directors of the Denton Central Appraisal District requests that your jurisdiction
nominate a candidate for possible appointment to the Appraisal Review Board.
We have enclosed the qualifications for appointment to the Appraisal Review Board, and a
questionnaire form. Please have your nominees review the qualifications and fill out the
enclosed questionnaire if possible. The questionnaire needs to be returned to the Appraisal
District by November 1, 1996. The Board of Directors will make their decision at their
December 5, 1996, Board of Directors meeting.
If you have any questions please call.
s
4
f
APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD
OLalification Appoinime~► ^ ;d Comaenu(t M
Who Can Serve?
To serve on the ARB, you must have lived in the appraisal district for at least two years
before taking office. You don't need any special qualifications, but you may not serve on
the board if you are:
1. An appraisal district director.
2. An appraisal district employee or chief appraiser.
3. A taxing unit officer or employee.
4. An officer or employee of the Comptroller of Public Accounts.
You also may not serve as an ARB member if you are closely related to a person who
operates for compensation as a tax agent or is in the business of appraising property for
property tax purposes in the appraisal district. Relatives barred are those within the
second degree of consanguinity or affinity. If you knowingly violate this provision, you
commit a class B misdemeanor. This provision took effect September 1, 1989, and
applies only to ARB members serving terms that began after that date.
The law also bars from ARB service members who contract with the appraisal district or
with a taxing unit in the appraisal district. The bar applies if the member or a business
entity in which the member has a substantial interest contracts witli the appraisal district
or a taxing unit that participates in the appraisal district. Likewise, the same taxing units
and the appraisal district are each prohibited from contracting with an ARB member or a
business entity in which an ARB member has a substantial interest. Substantial interest is
defined as either:
1. Combined ownership by the member or the member's spouse of at least 10
percent of the voting stock or shares of the business.
2. Service by the member or the member's spouse as a partner, limited partner or
officer in the business entity.
You may also not serve if you held some other paid public office. The Texas
Constitution does not allow a person to hold more than one paid public office.
c
ARB Termc and i P
Members serve two-year staggered terms; approximately half the member's terms expire
each year. Terms begin January 1. The appraisal district directors appoint ARB members
by a majority vote and record their decision in a resolution.
Terms are limited based on the size of the population in the county served by the
appraisal district. A person in an appraisal district serving a county with a population of
more than 50,000 may not serve more than all or part of three terms on the ARB. After
completing the third term, the person may never serve on the ARB again.
AliB Com„n ncay~
The ARB receives a $50.00 minimum for a half day and $12.50 an hour for any hours
worked after the $50.00 minimum. The maximum pay is capped at $100.00 per day.
ARUk!WM
ARB regular meetings are the third Wednesday of each month at 9:00 A.M.
ARB reappraisal hearings will start on a daily basis, as needed, from late May until the
appraisal roll is approved usually in late July. Meetings will be from 9:00
P.M. A.M. to 5:00
II
b
r>4 y,:~
F
3
The Board of Directors ss the Denton Central Appraisal District is
considering you as a possible member of the Appraisal Review
Board. The Board of Directors will choose four members for two
year terms. The selection will be made at the December Board
meeting. Would you please answer the following questions and
return to the District by November 1, 1996.
Same
Adddr=z
Add ca
Phone
ju indirhinn
1. Would you be willing to serve?
If so you would need to be available from mid May until
the end of July. The Board meets from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. until the roll is certified. There will also be
meetings periodically throughout the year.
2. How long have you resided in Denton County?
3. Occupation
4. Do you have any prior experiences serving on an
appraisal review board or any board that has to do with
property value?
5. Could you make a decision based on evidence rather than
feelings for the taxpayer?
6. The property tax code requires that all property he
valued at 100$ of market value. Could you keep this in
mind throughout the proceedings?
7. Would you be willing to work nights and weekends if
necessary?
The Board of Directors will notify you of their
decision.
Board of Directors
Denton Central Appraisal District
6
1Vf,
F
OCT-10-1996 16:26 FR01d DENTON APPRAISAL DISTRICT TO
1996APPRAISAL Ft/[~wanscn I P.02
i
Dai Term - Jan 1996 Term Expires 12(31/97 f
N. SORDM
817 Pine Bluff
Le . Tx 75067
214-22f 2240
Origsud , ern - June 1992 Term
S MORRdS Expires 17131/96
~u~2 8TX18d /
21 9440 75010 I,
-30
OOtAN ern -Jan. 1995 Term Expires 12/31/96
508 LANEY
2
Lane
Denton, x 76202
817-382
0rt~kw errs -mar. Term F.)*es 12/31/97
RENEKER
1609 Me~Inda Court
G.W BI !
Fbwer MMM, Tx 75028
214-539•I8f81 i
read erm - July 1993 Term E)*es 12131197
N S .
817 r 76,247
W gJnal arm -Jan. Term Expires 12131196:
RtR72.,LeAo us
Denton, x 7620E
817--382 77
Original ern - AM. 1993 Term Expires 12131196
CL1FF0 BOND
P.O. 626
Jan, T 762474626
817
~9HW ~ - Jan 1996 T9fM ElTims 12131197 = .
Rt 1, BQ 216A -
817 Tx 7 8227 -
817- { - _ ,
Ll ertrr G D9% Term Expires 12/31/97
703 P Sbee1
Lake ,Tx 75065
Lake
r
,
E
• 1 j j~
i
TOTAL P.02
f
4.
e
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS MU141CIPAL BUILDING • DENTON TEXAS 76201 • TELEPHONE (817) 588.8307
Office of the City Manager
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 16, 1996
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ted Benavides, City Manager
SUBJECT: "Make a Difference Day" Projects
Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked that this item be placed on the agenda
for Council discussion of possible projects. I have included the
list of projects presented by Fran Miller at the last meeting plus
a memorandum from Cecile Carson indicating that Mark Osborne of the
Keep Denton Beautiful Board has an additional project for the
Council to consider.
Please let me know if you require any additional information.
Ted Benav des
City Manager
Attachment
Vedlcat•d to Quality Serval
t
6
e
M=AKE A DIFFERENCE DAY ✓j~fl'~Pi ✓ri't'/`C'/lGl'i !/Lef?lO~ll
z Saturday, October 26, 1996
s
Catch the spirit!
s~ On October 28, 1995, thousands of people in Denton made history. They stepped forward,
' looked around, tent a hand and helped others during the city's first Make A Difference Day
DOING GOOD celebration. This year, you can make a difference to someone you know -or even a stranger
~
F L.0 0M OF HT
D in need - on Saturday, October 26, during Denton's second annual Make A Differerez Day.
Thousands of people helped thousands more last year...friend to friend, neighbor to
neighbor, person to person...an extraordinary example of this city's residents and their
dedication to making our community a better place to live.
Specifically, last fall 4,842 Denton neighbors performed an act of kindness for someone
else. (There may have been many more anonymous "helpers" who quietly did a good deed that
went unr,i)orted, too.) More than 7,000 communities participated in the 1995 Make A
Difference Day, which is sponsored annually by USA Weekend, the Points of Light Foundation,
Newman's Own and Campbell's Soups. Locally, Leadership Denton Alumni sponsors the
event. 'Denton's first adventure with Make A Difference Day was a hit locally and at the
national level: Denton's great success received national honors from the event's sponsoring
organization plus a $2,000 grant to support the 1996 day.
Denton's business community, civic and community organizations, university
communities, schools and individual citizens pitched in to help others who asked for a
hand ...from an elderly woman who needed her honse repainted to landscaping in targeted
e neighborhood communities to food and clothing drives. Some groups donated mat.rials,
i y others donated elbow grease and Leadership Denton Alumni coordirmpd the overall effort.
S~1rky Kriteger'k
»ti; y. tit. th 4.r This year Leadership Denton Alumni - specifically the Mab.e A Difference Day steering
dn-jirbfvag'Mele}'~ 41' committee and its volunteers encourages residents in the entire city to Make A Difference
~y~Y;B O+{S~Y r in Denton on October 26. Individuals and groups can clean a yard, plant a tree, host a
G N`~ barbecue, sponsor a wb.k-a-thon, partner with another business or non-profit agency to
/ i accomplish a large project, clean Adopt-a-Spots or share needs with the committee that either
SS$ they or someone they know has - that's where helping hands come in!
lllfdtd Reial~diiJ
HSeveral activities already are planned... Check the list below andjoin in - or come up with
your own project. It's a family affair -our Dentc,a family - so Make A Difference this year l
Joni us!
tt. We've started some plans - consider these ideas:
' rdrfuF e ■ Roll up your sleeve at a blood drive at Golden Triangle Mall.
y 5ola'' ' t ■ Drop off nonperishable items for a food drive st city recreation centers.
a uI ■ Call in needs to the Make A Difference Day hotline: 369.7200.
itd~)I!lfdlQ ■ Volunteer f(.r needs that people leave on the hotline.
• Stop by the Civic Center for an idea or an assignment; the center will be open all day,
era. and LDA members will point the way.
& rr w When day is done, join the special Celebration event at the Civic Center from S to 7 p.m.
f d and share your experience with others. Participants who report their activities and attend the
rY.t.1 rw,~~ A L~ celebration will receive certificates. (Sorry - the Wde•-i d)esn't cover mailing certificates
after the celebration's over l)
That's just the beginning! We need your help, your ideas and your support because each
person in the city can be a volunteer, ask for help or cheer one another on as we "Make A
t ~ Difference (Day)" in Denton. Just be there!
- Make A Difference Day Hotline: 369-7200
e
r
.~fltr/r~ a~ O&W,01cel Octo6ei• 26;
There is no end to the good ideas that can make a difference.
Here are some suggestions:
• Clean up a school yard. • Have a read-a-thon for a group of children.
• Weatherize a needy, elderly person's house. • Rake the yards of needy seniors.
• Adopt a grandmother/grandfather. • Give manicures and hairdos to hospice patients.
• Collect goods for families who lost homes In fires. • Clean up the shoreline at North Lakes Park.
e Do a joint project with local jail prisoners. • Hold a drug-awareness march.
• Make a canned food donation part of admission to • Organize and give free blood-pressure tests.
your high school football game. • Organize and hold an immunization clinic.
• Collect canned food for the food bank. • Start a friendship with a shut-in.
• Clean up your neighborhood. • Take your pet to visit retirement home residents and
• Throw a mass baby shower for babies enrolled at a shut-ins.
local nonprofit day nursery. • Volunteer to walk dogs for ill people.
• Take flowers to a senior citizen's home. • Hold a concert to benerit a worthwhile cause.
• Do yard work for the elderly or disabled. • Clean a creek or drainage ditch.
• Hold a party or picnic for special needs children.
• Have a "senior" prom for nursing home residents. • Clean and repair wheelchairs.
Build a playground - or reclaim it from trash.
• Collect new or good used clothing for the thrift • Have a pu
store. ppet show for kids.
• Collect and recycle cans and give the money to a
Build shelves - and fill them - at the food bank. worthwhile cause.
• Have a walk-a-thou for your favorite cause. • Hold a garage sale for a worthy cause.
Plant trees in conjunction with the city. • Collect old computers with software and give them
Clean a park or a hiking trail. to low-income adults who want to learn.
• Organize and conduct vision and hearing tests for • Tape-record books for learning disabled children or
preschool children and the disabled. the blind.
• Paint over graffiti. • Have a benefit carwash.
• Plant flowers in public places. • Fulfill a wish for a needy, elderly person or couple.
• Do practice job interviews for teens, college students • Clean a house for an elderly person or couple.
and challenged adults. • Sign up with Keep Denton Beautiful to work on one
• Sell used books to raise money to buy new books for or more projects during the day,
the library. • Get your school or civic organization to take on a
• Clip coupons and go on a shopping spree for a group project for the day,
shelter. • Adopt an orphanage for the day.
• Fill a need for a nonprofit child counseling program. • ETCETERA, ETCETERA, ETCETERA
Make A Difference Day Hotline: 369-7200
Sir Speedy Printing of Denton supports, Ifahe a b?r//r+ wre Mqy 4r Orrin. Printing donoW by Sir Speedy.
4
ti
2
Xeep Denton Beautiful
P.O. Box 374 ♦ Denton, Texas 76202 ♦ 817-566-8537
kr,
M MORANDUM
A
k
r' DATE: October 15, 1996
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Cecile Carson, Coordinator
RE: Make A Difference Day
Mark Osborne, a member of the Keep Denton Beautiful Board, has
requested that we extend an invitation to the City Council to
participate with the Key club on Make A Difference Day, Saturday,
'October 261 1996. The Key Club has adopted and landscaped the
?t." corner of Bell Ave. and Robertson Streets which is within the City
Council's Adopt-A-Spot on Bell Ave. between Eagle and Robertson.
} The Key Club completed a re-planting of
pa;-,,- of the site earlier
} this month. According to Mr. Osborne the members would like
to have an opportunity to meet and work with the City Council
members. If you would like to contact Mark about further plans,
4 his work number is 566-1961 and his home number is 898-1931.
rf you need any additional information please contact me at
566-8537.
u
Cecile-Carson