Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 18, 2009 Agenda AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL August 18, 2009 After determining that a quorum is present, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas will 3:00 p.m. convene in a Work Session on Tuesday, August 18, 2009 at in the City Hall Conference Room at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: 1.Requests for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for August 18, 2009. 2.Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding a November Charter election. 3.Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding the outcome of the st Texas Legislature, 2009 State Legislative Program of the City of Denton during the 81 including future legislative issues and strategies. 4.Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction on the 2009-10 City Manager’s Proposed Budget, Capital Improvement Program, and Five-Year Financial Forecast. Following the completion of the Work Session, the City Council will convene in a Closed Meeting to consider specific items when these items are listed below under the Closed Meeting section of this agenda. When items for consideration are not listed under the Closed Meeting section of the agenda, the City Council will not conduct a Closed Meeting and will convene at the time listed below for its regular or special called meeting. The City Council reserves the right to adjourn into a Closed Meeting on any item on its Open Meeting agenda consistent with Chapter 551 of the TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, as amended, as set forth below. 1.Closed Meeting: A. Deliberations regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters – Under Texas Government Code, Section 551.086; Consultation with Attorneys – Under Texas Government Code, Section 551.071. 1. Discuss and deliberate the status of pending mediation efforts regarding several public power issues involved with the Texas Municipal Power Agency litigation described below and receive a briefing from a City representative. Receive a briefing and status report from the City’s attorneys regarding the litigation entitled Ex Parte Texas Municipal Power th Agency,Cause No. D-1-GN-08-003426, pending in the 126 Judicial District Court in and for Travis County, Texas; as well as Ex Parte Texas st Municipal Power Agency – II, Cause No.D-1-GN-08-003693, in the 261 Judicial District Court in and for Travis County, Texas; and the Texas Municipal Power Agency,Plaintiff v. City of Bryan, Texas,Defendant, Counter-Plaintiff and Third-Party Plaintiff; v. City of Denton, Texas and City of Garland, Texas, Third-Party Defendants, Cause No. 28169, now th pending in the 506 Judicial District Court in and for Grimes County, Texas. Discuss and deliberate and provide the attorneys with direction. A public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duty of the City’s attorneys to the City Council under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. City of Denton City Council Agenda August 18, 2009 Page 2 B. Deliberations regarding Real Property – Under Texas Government Code Section 551.072; Consultation with Attorney – Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071. 1. Discuss, deliberate and receive information from staff and provide staff with direction pertaining to the grant of an easement for the construction, maintenance and operation of a rail line within the Denton Rail Corridor to the Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA), the limits of said corridor being all that certain lot, tract or parcel of land described in that certain Quitclaim Deed from Missouri Pacific Railroad Company to the City of Denton, Texas dated August 9, 1993, and filed on August 24, 1993, as Clerk No 93-R0058485 in the Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas; and also being that same property described in that certain Correction Quitclaim Deed, dated June 1, 2001 and filed for record in the Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas as Volume 4857, Page 020211 where such deliberation in an open meeting would have a detrimental effect on the position of the City Council in negotiations with DCTA. Consultation with the City’s attorneys regarding legal issues associated with the granting of said easement above described where a public discussion of these legal matters would clearly conflict with the duty of the City’s attorneys to the City of Denton and the Denton City Council under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. C. Deliberations Regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters – Under Texas Government Code Section 551.086. 1. Receive competitive public power information from staff in the form of a proposed operating budget for Denton Municipal Electric (“DME”) for the upcoming fiscal year, including without limitation, revenues, expenses, commodity volumes, and commitments, and the direction of DME; and discuss, deliberate, consider adoption of the budget and other matters, and provide staff with direction regarding such matters. D. Consultation with Attorneys – Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 1. Consultation with the City’s Attorneys, and receipt of legal advice, regarding potential bargaining issues to be raised by management team representatives during Meet and Confer negotiations with the Denton Police Officers Association and Denton Fire Fighters Association. Public discussion would conflict with the duties of the City’s attorneys to maintain confidential communications with the City Council under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. E. Deliberations regarding consultation with the City Attorney – Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071, Deliberations regarding Economic Development Negotiations – Under Texas Government Code Section 551.087. City of Denton City Council Agenda August 18, 2009 Page 3 1.Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding legal issues on matters in which the duty of the attorney to the governmental body under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas clearly conflicts with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code. Also hold a discussion regarding the construction of needed infrastructure in the industrially zoned area along Airport Road, west of Interstate 35 in support of Project Teacup. ANY FINAL ACTION, DECISION, OR VOTE ON A MATTER DELIBERATED IN A CLOSED MEETING WILL ONLY BE TAKEN IN AN OPEN MEETING THAT IS HELD IN COMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT SUCH FINAL ACTION, DECISION, OR VOTE IS TAKEN IN THE CLOSED MEETING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF §551.086 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE (THE ‘PUBLIC POWER EXCEPTION’). THE CITY COUNCIL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO A CLOSED MEETING OR EXECUTIVE SESSION AS AUTHORIZED BY TEX. GOV’T. CODE, §551.001, ET SEQ. (THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT) ON ANY ITEM ON ITS OPEN MEETING AGENDA OR TO RECONVENE IN A CONTINUATION OF THE CLOSED MEETING ON THE CLOSED MEETING ITEMS NOTED ABOVE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION §551.071-551.086 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. Following the completion of the Work Session, the City Council will attend a reception for Board and Commission members on Tuesday, August 18, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall. The City Council will convene in the Council Chambers at 6:00 p.m. at which time the following items will be considered: 1. Consider approval of a resolution of appreciation for retiring Board/Commission members. 2.Oath of Office for New and Continuing Board Members. After determining that a quorum is present, the City of Denton City Council will convene in a Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, August 18, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. U.S. Flag/Texas Flag “Honor the Texas flag; I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible." 2.PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A.Proclamations/Awards City of Denton City Council Agenda August 18, 2009 Page 4 1.Texas Public Power Association’s presentation of the System Achievement Award to DME and Industry Achievement Award. 2.Presentation of the U.S. Conference of Mayors City Livability Award for the Recycling Division’s Sustainable Schools Program. 3.Women’s Equality Day Proclamation 3. CONSENT AGENDA Each of these items is recommended by the Staff and approval thereof will be strictly on the basis of the Staff recommendations. Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the City Manager or his designee to implement each item in accordance with the Staff recommendations. The City Council has received background information and has had an opportunity to raise questions regarding these items prior to consideration. Citizens may speak on items listed on the Consent Agenda. A Request to Speak Card should be completed and returned to the City Secretary before Council considers the Consent Agenda. Citizen comments on Consent Agenda items are limited to three minutes. Listed below are bids, purchase orders, contracts, and other items to be approved under the Consent Agenda (Agenda Items A – L). This listing is provided on the Consent Agenda to allow Council Members to discuss or withdraw an item prior to approval of the Consent Agenda. If no items are pulled, Consent Agenda Items A – L below will be approved with one motion. If items are pulled for separate discussion, they may be considered as the first items following approval of the Consent Agenda. A.Consider a request for an exception to the Noise Ordinance and for the purpose of th the 11 Annual Denton Blues Festival, sponsored by the Denton Black Chamber of Commerce. The event will be held in Quakertown Park on Saturday, September 19, 2009, from 1:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. The exception is specifically requested to increase hours of operation for amplified sound from 10:00 p.m. until 11:00 p.m. The amplified sound will not go above the allowable 70 decibels for an outdoor concert. B.Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding an annual contract for water and sewer inventory parts for the City’s Water and Wastewater departments; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 4323–Annual Contract for Water and Sewer Inventory Parts awarded to the lowest responsible bidder for each item as shown on Exhibit A in the annual estimated amount of $1,000,000). C.Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas accepting competitive bids and awarding a best value purchase of a Caterpillar 826C Compactor for the City of Denton Landfill; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 4325–Best Value Bid for Landfill Compactor awarded to Caron Compactor Company in the amount of $182,550). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (6-0.). D.Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Halff Associates, Inc., for Park Design and Planning Services for Owsley Park, Preserve at Pecan Creek Park and City of Denton City Council Agenda August 18, 2009 Page 5 Wheeler Ridge Park; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (RFSP 4296–Professional Services Agreement for Park Design and Planning Services for Owsley Park, Preserve at Pecan Creek Park and Wheeler Ridge Park awarded to Halff Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $121,000). E.Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Arthur Surveying Co., for Professional Surveying Services for various City departments; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4374– Professional Services Agreement for Professional Surveying Services awarded to Arthur Surveying Co., in an amount not to exceed $500,000). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). F.Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor or his designee to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with Denton County for the County to provide property tax billing and collection services for the City of Denton; providing a savings clause and providing an effective date. G.Consider adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 18 of the Code of Ordinances to revise the bus loading zones to provide for limited time periods for the loading zones and to allow for towing of illegally parked vehicles in all the school bus loading zones; providing a penalty of a fine not to exceed two hundred dollars ($200.00); providing a severability clause; providing for publication; and declaring an effective date. The Traffic Safety Commission recommends approval (8-0). H.Consider adoption of an ordinance approving and authorizing the City Manager of the City of Denton, Texas to execute and deliver a Second Amendment to the Master Lease Agreement by and between the City of Denton, as lessor and the Denton County Transportation Authority, as lessee; providing for the modification of sections 3.2a and 3.2b of the Master Lease Agreement dated September 30, 2005 pertaining to certain leased premises owned by the City; authorizing the City Manager to take any and all necessary actions to complete the same; providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (6-0). I.Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a Professional Services Agreement for Architect or Engineer by and between the City of Denton, Texas and Malcom Pirnie to provide engineering services for the preliminary design of the Lake Lewisville Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation and Process Upgrade; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (6-0). J.Consider approval of a resolution voting for a member to the Board of Managers of the Denco Area 9-1-1 District; and declaring an effective date. City of Denton City Council Agenda August 18, 2009 Page 6 K.Consider approval of a resolution allowing the Black Chamber of Commerce to be the sole participant allowed to sell alcoholic beverages at the Blues Festival on September 19, 2009, upon certain conditions; authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an agreement in conformity with this resolution; and providing for an effective date. The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommends approval (4-0). L.Consider approval of the minutes of: July 21, 2009 4.PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas amending the Schedule of Fees contained in Ordinance 2004-060 by adopting a new Planning and Development Department Review Fee Schedule as authorized by the Denton Development Code for the City of Denton, Texas, for filing applications for review, approval, and issuance of specific use permits (SUPs) for: home occupations that require the approval of an SUP, adult day care; childcare/day care home; group homes; accessory dwelling units; and any development within the In-Fill Special Purpose District that requires the approval of an SUP; providing a severability clause; providing for publication; and providing for an effective date. 5. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION Tabled A. – Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving an interlocal cooperation agreement and granting an easement to the DCTA on the Denton Branch Rail Trail for the purpose of building a public commuter rail line; and declaring an effective date. The Mobility Committee (Tabled from March 3, 2009) recommends approval (3-0). Tabled B. - Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas regarding a Specific Use Permit to allow forty-six (46) attached and fifty-four (54) detached single family dwelling units on property located within a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district, the approximately 30.7 acres site being located at the southwest corner of Hinkle Drive and Windsor Street; and providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations, thereof, severability and effective date. (S09-0002) The Planning and Zoning AC Commission recommends denial (5-0). SUPERMAJORITY VOTE BY OUNCIL IS (Tabled from July 21, 2009) . REQUIRED FOR APPROVAL Tabled C. - Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas regarding a Specific Use Permit to allow for gas well drilling and production on property located within the Town Center of the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District with a base zoning of Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU), the approximately 3 acre site being located on the west side of Bonnie Brae Street, north of Scripture Street; and providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations, thereof, severability and an effective date.(S09-0006) City of Denton City Council Agenda August 18, 2009 Page 7 (Tabled The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (4-0). from August 4, 2009) D.Consider approval of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas placing a proposal on the September 22, 2009 City Council public meeting agenda to adopt a 2009 Tax Rate that will exceed the lower of the rollback rate or the effective tax rate; calling two public hearings on a tax increase to be held on September 8 and September 15, 2009 and calling a budget public hearing on the Fiscal Year 2009-10 Annual Program of Services of the City of Denton to be held on September 1, 2009; requiring publication of a notice of the public hearings in accordance with the law; requiring the posting of the notice of the public hearings on a tax increase on the City’s Internet website; requiring the posting of the notice on the City’s public access channel; and providing an effective date. E.Consider adoption of an ordinance ordering an election to be held on November 3, 2009 for the purpose of submitting to the registered voters of Denton, Texas amendments to the Denton City Charter regarding terms of office and term limits; prescribing the time and manner of the conduct of the election to be in accordance with an agreement with Denton County; prescribing the form of ballot; providing for notice; providing for publication of notice of this election; providing a severability clause; providing an open meetings clause; and providing an effective date. F.Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing a contract for election services with Denton County, Texas, performed by and through its Election Administrator to conduct a November 3, 2009 election concerning amendments to the City of Denton Charter; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. G.Consider appointments to the following boards and commissions: 1.Construction Advisory and Appeals Board 2.Historic Landmark Commission 3.Zoning Board of Adjustment H.Citizen Reports 1.Review of procedures for addressing the City Council. 2.Receive citizen reports from the following: a. Rudy Rivas regarding abuse of authority–impersonating a civil servant. I.Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, respond to inquiries from the City Council or the public with specific factual information or recitation of policy, or accept a proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming meeting. J.Possible Continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. City of Denton City Council Agenda August 18, 2009 Page 8 K.Official Action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. C E R T I F I C A T E I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of Denton, Texas, on the ________day of ___________________, 2009 at ________o'clock (a.m.) (p.m.) ____________________________________ CITY SECRETARY NOTE: THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS IS ACCESSIBLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. THE CITY WILL PROVIDE SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED MEETING. PLEASE CALL THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 349-8309 OR USE TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING 1-800- RELAY-TX SO THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY’S OFFICE. ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: General Government CM/DCM/ACM: George Campbell, City Manager SUBJECT: Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding the outcome of the 2009 st State Legislative Program of the City of Denton during the 81 Texas Legislature, including future legislative issues and strategies. BACKGROUND: The City of Denton compiled its key legislative issues into the 2009 State Legislative Program st for the 81 Regular Session of the Texas Legislature. This Program was adopted by City Council on December 9, 2008. The Program consisted of issues anticipated to be considered by the Texas Legislature, primarily relate to state initiatives that impact city finances, development and land use, rights-of-way, regional transportation, utility, and public safety issues. st The 81 Texas Legislature wrapped up the regular session without passing some “must-have” legislation. Some Texas state agencies—including the Texas Department of Transportation and the Texas Department of Insurance—faced an uncertain future because lawmakers failed to pass legislation that would extend their existence. This failure to act resulted in the Governor calling a Special Session, which lasted two days (July 1-2). During the Special Session, legislators did pass a bill that continued the existence of five state agencies, including the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), and authorizing the issuance of $2 billion in highway bonds. The Legislature did not enact a continuation of the current authority to privatize toll roads. Discussions with NTTA during and prior to the special session indicated that the failure to take this action was not critical to north Texas since projects have been approved that will take them well past the next session leaving plenty of time for the legislature to take positive action regarding toll roads. There is no indication that the governor will call legislators back to Austin to take up that issue again. The Important Numbers The 2009 session was characterized, first and foremost, by the volume of work. Lawmakers filed 7,609 bills and proposed Constitutional amendments (approximately 1,700 impacting cities). That’s an increase of 19 percent over the 2007 figure and 29 percent more than 10 years ago. It’s likely that no other American legislative body has ever filed that many bills in a biennium. The volume of bills was made even harder to handle by a five-day, late-session talk-a-thon in the House that prevented a voter identification bill from being considered for passage but held up dozens of other measures, as well. As a result, the number of bills passed dropped slightly (please see the chart below). In 2007, lawmakers passed 23.5 percent of bills filed; this year, only 19.3 percent made the cut. ADA/EOE/ADEA www.cityofdenton.com (TDD 800-735-2989) st 8/13/09 81 Legislature and Denton’s Legislative Program Page 2 of 5 Total Bills Total Bills City-Related Bills City-Related Year Introduced* PassedIntroduced Bills Passed 1993 4,5601,089 800+140+ 1995 5,1471,101 800+140+ 1997 5,7411,5021,100+ 130+ 1999 5,9081,638 1,230+ 130+ 20015,7121,621 1,200+ 150+ 20035,754 1,4031,200+ 110+ 20055,3691,397 1,200+ 105+ 20076,3741,495 1,200+ 120+ 20097,6091,468 1,500+ 120+ *Includes bills and proposed Constitutional amendments; regular session only. SOURCE: Texas Municipal League (June 2009) For city-related bills, the success rate was even lower: roughly eight percent. That’s good news for Denton, since the lion’s share of the city-related bills would have harmed municipal authority in some way. Vetoed Legislation The Governor vetoed 35 bills passed by the legislature during the regular session. Two of the 35 were city-related bills and are detailed below: H.B. 2820 – Professional Services : would have added landscape architectural and geoscientific services to the Professional Services Procurement Act. According to the governor’s veto message, the bill “would prevent price-based competition for services by geoscientists and landscape architects, and therefore does not guarantee the best value for taxpayers when government entities contract for these services.” S.B. 686 – Gas Pipelines : this bill would have applied to a natural gas pipeline located or proposed to be located in: (1) a county in which a part of the Barnett Shale natural gas field is known to be located; (2) a county that is located within the boundaries of a metropolitan planning organization; or (3) the corporate limits of a city. The bill would have provided, among other things, that a gas utility is entitled to lay, maintain, and operate a natural gas pipeline through, under, along, or across a controlled access state highway only if: (1) the pipeline is subject to the jurisdiction, control, and regulation of the Railroad Commission of Texas and subject to safety standard requirements pertaining to gas pipeline facilities and transmission lines for the transportation of gas; (2) the pipeline complies with all applicable state rules consistent with the bill and all applicable federal regulations on the accommodation of utility facilities on (TDD 800-735-2989) ADA/EOE/ADEA www.cityofdenton.com st 8/13/09 81 Legislature and Denton’s Legislative Program Page 3 of 5 the highway or right-of-way, including rules and regulations relating to the horizontal and vertical location of the pipeline; and (3) the highway and associated facilities are promptly restored to their former condition of usefulness after the installation or maintenance of the pipeline, as applicable, is complete. The bill would have provided that TxDOT may require a gas utility to relocate a facility at the cost of the gas utility to accommodate construction or expansion of a highway or for any other public work unless the gas utility has a property interest in the land occupied by the facility to be relocated. The bill was not to be construed to limit the authority of a gas utility to use a public right-of-way under any other law, and the bill was not to be construed to affect the authority of a city to regulate the use of a public right-of-way by a gas utility under any other law or to require payment of any applicable franchise fee. The governor’s veto message stated the following: “[w]hile I agree that this bill would provide a benefit to communities and reduce the impact on private property owners, the bill conflicts with House Bill No. 2572, which was signed on June 19, 2009, and which accomplishes the same objectives statewide while ensuring that pipelines are installed using the highest safety standards.” So how did Denton fare? The biggest victory for Denton and other Texas cities was the defeat of hundreds of bad bills that would have lowered or broadened the current cap on annual increases in property tax appraisals, imposed a property tax revenue cap, enacted costly unfunded mandates, or eroded municipal authority to conduct local affairs. The election of a new speaker of the House had a profound impact on the way business was done. Following an impasse amongst the opponents, Republican and Democrat, of Republican Speaker Tom Craddick an unprecedented action was taken by the membership in electing a relative new comer to the important role of speaker. Rep Joe Straus of San Antonio, having served just two terms (and, the first of those not a complete term since he was elected in a special election) was elected as a compromise candidate. He promised to return leadership of the House to the members. This shifted considerably more power to the committee chairs and away from the Speaker’s office. The results were favorable to cities and other local governments. In the previous several terms the speaker had taken the lead in supporting legislation that was detrimental to local control by advocating revenue and appraisal caps. Speaker Straus declared himself a “friend of local governments” early on in the session and allowed important committees to stop or delay legislation that would have impeded the ability of cities to govern from a local perspective. A great deal of our work was with these committees in stopping bad legislation. We were 100% effective regarding the caps issue. The focus that we supported regarding property tax issues was directed at the property tax appraisal process. Rep. John Otto filed several bills relating to the function of the Comptroller’s office and appraisal districts which passed and will have an impact on the process. Two other bills passed that related to the responsibility of local governments to provide additional transparency in the budget and tax hearings. Similar legislation had been passed in the previous session. (TDD 800-735-2989) ADA/EOE/ADEA www.cityofdenton.com st 8/13/09 81 Legislature and Denton’s Legislative Program Page 4 of 5 We coordinated the opposition to several sales tax holiday expansion bill and a few textbooks sales tax holiday bills with the Texas Municipal League and other “college” communities. We were successful in that none of these bills passed. SB 636 did pass and as a result helps to resolve the “place of business” (aka – Room Store) issue by clarifying the sourcing of the sales tax at the place of business where the purchase takes place in person. There is a five year grandfathering provision in this bill on existing Chapter 380 Agreements. Much work was done in support of the Texas Local Option Transportation Act (TLOTA) bills, but unfortunately in the end no transportation related bill was passed. It became clear that the opposition to TLOTA centered on the funding mechanism. The chairman of the House Committee on Transportation was an early opponent to the way the bill was introduced and rewrote much of the legislation. He expressed concern in committee that if the urban areas of the state were allowed to move forward under the TLOTA legislation that the rural areas would not be allowed to catch up. It is not clear how a plan can be developed that will satisfy his concerns without adopting a statewide funding mechanism for transit separate from what is in place for highways. Several bills were filed that would have negatively impacted our Red Light Camera (RLC) enforcement program. Fortunately, since the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Sunset bill did not pass, the amendment attached to this bill that would have taken our control away for this program died as well. We expect that this issue will continue to generate opposition in the House. Some cities have entered into longer term contracts with their providers in an attempt to get ahead of the opposition that may arise in future sessions. RECOMMENDATION Continue to work with TML and our legislative consultants in the interim on addressing legislative issues of importance to the City of Denton. We can anticipate many of the same issues to surface in future legislative sessions. This is dependent somewhat on the outcome of the next gubernatorial election. Governor Perry has been a strong advocate for revenue and appraisal caps and has given no indication that he will change his position. There also is a significant cadre of advocates on the caps issues in the membership of both the House and Senate. The focus for the next legislative session will include school finance which will impact all local governments simply because property taxes will have to be a part of the “solution”. In addition, nd we expect land use to be high on the agenda of the 82 Legislature. There were a number of bills filed this time that would have restricted the ability of local governments to control land use. The subject is popular among legislators and needs to be kept high on our radar screen. Redistricting will play a prominent role as it does every ten years. The significance to cities is that with the House divided almost equally between the two parties, redistricting will be the focus of a power struggle which will distract the membership and also cause considerable political posturing. We will have to guard against cities becoming collateral damage. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commission): None (TDD 800-735-2989) ADA/EOE/ADEA www.cityofdenton.com st 8/13/09 81 Legislature and Denton’s Legislative Program Page 5 of 5 FISCAL INFORMATION: None Respectfully submitted: John Cabrales Jr. Public Information/Intergovernmental Relations Officer st Attachments: HillCo Partners 81 Session Review st HillCo Partners 81 Legislative Session Briefing (TDD 800-735-2989) ADA/EOE/ADEA www.cityofdenton.com Client Advisory HillCo Client Advisory June 23, 2009 st 81 Interim Volume 111 HillCo Partners, 823 Congress Avenue Suite 900, Austin, Texas 512-480-8962 st 81 Session Inside This Issue 81st Session Bill Statistics Review Vetoes Appropriations Pension Texas Windstorm st Topics covered during the 81 Session included: taxes, health care, Insurance education, transportation, energy and environment, government Association organization, pensions and Hurricane Ike recovery just to name a Franchise Tax few. However, due to several missed deadlines some critical bills Eminent Domain st did not pass out of both chambers. The failure of the 81 Session to Appraisal Reform pass a Sunset Bill for the Texas Department of Transportation Transportation (TxDOT) and other agencies or the Sunset Safety Net bill will bring Health Care lawmakers back to town for a Special Session. Education Environment The delayed passage of SB 14, relating to the Texas Windstorm Contact Us Insurance Association (TWIA), caused discussion on a possible special session. SB 14 died on the House calendar but provisions of SB 14 were amended into HB 4409, an emergency preparedness and management bill. HB 4409 did finally pass out of both chambers but did not end rumors of a special session and, as published in the June th 9 HillCo Client News Flash, Governor Rick Perry stated he will call a special session to deal with unfinished legislation. The Governor’s office has yet to state if the special session will be limited to just safety net issues or the actual agencies but most observers think it will be limited to safety net issues with a narrow focus on Proposition 12 bonds for TxDOT and possibly the extension of Comprehensive Development Agreements (CDA’s). This advisory serves not only as a primer for some of the issues and st policies that were passed during the 81 legislative session but also offers insight into where lawmakers left off and where they may start again during the next special or upcoming regular session. Bill Statistics th 806,190 During the Session lawmakers filed House and Senate st 81 bills while during the Session over 1,200 more bills were filed thst 7,419 for a total of bills filed. The 80 and the 81 Session passed th 801,482 almost the same amount of bills. During the Session bills st 811,459 passed and in the Session bills passed. * Statistics according to the Texas Legislative Council/Legislative Reference Library. Vetoes th 80 Session54 bills and In the Governor Rick Perry vetoed resolutions . stst For the 81 Session the Governor had until June 21, Father’s Day to veto legislation and after that date, what's not vetoed or signed by then becomes law without his signature. st 81 Session38 bills and During this the Governor vetoed a total of resolutions . In his press release the Governor stated, “there was some legislation that, in its final form, would have done more harm than good to our citizens. After thoroughly and thoughtfully reviewing all legislation, I am confident that the final outcome of all bills passed will move Texas in the right direction, equipping our state to answer future challenges and providing better opportunities for all Texans.” The bills and resolutions vetoed were: HB 103 by Brown, Fred/Patrick, Dan Relating to health benefit plans for students at institutions of higher education and the operation of certain health benefit plans through student health centers at certain institutions of higher education. HB 130 by Patrick/Zaffirini Relating to an enhanced quality full-day prekindergarten program provided by public school districts in conjunction with community providers. HB 518 by Kohlkorst/Van de Putte Relating to programs to provide student loan repayment assistance for certain correctional officers, for certain speech-language pathologists and audiologists, and for certain mathematics and science teachers. HB 821 by Leibowitz/Watson Relating to the sale, recovery, and recycling of certain television equipment; providing administrative penalties. HB 1293 by Eiland/Ellis Relating to the sale and marketing of life insurance and annuities. HB 1457 by Hochberg/Duncan Relating to procedures concerning verification of certain information submitted in a voter registration application. HB 2142 by McClendon/Carona Relating to the promotion of toll projects by the Texas Department of Transportation. HB 2656 by Miller, Doug/Duncan Relating to the composition of the board of trustees of the Teacher Retirement System of Texas. HB 2692 by Rodriguez/Watson Relating to certain municipal requirements regarding sales of residential properties in certain areas. HB 2820 by Chisum/Wentworth Relating to contracts by governmental entities for professional services relating to geoscience and landscape architecture. HB 2888 by Martinez/West Relating to financial assistance administered by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. HB 3148 by Smith, Todd/West Relating to exempting certain young persons who are convicted of an offense involving consensual sex from the requirement of registering as a sex offender in this state. HB 3202 by Bonnen/Jackson Relating to authorizing the transfer of certain real property held by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. HB 3346 by Farabee/Averitt Relating to gas utilities and gas storage facilities. HB 3481 by Veasey/Harris Relating to the expunction of records and files relating to a person's arrest. HB 3485 by Coleman/West Relating to certain county, municipal, district, and other governmental functions, procedures, powers, duties, and services, including certain criminal procedures. HB 3515 by Dunnam/Carona Relating to the creation of the offense of failure to report barratry and solicitation of employment. HB 3983 by Rodriguez/Watson Relating to the imposition of property taxes on the residential homesteads of low-income and moderate-income persons. HB 4068 by Gonzales/Hinojosa Relating to the conduct of judicial proceedings and transaction of other essential judicial functions in the event of a disaster. HB 4685 by Homer/Eltife Relating to the County Court of Titus County. SB 223 by West/Thompson Relating to allowing a person who successfully completes a term of deferred adjudication community supervision to be eligible for a pardon. SB 434 by Wentworth/Bolton Relating to the establishment and operation of a public transit motor-bus-only lane pilot program in certain counties. SB 488 by Ellis/Harper-Brown Relating to the operation of a motor vehicle in the vicinity of a vulnerable road user; providing penalties. SB 686 by Davis, Wendy/Orr Relating to the installation, maintenance, or operation of natural gas pipelines on state highways and highway and county road rights-of- way. SB 978 by West/Coleman Relating to the creation and financing of public improvement districts. SB 1206 by Hinojosa/Edwards Relating to the release from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice of certain inmates who complete a rehabilitation program. SB 1343 by Hinojosa/Gonzales Relating to the formula funding for public institutions of higher education for certain credit hours that do not count toward a degree. SB 1440 by Watson/Madden Relating to orders and judgments rendered by associate judges in child support and child protection cases and to the investigation of child abuse and neglect. SB 1760 by Watson/Branch Relating to the administration of the Texas Save and Match Program to assist qualifying beneficiaries under the state's prepaid tuition plans and college savings plans and to the treatment of a beneficiary's assets under prepaid tuition plans and college savings plans in determining eligibility for student financial assistance and other assistance programs. SB 2038 by Duncan/Hartnett Relating to the construction of nonsubstantive codifications and revisions of statutes. SB 2141 by Wentworth/Hughes Relating to the statute of repose for engineers and architects. SB 2169 by Ellis/Alvarado Relating to the establishment of a smart growth policy work group and the development of a smart growth policy for this state. SB 2325 by Hinojosa/Madden Relating to the confidentiality of certain information pertaining to the State Commission on Judicial Conduct. SB 2468 by Gallegos/Coleman Relating to the postemployment activities of certain local government officers in certain counties; providing a penalty. SB 2558 by Gallegos/Thompson Relating to the promotion and marketing of alcoholic beverages. HCR 161 by Burnam/Davis, Wendy Granting John Cook permission to sue the Benbrook Water Authority. HCR 252 by Thompson/Averitt Requesting the governor to appoint a Governor's Task Force on Horse and Greyhound Racing. SCR 59 by Jackson/Taylor Granting MBP Corporation permission to sue the Board of Trustees of the Galveston Wharves. Appropriations The Conference Committee’s report on SB1 recommended that appropriations for state government operations for the 2010–11 biennium total $182.3 billion from all fund sources. The recommendations provide a $12.6 billion, or 7.4 percent, increase from the 2008–09 biennial level. General Revenue Funds, including funds dedicated within the General Revenue Fund, total $87.1 billion for the 2010–11 biennium, a decrease of $1.6 billion, or 1.8 percent, from the anticipated 2008–09 biennial spending level. SB 1 also makes adjustments due to the stimulus/ARRA funding coming to the state. It should be noted that although over an estimated $17 billion in increased Federal spending is coming to Texas, not all of those funds are under the purview of the state General Appropriations Act. However, SB 1 does include a total of $12.1 billion in Federal Funds and reduces General Revenue appropriated elsewhere in the bill by $6.4 billion thus creating a net article increase of $5.7 billion. Texas Comptroller Susan Combs certified the state's $182 billion budget. She also certified the supplemental budget, an emergency spending plan to cover the rest of 2009 which includes money to cover damage costs from Hurricane Ike. The governor signed SB 1 into law, however; he used his line-item veto power to reduce the two-year budget by $97.2 million in general revenue and $288.9 million from all funding sources. As a result of the line item veto the bill will now appropriate approximately $182.3 billion from all funding sources, including $80.7 billion from the General Revenue Fund, for the fiscal biennium beginning September 1, 2009, according to the Governor’s Proclamation. All of the line item vetoes, according to the Governor’s Proclamation, were contingency riders for bills that did not pass or bills that were vetoed. The contingency rider bills that did not pass and as a result were line item vetoed were: HB 373, HB 982, HB 1329, HB 1699, HB 2183, HB 2203, HB 2233, HB 2248, HB 2250, HB 2295, HB 2740, HB 2962, HB 3180, HB 3556, HB 3595, HB 4470, HB 4662, SB 8, SB 81, SB 362, SB 363, SB 485, SB 499, SB 546, SB 841, SB 1001, SB 1007, SB 1015, SB 1106, SB 1329, SB 1388, SB 1414, SB 1548, SB 1830, SB 1879, SB 2233, SB 2313, and SB 2567. Bills that were vetoed and as a result line item vetoed in SB 1 were: HB 518, HB 821, and SB 1206. For a copy of the Governor’s Proclamation and a complete listing of the contingency riders, please visit: Line Item Veto Proclamation. It should also be noted that HB 4586, the $2.3 billion supplemental st appropriations bill also passed out the 81 Session and was signed th by the Governor on June 19. Pension Several bills that affect pensions on a statewide level as well as bills that will affect local pensions were passed during the session. However, no significant legislation passed that would change the major procedures that pension funds operate under. st Highlights of bills that passed the 81 Session: HB 360crediting and charging , Kuempel/Williams, relates to the of investment gains and losses on the assets held in trust by the Texas Municipal Retirement System (TMRS) and providing a guaranteed minimum credit to employee accounts. Specifically, in adopting rates and tables, the board of trustees shall adopt a discount rate that is not less than five percent in developing an annuity purchase rate. The bill also allows city accounts to receive annual interest at a rate different from the member rate, including negative interest. th The bill was sent to the Governor on May 18 and signed on May th 26. HB 407 , Kuempel/Williams, relates to participation and credit in, Texas contributions to, benefits from, and administration of the County and District Retirement System . The bill provides for more efficient plan and operating administration, provides conformity with Internal Revenue Service qualified plan requirements in needed areas, and enables the implementation of planned technology changes to improve services provided to the system's membership. The bill makes no substantive benefit changes. th HB 407 was sent to the Governor on May 26 and signed on June th 19. HB 1979public , Rodriguez/Watson, relates to retirement under retirement systems for employees of certain municipalities . The bill provides that employees transferred from a position covered by one retirement system are afforded the same advantages as other participants in that program, even though they work in another position covered by a different retirement system. st The bill was sent to the Governor on May 21 and signed on June th 19. HB 2751participation and credit in , Truitt/Duncan, relates to , Texas Emergency benefits from, and the administration of the Services Retirement System . The bill would amend portions of the Texas Government Code governing the Texas Emergency Services Retirement System (TESRS), relating to participation and credit in, benefits from, and the administration of TESRS. The bill would allow participating departments in TESRS to include their support staff as members of TESRS, would allow the TESRS board of trustees by board rule to impose an interest charge on contributions that are late due to the correction of an error, would give the TESRS board of trustees the responsibility and flexibility to define nonservice death benefits by board rule, would give the TESRS board of trustees the authority not to pay a death benefit to a person convicted of causing that death, would authorize the TESRS board of trustees to designate a medical board to investigate applications for on-duty disability and on-duty death benefits, and would repeal the authority for TESRS board of trustees board rules for certain death benefit annuity provisions as a part of the changes that would authorize the TESRS board of trustees to define nonservice death benefits. The bill would repeal provisions involving the governor's involvement in appointing trustees to the state board of TESRS. The bill takes effect September 1, 2009. st The bill was sent to the Governor on June 1 and signed on June th 19. Texas Windstorm Insurance Association HB 4409emergency , Taylor/Jackson, Mike, relating to preparedness and management bill has language addressing some of the needs to the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association TWIA (). Some key provisions for TWIA include: The bill would restructure the revenues collected and deposited into the Catastrophe Reserve Trust Fund. The bill would authorize the Texas Public Finance Authority to issue Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 public securities on behalf of TWIA. The bill states that the public securities are not a debt of the State. The bill would eliminate premium tax credits resulting from certain assessments on insurers after a disaster which would no longer result in a negative fiscal impact to the General Revenue Fund. Requires the Sunset Advisory Commission (SAC) to review TWIA, but does not subject the entity to abolishment. The bill would require that the review be conducted as if the association were scheduled to be abolished September 1, 2015. The bill would require TWIA to pay the costs incurred by the SAC upon receipt of a statement from the SAC. The bill would create the windstorm insurance legislative oversight board to monitor TWIA and review proposed legislation. It also requires the board to produce a biennial report on the board's recommendations. rd The bill was sent to the Governor on June 3 and signed on June th 19. Franchise Tax rd On June 3 HB 4765, Oliveira/Patrick, Dan, was sent to the Governor. The legislation will increase the franchise tax small business exemption to exempt businesses with less than $1 million in gross receipts. The amount under current law is $300,000. The amount provided for by this bill and the fiscal cost of the bill st depended on HB 2154 of the 81 being made into law. The bill amends Chapter 155 of the Tax Code to change the taxation of certain tobacco products. The Governor signed HB 2154 on June th 16. Since the tobacco tax became law, the franchise tax bill has a direct impact of a revenue loss to the Property Tax Relief Fund of $172,125,000 for the 2010-11 biennium. If the tobacco tax had not become law, the franchise tax bill would have a direct impact of a revenue loss to the Property Tax Relief Fund of $36,450,000 for the 2010-11 biennium. Any loss to the Property Tax Relief Fund will have to be made up with General Revenue of the same amount to fund property tax relief. The tobacco products tax being implemented would impact the exemption for businesses. A tobacco tax means the total revenue amount at which a taxable entity would owe no tax would be $1 million for the years 2010 and 2011, and $600,000 in future years. More information on the tobacco tax bill can be found in the Health Care section below. th Governor Perry signed the bill into law on June 16 and stated, “As a result of this legislation, roughly 40,000 small businesses across Texas will be able to hang onto more of their dollars and plow them back into their businesses in the form of new hires and new equipment.” The bill takes effect on January 1, 2010 and applies to reports due on or after that date. Eminent Domain st There were many bills filed during the 81 Session relating to eminent domain but no significant bills passed during the recent session. However, a joint resolution, HJR 14, putting an eminent domain constitutional amendment before the Texas voters did pass st during the 81 Session. The amendment will be submitted to the voters on November 3, 2009. However, since SB 18, the enabling bill for HJR 14 did not pass; lawmakers will have to pass legislation implementing the constitutional amendment next session in order for the amendment to take effect. The proposed amendment would have two portions and the ballot would allow for voting or against the following propositions: The constitutional amendment to prohibit the taking, damaging, or destroying of private property for public use unless the action is for the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property by the State, a political subdivision of the State, the public at large, or entities granted the power of eminent domain under law or for the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property, but not for certain economic development or enhancement of tax revenue purposes, and to limit the legislature's authority to grant the power of eminent domain to an entity. The constitutional amendment establishing the national research university fund to enable emerging research universities in this state to achieve national prominence as major research universities and transferring the balance of the higher education fund to the national research university fund. th On June 15 Governor Perry signed the legislation into law. Appraisal Reform st During the 81 Session several bills passed that dealt with appraisal reform. Governor Rick Perry highlighted some of those bills when he recapped the highlights of session saying in his press release that st one of the accomplishments of the 81 Session was that lawmakers, “passed important reforms to the appraisal process to help property taxpayer…and passed other appraisal process reviews related to the practices of appraisal districts, and local options to improve the independence and quality of the Appraisal Review Boards.” th Perry highlighted the following bills in his May 30 press release: SB 771determination of the value of , Williams/Otto, relates to the property for ad valorem tax purposes , including appeals through binding arbitration of the appraisal review board orders determining protests of property value determinations; providing penalties. Specifically it: Amends Section 23.01 of the Tax Code to clarify prohibit an increase in the appraised value of property after the value had been determined by an appeal to the appraisal review board, binding arbitration, or court decision unless the increase is reasonably supported by substantial, reliable evidence after considering all the evidence in the record. Limits sales that could be used as comparable sales in developing appraisals to sales that occurred within two years of the appraisal date unless insufficient comparable sales occurred within two years of the appraisal date to form a representative sample. The bill would require that a comparable sale price be adjusted for market changes during the period between the date of the sale and the appraisal date. Additional factors can be included and considered before using a sale as a comparable. Provides that the eligibility of land qualified for agricultural appraisal does not end in situations in which a drought declared by the Governor causes the temporary cessation of typical agricultural activities if the landowner intends to resume the agricultural use when the drought ceases. Allows binding arbitration on any homestead and on other real or personal property appraised at $1 million or less (current law has restrictions on the use of binding arbitration.) Provides that if someone wishes to appeal their appraisal they can do so through an expedited arbitration by requesting one in their appeal. The bill will take effect January 1, 2010, and includes certain transition periods relating to the arbitration provisions. HB 8certain studies and reviews of , Otto/Williams, relates to appraisal districts . Highlights of the bill include: Requires the appraisal district that appraises property for the school district to be in compliance with the scoring requirement of the comptroller’s most recent review of the appraisal district conducted. Requires the comptroller to conduct a study at least every two years in each school district for which the most recent study resulted in a determination by the comptroller that the school district's local value was valid and each year in a school district for which the most recent study resulted in a determination by the comptroller that the school district's local value was not valid. Provides that if in any year the comptroller does not conduct a study, the school district's local value for that year is considered to be valid. Creates the Comptroller’s Property Value Study Advisory Committee consisting of nine appointed members (the Speaker of the House and Lieutenant Governor shall each appoint one member and the rest of the members will be appointed by the Comptroller). Requires the Comptroller to conduct a study in each appraisal district at least once every two years. This act takes effect January 1, 2010. HB 3611consolidation of appraisal , Otto/Williams, relates to the review board. Key provisions in the bill: Authorizing the legislature to authorize a single board of equalization for two or more adjoining appraisal entities that elect to provide for consolidated equalization if approved by the voters. Allows the adjoining appraisal districts to enter into an interlocal contract to create a consolidated appraisal review board. This act takes effect January 1, 2010. HB 3612creation of a pilot program , Otto/Williams, relates to the that allows taxpayer appeals from certain appraisal review board determinations in certain counties to be heard by the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH). The new subchapter would establish a pilot program allowing property owners to appeal appraisal review board (ARB) determinations for certain real or personal properties to SOAH. The pilot program would be implemented in Bexar, El Paso, Harris, Tarrant, and Travis counties for a three-year period beginning January 1, 2010, and would be limited to 3,000 appeals. Owners of real or personal properties appraised at more than $1 million could protest to SOAH determinations of ARBs resulting from protests of appraised and market value or unequal appraisal. Mineral and industrial property would be excluded. A SOAH determination would preclude a district court appeal. SOAH would have rulemaking authority to implement the pilot program. The bill would require relevant education and training for SOAH administrative law judges and would set out notice and procedural requirements. SOAH and chief appraisers for counties included in the pilot program would submit a report at the end of the pilot program to the Legislature including recommendations for future action. Currently, the only recourse for owners of property appraised at more than $1 million who are dissatisfied with ARB determinations is to file suit in district court. The pilot program would allow these property owners, with the exception of industrial or minerals property owners, to protest ARB determinations to SOAH. The chief appraisers of the appraisal district, where the pilot program is located, are required to issue a final report on the results of the program to the state legislature by January 1, 2013. The act takes effect on January 1, 2010. HB 3613determination or the , Otto/Williams, relates to the market value of a residence homestead or ad valorem tax purposes on the basis of the property’s value as a residence homestead. Highlights of the bill include: Authorizes a totally disabled veteran to receive an exemption of 100 percent of the appraised value of the veteran's residence homestead. Conforms the bracket limit points for veterans with disability ratings to the limit points provided in Section 2(b), Article VIII of the Texas Constitution. Conforms amendments requiring the deduction of the value lost to the new exemption in the Comptroller's property value study. Amends Chapter 23 of the Tax Code to require that the market value of a residence homestead be determined solely on the basis of its use as a homestead and not at its highest and best use. Transportation As noted above, it is not certain how Governor Perry will limit the special session but as reported in a previous HillCo Client News Flash, “conventional wisdom is the session will have a narrow tailored focus dealing with the sunset safety net issues, Proposition 12 bonds for TxDOT and possibly the extension of Comprehensive Development Agreements (CDA’s).” HB 300, Isett/Hegar, the Sunset Bill for TxDOT, did NOT pass nd this session but when the 82 Session convenes it is possible they will pick up where HB 300 left off. Although the House version of HB 300 would have changed the make up of the Transportation Commission to a 15-member elected commission with the chair being elected at large, the Senate version is the language that was in the conference report which kept the commission in its current structure. Along with various reporting requirements, the conference committee report on HB 300 also: Removes the requirement that the Executive Commissioner be a registered professional engineer in this state. Establishes an eight- member Transportation Oversight Committee. Establishes a pilot program that in at lease one county that is part of a RMA to study the feasibility of assessing a VMT (vehicle per mile traveled fee) road user fee. Establishes a Unified Transportation program. Establishes a transportation reinvestment zone. Requires approval and certification process for a comprehensive development agreement (Attorney General would review for legal sufficiency, comptroller would need to certify financial viability and chair of commission would need to sign). Prohibits noncompetition provisions. The Senate added a "local option" funding element to HB 300 which would have allowed certain counties to hold an election of the people for the purpose of raising new money for transportation projects. Under the proposal, the commissioners court in the major metropolitan parts of the state could choose from a menu of options (i.e. - gas tax, auto registration fees, etc.) and place the proposed fee on the ballot for voter approval. This "local option" funding proposal was ultimately not included in the final conference committee report. Throughout session, many warned that new funding options are badly needed. The state has not raised the gas tax since 1991, and, as TxDOT Commissioner Ned Holmes reminded lawmakers, the state will not have the financial capacity after 2012 to build any new projects. At the local level, there is a reported shortfall of $322 billion across the state to build the infrastructure planned for the near future. Theses shortfalls will delay projects and potentially threaten communities' ability to reach federal air attainment standards and thus impact the receipt of federal funds. st Transportation bills that passed during the 81 Session: HB 646, Hughes/Eltife, authorizes the governor, on behalf of the state, to execute the Southern High-Speed Rail Compact, thereby allowing Texas to participate in the interstate commission that will assist in conducting a feasibility study of rapid rail service between the member states: Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alabama. HB 2983, Phillips/Hegar, amends current law relating to the electronic transmission of motor vehicle rental information in connection with the payment of tolls. HB 3097, McClendon/Carona, amends current law relating to the creation, organization, governance, duties, and functions of the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles, including the transfer of certain duties to the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles and the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation and provides penalties. SB 375, Carona/Smith, Todd, makes the Crash Records Information System (CRIS) database and information contained in the CRIS database privileged in the same manner that accident reports are privileged under state law. The bill authorizes TxDOT or a governmental entity to make statistical information derived from the CRIS database available to the public at the department's discretion. SB 480, Carona/Smith, Wayne, adds Section 202.061, Transportation Code, to authorize the Texas Transportation Commission to enter into covenants for environmental remediation of real property owned by TxDOT. SB 448, Carona/Pickett, authorizes TxDOT to transfer any interest in certain real property to an appropriate public agency or private entity, as authorized by the regulatory authority that requires the mitigation, with or without monetary consideration if the property is to be used for mitigation purposes. SB 883, Carona/Pickett, amends current law relating to the state highway fund participating in the costs associated with a toll facility of a public or private entity. Specifically the department may not pledge or otherwise encumber money deposited in the state highway fund to: (1) guarantee a loan obtained by a public or private entity for costs associated with a toll facility of the public or private entity; or (2) insure bonds issued by a public or private entity for costs associated with a toll facility of the public or private entity. SB 1263, Watson/Rodriguez, authorizes a metropolitan rapid transit authority confirmed before July 1, 1985, in which the principal municipality has a population of less than 750,000 to employ fare enforcement officers. The bill clarifies that a fare enforcement officer is not a peace officer and has no special authority to enforce a criminal law. The bill authorizes a peace officer contracted for employment by the municipality to have the same powers and duties as a peace officer commissioned and employed for any violations occurring on the transit system. These powers include the authority to make an arrest in any county in which the transit authority system is located. The bill is subject to the authority to the Texas Sunset Act and revises the composition of the board of the authority. The bill also adds provisions relating to the authority of certain transit authorities to take private property through the use of eminent domain. Information on LIRAP and TERP can be found in environmental section. Health Care Although the Children’s Health Insurance Program buy in program was one of the most important coverage issues of the session and in the final chaos of the end of session was amended into SB 2080, the proposal was ultimately stripped out as leadership indicated the CHIP provisions were controversial to the overall bill. However, st other key pieces of health care legislation did pass during the 81 Session. Highlights include funding for cancer research, expansion of nursing funding and governance, insurance revisions, a physician loan repayment program, expansion of Health Information Technology (HIT), and continued reporting requirements. Appropriations In SB 1, the appropriations bill, all funds recommended for Health and Human Services total $59.6 billion for the 2010-11 biennium, an increase of $5.1 billion, or 9.3% from the 2008-09 biennium. For general revenue and general revenue-dedicated fund, the recommendations total $25.3 billion, an increase of $2.9 billion, or 12.8% from the 2008-09 biennium. SB 1 and the supplemental appropriations bill combined fill the 2009 Medicaid shortfall, fund the increase in caseload and costs for 2010-11, appropriate funding for nursing education, and reimburse uncompensated trauma care among other things. Specifically, in the supplemental appropriations bill all of the funds remaining in the red light camera trauma fund were appropriated- $6.7 million – in addition to amounts previously appropriated in the current budget biennium to the Health and Human Services Commission for the purpose of reimbursing uncompensated trauma care. Additionally the bill establishes a pilot program to test alternative payment systems in the Employees Retirement System. The language in the appropriation is similar to that of SB 10 by Duncan which would have amended the law relating to the adoption of alternative payment method pilot program for the provision of health care services to certain state employees. Although the supplemental bill is silent on certain components of the pilot program it does authorized the Employees Retirement System (ERS) to utilize some of the funding appropriated in SB 1, to establish a pilot program under which physicians and health care providers who provide health care services to employees and retirees participating in the group benefits program are compensated under a payment system designed to test alternatives to traditional fee-for-service payments. To the extent practicable, the program must be based on nationally recognized quality of care standards and evidence-based best practices, and must include policies designed to promote provider collaboration and other policies and practices as necessary to ensure high-quality and effective health care services. CPRIT SB 1, the budget bill, allocated $61.3 million in General Revenue for debt service on $450.0 million in bond proceeds for cancer prevention and research grants and administrative costs for the Caner Prevention and Research Institute of Texas – CPRIT. HB 1358, Keffer/Nelson, relates to the operation of CPRIT. Key Provisions include: Authorizes the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (institute) to supplement the salary of the executive director and other senior institute staff members and that funding may come from gifts, grants, donations, or appropriations. Requires the Institute’s Oversight Committee to now serve staggered six-year terms rather than four-year terms with the terms of three members expiring on January 31 of each odd- numbered year. Requires the executive director of the institute, with approval by simple majority of the members of the oversight committee, to appoint as members of scientific research and prevention programs committees experts in the field of cancer research and prevention. Authorizes a member of a scientific research and prevention programs committee to receive an honorarium. Provides that members of a research and prevention program committee serve for terms as determined by the executive director, rather than the previous four-year terms. Establishes the University Advisory Committee and the Ad Hoc Advisory Committee. Requires the oversight committee to issue rules regarding the procedure for awarding grants to an applicant under this chapter. Requires that the rules include certain procedures. Requires the oversight committee to follow the funding recommendations of the executive director in the order the executive director submits the applications to the oversight committee, rather than the funding recommendations of the research and prevention programs committee, unless two- thirds of the members of the oversight committee vote to disregard a recommendation. Require the recipient of the grant, before the oversight committee is authorized to make for cancer research any grant of any proceeds of the bonds issued under Subchapter E (Cancer Prevention and Research Fund), to have an amount of funds equal to one-half of the grant dedicated to the research that is the subject of the grant request. Requires the oversight committee to require as a condition of a grant that the grant recipient submit to regular inspection reviews of the grant project by institute staff, including progress oversight reviews, to ensure compliance with the terms of the award and to ensure the scientific merit of the research. Deletes existing text requiring the research and prevention programs committee to require a peer review progress oversight review of each grant recipient to ensure compliance with the terms of the award and to ensure the scientific merit of the research. Deletes existing text requiring the research and prevention programs committee to report to the oversight committee any recommendations for subsequent actions. Requires the executive director to determine the grant review process, terminate grants and report at least annually to the oversight committee. Requires certain information to be public for applicants applying for grants. th HB 1358 was sent to the Governor on May 26 and signed on June th 19. The bill is effective immediately. Nursing SB 476 , Nelson/Howard, Donna, relating to staffing, overtime, and nurses other employment protection for passed unanimously in the House and the Senate. Key provisions include: The governing body of a hospital must adopt, implement, and enforce a written nurse staffing policy to ensure that an adequate number of nurses with appropriate skill mix are available to meet the level of patient care. A hospital must establish a nursing staff committee as a standing committee. The committee must meet quarterly. Hospitals are required to submit an annual report to the Department of State Health Services (DSHS) on the recommendations, actions and work of the nursing staff committee. Hospital may not require a nurse to work mandatory overtime, certain exceptions apply. Nurses can refuse to work mandatory overtime however a nurse is not prohibited from volunteering to work overtime. The bill would take effect September 1, 2009, and apply only to disciplinary actions taken on or after the effective date. SB 476 was stth sent to the Governor on June 1 and signed on June 19. SB 1 also appropriated $49.7 million for the Professional Nursing Shortage Reduction Program, an increase of $35 million over the previous biennium. Insurance HB 2256, Hancock/Duncan, relating to the mediation of out-of- network health benefit claim disputes concerning enrollees, facility – based physicians, and certain health benefit plans; imposing an administrative penalty passed out of both chambers and was sent to rdth the governor June 3 and signed on June 19. Key provisions include: Establishes a mediation system for patients who wish to negotiate out-of-network charges imposed by certain facility-based physicians. Examples include radiologists, pathologists, anesthesiologists, and emergency room physicians. Requires provider and insurance companies to split mediation costs. Requires the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH) to appoint the mediator from a group of qualified mediators or allow the parties to agree to use a non-SOAH mediator and pay for the outside mediator's fees. If the mediation is not successful, the case will be referred to SOAH. Establishes a mediation reporting requirement to be sent to the Texas Medical Board (TMB) and Texas Department of Insurance (TDI). The agencies must maintain a database of public information regarding these disputes. HB 1888rank , Davis/Duncan, requires health benefit plans which physicians to meet standards that conform to nationally recognized guidelines; the standards shall be disclosed to each affected physician before an evaluation period; and each affected physician is afforded an opportunity to dispute the ranking or classification. It prohibits physicians from requesting a patient enter into an agreement restricting the patient from participating in physician ranking, evaluation and/or opinion survey activities. A health benefit plan issuer shall comply not later than December 31, 2009. A health benefit plan issuer or a physician is not subject to sanctions or disciplinary actions before January 1, 2010. st HB 1888 was sent to the Governor on June 1 and signed on June th 19. SB 39 , Zaffirini/Zerwas, requires health benefit plans to provide routine patient care costs benefits for to an enrollee in connection clinical trial with a phase I, phase II, phase III, or phase IV if the clinical trial is conducted in relation to the prevention, detection, or treatment of a life-threatening disease or condition and is approved by: the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); the National Institutes of Health; the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA); the U.S. Department of Defense; the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; or an institutional review board of an institute within Texas that has an agreement with the Office for Human Research Protections of HHS. Routine patient care costs include the costs of any medically necessary health care service for which benefits were provided under a health benefit plan, regardless of whether the person entitled to coverage under a health benefit plan was participating in a clinical trial. stth SB 39 was sent to the Governor on June 1 and signed on June 19. SB 78 , Nelson/Smithee, renames the Texas Department of Insurance’s (TDI) Health Coverage Awareness and Education TexLink Program to to Health Coverage. The program publicly promotes health coverage. During conference committee, the bill Healthy language was amended to include legislation creating the Texas Program which is a new health plan for small employers qualifying for program participation. The legislation creates the Healthy Texas Small Employer Premium Stabilization Fund (the “Healthy Texas Fund”) at TDI from which health benefit plan issuers may receive reimbursement for claims paid for individuals covered under group health plans. It requires insurers to be responsible for all payments up to an annual threshold of $5,000 per individual, and once that threshold is met, the Healthy Texas Fund will reimburse up to 80 percent of claims, up to $75,000 per individual. Any excess funds in the Healthy Texas Fund at the end of the calendar year will be carried forward and added to the Healthy Texas Fund in the next calendar year. rdth SB 78 was sent to the Governor on June 3 and signed on June 19. Vaccines HB 448 , Hopson/Carona, enhances the Department of State Health Vaccines for Children Services (DSHS) implementation of the Program by establishing a provider-choice system applicable to both the VFC and the adult safety-net vaccination programs. Health care providers will be allowed to select FDA-approved vaccines that are available and listed on the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC’s) vaccine list. DSHS will provide the chosen vaccine if the cost to provide it is not more than 115 percent of the lowest-priced equivalent vaccine. Equivalent vaccines are defined in the bill. An exception is created in the event of a disaster or public health emergency, terrorist attack, hostile military or paramilitary action, or extraordinary law enforcement emergency. DSHS shall implement all or part of the provider choice system as soon as it is determined to be feasible, provided, however, that the department shall complete implementation of the system not later than August 31, 2010. HB 448 was signed by the Governor on May 30, 2009. Tobacco Tax/Physician Loan Repayment Program HB 2154physician education , Edwards/Hinojosa, relates to the loan repayment program and tobacco product tax. HB 2154 creates a new health care access fund and a consolidated program for loan repayments. The intent is to expand access to health care by increasing the provider workforce and expanding the Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers' infrastructure in underserved areas. The physician loan repayment program will be in addition to other loan repayment programs already in operation, including the loan repayment program recently implemented by the Frew Strategic Initiatives Advisory Committee. The bill is funded by a change in the state's calculation of the smokeless tobacco tax , shifting from an ad valorem method to a weight-based approach. The amount of revenue equal to 40% of the manufacturer’s list price minus 35.213% will be allocated to a property tax relief fund while the amount equal to 35.213% of manufacturer’s list price will be allocated to the general revenue fund. Remaining revenue will be allocated to the physician education loan repayment fund. rd The bill was sent to the Governor on June 3 and signed on June th 16. Health Information Technology HB 1218exchange of , Howard, Donna/Watson, relating to the health information between the Health and Human Services Commission and certain health care entities and facilities was sent to the Governor on June 3rd. As passed the legislation directs HHSC to establish a pilot program to determine feasibility, costs, and benefits to the creation of a health information exchange to include secure electronic health information. In addition incentives, education, and outreach tools to encourage health care providers to use the health information exchange system are outlined. HHSC will establish an electronic health information exchange pilot project in at least one urban area of the state with the participation of at least two local or regional health information exchanges. At a minimum, the exchange of a patient’s medication history between HHSC and the selected health information exchanges under the pilot project will be required. If determined to be cost-effective, HHSC would be required to pursue any waiver from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) necessary to implement the pilot and to remove obstacles hampering physician adoption of electronic health information tools, such as the requirement for handwritten certification of certain drugs under federal statute to be dispensed as written. The pilot may include additional health care information either at inception or in a subsequent expansion. An Electronic Health Information Exchange System Advisory Committee will be appointed by the executive commission to assist with the implementation of certain provisions. Further, health information technology used in the CHIP and Medicaid programs is required to conform to nationally recognized standards. The executive commissioner of HHSC is further required, if feasible, to establish a quality of care health information exchange with long-term care nursing facilities choosing to participate in the program. The initiative shall be designed to improve the quality of care and services provided to Medicaid recipients and may provide incentive payments to encourage participation. HHSC is allowed to contract for data collection, data analysis, and technical support, as needed. The acttakes effect on September 1, 2009 and subsequently the executive commissioner shall adopt rules to implement the health information exchange systems and appoint the members of the Electronic Health Information Exchange System Advisory Committee. rd HB 1218 was sent to the Governor on June 3 and signed on June th 19. HB 1342adoption of certain , Menendez/Harris, relating to the information technology takes immediate effect. This bill requires health plans to use technology providing physicians, hospitals, or other health care providers with real-time information at the point of service. Health plan enrollees must be provided with information concerning the enrollee's copayment and coinsurance, deductibles, covered benefits and services and estimated financial responsibility. The bill, as amended in the Senate, establishes a “use of technology” waiver and offers exemptions for certain health care providers. The Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) shall adopt rules to implement the bill and create a waiver process to exempt certain insurers and health care providers from requirements listed. HB 1342 was signed by the Governor on May 30th and takes immediate effect. Studies, Reporting and Pilot Programs HB 497 , Zerwas/Nelson, requires the Health and Human Services Commission and the Texas Department of Insurance to conduct a joint studydetermine the effect to on the state’s health care if the infrastructure, including health care delivery mechanisms, state Medicaid program is abolished or the amount of federal matching money available to the state is severely reduced. In 2007, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) issued a report, The Long- Term Budget Outlook, and determined current spending levels for the Medicaid program cannot be sustained. The study will assist the state’s preparation for potential Medicaid program reforms, if implemented at the federal level, addressing the CBO findings. th HB 497 was sent to the Governor on May 26 and signed by the th Governor on June 19. HB 2196, Truitt/Deuell, requires the Health and Human Services workgroup Commission (HHSC) to establish a to recommend best promote practices in policy, training, and service delivery to integration of health and behavioral health services in the state. The executive commissioner is directed to form the workgroup by October 1, 2009 and to submit a report by August 1, 2010 to appropriate committees of the Senate and House of Representatives. The Task Force would be subject to sunset review and would be abolished September 1, 2015. rd HB 2196 was sent to the Governor on June 3 and signed by the th Governor on June 19. HB 1362extends to 2011 the electronic , Gutierrez/Van de Putte, Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureaus (MRSA) registry pilot program , which tracks the prevalence of MRSA infections, in Bexar, Brazos, Potter, and Randall Counties as established by HB 1082 in 2007. To date, only six months of data has been gathered due to the time required to establish rules prior to pilot implementation. An extension of the MRSA pilot program will enable San Antonio Metropolitan Health District to track the occurrence, collect data, and analyze findings of MRSA within the area served by the covered health authority. All clinical laboratories, including hospital laboratories and clinical reference laboratories, within the area served by the pilot program are required to report all positive cases of MSRA infection, including infections contracted in a community setting, a health care facility, and any other setting, to the applicable health authority using automated and secure electronic data transmission. A health authority is not required to participate in the program but participating authorities can administer the program locally and report to DSHS. th HB 1362 was sent to the Governor on May 27 and signed on June th 19. HB 1363modifications to the , Gutierrez/Van de Putte, makes diabetes mellitus registry pilot project required by House Bill 2132 passed in 2007. The bill requires DSHS to issue a report on the diabetes mellitus registry pilot no later than December 1, 2010 instead of 2009. The report shall include an evaluation of the effectiveness of the pilot and a recommendation to continue, expand, or eliminate the pilot program. A patient can opt out of the registry. This program will expire on September 1, 2011. The bill was signed by the Governor on May 30th and the earliest effective date is September 1, 2009. SB 203 , Shapleigh/Coleman, adds requirements to the Health and reporting of health care-associated Safety Code regarding infections and includes provisions originally proposed in SB 7. The legislation: adds the requirement to report the causative pathogen if the infection is laboratory-confirmed; requires a general hospital to report the causative pathogen of a laboratory-confirmed central line-associated primary bloodstream infection to DSHS; expands the Advisory Panel on Health Care-Associated Infections to include preventable adverse events; authorizes the Commissioner to establish subcommittees to assist the panel in addressing health care-associated infections and preventable adverse events relating to hospital care provided to certain populations; expands the Texas Health Care-Associated Infection Reporting System to include reporting to DSHS of a health care-associated adverse condition or event for which the Medicare program will not provide additional payment to the facility under a policy adopted by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and an event included on the list of adverse events identified by National Quality Forum not included in the CMS list, unless the executive commissioner excludes the event; and requires DSHS to report the information publicly and require the Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) to adopt rules regarding the denial or reduction of reimbursement under the Medicaid program for preventable adverse events that occur in a hospital setting. st SB 203 was sent to the Governor on June 1 and signed on June th 19. SB 1757 , Watson/Howard, requires Texas Commission on study the methods Environmental Quality to currently used in the safely handle and dispose of unused pharmaceuticals so state to that they do not enter a wastewater system . More information on the bill is located in the Environment section. rd SB 1757 was sent to the Governor on June 3 and signed on June th 19. Education HB 3public education reform bill , Eissler/Shapiro, is an omnibus that addresses accountability at a system level and a student level. System Level Changes The bill creates a two-tiered system with an accreditation tier and a distinction tier. Accreditation is based on academic and financial performance indicators. The student achievement indicator evaluates districts and campuses on the number of students who perform at a college-ready level or who demonstrate significant growth toward that standard. The commissioner shall periodically raise the state standards to ensure that Texas is one of the top ten states in terms of college-readiness by the 2019-2020 school year. Under the distinction tier, the Commissioner of Education may designate accredited districts and acceptable campuses as “recognized” or “exemplary”. These designations will be based on meeting or showing annual improvement toward the college- readiness standard. The commissioner may award other distinctions based on outstanding academic achievement in core subject areas, growth in student achievement, and excellence in areas such as fine arts, physical education, 21st century workforce development, and second-language programs. If a campus has an unacceptable performance rating for two consecutive school years, the commissioner shall order reconstitution. The bill allows three years after reconstitution for a campus to demonstrate acceptable performance before the commissioner shall order one of the following sanctions: repurposing of the campus; alternative management of the campus; or closure of the campus. The commissioner may waive the required sanction for not more than one school year if the commissioner determines that, on the basis of significant improvement in student performance over the preceding two school years, the campus is likely to be assigned an acceptable performance rating for the following school year. Financial accountability includes a review by the comptroller to identify districts and campuses that use efficient resource allocation practices. Within that review, the comptroller shall: Evaluate existing academic accountability and financial data by integrating the data; Rank the results of the evaluation to identify the relative performance of districts and campuses; and Identify potential areas for district and campus improvement. TEA shall also develop a review process to anticipate the future financial solvency (two year projections) of each school district. The program shall be electronic-based for submitting and flagging data. Districts must create plans to address the condition(s) triggering an alert for insolvency. Student Level Changes Districts must establish a grade promotion policy at the start of each school year to include: Teacher recommendations Course or class grades Results on state assessments Other necessary academic information Students in third grade will no longer be required to pass the state assessment in order to be promoted. Advancement from grades 5 and 8 will still require that a student pass the state assessments for math and reading. Accelerated instruction will be provided to each student in grades 3 through 8 who fails a state assessment. High school students under the recommended plan will be required to pass the Algebra II and English III end-of-course exams in order to graduate. In addition, students must show mastery in all four core subject areas—math, science, social studies, and English—by achieving a cumulative score equal to the number of tests in each core area multiplied by a scale score (to be set by the commissioner). Students who perform at the college-readiness standard on these exams will be exempt from taking remedial courses in state institutions of higher education. The Recommended (RHSP) and Distinguished (DAP) graduation plans no longer include a required credit in health, speech or technology applications. Students must take four credits in each of the four core areas (“4x4”), two credits in foreign language (3 credits under the DAP), one credit in physical education, one credit in fine arts, and six unspecified elective credits (5 credits under the DAP). To be eligible for the Minimum Plan, a student must: be 16 years-old; and have completed 2 courses in each of the 4 core areas (“2x4”); OR not been promoted to 10th grade at least once. The bill allows students who have completed Algebra II and Physics to substitute rigorous applied courses (Career and Technology Education) for their required fourth-year math and science credits. Additionally, the comptroller shall establish and administer a grant program, entitled “Jobs and Education for Texans” (JET), based on the recommendations of an advisory board. The grant program will provide funding to public junior colleges, public technical institutes, and eligible nonprofit organizations that prepare low-income students for careers in high-wage, high-demand occupations. rdth HB 3 was sent to the Governor on June 3 and signed on June 19. HB 3041 , Farias/Van de Putte, requires the Texas Education Agency, to the extent possible, to develop and maintain a comprehensive scheduleaddresses each reporting that requirement generally applicable to a school district. The schedule shall include requirements imposed by a state agency or an entity other than the agency, and the date by which a school district must comply with each requirement. rdth HB 3041 was sent to the Governor on June 3 and June 19. substantial changes to the HB 3646, Hochberg/Shapiro, makes formulas and provisions of the Foundation School Program. The bill: Provides funding for charter schools equal to the greater of: 1) the amount of funding per student in weighted average daily attendance (WADA) that they would have received for the school during the 2009-2010 school year, excluding enrichment funding as they existed on January 1, 2009, and 2) an additional $120 per student in WADA or the amount of funding per student in WADA excluding enrichment to which the charter school would be entitled under Chapter 42; Provides for a wage increase of $60 per WADA or $80 per month (whichever is greater)for eligible professional staff of an open-enrollment charter school or district; Requires notification to teachers and principals who may be possible recipients of local awards to be notified of the specific criteria and any formulas on which the awards will be based; Establishes award payment structures so that remaining funds may also be used to provide teacher induction and mentoring support, provide stipends to recruit and retain classroom teachers and principals, or provide funding for previously developed incentive programs; Provides grants to assist school districts in covering the cost of educating students with disabilities; Provides supplemental funding for students in a special education program or students receiving training and instructions for employment in a current or emerging high- demand, high-wage, and high-skill occupation; Allows students to enroll full-time or for one or more courses provided through the virtual school network (SB 1 increased funding for the Virtual School Network by $18 million); Provides further guidance on electronic courses; Establishes the Select Committee on Public School Finance Weights, Allotments, and Adjustments to conduct a comprehensive review of weights, allotments, and adjustments under the public school finance system; Requires a school district to adopt a policy governing the expenditure of local funds from vending machines, rentals, gate receipts, or other local sources of revenue over which the district has direct control; Continues existing bond guarantees; Authorizes school districts and an institution of higher education located within the districts boundaries to jointly construct an instructional facility, stadium, or other athletic facilities; Allows a school district to apply for credit enhancement of bonds if the district’s application for guarantee of district bonds by the corpus and income of the permanent school fund is rejected; and Allows a school district to adopt a tax rate before the adoption of a budget. Finance Amounts - Establishes a basic allotment based on a district’s compressed tax rate, where the allotment is the greater of $4,765 or the amount equal to the product of .0165 and the average statewide property wealth per WADA. Limits a school district in any school year from receiving an amount of state and local maintenance and operations revenue per WADA that exceeds $350 of the amount of state and local maintenance and operations revenue per WADA received by the district during the preceding school year (enrichment revenue is excluded from this calculation). Provides for the commissioner to make adjustments to amounts due to a school district to comply with state code; decisions made by the commissioner under this section are final and may not be appealed. Allotment Amounts – $650 per student in average daily attendance (ADA) for students with a parent or guardian serving on active duty in a combat zone as a member of the armed forces or who is in the armed forces and the student has been transferred to a campus in the district during the school year as a result of change in residence because of an action taken under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act. $50 per student enrolled in two or more advanced career and technology education classes for a total of three or more credits or in an advance course as part of a tech-prep program. $400 per successful course a student completes through the virtual school network that satisfies a curriculum requirement for graduation, and $80 per participating student distributed to the school for administrative costs. $275 per ADA for the high school allotment added to Tier 1. School districts that impose a maintenance and operations tax at a rate equal to the state compression rate is entitled to receive an increase over the 2008-2009 school year of at least $120 per WADA. rd HB 3646 was sent to the Governor on June 3 and signed on June th 19. HB 4294textbooks, electronic , Branch/Shapiro, relates to textbooks, instruction material, and technological equipment in public schools. The bill states: Each school district and open-enrollment charter school must certify to the State Board of Education (SBOE) and the Commissioner of Education that each student has been provided with the necessary instructional materials that cover all elements of the essential knowledge and skills that have been adopted by the State Board of Education (SBOE). State textbook funds may be used to purchase technological equipment necessary to utilize electronic textbooks and instructional materials on the list. The Commissioner shall adopt a list of electronic textbooks and instructional material. The SBOE must have an opportunity to comment on textbooks and materials before the list is adopted. The school district is required to purchase at least one classroom set of textbooks adopted by the SBOE for each subject and grade level in the foundation and enrichment curriculum. The bill also establishes a pilot program where the commissioner by rule shall establish a computer lending pilot program to provide computers to participating public schools that make computers available for use by students and their parents. rd HB 4294 was sent to the Governor on June 3 and he signed it into th law on June 19. “I am signing House Bill No. 4294 into law because it will further propel Texas schools into the 21st century and ensure that our students have access to the most up-to-date information available in each subject,” said Governor Rick Perry. He further issued an Executive Order clarifying the role the State Board of Education (SBOE) must have in approving electronic textbooks and other instructional materials. Click on the following link to view the Executive-Order. SB 891public school physical , Nelson/Eissler, relates to the education curriculum . The bill requires: The physical education curriculum to be sequential, developmentally appropriate, and designed, implemented, and evaluated to enable students to develop the motor, self- management, and other skills, knowledge, attitudes, and confidence necessary to participate in physical activity throughout life. Full-day prekindergarten programs include a physical education component. Criteria provided on student teacher ratio in physical education classes and limits to class size. Each school district to establish specific objectives and goals the district intends to accomplish through the physical education curriculum. The SBOE shall ensure the curriculum does the following: Emphasizes the knowledge and skills capable of being used during a lifetime of regular physical activity; consistent with national physical education standards; requires on a weekly basis that at least 50% of physical education class time be used for actual student physical activity at a moderate or vigorous level; offers students choice in which type of physical activity to participate; offers students both cooperative and competitive games; meets the needs of students of all physical ability levels; takes into account the effect that gender and cultural differences may influence students interest in physical activity or types of physical activity; teaches self-management and movement skills; teaches cooperation, fair play, and responsible participation in physical activity; promotes student participation in physical activity outside of school; and allows physical education classes to be an enjoyable experience for students. st SB 891 was sent to the Governor on June 1 and signed on June th 19. SB 2274alters the tax code , Seliger/Chisum, so that if a district's M&O) tax rate adopted maintenance and operations ( for the prior year was less than its effective M&O rate for that year, then the district's current-year rollback tax rate would be calculated as if its prior-year adopted M&O rate was equal to its prior-year effective M&O rate. rd SB 2274 was sent to the Governor on June 3 and signed on June th 19. Environment There were several significant bills that passed during this session that addressed air quality, energy and renewable energy, and water. HB 1796carbon , Chisum/Watson, relates to the development of dioxide capture and sequestration in this state. The bill would require the Land Commissioner to contract with the University of Texas Bureau of Economic Geology (BEG) at the University of Texas at Austin to conduct a study of state-owned offshore submerged land to identify potential locations for a carbon dioxide repository. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) would develop standards and rules for the offshore sequestration of carbon dioxide. Any standards adopted by the TCEQ would need to comply with any requirements issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The School Land Board (SLB) would make the final determination of suitable locations for carbon dioxide storage. The SLB also would issue a request for proposals for the construction of infrastructure for transportation to and storage in the offshore repository. The legislation would also give the SLB authority to establish a storage fee by rule. The TCEQ would be required to adopt standards for monitoring, measuring and verifying the permanent storage status of the repository, and the BEG would perform those functions and serve as a scientific advisor. The BEG would perform the measurement, monitoring, and verification of the permanent status of carbon dioxide in the carbon dioxide repository. They would also be required to provide the SLB data relating to the measurement, monitoring, and verification of the permanent storage status of the carbon dioxide in the carbon dioxide repository, as determined by the SLB. The SLB would acquire title to the carbon dioxide stored in the repository on behalf of the state and administer and control the stored carbon dioxide in the name of the state. Both the SLB and the TCEQ would be prohibited from establishing or regulating the rates charged for the transportation of carbon dioxide to the carbon dioxide repository. Finally, the SLB would issue an annual report on the repository. The New Technology Implementation Grant (NTIG) program established in the bill would require the Commission on Environmental Quality to establish and administer a new technology implementation grant program to implement new technologies to reduce emissions from facilities and other stationary sources located within the state. The bill provides guidelines and criteria for the program as well as grant application review procedures. The section provides cost sharing requirements that require applicants to provide at least 50 percent of the costs of implementing a project under this chapter. TCEQ is required to coordinate an interagency application review process with the Comptroller, Public Utility Commission, and the Railroad Commission. The TCEQ would be required to incorporate the review results into the grant award decision process and include an annual report justification for awards made to projects that were negatively reviewed by the other agencies. Projects eligible for grants in the NTIG program could include: advanced clean energy project; new technology projects that reduce emissions of regulated pollutants from point sources that involve capital expenditures that exceed $500 million; and electricity storage projects related to renewable energy. HB 1796 would provide that funds collected under Section 185 of the Federal Clean Air Act be deposited to the General Revenue- Dedicated Clean Air Account No. 151. There would be an extension of a 2.5 percent surcharge on vehicles over 14,000 pounds, a surcharge on the registration of a truck- tractor or commercial vehicle in an amount equal to 10 percent of total fees due for the registration; and a $10 fee on every commercial motor vehicle required to be inspected, all of which would expire under current law on August 31, 2013, to August 31, 2019. Article IV also adds stationary engines to the list of items the TCEQ can fund through the TERP grant program. It would also exempt mobile generators used for natural gas recovery purposes from the requirement that at least 75 percent of the annual use of a TERP-funded project occur in nonattainment areas and affected counties for at least five years. The bill would reduce the allocation of funding for the New Technology Research and Development (NTRD) program from 9.5 percent of TERP funds to 9 percent. It would also remove an allocation of $250,000 to the TCEQ for administering the NTRD program and it would remove an allocation of $216,000 of the NTRD funds to be used by the Texas Engineering Experiment Station (TEES) for the calculation of the statewide emissions reduction for the State Implementation Plan (SIP). In addition the legislation would remove an allocation of at least 20 percent of the NTRD funds for research related to air quality at a nonprofit entity based in Houston, and it would reallocate these NTRD funds to contract with a nonprofit organization or institution of higher education to establish and administer a program to support research related to air quality. The bill would allow the TCEQ to fund air quality research with the remaining NTRD funds and provide a $216,000 contract with the TEES for the development and annual computation of creditable statewide emissions reductions obtained through wind and other renewable energy resources for the SIP. Finally, Article V of the bill would provide that 3.5 percent of TERP funding, instead of 3 percent, can be used for administration of the TERP program, and it would specify that the TCEQ receive 2 percent, and that the TEES receive 1.5 percent. The bill would require the TCEQ, the Railroad Commission, and the PUC to establish a greenhouse gas registry in which they would participate in the development of federal greenhouse gas reporting requirements. The TCEQ would also be directed to establish a registry of voluntary actions taken by businesses in the state and state agencies since September 1, 2001 to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and to work with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to give credit for early action under any federal rules that may be adopted for federal greenhouse gas regulation. rd HB 1796 was sent to the Governor on June 3 and signed on June th 19. HB 469tax incentives , King/Seliger, would provide to organizations that participate in research and development activities clean energy project related to a "". Specifically, a "clean energy project" is defined as the construction of a coal-fueled or petroleum coke-fueled electric generating facility, including a facility in which the fuel is gasified before combustion, that: (1) has a capacity of at least 200 megawatts; (2) meets various emission limits outlined in the bill; (3) will capture at least 70 percent of the carbon dioxide resulting from the generation of electricity by the facility; (4) is capable of permanently sequestering the captured carbon dioxide in a geological formation; and (5) is capable of supplying the carbon dioxide for use in an Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) project. Additionally, Section 382 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to modify the definition of an "advanced clean energy project". Advanced clean energy projects would be similar to clean energy projects, except they would include modifications to existing facilities, have different emission standards, require a smaller percentage of the carbon dioxide emitted be captured and sequestered, and could involve only a portion of the emissions stream from the facility. The Texas Commission on Environment Quality would be responsible for approving the application of a project to be certified as an advanced clean energy project. HB 469 also provides for a franchise tax credit, that would equal up to the lesser of 10 percent of the total capital cost of the project or $100 million, for an entity implementing a clean energy project, with a maximum of three projects receiving the credit. The Comptroller would decide whether to issue the tax credit to an entity only after: (1) the Railroad Commission has issued a certificate of compliance for the project; (2) the facility is completed and fully operational; (3) the Bureau of Economic Geology of the University of Texas at Austin verifies the facility is sequestering at least 70 percent of the carbon dioxide resulting from the generation of electricity by the facility; and (4) the project's owners have signed an interconnection agreement with the Electric Reliability Commission of Texas. The amount of franchise tax credit issued to each entity may not exceed the total amount of franchise tax that would have been due if the entity operating the clean energy project had not received the credit. The Comptroller could not issue a franchise tax credit until September 1, 2013. Property tax abatement provisions will be created for advanced clean energy projects located in county reinvestment zones. The Railroad Commission will be required to issue a certificate of compliance verifying a project met the requirements for a clean energy project. The Railroad Commission would be authorized to charge a fee to cover the cost of processing an application for certification. Under the bill, the Bureau of Economic Geology of the University of Texas at Austin (BEG) is also required to monitor, measure, and verify the status of the sequestered carbon dioxide generated by clean energy projects. The BEG would also be responsible for designing initial protocols and standards for the process, reviewing the conduct of the process, evaluating the results of the process, and determining whether to transmit verification of the process to the Comptroller. The bill would allow the BEG to charge a varying annual fee, that would total $8.1 million over eight years, to cover the cost of these services. The first fee would be due within two years of the date the project first supplies carbon captured by the project to an enhanced oil recovery project. New Sections 151.334 to the Tax Code have been added to create a sales tax exemption for certain components of tangible personal property used in connection with an advanced clean energy project. These changes to the Code would not affect taxes imposed before the effective date of this bill. With respect to the new sales tax exemption, there are currently no facilities in Texas being operated to capture and sequester anthropogenic carbon dioxide. Therefore, the amount and value of tangible personal property used for a project is unknown and the potential revenue loss from the sales tax exemption cannot be estimated. The bill would amend the Tax Code to reduce the oil production tax rate from 4.6% to 1.15% for certain oil producers. To qualify, the oil produced must be recovered through an Enhanced Oil Recovery Project (EOR) that uses carbon dioxide generated by a clean energy project. Also, the producer must receive certification from either the Railroad Commission or the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, depending on where the carbon dioxide is sequestered. The tax rate reduction would last for 30 years from the Comptroller's application approval date. Currently, a producer is eligible for the rate reduction for 7 years if at least 99% of the carbon dioxide sequestered will remain so for at least 1000 years. Since the bill would extend the length of the rate reduction the state could experience a revenue loss that would depend on the number of producers participating in an EOR project. HB 469 would take effect September 1, 2009. HB 1433increases the maximum annual water , Lucio/Averitt, quality fee to $100,000 beginning on September 1, 2009. On September 1 of each subsequent year, the commission shall adjust the maximum fee amount as necessary however the fee may not exceed $150,000 for each permit or contract and the maximum annual fee under this section for a wastewater discharge or waste treatment facility that holds a water right for the use of water by the facility is $150,000 th The bill was signed by the Governor on May 26 and will take effect September 1, 2009. HB 2063 , Callegari/Duncan, The bill would amend Section 36.102 enforcement action taken of the Water Code to specify that in an by a groundwater conservation district against any person that is a governmental entity for a violation of district rules, the limits on the amount of fees, costs, and penalties that a district may impose under certain statutes would constitute a limit on the governmental entity's liability for the violation. thth The bill was sent to the Governor on May 26 and signed June 19. HB 3544 , Lucio/Fraser, The legislation calls on the Texas TCEQ) to utilize Commission on Environmental Quality ( electronic mail (e-mail) to send out information , including notices, orders, and decisions issued or sent by TCEQ. This bill also provides that an e-mail address from a member of the public that is provided for receiving notices, orders, or decisions from a governmental body is not considered confidential and nondisclosable. Finally this legislation provides that if public information exists in electronic or magnetic medium, then the requestor may request a copy. It modifies the program at the Texas Commission on Environmental property tax exemptions for pollution Quality that determines control property to require TCEQ to use its own cost analysis procedure when making a use determination for equipment and requires the TCEQ to create a permanent advisory committee with members from industry, appraisal districts, taxing units, and environmental groups. th HB 3544 was sent to the Governor on May 28 and signed June th 19. HB 4231water imported from a source , Ritter/Eltife, allows outside of the state (except water imported from Mexico) to be conveyed from the place of storage to the place of use via the bank and bed of any flowing natural stream in the state. Since the new out-of-state water and its movement does not affect the current situation in any basin, the movement from one basin or another of this new water should be exempt from all of the requirements of an interbasin transfer. This bill would exempt these transfers from the requirements of the Water Code afforded interbasin transfers. th HB 4231 was sent to the Governor on May 26 and signed June th 19. SB 184 , Watson/Chisum, requires the comptroller to report to the Legislature on greenhouse gas reduction measures this legislation “no regrets” greenhouse gas emissions was also referred to as the legislation . The report shall be delivered to the legislature no later than December 31, 2010 and must list strategies for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases that result in net savings for consumers or businesses in the state; that can be achieved without financial cost to consumers or businesses in the state; or help businesses in the state maintain global competitiveness. It requires the comptroller to consider the strategies for reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases that have been implemented in other states or nations. In determining whether an emission reduction strategy may result in a financial cost, the comptroller must consider the total net costs that may occur over the life of the strategy. The report must include for each identified strategy: initial, short-term capital costs that may result from the implementation of the strategy delineated by the cost to business and the cost to consumers; and lifetime costs and savings that may result from the implementation of the strategy delineated by the costs and savings to business and consumers. The comptroller is also required under the bill to appoint one or more advisory committees to assist in identifying and evaluating greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies and the bill further provides who should be appointed to the committees. stth SB 184 was sent to the Governor on June 1 and signed June 19. The effective date is September 1, 2009. SB 1387Texas Railroad , Seliger/Crownover, requires the Commission to regulate the injection of anthropogenic carbon dioxide . The railroad commission is given jurisdiction over the geologic storage of carbon dioxide in, and the injection of carbon dioxide into, a reservoir that is initially or may be productive of oil, gas, or geothermal resources or a saline formation directly above or below that reservoir. A person drilling or operating such well is required to first obtain the necessary permits from the railroad commission. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) must also certify that underground fresh water supplies will not be injured by a permitted activity before the Railroad Commission can issue a permit. No later than December 1, 2010 the General Land Office shall prepare and file with the legislature a preliminary report on a recommended framework for managing activities related to geologic storage on state-owned land. th SB 1387 was signed by the Governor on May 27 and is effective on September 1, 2009. SB 1472air permit applicants to , Gallegos/Hernandez, requires attend a public meeting to answer questions regarding the permit. st The bill was sent to the Governor on June 1 and signed on June th 19. SB 1711surface mining operations , Hegar/Frost, authorizes to use a reservoir for sediment control or to comply with regulations relating to fire or dust suppression. th The bill was sent to the Governor on May 8 and signed on May th 19. The bill is effective immediately. SB 1757 , Watson/Howard, requires Texas Commission on study Environmental Quality to the methods currently used in the handle and dispose of unused pharmaceuticals state to safely so that they do not enter a wastewater system. It requires the commission to consider: the methods currently used in the state by consumers, health care providers, and others for that purpose; alternative methods used for that purpose including methods used in other states; and the effects on public health and the environment of the various methods used for that purpose. In conducting the study, the commission may solicit input from: HHSC, DPS, pharmaceutical manufacturers, pharmacies, health care providers, hospitals, clinics, long-term care facilities, local governments, EPA, etc. The commission shall submit a report of the results of the study to the legislature not later than December 1, 2010. The report must include the commission's recommendations regarding the methods to be used by consumers, health care providers, and others for disposing of unused pharmaceuticals so that they do not enter a wastewater system; and an analysis of the feasibility of implementing the recommended disposal methods on a statewide basis. r d SB 1757 was sent to the Governor on June 3 and signed on June th 19. SB 2312 , Averitt/Miller, makes cities, counties, groundwater districts, interstate compact commissions to which the state is a eligible for funds party, and nonprofit water supply corporations from the water infrastructure fund administered by the Water Development Board. th SB 2312 was sent to the Governor on May 29 and signed on June th 19. The Act takes effect September 1, 2009. SB 2314 , Averitt/Callegari, requires the Texas Water Development any Board to adopt rules specifying the manner in which capitalization grant under the state water pollution control revolving fund, the safe drinking water revolving fund, or any to provide additional state revolving fund are authorized to be used assistance to an eligible applicant for public works. The bill authorizes the board to adopt rules in an expedient manner in order to comply with federal funding terms, if necessary, and continues the validity of rules adopted in such a manner if the board readopts the rules as required by the Administrative Procedure Act within 180 days of initial adoption. th SB 2314 was sent to the Governor on May 18 and signed by him rd on May 23. The act takes effect on September 1, 2009. ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Finance ACM: Jon Fortune ______________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction on the 2009-10 Proposed Budget, Capital Improvement Program, and Five-Year Financial Forecast. BACKGROUND st The FY 2009-10 . Staff provided the City Council with a comprehensive overview of the proposed budget at a Budget Work Session on August 6, 2009. During this meeting, the City Council asked a number of questions and requested a variety of information concerning the budget proposal. In response to the questions, staff has prepared the attached memorandum that summarizes the questions we received and the answers that we have been able to compile. In addition, the attached PowerPoint presentation outlines the impact of a number of potential changes to the General Fund Five Year Forecast. The purpose of this agenda item is to provide the City Council with the above described information concerning the proposed budget and allow an additional opportunity for questions and dialogue. Below is the schedule we will follow to adopt the budget and tax rate: August 18 Vote to Consider a Proposal for a Tax Increase prior to publishing Notice of Hearing (if necessary) September 1 Public Hearing on Proposed Budget st September 8 1 Public Hearing on Tax rate (if necessary) nd September 15 2 Public Hearing on Tax rate (if necessary) September 22 City Council Adopts Budget and Tax rate I look forward to discussing the budget materials in detail with you. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please let me know. Agenda Information Sheet August 18, 2009 Page 2 EXHIBITS 1. Power Point Presentation Updated 2009-10 Proposed Budget and Financial Forecast 2. Question and Answer Memorandum and Exhibits Respectfully Submitted By: Bryan Langley Director of Finance Finance Department * 215 E. McKinney * Denton, TX 76201 (940) 349-8224 * DFW Metro (972) 434-2259 * Fax (940) 349-7206 MEMORANDUM ÜßÌÛæ ß«¹«­¬ ïèô îððç ÌÑæ ر²±®¿¾´» Ó¿§±® ¿²¼ Ó»³¾»®­ ±º ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ÚÎÑÓæ Þ®§¿² Ô¿²¹´»§ô Ü·®»½¬±® ±º Ú·²¿²½» ÍËÞÖÛÝÌ Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ Þ«¼¹»¬ ɱ®µ­¸±° Ï«»­¬·±²­ ¿²¼ λ­°±²­»­ : ײº±®³¿¬·±² ®»¹¿®¼·²¹ ¬¸» îððçóïð Þ«¼¹»¬ ¿²¼ Ú·ª» Ç»¿® Ú±®»½¿­¬ ©¿­ °®»­»²¬»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ±² ß«¹«­¬ êò Þ»´±© ·­ ¿ ­«³³¿®§ ±º ¬¸» ¯«»­¬·±²­ ¬¸¿¬ × ¸¿ª» ®»½»·ª»¼ ¿²¼ ¬¸» ¿²­©»®­ ¬¸¿¬ ©» ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ¿¾´» ¬± ½±³°·´»ò Ú±® ¬¸» ·¬»³­ ¬¸¿¬ ®»¯«·®» º«®¬¸»® ®»­»¿®½¸ô ©» ©·´´ °®±ª·¼» ¿¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ¿¬ ¿ º«¬«®» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ³»»¬·²¹ò Ïïæ É¿­ ¬¸»®» ¿²§ ­¬·°«´¿¬·±² ·² ¿² »½±²±³·½ ·²½»²¬·ª» ¿¹®»»³»²¬ ©·¬¸ Ю»­¾§¬»®·¿² ر­°·¬¿´ ¬¸¿¬ ©±«´¼ ¾» ¿ºº»½¬»¼ ¾§ ¬¸»·® ®»½»²¬ ½¸¿²¹» ¬± ¬¿¨ »¨»³°¬ ­¬¿¬«­á ßæ Ò±ô ²±¬ ¿½½±®¼·²¹ ¬± ¬¸» ·²½»²¬·ª» ¿¹®»»³»²¬ ¿°°®±ª»¼ ¾§ ݱ«²½·´ ·² ѽ¬±¾»® îððíò д»¿­» ®»º»® ¬± ¿¬¬¿½¸³»²¬ ïò Ïîæ ɸ¿¬ ©»®» ¬¸» ½¸¿²¹»­ °»® ½¿¬»¹±®§ ø­·²¹´»óº¿³·´§ô ³«´¬·óº¿³·´§ ¿²¼ ½±³³»®½·¿´÷ º®±³ ¬¸» îððè ¬± ¬¸» îððç ¿°°®¿·­¿´á ßæ д»¿­» ®»º»® ¬± ¿¬¬¿½¸³»²¬ èò Ïíæ ɸ¿¬ ¿®» ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ®¿¬»­ ±º ½±³°¿®¿¬·ª» ½·¬·»­á ßæ ß ½±³°¿®¿¬·ª» ½¸¿®¬ ±² ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ °¿¹» ­¸±©­ ¬¸» ÚÇ îððèóðç ¬¿¨ ®¿¬»­ ¿²¼ ¿²§ °®±°±­»¼ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ½¸¿²¹»­ò ï Ý·¬§ ÚÇ îððèóðç Ì¿¨ כּ ÚÇ îððçóïð Ю±°±­»¼ Ì¿¨ כּ ß®´·²¹¬±² üðòêìè Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ý¿®®±´´¬±² üðòêïéèéë Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ü¿´´¿­ üðòéìéç Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ü»²¬±² üðòêêêëî Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ú´±©»® Ó±«²¼ üðòììéçð Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ú±®¬ ɱ®¬¸ üðòèëë Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ú®·­½± üðòìëððð Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ù¿®´¿²¼ üðòêççê üðòéðìê Ù®¿²¼ Ю¿·®·» üðòêêçççè Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ù®¿°»ª·²» üðòíëððð Ò± ݸ¿²¹» ×®ª·²¹ üðòëìðê Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ô»©·­ª·´´» üðòììðîï Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ó½Õ·²²»§ üðòëèëëðð Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ó»­¯«·¬» üðòêìððð Ò± ݸ¿²¹» д¿²± üðòìéíëð üðòìèèê η½¸¿®¼­±² üðòëéïéê Ò± ݸ¿²¹» ͱ«¬¸´¿µ» üðòìêîðð Ò± ݸ¿²¹» Ïìæ ɸ¿¬ ·­ ¬¸» ·³°¿½¬ ±º ¬¸» ¾«¼¹»¬ ®»¼«½¬·±² º±® ¬¸» °«®½¸¿­» ±º ´·¾®¿®§ ¾±±µ­ ±² ¬¸» ¾±±µ­ °»® ½¿°·¬¿ ®¿¬·±á ßæ ͬ¿ºº ·­ ½±²¬·²«·²¹ ¬± ®»­»¿®½¸ ¬¸·­ ®»¯«»­¬ò ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ©·´´ ¾» º±®©¿®¼»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ·² ¬¸» ²»¿® º«¬«®»ò Ïëæ ɸ¿¬ ·­ ¬¸» ®¿¬·±²¿´» ¾»¸·²¼ ¬¸» °®±°±­¿´ ¬± ®»¼«½» º«²¼·²¹ º±® ¬¸» Õ·©¿²·­ º·®»©±®µ­ ­¸±©á ßæ ͬ¿ºº ·­ ½±²¬·²«·²¹ ¬± ®»­»¿®½¸ ¬¸·­ ®»¯«»­¬ò ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ©·´´ ¾» º±®©¿®¼»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ·² ¬¸» ²»¿® º«¬«®»ò Ïêæ Ю±ª·¼» ¿ ½±³°¿®·­±² ±º ®»ª»²«»­ °®±°±­»¼ ¬± ·²½®»¿­» ·² ¬¸» п®µ­ Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬ò ßæ ͬ¿ºº ·­ ½±²¬·²«·²¹ ¬± ®»­»¿®½¸ ¬¸·­ ®»¯«»­¬ò ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ©·´´ ¾» º±®©¿®¼»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ·² ¬¸» ²»¿® º«¬«®»ò Ïéæ Ю±ª·¼» ¬±¬¿´ ½±­¬ ±º °®±ª·¼·²¹ Ý·¬§ ­»®ª·½»­ ¬± ¬¸» ß®¬­ ¿²¼ Ö¿¦¦ Ú»­¬·ª¿´ò ײ½´«¼» ½±³°®»¸»²­·ª» ´±±µ ¿¬ ¬¸» ¬±¬¿´ »½±²±³·½ ·³°¿½¬ ¬¸·­ »ª»²¬ ¼®¿©­ò ßæ ͬ¿ºº ·­ ½±²¬·²«·²¹ ¬± ®»­»¿®½¸ ¬¸·­ ®»¯«»­¬ò ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ©·´´ ¾» º±®©¿®¼»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ·² ¬¸» ²»¿® º«¬«®»ò Ïèæ Ю±ª·¼» ¼»¬¿·´­ ±² ¬¸» °®±°±­¿´ ¬± ½«¬ ¬¸» ½±«®¬ ®»°±®¬»® º±® °´¿²²·²¹ò î ßæ ̸» ½±«®¬ ®»°±®¬»® ©±«´¼ ­¬·´´ ¾» ·² °´¿½» ¬± ¬¿µ» ³·²«¬»­ ¿¬ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ λª·»© ݱ³³·¬¬»» ³»»¬·²¹­ò ß É»¾ó¾¿­»¼ °®±¹®¿³ ½¿´´»¼ Ù®¿²·½«­ ©±«´¼ ®»°´¿½» ¬¸» ²»»¼ º±® ¿ ½±«®¬ ®»°±®¬»® ¿¬ ¬¸» д¿²²·²¹ ¿²¼ Ʊ²·²¹ ©±®µ ­»­­·±² ³»»¬·²¹­ ¿²¼ °«¾´·½ ¸»¿®·²¹­ò Ù®¿²·½«­ ¿´´±©­ °´¿§ó¾¿½µ ±º ¿² »²¬·®» ³»»¬·²¹ ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¬¸» ¾®±¿¼½¿­¬ ±º ¬¸» ³»»¬·²¹ ¿«¼·± ±²´·²»ò Ó»»¬·²¹­ ¿®» ®»½±®¼»¼ ¿²¼ ½¿¬¿´±¹»¼ ¾§ ¿¹»²¼¿ ·¬»³ô ¿´´±©·²¹ ¬¸» «­»® ¬± ´·­¬»² ¬± ¬¸» °±®¬·±² ±º ¬¸» ³»»¬·²¹ ¬¸¿¬ ·²¬»®»­¬­ ¬¸»³ò ß Ð´¿²²·²¹ Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬ ­¬¿ºº ³»³¾»® ©·´´ ®»½±®¼ ³·²«¬»­ º±® ¬¸» Ø·­¬±®·½ Ô¿²¼ ݱ³³·­­·±²ô Ʊ²·²¹ Þ±¿®¼ ±º ß¼¶«­¬³»²¬­ ¿²¼ ¬¸» ݱ²­¬®«½¬·±² ß¼ª·­±®§ ß°°»¿´­ Þ±¿®¼ò Ïçæ Ю±ª·¼» ¼»¬¿·´­ º±® ¬¸» ±ª»®¬·³» ®»¼«½¬·±² ·² ¬¸» º·®» ¼»°¿®¬³»²¬ò ر© ³«½¸ ±º ¬¸» ®»¼«½¬·±² ·­ ¿¬¬®·¾«¬»¼ ¬± ®»¼«½·²¹ ì󳿲 »²¹·²» ½®»©­ ¬± í󳿲 »²¹·²» ½®»©­á Ю±ª·¼» ¿ ³¿¬®·¨ ±² ¬¸» ·³°¿½¬ ±º ®±´´·²¹ °±­·¬·±²­ ¬± ­·½µ ´»¿ª» ­´±¬­ò ßæ ß°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ üïïèôðð𠱺 ¬¸» »¨°»²¼·¬«®» ®»¼«½¬·±² ·² ±ª»®¬·³» ·­ ®»´¿¬»¼ ¬± ¬¸» ­¬¿ºº·²¹ ½¸¿²¹» ±º ¿ ì ¬± í °»®­±² ½®»©ò ̸» ®»³¿·²·²¹ ½±­¬ ­¿ª·²¹­ ·­ ¿¬¬®·¾«¬»¼ ¬± ³±ª·²¹ ¿¼³·²·­¬®¿¬·ª» ¾¿¬¬¿´·±² ½¸·»º­ ¬± ±°»®¿¬·±²­ ¾¿¬¬¿´·±² ½¸·»º­ º±® ±ª»®¬·³» ½±ª»®¿¹» èæðð ¿ò³ò ¬± ëæ ðð °ò³ò ͬ¿ºº ©·´´ ¾®·²¹ º±®©¿®¼ ¿ ³¿¬®·¨ ¬± ¼»­½®·¾» ¬¸» ·³°¿½¬ ±º ®±´´·²¹ °±­·¬·±²­ ¬± ­·½µ ´»¿ª» ­´±¬­ ·² ¬¸» º«¬«®»ò Ïïðæ Ю±ª·¼» ¿ ½±³°¿®·­±² ±º ¬¸» ´»ª»´ ±º º«²¼·²¹ ¾«¼¹»¬»¼ º±® ­¬®»»¬ ³¿·²¬»²¿²½» ª»®­«­ ¬¸» ±ª»®¿´´ ²»»¼ò ßæ д»¿­» ®»º»® ¬± ¿¬¬¿½¸³»²¬ êò Ïïïæ Ю±ª·¼» ¿² ¿²¿´§­·­ ±º ¬¸» ½±­¬ ­¿ª·²¹­ ¿­­±½·¿¬»¼ ©·¬¸ ¸·®·²¹ ´»¹¿´ ­¬¿ºº ª»®­«­ ½±²¬®¿½¬·²¹ º±® ±«¬­·¼» ­»®ª·½»­ò ßæ д»¿­» ®»º»® ¬± ¿¬¬¿½¸³»²¬ îò Ïïîæ ɸ¿¬ ·­ ¬¸» ®»¬«®² ®¿¬» º±® ½±´´»½¬·±² ±º ½±¼» »²º±®½»³»²¬ ´·»²­á ßæ ̸·­ ·­ ¿ ½±³°´·½¿¬»¼ ®»¬«®² ®¿¬» ¬± ½¿´½«´¿¬»ô ¾»½¿«­» ´·»²­ °¿·¼ ¿®» ²±¬ ²»½»­­¿®·´§ ¬·»¼ ¬± ¬¸» º·­½¿´ §»¿® ¬¸»§ ©»®» ±®·¹·²¿´´§ º·´»¼ ·²ò Ю±ª·¼»¼ ¾»´±© ·­ ¬¸» ´·»²­ °¿·¼ ª»®­«­ ²»© ´·»²­ º·´»¼ º±® ¬¸» °¿­¬ º±«® º·­½¿´ §»¿®­ò ÚÇîððëóðê íìð ´·»²­ °¿·¼å íî º·´»¼ ÚÇ îððêóðé ïîð ´·»²­ °¿·¼å íï º·´»¼ ÚÇ îððéóðè ëî ´·»²­ °¿·¼å êî º·´»¼ ÚÇ îððèóðç îì ´·»²­ °¿·¼å ïð º·´»¼ Ïïíæ Ю±ª·¼» ¼»¬¿·´­ ±² ¬¸» Ю±¶»½¬¼±¨ ¿²¼ Ô¿­»®º·½¸» ­±º¬©¿®» °¿½µ¿¹»ò ßæ д»¿­» ®»º»® ¬± ¿¬¬¿½¸³»²¬ í ¿²¼ ëò í Ïïìæ Ю±ª·¼» ¿ ½±³°®»¸»²­·ª» ¼·­½«­­·±² ±² ¬¸» «­» ±º ¹¿­ ©»´´ °®±½»»¼­ò ßæ º ½·¬§ó±©²»¼ °®±°»®¬§ò Û¨¬®¿¬»®®·¬±®·¿´ Ö«®·­¼·½¬·±² øÛÌÖ÷ò Ѻ ¬¸±­» ¹¿­ ©»´´­ô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Ü»²¬±² ¸¿­ ±©²»®­¸·° ·²¬»®»­¬ ·² ¬»² øïð÷ ±²ó­·¬» ¹¿­ ©»´´­ ¿²¼ ­»ª»² øé÷ ±ººó­·¬» ¹¿­ °±±´­ò ̸» ¬»² øïð÷ ±²ó­·¬» ¹¿­ ©»´´­ ¿®» ¿´´ ó­·¬» ¹¿­ °±±´ò ̸» ®»³¿·²·²¹ ­·¨ øê÷ ¹¿­ °±±´­ ¿®» ´±½¿¬»¼ ±² ±¬¸»® ½·¬§ó±©²»¼ °®±°»®¬§ ¿²¼ñ±® ®·¹¸¬ó±ºó©¿§ò Ú±® ¹¿­ ©»´´­ ´±½¿¬»¼ ±² °®·ª¿¬» °®±°»®¬§ô ¬¸» °®·²½·°¿´ ®»ª»²«» ­±«®½» º±® ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Ü»²¬±² ·­ ¼»¬»®³·²»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» Ü»²¬±² Ý»²¬®¿´ ß°°®¿·­¿´ Ü·­¬®·½¬ øÜÝßÜ÷ò Ó·²»®¿´ ±©²»®­ ¿®» ¿­­»­­»¼ ¬¿¨»­ ¾¿­»¼ ±² ¬¸»·® ±©²»®­¸·° ·²¬»®»­¬ò ÜÝßÜ »­¬·³¿¬»­ ¬¸¿¬ ³±­¬ ¹¿­ ©»´´­ °»¿µ ¿¬ ±²» §»¿® ¿²¼ °®±¼«½¬·±² ¼»½®»¿­»­ ¿°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ êðû ¬¸»®»¿º¬»®ò ̸» Ý·¬§ ¿´­± ½¸¿®¹»­ ¿ ª¿®·»¬§ ±º º»»­ ¬± ±ºº­»¬ ¬¸» ¼»´·ª»®§ ±º °´¿²²·²¹ô º·®» ¿²¼ ©¿¬»®­¸»¼ °®±¬»½¬·±² ­»®ª·½»­ò ̸» Ý·¬§ ³¿§ ¿´­± ®»½»·ª» ­¿´»­ ¿²¼ «­» ¬¿¨»­ ¿­­±½·¿¬»¼ ©·¬¸ ¬¸»­» ¹¿­ ©»´´­ò Ú±® ¹¿­ ©»´´­ ´±½¿¬»¼ ±² ±® ¿­­±½·¿¬»¼ ©·¬¸ ½·¬§ó±©²»¼ °®±°»®¬§ô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Ü»²¬±² ®»½»·ª»­ ®±§¿´¬·»­ô ­«®º¿½» «­» ®»²¬¿´ º»»­ô ¿¼ ª¿´±®»³ ¬¿¨»­ô ­¿´»­ ¿²¼ «­» ¬¿¨»­ô ´»¿­» ¾±²«­ ³±²»§ô º·®» º»»­ô °´¿²²·²¹ º»»­ô ®±¿¼ ¼¿³¿¹» ¿­­»­­³»²¬ º»»­ô ©¿¬»®­¸»¼ °®±¬»½¬·±² º»»­ô ¿²¼ ³·­½»´´¿²»±«­ º»»­ ¿­­±½·¿¬»¼ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ¬»®³­ ±º »¿½¸ ¿¹®»»³»²¬ ø·ò»òô ­¸«¬ó·² º»»­ô ¼»´·²¯«»²¬ º»»­ô »¬½÷ò ɸ·´» ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Ü»²¬±² ·­ »¨»³°¬ º®±³ ¿¼ ª¿´±®»³ ¬¿¨»­ô ¬¸» ±©²»®­¸·° ·²¬»®»­¬ ¸»´¼ ¾§ ¬¸» °®·ª¿¬» ±°»®¿¬±® ·­ ²±¬ò ߬ ¬¸» ¼·®»½¬·±² ±º ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Ü»²¬±² ³¿·²¬¿·²­ ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ¬©± øî÷ ­»¹®»¹¿¬»¼ º«²¼­ º±® ¹¿­ ©»´´ ®»ª»²«»­æ ̸» º·®­¬ º«²¼ ·­ ¬¸» ß·®°±®¬ Ù¿­ É»´´ Ú«²¼ò ̸·­ º«²¼ ·­ «­»¼ ¬± ¿½½±«²¬ º±® ®»ª»²«»­ ¿­­±½·¿¬»¼ ©·¬¸ ¹¿­ ©»´´­ ±² ¿·®°±®¬ °®±°»®¬§ ¿²¼ ·­ ®»­¬®·½¬»¼ ¾§ Ú»¼»®¿´ ߪ·¿¬·±² ß¼³·²·­¬®¿¬·±² øÚßß÷ ®»¹«´¿¬·±²­ º±® «­» ±² ¿·®°±®¬ °®±°»®¬§ ±²´§ò ß­ ±º Ö«²» íðô îððçô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ¸¿­ ½±´´»½¬»¼ ¿°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ üìôçêìôïèè ·² ®±§¿´¬·»­ô ­«®º¿½» «­» ®»²¬¿´ º»»­ô ´»¿­» ¾±²«­ ³±²»§ô ³·­½»´´¿²»±«­ º»»­ô ¿²¼ ·²¬»®»­¬ ·²½±³»ò Ý«®®»²¬´§ô ¬¸»®» ¿®» ¬¸®»» øí÷ °®±¼«½·²¹ ±²ó­·¬» ¹¿­ ©»´´­ ¿²¼ ±²» øï÷ °®±¼«½·²¹ ±ººó­·¬» ¹¿­ °±±´ò ͬ¿ºº ¿²¬·½·°¿¬»­ ¬¸¿¬ ¿² ¿¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ­»ª»² øé÷ ±²ó ­·¬» ¹¿­ ©»´´­ ©·´´ ¾» ±²ó´·²» ¾§ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º ß«¹«­¬ îððçò ̸» °®·³¿®§ ®»¿­±² º±® ¬¸·­ ­·¹²·º·½¿²¬ ·²½®»¿­» ·­ ¼«» ¬± ¬¸» ®»½»²¬ ¿ª¿·´¿¾·´·¬§ ±º ¿ ¬®¿²­³·­­·±² ´·²» ¬± ¬¸»­» ¹¿­ ©»´´­ò Ô¿­¬´§ô ¿² »´»ª»²¬¸ ©»´´ ©¿­ ±®·¹·²¿´´§ °´¿²²»¼ º±® ¬¸» ß·®°±®¬ ¾«¬ ·­­«»­ ®»´¿¬»¼ ·¬­ ´±½¿¬·±² ¸¿ª» ½¿«­»¼ ¬¸» ±°»®¿¬±® ¬± ¿¾¿²¼±² ¬¸±­» °´¿²­ò ̸» ­»½±²¼ º«²¼ ·­ ¬¸» Ò±²óß·®°±®¬ Ù¿­ É»´´ Ú«²¼ò ̸·­ º«²¼ ·­ «­»¼ ¬± ¿½½±«²¬ º±® ®»ª»²«»­ ¿­­±½·¿¬»¼ ©·¬¸ ¹¿­ ©»´´­ ²±¬ ´±½¿¬»¼ ±² ¿·®°±®¬ °®±°»®¬·»­ò Í·²½» ±²ó­·¬» ¼®·´´·²¹ ¸¿­ ±²´§ ¾»»² ¿«¬¸±®·¦»¼ ±² ¿·®°±®¬ °®±°»®¬§ô ¿´´ ¼·®»½¬ ¹¿­ ©»´´ ®»ª»²«»­ ¿®» º®±³ ±ººó­·¬» ¹¿­ °±±´­ò ß­ ±º Ö«²» íðô îððçô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ¸¿­ ½±´´»½¬»¼ ¿°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ üíôêïìôéïí ·² ®±§¿´¬·»­ô ´»¿­» ¾±²«­ ³±²»§ô ¿¼ ª¿´±®»³ ¬¿¨»­ô ­¿´»­ ¿²¼ «­» ¬¿¨»­ô ³·­½»´´¿²»±«­ º»»­ô ¿²¼ ·²¬»®»­¬ ·²½±³»ò Ý«®®»²¬´§ô ¬¸»®» ¿®» ­·¨ øê÷ ¹¿­ °±±´­ ¿½½±«²¬»¼ ·² ¬¸·­ º«²¼ ¾«¬ ±²´§ º±«® øì÷ ¿®» °®±¼«½·²¹ò ̸» ¹¿­ °±±´­ ¿®» ì ¿­­±½·¿¬»¼ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ½·¬§ó±©²»¼ °®±°»®¬·»­æ Ò±®¬¸ Ô¿µ»­ п®µ øï÷ô Ý®±­­ Ì·³¾»®­ п®µ øï÷ô Ô¿µ» Ú±®»­¬ п®µ øï÷ô ß·®°±®¬ Ñ°»² Í°¿½» п®µ øï÷ô Ø·½µ±®§ Ý®»»µ Í«¾­¬¿¬·±² øï÷ô ¿²¼ Ê·²¬¿¹» п®µ©¿§ øï÷ò Ѳ´§ ¬¸» ¹¿­ °±±´­ ¿­­±½·¿¬»¼ ©·¬¸ Ò±®¬¸ Ô¿µ»­ п®µô Ý®±­­ Ì·³¾»®­ п®µô ß·®°±®¬ Ñ°»² Í°¿½» п®µô ¿²¼ Ê·²¬¿¹» п®µ©¿§ ¿®» ½«®®»²¬´§ °®±¼«½·²¹ò ײ ¬¸» Ò±²óß·®°±®¬ Ù¿­ É»´´ Ú«²¼ô ¿¼ ª¿´±®»³ ¬¿¨»­ ¿²¼ ­¿´»­ ¬¿¨»­ ¿®» ¬®¿²­º»®®»¼ ¬± ¬¸·­ º«²¼ ¬¸±­» ®»ª»²«»­ º®±³ ¹¿­ ©»´´­ ¿®» ¼»°±­·¬»¼ ¼·® Ì¿¨ α´´ò Í·²½» »¨°»²­»­ ·² ¬¸» Ü»¾¬ Í»®ª·½» Ú«²¼ ½¿² ±²´§ ¾» «­»¼ º±® ¼»¾¬ °¿§³»²¬­ô ­¬¿ºº ¬®¿²­º»®­ ¬¸» ¿³±«²¬ Ù»²»®¿´ Ú«²¼ ¿²¼ ¬¸»² ¬®¿²­º»®®»¼ ±«¬ò ̸» ¬®¿²­º»® ¿³±«²¬ ·­ ¾¿­»¼ ±² ½±²º·¼»²¬·¿´ ­¿´»­ ¬¿¨ λ½»²¬´§ô ­¬¿ºº ¾»½¿³» ¿©¿®» ±º ­»ª»®¿´ º»¼»®¿´ ¹®¿²¬­ ¿­­±½·¿¬»¼ ©·¬¸ ¬¸®»» øí÷ °¿®µ­ ·² ©¸·½¸ Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬ °®±ª·¼» ¿² ±°·²·±² ±² ©¸»¬¸»® ±® ²±¬ ¹¿­ ©»´´ ®»ª»²«»­ ¿­­±½·¿¬»¼ ©·¬¸ ¬¸»­» °¿®µ­ ¸¿¼ ¬± ¾» ®»­¬®·½¬»¼ ·² ¿²§ ©¿§ò ߬¬¿½¸³»²¬ é ·­ ¬¸» ´»¹¿´ ¬¸» ­°»½·º·½ °¿®µ­ô ­¬¿ºº ¸¿­ ®»½±³³»²¼»¼ ¬¸» ½®»¿¬·±² ±º ¿ ²»© п®µ­ Ù¿­ É»´´ º«²¼ ¿­ °¿®¬ ±º ¬¸» ÚÇ îððçóïð Þ«¼¹»¬ò Í·²½» ¬¸»­» ®»ª»²«»­ ©»®» °®»ª·±«­´§ ¿½½±«²¬»¼ º±® ·² ¬¸» Ò±²óß·®°±®¬ Ù¿­ É»´´ Ú«²¼ô ­¬¿ºº ©·´´ ¾» ®»¯«·®»¼ ¬± ¬®¿²­º»® ¬¸» ¹¿­ ©»´´ º«²¼­ ¿­­±½·¿¬»¼ ©·¬¸ °¿®µ °®±°»®¬§ ¬¸¿¬ ©¿­ °«®½¸¿­»¼ ©·¬¸ ­¬¿¬» ±® º»¼»®¿´ ¹®¿²¬­ ·²¬± ¬¸» °®±°±­»¼ п®µ­ Ù¿­ É»´´ Ú«²¼ò Ú«¬«®» ®»ª»²«»­ º®±³ ¬¸» ¿ºº»½¬»¼ °¿®µ °®±°»®¬·»­ ©·´´ ¾» ¼·®»½¬´§ ¼»°±­·¬»¼ ·²¬± ¬¸» ²»© п®µ­ Ù¿­ É»´´ º«²¼ò ͬ¿ºº ¸¿­ ½¿´½«´¿¬»¼ ¬¸» ¬®¿²­º»® ¿­ ±º Ö«²» íðô îððç ¬± ¾» ¿°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ üïôêðïôêîíò ̸·­ º·¹«®» ·­ ­´·¹¸¬´§ ¹®»¿¬»® ¬¸¿² ©¸¿¬ ©¿­ ½±²¬»³°´¿¬»¼ ·² ¬¸» ÚÇ îððçóïð °®±°±­»¼ ¾«¼¹»¬ò ß­ ­«½¸ô ¬¸·­ ®»ª·­»¼ ¿³±«²¬ ©·´´ ¾» °®»­»²¬»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ º±® ½±²­·¼»®¿¬·±² ·² ¬¸» ¾«¼¹»¬ ¿°°®±°®·¿¬·±² ±®¼·²¿²½» ±² Í»°¬»³¾»® îîô îððçò Ïïëæ Ю±ª·¼» ¿ ­«³³¿®§ ±º °¿®µ ¼»¼·½¿¬·±² º»»­ °¿·¼ ¬± ¼¿¬» ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ¿²¼ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ±² ¸±© ©» ¸¿ª» ­°»²¬ ¿²§ °®±½»»¼­ò ßæ ̸» п®µ Ô¿²¼ Ü»¼·½¿¬·±² Ñ®¼·²¿²½» ýçèóðíç ©¿­ ¿¼±°¬»¼ ¾§ Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ±² Ú»¾®«¿®§ ïéô ïççèô º±® ¬¸» °«®°±­» ±º ¿½¯«·®·²¹ °¿®µ °®±°»®¬§ ¿²¼ ¼»ª»´±°·²¹ °¿®µ­ ·² ²»© ®»­·¼»²¬·¿´ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬­ ·² ¬¸» ½·¬§ò ̸» Ñ®¼·²¿²½» ·­ ¿¼³·²·­¬»®»¼ ¿­ °¿®¬ ±º ¬¸» ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ °®±½»­­ ¿²¼ ·­ ·²·¬·¿¬»¼ ©¸»² ´¿²¼ ·­ °´¿¬¬»¼ ±® ¾«·´¼·²¹ °»®³·¬­ ¿®» ·­­«»¼ò п®µ Ô¿²¼ Ü»¼·½¿¬·±² Ú«²¼ çïëæ ɸ»² ®»­·¼»²¬·¿´ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ·­ °´¿²²»¼ º±® ¿ ²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼ô ¿ º±®³«´¿ ·­ «­»¼ ¬± ¼»¬»®³·²» ©¸¿¬ ¬¸» °¿®µ ¿½®»¿¹» ®»¯«·®»³»²¬ ©·´´ ¾» º±® ²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼ °¿®µ º¿½·´·¬·»­ò ̸·­ º±®³«´¿ ·­ ¾¿­»¼ ±² ¬¸» ²«³¾»® ±º °®±°±­»¼ ¸±³»­ ±® ¿°¿®¬³»²¬ «²·¬­ò ̸» ¼»ª»´±°»® ³«­¬ ¼»¼·½¿¬» ¬¸» ®»¯«·®»¼ ¿½®»¿¹» ±®ô ·º ·¬ ·­ ´»­­ ¬¸¿² ë ¿½®»­ô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ³¿§ ®»¯«·®» ¿ ë º»» ·² ´·»« ±º ´¿²¼ ¼»¼·½¿¬·±²ô ¾¿­»¼ ±² ¬¸» °»® ¿½®» ³¿®µ»¬ ª¿´«» ±º ¬¸» ´¿²¼ ¾»·²¹ °´¿¬¬»¼ò ̸» ±®¼·²¿²½» ®»¯«·®»­ ¬¸» ´¿²¼ ±® ¬¸» º»» ·² ´·»« ±º ´¿²¼ô ¾» »¨°»²¼»¼ ©·¬¸·² c ³·´» ±® «° ¬± ï ³·´» º®±³ ¬¸» ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ò Û·¹¸¬ ²»© °¿®µ ­·¬»­ ¬±¬¿´·²¹ ïëìòïë ¿½®»­ ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ¿½½»°¬»¼ ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¬¸» п®µ Ô¿²¼ Ü»¼·½¿¬·±² Ñ®¼·²¿²½» ­·²½» ·¬­ ¿¼±°¬·±² ·² Ú»¾®«¿®§ ïççèò ̸»­» ­·¬»­ ·²½´«¼» Ý®±­­ Ì·³¾»®­ п®µô Ò±®¬¸ б·²¬» п®µô Þ»²¬ Ý®»»µ п®µô л¾¾´»¾®±±µ п®µô ̸» Ю»­»®ª» ¿¬ л½¿² Ý®»»µ п®µô Í»¯«±·¿ п®µô α¾­±² ο²½¸ п®µô ¿²¼ ɸ»»´»® η¼¹» п®µò Ú«²¼­ ½±´´»½¬»¼ ·² ¬¸» п®µ Ü»¼·½¿¬·±² Ú«²¼ çïë ­·²½» ïççè ¿®» üïôêçëôèêçòëíô ·²½´«¼·²¹ üïéíôçéíòéç ·²¬»®»­¬ »¿®²»¼ò ̸·­ ¸¿­ ¾»»² ®»½»·ª»¼ º®±³ ¿ ¬±¬¿´ ±º èê ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ¿½½±«²¬­ò üèìíôïðèòìì ¸¿­ ¾»»² ¿´´±½¿¬»¼ º±® ïì °¿®µ ´¿²¼ ¿½¯«·­·¬·±²­ ±® ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ±º »¨·­¬·²¹ °¿®µ ´¿²¼ ·² ¬¸» ·³³»¼·¿¬» ¿®»¿ ±º ®»½»·°¬ò ̸» ½«®®»²¬ ¾¿´¿²½» ±º ¬¸» п®µ Ü»¼·½¿¬·±² Ú«²¼ çïë ·­ üèïéôééîòðçò п®µ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ Ú«²¼ çïêæ ß­ ¾«·´¼·²¹ °»®³·¬­ ¿®» ±¾¬¿·²»¼ º±® ®»­·¼»²¬·¿´ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ô ¿ °¿®µ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ º»» ±º üîçïòðð °»® ­·²¹´» º¿³·´§ «²·¬ ¿²¼ üïèéòð𠺱® ³«´¬·º¿³·´§ «²·¬ ·­ ¿­­»­­»¼ò ̸»­» º«²¼­ ³«­¬ ¾» «­»¼ ¬± ¼»ª»´±° ²»© °¿®µ­ ±® ³¿µ» ·³°®±ª»³»²¬­ ¬± »¨·­¬·²¹ °¿®µ­ ©·¬¸·² c ³·´» ±® «° ¬± ï ³·´» º®±³ ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬ ¬¸¿¬ ¼»¼·½¿¬»¼ ¬¸» º«²¼­ò Í·²½» ¬¸» ¿¼±°¬·±² ±º ¬¸» ±®¼·²¿²½» ·² ïççèô ¿ ¬±¬¿´ ±º üíôèêíôíïðòîî ¸¿­ ¾»»² ½±´´»½¬»¼ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ üìéìôìèèòðð ·²¬»®»­¬ »¿®²»¼ò Û¨°»²¼·¬«®»­ ±® ¿´´±½¿¬·±² ±º üîôðïéôéêçòðë ¸¿­ ¾»»² ³¿¼» ±² îí °¿®µ ¿®»¿­ò Û¨¿³°´»­ ±º ­±³» ±º ¬¸»­» °¿®µ­ ¿®» ͱ«¬¸ Ô¿µ»­ п®µô Ô¿µ» Ú±®»­¬ п®µô Ü»²·¿ п®µô Ó¿½µ п®µô ÓÔÕ Ð¿®µô Ý®±­­ Ì·³¾»®­ п®µ ¿²¼ Ò±®¬¸ б·²¬» п®µò ̸» ½«®®»²¬ ¾¿´¿²½» º±® ¬¸» п®µ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ Ú«²¼ çïê ·­ üïôèìêôìëìòïéò Ïïêæ Ю±ª·¼» ¿ ­«³³¿®§ ±º ¬¸» É¿¬»® п®µ ¿²¼ Ò¿¬¿¬±®·«³ º·²¿²½·¿´­ò ßæ д»¿­» ®»º»® ¬± ¬¸» ½¸¿®¬ ±² ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ °¿¹» º±® ¿ ¬¸®»»ó§»¿® ¸·­¬±®§ ±² ®»ª»²«»­ ¿²¼ »¨°»²¼·¬«®»­æ 못²«»­ îððêóðé îððéóðè îððèóðçöö Ò¿¬¿¬±®·«³ö üéìïôîîë üêçîôëíî üêêðôëèë É¿¬»® п®µ üêíðôïíï üéïêôêèí üëïîôçèê ̱¬¿´ üïôíéïôíëê üïôîëéôèðî üïôïéíôëéï Û¨°»²¼·¬«®»­ îððêóðé îððéóðè îððèóðç Ò¿¬¿¬±®·«³ üïôïîðôëíï üïôïêëôìëð üïôðïèôèíè É¿¬»® п®µ üëêéôíêé üêðìôíîð üëðíôîçð ̱¬¿´ üïôêèéôèçè üïôéêçôééð üïôëîîôïîè öײ½´«¼»­ Ü×ÍÜ Î»·³¾«®­»³»²¬ öö̸®±«¹¸ Ö«´§ íïô îððç ê Ïïéæ Ю±ª·¼» ¼»¬¿·´­ ±² ®»ª»²«» ¹»²»®¿¬»¼ º®±³ ­±º¬¾¿´´ ¿²¼ ¾¿­»¾¿´´ º·»´¼­ò ßæ ͬ¿ºº ·­ ½±²¬·²«·²¹ ¬± ®»­»¿®½¸ ¬¸·­ ®»¯«»­¬ò ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ©·´´ ¾» º±®©¿®¼»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ·² ¬¸» ²»¿® º«¬«®»ò Ïïèæ Ю±ª·¼» ÌÓÎÍ ½·¬§ ½±³°¿®·­±² ±º ¾»²»º·¬ ±°¬·±²­ ­»´»½¬»¼ ¾§ ±¬¸»® ½·¬·»­ò ßæ д»¿­» ®»º»® ¬± ¿¬¬¿½¸³»²¬ ìò Ïïçæ ر© ©·´´ ¬¸» ´«³° ­«³ ­¿´¿®§ °®±°±­¿´ ·³°¿½¬ ݱ«²½·´ ¿°°±·²¬»¼ °±­·¬·±²­á ßæ ͬ¿ºº ·­ ½±²¬·²«·²¹ ¬± ®»­»¿®½¸ ¬¸·­ ®»¯«»­¬ò ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ©·´´ ¾» º±®©¿®¼»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ·² ¬¸» ²»¿® º«¬«®»ò Ïîðæ Ю±ª·¼» »³°·®·½¿´ ¼¿¬¿ °®»ª·±«­´§ °®±ª·¼»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ¬± ½±³°¿®» ¬¸» ´»ª»´ ±º °¿®µ ´¿²¼ °»® ½¿°·¬¿ô ´·¾®¿®§ ¾±±µ­ °»® ½¿°·¬¿ô °±´·½» ±ºº·½»®­ ¿²¼ º·®»º·¹¸¬»®­ °»® ½¿°·¬¿ò ßæ ͬ¿ºº ·­ ½±²¬·²«·²¹ ¬± ®»­»¿®½¸ ¬¸·­ ®»¯«»­¬ò ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ©·´´ ¾» º±®©¿®¼»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ·² ¬¸» ²»¿® º«¬«®»ò Ïîïæ Ю±ª·¼» ¼»¬¿·´­ ±º ¬¸» ÚÇ îððèóðç »­¬·³¿¬»¼ »¨°»²¼·¬«®»­ º±® ¬¸» η­µ 묻²¬·±² Ú«²¼ò ɸ¿¬ ¿®» ¬¸» ³·­½»´´¿²»±«­ »¨°»²­»­á ßæ ̸» ³·­½»´´¿²»±«­ »¨°»²¼·¬«®»­ ·² ¬¸» η­µ 묻²¬·±² Ú«²¼ ¿®» ¿¬¬®·¾«¬»¼ °®·³¿®·´§ ¬± ´·¬·¹¿¬·±² ½±­¬­ò ̸» ±®·¹·²¿´ ¾«¼¹»¬»¼ »¨°»²¼·¬«®»­ º±® ¬¸» ³·­½»´´¿²»±«­ ½¿¬»¹±®§ ©»®» üïëðôðððò ̸» Ý·¬§ ¸¿­ ½«®®»²¬´§ ­°»²¬ üíîêôïéíò ß ¾«¼¹»¬ ¿³»²¼³»²¬ ©·´´ ¾» °®»­»²¬»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ݱ«²½·´ ¼«®·²¹ ¬¸» Í»°¬»³¾»® ïô îððç ³»»¬·²¹ ¬± ·²½®»¿­» ¬¸» »¨°»²¼·¬«®» ¿«¬¸±®·¬§ ·² ¬¸» η­µ 묻²¬·±² Ú«²¼ò é ßÌÌßÝØÓÛÒÌï ßÌÌßÝØÓÛÒÌî ÍËÐÐÔÛÓÛÒÌßÔÎßÒÕ×ÒÙÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ ÌÑÌßÔÚËÒÜ×ÒÙÎÛÏËÛÍÌüÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ Ü×Ê×Í×ÑÒÐÎÑÙÎßÓÐßÝÕßÙÛ ÔÛÙßÔ    ÐÎÑÙÎßÓÐßÝÕßÙÛÌ×ÌÔÛ  ÜÛÍÝÎ×ÐÌ×ÑÒ Add two full time attorney positions to the City Attorney’s office; one full time in municipal court and one full time in the central office. Add one clerical in the municipal court.  ×ÍÍËÛÍÚ×ÍÝßÔ×ÓÐßÝÌßÒÜÐÑÔ×ÝÇÎÛÝÑÓÓÛÒÜßÌ×ÑÒÍ With regard to Municipal Court, one full-time prosecutor has tried all Municipal Court cases since her arrival in 1993. The number of cases has quadrupled, the number of assistant judges has increased, but no additional prosecutors have been added. The prosecutor has only had contract prosecutors to help cover dockets in her absence and to assist on some of our multiple attorney, code enforcement, and arraignment dockets. The prosecutor has no clerical assistance, provides legal advice to the Police Department, Animal Control, and Code Enforcement officers. She is on call 24/7. She also works many weekends. This accretion of duties creates a very tenuous situation for the City in the event the prosecutor should leave, as the tickets continue to be issued and the docket stalls. It would be prudent to hire an entry-level attorney and create a career ladder progression. This would address the workload accretion, as well as the lack of any succession planning in this critical area. The addition of a clerical person in municipal court to handle phones, scheduling appointments, typing, subpoenas, and other duties is also essential for support of the prosecutor and efficiency of the office. The cost of the additional personnel can be funded in part by deleting the part-time contract prosecutors. In 2007-2008, this expense totaled $45,650. In 2008-2009 to date, we have expended $16,540. I recommend adding one full time attorney in the mid range to the City Attorney’s Office. The cost of outside counsel has proven quite high in recent years, and performing additional work in-house is more cost effective. The current tempo of operations and workload justifies the additional full time attorney and will allow the delivery of more timely legal services. Denton is poised to grow exponentially, and the City, including the Legal staff, must be adequate to deliver the needed services. ÍËÐÐÔÛÓÛÒÌßÔÎßÒÕ×ÒÙÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ ÌÑÌßÔÚËÒÜ×ÒÙÎÛÏËÛÍÌüÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ ÌÎÛÒÜßÒßÔÇÍ×Í É±ª£†¦£k«k††Ã±±††ÆÂÂk——±«ª†±É”£Ð”«úkªêÐÆ•k†Áø£”«†£†ÆÐ _ÆÆ——”£k†±ÃªÃªÐ±ÃªÆ«†ñ£øY£k”økªêД•k†È ßÌÌßÝØÓÛÒÌí 221 N. Elm * Denton, TX 76201 * Telephone (940) 349-8360 * FAX (940) 349-7208 Building Inspection / Consumer Health Divisions Memorandum To: Bryan Langley, Director of Finance From: Rodney Patterson, Plans Examiner Supervisor Date: August 12, 2009 Subject: ProjectDox Software The Building Inspections division has been exploring the possibilities of implementing a digital plan review process for the past several years. These efforts have recently been intensified as the City looks for ways to “green up” our processes. In the past, there has always been a reluctance to switch to a digital plan review process due to several hurdles which have seemed insurmountable. The greatest hurdle has always been the difficulties associated with performing highly technical reviews of large commercial projects on a computer screen using cumbersome PDF documents. Some of the toughest issues our examiners have expressed with reviewing plans digitally have always been: 1) the limited ability to switch back and forth between sheets easily and expediently in order to compare items between sheets such as wall and door designations and locations on floor plan sheets to the ratings and construction types on door and wall schedules; 2) The ability to adequately track changes made to plans between submittals; and 3) The ability to verify that final plan sets submitted for construction contain all of the revisions which were required as a part of the review and approval process. These issues are difficult and time consuming with paper copies of the plans and with digital plan review from a CD it would be even more time consuming. In the past, we had been unable to find a solution which would allow us to overcome these obstacles. However, after viewing a presentation of the ProjectDox software, and conducting research on-line as to the features and capabilities of the software, I am convinced that this tool will be invaluable to our department, the development community, and the City as a whole in streamlining our development review process. Not only will this software allow us to go to an almost totally paperless permitting system, (we are recommending that applicants continue to be given the option of submitting plans and applications via the traditional paper methods with proper digital back up during a phase in period for those do-it- yourself and small “mom and pop” applicants), it will save time, money, and other valuable resources for applicants by allowing them the opportunity to submit plans and applications from the comforts of their own office. There are several unique features of the ProjectDox software which have helped to alleviate some of the past concerns with digital plan review. A transition to digital plan review using ProjectDox software will provide reviewers with the tools they need to more effectively and efficiently track plans through the process. These tools include: 1) automated notification to both project managers and applicants, when plan reviews are complete; 2) routing tools which allow permit techs to route plans with the push of a button; 3) layering tools in which layers are created for each reviewer so that plan sheets can be “redlined’ by each individual reviewer and viewed individually byapplicants; and 4) overlay tools which allow reviewers to verify the changes made between versions by overlaying each plan sheet onto previous versions and the software will track changes between versions by showing them in green and red as opposed to black for areas that have remained the same. As to how this software will assist in “greening up” the process, the current process for building permit submittal requires that the applicant submit ten (10) complete sets of plans with their application. These plans are parceled out to various different departments for review. The plans include both civil and architectural plans, landscape drawings etc. For most projects, these plan sets include between 50 and 150 sheets and for larger projects they may contain several hundred sheets. Taking into account the revisions that are required before the plans are approved, even smaller projects can easily generate between 2,000 and 5,000 sheets of paper. These sheets range in size from 24” x 36” to 36” x 48”. The sad truth is that the majority of this paper ends up in the recycle bin. In transitioning to digital plan review, the majority of this paper will be eliminated. Additionally, allowing applicants to submit electronically will reduce vehicle trips by applicants/couriers who currently must deliver paper plans to our office for processing. It will also eliminate internal trips between city facilities by reviewers from other departments who currently visit our office to pick up plans for review. The implementation of PrjectDox software will not be limited to building permits alone. It will also be used by Planning and DRC Engineering to streamline submittals through the DRC process as well. As a part of our research in determining the feasibility of transitioning to a digital plan review process, a brief presentation was made to the development community at the developer’s quarterly luncheon on February 25, 2009. The information was well received by members of the development community. Also, subsequent discussions with the developer’s committee which is currently reviewing the DRC process, indicated that not only were most members in favor of a transition to digital plan review, they would also be willing to entertain an additional submittal fee in order to help defray the cost of the software. The reasoning behind their willingness to pay the additional fee was the fact that their printing costs would be significantly reduced by the transition to a digital plan review process. Included below is a list of the benefits, both tangible and intangible, that based on the assessment of the software’s capabilities we believe will be realized with a transition to digital plan review using the ProjectDox software. Tangible Increases staff efficiency in performing plan review. Speeds up the plan review process. Allows concurrent reviews by all divisions. Reduces routing errors and/or delays. Provides real-time access to permit status and progress for applicants and City staff. Improves workflow reporting for staff to help manage projects. Decreases costs for external archival and retrieval of paper plans. Provides immediate retrieval of approved plans. Reduces paper storage; eliminates clutter; frees office space. Consolidates separate departmental plan storage areas into a centralized computer access point. Plans available on-line 24/7 to reviewers, inspectors and first responders. Saves costs for office supplies. Reduce printing and courier costs for developers. Reduces the potential for lost plans. Intangible The City is viewed as a leader in electronic plan review technology. The City’s reputation as a leader in “Green Innovation” is enhanced. The City is viewed by developers in a favorable light since we would be saving applicants, owners, designers and contractor’s time and money, making it easier to do business with the City of Denton. Improved employee morale. Improved internal and external customer service and customer satisfaction. Major Objectives Eliminate submission of paper plans. Decrease vehicular trips to City facilities and on City streets. Improve efficiency in plan review. Improve the customer experience for issues related to development services. Decrease customer costs for printing, couriers and gas. Speed up the plan submittal process; decrease turnaround time for applicant. Conclusion In conclusion, staff has long realized that there are far reaching benefits which can be achieved with the transition to a digital plan review process. The consensus among staff is that with the ProjectDox software, we have finally found a product that provides us with the tools necessary to make the transition to a digital plan review process a reality. _________________________ Rodney Patterson Plans Examiner Cc: Mark Cunningham, Planning and Development Department Director Kurt Hansen, Building Official Brian Lockley, Development Review Committee Administrator Chuck Russell, Interim Planning Manager ßÌÌßÝØÓÛÒÌì ݱ³°¿®·­±²±ºÝ·¬§Ð´¿²Ð®±ª·­·±²­ £ªñªø£”«†Ã£ªø”£«¼ÜÆ п®¬·½·°¿¬·²¹Û³°´±§»»Ó«²·½·°¿´Ë°¼¿¬»¼Ë°¼¿¬»¼ß²²«·¬§ß²²«·¬§Í»®ª·½»Í«°°´»³»²¬¿´Í«°°´»³»²¬¿´Ð±°«´¿¬·±²Ý±²¬®·¾«¬·²¹ Ó«²·½·°¿´·¬§Ü»°±­·¬Ý«®®»²¬Í»®ª·½»Í»®ª·½»×²½®»¿­»×²½®»¿­»Î»¬·®»³»²¬Ü»¿¬¸Ü»¿¬¸Ó»³¾»®­ ο¬»Ó¿¬½¸·²¹Ý®»¼·¬Ý®»¼·¬øû÷Ç»¿®Û´·¹·¾·´·¬·»­Þ»²»º·¬­Þ»²»º·¬­ ο¬·±øû÷Ç»¿®Ûºº»½¬·ª»Û³°´±§»»­Î»¬·®»»­ Ûºº»½¬·ª» ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô ß´´»² éûîæïïððÌïççéÎéðïççéÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ç»­Ç»­èïôéèíêîð ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô ß®´·²¹¬±² éûîæïïððÌïççèÎéðïççèÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ç»­Ç»­íêçôïëðîôëðé ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ý¿®®±´´¬±² éûîæïéëîððçÎéðîððçÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ò±Ò±ïîïôêðìèíè ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ü»²¬±² éûîæïïððÌîðððÎéðîðððÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ç»­Ç»­ïðçôëêïïôðïç ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ú¿®³»®­Þ®¿²½¸éûîæïïððÌïççêÎéðïççêÎîëÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ç»­Ò±îèôéëðìíë ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ú®·­½±éûîæïïððÌîðððÎéðîðððÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ç»­Ç»­ïððôðððèðè ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ù¿®´¿²¼éûîæïïððÌïçççÎéðîððèîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ç»­Ç»­îîèôìëðîôðïç ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ù®¿²¼Ð®¿·®·»éûîæïïððÌïççíÎéðïççíÎîëÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ç»­Ç»­ïêéôçðîïôïéì ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ù®¿°»ª·²»éûîæïïððÌïççèÎéðïççèÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ò±Ò±ìçôêíëëëí ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ø«®­¬éûîæïïððîððçÎéðîððçÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ò±Ò±íèôëððííð ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô ×®ª·²¹ éûîæïïððÌïççîÎéðîððèîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ç»­Ç»­îïðôïëðïôìèí ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ô»©·­ª·´´»éûîæïïððÌïççéÎéðïççéÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ò±Ò±çìôëèçêéì ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ó¿²­º·»´¼éûîæïïððÌïççîÎéðïççîÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ç»­Ç»­ ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ó½Õ·²²»§éûîæïïððÌïççêÎéðîððíÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ç»­Ç»­ïïèôîððéèë ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô Ó»­¯«·¬»éûîæïïððÌïççîÎéðïççîÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ò±Ò±ïíéôëëðïôðëð ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô д¿²±éûîæïïððÌïççìÎéðïççìÎîðÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ò±Ò±îêðôîððîôîðë ëÇ®­ñß¹»êðô η½¸¿®¼­±² éûîæïïððÌïççîÎéðïççîÎîëÇ®­ñß²§ß¹»Ò±Ò±ççôèîîççð ßÌÌßÝØÓÛÒÌë   îîï Òò Û´³ ö Ü»²¬±²ô ÌÈ éêîðï ö Ì»´»°¸±²» øçìð÷ íìçóèëìï ö ÚßÈ øçìð÷ íìçóééðé Planning and Development Department MEMORANDUM To: Bryan Langley From: Chuck Russell Date: August 12, 2009 Subject: Supplemental Laserfiche Information Bryan, I have been asked to provide back-up material that will support request to fund the Laserfiche Imaging Project. Planning staff previously provided an overview proposed 09-10 budget (see Attachment 1). I have attached several additional documents that provide more detail of the benefits of purchasing this system and its role as a critical tool to enhance and improve the development processes in the City. As stated in the Supplemental Package, the Laserfiche system will provide consistent filing of documents into one repository, a streamlined project approval process, management reports for projects, improved records management, and a reduction in the amount of staff time spent on responding to requests for information. oal is to provide on-line applications and document access to applicants. Planning would like automated notifications to go to applicants by email and to be able to streamline, track, and report progress on the approval process across the entire Department. Attachment 2 contains the updated comprehensive report prepared by Technology Services that includes the scope of work for each of the line items in the project. Attachment 3 contains a helpful presentation that summarizes the key points of the project. Attachments 4, 5 and 6 contain examples of two cities and a county that benefitted from implementation of Laserfiche systems. www.cityofdenton.com Supplemental Laserfiche Information August 14, 2009 Page 2 of 2 Some of the specific benefits that Laserfiche can provide include: Significant time savings for staff with a corresponding time savings for the public in everything from report writing to front counter customer service (e.g. responding to daily requests for information) Ability for staff to locate all information for a site or project in one place Allows for more comprehensive reviews of projects Multiple people are able to review the same information at the same time Lessens any potential impact of an institutional knowledge drain due to staff turnover All electronic system reduces the need for and cost of paper copies Builds a historical database for all City staff to access Reduces demand for storage space in City Hall West Please let me know if I can provide any additional information or clarification. Chuck Russell, AICP Planning Supervisor Planning Department City of Denton 221 N. Elm Street Denton TX 76201 (940) 349-7705 (office) (940) 390-3430 (mobile) (940) 349-7707 (fax) Email: chuck.russell@cityofdenton.com ÍËÐÐÔÛÓÛÒÌßÔÎßÒÕ×ÒÙÁÁÁÁïÁÁÁÁÁ ÌÑÌßÔÚËÒÜ×ÒÙÎÛÏËÛÍÌüÁÁïçêôêëðÁÁÁÁÁ Ü×Ê×Í×ÑÒÐÎÑÙÎßÓÐßÝÕßÙÛ Ð´¿²²·²¹Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬   ñÜÊØË×ÔÚÕØôÐÜÖÔÏÖíËÎÓØÚÉ ÜÛÍÝÎ×ÐÌ×ÑÒ  ̸»½¿°¬«®»¿²¼³¿²¿¹»³»²¬±º¼±½«³»²¬­©·¬¸·²¬¸»Ý·¬§±ºÜ»²¬±²·­½®·¬·½¿´¬±»ª»®§ ¿­°»½¬±º¸±©¬¸»Ý·¬§º«²½¬·±²­ôº®±³½«­¬±³»®­»®ª·½»¬±´»¹¿´®»¯«·®»³»²¬­ò̸»Ý·¬§±º Ü»²¬±²«¬·´·¦»­¿²Û²¬»®°®·­»Ü±½«³»²¬Ó¿²¿¹»³»²¬Í±´«¬·±²øÛÜÓÍ÷±º©¸·½¸Ô¿­»®º·½¸» ­±º¬©¿®»·­¬¸»¾¿½µ¾±²»òܱ½«Ò¿ªÍ±´«¬·±²­©¿­®»¬¿·²»¼¾§¬¸»Ý·¬§±ºÜ»²¬±²¬±³¿µ» ­«¹¹»­¬·±²­¿­¬±¸±©¬¸»ÆYŐÛÜÓÍ°®±¶»½¬½±«´¼¾»·³°®±ª»¼¿²¼·³°´»³»²¬»¼¿²¼ »­¬·³¿¬»­©»®»°®±ª·¼»¼º±®»¿½¸­¬¿¹»±º¬¸»°®±¶»½¬ò ̸»Ð´¿²²·²¹—”†«ª†Å¼»­·®»¼®»­«´¬­º±®¬¸»ÛÜÓÍ°®±¶»½¬·²½´«¼»­±´«¬·±²­º±®æ ½±²­·­¬»²¬º·´·²¹·²¬±±²»®»°±­·¬±®§ô­¬®»¿³´·²»¬¸»°®±¶»½¬¿°°®±ª¿´°®±½»­­ô°®±ª·¼» ³¿²¿¹»³»²¬®»°±®¬­º±®°®±¶»½¬­ô·³°®±ª»¼®»½±®¼­³¿²¿¹»³»²¬ô¿²¼®»¼«½»¬¸»¿³±«²¬ ±º­¬¿ºº¬·³»­°»²¬±²®»­°±²¼·²¹¬±±°»²®»½±®¼­®»¯«»­¬­ò  ÌÎÛÒÜßÒßÔÇÍ×Í Ñª»®¬¸»°¿­¬¬©±¼»½¿¼»­ô´±½¿´¹±ª»®²³»²¬­¸¿ª»·²½®»¿­·²¹´§´»ª»®¿¹»¼·²º±®³¿¬·±² ¬»½¸²±´±¹§¬±¬®¿²­º±®³®»´¿¬·±²­¸·°­©·¬¸½·¬·¦»²­¾§·³°®±ª·²¹¬¸»¼»´·ª»®§±º­»®ª·½»­ò ̸»­»·³°®±ª»³»²¬­½¿²´»¿¼¬±¹®»¿¬»®½·¬·¦»²­¿¬·­º¿½¬·±²ô·²½®»¿­»¼¹±ª»®²³»²¬ ¬®¿²­°¿®»²½§¿²¼­·¹²·º·½¿²¬®»¼«½¬·±²­·²±°»®¿¬·²¹½±­¬­òÝ®»¿¬·²¹²»©¿²¼¸·­¬±®·½¿´ °®±¶»½¬­·²¿²»´»½¬®±²·½ô­»¿®½¸¿¾´»º±®³¿¬ô¬¸»Ý·¬§©±«´¼¿´´±©½·¬·¦»²­¬±¾»¿¾´»¬± ´±½¿¬»·²º±®³¿¬·±²î츱«®­¿¼¿§ô鼿§­¿©»»µª·¿¬¸»Ý·¬§©»¾­·¬»ò̸»®»¯«»­¬»¼ ­»®ª·½»­©±«´¼¿´­±·³°®±ª»¬¸»½«®®»²¬Ô¿­»®º·½¸»Ñ®¼·²¿²½»º·´»´±½¿¬»¼·²¬¸»Ý·¬§ Í»½®»¬¿®§®»°±­·¬±®§òÑ®¼·²¿²½»­©±«´¼»ª»²¬«¿´´§¾»­»¿®½¸¿¾´»¿²¼·²¬»¹®¿¬»¼©·¬¸ÛÍÎ× ³¿°­¦±²·²¹´¿§»®­¬±°®±ª·¼»¿´´¸·­¬±®·½¿´±®¼·²¿²½»·²º±®³¿¬·±²®»´¿¬»¼¬±¿´´°¿®½»´­·² ¬¸»Ý·¬§ò  ×ÍÍËÛÍ Ì¸»·³°´»³»²¬¿¬·±²±º¿²«°¬±¼¿¬»ÛÜÓͳ¿¨·³·¦»­½·¬·¦»²ª¿´«»·²¿²«³¾»®±º©¿§­ò׬ ©·´´»²¿¾´»­¬¿ºº¬±½±³°´»¬»¼¿·´§¬¿­µ­»¨°»¼·»²¬´§¿²¼´±½¿¬»½®·¬·½¿´·²º±®³¿¬·±²¿´³±­¬ ·²­¬¿²¬¿²»±«­´§òܱ½«³»²¬­©·´´¾»·²¿­¸¿®»¼®»°±­·¬±®§¿ª¿·´¿¾´»¬±¿´´Ý·¬§­¬¿ºº¿²¼©·´´ »²¿¾´»­¬¿ºº¬±¸¿ª»®»¿¼§¿½½»­­¬±·²º±®³¿¬·±²¬±³¿µ»¬·³»´§ô¿½½«®¿¬»¼»½·­·±²­¿²¼ »²­«®»½±²¬·²«·¬§±º±°»®¿¬·±²­òɸ»²»³°´±§·²¹­»½«®·¬§³»¿­«®»­¿²ÛÜÓÍ¿­­·­¬­·²¬¸» °®±¬»½¬·±²±ºÆÃTªÅ°®·ª¿¬»·²º±®³¿¬·±²º®±³¬¸»º¬ô¬¿³°»®·²¹±®«²¿«¬¸±®·¦»¼®»´»¿­»ò ͽ¿²²»¼¼±½«³»²¬­¿®»³«½¸´»­­´·µ»´§¬±¹±³·­­·²¹¬¸¿²°¿°»®º·´»­òλ½±®¼­ ³¿²¿¹»³»²¬º«²½¬·±²¿´·¬§¸»´°­»²­«®»½±³°´·¿²½»©·¬¸¼¿¬¿­»½«®·¬§­¬¿²¼¿®¼­¿²¼ ®»¬»²¬·±²­½¸»¼«´»­¬¸®±«¹¸±«¬¿£k«ª†Å´·º»½§½´»ò̸»ÛÜÓͽ¿²¾»·²¬»¹®¿¬»¼·²¬±¿ ÍËÐÐÔÛÓÛÒÌßÔÎßÒÕ×ÒÙÁÁÁÁïÁÁÁÁÁ ÌÑÌßÔÚËÒÜ×ÒÙÎÛÏËÛÍÌüÁÁïçêôêëðÁÁÁÁÁ ²«³¾»®±º¬¸·®¼°¿®¬§¿°°´·½¿¬·±²­¬±¼»´·ª»®¾»¬¬»®©±®µ°®±½»­­»­¿½®±­­¼»°¿®¬³»²¬­ò Ú´»¨·¾´»·²¼»¨·²¹©·¬¸¿´´±©­¬¿ºº¬±±®¹¿²·¦»·²º±®³¿¬·±²·²¬¸»©¿§¬¸¿¬·­³±­¬·²¬«·¬·ª»±º ­¬¿ºº®»­«´¬·²¹·²´»­­¬·³»­°»²¬­»¿®½¸·²¹º±®·²º±®³¿¬·±²¿²¼³±®»¬·³»¿½¬·ª»´§«­·²¹¬¸» ·²º±®³¿¬·±²¬±­»®ª»¬¸»°«¾´·½ò ÝËÎÎÛÒÌÐÎßÝÌ×ÝÛÍ Ý«®®»²¬´§©¸»²¿º·´»³±®»¬¸¿²¿º»©§»¿®­±´¼³«­¬¾»´±½¿¬»¼­¬¿ºº¾»¹·²­¬±¿¬¬»³°¬¬± ´±½¿¬»¬¸»º·´»·²±²»±ºº±«®º·´·²¹´±½¿¬·±²­±²ª¿®·±«­´»ª»´­±º¬¸»¾«·´¼·²¹ò׺¬¸»º·´» ½¿²²±¬¾»´±½¿¬»¼¬¸»²¬¸»­»¿®½¸½±²¬·²«»­·²¿´´¬¸»—±ªª”Ő±ºº·½»­òß°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ï ±«¬±ºï𺷴»­½¿²²±¬¾»·³³»¼·¿¬»´§´±½¿¬»¼¿²¼·¬½±«´¼¬¿µ»­»ª»®¿´¼¿§­¬±´±½¿¬»º·´»­ ¬¸¿¬¸¿ª»¾»»²·²¿¼ª»®¬»²¬´§®»³±ª»¼º®±³¬¸»¾«·´¼·²¹ò׺¿´´±®¼·²¿²½»­®»´¿¬·²¹¬±¬¸» ¦±²·²¹±º¿°®±°»®¬§¿®»®»¯«·®»¼ô¬¸»²¬¸»°´¿²²»®³«­¬¾»¹·²¿­»¿®½¸·²Ì®¿µ×̬±´±½¿¬» ¬¸»±®¼·²¿²½»²«³¾»®­òÛ¿½¸±®¼·²¿²½»³«­¬¬¸»²¾»´±½¿¬»¼·²Ý·¬§Â”†”YŐԿ­»®º·½¸» ®»°±­·¬±®§ò̸»±®¼·²¿²½»­¿®»´«³°»¼¬±¹»¬¸»®¿²¼¿®»²±¬­»¿®½¸¿¾´»òß°´¿²²»®½±«´¼ ­°»²¼±ª»®¿²¸±«®¹±·²¹¬¸®±«¹¸¬¸»±®¼·²¿²½»­°¿¹»¾§°¿¹»¬±´±½¿¬»»¿½¸®»¯«·®»¼ ±®¼·²¿²½»ò Ú×ÍÝßÔ×ÓÐßÝÌßÒÜÐÑÔ×ÝÇÎÛÝÑÓÓÛÒÜßÌ×ÑÒÍ ×¬©¿­¼»¬»®³·²»¼¬¸¿¬¬¸·­°®±¶»½¬½¿²¾»¾®±µ»²¼±©²·²¬±º·ª»½¿¬»¹±®·»­º±®¬¸»Ð´¿²²·²¹ Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬æß®½¸·ª¿´ñ묮·»ª¿´ôɱ®µº´±©ôÞ¿½µÍ½¿²²·²¹ôײ¬»¹®¿¬·±²¿²¼Ð«¾´·½Ð±®¬¿´ò ̸»ß®½¸·ª»¿²¼Î»¬®·»ª¿´Ð®±¶»½¬­©·´´¿´´±©¬¸»Ü·ª·­·±²¬±¸¿ª»±²»½»²¬®¿´®»°±­·¬±®§©·¬¸ ¿´´¬¸»¼±½«³»²¬­º·´»¼º±´´±©·²¹»­¬¿¾´·­¸»¼°®±¬±½±´ò̸·­½¿¬»¹±®§³«­¬¾»½±³°´»¬»¼ ¾»º±®»¿²§±¬¸»®½¿¬»¹±®§½¿²¾»¹·²¾»½¿«­»¬¸»¼±½«³»²¬­³«­¬®»­·¼»·²¬¸»ÛÜÓͬ± ¿½½±³°´·­¸¬¸»¿¼¼·¬·±²¿´¹±¿´­±º¬¸»°®±¶»½¬­ò̸·­°¸¿­»·²½´«¼»­«­·²¹ß«¬±Ú·´»­±º¬©¿®» ¬±¿«¬±³¿¬»¬¸»º·´·²¹±º¿´´¬¸»¼±½«³»²¬­¿²¼¿´´±©­º±®·²¼»¨·²¬»¹®¿¬·±²©·¬¸¬¸» »¨·­¬·²¹ÌÎßÕ·Ì¿°°´·½¿¬·±²òѲ½»½±³°´»¬»¼¿²§±º¬¸»Þ¿½µÍ½¿²²·²¹±®×²¬»¹®¿¬·±² Ю±¶»½¬­½±«´¼¾»¹·²ò ر©»ª»®ô¬¸»ÌÎßÕ·ÌÓ·¹®¿¬·±²Ð®±¶»½¬­¸±«´¼¾»¬¸»²»¨¬°®·±®·¬§òѪ»®¬¸»´¿­¬­»ª»®¿´ §»¿®­ô³¿²§¼±½«³»²¬­¸¿ª»¾»»²¿¬¬¿½¸»¼¬±®»½±®¼­·²¬¸»ÌÎßշ̼¿¬¿¾¿­»ò̱ »´·³·²¿¬»¬¸»²»»¼º±®«­»®­¬±´±±µ·²³«´¬·°´»´±½¿¬·±²­º±®¬¸»¼±½«³»²¬­ô¿´´·³¿¹»­ ©±«´¼¾»³·¹®¿¬»¼·²¬±Ô¿­»®º·½¸»ò̸»ÌÎßշ̳·¹®¿¬·±²©±«´¼¿´­±¾»®»¯«·®»¼¾»º±®» Þ¿½µÍ½¿²²·²¹Ð´¿²²·²¹Ð®±¶»½¬Ú·´»­½±«´¼¾»¹·²ò ß´´Þ¿½µÍ½¿²²·²¹Ð®±¶»½¬­¿²¼×²¬»¹®¿¬·±²Ð®±¶»½¬­½±«´¼®«²½±²½«®®»²¬´§ò ß®½¸·ª»ñ묮·»ª¿´ôײ¬»¹®¿¬·±²ôÌÎßÕ·ÌÓ·¹®¿¬·±²¿²¼É±®µº´±©­¸±«´¼¾»½±³°´»¬»¼¾»º±®» ¾»¹·²²·²¹¬¸»Ð«¾´·½Ð±®¬¿´Ð®±¶»½¬­òß®½¸·ª»ñ묮·»ª¿´¿²¼É±®µº´±©°®±¶»½¬­­¸±«´¼¾» ­¬¿®¬»¼½±²­»½«¬·ª»´§ò ̸»Ü·ª·­·±²¸¿­¼»¬»®³·²»¼¬¸¿¬¿²§­½¿²²·²¹²»»¼»¼¬±·³°´»³»²¬¬¸»­»°®±¶»½¬­ô·²¿ ¼¿¬»º±®©¿®¼³±¼»ô½±«´¼¾»°»®º±®³»¼¾§­¬¿ºº¿¬¬¸»½«®®»²¬­¬¿ºº·²¹´»ª»´­òÜ«®·²¹¬¸» ·³°´»³»²¬¿¬·±²°¸¿­»­±º¿´´¬¸»°®±¶»½¬­ô¬¸»¼»°¿®¬³»²¬­©·´´²»»¼¬±º«®²·­¸­¬¿ººº±® ÍËÐÐÔÛÓÛÒÌßÔÎßÒÕ×ÒÙÁÁÁÁïÁÁÁÁÁ ÌÑÌßÔÚËÒÜ×ÒÙÎÛÏËÛÍÌüÁÁïçêôêëðÁÁÁÁÁ ¬®¿·²·²¹¿²¼º±®¼»½·­·±²­¼«®·²¹½±²º·¹«®¿¬·±²­òѲ½»½±³°´»¬»¼ô¬¸»»ºº·½·»²½·»­±º¬¸» ¼»°¿®¬³»²¬­©±«´¼¾»¹®»¿¬´§·²½®»¿­»¼·²¿´³±­¬»ª»®§°±­·¬·±²òÓ¿²¿¹»³»²¬©·´´¾»¿¾´» ¬±½±²¬®±´¬¸»¿°°®±ª¿´°®±½»­­»­¿²¼·³°®±ª»¼»º·½·»²½·»­ò Completion Quote1st2nd Projects TimeNumberCostYearYear Planning: Archive/Retrieval 6 weeks 31594 $8,000 $8,000 TRAKiT Migration: Integration 4 weeks 31592 8,0008,000 Planning /City Secretary: Ordinance Reconfiguration 8 weeks 31595 16,30016,300 ESRI Search to Ordinances: Integration 2 weeks 31596 11,15011,150 Planning Project Files: Workflow 8 weeks 31590 19,00019,000 Planning Project Files: Back Scanning (Phase I & II) 52 weeks 31601 83,20041,600 41,600 Digital Light Box Software: Integration 10 weeks 31597 6,0006,000 Web Interface: Public Portal 12 weeks 31593 27,00027,000 Scanners (2 x $2,000 each) 4,0004,000 City of Denton Disk - Space Storage Needs 14,00014,000 Planning Total $196,650 $103,050 $ 93,600 ɱª£†¦£k«k††Ã±±††ÆÂÂk——±«ª†±É”£Ð”«úkªêÐÆ•k†Áø£”«†£†ÆÐ_ÆÆ ——”£k†±ÃªÃªÐ±ÃªÆ«†ñ£øY£k”økªêД•k†È PlanningDivision PlanningDivision Laserfiche Project Plan and Quotes Table of Contents Section Project Overview & Presentation -1- Quotes and Statements of Work 2- -- Planning –Archive & Retrieval -- 3 - – TRAKiTImagesMovedtoLaserfiche TRAKiTImagesMovedtoLaserfiche 3 -4- - City Zoning Ordinances–Reorganization & -4- - ESRI Search to Ordinances –Integration -5- - Planning –Workflow 6- -- Planning Project Files –Back Scanning -- 7 - – ResidentialorCommercialAlt.Workflow ResidentialorCommercialAlt.Workflow 7 -8- - Commercial Building Permits –Workflow -9- - Commercial Build Plans –Back Scanning -- 10 - Digital Light Box –Integration 10 -11- - Web Interface –Public Portal -12- - Building Inspections –Archive & Retrieval -13- - Bldg. Insp. Address Files –Back Scanning 14- -- Code Enforcement –Archive & Retrieval -- 15 - ommunyev. –rcveereva CitDAhi&Rtil CitDAhi&Rtil 15 City of Denton Planning Division Imaging Project Overview Project Scope: Needs Review - The City of Denton hired DocuNav Solutions/VP Imaging to review the Planning Division’s departmental needs for: Scanning and digital archive Sharing and security of documents Approval processes Document tracking Document retention and destruction periods Integration Cody Bettis of DocuNav met with representatives from Planning, Building Inspections, Code Enforcement, and Community Development to determine the imaging needs of each area. The City of Denton has an Enterprise Document Management Solution (EDMS) using Laserfiche software as the backbone. DocuNav Solutions was asked to make suggestions as to how the EDMS project could be implemented and provide estimates for each stage of the project. Where appropriate, the recommended Planning Division’s solutions should fit within the City’s current EDMS. After reviewing the Division’s current business processes, it became very clear that a properly implemented EDMS would provide: Greatly improved customer service Staff efficiencies Departmental management for document and plan driven approval processes Reduction in storage needs Improved records management Improved code enforcement process Desired Results - The Planning Division’s key desired results where that the solutions provide: Consistent filing into one repository Streamline approval processes Provide management reports for projects Improved records management Help filling open records requests Goals - The Planning Division’s ultimate goal would be to provide on-line applications and document access to applicants. Planning would like automated notifications to go to applicants by email and to be able to streamline, track, and report progress on the approval process across the entire Division. The process should include approvals and document tracking all the way through code enforcement and the case files for courts. City of Denton - Planning Division Imaging Project Overview Page 2 Recommended Solutions and Implementation Order: Project Categories - It was determined that the project can be broken down into five categories and fifteen separate projects. Archive/Retrieval Planning o Building Inspections o Code Enforcement o Community Development o Ordinance Reconfiguration o Workflow Residential or Commercial Alterations o Planning Projects o Commercial Construction o Back Scanning Planning Project Files o Building Inspections Address Files o Commercial Building Plans o Integration TRAKiT Migration o ESRI Search o Digital Light Box Software (Plans Overlay) o Public Portal Web Interface o The Archive and Retrieval Projects will allow the Division to have one central repository with all the documents filed following established protocol. This category must be completed before any other category can begin because the documents must reside in the EDMS to accomplish the additional goals of the projects. This phase includes using AutoFile software to automate the filing of all the documents and allows for index integration with the existing TRAKiT application. Once completed any of the Back Scanning or Integration Projects could begin. However, the TRAKiT Migration Project should be the next priority. Over the last several years, many documents have been attached to records in the TRAKiT database. To eliminate the need for users to look in multiple locations for the documents, all images would be migrated into Laserfiche. The TRAKiT migration would also be required before Back Scanning Planning Project Files could begin. The Workflow Projects could roll-out in any order. However, Cody recommended that the Residential or Commercial Alterations Project be the first workflow project. This project is much more contained than the other two workflow projects and would be a good learning ground before starting the more complicated workflow projects. All Back Scanning Projects and Integration Projects could run concurrently. Archive/Retrieval, Integration, TRAKiT Migration and Workflow should be completed before beginning the Public Portal Projects. Archive/Retrieval and Workflow projects should be started consecutively. City of Denton - Planning Division Imaging Project Overview Page 3 Department Requirements - The project cost estimates are listed below by Department. Planning Projects – Contact: Brian Lockley Completion Quote Projects TimeNumberCost Planning: Archive/Retrieval 6 weeks 31594 $ 8,000 TRAKiT Migration: Integration 4 weeks 31592 8,000 Planning & City Secretary: Ordinance Reconfiguration 8 weeks 31595 16,300 ESRI Search to Ordinances: Integration 2 weeks 31596 11,150 Planning Project Files: Workflow 8 weeks 31590 19,000 Planning Project Files: Back Scanning 52 weeks 31601 83,200 Digital Light Box Software: Integration 10 weeks 31597 6,000 Web Interface: Public Portal 12 weeks 31593 27,000 Scanners (2 x $2,000 each) 4,000 City of Denton Disk - Space Storage Needs 14,000 Planning Total$196,650 Building Inspections – Project Contact: Kurt Hanson Completion Quote Projects TimeNumberCost Building Inspections: Archive/Retrieval 4 weeks 31600 $ 5,000 Building Inspections Address Files: Back Scanning 20 weeks 31603 30,000 Residential or Commercial Alterations Permits: Workflow 6 weeks 31589 9,000 Commercial Construction: Workflow 8 weeks 31591 19,000 Commercial Building Plans: Back Scanning 75 weeks 31602 120,000 Scanners (2 x $2,000 each) 4,000 City of Denton Disk - Space Storage Needs 14,000 Building Inspections Total$201,000 Code Enforcement – Project Contact: Lancine Bentley Completion Quote Projects TimeNumberCost Code Enforcement: Archive/Retrieval 2 weeks 31599 $ 3,500 Scanners (1 x $2,000 each) 2,000 Code Enforcement Total$ 5,500 Community Development – Project Contact: Barbara Ross Completion Quote Projects TimeNumberCost Community Development: Archive/Retrieval 1 week 31598 $ 2,000 Scanners (1 x $2,000 each) 2,000 Code Enforcement Total$ 4,000 Estimated Cost of the Planning Division’s Imaging Projects = $407,150 City of Denton - Planning Division Imaging Project Overview Page 4 Departmental Resources: The Division has determined that any scanning needed to implement these projects, in a date forward mode, could be performed by staff at the current staffing levels. During the implementation phases of all the projects, the departments will need to furnish staff for training and for decisions during configurations. Once completed, the efficiencies of the departments would be greatly increased in almost every position. Management will be able to control the approval processes and improve deficiencies. NOTE: If the ProjectDox solution is implemented, the development review workflow projects included in this Laserfiche proposal may not be needed. A comparison of features will be necessary to identify any overlapping functionality. City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions Configuration for Planning Division Archive and Retrieval/Quote 31594 The goal for this project is to improve the storage and retrieval of documents for the Planning Division. Currently the documents are stored as paper files, on cds, in TRAKiT, and in shared folders. Centralized storage in the Laserfiche server and quick retrieval will provide improved business processes and increase staff efficiencies. DocuNav Solutions will review, configure, train, and document the implementation of Laserfiche and DocuNav Solutions software for this division. Scope of Work: . DocuNav Solutions will work with the Planning Division to determine the proper configuration of the Laserfiche template and folder structure for the Project Files folders and documents. DocuNav Solutions will create the Laserfiche templates and folders. DocuNav Solutions will configure the initial AutoFile rules to retrieve index data from TRAKiT and files documents into Address Folders. DocuNav Solutions will review the structure with the appropriate Denton staff and make any additional changes as needed to receive confirmation. DocuNav Solutions will work with Denton IT staff to properly configure and install the QuickLink tool for search links from TRAKiT. DocuNav Solutions will work with Denton IT for the security configuration for Build Inspections Laserfiche security. DocuNav Solutions will provide (3 days) of training for Denton staff involved with scanning, indexing, importing and searching documents in the system. DocuNav Solutions will provide documentation for the configurations of new Laserfiche process for the Planning Division. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31594 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Planning Division -Archive & Ret Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 1DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 LS PRJ Permits for residential permits. See scope for details. Prelimary meeting, Configuration and setup of AutoFile with rules. Post configuration meeting and testing. Training and rollout, 3 days onsite included. Documentation of processes for Planning dept to be written and provided to the department File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: $ - IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. We look forward to working with you! Subtotal $ 8,000.00 Thank you, Nadine Tax EXEMPT _____________________________________________ SIGN & DATE HERE Freight Total $ 8,000.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions TRAKiT Project/Quote 31592 The goal for this project is to move all existing documents from the TRAKiT application and store them in the Laserfiche server. Currently documents are stored in multiple locations without structure and moving all files into a central repository will allow for the document management and retrieval options the department desires. Documents stored in Laserfiche are accessible from ESRI, TRAKiT, Laserfiche and any other method desired. Scope of Work: . After the Archive/Retrieval configuration of all the division Laserfiche folders and templates. DocuNav Solutions will configure our export utility tool to export all the documents currently stored in TRAKiT and import the same into the Laserfiche server. Documents will remain in their existing file formats, no file format changes will be provided during this project. The AutoFile configuration will be updated if needed to support the exported documents. The documents will not be deleted from TRAKiT during this project only copied. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31592 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Planning Division -TRAKiT Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 1DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 LS PRJ Planning Division for TRAKiT project. See scope for details. File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process Subtotal $ 8,000.00 your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. We look forward to working with you! Tax Thank you, Nadine EXEMPT _____________________________________________ Freight SIGN & DATE HERE Total $ 8,000.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions City Ordinances Reorganized/Quote 31595 The goal for this project is to simplify searching through the existing City Ordinances. Currently the Ordinances are scanned by the City Secretary’s office and indexed by the year with approximately 50 Ordinances per document. Several departmental users currently struggle to quickly fine the appropriate Ordinance. Scope of Work: . DocuNav Solutions will work with the Planning Division to determine the proper reconfiguration of the Laserfiche template and folder structure for the Ordinance documents. DocuNav Solutions will edit the Laserfiche templates and folders. DocuNav Solutions will review the revised structure with the appropriate Denton staff and make any additional changes as needed to receive confirmation. DocuNav Solutions will work with Denton IT for the security configuration for Ordinance documents. DocuNav Solutions will provide the labor required to reprocess all the existing Ordinance documents so each ordinance is a separate document and has the Ordinance Number on the document template. Denton staff will review the documents in a timely manner for proper indexing. DocuNav Solutions will provide an ESRI search tool to allow user to search the properly configured documents to be retrieved from a Zoning Layer. DocuNav Solutions will configure the system to provide work queues for the date forward indexing by Denton staff. DocuNav Solutions will provide (1 day) of training for Denton staff involved with the new Ordinance indexing process. DocuNav Solutions will provide documentation for the configurations of new Laserfiche process for the journal entry documents. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31595 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Planning/City Sec Ordinances Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 1DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00 LS PRJ the Planning Division to work with the City Secretary to get Ordinances reorganized. See scope for details. Prelimary pre- config meeting, Re-configuration and setup. Review Meeting. Training 1 day onsite included. Documentation of processes for Planning Division to be written and provided. 1ReindxReindex all Ordinances. 8hrs per year/at $40.00/hr=$320/yr $ 12,800.00 $ 12,800.00 OrdinEstimate a total of 40 years that need to be completed * ESRI Search Tool Enterprise License, needed for this project $ 11,150.00 $ - see additional Quote #31596. This software is listed on the Planning ESRI quoted project. File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process Subtotal $ 16,300.00 your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine Tax EXEMPT _____________________________________________ Freight SIGN & DATE HERE Total $ 16,300.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions ESRI Integration/Quote 31596 The goal for this project is provide an Enterprise search tool for ESRI to retrieve documents stored in the Laserfiche repository. Currently documents are stored in multiple locations with copies of files being attached to the ESRI features. The search tool will allow simple configuration to retrieve the desired documents from the ESRI interface. Scope of Work: . DocuNav Solutions will install the DocuNav Solutions Enterprise Search Tool for ESRI. DocuNav Solutions will work with Denton staff to configure the search tool to work for Zoning Ordinances and Project Files. DocuNav Solutions will train Denton IT (ESRI) staff on the functions and configuration on the Enterprise Search Tool. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31596 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Planning ESRI Integration Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 1Install $ 1,150.00 1DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 LS PRJ Planning Division for Enterprise Search Tool software for ESRI. See scope for details. Installation, Configuration and setup. Training 1 day onsite included with IT. File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. Subtotal $ 11,150.00 We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine Tax EXEMPT _____________________________________________ Freight SIGN & DATE HERE Total $ 11,150.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions Workflow for Planning Division/Quote 31590 The goal for this project is to improve the business processes for review and approval of applications submitted to the Planning Division. Currently, the processes are manual and paper based with tracking information keyed into TRAKiT. Digitizing the business and approval processes will greatly improve the department efficiency and lead to better customer service. DocuNav Solutions will review, configure, train and document the implementation of Workflow processes using TRAKiT, Laserfiche and DocuNav Solutions software for this division. Scope of Work: . DocuNav Solutions will work with the Planning Division to determine the proper configuration of the Laserfiche workflow engine and any needed interfaces with TRAKiT. DocuNav Solutions will create the Laserfiche workflow configurations. DocuNav Solutions will review the new digital processes with the appropriate Denton staff and make any additional changes as needed to receive confirmation. DocuNav Solutions will work with the division to determine the needed reports to track the progress of projects. DocuNav Solutions will build up to 6 different reports using the City’s reporting tools application. DocuNav Solutions will provide (5 days) of training for Denton staff involved with approvals, importing, scanning, plan reviews and archive. DocuNav Solutions will provide documentation for the configurations of new Laserfiche processes for the Planning Division. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: 31590 Q 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Planning Workflow Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 1DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 19,000.00 $ 19,000.00 LS PRJ Planning Division. See scope for details. Prelimary configuration meeting, Configuration and setup of Workflow on server. Post configuration meeting and testing. Training and rollout, 5 days onsite included. Setup of 6 (six) different reports. Documentation of processes for Planning Division to be written and provided to the division. File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: $ - IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. Subtotal $ 19,000.00 We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine Tax EXEMPT _____________________________________________ Freight SIGN & DATE HERE Total $ 19,000.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions On-Site Assistance with Back Scanning Project Files/Quote 31601 The goal for this project is to improve the availability of documents, organize the project files and locate all required documents. Currently, the documents are stored as paper files, on cds, in TRAKiT and in shared folders with many duplicate documents because the required 15 copies provided with the application. Scanning of all paper documents would not be practical or necessary. We are quoting a project file based approach. Scope of Work: . After the configurations projects are completed. DocuNav Solutions will work with the Planning Division to determine the required documents for each project. DocuNav Solutions will furnish on-site help to complete the project file folders. DocuNav Solutions will index all the assembled digital copies of document for the project files that where imported from TRAKiT, CDs and the shared folders. DocuNav Solutions will then determine the required files that are missing. Denton staff will assist in locating the missing files. As needed DocuNav Solutions will prep, scan and index additional files to complete the project folders. Denton staff will review all work in a timely manner. DocuNav Solutions will work from the current year backwards. DocuNav Solutions will tag paper documents for destruction but will not do any destruction of the documents. Denton will help direct the on-site staff toward the most productive outcome. DocuNav Solutions will bill for hours used. Denton will furnish location and equipment for the project. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31601 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Planning Project Files Backscan Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 2080DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 40.00 $ 83,200.00 LS PRJ Planning Division for backscanning of Project Files. See scope for details. Estimated 2080 hours. File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process Subtotal $ 83,200.00 your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine Tax EXEMPT _____________________________________________ Freight SIGN & DATE HERE Total $ 83,200.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions Workflow for Residential and Commercial Alterations/Quote 31589 The goal for this project is to improve the business processes for review and approval of Residential and Commercial Alterations permits. Currently the processes are manual and paper based with tracking information keyed into TRAKiT. Digitizing the business and approval processes will greatly improve the department efficiency and lead to better customer service. DocuNav Solutions will review, configure, train and document the implementation of Workflow processes using TRAKiT, Laserfiche and DocuNav Solutions software for this division. Scope of Work: . DocuNav Solutions will work with the Residential and Commercial Alterations Permit Department to determine the proper configuration of the Laserfiche workflow engine and any needed interfaces with TRAKiT. DocuNav Solutions will create the Laserfiche workflow configurations. DocuNav Solutions will review the new digital processes with the appropriate Denton staff and make any additional changes as needed to receive confirmation. DocuNav Solutions will provide (3 days) of training for Denton staff involved with approvals, importing, scanning, plan reviews and archive. DocuNav Solutions will provide documentation for the configurations of new Laserfiche processes for Residential and Commercial Alterations. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31589 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Resident. & Commer Permits WF Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 1DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 9,000.00 $ 9,000.00 LS PRJ Permit Dept. for residential permits. See scope for details. Prelimary meeting, Configuration and setup of Workflow on server. Post configuration meeting and testing. Training and rollout, 3 days onsite included. Documentation of processes for Permit dept to be written and provided to the division. File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: $ - IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. Subtotal $ 9,000.00 We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine Tax EXEMPT _____________________________________________ Freight SIGN & DATE HERE Total $ 9,000.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions Workflow for Commercial Building Permits/Quote 31591 The goal for this project is to improve the business processes for review and approval of applications submitted to the Commercial Building Permits. Currently the processes are manual and paper based with tracking information keyed into TRAKiT. Digitizing the business and approval processes will greatly improve the department efficiency and lead to better customer service. DocuNav Solutions will review, configure, train, and document the implementation of Workflow processes using TRAKiT, Laserfiche and DocuNav Solutions software for this division. Scope of Work: . DocuNav Solutions will work with the Commercial Building Permits division to determine the proper configuration of the Laserfiche workflow engine and any needed interfaces with TRAKiT. DocuNav Solutions will create the Laserfiche workflow configurations. DocuNav Solutions will review the new digital processes with the appropriate Denton staff and make any additional changes as needed to receive confirmation. DocuNav Solutions will work with the division to determine the needed reports to track the progress of projects. DocuNav Solutions will build up to 6 different reports using the City’s reporting tools application. DocuNav Solutions will provide (5 days) of training for Denton staff involved with approvals, importing, scanning, plan reviews and archive. DocuNav Solutions will provide documentation for the configurations of new Laserfiche processes for the Commercial Building Permits division. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31591 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Commercial Bldg Workflow Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 1DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 19,000.00 $ 19,000.00 LS PRJ Planning Dept. for Workflow for Commercial Building Permits. See scope for details. Prelimary meeting, Configuration and setup of Workflow on server. Post configuration meeting and testing. Training and rollout, 5 days onsite included. Reports to be made. Documentation of processes for Planning Division to be written and provided to the Division. File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: $ - IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. Subtotal $ 19,000.00 We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine Tax EXEMPT _____________________________________________ Freight SIGN & DATE HERE Total $ 19,000.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions On-Site Assistance with Backscanning Commercial Building Plans/Quote 31602 The goal for this project is to improve the availability of documents and reduce the need for file cabinet storage. Commercial Building Plans have a permanent retention and need long term storage. Scope of Work: . After the configurations projects are completed. DocuNav Solutions will furnish on-site help to scan the Commercial Building Plans. All documents scanned as one multiple page file. One index per set of plans (property address). As needed DocuNav Solutions will prep, scan and index the documents. Denton staff will review all work in a timely manner. DocuNav Solutions will tag paper documents for destruction but will not do any destruction of the documents. Denton will help direct the on-site staff toward the most productive outcome DocuNav Solutions will bill for on-site hours. Denton will furnish both the location and equipment needed. Hours needed are estimates only. Estimated number of images 40,000 – 1,000 sets of plans, 40 images each. Estimated hours 3,000. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31602 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Planning Commercial Blg Backscan Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 3000DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 40.00 $ 120,000.00 LS PRJ Planning Division for backscanning of Project Files. See scope for details. Approx 40,000 images. Estimated 3,000 hours. File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process Subtotal $ 120,000.00 your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine Tax EXEMPT _____________________________________________ Freight SIGN & DATE HERE Total $ 120,000.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions Digital Light Box Software/Quote 31597 While reviewing plans, some staff desires the ability to match a red line copy to a newly submitted version of the plan. DocuNav Solutions will develop an add-on application that will allow the users to compare the plans digitally. Scope of Work: . DocuNav Solutions will work with the Division to determine the functionality of the add-on tool. DocuNav Solutions will design the tool to plug into the Laserfiche application. DocuNav Solutions will review with Denton staff the application while it is in the Beta stage of development. DocuNav Solutions will make revisions as needed to provide the basic functionality. DocuNav Solutions will work with Denton Staff to install the application. DocuNav Solutions will provide documentation for the new application. DocuNav Solutions will provide (1/2 day) of training for users and administrators of the new application. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31597 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Planning Division Digital Light Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. DLB EDigital Light Box Software Enterprise license $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 DLB or Option: Digital Light Box Software per each station $ 500.00 $ - (Note: Let us know the quantity of stations needed) 1DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 LS PRJ Planning Division for Digital Light Box project. See scope for details. Installation, Configuration and setup. Training needed 1/2 day onsite included. File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: $ - IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. $ - We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine Subtotal $ 6,000.00 _____________________________________________ SIGN & DATE HERE Tax EXEMPT Freight Total $ 6,000.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions Public Portal/Quote 31593 The goal for this project is to improve customer service for applicants and streamline notifications and the review processes. Currently applicants provide 15 copies for projects and the paper documents are distributed to multiple reviewers. This project would allow applications and documents to be uploaded via the web and notifications to be sent via email. Applicants would also be able to view documents on-line during the review process. Scope of Work: . DocuNav Solutions will work with the Planning Division to determine the proper configuration and design of a custom web portal. DocuNav Solutions will create the custom web portal to be used by applicants. DocuNav Solutions will build 50 web forms for use on the portal. DocuNav Solutions will configure the routing and workflow of the documents and forms loaded into the portal. DocuNav Solutions will review the new digital processes with the appropriate Denton staff and make any additional changes as needed to receive confirmation. DocuNav Solutions will provide (2 days) of training for Denton staff involved with approvals, importing, scanning, plan reviews and archive. DocuNav Solutions will provide documentation for the configurations of new Laserfiche processes for the Planning Division’s Public Portal. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31593 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Planning Division Public Portal Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 1DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 27,000.00 $ 27,000.00 LS PRJ Planning Division for Public Portal. See scope for details. Prelimary meeting, Custom Web page interface. Design web forms. Configuration and setup of Workflow on server. Post configuration meeting. Training, 2 days onsite included. File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: $ - IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. Subtotal $ 27,000.00 We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine Tax EXEMPT _____________________________________________ Freight SIGN & DATE HERE Total $ 27,000.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Building Inspections DocuNav Solutions Configuration for Building Inspections Archive and Retrieval/Quote 31600 The goal for this project is to improve the storage and retrieval of documents for the Building Inspections division. Currently the documents are stored as paper files, on cds, in TRAKiT, and in shared folders. Centralized storage in the Laserfiche server and quick retrieval will provide improved business processes and increase staff efficiencies. DocuNav Solutions will review, configure, train, and document the implementation of Laserfiche and DocuNav Solutions software for this division. Scope of Work: . DocuNav Solutions will work with Building Inspections to determine the proper configuration of the Laserfiche template and folder structure for the Address folders and documents. DocuNav Solutions will create the Laserfiche templates and folders. DocuNav Solutions will configure the initial AutoFile rules to retrieve index data from TRAKiT and files documents into Address Folders. DocuNav Solutions will review the structure with the appropriate Denton staff and make any additional changes as needed to receive confirmation. DocuNav Solutions will work with Denton IT staff to properly configure and install the QuickLink tool for search links from TRAKiT. DocuNav Solutions will work with Denton IT for the security configuration for Build Inspections Laserfiche security. DocuNav Solutions will provide (2 days) of training for Denton staff involved with scanning, indexing, importing and searching documents in the system. DocuNav Solutions will provide documentation for the configurations of new Laserfiche process for Building Inspections. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31600 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Building Insp Archive & Retreival Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 1DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 LS PRJ Planning Division for Building Inspections. See scope for details. Prelimary meeting, Configuration and setup of AutoFile. Post configuration meeting. Training 2 days onsite included. Documentation of processes for Planning Division to be written and provided to the department File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: $ - IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. Subtotal $ 5,000.00 We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine Tax EXEMPT _____________________________________________ Freight SIGN & DATE HERE Total $ 5,000.00 City of Denton Scope of Work - Planning Division DocuNav Solutions On-Site Assistance with Back Scanning BI Address Files/Quote 31603 The goal for this project is to improve the availability of documents and reduce the need for file cabinet storage. Currently, the address files are stored in 15 (4 drawer) lateral file cabinets. Scope of Work: . After the configurations projects are completed. DocuNav Solutions will furnish on-site help to scan the address files. All documents scanned as one multiple page file. One index per folder (property address). As needed DocuNav Solutions will prep, scan and index the documents in the address file folder. Denton staff will review all work in a timely manner. DocuNav Solutions will tag paper documents for destruction but will not do any destruction of the documents. Denton will help direct the on-site staff toward the most productive outcome. DocuNav Solutions will bill for on-site hours. Denton will furnish both the location and equipment needed. Hours needed are estimates only. Estimated number of images 60 drawers, 4,000 images per drawer, 240,000 images. Estimated hours 750. ® QUOTE S O L U T I O N S VP Imaging, Inc. 5048Tennyson Parkway, Suite 110 Dallas, Texas 75024 uote: Q 31603 800-353-2320 Date:9/29/2008 VID# 1752738222400 DocuNav Contact: ANadine Bettis Customer ID: Denton To: Planning BI Address Files scan Mary Collins City of Denton Note: All quotes expire 30 days from above 215 E. McKinney Street date. Please call your VPI contact for any Denton, Texas 76201 940-349-7888 changes. QtyItemDescriptionsUnit PrTotal DocuNav Support Agreement, DSA Priority one year, support via email, phone, fax, M-F, 8am-5pm, CST, excluding holidays. 750DocuNav Solution project to work with and provide services for $ 40.00 $ 30,000.00 LS PRJ Planning Divsions for backscanning of Project Files. See scope for details. Approx 240,000 Estimated 750 hours. File No. 4062 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ATTENTION: IncludesCISV pricing. VP Imaging, Inc. vendor # ïéëîéíèîîîìðð Please sign, date, attach PO and fax back to DocuNav Solutions and we will process Subtotal $ 30,000.00 your order. Kindly call us @ 800-353-2320 with any questions. We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine Tax EXEMPT _____________________________________________ Freight SIGN & DATE HERE Total $ 30,000.00 Collin County, TX, shows the power of pre-planning April 6th, 2009 by Hobey EchlinComment on this article Since implementing Laserfiche in 2007, Collin County, TX, home to the Dallas/Fort Worth area’s fastest-growing northeast suburbs, has enjoyed enterprise-wide success automating and integrating its business processes. But as Records Manager Margaret Anderson points out, it’s been as a direct result of equally enterprise-wide pre-planning working with the county’s myriad departments. The County saw its population increase nearly 50%—from nearly 500,000 in 2000 to 725,000 by 2007—straining the county’s infrastructure. As Anderson puts it, “The exponential growth rate of our county is reflected in the increased demand for essential county services.” The governing body of the county, the Commissioners Court, then issued a strategic direction to improve efficiency and customer service. “This caused us to look at an enterprise solution to managing our records with emphasis on migrating to electronic records,” she explains. “We had to reduce our paper and microfilm records volume.” Collin County by the Numbers 27 : towns and cities in the county 50% : population growth in just seven years 15,000 : reels of microfilm 18,450: boxes of paper stored in multiple locations 2 million: archived images in the District Clerk’s system 4.3 million : images added by the Sheriff’s Office annually 10 : days (per payment) saved by eliminating paper payment processing in the Tax Assessor/Collector’s Office 400: records storage boxes eliminated just in the Tax Assessor’s Office 300: staff hours saved in the Auditor’s Accounts Payable office The county published its RFP in December 2006, and soon after a committeedrawn from several county offices (District Clerk, County Clerk, Auditor, Sheriff, Tax Office, Juvenile Probation, Adult Probation, Purchasing, IT and Records) determined that Laserfiche (as bid by reseller MCCi) was the best fit for Collin County. Anderson notes that she had had county-wide support from the start. “Thesuccess of the project is directly attributable to getting these larger user departments involved in both identifying the requirements for the RFP and making the selection,” she says. Anderson had visited the Laserfiche booth at past ARMA conferences (an active ARMA member, she was a presenter at last year’s conference and is scheduled to present again at this year’s conference, October 15-18 in Orlando, FL). Anderson looked to Laserfiche for three things: its scalability and extensibility; the Laserfiche Toolkit, for integrating Laserfiche with existing and planned software applications; and the Records Management Edition (RME), in order to manage retention for electronic documents. “RME provides a standard methodology for administering the state mandated retention requirements for all records as well as providing an audit trail for disposition,” Anderson says. “And all of this occurs in the background, so it’s transparent to the user.” Collin County installed Laserfiche in mid-2007, followed by its first production implementation that November, starting with 100 user licenses and 500 WebLink retrieval licenses just to accommodate cross-departmental use. The first offices to deploy were the District Clerk, County Clerk (whichhandles vital records, land recording, and county court at law records), District Attorney, Auditor and Records Department. Because the county was migrating from a legacy system dating from the ‘80s, a massive backlogconversion to Laserfiche was first priority. “Records was actually already scanning for the DA and Auditor, so we switched this to Laserfiche first,” Anderson says. In the District Clerk’s office, a massive backlog conversion of documents from 1846-2000 into two million images added to the county’s Laserfiche system. “While we eliminated some paper files, we did keep the 1800s paper files for their historical value,” Anderson notes. When it came to the auditor’s office, the County focused on integration to optimize business processes. “We added a property tax receipts interface with our RT Lawrence receipt processing system,” explains Anderson. Because the tax assessor/collector relied on paper documents, the 10 days it took to processmail resulted in over $1 million lost each day in interest. The county was able to get the assessor’s office up and running by the end of the year to coincide with the heaviest period of property tax receipts. up to 10 days fastereliminated almost “Now we process payments much more quickly—,” Anderson says. “In fact, we 400 records storage boxes just with this one Laserfiche implementation.” The County Clerk’s Office also uses RME as the back end for the court’s case management system, where it provides records retention for closed and inactive case files. Collin County’s Best Practices at a Glance 1.Get customers involved very early in the decision making process. 2.Learn to manage change and project scope creep. 3.Distributing roadmaps and project plans is as essential as communication with departmental users. “We use an internal SharePoint site to share information about the project, planning and implementation documents, and training materials,” Anderson says. 4.Ask business process questions to help departments understand their current processes and how they can take advantage of Laserfiche functionality to enhance them. 5.Plan to respond to demand. “You have to learn to say no nicely.” 6.Design a plan to manage your electronic records. 7.Think about your budget cycle. 8.Work with your IT department. “Support from your IT Developer is critical.” Finally, the Justice of the Peace, which manages traffic, truancy, small claims and evictions records, came onboard in June 2008. With an implementation this extensive, there were understandably some hiccups along the way. “One of the mistakes we made was only purchasing one license each for Quick Fields, Zone OCR and Real-Time Lookup,” Anderson says. But with the approval of the FY2009 budget, the County will be adding Workflow, to be installed when the county upgrades to Laserfiche 8 by the end of the year, as well as additional licenses for ScanConnect, Quick Fields, Zone OCR, and Real-Time Lookup. The biggest hurdle, however, hasn’t been what modules to use. “I’d say one of our biggest initial challenges was helping departments understand their business processes so we could develop a records series plan tied to record management and retention,” Anderson says. “It’s really an educational process.” Anderson and her team of what she calls “Customer Department Advocates“ employ business plan questionnaires, user guides and demos of successful intra-county implementations, and even help departments choose the right scanners. These Advocates identify training needs, review business processes, records series structure and templates, and scan sample boxes of files into Laserfiche so departmental staff can see how their records series and template structures will work in the new environment. As more departments successfully use Laserfiche, even more want to get on board. The Commissioners Court has a planned deployment through September 2009, which includes implementations in IT, the Auditor’s Department, Development Services (permitting and animal control), Human Resources, Sheriff’s Office records, Tax, Motor Vehicle and Purchasing. “We based our 2009 deployment plan on several factors, including percentage of permanent records maintained for the department, volume of records, distributed accessibility requirements, and overall reduction in paper storage space in the new administration building for the departments moving their this year,” Anderson explains. The County’s still quantifying ROI from using Laserfiche, but Anderson can point to a windfall of newfound efficiency. “By using Laserfiche and changing the internal process to take advantage of the system’s new capabilities, the Auditor’s 300 hours of staff time saved accounts payable office has already identified , and reduction in volume of file folders and labels formerly used to place each paper copy of a check and the backup into a separate folder on their departmental shelving,” Anderson says. “The internal audit staff is able to review case files and receipts as part of their auditing process —freeing Auditor-, departmental-, and records staff from pulling paper files for auditors to review.” Then there’s the peace of mind knowing that Collin County’s doing its part to provide better and more sustainable customer service now and in the future. “We’re finally getting a handle on our electronic records, even though it’s going to take three to five years to fully implement,” Anderson says. “And we’ve definitely enjoyed faster response time when a customer or citizen requests a file. Even better, multiple users can access the same record from different locations simultaneously.” Speaking of simultaneous, Anderson says that her biggest obstacle is handling the requests from remaining departments to implement Laserfiche. “The hardest thing I have to do is tell someone, ‘Not yet –can I work with you to make sure your needs are included in next year’s budget?’” But as Collin County is proving department by department, the results areworth the wait—and the planning time. Ropin’ Runaway Records Texas City Corralls a Century’s Worth of Paper Using Document Management February 12th, 2007 Comment on this article Residents of the 186-year-old City of Bryan, Texas experience “The Good Life, Texas Style.” This trademarked motto motivates members of Bryan City Government to cultivate an active relationship with its 70,000 fellow citizens. To this end, Bryan kicked-off the new millennium with a groundbreaking document management solution that would eventually ® lead to the development of the first integration module to connect Laserfiche with its management software, SunGard HTE. Mary Lynne Strata ® “Laserfiche was by far the most user-friendly, and the search and retrieval function was head and shoulders above the rest.” —Mary Lynne Strata City Secretary Bryan is extremely dedicated to preserving its history, rooted in the westward railroad expansion of the mid-nineteenth century -including city records dating back to 1889. A hundred years later, reflecting a century’s changes in local government, Bryan established a citywide records management system to retain, store and destroy records in compliance with state and federal law. But as the city grew, so did the piles of paper and storage space needed to maintain the system. When two records storage facilities reached maximum capacity, the city sought records management alternatives. In this issue, City Secretary Mary Lynne Stratta, Records Management Coordinator Jodi Chaney and Network Specialist Chris Martin share their experiences with a groundbreaking document management solution. On the initiative of City Secretary Mary Lynne Stratta, Bryan began exploring digital solutions in 1999, forming a committee to consider various options. The goals were to reduce the costs of document storage and retrieval, transfer and store data from the city’s computer systems, provide online access to city documents and apply retention schedules to electronic records. In July of 2000, the city issued an RFP. After reviewing four document management systems, the committee decided on Laserfiche because of its ease of use and rapid search and retrieval capabilities. The city soon found out for itself why Laserfiche had such a great reputation among other municipalities as a feature-rich, easy-to-use solution. In just a couple of years after implementation, Bryan would garner media praise with an innovative and award-winning approach to software integration. Bryan had a detailed paper-records management system before it began using Laserfiche. However, the city wanted to boost efficiency and free up space by eliminating reliance on paper. To follow city charter mandates, the city secretary needs to be the records management officer with a records management system that meets statewide criteria. Stratta took this responsibility very seriously. Preserving the history of the city , even in unforeseen circumstances, was one of her topconcerns. “If a disaster struck,” says Stratta, “we needed to recreate our vital records to get our business going again. I thought that an imaging system was the way to go.” Offering a way to access records online was equally important to Stratta. She saw the Web as a way to further democratize city government. “I wanted residents to be able to access ordinances, minutes and records that were clearly public that show the history of the city and the actions of their elected officials.” The search committee looked at four different imaging systems and met with each company as well as officials from other Texas cities.”Laserfiche was the unanimous choice of the team,” says Stratta. From the end user perspective, Laserfiche was the overwhelming choice. Says Stratta, “It was by far the most user friendly. And the search and retrieval function was head and shoulders above the rest. I also wanted to make sure that whatever system we chose was from a company that was reputable and was going to be around for a long time. Again, Laserfiche beat out the competition-by far. We were making a long-term commitment, and we knew that Laserfiche would be around for a long time.” City Secretary Stratta has come a long way from her early days on the job. For her entire first year, over 17 years ago, she actually had to bring in her own computer because the city didn’t have one. At that time, Bryan stored paper records in enormous boxes in the basement of the former city hall building, and the only disaster recovery plan was to store birth and death records on microfilm. Chris Martin We continually achieve great return on our investment with Laserfiche.” —Chris Martin Network Specialist Having led the path from sorting through volumes of paper stored in thebasement of another building to instant access of electronic records from a desktop, Stratta has a unique perspective on the evolution of records management. Under her stewardship, the city became the first anywhere to deploy an integration module that connected Laserfiche to HTE-the software Bryan uses in all city departments to handle accounting, risk management, HR, permits and other city functions. Bryan installed Laserfiche in seven city departments beginning with a pilotprogram in 2001. From the start, Bryan made city ordinances, city council meeting minutes, resolutions and agendas available to the public. Gradually upgrading and expanding the system, so by the end of 2005, Bryan had the latest version of Laserfiche installed in fifteen city departments. Stratta adds, “That was a huge accomplishment. Previously, in order to access records, people used to have to go downstairs, get a key, go across the parking lot, walk down into the basement, dig for the record, and come back. And when they were finished with the records, they had to go through the same process toput them back. Now we can go into Laserfiche, call up a record, and email it directly. It really saved us a lot of time as well as space.” The results also dramatically reduced paper and freed up a lot of office space. “We were able to do away with a complete storage center-about 1500 square feet,” says Records Management Coordinator Jodi Chaney. Management Coordinator Chaney also notes that Laserfiche greatly simplifies disaster preparedness. “When Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita were headed our way, we were able to copy all our ordinances, minutes, and other critical documents onto CDs and put them in a safe deposit box.” Perhaps, the greatest impact of Laserfiche has been the streamlining of the city worker’s day-to-day workload and the increased access to records by Bryan’s citizens. Customizing the system to work with HTE, the city’s accounting and management software, has been essential to Bryan’s success. In 2006, building on its already cutting-edge solution, Bryan pioneered an HTE integration module that eliminated scripting and automated the process of pulling information from HTE to Laserfiche. The first of its kind, the installation allows users to open either program to access the other. “It really freed up our IT department,” says Stratta. “And the users love it.” The city installed the integration module over a weekend with no interruption of service to the users. “We then moved onto training and installation on the client side,” says Martin. “Now that we have a process in place, we bring departments aboard quickly and smoothly. We continually achieve great returns on our investment in both applications, HTE and Laserfiche.” In other government offices, the integration has likewise increased efficiency and streamlined workflow. “Integration has made the work a lot easier for departments like finance and HR,” says Martin. “It blended well with what they already do. Rather than waiting to scan checks or invoices into Laserfiche, they can do it right when they’re entering them into HTE. They don’t have to wait for scripts to run. The uptime and availability of the system is much greater.” Overall the Laserfiche solution saves work, time and builds more transparency into city government. Chaney remembers the days before Laserfiche: “We recently had an open-records request that involved a lot of information. Before Laserfiche, it would have taken at least a month to actually research the minutes and find out all the names of the contracts, easements and documents associated with this project. With Laserfiche, we were able to get a print-out of all the documents the first day. Even taking time to pull the documents that had not been scanned into Laserfiche, we were able to gather all the documents within six business days.” Martin adds, “Another example is our Finance department. This was the firstyear that they had Laserfiche, and it made a real difference when the auditors were here. Instead of having the auditors go to physical file cabinets, theysaved a lot of time with index searches, going directly through HTE. They actually finished a few days early.” Network Specialist Martin’s job involves training new users to use Laserfiche. “The training is straightforward and simple,” he says. “People have an easy time understanding the product and how to use it-it’s very intuitive. It looks like the Microsoft Windows File System they already know. I usually train ten people at a time, and each session lasts about ® an hour. ” Perhaps the greatest measure of success has been the satisfaction of Bryan residents. “The positive feedback we’ve had from citizens has just been incredible. For example, the other day I talked to a real estate agent who had been digging at the courthouse for days to find a document from 1922. I called it up using Laserfiche and emailed it to him in minutes. He was very impressed.” Stratta is committed to providing great service to Bryan’s citizens and city departments. She thinks back to the days of rooting through boxes to find records. “We’ve come along way to get here.” Alexandria, Virginia, hits one out of the park with Laserfiche October 12th, 2007 Comment on this article Among city staff in Alexandria, Virginia, the Laserfiche® imaging team is the most popular crew in town. Says Applications Division Chief Judy Milligan: “Departments are standing in line to come onboard with Laserfiche. We asked Laserfiche to send us some shirts with their logo, so everyone would know we’re on the imaging team. And they sent them to us, too.” Before installing Laserfiche, Alexandria archived its documents on paper andmicrofiche. With a rich history dating back to the eighteenth century, the city could ill afford to trust the aging system. Says Milligan, “We have all kinds of documentation dating back to the early 1900s. Our paper copies and microfiche were beginning to deteriorate. We didn’t want to update that technology—we needed an imaging system.” With the goal of quickly responding to document requests from citizens, city councilors and staff, Milligan set out to implement an electronic document management system. She’d already heard a lot about document imaging from her colleagues, and she believed it was important to get a city-wide system in place that would enable all city departments to share documents. Milligan already had a good idea of what was important to her in a document management system: “Good support and easy maintenance. I also wanted to ensure we could access the system over the Web and that it could support a Microsoft® .NET™ programming environment. Because we were going to import personnel files to conform to state- mandated retention dates, I knew we had to have security as tight as we could get it—down to the file level.” Laserfiche security features made the product stand out over the others the committee considered. The ability to redact sensitive information such as Social Security numbers was a big plus for Milligan. “I also liked it because it took different media— paper, microfiche, aperture cards—in different sizes,” she recalls. “And Workflow™ was so easy to set up because it’s so familiar—it’s just like Windows® Explorer.” Located just eight miles south of Old Town Alexandria, Mount Vernon was native Alexandrian George Washington’s home for 40 years. Alexandria first installed Laserfiche in the fire and code departments, and it wasn’t long before other departments wanted Laserfiche for themselves. Says Milligan, “When the staff got a taste of it, they loved it. As with anything city-wide, it took a while to get them started, but once we did, we couldn’t stop them. It sells itself.” Currently, both the accounting and treasury divisions of the finance department, as well as the planning and zoning, police personnel, city attorney, environmental services, transportation and IT departments use Laserfiche. Getting the support of the city was easy once staff noticed the improved work environment and saved storage space. Milligan estimates that it took a few weeks to get each initial installation up and running smoothly. And the results have been dramatic. “We get a lot of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests from citizens,” Milligan continues. “Instead of making all these copies,you can hit one button and print the documents, or e-mail them to citizens.” “FOIA requests have short turnaround times,” says Supervisory Administrative Officer Virginia Clarke. “They usually require some action within 24 hours—at least to respond with the cost of reproduction. If we don’t meet the deadline,the city is subject to monetary penalties. When we had to go off-site to find the document, the 24 hours were gone. With Laserfiche, we can see how many documents we have and calculate the cost without leaving our desks.” City Hall overlooks the Alexandria Farmer’s Market. Searching through files was tough enough when things were properly filed, but misfiled documents were particularly aggravating. “Previously,” recalls Clarke, “if something was misfiled, it was a nightmare trying to find it. But Laserfiche corrected that problem. If something’s been misfiled, we can search for it in any number of ways, get the information we need and file it properly without missing a beat.” Accounting Clerk Jan Pettey notes the boost in efficiency: “I scan all the AP and payroll documents,” she says. “We were looking for something that would make it easy to search for paid invoices —and we found it in Laserfiche. Now staff can go directly into Laserfiche instead of asking accounting to pull the originals and send copies. They have so many ways to search: by payment voucher, invoice, vendor number or document number. They really like it—we rarely get calls any more.” Laserfiche has greatly improved efficiency for the IT fiscal analyst by eliminating backlog-related errors due to the huge volume of invoices. “We set up Workflow so that the second the invoices come in, they’re scanned and e-mailed directly to the person who has to approve them,” says Milligan. “Invoices get paid much faster, and they don’t get lost. And I can refer back to them easily to calculate how much I spent on a specific project.” As Alexandria expands its system, Milligan is overseeing an increasing number of integrations with other applications. Alexandria has already integrated Laserfiche with the city’s real estate receivables software, and will soon do the same with its GIS and permitting programs. The city is also upgrading its treasury department’s collection system to automatically file checks upon scanning. Milligan largely relies on Quick Fields™ to streamline operations for departments using these integrations. “Because it automatically populates the data fields, it greatly reduces errors by filing documents in the right places,” she says. “When the staff got a taste of it, they loved it. As with anything city-wide, it took a little while to get them started, but once we did, we couldn’t stop them. It sells itself.” —Judy Milligan Applications Division Chief Milligan is about to roll out Laserfiche to the city clerk’s office, which has long posted past agenda packets and city council meeting minutes to the city’s Website as TIFF files. However, citizen demand to access them in PDFformat led Milligan to try a couple of conversion methods, both of which were painfully slow. She was pleased to learn that a simple tweak with the Integrator’s Toolkit™ would enable Laserfiche to import TIFFs and export them out as PDFs all at once. Alexandria currently has 387 licenses, and is gearing up to add more.Milligan is in the process of installing Laserfiche in the sheriff’s office, with plans to add the real estate asessment, housing and finance revenue departments. “We had to start with baby steps,” she says. “But soon we’ll be city-wide. I hope to get a site license soon to expand access even further. It’s just a great product.” Milligan’s advice to other cities just starting implementation? Be prepared. “I suggest getting a technical team ready, because it could take off overnight. And when it does take off, you’re absolutely bombarded—I could keep six programmers busy right now.” But she’s sure next year will be bigger and better, and she’ll have even more valuable advice. Meanwhile, Virginia Clarke sums up the sentiments of Alexandria’s staff: “It’s wonderful to be able to access our documents this way. It’s fantastic.” ßÌÌßÝØÓÛÒÌê WATER UTILITIES 901-A Texas Street Denton, TX 76209 (940) 349-8452 Fax (940) 349-8951 Memo To: Bryan Langley From: Jim Coulter Date: 8-13-09 Re: Street Maintenance Funding The question was asked at the rec pavement assessment program conducted by ERES, the estimated street maintenance funding needs to prevent the continued decline in the overall condition index (OCI) of our streets was 18 million dollars per year, Exhibit 1. The model indicates that we should have spent 90 million dollars over the last 5 year period. One thing to keep in mind is that since the 2003 study asphalt prices have risen approximately 135 percent. We estimate that overall street maintenance costs have risen approximately 70 percent during this period. In theory that would increase the level of expenditures necessary to prevent the continued decline of our street system by approximately 70 percent (or 30 million per year). Over the past 5 years through various funding avenues; CIP, ELAP and O&M funding the streets department has expended a total of 26 million dollars on OCI street maintenance issues, Exhibit 2. overall effect of the 26 million expenditure. The street department will be conducting another pavement assessment study this fall. At the conclusion of this study we will have a much better idea about our budgetary needs for the street maintenance program. We will factor in the 26 million dollars expenditure to determine if we are making progress on the Overall Condition Index or if our road system is deteriorating. Once we have completed this study we will bring the information to the Mobility Committee and City Council. ßÌÌßÝØÓÛÒÌé ßÌÌßÝØÓÛÒÌè AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT th Consider a request for an exception to the Noise Ordinance and for the purpose of the 11 Annual Denton Blues Festival, sponsored by the Denton Black Chamber of Commerce. The event will be held in Quakertown Park on Saturday, September 19, 2009, from 1:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. The exception is specifically requested to increase hours of operation for amplified sound from 10:00 p.m. until 11:00 p.m. The amplified sound will not go above the allowable 70 decibels for an outdoor concert. BACKGROUND The Denton Black Chamber of Commerce has requested an exception to the Noise Ordinance hours to increase the time from 10:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. The event expects to have 2,500 people in attendance to hear conventional Blues music performed by national and local Blues artists. Amplified sound will be used for both music and public announcements. RECOMMENDATION approval Staff recommends of the noise exception request. EXHIBITS 1. Denton Black Chamber of Commerce Letter of Request Respectfully Submitted: Emerson Vorel Director of Parks and Recreation Prepared By: Janie McLeod Community Events Coordinator AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed DEPARTMENT: Materials Management to Tom Shaw 349-7133 ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding an annual contract iding for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 4323-Annual Contract for Water and Sewer Inventory Parts awarded to the lowest responsible bidder for each item as shown on Exhibit A to the ordinance in the annual estimated amount of $1,000,000). BID INFORMATION This bid is for miscellaneous items that are stocked in the Warehouse for ease of accessibility to be used by the Water and Wastewater departments in their daily operations, and for repair and maintenance of their distribution and collection systems. Materials will be ordered on an as needed basis to maintain appropriate stocking levels. RECOMMENDATION Award to the lowest responsible bidder for each item as listed below. Bidders offering lower prices for items 11, 36, 90, 318, 322, and 325-327 were rejected for failure to meet specification regarding either the brand or manufacturer. All items quoted by Cambridge Brass, Inc. do not meet specifications-the manufacturer quoted is not an approved manufacturer as listed in the specifications. Items 155, 204 and 205 had tied pricing; therefore lots were cast to determine the low bidder. ACT Pipe and Supply met the requirements for Local Vendor Preference; therefore, their bid proposal was evaluated with a 5% local vendor preference reduction. Item Number Vendor Items 1-13,19-35,39-43,45-53,75,84-86,89,91-97,100-103,105 ACT Pipe and Supply 108,111-115,117,119-125,127-133,136-137,140-142 144-149,157-162,166,170,173,198,200,228,231,232,238-245 250-253,255,257-260,274-291,296-305,314-316,334-338,350 Items 317,320-321,332 BadgerMeter, Inc. Items 116,118,206,248-249,254,256,318-319,322-327 HD Supply Waterworks Agenda Information Sheet August 18, 2009 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION(CONTINUED) Items 14-18,54-60,72,81,98-99,126,138-139,174,204,226, Mainline Supply Company 261-262, 264,308,339-342 Items 328-331 Matron-Farnier Items 73,87-88,104,106-107,109,110,134-135,152,163-165, Morrison Supply Company 167-169,171-172,178-197,199,201-203,207-225,227, 229-230,233-237,269-270,273,292,294,307,309-313,333, 343-349,351-352 Items 36-37,44,74,78,90,143,150-151,153-154,246-247, Municipal Waterworks 263,265 Supply, Inc. Items 38,61-71,76-77,79-80,82-83,155-156,175-177,205, Texas Water Supply 266-268,271-272,293,295,306 Products, Inc. Due to the volatility of material prices, item prices may be adjusted (increase/decrease) quarterly as market conditions change. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS ACT Pipe and Supply BadgerMeter, Inc. HD Supply Waterworks Denton, TX Milwaukee, WI Dallas, TX Mainline Supply Company Matron-Farnier Morrison Supply Company Dallas, TX Boulder, CO Waxahachie, TX Municipal Waterworks Supply Texas Water Supply Products, Inc. Royse City, TX Fort Worth, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This is a two-year contract with the option to renew for additional one-year periods. At renewal, the bid prices may be adjusted in accordance with a federal index for related items. FISCAL INFORMATION The items in this bid will be funded out of the Warehouse Working Capital account and charged back to the using department. Agenda Information Sheet August 18, 2009 Page 3 Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Bid Tabulation 1-AIS-Bid4323 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING AN ANNUAL AND WASTEWATER DEPARTMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 4323-ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR WATER AND SEWER INVENTORY PARTS AWARDED TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR EACH ITEM AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT A TO THE ORDINANCE IN THE ANNUAL ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $1,000,000).  WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated competitive bids for the purchase of necessary materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the procedures of State law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has reviewed and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest responsible bids for the materials, equipment, supplies or services as shown in the "Bid Proposals" submitted therefor; and WHEREAS, the City Council has provided in the City Budget for the appropriation of funds to be used for the purchase of the materials, equipment, supplies or services approved and accepted herein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The numbered items in the following numbered bids for materials, equipment, supplies, or services, shown in the "Bid Proposals" on file in the office of the City Purchasing Agent, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids for such items: Item Number Vendor Amount Items 1-13,19-35,39-43,45-53,75, ACT Pipe and Supply Exhibit A 84-86,89,91-97,100-103,105 108, 111-115,117,119-125,127-133,136-137, 140-142,144-149,157-162,166,170,173, 198,200,228,231,232,238-245, 250-253, 255,257-260,274-291,296-305,314-316,334-338,350 Items 317,320-321,332 BadgerMeter, Inc. Exhibit A Items 116,118,206,248-249,254,256, HD Supply Waterworks Exhibit A 318-319,322-327 Items 14-18,54-60,72,81,98-99,126, Mainline Supply Company Exhibit A 138-139,174,204,226,261-262, 264,308,339-342 Items 328-331 Matron-Farnier Exhibit A    Item Number Vendor Amount  Items 73,87-88,104,106-107,109,110, Morrison Supply Company Exhibit A 134-135,152,163-165,167-169, 171-172,178-197,199,201-203, 207-225,227,229-230,233-237, 269-270,273,292,294,307,309-313, 333,343-349,351-352 Items 36-37,44,74,78,90,143,150-151, Municipal Waterworks Exhibit A 153-154,246-247,263,265 Supply, Inc. Items 38,61-71,76-77,79-80,82-83, Texas Water Supply Exhibit A 155-156,175-177,205,266-268, Products, Inc. 271-272,293,295,306  SECTION 2. By the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted bids, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids for such items and agrees to pur- chase the materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the terms, specifications, standards, quantities and for the specified sums contained in the Bid Invitations, Bid Proposals, and related documents. SECTION 3. Should the City and the winning bidder(s) wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the acceptance, approval, and awarding of the bids, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute a written contract in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained in the Bid Proposal and related documents and to extend that contract as determined to be advantageous to the City of Denton. SECTION 4. By the acceptance and approval of the above enumerated bids, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved bids. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 2009. ______________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR   ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY  BY: _________________________________ 3-ORD-BID 4323   AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed DEPARTMENT: Materials Management to Vance Kemler 349-8044 ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas accepting competitive bids and awarding a best value purchase of a Caterpillar 826C Compactor for the City of Denton Landfill; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 4325-Best Value Bid for Landfill Compactor awarded to Caron Compactor Company in the amount of $182,550). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (6-0). BID INFORMATION This bid is for the purchase of a rebuilt Caterpillar Model 826C or equivalent Landfill Compactor. The Solid Waste Department owns two compactors, and recently the backup unit, a Caterpillar Model 826G, became inoperable due to the need for a machine rebuild of the unit. The unit has in excess of 13,445 hours, and is currently in the process of being rebuilt. The FY 2009 Solid Waste Capital Improvement Program includes funding for the purchase of a new landfill compactor. After receiving bids on a new compactor that was priced at $923,167, Four bids were received for Bid #4325, which were opened on July 2, 2009. An evaluation committee analyzed the bids for best value. The committee recommends the purchase of a rebuilt Caterpillar Model 826C landfill compactor which has been recently rebuilt and meets our specification requirements. The unit is equipped with Caron high density wheels with axle safeguard group, Cat straight blade, air conditioning, Sentinel engine shutdown system, and an Amerex fire suppression system. The machine offered by Caron is currently on a three month rental to the City of Denton at $16,640 per month. Caron has agreed to apply 85% of the rental payment towards the purchase price. This is equivalent to a $225,000 sales price less $42,450 rental fees paid, for a total buyout amount of $182,500 as of September 10, 2009. Two of the bids were from Marcel Equipment for machines that did not meet the minimum unit #C7758 was reconditioned in 1995, and their unit #C3621 was rebuilt in 1992, with only the engine rebuilt, and has had a recent engine overhaul. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) The Public Utilities Board approved this item at its August 10, 2009 meeting. Agenda Information Sheet August 18, 2009 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Award the purchase of the Caterpillar Model 826C compactor from Caron Compactor Company in the amount of $182,550. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Caron Compactor Company Escalon, CA ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT The recommended compactor is currently rented and on site for immediate transfer of ownership. FISCAL INFORMATION This project will be funded from account 660041591.1350.30100. The Landfill Compactor will be funded using short-term bonds, Solid Waste job cost account number. Requisition 94600 has been entered in the Purchasing software system. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Bid Tabulation Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent 1-AIS-Bid 4325 Exhibit 1 Bid # 4325 Date: July 2, 2009 Best Value Bid for Landfill Compactor ITEMDESCRIPTION VENDORVENDORVENDORVENDOR Marcel Equipment Marcel Equipment Caron CompactorLandfill Equipment LimitedLimited Principle Place of Business: London Ontario CanadaLondon Ontario CanadaEscalon, CAHerculaneum, MO Unit # C7758Unit # C3621 Base cost for a rebuilt Caterpillar 826C or equal Landfill 1Compactor, F.O.B. City of Denton Landfill, 1527 S. Mayhill $134,000.00$138,000.00$182,550.00$242,000.00 Rd., Denton, TX 76208 *Without Wheels*Without Wheels aMachine Make___________________1CaterpillarCaterpillarCaterpillar bModel__________________________826C826C826C826C cSerial Number____________________87X0177887X0136187X1782Will Provide OPTION ONE Priced Without Priced Without 2Cost to delete four wheels$15,000.00 $20,000.00 WheelsWheels ORDINANCE. _________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A BEST VALUE PURCHASE OF A CATERPILLAR 826C COMPACTOR FOR THE CITY OF DENTON LANDFILL; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 4325-BEST VALUE BID FOR LANDFILL COMPACTOR AWARDED TO CARON COMPACTOR COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $182,550). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received, and tabulated competitive best value bids, for the purchase of necessary materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the procedures of State law and City ordinances based on the best value as determined by using the selection criteria set forth in the request for bids; and reviewed and recommended that the herein described bids are the best value based on the selection criteria for the materials, equipment, ned that the best value bid process provides the best value to the City for this procurement; and WHEREAS, the City Council has provided in the City Budget for the appropriation of funds to be used for the purchase of the materials, equipment, supplies or services approved and accepted herein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings and conclusions set forth in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated within the body of the ordinance. SECTION 2. The options in the following numbered bids for materials, equipment, Agent, is hereby accepted and approved as being the best value based on the selection criteria contained in the request for bids for such items: BID NUMBER VENDOR AMOUNT 4325 Caron Compactor Company $182,550 SECTION 3. By the acceptance and approval of the above items of the submitted bids, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids for such items and agrees to purchase the materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the terms, specifications, standards, quantities and for the specified sums contained in the Bid Invitations, Bid Proposals, and related documents. SECTION 4. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute any and all necessary written contracts for the performance of the services in accordance with the bids accepted and approved herein, provided that such contracts are made in accordance with and relating to the items specified in Section 1, which written contract(s) shall be attached hereto; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the above Request to Submit Bids, Bid Proposals, and documents relating thereto specifying the terms, conditions, plans and specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained therein. SECTION 5. By the acceptance and approval of the above enumerated bids, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved bids. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this_______day of ______________________________,2009. ______________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: _________________________________ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: _________________________________ 3-ORD-BID 4325 PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD AGENDA ITEM # 1 2 3 DRAFT MINUTES 4 PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD 5 August 10, 2009 6 7 After determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board of the City of Denton, Texas was 8 present, the Chair of the Public Utilities Board thereafter convened into an Open Meeting on 9 Monday, August 10, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. in the Service Center Training Room, City of Denton 10 Service Center, 901-A Texas Street, Denton, Texas. 11 Present: 12 Chair Dick Smith, Bill Cheek, Randy Robinson, Bill Grubbs, Phil Gallivan and 13 Barbara Russell. 14 15 Ex Officio Officers: 16 George C. Campbell, City Manager 17 Howard Martin, ACM Utilities 18 Absent 19 : John Baines, excused 20 OPEN MEETING: 21 22 23 Welcome new board member Barbara Russell. 24 CONSENT AGENDA: 25 26 The Public Utilities Board has received backgroun 27 has had an opportunity to raise questions regarding these items prior to consideration. 28 Board Member Bill Cheek pulled Item 1 for individual consideration 29 . 30 31 2) Recommend the expenditure of funds for the purchase of an automatic tarping unit (ATM) 32 from Tarpomatic Inc. in the amount of $97,537.00. 33 34 3) Consider a recommendation for the approval of a Professional Services Agreement between 35 Chiang, Patel, and Yerby, Inc. (CP&Y) and the City of Denton Solid Waste Department for 36 CP&Y to provide engineering consulting services for a Denton Landfill Floodplain 37 Reclamation Study in an amount not to exceed $63,000. 38 Board Member Bill Cheek moved to approve Items 2-3 with a second from Board Member 39 Bill Grubbs. The motion was approved by a 6-0 vote. 40 41 Draft Minutes of the Public Utilities Board meeting August 10, 2009 Page 2 of 7 ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION 1 : 2 3 Consider a recommendation of approval of the purchase of a rebuilt Caterpillar Model 826C 4 landfill compactor, in the amount of $182,550 from Caron Compactor Company, Best Value 5 Bid for Landfill Compactor Bid #4325. 6 7 8 important item when it comes to trash compaction. Cheek asked if it was pad foot roller. 9 Kemler stated that it is a Brownsfield drum with special teeth that has a variety of configurations. 10 said 11 different geography. Caterpillar wheels have a special tooth that peek out and roll along, with a 12 high cost. The major difference in the Caron wheels is they put a base on that drum with a pin 13 on assembly so that when a tooth breaks they are replaceable. You can change out a whole set of 14 teeth in a full day. Whereas, you would have a machine down one to two weeks if you have to 15 cut the teeth off to replace them. The other factor that comes into play is the hardness the alloys 16 that are used are problems that we have seen over the years with Cat is the alloys are softer the 17 teeth wear out faster. The Caron teeth are extremely hard material on the shell that pins on so 18 you have a better life the life depends on the soil characteristics at the site. Sandy materials are 19 very abrasive vs. clays or slick surfaces. Teeth pattern number of rows of teeth and number of 20 teeth enter in. Caron has been the leader in research in determining better compaction. Variation 21 of earth compacting equipment designed especially in garbage compaction. They took bids on 22 new machines several months ago and were astonished at the increased cost. The increase in 23 requirements is due to emission requirements for the engines and the cost associated with this 24 technology. One of the problems with last compactor they bought weighed about 85,000 lbs. 25 When we went out with the same standard a couple of years ago was the performance. When 26 you put it in first gear the new emissions criteria performance of that engine was substantially 27 lower than previous generations of engines. We were dealing with the factory for more than a 28 year trying 29 problem. That was not a successful venture. The next machine to bid out this year was to 30 replace that low performer 06 and buy a new machine that new machine was $900k the trade in 31 32 money we will keep it use it in a lower production capacity. We will keep it for a year or two 33 more and try to sell again later. Rather than spend $900k on a new machine it would be a better 34 opportunity to buy a remanufactured machine. Cheek asked what it would cost to add that to a 35 36 clarified to add Caron wheels to tsaid that was 37 correct. Cheek asked about the exhibit that had prices without wheels. Kemler said that even 38 though they ask for machines with wheels all the vendors price the machines without wheels. 39 With wheels the price is $15k more. If you are a government buyer and only look at low price 40 then the vendor wants the lowest cost. This was specifically a best value bid, very important on 41 used or rebuilt equipment. One of these pieces of equipments was rebuild in 1992 and one in 42 1995, neither was completely remanufactured. Cheek asked when the Caron compactor was 43 remanufactured. Kemler said about a year ago. It was a stem to stern total re-build, a CAT 44 dealer did the entire rebuild. With Marciel they overhauled the machine. On Caron used a 45 California CAT dealer and went through remanufacturing the engine and the transmission they 46 redid all the drive components. The invoice was extremely long. They also improved cooling Draft Minutes of the Public Utilities Board meeting August 10, 2009 Page 3 of 7 1 system, all machines original radiators tend to clog up; they have come up new radiator. Landfill 2 Equipment out of Missouri do an excellent job they tear the entire machine down and build it 3 back up. Those two I felt were good offerings. Both machines would get several years of use. 4 A couple of differences were: Landfill E 5 machine to us; it would be about 3 months. Caron rebuilt the machine to have it available for 6 some of their customers. Cheek asked what year model was the Caron machine. Kemler said 7 this 8 9 have air seats. Old style technology before tear two before high tech equipment was 10 manufactured. Cheek asked the projected life of the machine. Kemler said 8-10 years. This 11 machine is so stout it can go through another rebuild. It is that quality of machine. Cheek asked 12 if they have seen the machine. Kemler said they have actually rented the machine and are 13 currently using it. Cheek said that would have been good information to have. Did we get a 14 break on the price since we are leasing it? Kemler said yes that is why the price is so much 15 different than the one from Landfill. Warranty? Kemler said the warranty is 6 months 50/50. 16 We have used it just shy of two months every day. Dick Smith said comments were good, a lot 17 of information that should have been in the back up. 18 Board Member Bill Cheek moved to approve Item 1 with a second from Board Member 19 Bill Grubbs. The motion was passed by a 6-0 vote. 20 21 22 4) Consider recommending approval of the Public Utilities Board meeting minutes of: 23 a. July 27, 2009 24 The minutes were approved as circulated. 25 26 27 5) Consider approval of a Professional Services Agreement for Architect or Engineer between 28 the City of Denton and Malcom Pirnie in the amount of $2,600,000 for Engineering Services 29 for the Design of the Lake Lewisville Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation and Process 30 Upgrade. 31 32 Tim Fisher, Director of Water Utilities, presented this item. He had a presentation that he had 33 shown at a previous meeting. One of the keys on this project is the change in process. We are 34 trying to get away from the present mode of operation which is a disinfectant grade of fillers 35 going to ozone. The biggest difference from a regulatory standpoint that we are going to gain 36 out of this is basically by products. Regulatory driver that we are getting in to with the service 37 water treatment rules which is going to start lowering turbidity standards. We are trying to 38 change the filter media that is in the filters as a compliment to the ozone process. We are 39 looking at a complete revamp of the filters. We have been running an enhanced coagulation 40 process at this facility for about 15 years we are running a low Ph in the basins. We are running 41 an aggressive coagulation process to try to move the organic material through the chlorine. Over 42 the 15 years of operation we are starting to erode concrete. What we are looking at is to change 43 that treatment process and look at ozone and biological filtration. Another big decision that we 44 are making on this is chlorine. We got an older gas feed system that we have done a lot of 45 46 with is the scrubber retrofit. One thing that we are doing in this project, back in 1998 we Draft Minutes of the Public Utilities Board meeting August 10, 2009 Page 4 of 7 1 exasperated whether to stay with chlorine or switch to an alternate disinfectant. A bleach storage 2 and pumping system; get away from a gas feed system. In 1998 it made since to stay with the 3 gas feed system. 9-11 changed a lot of that. Now we are going to phase out gas feed chlorine at 4 this particular location. Fisher showed a site plan with major areas of the chlorine facility. The 5 clarifier mechanisms are only in the front cells we have no sludge removal in the back. We are 6 going to a vacuum based sludge removal system. The clarifier mechanisms date back to the 7 origin 8 the $26m. The big ticket item is the ozonation system which is about 40% of the project. Fisher 9 said the numbers have not been updated with 2007. We will stay with our budget and prioritize 10 and sacrifice components. We have not increased the budget so we are looking to see; what is 11 the best package that we can get for the budget that we have. Fisher then showed the CIP budget 12 sheet that was in the backup packet with explanation. After the bid process we want to find a 13 14 project. Fisher then talked about Exhibit 6 and the cost comparison graph. Fisher was very 15 happy with the negotiations. As far as in house work goes, there will not be any. Cheek asked 16 about the length of engineering. Fisher responded about 11 months, with a construction window 17 ait and see who the 18 contractor is before we made that final decision of who we will use for that rep. 19 Board Member Phil Gallivan moved to approve Item 5 with a second from Board Member 20 Randy Robinson. The motion was passed by a 6-0 vote. 21 22 23 24 6) Consid 25 26 as Lessee, being a modification of the Lease, for a tract of real property situated within the 27 . 28 29 Vance Kemler presented this item. This item is concerning a lease agreement with DCTA. For a 30 background on this in the spring of 2005 this facility tenants would outgrow the space at the city 31 bus system. The city was looking at the DCTA to take over the bus service. The transportation 32 operation started looking for a new facility. The solid waste facility said they would be happy to 33 assist while they looked for a permanent home for a period of time. While they were finalizing 34 the contracts with the DCTA and in doing so they planned on building a maintenance facility and 35 bus ban operation. They would need an interim solution until that facility was on the ground and 36 useable. With that background we developed a lease agreement which had a three year term that 37 was from September 2005 through September 2008. The agreement had the ability to have two 38 renewal terms which would take it to a five year lease. As they expanded their operations with 39 UNT they needed more space, which was the first renewal term. That renewal term ends 40 September 2009. Although he has not received the second year renewal, he is sure he will get it 41 due to DCTA moving in another modular office. The amendment we are talking about a today 42 allows them to bring in this second modular building for the period of time to operate out of. It 43 does appear that we will need to negotiate a new agreement within the next six months that will 44 e the facility built at 45 that time. Gallivan asked if the buildings will be removed at some point. Kemler said the first 46 modular building was purchased by solid waste. They are paying back for the use of it. The Draft Minutes of the Public Utilities Board meeting August 10, 2009 Page 5 of 7 1 intent is that as construction throughout the city occurs, that type of building can be used in other 2 locations during construction to house offices. The second modular building, DCTA are 3 reimbursing Solid Waste for the rent plus 20%. This building will be moved off as soon as 4 DCTA moves. 5 Board Member Bill Grubbs moved to approve Item 6 with a second from Board Member 6 Barbara Russell. The motion was passed by a 6-0 vote. 7 8 9 10 7) Receive a report, hold a discussion and take action on Electric, Water, Wastewater, Solid 11 Waste, Miscellaneous, and Engineering Fee Ordinances effective for FY 2010. 12 13 Howard Martin stated that at the last meeting there were some minor changes proposed in 14 various rate ordinances that were identified in the information sheet. However in the last review 15 of the rate increa 16 different in this time and the last meeting is some minor changes to the electric rate ordinance. 17 Phil Williamson will go over the minor changes. In your packet are the rate ordinances in its 18 entirety and right behind that is the red line of any changes. Williams stated there were minor 19 changes to the wording only no changes in the rates. For example, the wording for rebates added 20 The Renewable Sources Rider changed in wording 21 only. The Special Event Rider; that is tied to one event that is the County Courthouse. The 22 pedestals that are freestanding were unmetered and charged a flat fee, are now behind the meter 23 and are the responsibility of the County. That Special Event Rider is not longer needed with this 24 change. That is all the electric changes. Howard Martin stated that generally across all the City 25 Utilities there would be no change in rates. Dick Smith had a question on water tap fees to Tim 26 27 do are part of an installation where the developer is extending the line to where the service 28 already has a meter set. We do approximately 800 or 900 meter sets per year. Then when you 29 get into setting a main line extension for a contractor, we have standard tap fees for that. Last 30 year we did about 65 of those. We first adopted standardization around 2001 and have only 31 changed them one ti 32 one of those 65 installs being a development that would have to tap the street for a particular pad 33 site. Fisher also did some tap fee comparisons with other cities and we seem to be on track with 34 them. We made the recommendation for the change due to cost recovery. 35 Board Member Randy Robinson moved to approve Item 7 with a second from Board 36 Member Bill Cheek. The motion was passed by a 6-0 vote. 37 38 39 40 8) ACM Update: 41 a) Nothing to report 42 43 9) Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Government Code, respond to inquiries from the 44 Board or the public with specific factual information or recitation of policy, or accept a 45 proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming meeting. 46 Draft Minutes of the Public Utilities Board meeting August 10, 2009 Page 6 of 7 1 Nothing to report 2 3 Official Action, if necessary, on Closed Meeting item(s) under §551.071-551.088 of the Texas 4 Government Code, as amended. 5 At 10:00 a.m., Chair Dick Smith declared a quorum and announced that the Public 6 Utilities Board was now in closed session. 7 8 CLOSED MEETING 9 : 10 11 12 the provisions of Texas Government 13 the Chair of the PUB shall first announce the time, and then the PUB must then vote and make a 14 good faith determination, by a majority vote of its members, that if any particular agenda item 15 listed 16 17 agenda, then a separate vote must be taken for each item. The vote shall be taken during the 18 Closed Meeting and shall be included in the certified agenda or tape recording of the Closed 19 Meeting. If the PUB fails to determine by a majority vote of its members that the particular 20 agenda item satisfies the requirements of §551.086(b)(3), then the PUB may not discuss, 21 deliberate or take any further action on that Agenda item in its Closed Meeting. For any agenda 22 item listed under any other section of the Texas Government Code, other than §551.086, 23 consideration in the Closed Meeting is permitted without the necessity of a preliminary motion 24 and a vote of the Board being taken.] 25 A.CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY --- Under Texas Government Code 26 §551.071. 27 28 29 1. Receive a status report, briefing and information regarding the litigation entitled City 30 of Denton v University of North Texas, Cause No. 2008-20043-158, now pending th 31 before the 158 Judicial District Court in and for Denton County, Texas; and 32 33 recommendations regarding such legal matter. A public discussion of this legal 34 matter would conflict with 35 Board under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of 36 Texas. 37 38 2. Receive information, a status report, and legal briefing 39 regarding Wastewater Department legal issues pertaining to the Grissom Road Lift 40 Station project and possible claims dealing with the rainstorm of May 2, 2009; and 41 discuss, deliberate, and provide Staff with direction and any 42 recommendations regarding such legal matters. A public discussion of this legal 43 44 Board under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of 45 Texas. 46 Draft Minutes of the Public Utilities Board meeting August 10, 2009 Page 7 of 7 At 10:48 a.m. Chair Dick Smith announced that the Public Utilities Board was now in open 1 session. 2 3 4 There was no official action on a closed meeting item. 5 6 The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 10:50 a.m. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed DEPARTMENT: Materials Management to Emerson Vorel 349-7460 ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement (PSA) with Halff Associates, Inc., for Park Design and Planning Services for Owsley Park, The Preserve at Pecan Creek Park, and Wheeler Ridge Park; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (RFSP 4296Professional Services Agreement for Park Design and Planning Services for Owsley Park, The Preserve at Pecan Creek Park, and Wheeler Ridge Park awarded to Halff Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $121,000). RFSP INFORMATION The purpose of this project is to prepare plans and specifications for three City of Denton neighborhood parks and one linear trail. The Parks include Owsley Park (.52 acres), The Preserve at Pecan Creek Park (approx. 5 acres), and Wheeler Ridge Linear Trail and Park (approx. 4.5 acres). The parks will include support infrastructure such as trails, walking paths, a medium Eighteen proposals were submitted for this project. A committee consisting of representatives from the Parks and Recreation Department and Planning Department evaluated the top six proposals based upon the following criteria and percentages: 30% Approach to analyzing current site and laying out the needs for the site 25% ience in park design 20% Qualifications of the proposer and ability to perform work 15% Make up and resume of team members 10% The committee recommends Halff Associates, Inc. based upon the evaluation ranking as shown on Exhibit 1. RECOMMENDATION Award a Professional Services Agreement for Park Design and Planning Services to Halff Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $121,000. Agenda Information Sheet August 18, 2009 Page 2 PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Halff Associates, Inc. Richardson, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT The design of the neighborhood parks is scheduled to be completed by December 2009. FISCAL INFORMATION This project will be funded from accounts: Owsley Park 400095915.1360.21100 $40,333.34 The Preserve at Pecan Creek 400102915.1360.21100 $34,989.00 Wheeler Ridge Park Fund 400101916.1360.21100 $40,333.33 Miscellaneous Services 400102916.1360.21100 $ 5,344.33 Requisition 94460 has been entered in the Purchasing software system. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Vendor Evaluation Ranking Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent 1-AIS-RFSP 4296 ORDINANCE NO. _________________ AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (PSA) WITH HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR PARK DESIGN AND PLANNING SERVICES FOR OWSLEY PARK, THE PRESERVE AT PECAN CREEK PARK AND WHEELER RIDGE PARK; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (RFSP 4296PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR PARK DESIGN AND PLANNING SERVICES FOR OWSLEY PARK, PRESERVE AT PECAN CREEK PARK AND WHEELER RIDGE PARK AWARDED TO HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $121,000). WHEREAS, is being selected as the most highly qualified on the basis of its demonstrated competence and qualifications to perform the proposed professional services; and WHEREAS, The fees under the proposed contract are fair and reasonable and are consistent with and not higher than the recommended practices and fees published by the professional a provided by law; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into a professional service contract with Halff Associates, Inc., to provide professional architectural and related services for park design and planning services for Owsley Park, The Preserve at Pecan Creek Park and Wheeler Ridge Linear Trail and Park, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION II. The City Manager is authorized to expend funds as required by the attached contract. SECTION III. The findings in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION IV. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2009. ______________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR   ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY:_________________________________ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY  BY: _________________________________ 3-ORD-RFSP 4296   ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed DEPARTMENT: Materials Management to Frank Payne 349-8946 ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Arthur Surveying Co., for Professional Surveying Services for various City departments; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4374Professional Services Agreement for Professional Surveying Services awarded to Arthur Surveying Co., in an amount not to exceed $500,000). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). FILE INFORMATION This agreement is for the City of Denton Engineering Department to continue contracting with a qualified surveying firm for the delivery of routine surveying services on a work order basis. Surveying services will include, but not be limited to providing construction staking, field design surveys, topographic surveys, boundary surveys and analysis, preparation of easement or right- of-way exhibits, GPS monument placement, and other professional surveying services as provided in the attached Public Utility Board agenda information sheet (Attachment 1). The award of this new agreement will extend the same services that Arthur Surveying has provided since October 2003, with a (10%) price increase for the first time, and no change in terms, or conditions. Section 252.022 of the Local Government Code provides that professional services do not have to be bid. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) The Public Utilities Board approved this item at its July 27, 2009 meeting. RECOMMENDATION Award a Professional Services Agreement for delivery of surveying services to Arthur Surveying Co., Inc. in an amount not to exceed $500,000. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Arthur Surveying Co., Inc. Lewisville, TX Agenda Information Sheet August 18, 2009 Page 2 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This Agreement will remain in effect until all funds are depleted or an additional funding amount is approved. FISCAL INFORMATION Funding for this service is provided from individual project accounts as services are requested. All surveying for the Engineering Department will be funded from account 630400.7875. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Public Utilities Board Agenda Information Sheet Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent 1-AIS-File 4374 Exhibit 1 PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD AGENDA ITEM #6 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: July 27, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Utility Administration ACM: Howard Martin, Utilities, 349-8232 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT Consider recommending approval of a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Denton and Arthur Surveying Co., Inc. in the not-to-exceed amount of $500,000 for the delivery of routine surveying services on a work order basis for a three year term beginning in fiscal year 2009. BACKGROUND The City of Denton has contracted with Arthur Surveying Co., Inc. for surveying services in a series of typically annual authorizations since fiscal year 2003. Over the course of that time, annual amounts expended for survey services have been approximately the following amounts (rounded to the nearest $10,000): 2003-2004: $300,000 2004-2005: $190,000 2005-2006: $150,000 2006-2007: $220,000 2007-2008: $200,000 2008-2009: $140,000 The average annual expenditure over this time frame was approximately $200,000 per year. However, the contract authorizations varied in amount, and extensions were authorized for various contracts depending on the ongoing work at the time that the authorization amounts were expended. It is worth noting that Arthur Surveying’s Schedule of Hourly Rates that were associated with their initial contract in 2003 were maintained at those same billing levels for all subsequent contracts and authorizations for the following six years. In July 2009, the Utility and CIP Engineering division of Water Utilities approached Arthur Surveying for a proposal to enter into a new contract for survey services. The difference between this contract and previous ones is that the amount is higher ($500,000), and the intent is for this authorization to stretch over three fiscal years. Arthur Surveying has expressed their desire to renew their contract for this term and amount, with a modest (10%) increase in their hourly rates. The Professional Services Agreement for Architect or Engineer has also been included with this Agenda Information Sheet. Please see Exhibit 1. AIS – PUB Agenda Item #6 July 27, 2009 Page 2 of 2 OPTIONS 1.Recommend approval of the Professional Services Agreement. 2.Decline to recommend approval of the Professional Services Agreement. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Denton and Arthur Surveying Co., Inc. in the amount of $500,000 for Surveying Services in support of the Utility and CIP Engineering division. Arthur Surveying has served as a valuable and reliable extension of Engineering’s staff over the course of their association with the City of Denton PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) Not applicable. FISCAL INFORMATION Survey services associated with this contract are to be paid for on an “as-needed” or “as- authorized” basis, depending on the availability of funds in the various using department budgets or in the CIP projects on which Arthur Surveying Co., Inc. is to be utilized. The award of this agreement will extend these services with no change in terms or conditions and a 10% increase in hourly rates from the January 2003 Schedule of Hourly Rates published by Arthur Surveying. BID INFORMATION Not applicable. Section 252.022 of the Local Government Code provides that professional services do not have to be bid. DATE SCHEDULED FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL August 18, 2009 EXHIBITS 1.Professional Services Agreement. Respectfully submitted, Frank G. Payne, P.E. City Engineer ORDINANCE NO. __________________ AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (PSA) WITH ARTHUR SURVEYING CO., INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SURVEYING SERVICES FOR VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 4374PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SURVEYING SERVICES AWARDED TO ARTHUR SURVEYING CO., INC. IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $500,000). WHEREAS, The professional serv is being selected as the most highly qualified on the basis of its demonstrated competence and qualifications to perform the proposed professional services; and WHEREAS, The fees under the proposed contract are fair and reasonable and are consistent with and not higher than the recommended practices and fees published by the professional provided by law; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into a professional service contract with Arthur Surveying Co., Inc., to provide professional surveying services for the City of Denton, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION II. The City Manager is authorized to expend funds as required by the attached contract. SECTION III. The findings in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION IV. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2009. ______________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR   ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY:_________________________________ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY  BY: _________________________________ 3-ORD-File 4374   1 DRAFT MINUTES 2 PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD 3 July 27, 2009 4 5 After determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board of the City of Denton, Texas was 6 present, the Chair of the Public Utilities Board thereafter convened into an Open Meeting on 7 Monday, July 27, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. in the Service Center Training Room, City of Denton 8 Service Center, 901-A Texas Street, Denton, Texas. 9 Present: 10 Chair Dick Smith, Bill Cheek, Randy Robinson, Bill Grubbs and John Baines 11 (arrived at 9:02) 12 Absent 13 : Phil Gallivan, excused 14 15 Ex Officio Officers: 16 George C. Campbell, City Manager, excused 17 Howard Martin, ACM Utilities, excused 18 OPEN MEETING: 19 20 ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION 21 : 22 23 6) Consider recommending approval of a Professional Services Agreement between the City of 24 Denton and Arthur Surveying Co., Inc. in the not-to-exceed amount of $500,000 for the 25 delivery of routine surveying services on a work order basis for a three year term beginning 26 in fiscal year 2009. 27 28 Director Coulter called on Frank Payne, City Engineer, to present this item. Payne stated that the 29 city has been working with Arthur Surveying, Inc., for survey services in a series of annual 30 authorizations since fiscal year 2003. The average annual expenditure over this time frame has 31 been approximately $200,000 per year. The contract authorizations varied in amount, and 32 extensions were authorized for various contracts depending on the ongoing work at the time that 33 the authorization amounts were expended. Payne stated that it is worth noting that Arthur 34 Su 35 were maintained at those same billing levels for all subsequent contracts and authorizations for 36 the following six years. 37 38 In July 2009, the Utility and CIP Engineering division of Water Utilities approached Arthur 39 Surveying for a proposal to enter into a new contract for survey services. The difference 40 between this contract and previous ones is that the amount is higher ($500,000), and the intent is 41 for this authorization to stretch over three fiscal years. Arthur Surveying has expressed their 42 desire to renew their contract for this term and amount, with a modest (10%) increase in their 43 hourly rates. 44 45 Payne then stated that survey services associated with this c- 46 - 47 department budgets or in the CIP projects on which Arthur Surveying Co., Inc. is to be utilized. 48 The award of this agreement will extend these services with no change in terms or conditions and 49 a 10% increase in hourly rates from the January 2003 Schedule of Hourly Rates published by 50 Arthur Surveying. Draft Minutes of the Public Utilities Board meeting July 27, 2009 Page 2 of 2 1 Payne stated that staff recommends approval of the Professional Services Agreement between 2 the City of Denton and Arthur Surveying Co., Inc. in the amount of $500,000 for Surveying 3 Services in support of the Utility and CIP Engineering division. The intent is that this contract 4 will cover services over three fiscal years. Arthur Surveying has served as a valuable and 5 reliable extension over the course of its association with the City of Denton 6 7 Chair Dick Smith stated that he is a little uncomfortable with the $500,000 amount when there 8 could be year with a $100,000 expenditure. Payne stated that the dollar amount does not mean 9 that all will be expended; each one of the billings received is assigned a different purchase order 10 (PO). If staff needs $2,000 worth of survey services, when those services are billed a different 11 PO is cut for each one of those services. Payne added that if the City uses $500,000 over three 12 years, which it probably will, and if it goes beyond that amount, staff will ask for a contract 13 amendment. Some surveying will brought forward from the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 14 activities; however, most of the heavy projects will go through direct contracts rather than 15 through the survey contract. Payne stated that the large roadway projects will be turn key to the 16 engineering company rather than having different people do different chores, and that large 17 sewer projects that are done in house will use Arthur Surveying. 18 19 Board Member Randy Robinson asked if there will be a line item each year for this expense. 20 Payne replied that it is usually factored in as part of the CIP budget. 21 22 Payne then stated that staff will be doing utility relocates for McKinney Street and FM 2181 in 23 this next fiscal year. This is a significant undertaking which will require surveying services that 24 will begin occurring soon and that is why staff is bringing this contract forward now instead of 25 waiting until October. 26 27 Board Member Bill Grubbs asked what the term of the last contract. Payne replied there has not 28 really been a hard end date put in those contracts, but the contracts have always been intended 29 for a fiscal year and have been brought forward in a September time frame. 30 31 Chair Smith asked if this contract will begin in the next fiscal year. Payne replied that it begins 32 upon execution. 33 34 Board Member John Baines asked if this is an exclusive for this firm. Payne replied that this 35 contract allows staff to pick up the phone and tell Arthur Survey surveying is needed now and 36 that yes it is exclusive with Arthur Surveying but only for in-house survey services. Board 37 Member Baines asked if this is in lieu of having survey staff. Payne replied that is correct. 38 Board Member Bill Cheek moved to approve Item 6 with a second from Board Member 39 John Baines. The motion was passed by a 5-0 vote. 40 41 42 The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 9:51 a.m. ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Finance ACM: Jon Fortune ______________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor or his designee to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with Denton County for the County to provide property tax billing and collection services for the City of Denton; providing a savings clause and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND This Interlocal Agreement for tax collection services to be performed by Denton County was initially established in March 2007. At that time, the agreement was exclusive to the processing of statements and supplemental payments for the 2007 tax year. In August 2008, the City Council renewed the Interlocal Agreement, and included a provision for all tax years to be included in processing supplemental tax payments. The County currently processes tax statements (approximately 39,500 accounts) and tax responsible for billing and collecting payments for all three taxing entities (the City, the County and the School District). This Interlocal Agreement continues to authorize Denton County to process tax statements and payments on behalf of the City of Denton. There are three changes to the contract for 2009. The first change requires the City to provide a copy of the delinquent property tax attorney contract. The second change allows the County to offset unpaid invoices in excess of 61 days through withholding the billed amount of payments to the entity. Last, there is a nominal pricing increase in the processing of the tax statements, from $0.73 per statement to $0.74 per statement. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of continuing the Interlocal Agreement with Denton County to provide tax processing services for the 2009 tax year. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW City Council Meeting, March 6, 2007 The City Council approved an Interlocal Agreement with Denton County, establishing tax billing and collection management on behalf of the City of Denton for tax years 2007 and forward. Agenda Information Sheet August 18, 2009 Page 2 City Council Meeting, August 19, 2008 The City Council approved and Interlocal Agreement with Denton County for the County to provide property tax billing and collection services for the City of Denton, repealing Subsection 10-2(B) of the City Code and all ordinances allowing the split-payment option for payment of property taxes. FISCAL INFORMATION Under the current Interlocal Agreement, the City pays the County for receipting, bookkeeping, issuing and mailing of the tax statements. Expenditures for the 2008 tax year are $31,576. Summary fees are listed below: Current fees for the 2008 tax year: $0.73 per initial statement processing in October and delinquent statement processing before April 1 and July 1. $0.25 surcharge for processing statements for the municipality that reside outside Denton County. No fee increases to the additional statement processing in March or the mailing charge. The City must submit written notice to the County in February if March delinquent statements should be sent. Proposed fees for the 2009 tax year: $0.74 per initial statement processing in October and delinquent statement processing before April 1 and July 1. $0.25 surcharge for processing statements for the municipality that reside outside Denton County. No fee increases to the additional statement processing in March or the mailing charge. The City must submit written notice to the County in February if March delinquent statements should be sent. A one-cent increase in the initial statement processing, and delinquent statement processing is estimated at less than a $400 cost. Respectfully Submitted By: Bryan Langley Director of Finance ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Utility and CIP Engineering ACM: Howard Martin, 349-8232 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 18 of the Code of Ordinances to revise the bus loading zones to provide for limited time periods for the loading zones and to allow for towing of illegally parked vehicles in all the school bus loading zones; providing a penalty of a fine not to exceed two hundred dollars ($200.00); providing a severability clause; providing for publication; and declaring an effective date. The Traffic Safety Commission recommends approval (8-0). BACKGROUND The Denton Independent School District (DISD) transportation staff is working with City staff to improve both on site (as a part of the ongoing DISD bond program) and off site traffic circulation issues. The first school that was considered as a part of this effort was Borman Elementary. To help facilitate traffic in a more manageable manner, the DISD and City staff agreed that there was a need to change the bus loading zone along Borman’s frontage to help facilitate the closest entry for emergency needs, improve the needs of the school’s volunteers as well as other parking needs. The City’s Traffic Safety Commission considered this item at their May meeting and recommended that the City Council approve the DISD’s request. Detailed information, as provided to the Traffic Safety Commission, is attached. OPTIONS 1.Approve the ordinance as written 2.Approve the ordinance with conditions 3.Direct staff to make changes and return this item at a later date 4.Deny approval of the ordinance RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Traffic Safety Commission both recommend approval of the ordinance. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The City’s Traffic Safety Commission considered this item at their May meeting and recommended (8-0) that the City Council approve the DISD’s request. Minutes of the Traffic Safety Commission’s meeting and their approval is attached. FISCAL INFORMATION Once the ordinance is passed, the City will remove the existing signs and posts and install the new signs with new posts at a cost of about $300 each. Staff estimates that it will take approximately 4 new signs/post to adequately notice this area. EXHIBITS 1.Ordinance 2.Staff memo to the Traffic Safety Commission 3.Minutes of the May Traffic Safety Commission, reviewed in June 4.Approval of the May Minutes, reviewed in July Respectfully submitted: ______________________________ Frank G. Payne, P.E. City Engineer S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\09\SchoolZone1.doc ORDINANCE NO. __________ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO REVISE THE BUS LOADING ZONES TO PROVIDE FOR LIMITED TIME PERIODS FOR THE LOADING ZONES AND TO ALLOW FOR TOWING OF ILLEGALLY PARKED VEHICLES IN ALL THE SCHOOL BUS LOADING ZONES; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF A FINE NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200.00); PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, it is in the interest of public safety to tow vehicles illegally parked in school bus loading zones if these vehicles are unattended during loading and unloading periods; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of public safety to specify the specific time periods for the school bus loading zones at Borman Elementary so that traffic may utilize the bus loading zones during other times; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1 Denton, Texas is hereby amended by changing portions 18- 221. This section shall now read as follows: Sec. 18-221. Unlawful for any person to operate or park a motor vehicle in a school bus loading zone. When signs are erected giving notice thereof, it shall be unlawful for any person to operate or park a motor vehicle other than a school bus in a herein described school bus loading zone during school zone hours or any other specified periods of loading or unloading. An individual adjudged guilty of the provision of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine not to exceed two hundred dollars ($200.00). Unattended vehicles parked in the bus loading zones in violations of Section 18-220 are subject to being towed.  SECTION 2. An individual adjudged guilty of any provision of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine not to exceed Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00). SECTION 3. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Denton defining school zones and school bus loading zones and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. SECTION 4. That if in any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas hereby declares it would have enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity. S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\09\SchoolZone1.doc SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, the official newspaper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the _____ day of ___________________, 2009. ____________________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: _________________________________ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: _________________________________ Page 2 of 2 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM #2 FOR MAY Memo To: Traffic Safety Commission From: Bernard Vokoun, Traffic Engineer Date: May 1, 2009 Re: Traffic Safety Meeting Monday, May 4, 2009 RECEIVE A REPORT, HOLD A DISCUSSION AND MAKE ITEM #2: RECOMMENDATION(S) AND/OR DIRECT STAFF ACCORDINGLY AS TO THE REVISION OF THE BUS LOADING ZONE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PARVIN STREET ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF BORMAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. Within the past year, staff brought a petition request to the Commission from the citizens in this area to restrict parking on the north side of Parvin Street. The Commission reviewed this item 3 times and each time agreed to recommend to City Council that a parking restriction be imposed, such that on October 10, 2008 the Commission’s final recommendation was: NO STOPPING OR STANDING, 7:30 A.M. TO 3:30 PM SCHOOL DAYS, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PARVIN STREET FROM MERCEDES ROAD TO MCCORMICK STREET. The City Council agreed with the Commission’s recommendation and the ordinance was signed into th effect on November 4, 2008. The signs were installed around January 6 and after winter break, at the request of DISD so they could prepare staff and parents over the break period. After recently reviewing various issues on site with Denton Independent School District (DISD) staff and their engineering consultant with City staff, including the effects of the parking restriction (noted above) the DISD has decided to implement a number of onsite improvements to help circulation issues. In addition, it was decided to change the current ordinance that deals with the bus loading zone on Parvin in front of the school, upon a request from the DISD. The most current ordinance is 2003- 343 and indicates, in part: Sect 18-220. School bus loading zones. The location of school bus loading zones for the following schools shall be as follows, to-wit” (1)Borman Elementary The southernmost lane of Parvin Street beginning where Parvin Street intersects the east curb line of McCormick Street to where Parvin Street intersects the west curb line of Mercedes Road. Traffic Safety Agenda Item #2 May 4, 2009 Page 2 of 2 Without any reference(s) to any exceptions, the City has taken the position that the restriction is 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, whether school is in session or not. As such, the restriction is too restrictive for the few buses that load/unload in this area. The City has received a request from DISD (as noted on the attachment) and agrees with the request. The lessening of the restriction will allow parents to park on Parvin Street in front of the school to do school business and thus improve the previous situation when they were parking on the north side of Parvin Street before the restriction was imposed. In addition, this would add addition parking for evening and week-end events. Once the ordinance is approved, staff would assure that the signing would not be installed until after the current school year is finished. Recommendations 1.Staff recommend(s) that the Commission recommend to City Council that the current school bus loading zone ordinance be amended for Borman Elementary to be: No Parking, Bus Loading Zone from 7:30 – 8:30AM and 2:30-3:00PM, School Days, on the south side of Parvin Street beginning where Parvin Street intersects the east curb line of McCormick Street and ending where Parvin Street intersects the west curb line of Mercedes Road. 2.Recommend approval with revision(s), 3.Return to staff with instructions as to changes, 4.Recommend denial, 5.Postpone consideration until a future meeting. Exhibits : 1.E-mail request from DISD 2.Map of area TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM #2 attachments From: Roderick Reeves [mailto:rreeves2@dentonisd.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 8:44 AM To: Vokoun, Bernard J. Cc: Ruben Molinar; 'Robert A. Howman'; Gene Holloway; Sharon Cox; Norm Sisk; Jamie Wilson Subject: Borman No Parking Signs Bud, After consultation with Mr. Molinar (principal at Borman), Robert Howman (District engineering consultant) and Gene Holloway (District Director of Transportation), the District request the City of Denton to change the signage on the south side of Parvin from No parking to Bus Loading Zone – No parking from 7:30 – 8:30 and 2:30-3:00. This will allow staff and volunteers to park along the south side of Parvin throughout the day and on evening events. Please contact me if you need further clarification. Sincerely, Rod ROD REEVES, AIA COORDINATOR OF FACILITIES DENTON ISD 230 N. Mayhill Rd. Denton, texas 76201 (940)369-0200 (940)369-4973 FAX TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM #2 attachments N AMENDED TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES FOR MAY TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM #2 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION May 4, 2009 After determining that a quorum of the Traffic Safety Commission of the City of Denton, Texas was present, the Chair of the Traffic Safety Commission convened into an Open Meeting on Monday, May 4, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, City of Denton City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Present: Chair John Crew, Pat Cheek, Linda Brown, Connie Baker, Marion Scott, Kim Spivey, Jason Davis (arrived 5:34 p.m.), and Michael Green (arrived 5:40 p.m.) Also Present : Bud Vokoun, Traffic Engineer; Ann Forsythe, Boards and Committees Coordinator and Rod Reeves, Denton Independent School District OPEN MEETING: 2. Receive a report, hold a discussion and make recommendation(s) and/or direct staff accordingly as to the revision of the bus loading zone on the south side of Parvin Street along the frontage of Borman Elementary School. Traffic Engineer Bud Vokoun stated that within the past year, staff brought a petition request to the Commission from the citizens in this area to restrict parking on the north side of Parvin Street. The Commission reviewed this item three times and each time agreed to recommend to the City Council that a parking restriction be imposed. On November 4, 2008 the Council approved signage for no stopping or standing, 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 pm school days on the north side of Parvin Street from Mercedes Road to McCormick Street. Vokoun next stated that after recently reviewing various issues on site between Denton Independent School District (DISD) staff and their engineering consultant and with City staff (including the effects of the parking restriction), the DISD has decided to implement a number of onsite improvements to alleviate vehicle traffic circulation issues. In addition, it was decided to change the current ordinance that deals with the bus loading zone on Parvin in front of the school, upon a request from the DISD. The most current ordinance is 2003-343 and indicates, in part: Without any reference(s) to any exceptions, the City has taken the position that the restriction is 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, whether school is in session or not. As such, the restriction is too restrictive for the few buses that load/unload in this area. The City has received a request from DISD to reduce the bus loading zone times and days it is in effect and agrees with the request. The lessening of the restriction will allow parents to park on the south side of Parvin Street in front of the school to conduct school business during most the school’s hours and thus improve Draft Minutes of the Traffic Safety Commission meeting May 4, 2009 Page 2 of 4 the previous situation when there was only parking on the north side of Parvin Street, before that restriction was imposed this past winter. In addition, this would add additional parking for evening and week-end events. Once the ordinance is approved, staff would assure that the signing would not be installed until after the current school year is finished. Staff recommendation is that the Commission recommend to City Council that the current school bus loading zone ordinance be amended for Borman Elementary to be “No Parking, Bus Loading Zone from 7:30 – 8:30 A.M. and 2:30-3:00 P.M., School Days, on the south side of Parvin Street beginning where Parvin Street intersects the east curb line of McCormick Street and ending where Parvin Street intersects the west curb line of Mercedes Road”. Vokoun next invited Rod Reeves from the Denton Independent School District to speak on this item. Reeves stated that the DISD is requesting the change to signage on the south side of Parvin Street from “no parking to Bus Loading Zone – No Parking from 7:30 a.m. – 8:30 a.m. and 2:30 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. That change will allow staff and volunteers to park along the south side of Parvin throughout the day and for evening events. Reeves also stated that the long range plan by the DISD is to eventually relocate buses to another location Commissioner Pat Cheek stated she was pleased with the DISD’s request and thought it best served the volunteers at the school. Commissioner Michael Green asked if notification would be provided to the group of citizens which opposed parking on the south side of Parvin Street. Vokoun replied the requested change would not change the designation parking on Parvin Street and would therefore not involve those residents. Vokoun indicated that the Commission should modify staff’s recommendation to include “Tow- Away” and after Buses - remove “Loading Zone and add “Only”. Commissioner Pat Cheek moved to recommend to the City Council that the current school bus loading zone ordinance be amended for Borman Elementary to be “No Parking, Tow-Away, Buses Only from 7:30 – 8:30 A.M. and 2:30-3:00 P.M., School Days, on the south side of Parvin Street beginning where Parvin Street intersects the east curb line of McCormick Street and ending where Parvin Street intersects the west curb line of Mercedes Road with a second from Marion Scott. The motion was approved by an 8-0 vote. APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES FOR MAY TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM #1 DRAFT MINUTES TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION June 1, 2009 After determining that a quorum of the Traffic Safety Commission of the City of Denton, Texas was present, the Chair of the Traffic Safety Commission thereafter convened into an Open Meeting on Monday, June 1, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, City of Denton City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Present: Chair John Crew, Linda Brown, Kim Spivey, Zackary Tucker and Michael Green Absent: Pat Cheek, Marion Scott, both excused; Jason Davis, unexcused Also Present : Bud Vokoun, Traffic Engineer; Ann Forsythe, Boards & Committees Coordinator OPEN MEETING: 1) Consider recommending approval of the Traffic Safety Commission meeting minutes of: a) May 4, 2009 The minutes, with corrections, were approved as circulated. ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Solid Waste Department ACM: Howard Martin, 349-8232 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance approving and authorizing the City Manager of the City of Denton, Texas to execute and deliver a Second Amendment to the Master Lease Agreement by and between the City of Denton, as lessor and the Denton County Transportation, as lessee; providing for the modification of sections 3.2a and 3.2b of the Master Lease Agreement dated September 30, 2005 pertaining to certain leased premises owned by the City; authorizing the City Manager to take any and all necessary actions to complete the same; providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (6-0). BACKGROUND The Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) Master Lease Agreement was entered into on September 30, 2005, and provides for an initial term of three (3) years from that date, ending on September 30, 2008. The agreement provided for two (2) additional one-year renewal terms, which would be available to DCTA, provided that they are not in default in their performance of the lease. These options to extend the lease mainly provide that if DCTA has not completed or made arrangements for its new facility, they may continue in possession for the extension term or terms. The First Amendment to Master Lease Agreement with an effective date of December 12, 2006 was adopted by Council. It added additional acreage necessary to accommodate DCTA’s expanded operations. In October 2008 the PUB recommended to the City Council that the DCTA lease be extended under the terms of the Master Lease Agreement for one year. The City Council adopted the First Extension to the Master Lease Agreement in November 2008. DCTA has requested a Second Amendment to the Master Lease Agreement for the placement of an additional modular building within the leased premises. The monthly lease payment to the City of Denton Solid Waste Department will increase an additional $1,168.92, bringing the lease payment to $7,657.92 per month. Installation and connection charges for the additional modular building were initially incurred by the Solid Waste Department, totaling $15,786.00, and are being reimbursed by DCTA to the Solid Waste Department. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) The City Council adopted an ordinance on September 30, 2005 authorizing the City Manager to execute the Master Lease Agreement. The First Extension to the Master Lease Agreement was adopted by the City Council at their meeting of November 4, 2008. th The Publlic Utilities BBoard considdered this iteem at their AAugust 10mmeeting and recommendds approval(6-0). FISCALL INFORMAATION With the additional mmodular officcebuilding,the DCTA mmonthly leasse payment wwill increasee to $7,657.922 per monthh. EXHIBIITS 1.Ordinnance 2.DCTAA Master Leease Agreemment 3.FirstAmendmentt to Master LLease Agreeement 4.FirstExtension too the Masterr Lease Agreeement 5.Seconnd Amendmment to the MMaster Lease Agreement 6.PUBMinutes Resppectfully subbmitted, A.VVance Kemleer Genneral Manageer, Solid Waaste Preparedd by, S. Lebsacck Administtration and DDevelopmennt Manager ORDINANCE NO. 2009-________ AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS TO EXECUTE AND DELIVER A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER LEASE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON, AS LESSOR AND THE DENTON COUNTY TRANSPORTATION, AS LESSEE; PROVIDING FOR THE MODIFICATION OF SECTIONS 3.2A AND 3.2B OF THE MASTER LEASE AGREEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 30, 2005 PERTAINING TO CERTAIN LEASED PREMISES OWNED BY THE CITY; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE ANY AND ALL NECESSARY ACTIONS TO COMPLETE THE SAME; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that this Second Amendment to the Master Lease Agreement (“Second Amendment”) provides for the additional rent and for the necessary installation and utility connection charges incurred in connection with the activation of a certain additional 24’ by 60’ modular building, which the City agrees to lease to the Lessee, Denton County Transportation Authority (“DCTA”) that is located upon the leased premises; said Second Amendment will further the objectives of the parties in the original Master Lease Agreement as well as the First Amended Master Use Agreement by and between the City and DCTA; is for the public good in complementing the existing DCTA transportation facilities in the City; and is in the best interest of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby approves and authorizes that the City Manager shall execute the Second Amendment to the Master Lease Agreement, substantially in the form of the document attached hereto as Exhibit “A.” SECTION 3. The City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to perform any and all acts necessary, as well as to exercise all rights and duties of the City of Denton, Texas as Lessor, to effectuate the Second Amendment to Master Lease Agreement. SECTION 4. A true and correct executed copy of this Ordinance will be transmitted to the appropriate officials of the DCTA by the City Manager or his designee, immediately upon its passage and approval. SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the _____ day of _______________, 2009. ____________________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: __________________________________ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY By: _________________________________ ÌØÛ ÍÌßÌÛ ÑÚ ÌÛÈßÍ y y ÍÛÝÑÒÜ ßÓÛÒÜÓÛÒÌ ÌÑ ÌØÛ ÓßÍÌÛÎ ÝÑËÒÌÇ ÑÚ ÜÛÒÌÑÒ y ÔÛßÍÛ ßÙÎÛÛÓÛÒÌ ÌØ×Í ÍÛÝÑÒÜ ßÓÛÒÜÓÛÒÌ ÌÑ ÌØÛ ÓßÍÌÛÎ ÔÛßÍÛ ßÙÎÛÛÓÛÒÌ (the “Second Amendment”) is made and entered intoby and between THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, a Texas Municipal Corporation and a home-rule city (the “Lessor”), and DENTON COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, a political subdivision and coordinated county transportation authority created pursuant to Chapter 460 Tex. Trans. Code (the “Lessee”). ÉØÛÎÛßÍ , the parties previously entered into that certain Master Lease Agreement dated September 30, 2005 (the “Master Lease”) pertaining to certain leased Premiseslocated in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, more particularly described in the Master Lease (the “Leased Premises”); and ÉØÛÎÛßÍô the parties previously entered into that certain First Extension to the Master Lease dated September 30, 2005(the “First Extension”); and ÉØÛÎÛßÍ ,the parties entered into that certain First Amendment to Master Lease Agreement datedDecember 4, 2006, (the “First Amendment”) but effective as of December 12, 2006, wherein several provisions of the Master Lease were changed, to include without limitation, the leasing of additional real property from the Lessor by Lessee (the “Revised Leased Premises”)(the Master Lease, as amended by the First Amendment and the First Extension collectively referred to herein as the “Master Lease”); and ÉØÛÎÛßÍô the parties desire to amend the Master Lease as heretofore amended to provide for the installation and lease of an additional modular building to be located within the Revised Lease Premises; and ÉØÛÎÛßÍ ,the Lessor has caused to be installed on the Revised Leased Premises, and connected to the utilities,a 12’ x 60’ modular building, for useby the DCTA (the “Modular Building”); ÒÑÉô ÌØÛÎÛÚÑÎÛ , for and in consideration of the matters set forth herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the partiesagree as follows: 1.Effective as of the June 1, 2009the Master Lease,Article 3 Rent, is hereby amended to add Sections3.2A and 3.3B to read as follows: ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ 벬 “Section 3.2A .On or before the first day of each month during the Extension Terms beginning on June1, 2009, Lessee shall pay to Lessor the sum of One Thousand One Hundred Sixty-Eight Dollars 92/100 ($1168.92) per month as additional rent for the use of the Modular Building.” SAML–P138168 ECOND MENDMENT TO ASTER EASE AGE ײ­¬¿´´¿¬·±² ¿²¼ ݱ²²»½¬·±² ݸ¿®¹»­ “Section 3.2B .The Lessee agrees to pay the sum of Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Forty-Six Dollars ($9,246) to reimburse the Lessor for the costs incurred for the installation and skirting for the Modular Buildingwithin ten (10) days after the Effective Date. The Lessee agrees to pay the sum of Six Thousand Five Hundred Forty Dollars ($6,540) to reimburse the Lessor for the costs incurred to connect the Modular Building to water, sewer and other utilities to be paid within ten (10) days after the Effective Date.” 2.Except as amended by this Second Amendmentthe terms and provisions of the Master Lease Agreement as heretofore amendedshall remain in full force and effect. 3.This Agreementmay be executed by facsimile signatures and in several counterparts, and by the parties hereto in separate counterparts, and each counterpart, when so executed and delivered, shall constitute an original agreement, and all such separate counterparts shall constitute but one and the same agreement. 4.This Agreementshall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their representatives, successors and assigns. [signature page to follow] SAML–P238168 ECOND MENDMENT TO ASTER EASE AGE PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD AGENDA ITEM # 1 2 3DRAFT MINUTES 4PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD 5August 10, 2009 6 7After determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board of the City of Denton, Texas was 8present, the Chair of the Public Utilities Board thereafter convened into an Open Meeting on 9Monday, August 10, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. in the Service Center Training Room, City of Denton 10Service Center, 901-A Texas Street, Denton, Texas. 11 Present: 12Chair Dick Smith, Bill Cheek, Randy Robinson, Bill Grubbs, Phil Gallivan and 13Barbara Russell. 14 15Ex Officio Officers: 16 George C. Campbell, City Manager 17 Howard Martin, ACM Utilities 18 Absent 19: John Baines, excused 20 OPEN MEETING: 21 22 23 246) Consider a recommendation of approval of an ordinance regarding the “Second Amendment 25to the Master Lease Agreement” entered into by and between the City, as Lessor and DCTA, 26as Lessee, being a modification of the Lease, for a tract of real property situated within the 27City’s Landfill. 28 29Vance Kemler presented this item. This item is concerning a lease agreement with DCTA. For a 30background on this in the spring of 2005 this facility tenants would outgrow the space at the city 31bus system. The city was looking at the DCTA to take over the bus service. The transportation 32operation started looking for a new facility. The solid waste facility said they would be happy to 33assist while they looked for a permanent home for a period of time. While they were finalizing 34the contracts with the DCTA and in doing so they planned on building a maintenance facility and 35bus ban operation. They would need an interim solution until that facility was on the ground and 36useable. With that background we developed a lease agreement which had a three year term that 37was from September 2005 through September 2008. The agreement had the ability to have two 38renewal terms which would take it to a five year lease. As they expanded their operations with 39UNT they needed more space, which was the first renewal term. That renewal term ends 40September 2009. Although he has not received the second year renewal, he is sure he will get it 41due to DCTA moving in another modular office. The amendment we are talking about a today 42allows them to bring in this second modular building for the period of time to operate out of. It 43does appear that we will need to negotiate a new agreement within the next six months that will 44cover them after this five year term end. I just don’t see that they will have the facility built at 45that time. Gallivan asked if the buildings will be removed at some point. Kemler said the first 46modular building was purchased by solid waste.They are paying back for the use of it. The 47intent is that as construction throughout the city occurs, that type of building can be used in other 48locations during construction to house offices. The second modular building, DCTA are 49reimbursing Solid Waste for the rent plus 20%. This building will be moved off as soon as 50DCTA moves. Board Member Bill Grubbs moved to approve Item 6 with a second from Board Member 1 Barbara Russell. The motion was passed by a 6-0 vote. 2 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE : August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT : Utility Administration ACM: Howard Martin, 349-8232 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a Professional Services Agreement for Architect or Engineer by and between the City of Denton, Texas and Malcom Pirnie to provide engineering services for the preliminary design of the Lake Lewisville Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation and Process Upgrade; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (6-0). BACKGROUND In the development of the FY 2006 – 2010 CIP for the Water Production Division, several large CIP projects designed to address specific concerns with the Lake Lewisville Water Treatment Plant located off of Spencer Road (Exhibit 1) were combined into a larger, more comprehensive project designed to address the following: 1.An upgrade to the chlorine and ammonia feed systems to increase system capacity, improve safety and automate the disinfection system. 2.An upgrade to the plant’s primary disinfection process (either ozonation or UltraViolet (UV) light) to conform to new regulatory requirements. 3.An upgrade to the existing Powdered Activated Carbon (PAC) feed system for improving the plant’s taste and odor control process. 4.Miscellaneous improvements to the plant clarifiers and plant filters. Some of these improvements were dependent upon each other. For example, an ozonation disinfection process selection instead of a UV disinfection process would negate the need for an improved PAC feed system for taste and odor control and could impact the sizing of the new chlorination feed system. In addition, the process selection decision between an ozonation disinfection process and a UV disinfection process involves many variables, including capital costs, operation and maintenance costs, water quality and future regulatory compliance, ect. Additionally, implementing several smaller projects to deal with a specific plant issues would require hiring consultants and contractors for each project, losing the opportunity to attract and manage more qualified firms for these services. Due to the magnitude and complexities of the project, staff elected to select the engineering consultant through a Request For Proposal (RFP) process. Staff formed a RFP committee representing key stake holders as well as personnel with experience in dealing with engineering consultants and the RFP process. The committee reviewed and provided input on the RFP developed by the Water Production Superintendent and ultimately selected seven DFW area based consulting firms for invitations to participate. Five of the selected firms responded to the RFP and three were short listed for presentations to the RFP committee. The committee ultimately selected Malcom Pirnie from Dallas, Texas as the number one ranked firm with Camp Dresser and McKee from Dallas, Texas being a very closely ranked second place firm. Although the RFP was structured around the preliminary design phase of the project only, it was anticipated and communicated that the selected consultant for the preliminary design phase would also be awarded the final design phase for the project. Staff negotiated a PSA for the preliminary design phase of the project with Malcom Pirnie for a total lump sum fee of $ 200,000. The PSA with Malcom Pirnie was approved by the Public Utilities Board on February 27, 2006 and the Denton City Council on March 7, 2006. During the preliminary design process, the Water Utilities Department formed a review team comprised of staff members from the Water Administration and Water Production divisions. The review team also attended a series of workshops with the consultant to identify facility conditions and water quality goals to develop design criteria for inclusion in the Preliminary Design Report. The Preliminary Design Report identified the proposed process improvements to meet current and pending new water quality regulations as well as identifying the critical facility conditions needing rehabilitation on the short term. The report also outlines the preliminary design criteria and sizing of facilities to meet the projected water quality goals. The report also estimated construction costs for the facilities to be included in the project for budget purposes. The report also provides the basis for staff to identify the scope of services and negotiate a professional services agreement with Malcolm Pirnie for completing the final design and construction phase services for the LLWTP Upgrade project. The Preliminary Design Report’s significant findings are listed below: 1.The water plant audit assessment identified several limitations at the LLWTP that should be addressed to improve treated water quality and overall system reliability. Many of these improvements were not originally included in the LLWTP Upgrade Project budget as prepared by staff. 2.Current and pending water quality regulations will result in the LLWTP becoming a limiting factor in system wide compliance. The newer design and advanced treatment processes currently used by the Lake Ray Roberts Water Treatment Plant (LRRWTP) provide a higher level of water treatment than currently achievable from the older design and physical condition of the LLWTP. 3.Raw water ozonation with biologically active Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) filters was identified as the recommended process enhancement at the LLWTP. The process was selected from a total of 17 different process alternatives that were preliminarily screened and a short list of 6 process alternatives that were evaluated and ranked based upon both water quality performance and life cycle costs. 4.Powdered Activated Carbon (PAC) coupled with Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection was identified as an alternative when life cycle cost was the prevailing factor. However, this alternative was not as favorable when water quality goals were the prevailing factor. In particular, water quality performance with removal of Taste and Odor (TO) compounds and reduction in Disinfection By Products (DBPs) were not at the same level for the PAC and UV alternative as compared to the Ozone and biologically active GAC filter alternatives. 5.The plant condition assessment coupled with recent cost inflation in the construction market has resulted in a revised cost estimate of 26.4 M$ for the construction phase of the project. The LLWTP has not had a capital improvements rehabilitation upgrade since the late 1980s and major work is necessary to upgrade the existing treatment processes to comply with new drinking water quality standards and sustain operational reliability. The preliminary design phase project was completed and presented to the PUB on February 26, 2007. The construction phase for the project was incorporated into the Water Utilities Department FY 2008-2012 CIP. In negotiating the fee for this project, the staff referred to the Professional Engineering Services – A Guide to the Selection and Negotiation Process, a widely recognized reference document prepared by the Consulting Engineers Council of Texas (CECT) and the Texas Society of Professional Engineers (TSPE) published in 1993. Engineering fees for construction projects are frequently negotiated on the basis of a percentage of the estimated construction cost of the project. The CIP budget for this project included an estimated construction cost of $26,400,000 (Exhibit 2) Using the CECT & TSPE method for fee estimation related to construction costs, full basic engineering services (without a full time resident construction manager) for a project of this size, cost and complexity would typically be around 12% of construction cost, or approximately $3,168,000. The total budget for professional services for Final Design in the FY 2009 CIP is $3,500,000. An additional $ 530,000 was included in the budget for construction inspection (full time resident construction manager) and $ 200,000 for start up phase services. Based upon prior experience and comparison with other projects, staff prepared these budget numbers to reflect current market conditions for engineering fees for a water plant rehabilitation and upgrade project of this size, scope and complexity. The original fee proposal from Malcom Pirnie was submitted to staff last year and included proposed fees for all three phases of the project (design, construction and startup). These fee proposals were based upon the initial draft scope of services prepared by the consultant. The fees were based upon a man-hour cost breakdown for each scope item and deliverable including expenses and subcontractor expenses. The original fee proposal was based on a 3.2 multiplier and totaled $ 3,875,000. This fee proposal included $ 3,256,000 for basic design and construction phase services (final design, bidding and basic services during construction). This fee for basic services through construction was 12.3% of the estimated construction cost of 26.4 M$. Special services for a full time resident construction manager and for startup activities were and additional $ 422,000 and $ 197,000 respectively. Staff has negotiated both scope of services as well as the consultant’s fees over the course of the year and through three rounds of price cut negotiations. This has lowered the fee for basic design and construction phase’s services from the initial $ 3,256,000 proposal to $ 2,600,000 (which now represents 9.85% of the estimated construction cost of the project). Staff is recommending entering into a PSA with Malcom Pirnie for this negotiated lump sum amount for basic services through the design and construction phase of the project. Staff is also recommending deferral of the authorization for special services during the construction and start up phase of the project until after the project has been bid to determine the level of services needed and the final fees for these services. It will be important for both the parties (Malcom Pirnie and the City of Denton Water Utilities) to complete the design phase and determine the actual construction cost and the contractor that will be awarded the bid for construction before these services can be accurately determined. The Professional Services Agreement is included as (Exhibit 3). Staff was pleased with the overall quality of the work performed by Malcom Pirnie during the preliminary design phase of the project and is satisfied with the final fee negotiations represented in the PSA. OPTIONS 1. Approve the Professional Services Agreement. 2. Reject the Professional Services Agreement. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Denton and Malcom Pirnie in the amount of $2,600,000 for Engineering Services for the design and construction phase of the Lake Lewisville Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation and Upgrade project. PRIOR ACTION REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) February 27, 2006 PUB Approval of PSA with Malcom Pirnie for the Preliminary Design of the LLWTP Upgrade Project in the Amount of $ 200,000. March 7, 2006 City Council Approval of PSA with Malcom Pirnie for the Preliminary Design of the LLWTP Upgrade Project in the Amount of $ 200,000. February 26, 2007 PUB Approval of the Preliminary Design Report for the LLWTP Upgrade Project. th August 10, 2009 The Public Utilities Board considered this item at their August 10 meeting and recommends approval (6-0). FISCAL INFORMATION A total of $ 3.500.000 was included in the CIP (Exhibit 2) for final design of the Lake Lewisville Water Treatment Plant upgrade project. The current budget for the project is $30,792,000 and includes $200,000 for preliminary design, $3,500,000 for final design, $26,362,000 for construction, $530,000 for full time resident construction manager and $200,000 for start up services. According to the CECT & TSPE method of fee estimation referenced earlier, an average engineering fee of approximately 12% million should be anticipated for a construction project of this size and scope (Exhibit 4). Staff also reviewed a 2002 survey of A/E fees prepared by PSMJ Resources. Table 71 covered typical A/E fees for new water treatment plants and it indicated a median fee of 12% of construction value for water treatment plant design with 25-percentile and 75-percentile fee range between 9% and 16% (Exhibit 5). Staff also obtained fee information from Malcom Pirnie for other recently completed water and wastewater projects for comparision purposes (Exhibit 6). The proposed agreement includes the scope items recommended by staff in the fee negotiations process and is within the budget level established for this phase of the project. BID INFORMATION Not applicable. EXHIBITS 1. Location Map 2. CIP Detail Sheet 3. Professional Services Agreement 4. CECT & TSPE Method of Fee Estimation Calculation 5. PSMJ Resources 2002 A/E Fees and Pricing Survey-Table 71-Water Treatment Plants 6. Malcom Pirnie Fees for Water/Wastewater Treatment Plant Projects in the DFW Area. 7. Ordinance 8. PUB Minutes Respectfully submitted: Jim Coulter Director of Water Utilities Prepared by: Timothy S. Fisher, P.E. Assistant Director of Water Utilities Feet 0312.56251,250 CCIITTYYOOFFDDEENNTTOONN EXHIBITI City of Denton 2009 - 2013 Capital Improvements Project Project Title:â´â_Ð`ñ±¬†”¼”†«ª†ɱª†ÆÆ Description:̸·­ °®±¶»½¬ ©·´´ ½¸¿²¹» ¬¸» °®·³¿®§ ¼·­·²º»½¬·±² ¿²¼ ·³°®±ª» ±ª»®¿´´ ¼·­·²º»½¬·±² ¬± ¬¸» Ô¿µ» Ô»©·­ª·´´» É¿¬»® д¿²¬ ¬®»¿¬»¼ ©¿¬»®ò Business Unit:êíðïðð É¿¬»®óЮ±¼«½¬·±² Project Type:ͬ¿¬«¬±®§ øλ¹«´¿¬±®§÷ Project Scope:Ó«´¬·óÇ»¿® Ю±¶»½¬ Category Code: ðíë ÎÛÙËÔßÌÑÎÇ Ü×Í×ÒÚÛÝÌ×ÑÒ ÓÑÜÍ Revenue Ú·­½¿´ Ç»¿®Ý±­¬ ½±¼»Ü»­½®·°¬·±²Ý±­¬ ̧°»Ü»­½®·°¬·±²ß³±«²¬ îððçìðïððÝÑÒÍÌÎËÝÌ×ÑÒïíêðÍ«¾ ݱ²¬®¿½¬üîôçëðôðððòðð üîôçëðôðððòðð Revenue Total: Utility Bonds Ú·­½¿´ Ç»¿®Ý±­¬ ½±¼»Ü»­½®·°¬·±²Ý±­¬ ̧°»Ü»­½®·°¬·±²ß³±«²¬ îððçìðïððÝÑÒÍÌÎËÝÌ×ÑÒïíêðÍ«¾ ݱ²¬®¿½¬üîíôìïîôðððòðð îððçìééïð×ÒÍÐÛÝÌ×ÑÒïíêëѬ¸»®üëíðôðððòðð îðïðìééïð×ÒÍÐÛÝÌ×ÑÒïíêëѬ¸»®üîððôðððòðð üîìôïìîôðððòðð Utility Bonds Total: üîéôðçîôðððòðð Project Total: Comments: ׳°®±ª»³»²¬­ ¬± ·²½´«¼» ¿ ½¸¿²¹» ·² ¬¸» °®·³¿®§ ¼·­·²º»½¬·±² ¬± ³»»¬ ²»© ®»¹«´¿¬·±²­ô ¿ ²»© ½¸´±®·²» ¿²¼ ¿³³±²·¿ º»»¼ º¿½·´·¬§ ¬¸¿¬ ³»»¬­ η­µ Ó¿²¿¹»³»²¬ д¿²­ ®»½±³³»²¼¿¬·±²­ô º·´¬»® ³±¼·º·½¿¬·±²­ ¬± ·³°®±ª» º·´¬»®·²¹ °»®º±®³¿²½» ¿²¼ ª¿®·±«­ »´»½¬®·½¿´ ¿²¼ ³»½¸¿²·½¿´ ·³°®±ª»³»²¬­ ¬± ¬¸» °´¿²¬ò üíôëððôðððÛ²¹·²»»®·²¹ Ü»­·¹² ø°®»ª·±«­´§ º«²¼»¼ ·² °®·±® Ý×Ð÷ üîêôíêîôðððݱ²­¬®«½¬·±² üëíðôðððݱ²­¬®«½¬·±² ײ­°»½¬·±² üîððôðððͬ¿®¬ Ë° Í»®ª·½»­ ORDINANCE NO. 2009-__________ AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AND MALCOM PIRNIE, INC. TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN OF THE LAKE LEWISVILLE WATER TREATMENT PLANT REHABILITATION AND PROCESS UPGRADE; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Malcom Pirnie, Inc., a professional engineering firm (“Pirnie”) is being selected as the most highly qualified firm on the basis of its demonstrated competence and qualifications to perform the proposed professional engineering services; and WHEREAS, the fees under the Agreement are fair and reasonable and are consistent with and not higher than the recommended practices and fees published by the professional associations applicable to the Pirnie’s profession and such fees do not exceed any maximum provided by law; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The “Professional Services Agreement for Architect or Engineer” entered into by and between the City of Denton, Texas and the firm of Malcom Pirnie, in an amount not to exceed $2,600,000 is hereby approved; said Agreement is attached as Exhibit “A” hereto and is incorporated herewith by reference. SECTION 2. The City Manager is hereby designated to execute the Agreement. SECTION 3. The City Manager is hereby authorized to expend funds as provided for by the Agreement. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the ______ day of _________________, 2009. _________________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: __________________________________ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY By: _________________________________ PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD AGENDA ITEM # 1 2 3DRAFT MINUTES 4PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD 5August 10, 2009 6 7After determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board of the City of Denton, Texas was 8present, the Chair of the Public Utilities Board thereafter convened into an Open Meeting on 9Monday, August 10, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. in the Service Center Training Room, City of Denton 10Service Center, 901-A Texas Street, Denton, Texas. 11 Present: 12Chair Dick Smith, Bill Cheek, Randy Robinson, Bill Grubbs, Phil Gallivan and 13Barbara Russell. 14 15Ex Officio Officers: 16 George C. Campbell, City Manager 17 Howard Martin, ACM Utilities 18 Absent 19: John Baines, excused 20 OPEN MEETING: 21 22 235) Consider approval of a Professional Services Agreement for Architect or Engineer between 24the City of Denton and Malcom Pirnie in the amount of $2,600,000 for Engineering Services 25for the Design of the Lake Lewisville Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation and Process 26Upgrade. 27 28Tim Fisher, Director of Water Utilities, presented this item. He had a presentation that he had 29shown at a previous meeting. One of the keys on this project is the change in process. We are 30trying to get away from the present mode of operation which is a disinfectant grade of fillers 31going to ozone. The biggest difference from a regulatory standpoint that we are going to gain 32out of this is basically by products. Regulatory driver that we are getting in to with the service 33water treatment rules which is going to start lowering turbidity standards. We are trying to 34change the filter media that is in the filters as a compliment to the ozone process. We are 35looking at a complete revamp of the filters. We have been running an enhanced coagulation 36process at this facility for about 15 years we are running a low Ph in the basins. We are running 37an aggressive coagulation process to try to move the organic material through the chlorine. Over 38the 15 years of operation we are starting to erode concrete. What we are looking at is to change 39that treatment process and look at ozone and biological filtration. Another big decision that we 40are making on this is chlorine. We got an older gas feed system that we have done a lot of 41improvement to enhance safety but one major improvement that we haven’t been able to deal 42with is the scrubber retrofit.One thing that we are doing in this project, back in 1998 we 43exasperated whether to stay with chlorine or switch to an alternate disinfectant. A bleach storage 44and pumping system; get away from a gas feed system. In 1998 it made since to stay with the 45gas feed system. 9-11 changed a lot of that. Now we are going to phase out gas feed chlorine at 46this particular location. Fisher showed a site plan with major areas of the chlorine facility. The 47clarifier mechanisms are only in the front cells we have no sludge removal in the back. We are 48going to a vacuum based sludge removal system. The clarifier mechanisms date back to the 49original 1972 installation. These were replaced in the late 80’s. Fisher showed a breakdown of 50the $26m. The big ticket item is the ozonation system which is about 40% of the project. Fisher 1said the numbers have not been updated with 2007. We will stay with our budget and prioritize 2and sacrifice components. We have not increased the budget so we are looking to see; what is 3the best package that we can get for the budget that we have. Fisher then showed the CIP budget 4sheet that was in the backup packet with explanation. After the bid process we want to find a 5resident rep and do a startup phase that isn’t included. Similar to what we did at the Ray Roberts 6project. Fisher then talked about Exhibit 6 and the cost comparison graph. Fisher was very 7happy with the negotiations. As far as in house work goes, there will not be any. Cheek asked 8about the length of engineering. Fisher responded about 11 months, with a construction window 9of 24 months. A full time resident rep wasn’t included. We want to wait and see who the 10contractor is before we made that final decision of who we will use for that rep. 11 Board Member Phil Gallivan moved to approve Item 5 with a second from Board Member 12 Randy Robinson. The motion was passed by a 6-0 vote. 13 14 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Finance ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider approval of a resolution voting for a member to the Board of Managers of the Denco Area 9-1-1 District; and declaring an effective date. BACKGROUND The Denco Area 9-1-1 District, created in 1987, is governed by a board of managers. The board is appointed by the county, participating cities and the Denton County Fire Chief's Association. Board members serve staggered two-year terms and are eligible for reappointment. The Emergency Telephone Number Act states: "the board shall manage, control and administer the district. The board may adopt rules for the operation of the district." On May 15, 2009, Denco Area 9-1-1 sent a memo requesting nominations to serve on the Board of Managers, which was provided to Council in the June 5, 2009, Reading File. On July 16, 2009, the Denco Area 9-1-1 District sent a list of the nominations they received from participating cities. There were two nominees: Olive Stephens, and Bob Radder (Attached). Last year, the City nominated Harlan Jefferson to serve another term on the Board. This year, the term of Mayor Olive Stephens of the Town of Shady Shores, expires on September 30, 2009. Ms. Stephens has expressed her desire to serve another term if appointed. The City has nominated Ms. Stephens to serve on the Board since 1987. The current Board of Managers is comprised of the following individuals: Board MemberAppointed By Term Expires Jack Miller, Chair Denton County Commissioners Court 9/30/2010 Mayor Olive Stephens, Vice Chair Denton County Participating City 9/30/2009 Chief Lonnie Tatum, Secretary Denton County Fire Chiefs Association 9/30/2009 Harlan Jefferson Denton County Participating City 9/30/2010 Bill Lawrence Denton County Commissioners Court 9/30/2010 Keith Stephens Largest Telephone Service Provider Rep. Non-voting Agenda Information Sheet August 18, 2009 Page 2 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT Denco requests each city to vote for one of the nominees and advise them of its selection prior to September 9, 2009. The nominee with the most votes will be the municipalities' representative to the Denco Area 9-1-1 District Board of Managers for the two-year term beginning October 1, 2009. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) On June 16, 2009, the City Council approved a resolution to nominate Olive Stephens as a member to the Board of Managers of the Denco Area 9-1-1 District for a two-year term to commence on October 1, 2009. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends voting for Mayor Olive Stephens to serve on the Board of Managers for Denco 9-1-1, as Ms. Stephens was FISCAL INFORMATION This resolution has no fiscal impact. EXHIBITS Letter from Denco Resolution Respectfully submitted: Bryan Langley Director of Finance ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT Consider approval of a resolution allowing the Black Chamber of Commerce to be the sole participant allowed to sell alcoholic beverages at the Blues Festival on September 19, 2009, upon certain conditions; authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an agreement in conformity with this resolution; and providing for an effective date. The Parks, Recreation and approval Beautification Board recommend of this the request with a vote of 4-0. BACKGROUND The Blues Festival returned to Quakertown Park in 2007. The event coordinators are requesting to be allowed to sell alcoholic beverages in the city park. Quakertown Park is the only city park where the sale of alcohol is permitted, RECOMMENDATION approval Staff recommends of the ordinance and agreement as submitted, which is consistent with agreements for other events selling alcoholic beverages. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) At the August 3, 2009 meeting, the Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommended approval of the request with a vote of 4-0. FISCAL INFORMATION None. EXHIBITS 1. Resolution 2. Letter of Request 3. Quakertown Agreement 4. Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board Minutes of August 3, 2009 Respectfully submitted: Emerson Vorel Director of Parks and Recreation Prepared by: Janie McLeod Community Events Coordinator 1 DRAFT Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board 2 Minutes 3 4 August 3, 2009 5 Civic Center Conference Room 6 7 Members present : Carol Brantley, Allyson Coe, Dale Conway, Jo Kuhn 8 Members absent: Reggie Heard, Ross Richardson, Jennifer Wages 9 Staff present: Emerson Vorel, Cindy Deckard, Amanda Green, Jim Mays, Kathy Schaeffer, Bob Tickner, Mary 10 Aukerman 11 12 Chairperson Jo Kuhn called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. 13 14 AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS: Emerson Vorel presented Jo Kuhn with a dedicated service award for the 15 years 2003-2009. Emerson thanked her for her participation on the Board for so many years. 16 17 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF April 6, 2009 MEETING: Chairperson Jo Kuhn asked for any corrections or 18 amendments to the minutes. Hearing none the minutes stand approved as presented. 19 20 ACTION ITEMS: 21 f 22 23 seconded the motion and the agenda was amended. 24 25 2009-2010 Fee Ordinance a) The City of Denton Budget department asked for proposed 1% to 5% reduction 26 for the 2009-2010 fiscal year. In order to offset the reduction, the Parks & Recreation Department looked for 27 items that would increase revenue without impacting all citizens. Some of the proposed increases are for the 28 establishment of a Quakertown Park rental fee, which has not been required in the past; a regional park rental 29 fee for North and South Lakes Parks for special events; a Tennis Center Tournament rental rate; and a Special 30 Events Application Fee. Increases include rates for gyms, kitchens and meeting room rentals in rec centers; 31 athletic field and lighted tennis court rentals; after hour Water Park rentals; the Civic Center Rotunda rental 32 rates and the Senior Center multipurpose room rental rates. Some discussion was held regarding the Athletic 33 Impact Fee being increased by $5, which helps offset the cost of maintaining the fields. Amanda Green told 34 the Board that Board member Jennifer Wages, who could not be present, called her to voice her concerns that 35 the increase in the Athletic Impact Fee may preclude some youth from participating in sports. During their 36 discussion, the exploration of additional scholarships through the Park Foundation was offered as a possible 37 alternative for some players. When asked how our fees compare to that of North Texas Fairgrounds, Janie 38 explained that because it is a totally enclosed area, it is significantly higher than any of our parks or facilities 39 and that an entrance can be charged there as well. 40 41 MOTION: Jo asked for a motion recommending the approval of the ordinance amending Section 22-38 of 42 Chapter 22 (Parks and Recreation) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, relating to 43 facility and program fees by adopting a revised Schedule of Fees; which will repeal all fees in conflict with 44 the new schedule; will repeal the existing Ordinance No. 2007-267 and all other ordinances that are in 45 conflict with the new Schedule of Fees. Dale made a motion to recommend the acceptance of the changes to 46 the fee schedule for the 2009-2010 budget; Allyson seconded the motion and it passed with a vote of 4-0. . 47 48 Sale of Alcohol for Blues Festival b) A request from the Black Chamber of Commerce to be the sole th 49 proprietor to sell alcoholic beverages at the 11 annual Blues Festival came was presented to the Board for 50 their approval. This request is consistent with other music events held in Quakertown Park. 51 52 MOTION: Jo asked for a motion recommending to the City Council that the Denton Black Chamber of th 53 Commerce be the sole participant allowed to sell alcoholic beverages at the 11 Annual Blues Festival to 14 August 3, 2009 Page of 1 be held in Quakertown Park on Saturday, September 19, 2009, from 1:00 p.m. until 11:00 p.m. Carol made 2 a motion to that affect; Allyson seconded the motion and it passed with a vote of 4-0. 3 4 - Public Art Sculpture at South Lakes Park c) Harmony The Public Art Committee recommends the 5 sculpture Harmony by George Caddell be approved to be placed at South Lakes Park by the trail. The 6 sculpture of two herons, which will turn independently of each other as the wind blows, is approximately eight 7 feet in height and weighs close to 600 pounds. It will be located by the walking path in South Lakes Park on 8 Teasley Lane near Long Ridge. 2010 HOT Funds will pay for the sculpture, two benches for visitors to sit and 9 enjoy the piece, and native grass to enhance the area. 10 11 MOTION: Jo asked for a motion recommending to City Council the selection of George Cadell as the artist 12 for the sculpture of two herons to be located in South Lakes Park. Allyson made a motion to recommend 13 the sculpture; Carol seconded the motion and it passed with a vote of 4-0. 14 15 Boy and Girl Sculptures for South Branch Library Public Art d) A Book A Day The Public Art 16 Committee is recommending the approval of their selection of A Book A Day bronze 17 sculptures reading a book, one of a boy and one of a girl, to be purchased from the 2009 HOT funds for 18 the South Branch Library. These pieces are part of a series of 50 sculptures that Ms. has made. 19 A bench to set the sculptures on will also be purchased with 2009 HOT funds. 20 21 MOTION: Jo asked for a motion to recommend to CiA 22 Book A Day bronze sculptures, one of a boy and one of a girl, reading a book as public art for South 23 Branch Library. Dale made a motion to recommend the purchase of the sculptures and bench to City 24 Council; Carol seconded the motion and it passed with a vote of 4-0 25 26 - Public Art Watercolor for South Branch Library e) Summer Haze The Public Art Committee 27 subcommittee selected Summer Haze watercolor painting for placement at the South Branch 28 Lie passed away and that 29 his widow is pleased that his work is being recommended for the library. Purchase of this piece will be 30 with 2009 HOT Funds. 31 32 MOTION: Jo asked for a motion to recommend to City Council the 33 Summer Haze watercolor painting for the South Branch Library. 34 Allyson made a motion recommending the painting be accepted, Dale seconded the motion and it passed with 35 a vote of 4-0. 36 37 Public Art for City Hall East f) The Public Art Committee recommends that one of photographer Carlatta 38 39 measures 40 work is well known in the art world. Purchase of this photograph will be with 2009 HOT Funds. 41 42 MOTION: Jo asked for a motion recommending the approval of the Public 43 for public art in City Hall East, namely the black and white photo from Carlatta Corpron, Allyson made the 44 motion as presented, Dale seconded the motion and it passed with a vote of 4-0. 45 46 DISCUSSION ITEMS : 47 a) Alcohol Ordinance Revised The current ordinance for alcohol in City parks still has Quakertown Park 48 listed as Civic Center Park, which will be changed, and the approval process for rentals at the Civic Center 49 needs to be clarified. The Senior Center Advisory Board has asked that alcohol rentals no longer be 50 permitted in the Senior Center, as damage is being done to the wood floors which are expensive to fix. 51 The Senior Center will be removed from the ordinance as a location for alcohol events. The Park Board is 52 being asked to review the changes made on the attached ordinance and make recommendations to the City 53 Council in an Action Item at the September Park Board meeting. 54 24 August 3, 2009 Page of 1 b) Cemetery Ordinance Revised When an old structure was torn down it presented an opportunity to open a 2 new section of the IOOF Cemetery for the City to sell lots. Currently, the only lots available are those 3 sold by families owning the lots. Due to infractions to the existing ordinance, the cemetery ordinance was 4 revised to include fines for those not obtaining a permit before a burial or the placement of a monument in 5 both of the City cemeteries. Section 2 of the ordinance has been revised to include fees for the purchase of 6 the new lots, increased the fees for existing lots, added a fee for the purchase of lots for the burial of 7 cremation ashes, and restated the internment and concrete work permit fees as well as provides the late fee 8 for failure to obtain these permits in advance. Obtaining the permits is the responsibility of the funeral 9 home or monument company and is imperative to keeping accurate records for the cemeteries. The Park 10 Board is being asked to review the changes to the attached ordinance in able to take action on it at the 11 September Park Board Meeting. 12 13 Before moving on with the rest of the meeting, Emerson wanted to acknowledge two guests that came in after 14 the meeting started. The first citizen said that she came only to observe to see if she was interested in volunteering 15 to be a member of the Park Board. Jo told her that Emerson could help her with that. 16 17 Mr. David Hiegel asked to address the Board. He started by saying that he and his wife Cindy live on Hillcrest 18 Street, just behind McKenna Park, and his concern is with the Special Use Permit for gas wells that City Council is th 19 voting on at the meeting on August 4. He would like the Park Board to issue a courtesy note to the City Council 20 21 to McKenna Park being in the immediate area of the proposed gas wells. 22 23 Emerson pointed out that, since Mr. Hiegel and his concern were not part of the agenda, we could not violate the 24 Open Meeting Act and take action on his request. Emerson did suggest that individual members of the Park Board 25 express their thoughts, concerns, support to the City Council if they were so inclined. Mr. Hiegel thanked the 26 Board for their time. 27 28 PARKS PROJECT STATUS REPORT 29 Briercliff Park Design and Development Project The bid for this project is being awarded to Jones & th 30 Jefferies at the August 4 City Council meeting. 31 32 Denia Park Trail Project Progress on this project is being made to the extent that it is about half finished. 33 34 Denton Branch Rail Trail Bridges Project The plans for this project are still in the legal process with 35 DCTA. Bob pointed out that he was getting calls regarding the trees that have been removed from the area. Jo 36 said that she had gotten calls as well. Bob said that once we make people aware that we are getting a new trial, 37 they seem to be okay with it. 38 Neighborhood Park Design: Preserve @ Pecan Creek, Owsley Park and Wheeler Ridge Cindy said that th 39 the Contract for Professional Services will go to Council on August 18 and is being awarded to Halff and 40 Associates. 41 42 North Lakes Adult Soccer Field Development Project A contract is in the works for Jacobs Engineering th 43 Group to design this project and will go to Council on the next meeting after the August 18 meeting. 44 45 Senior Center Renovation and Expansion Project Emerson said that the contractor is great and that the 46 addition is almost completed, with a move into that structure slated for September. After that, work on the 47 existing structure will begin. 48 49 Unicorn Lake Trail and Landscape Project The bridge was delivered to the site in two pieces, but the rain 50 has kept it from being set. 51 52 KEEP DENTON BEAUTIFUL UPDATE 53 No comments were expressed on the update. 54 34 August 3, 2009 Page of 1 PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 2 As most of the items were covered as Action Items, no additional comments were expressed. 3 4 ITEMS FOR UPCOMING MEETINGS: 5 The revised Alcohol and Cemetery Ordinances will be Action Items on the September 2009 agenda. 6 7 With no further business on the agenda, Jo asked for a motion to adjourn; Carol made the motion to 8 adjourn, Allyson seconded the motion and the meeting was adjourned at 6:56 p.m. 44 August 3, 2009 Page of ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES July 21, 2009 After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Work Session on Tuesday, July 21, 2009 at 3:30 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Burroughs; Mayor Pro Tem Kamp; Council Members Engelbrecht, Gregory, Heggins, Mulroy, and Watts. ABSENT: None 1.There were no requests for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for July 21, 2009. 2.The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding nominations to the City’s Boards and Commissions. Jennifer Walters, City Secretary, presented the list of nominations for Council consideration. She indicated that any names added during the Work Session would be added for Council consideration during the Regular Meeting. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the nomination process. 3.The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding appointments to Council committees. Mayor Burroughs stated that the list of appointments to the Council committees had been handed out to Council. He noted that the membership requirements for the Audit/Finance Committee had changed and while he was no longer required to be a member of the Committee, he would remain as a member. There was an item on the Regular Agenda to formally consider these appointments. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the appointments. 4.The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding revisions to the Rules of Procedure for the City Council. Betty Williams, Director of Administrative Services, presented the proposed changes. Section 4.1 - Regular Meetings – the set time for the work session would be deleted and the wording “municipal building” would be changed to “city hall”. Section 4.2 – Special Meetings – change the wording “municipal building” to “city hall”. Section 4.3 – Workshop Meetings – the specific times for the meeting would be deleted and the wording would be changed to reflect current practice. Section 6.3 – Presentations by Members of the Council – the wording would be changed to reflect the new language from the Attorney General’s opinion and would become effective September 1, 2009. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 2 Section 6.4.4. – Presentations by Citizens/citizen reports – a Council Member requested consideration of a change in the placement on the agenda. Mayor Burroughs suggested that the wording “no citizen may fill out a request to speak form or have an opportunity to speak or comment on another citizen’s report” be revised to “no citizen may fill out a request to speak form in order to comment on another citizen report”. He also asked if only citizens of Denton could do a citizen report. City Attorney Burgess indicated that the Council could limit this section of the agenda to just citizens; however, most cities did not have such a limitation. Council Member Mulroy felt that there might be a better term than “citizen report” such as “public report”. He felt Council needed to decide what the intent of this section of the agenda was and find better wording. Council Member Heggins questioned that if the section were limited to only citizens of Denton, how would that distinction be determined and what process would speakers have to go through. Section 6.4 (4) (c). – Presentations by Citizens – public hearings – as speaker cards were not required for public hearings, it was suggested to change the wording to “is encouraged to complete a request to speak form”. Mayor Burroughs suggested taking out the reference to public hearings from Section b. Section 8 – Creation of Committees, Boards, and Commissions – wording would be added to indicate that all committees, boards, and commissions would be created and dissolved by resolution if not specified by the City Charter or Code. Section 8.3.d. – wording would be added regarding the replacement of members who had completed three full terms on a board so as to be in compliance with Section 2-65 of the Code. Section 8.3 (3) e – wording would be changed to indicate nominations “shall” correspond to City Council Member’s place instead of the word “may”. Section 8.4 (4) – Rules of Procedure – wording would be added regarding the City of Denton Handbook for Boards, Commissions and Committees which would contain a common set of rules of procedures for all boards/ commissions. Council Member Heggins asked about the placement on the agenda for citizen reports. She had suggested at one time considering moving that item closer to the front of the agenda. City Manager Campbell felt that it was a determination of the Agenda Committee. Council Member Mulroy suggested looking for the history of why the placement was changed to the end of the agenda. A consideration might be made to move the citizen reports ahead of regular business for the convenience of citizens. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 3 Council Member Gregory stated that this was an issue he heard during the election. Consideration might be made for two place holders on the agenda. One for first time speakers at the beginning of the agenda and one for repeaters later in the agenda. Council Member Heggins asked about people who continue to call in to get on an agenda and who did not show up for the meeting. Mayor Burroughs stated that currently there were no regulations regarding that circumstance. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the changes as proposed. 5.The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding the potential closure of the City of Denton’s Utility Customer Service facility located in the Golden Triangle Mall. Bryan Langley, Director of Finance, stated that the purpose of the discussion was to (1) review City Hall in the Mall’s operation and role in the Customer Service organization; (2) examine statistics that illustrated how customers were using City Hall in the Mall; (3) review department strategy and consider the benefits of service options available to customers; (4) review cost savings and efficiency improvements resulting from the closure of City Hall in the Mall; and (5) discuss next steps and communicationstrategy. City Hall in the Mall – this was a full service counter location designed to handle requests from walk-in customers related to their utilities. It consisted of 3 full-time and 1 part-time temporary employees. Average daily customer volume for 2009 was 272. The contract with the Mall would expire on 9/30/09. Customer Use of City Hall in the Mall – less that ¼ of customer transactions were done at CHM. Most transactions were payments and did not require full service. Customer Service Strategy Review – Customer Service introduced a department strategy during th the March 10 Council session. Key elements included (1) develop better payment options; (2) limit or reduce the number of full-service payment locations; (3) reduce the number of walk in payments; (4) provide self service tools; (5) provide interactive voice response phone service; and (6) contract with Fidelity Express for remote utility bill payment locations such as Kroger and Sack N Save. Cost Savings/Efficiency Improvements - closure of the Mall location would provide approximately $55,000 in annual savings. Consolidating to one location would reduce the need to hire additional employees at walk in locations. Communication – The City’s agreement with Golden Triangle would expire on 9/30/09. If approved, staff would use this target date for the closure of the office. There was a 60 day notice requirement to the property owner. During that 60 days customers would be notified of the closure through bill messages, a press release, posted signs and phone recordings. Transition and Next Steps – the Mall staff would be consolidated with the City Hall East staff with extended City Hall East hours of operation. Staff usage would be maximized through flex scheduling. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 4 Council Member Watts noted that there were still a high number of people using CHM rather than remote locations. Langley stated that there was no revenue to the City for use of the remote locations - Fidelity Express received a small service charge when payments were made at their locations. Council Member Watts questioned if some of the 75% using CHE might be because they were delinquent as opposed to mailing in their payment. Council Member Mulroy asked about automatic draft failure rate. Ethan Cox, Customer Service Manager, state that no failure rate information was available for this meeting but he could get the information. Council Member Mulroy asked who paid the merchant fee for the web payment process. Langley stated that the customer paid $4.95 for payment online. Council Member Gregory stated that a convenience fee for paying online or at Fidelity Express was not really conducive to the City trying to discourage the use of CHE for only making a payment. Mayor Burroughs stated that a lot of payments went through the Mall location and the closing of the location might have a negative impact on the Mall. He questioned the possibility of having a payment only location at the Mall. Council Member Heggins asked if relocated employees would receive the same amount of work hours. Cox stated that the flex schedule would allow the reduction of the amount of overtime currently used. Consensus of the Council was to follow the staff recommendations. 6.The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding the status of funding applications submitted by the City of Denton under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). st Barbara Ross, Community Development Administrator, stated that as of July 1, several applications had been submitted to various Federal and State agencies either directly by the City or through a collaborative effort with another entity. Collaborative efforts included the Diesel Emission Reduction Grant application submitted by the North Central Texas Council of Governments and the Bryne Justice Assistance Grant submitted by Denton County. Three of the grants under which the city was requesting funds were “formula” grants. A “formula grant” provided a pre-determined amount of funding to an organization to carry out projects related to a specific area. The City had applied for (1) an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant, (2) Byrne Justice Assistance Grant and (3) CDBG-R. Update on several of the grants included the (1) Diesel Emission Reduction Grant was a co- application with COG which was still waiting for a response on the application; (2) Water City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 5 Reclamation had submitted three requests with no response to date; (3) CDBG-R involved parks facilities, drainage, sewer, housing, social services. etc. with staff waiting on application approval; (4) Police Department grants included a COPS grant, Secure our Schools and Byrne Justice Assistance Grant which were all still in progress; and (5) TIGER Discretionary Grants involving transportation which the City was working through with NCTCOG. Ross reviewed the inactive applications. One of the main inactive grants was the Firefighter Assistance Grant which the city was not eligible for as the funds had to be used for replacement of unsafe or uninhabitable structures or to fund projects expanding fire protection coverage to meet increased service demand in compliance with NFPA 1710 which required that four firefighters be assigned to each engine. The City had also applied for several economic development grants but was not eligible for the program as Denton did not meet the economic distress criteria level. Following the completion of the Work Session, the City Council convened in a Closed Meeting at 5:00 p.m. to consider the specific items listed below under the Closed Meeting section of this agenda. 1.Closed Meeting: A. Consultation with Attorneys – Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071. 1. Received a briefing and status report from the City’s attorneys regarding the litigation entitled The City of Denton, Texas v. The University of th North Texas, Cause No. 2008-20043-158, now pending before the 158 Judicial District Court in and for Denton County, Texas; discussed, deliberated and provided the attorneys with direction. A public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duty of the City’s attorneys to the City Council under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. 2. Received a legal briefing from the City's attorneys and discussed legal obligations and options facing the City, under a certain compromise settlement agreement and mutual release of claims, dated October 21, 2008, involving the City of Denton, Texas, JNC Partners Denton, LLC, White Cake Denton, L.P., John Lau, and Campbell Road Holding Company as parties. 3. Discussed and considered strategy, status, and possible approval of a change in the tariffs of Atmos Energy Corporation, Mid-Tex Division (“Atmos”) as a result of a settlement between Atmos and the Atmos Texas Municipalities. A public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duty of the City’s attorneys to the City Council under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. B.Deliberations regarding Personnel Matters – Under Texas Government Code Section 551.074. 1. Deliberated and discussed the appointment and duties of public officers to boards or commissions exercising discretionary or rule making power as City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 6 opposed to purely advisory powers, which includes without limitation the Construction Advisory and Appeals Board, the Historic Landmark Commission, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Zoning Board of Adjustment. This item was not discussed in Closed Session. C. Deliberations regarding consultation with the City Attorney – Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 and Deliberations regarding Economic Development Negotiations – Under Texas Government Code Section 551.087. 1. Received a report and held a discussion regarding legal issues on matters in which the duty of the attorney to the governmental body under the Texas Disciplinary rules of Professional conduct of the State Bar of Texas clearly conflicts with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code. Also held a discussion regarding the leasing of land and financing of a city facility on University of North Texas property located at I-35 and North Texas Blvd. The discussion shall include financial information the City Council will review, including the offer of financial or other incentives D. Deliberations regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters – Under Texas Government Code, Section 551.086; Consultation with Attorneys – Under Texas Government Code, Section 551.071. 1. Discussed and deliberated the status of pending mediation efforts regarding several public power issues involved with the Texas Municipal Power Agency litigation described below and receive a briefing from a City representative. Received a briefing and status report from the City’s attorneys regarding the litigation entitled Ex Parte Texas Municipal Power th Agency,Cause No. D-1-GN-08-003426, pending in the 126 Judicial District Court in and for Travis County, Texas; as well as Ex Parte Texas st Municipal Power Agency – II, Cause No.D-1-GN-08-003693, in the 261 Judicial District Court in and for Travis County, Texas; and the Texas Municipal Power Agency,Plaintiff v. City of Bryan, Texas,Defendant, Counter-Plaintiff and Third-Party Plaintiff; v. City of Denton, Texas and City of Garland, Texas, Third-Party Defendants, Cause No. 28169, now th pending in the 506 Judicial District Court in and for Grimes County, Texas. Discuss and deliberate and provide the attorneys with direction. A public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duty of the City’s attorneys to the City Council under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, July 21, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 7 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the U. S. and Texas flags. 2. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A.Proclamations/Awards There were no proclamations/awards for this meeting. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Kamp motioned, Mulroy seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and accompanying ordinances and resolutions. On roll vote, Engelbrecht “aye”, Gregory “aye”, Heggins “aye”, Kamp “aye”, Mulroy “aye”, Watts “aye”, and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried unanimously. A.2009-150 - An ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing an agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and Hearts for Homes; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing for an effective date. ($543) B.2009-151 - An ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing an agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and Fred Moore Day Nursery School; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing for an effective date. ($694) C.2009-152 - An ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing an agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and Denton County to help with the cost of protecting the Historical Buildings Quilt for the Denton County Museums; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing for an effective date. ($700) D.2009-153 - An ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing an agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and the Historical Park Foundation for the purpose of installing an arbor leading into the Victorian Rose Garden; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing for an effective date. ($300) E.2009-154 - An ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing an agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and Court Appointed Special Advocates to assist with funding of phone cost, local travel for child visits and office supplies; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing for an effective date. ($500) F.2009-155 - An ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing an agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and Southridge Recreation Club which serves a public purpose in facilitating recreational activities; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing for an effective date. ($450) G.2009-156 - An ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing an agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and Cumberland Presbyterian Children’s Home to City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 8 assist with their Fall Festival Fund Raiser; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing for an effective date. ($350) H.2009-157 - An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas amending the Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Budget and Annual Program of Services of the City of Denton to allow for an adjustment to the Materials Management Fund of two million dollars ($2,000,000) to provide for additional expenditure authority associated with the cost of goods sold; declaring a municipal purpose; providing a severability clause; an open meetings clause; and an effective date. I.2009-158 - An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas to declare the intent to reimburse expenditures from the Solid Waste Reserve Fund with certificates of obligation with an aggregate maximum principal amount equal to $2,902,000 to allow the Solid Waste Department to continue funding ongoing capital expenditures for Solid Waste facilities; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommended approval (5–0). J.2009-159 - An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas accepting competitive bids and awarding a best value three year contract for utility bill printing and mailing services for the City of Denton; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 4246–Best Value Bid for Utility Bill Printing and Mailing awarded to Ancor Information Management, LLC, dba Utilitec in an annual amount not to exceed $350,000 for a three year contract amount not to exceed $1,050,000). The Public Utilities Board recommended approval (5–0). K.2009-160 - An ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the contract between the City of Denton and Redflex Traffic Systems USA for operation of an automated traffic signal enforcement program; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 3364– Amendment for Contract Extension/Price Adjustment). L.2009-161 - An ordinance awarding a contract to Panasonic Financial Solutions for the lease purchase of thirty (30) Panasonic Toughbook PCs and accessories for Denton Municipal Electric (DME) as awarded by the State of Texas General Services Commission, Department of Information Resources (DIR Contract DIR- SDD-531); providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4352–Panasonic Finance Solutions/Municipal Lease Agreement #42209 in the amount of $27,726.00, the first of six semi-annual payments, for a total three-year lease in the amount of $166,356.00). The Public Utilities Board recommended approval (5–0). M.2009-162 - An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the expenditure of funds for payments by the City of Denton for electrical energy transmission fees to those cities and utilities providing energy transmission services to the City of Denton; and providing an effective date (File 4198– Electrical Energy Transmission Fees for American Electric Power in the additional amount of $25,651.96 for a total award of $113,933.96 and File 4199- Electrical Energy Transmission Fees for Lower Colorado River Authority City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 9 (LCRA) in the additional amount of $148,182.64 for a total award of $736,682.64). The Public Utilities Board recommended approval (5–0). N.2009-163 - An ordinance accepting competitive bids by way of an interlocal cooperative purchasing program participation agreement with the City of Carrollton under section 271.102 of the Local Government Code, for the purchase of emergency medical supplies for the City of Denton Fire Department; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4341– Interlocal Agreement for Emergency Medical Supplies with the City of Carrollton, contract awarded to Bound Tree Medical in the estimated amount of $150,000). O.2009-164 - An ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a purchase order through the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network for the acquisition of a three digger trucks for Denton Municipal Electric by way of an interlocal agreement with the City of Denton; and providing an effective date (File 4350–Three Digger Trucks for Denton Municipal Electric awarded to Southwest International Trucks for one chassis/body in the amount of $186,267.20 and Rush Truck Center, Crane for two chassis/bodies in the amount of $547,183.62 for a total award of $733,450.82). The Public Utilities Board recommended approval (5–0). P.2009-165 - An ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a purchase order through the Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) for the acquisition of two trailer mounted generators for Denton Municipal Electric by way of an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Denton; and providing an effective date (File 4354–Interlocal Agreement for the purchase of two trailer mounted generators for Denton Municipal Electric awarded to Volvo Construction Equipment and Services in the amount of $111,374.94. The Public Utilities Board recommended approval (5–0). Q.2009-166 - An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas providing for, authorizing, and approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Cem-Line from TXI, which is available from only one source in accordance with the pertinent provisions of Chapter 252 of the Texas Local Government Code exempting such purchases from the requirements of competitive bidding; and providing an effective date (File 4353–Purchase of Cem-Line for Street Department in the unit price amount of $140/dry ton for an annual estimated amount of $200,000). R.Approved the minutes of: June 8, 2009 June 9, 2009 June 16, 2009 June 23, 2009 S.2009-167 - An ordinance authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an easement purchase agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and Rayzor Investments, Ltd., and any other documents that are necessary to acquire City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 10 approximate 0.193 and 0.108 acre tracts for utility easements, approximately 0.191 and 0.108 acre tracts for temporary construction easements, and an approximate 0.091 acre tract for electric utility easement, all being located in the Robert Beaumont Survey, Abstract Number 31, Tracts 101, and 220 as evidenced by conveyance to Rayzor Investments Ltd. by instrument recorded by deed in Volume 1796, Page 601, Denton County deed records, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommended approval (5-0). T.R2009-018 - A resolution of the City of Denton approving a change in the tariffs of Atmos Energy Corporation, Mid-Tex Division (“Atmos”) as a result of a settlement between Atmos and the Atmos Texas Municipalities (“ATM”); finding that the rates set by the attached tariffs to be just and reasonable; finding that the meeting complied with the Open Meetings Act; and declaring an effective date. U.Approved a request for an exception to the Noise Ordinance to extend working hours for the purpose of Hodges and Associates, P.L.L.C. to pour concrete paving for the Rayzor Ranch Market Place construction on US 380. The contractors, Mario Sinacola and Sons, need an exception to operate between the hours of 2:30 a.m. and 6:00 a.m., Monday through Saturday, for approximately three weeks between July 27, 2009, and August 20, 2009. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing for Detail Plan approval to allow for the development of 192 multifamily housing units, amenity center, pool, passive pedestrian trail and parking on approximately 15.645 acres of land located within a Planned Development (The Preserve Planned Development, PD-132) zoning district generally located 550 feet east of Old Highway 77, north of Shady Shores Road, south of Lakeview Boulevard and west of Swisher Road; and providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations, thereof, severability and an effective date. (Z09-0002) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (4-0) with conditions. Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, stated that the proposed Detail Plan included 192 multifamily dwelling units, an amenity center, pool, passive pedestrian trail and parking on approximately 15.645 acres of land within PD 132. The subject site was located within Area C of PD-132 which permitted up to 400 multifamily dwelling units. Council previously approved a Detail Plan for 192 multifamily units immediately west of the subject property and that site was now developed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval with the following conditions: (1) the maximum number of dwelling units permitted by the Detail Plan would be 192 multifamily units, an amenity center, pool, passive pedestrian trail and parking on approximately 15.645 acres of land within Area C of PD-132 and (2) the applicant would provide a 6 foot tall wrought iron style fence along the perimeter of the 15.645 acre site, outside of the mapped floodplain. Council Member Watts asked about the density of units per acre. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 11 Cunningham stated that it was a little over 12 units/acre. Council Member Gregory asked about the location of the flood plain. Cunningham showed the location of the flood plain and the passive recreation trail. Council Member Gregory asked if there were plans for a sidewalk along the flood plain. Cunningham stated that the passive trail would be preserved. Mayor Burroughs noted that under the planned development which was previously approved for this location, the density could be as much as 20 units/acre. Cunningham replied correct that the proposed density was much lower. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individuals spoke during the public hearing: Jim Grose, Oakwood Development, was present to answer questions. Council Member Gregory asked about plans for the trees as the development proceeded. Grose stated that they would preserve the trees but would eliminate the underbrush in the flood plain which would help with water flow. They had a meeting with the neighbors and plan to keep most of the trees. None of the major trees would be removed. Chris Cash, 168 Chaparral, Shady Shores, 76208 - opposed Joel Hays, 4809 Crossvine Court, Denton, 76208 - opposed Council Member Gregory asked for a clarification of the fence. Cunningham stated that it would be a 6 foot tall wrought iron fence along the perimeter of the site outside the mapped floodplain. Council discussed the placement of fence, the location of the floodplain, and park dedication credit for flood plain area. Council Member Watts asked if the preservation of the trees along the creek and the cutting of only the underbrush was memorialized somewhere or would that be addressed at a later time. Cunningham noted that the trees would be preserved; however, Council could add a condition that all trees in the 100 year flood plain would be preserved. A five minute rebuttal was allowed. Mr. Grose stated that they wanted to work with the neighborhood in terms of traffic. It was not their intention to cut down any more trees than necessary for development. He would hate to see a restriction to not cut down any trees. They would have to remove some underbrush for the walkway. He also noted that the elevation of the buildings would be lower than the previous buildings. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 12 The Mayor closed the public hearing. Council Member Heggins asked about the flood plain maintenance for the current site and the offsite area. Grose stated that on-site they would have to keep the flood plain clean to maintain the water flow. The prior development did not have any property improvements across the property. Off- site maintenance was out of their control as they did not own the property. Council Member Gregory stated that when the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the proposal it appeared that they were under the impression that the trees along the flood plain would remain untouched. Citizens were also expressing the desire to maintain the east side of the underbrush. Grose stated that they were willing to work with the neighbors but also had to work with the Parks Department for the pedestrian trail. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked if this would affect both sides of the creek. Cunningham stated that the east side was not part of the proposal and not Oakwood Development’s property. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked how many trees were on the east side of creek. Cunningham replied that they could not do a physical count of the trees but that the 100 year flood plain was a recorded Environmentally Sensitive Area. The underbrush could be removed but not the trees except for dead or diseased trees. Council Member Mulroy stated that his preference was to preserve as many trees as practicable. The ESA level of regulation was one that the applicant would have to comply with. Jerry Drake, Deputy City Attorney, stated that the planned development could modify the standards associated with the development. Mayor Burroughs stated that each step of the process had its own parameters to work with and questioned if a landscape plan could be created as part of the detail plan. Drake stated that a landscape plan with some conditions could be included with the detail plan as long as they were consistent with the concept plan and standards already in place. Council Member Watts stated that the fence as conditioned by the Planning and Zoning Commission was not on the detail plan. Cunningham replied that the plan could be modified and resubmitted to Planning. The applicant did have a plan showing the placement of the fence. Council Member Watts stated that he would like the plan to show the ESA. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 13 Cunningham suggested adding a condition that the applicant would submit a revised Detail Plan showing the extent of Environmentally Sensitive Area and the location of the 6-foot perimeter fence within 30 days of the July 21, 2009 public hearing or the subject Detail Plan would be null and void without any further action. Council Member Engelbrecht asked if the ESA regulations applied as the ordinance approving the planned development was older than the regulations. Mayor Burroughs stated that the Detail Plan indicated that 100 year flood plain which qualified as a definition of an ESA. It should not be a problem. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 2009-168 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING A DETAIL PLAN TO ALLOW FOR 192 MULTIFAMILY HOUSING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (THE PRESERVE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, PD-132) ZONING DISTRICT COMPRISING 15.645 ACRES IN SIZE BEING LOCATED 550 FEET EAST OF OLD HIGHWAY 77, NORTH OF SHADY SHORES BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF LAKEVIEW BOULEVARD AND WEST OF SWISHER ROAD; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.(Z09-0002  Kamp motioned, Watts seconded to adopt the ordinance with the conditions recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission plus the condition that the applicant would submit a revised Detail Plan showing the extent of Environmentally Sensitive Area and the location of the 6-foot perimeter fence within 30 days of the July 21, 2009 public hearing or the subject Detail Plan would be null and void without any further action. On roll vote, Engelbrecht “aye”, Gregory “aye”, Heggins “aye”, Kamp “aye”, Mulroy “aye”, Watts “aye”, and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried unanimously. B.The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas regarding a Specific Use Permit to allow forty-six (46) attached and fifty- four (54) detached single family dwelling units on property located within a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district, the approximately 30.7 acres site being located at the southwest corner of Hinkle Drive and Windsor Street; and providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations, thereof, severability and effective date. (S09- 0002) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial (5-0). A SUPERMAJORITY C. VOTE BY OUNCIL IS REQUIRED FOR APPROVAL Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, stated that the proposal was for 46 single-family attached and 54 single-family detached dwelling units. The single-family detached units were permitted by right while the 46 attached units would need a Specific Use Permit. The proposed SUP would bind both the attached and detached units. The SUP for both the detached and attached units was being used in order to create a buffer from the neighborhood. A 50-foot landscape buffer would be provided along Windsor Street and Hinkle Drive and a minimum 30- foot landscape buffer along the southern property boundary. In February 2007 Council approved City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 14 a zoning change from NR-2 to NR-3 with the following overlay conditions: (1) the woods along the south and east boundary of the site would be preserved; (2) a perimeter fence with a “wrought” iron appearance, with taller posts topped by a decorative finial at the corner of each lot would be installed along the perimeter of the site. The setback of the fence would be 50 feet minimum from the existing curb. Rows of shrubbery between the fence and sidewalk would be installed to obtain privacy. The distance from the fence and back of the sidewalk would be a minimum of 12 feet. The developer, and later an H.O.A. would take responsibility for maintenance and irrigation of the approximately 3-acre perimeter landscape area; (3) except for glazing, doors and trim, the exterior of the homes would be vitrified clay brick or stone for all vertical surfaces with a direct load path to the foundation; (4) restrictions and conditions for the single-family detached homes included street right-of-way would be a minimum of 56 feet, parkway width would be a minimum of 9 feet, sidewalk width would be a minimum of 5 feet, front yard setback would be a minimum of 15 feet, side yard setback would be a minimum of 6 feet, rear yard setback would be a minimum of 10 feet, except for rear entry garages, rear yard setback would be a minimum of 20 feet if garages were accessed through the rear of the property, front entry garages would be setback 12 feet from the front most wall of that unit and three car garages would not face the street. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial thus requiring a supermajority vote by the Council. The Development Review Committee recommended approval with the following conditions (1) the approval of the Specific Use Permit would not grant any waiver to the Overlay conditions approved by Ordinance 2007-032; (2) the site plan as submitted and shown would be binding and guide the development of the Specific Use Permit; (3) all single-family attached development would conform to the requirements of the site plan; however, any other use permitted by right under the NR-3 zoning classification and use designation, including the single-family detached uses shown were not subject to any restrictions imposed or implied by the site plan and were subject only to the general zoning restrictions imposed for the NR-3 zoning district classification and use designation by the Denton Development Code; (4) the applicant would provide a minimum 50 foot landscape buffer along Windsor Street and Hinkle Drive and a minimum 30 foot buffer along the southern property boundary as shown on the site plan; and (5) the applicant would preserve all trees currently existing on the western property boundaries or the trees could be removed through sufficient mitigation methods approved by the City’s Urban Forrester. Mayor Burroughs stated that traffic with the current zoning of NR-3 would not be affected as the developer could build an equivalent number of single family detached units. Council Member Watts stated that when the proposal was first presented to change the zoning from NR-2 to NR-3, a general outline was presented but not an official site plan on how the property would be developed. He questioned if the single-family attached was included at that time. Cunningham stated that unless the site plan was presented as part of the approval for the zoning, it was not binding at the time. Council Member Watts stated that the west side of the proposal was park property and asked if there was any other single-family attached in the area. Cunningham stated that Good Samaritan had single-family attached units as well as other smaller single-family attached lots in the area. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 15 Council Member Mulroy stated that Good Samaritan contained duplexes, the Meadow Ridge area has zero lot line homes and the NR-6 zoning had single family homes. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that Bowling Green and Vanderbilt had homes originally designed as two-family. The individual purchasers made a mix of single-family and duplexes. The Mayor opened the public hearing Lessie Perry, 720 Mimosa, Denton, 76201 - opposed David Speicher, developer - favor Council Member Mulroy asked if the single-family attached units would be individually platted lots. Speicher replied correct that each had its own lot but were attached. These would not be rental property units. Mayor Burroughs asked if the units would rented or individually sold. Speicher replied that they would be sold. Mayor Burroughs asked if these would be limited to seniors. Speicher replied that the subdivision was designed so that in the future it could become a gated community. Mayor Burroughs stated that the property was rezoned two years ago and questioned why the proposal was not presented two years ago. Speicher stated that the zoning required an SUP regardless of when it was done. Council Member Watts stated that each single-family attached unit represented a townhome attached at a lot line. Speicher stated that only five units could be attached together and required a six foot setback. Council Member Watts asked for the minimum square footage according to the current zoning. Cunningham stated that areas over two acres were based on density and not according to lot size or building size. Council Member Watts asked why attached units rather than all detached units. Speicher stated that there was a huge need for townhomes in Denton and felt the market would take care of it. Council Member Watts stated that only one ingress/egress was proposed for Hinkle. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 16 Speicher stated that they were required by code only to have access on Hinkle but have another access for emergency vehicles. They were not allowed to use Windsor. Council Member Mulroy asked how they could be assured of the minimum square footage. He questioned what the requirements for site plan were. Cunningham stated that it was required only on the site plan. What was currently shown was not binding. Council Member Mulroy asked how to assure the public and Council that the development would have the size of the attached product as noted. Cunningham stated that if all of the units were single-family detached there would be nothing to guarantee a particular size house but as an SUP, conditions could be put on it. Speicher indicated that they were favorable towards the 1600 foot minimum. Council Member Engelbrecht asked if there would be rear access to the homes. Speicher replied correct that the townhomes would have rear access. Council Member Engelbrecht asked about the size of the buffer on Windsor and Hinkle if the SUP were not granted and it remained NR-3. Cunningham stated that it would be substantially less than what was proposed. Council Member Engelbrecht asked if there were architectural standards for NR-3 zoning. Cunningham replied there were no standards, only an offset garage. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that under the current zoning the standard was a typical subdivision “box”. Cunningham replied correct. Council Member Gregory asked with the attached units what percentage of the platted lot was pervious and what percentage was impervious. Speicher stated that there would be areas with extra green space for a courtyard appearance. Cunningham replied that it would be 50%. Kirk Pierce, 500 Mimosa, Denton, 76201 - opposed Mayor Burroughs stated that if the property were developed the way it was laid out right now, there would be 200 more car trips than what was being proposed. He questioned why the neighbors would be opposed to a less density. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 17 Council Member Engelbrecht stated that the current standard would allow the same number of big box homes; however, the proposed zoning would allow for the control of the square footage and standards for elevation. The proposed zoning also allowed for a large buffer along Windsor and Hinkle. Cynthia Cundall, 700 W. Windsor, Denton, 76207 - opposed Shawn Zeigler, 715 Mimosa, Denton, 76201 - opposed Barbara Reinke, 701 Northridge, Denton, 76201 - opposed Robert Curry, 1210 Meadow Ridge, Denton, 76201 - opposed Jack Frisby, 405 Magnolia, Denton, 76201 - opposed Comment cards in opposition were received from: John Williams, 714 Mimosa, Denton, 76201 Nannette and Kevin Williams, 714 Headlee, Denton, 76201 Margaret Lambert, 710 Northridge, Denton, 76201 Bobby and Mary Sigle Morris, 700 Magnolia, Denton, 76201 Hatice Salih, 300 Northridge, Denton, 76201 Daniel Garza, 300 Northridge, Denton, 76201 Doretha Wilson, 606 Mimosa, Denton, 76201 Charles Borth, 626 Magnolia, Denton, 76201 Gail Gerber, 1200 Meadow Ridge, Denton, 76201 Rob Storrie, 2901 Lakewood, Denton, 76207 Kathleen Goldmann, 301 Northridge, Denton, 76201 Tom and Margaret Hook, 721 W. Windsor, Denton, 76207 Additional speakers against the proposal were: Charles Wahlert, 803 Thomas, Denton, 76201 Devin Taylor, 921 N. Carroll, Denton, 7620 - concerned about bike lanes Gail Garber, 1200 Meadow Ridge, Denton, 76201 Tom Hook, 721 W. Windsor, Denton, 76201 Bobby Morris, 700 Magnolia, Denton, 76201 The petitioner was allowed a five minute rebuttal. Mr. Speicher stated they would be paying for a signal at the intersection of Hinkle and Windsor, an 8’ bike and pedestrian trail along the west side of Hinkle would be constructed, they would work with the city to restripe Hinkle to remove the current bike path and create a left turn lane and right turn lane for the entrance into the development. He also noted that the number of homes would be equal whether single-family detached or single-family attached homes were built. Council Member Watts asked if the picture of townhomes shown by Mr. Speicher were from Colleyville Speicher replied correct from the Colleyville Towncenter. Council Member Mulroy asked if the single family attached homes would be two story. Speicher replied correct. The Mayor closed the public hearing. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 18 Council Member Engelbrecht felt that there would be increased traffic in the area no matter what type of project was built. Zoning was also already in place and he asked what could be done to assist the neighborhood and minimize the traffic. He questioned if there was any plan for a study to address that issue. Cunningham stated that staff would assist the developers but with any scenario, a Traffic Impact Analysis would be done at the time of development. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that the Council Mobility Committee would be looking at mobility issues for entire city in the future. Council Member Gregory stated that Windsor was a difficult street as it was wide in some areas and narrow in others. The site needed to be developed properly to make it work. Council discussed the 2007 conditions placed on the property and the suggested conditions by the Development Review Committee plus the difference in conditions with the attached versus the detached homes. Council Member Heggins felt that it was not good to break the continuity of a neighborhood. Council Member Mulroy stated that he was in agreement that the site plan to go forward to include the total development. The matter he heard most about was the traffic. He noted that when the developers come in for platting, a Traffic Impact Analysis would be done. He asked the developer how tight the time line was on this development. Speicher stated that they did not have an immediate time line. Council Member Mulroy suggested that more information was needed on the traffic in the area and felt that staff might want to revisit the proposal and bring back recommendations to Council. He asked the developer if he had any problems with the qualitative items presented thus far. Speicher replied that he did not have any problems so far with specifics suggested. Council Member Watts felt that if the proposal were delayed, it would allow staff to rework some of the language. He asked the developer for examples of single family detached projects done and the names of single-family attached projects completed. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that the Mobility Committee would continue to work with staff on the traffic issues. th Mulroy motioned, Kamp seconded to table the item until the August 4council meeting. On roll vote, Engelbrecht “nay”, Gregory “aye”, Heggins “nay”, Kamp “aye”, Mulroy “aye”, Watts “aye”, and Mayor Burroughs “aye”.Motion carried with a 5-2 vote. C.The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas regarding a Specific Use Permit to allow for gas well drilling and production on property located within the Town Center of the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District with a base zoning of Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU), the approximately 3 acre site being located on the west side of Bonnie Brae Street, north of Scripture Street; and providing City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 19 for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations, thereof, severability and an effective date.(S09-0006) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (4-0). Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, stated that this proposal was not a part of the Rayzor Ranch development. The proposal was for a Specific Use Permit for gas well development on property at the Rayzor Ranch overlay district. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval as well as the Development Review Committee for a Specific Use Permit with 10 conditions. Those conditions included: (1) the approval of this Specific Use Permit shall not grant any waiver to the overlay conditions approved with Ordinance No. 2008-284.; (2) the applicant shall install a screening fence along the northern, southern and western boundaries of the site and a type “D buffer on the portion of the site along Bonnie Brae Road; (3) the screening fence and type “D buffer, as conditioned, shall be constructed within 30 days after drilling operations are complete or planted during the first dormant season after drilling, if approved by the City Landscape Administrator; (4) if screening or landscaping was damaged or removed during fracturing or refracturing operations, the operator of the gas well shall be responsible for replacing the damaged or removed portions of the landscaping; (5) the site plan as submitted and shown in Exhibit 6 shall guide the development of gas wells on the subject site; (6) prior to the issuance of a gas well permit and the commencement of operations, the operator shall submit a noise management plan to the Development Review Committee for review and approval, detailing how the equipment used in the drilling, completion, transportation, or production of the wells complies with the maximum permissible ambient noise levels. The maximum permissible ambient noise level shall not exceed ninety (90) decibels as measured 300 feet from the boundary of the drill site; (7) prior to the issuance of a gas well permit, the operator shall be responsible for establishing and reporting to the City a continuous 72 hour pre-drilling ambient noise level. The 72 hour study shall include at least one twenty four hour reading during a Saturday or Sunday. The operator shall use the prior established ambient noise level for the installation of any new noise generation equipment unless the operator can demonstrate that the increase in the ambient noise level is not associated with drilling and production activities located either on or off-site; (8) the sound level meter used in conducting noise evaluations shall meet the American National Standard Institute’s Standard for sound meters or an instrument and the associated recording and analyzing equipment which will provide equivalent data; (9) a citation may be immediately issued for failure to comply with these conditions. However, if the operator was in compliance with the approved noise management plan, and a violation still occurred, the operator would be given 24 hours from notice of non-compliance to correct the violation from an identified source before a citation was issued. Additional extensions of the 24 hour period may be granted in the event that the source of the violations cannot be indentified after reasonable diligence by the operator; and (10) the operator of the gas well shall instruct and ensure that employees involve in the operation of the gas wells park vehicles on-site only. Council Member Watts asked about Condition #4 and how long the operator had to repair the landscaping. Cunningham stated that it depended on when it was done – whether it was in a growing season or not. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 20 Council Member Watts suggested using language for condition #4 as was used for condition #3. In regards to condition #9, he asked if the developer would receive a fine after one regular noise violation. Cunningham stated that a citation could be issued immediately for failure to comply with the conditions. However, if the operator was in compliance with the approved noise management plan, and a violation still occurred, the operator would have 24 hours from notice of non- compliance to correct the violation from an identified source before a citation was issued. Additional extensions of the 24 hour period could be granted in the event that the source of the violations could not be identified after reasonable diligence by the operator. Mayor Burroughs asked if the noise level in condition #6 was for 24 hours a day. Cunningham replied that it would be maintained 24 hours per day. Mayor Burroughs asked if there would be a decrease at night. Cunningham stated that standard operations would be performed with the 90 db levels including during the night. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Mary Patton, Range Production Company, stated she was available for questions. Mayor Burroughs asked Ms. Patton about the requirement for noise no louder than 90 db, especially throughout the night Patton replied that was recommended by staff. It took 3-4 weeks to drill each well, working 24/7. Fracking would involve another week which was only done during the day. Sound walls would be put up, especially along Bonnie Brae near the neighborhoods, to keep the impact below the 90 db level. After the wells were completed, there was no noise associated with the wells. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked how the location of the wells was chosen. Patton stated that the surface rights were separate from the mineral estate. An agreement was made on where the pad sites would be granted through a different developer. Range had determined that they only needed one pad site for a smaller footprint. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked if the other pad sites were at different locations on the property. Patton replied correct that there were other sites shown on the Rayzor Ranch Overlay but that those had been relinquished by Range. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that this site was the only choice by Range. Patton replied that Range did not need to develop the other sites, that this one was sufficient. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp asked if this was the only site or could it be moved. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 21 Patton replied that they would not want to move the site. Council Member Gregory asked how close the wells were on the pad site. Patton replied that they were 30 feet apart. Council Member Gregory asked how close the houses were to the pad site. Patton stated that there could not be any residential structures within 250 feet. Council Member Gregory asked who received the royalties from the gas. Patton stated that only the property under lease was under Rayzor Ranch which went to Rayzor Investments. Council Member Engelbrecht questioned that drilling 5 wells on the site would only take with 3- 4 weeks of work per site. Patton replied correct. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that the wells he was aware of took longer than that. He asked about a work over rig. Patton stated that was the time it took for the drilling rig to be on location and drill the wells. The rig was then removed and completion equipment was moved in to do the frack job. After that the production equipment was installed. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that then under Patton’s estimate, there would be a minimum of five months of drilling with a derrick up. Patton replied that they were not planning on drilling the wells back to back. This was an exploratory area and they needed to drill the first well and move the rig off and then evaluate the results. Council Member Engelbrecht asked for a definition of the term “work over” with a well. Patton replied that tubing was first run in the well. If the design of the tubing was changed or if it needed to be changed out, a work over rig would be used to pull the tubing. Council Member Engelbrecht asked about the requirements for the well when it was no longer a working well. Patton replied that if the first well was not productive, it would be plugged and they would move on. If productive, they hoped to have a life span of 20 years. Council Member Engelbrecht asked what happened at the end of 20 years. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 22 Patton stated that the Railroad Commission required them to flood the wells within a year of becoming inactive. All equipment was removed and well would be plugged according to Railroad Commission regulations. The casing might be pulled if salvageable. Council Member Engelbrecht asked Patton if she was aware of the opposition in last two day to this issue. Patton replied yes. Council Member Mulroy asked about the noise restriction. After the initial drilling and treatment could the developer live with the restriction of normal working hours including a compressor. Patton stated that is was her understanding that a compressor would not be needed but if so, they would sound proof it with sound walls. Mayor Burroughs stated that outside of the original drilling, fracking and emergencies, all other noises would adhere to the standard noise ordinance limits. Patton relied that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation was below 90 db with sound walls. They had no problem with the lower limits. Council Member Watts stated Range Resources had acquired this lease from a previous operator who had negotiated three pad sites. Patton replied correct. Council Member Watts asked if the other sites were still under Range’s control or had they been relinquished to the surface owner. Patton replied it was her understanding was that they had been relinquished. She had only mentioned them because she had been asked why they picked this particular site. They had evaluated several pad sites and this was the best available pad site. Council Member Watts stated that the other sites were not available to Range. Patton replied correct. Council Member Gregory asked what kind of analysis was done after drilling. Patton stated that as the drilling was being done, they would evaluate if the well was going to be a production well. During fraction they would continue with their evaluations such as drilling more wells, what kind of equipment to use, etc. Tennessee Walker, Range Resources, stated that the initial agreement had well four sites but to limit the use of land and make concessions to the landowner they amended the agreement to only have the rights to this one site. Additional public hearing speakers included: City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 23 Scott Langford, 810 Stanley, Denton, 76201 - opposed David Williams, 819 Stanley, Denton, 76201 - opposed Charles Wahlert, 803 Thomas, Denton, 76201 - opposed Bill Carter, 730 Thomas, Denton, 76201 - opposed Claire Hetherington, 2309 Panhandle, Denton, 76201 - opposed Brett Darr, 2309 Panhandle, Denton, 76201 - opposed James Hutton, 924 Thomas, Denton, 76201 - opposed Jake Hendricks, 1014 Hillcrest, Denton, 76201 - opposed Heidi Klein, 621 Hillcrest, Denton, 76201 - opposed Margarete Neale, 731 Hillcrest, Denton, 76201 - opposed Pamela Barnes, 1222 Thomas, Denton, 76201 - opposed DeeDee Romero, 1222 Thomas, Denton, 76201 - opposed David Hiegel, 820 Hillcrest, Denton, 76201 - opposed Sue Smith, 1819 Crescent, Denton, 76201 - opposed Comment cards in opposition were received from: John Hoeffler, 1704 Panhandle, Denton, 76201 Poovalur Sriji, 803 Hillcrest, Denton, 76201 Sammy Haren, 804 Hillcrest, Denton, 76201 Karen DeVinney and David Holdeman, 1820 W. Oak, Denton, 76201 William Neale, 731 Hillcrest, Denton, 76201 Gena Williams, 819 Stanley, Denton, 76201 Additional public hearing speakers included: Sher Smith, 909 Stanley, Denton, 76201 - opposed Sammy Haren, 804 Hillcrest, Denton, 76201 - opposed Dean Wynn, 818 N. Bonnie Brae, Denton, 76201 - opposed Ron Watson, 805 Ector Street, Denton, 76201 - opposed Kent McIntyre, 911 Hillcrest, Denton, 87201 - opposed Poovalur Sriji, 803 Hillcrest, Denton, 76201 - opposed Mel Sumral, 1020 N. Bonnie Brae, Denton, 76201 - opposed The petitioner was allowed a five minute rebuttal. Ms. Patton stated that they had worked with city staff to bring the proposal into compliance with city ordinances. The current city ordinance required waivers from homeowners with 500 feet of the well head. They had received the two required waivers. Mayor Burroughs stated that Ms. Patton had indicated that the northwest site was not viable. He asked if there were any possibility of revisiting that site. Patton replied that the surface owner was not willing to grant that pad site. Mayor Burroughs noted that another issue was the lighting on the rigs as it was very bright. He asked if there would be directional lighting. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 24 City Attorney Burgess read the section of the Code dealing with directional lighting. However, she noted that safety came first. Mayor Burroughs asked about the sound noise. Patton stated that the sound walls would knock the sound down by 20 db. Mayor Burroughs asked about the time when the trucks would be coming in and out. Patton stated that they would be sensitive to the truck traffic but initially it might have to be 24 hours per day. Walker stated that there were both mineral rights owners and surface use owners and some of the negotiations were out of their hands. Council Member Mulroy stated that the location of this pad site appeared to be by default as the other sites were given up. He felt the information was incomplete at this time and questioned that this was the only viable location at this time. The City was obligated to give access to the minerals but not at any location. He requested more data to back up that this site was the only place to drill. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp questioned that if Council received the requested data, would there be a choice in this matter or did mineral rights trump everything else. City Attorney Burgess stated that in Texas, mineral rights dominated which was a consideration Council needed to note. If more information were obtained, Council might want to discuss the legal issues involved. She asked how the litigation was going and would a delay impact their litigation. Patton stated it was past the time they should have already started drilling. Walker stated that they had asked for an extension under the surface use agreement. The Court had issued a temporary restraining order enjoining the other party from preventing them from obtaining the necessary permits to begin drilling. The extension required them to obtain the permits and begin drilling before the end of August. Council Member Engelbrecht asked if the City had people who could review this data. Would it be beneficial to have a couple of independent looks at this data. Mayor Burroughs stated that Council needed to know options if the surface and mineral owners didn’t mind using a different site and if geological data showed it was possible, could the Council force Range to move to an alternate site. Council Member Mulroy felt that a closed session was needed to work out the details. He understood the rights to the minerals and was not precluding that but the Council also had to balance the safety of citizens. He asked when Range first got possession of the lease. Patton replied at least a year ago. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 25 Council Member Mulroy stated that they were now down to a matter of days to get the specific use permit for drilling. Walker stated that if the Council needed to postpone, it would have to be. Patton stated that the other pad sites were shown and included to demonstrate how this was the best site and was planned for quite some time. It was pubic record and the plans were made by another operator. Range had evaluated the sites and determined the most logical location with the smallest footprint. They had worked with staff to make sure they met all of the City’s ordinances which were written with safety in mind. The Mayor closed the public hearing. th Mulroy motioned, Kamp seconded to table the item until the August 4 Council meeting pending the information as requested. That information included the pooling agreement, what was submitted to the Railroad Commission, lease carve outs, a map of the property, and the actual distances on the northern tracts. On roll vote, Engelbrecht “aye”, Gregory “nay”, Heggins “aye”, Kamp “aye”, Mulroy “aye”, Watts “aye”, and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried with a 6- 1 vote. D.The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas regarding amendments to the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District encompassing approximately 410 acres of land located generally on both sides of U.S. Highway 380 (West University Drive), between Interstate Highway 35 and Bonnie Brae Street, specifically including amendments to the development standards applicable to the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District, as well as the provisions of Subchapter 35.7 of the Denton Development Code, and approving amendments to the Rayzor Ranch Special Purpose Sign District. (Z06-0029, Z06- 0030 and S07-0001) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (6-0). Chuck Russell, Planning Manager, stated that this proposal would amend the previously approved architectural and landscape standards and sign district. The final right-of-way screening must be installed within 6 months after the final certificate of occupancy was issued for 80% of the lots fronting US 380 or within two years of the effective date of the exhibit, whichever was less. The applicant was requesting to complete the standards, locations and design of the remaining signs for the Northern Tract. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that there were many changes in the landscaping standards with lots of strike outs in the material. Russell stated that the previous language was being modified to more accurately reflect what was going to happen north of the big boxes. Council Member Gregory stated that the earlier version of the landscape plan indicated a tree every 20 linear feet and 20 shrubs in between. The new plan indicated one tree for every 20 feet and no shrubs. Russell replied that was correct and they now had a better idea where to physically plant the materials in the area. The 8 foot wall would have the green on the outside of the wall. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 26 The Mayor opened the public hearing. No one spoke during the public hearing. The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 2009-169 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, SUPERSEDING THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE STANDARDS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RAYZOR RANCH OVERLAY DISTRICT; SUPERSEDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE RAYZOR RANCH SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY ORDINANCE 2008-319; RE- DESIGNATING THE SECTION NUMBERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CODIFIED PROVISIONS OF THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, FOR EDITORIAL PURPOSES ONLY; ALL OF WHICH CHANGES APPLY TO LAND LOCATED GENERALLY ON BOTH SIDES OF U.S. HIGHWAY 380 (WEST UNIVERSITY DRIVE), BETWEEN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35 AND BONNIE BRAE STREET, AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Heggins motioned, Kamp seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Engelbrecht “aye”, Gregory “aye”, Heggins “aye”, Kamp “aye”, Mulroy “aye”, Watts “aye”, and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried unanimously. 5. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION Tabled A. – Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving an interlocal cooperation agreement and granting an easement to the DCTA on the Denton Branch Rail Trail for the purpose of building a public commuter rail line; and declaring an effective date. The Mobility Committee (Tabled from March 3, 2009) recommends approval (3-0). This item remained on the table. Tabled B. - Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing for zoning change from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation with an overlay district, on approximately 15.13 acres of land located west of Stuart Road and approximately 600 feet northwest of the intersection of Windsor Street and Stuart Road; and providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date (Z08-0016, Pine Creek). The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (4-2) with an overlay (Tabled from June 16, 2009) district. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 27 Mulroy motioned, Kamp seconded to remove this item from the table. On roll vote, Engelbrecht “aye”, Gregory “aye”, Heggins “aye”, Kamp “aye”, Mulroy “aye”, Watts “aye”, and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried unanimously. City Manager Campbell stated that the applicant was in agreement to table this item indefinitely with direction to remove it from the agenda and when the applicant and staff were ready for action by Council, it would be included on an upcoming agenda. Kamp motioned, Gregory seconded to table the item indefinitely. On roll vote, Engelbrecht “aye”, Gregory “aye”, Heggins “aye”, Kamp “aye”, Mulroy “aye”, Watts “aye”, and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried unanimously. C.The Council considered appointments to Council committees. Mayor Burroughs stated that the list of nominations had been presented and discussed in the Work Session. Mulroy motioned, Heggins seconded to approve the nominations as presented. On roll vote, Engelbrecht “aye”, Gregory “aye”, Heggins “aye”, Kamp “aye”, Mulroy “aye”, Watts “aye”, and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried unanimously. D.The Council considered appointments to the following boards and commissions: 1. Airport Advisory Board 2. Animal Shelter Advisory Committee 3. Community Development Advisory Committee 4. Construction Advisory and Appeals Board 5. Historic Landmark Commission 6. Human Services Advisory Committee 7. Library Board 8. Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board 9. Planning and Zoning Commission 10. Public Art Committee 11. Public Utilities Board 12. Traffic Safety Commission 13. Zoning Board of Adjustment Mulroy motioned, Kamp seconded to approve the nominations as discussed during the Work Session. On roll vote, Engelbrecht “aye”, Gregory “aye”, Heggins “aye”, Kamp “aye”, Mulroy “aye”, Watts “aye”, and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried unanimously. E. The Council considered nominations/appointments to the Economic Development Partnership Board. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that the Nominating Committee was recommending the following appointments: City Council representative – Dalton Gregory; Chamber of Commerce representative – Virgil Strange; and top 20 taxpayers – Caleb O’Rear and Denny Aldridge. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 28 Kamp motioned, Engelbrecht seconded to approve the nominations. On roll vote, Engelbrecht “aye”, Gregory “aye”, Heggins “aye”, Kamp “aye”, Mulroy “aye”, Watts “aye”, and Mayor Burroughs “aye”. Motion carried unanimously. F. Citizen Reports 1.Review of procedures for addressing the City Council. 2.The Council received citizen reports from the following: a.Charles Jones regarding airport lot lease. Mr. Jones stated that he had received a notice of termination of a lease regarding completion time and financing availability. He felt that the problems had been resolved and needed a short extension to complete the paperwork. He questioned if his lease would be terminated at the end of the month and felt that he had the financing issues worked out. b.Catherine Bell regarding several issues in Southeast Denton. Ms. Bell was not present at the meeting. c.Bob Clifton regarding DCTA right-of-way and the City of Denton. Mr. Clifton was not present at the meeting. d.Nell Yeldell on trespassing on her property and the bugging of phones and cars. Ms. Yeldell was not present at the meeting. G. Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, respond to inquiries from the City Council or the public with specific factual information or recitation of policy, or accept a proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming meeting. There were no items suggested by Council. H. Possible Continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. There was no continuation of the Closed Meeting. I. Official Action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. There was no official action on Closed Meeting items. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 1:21 a.m. City of Denton City Council Minutes July 21, 2009 Page 29 _________________________________ MARK A. BURROUGHS MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS _________________________________ JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Planning ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas amending the Schedule of Fees contained in Ordinance 2004-060 by adopting a new Planning and Development Department Review Fee Schedule as authorized by the Denton Development Code (DDC) for the City of Denton, Texas, for filing applications for review, approval, and issuance of Specific Use Permits (SUPs) for: home occupations that require the approval of an SUP, adult day care, childcare/day care home, group homes, accessory dwelling units, and any development within the In-fill Special Purpose District that requires the approval of an SUP; providing a severability clause; providing for publication; and providing for an effective date. BACKGROUND City of Denton staff recently facilitated a meeting with members of the Denton Daycare Association to address the applicability of the Denton Development Code (DDC) with regards to in-home childcare. Specifically, according to Subchapter 35.5, Zoning Districts and Limitations of the DDC, childcare, day care home located within the NR-1, NR-2, NR-3, NR-4, and NR-5 zoning districts must obtain an SUP. A childcare, day care home is a facility that provides care for seven (7) to twelve (12) children, includin-aged children within a residential dwelling. Staff also discussed the fees associated with an SUP which includes $1,500 + $65/acre + $220 notification fees. Upon further review of the associated SUP fees staff determined that the fee was unreasonably high relative to the type of review required for uses such as childcare, day care home. Unlike the other uses in the DDC that require an SUP, the review of a childcare, day care home is conducted by a limited number of Departments, and the amount of information required in much less than that of typical SUPs. Therefore, staff is recommending that the application fee of $1,500 + $65/acre + $220 notification be reduced to $500 for childcare, day care home. Staff is also recommending that SUPs fee for home occupations that require the approval of a SUP, adult day care, group homes, and accessory dwelling units be assessed the reduced fee of $500. Similar to childcare, day care home, staff considers these uses as small in scope and do not require extensive review. In addition, staff is recommending that any development within the In-fill Special Purpose District that is required to obtain an SUP be assessed the reduced fee of $500 to create an incentive to spur development within this District. A map showing the boundaries of the In-fill Special Purpose District is presented in Exhibit 2. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW August 4, 2008 City Council Work Session FISCAL IMPACT The $500 fee application is adequate to cove SUP and public notification for: home occupations that require the approval of an SUP, adult day care, childcare/day care home, group homes, accessory dwelling units, and any development within the In-fill Special Purpose District that requires the approval of an SUP. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted 2. Approve subject to conditions 3. Deny 4. Postpone consideration 5. Table item RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the fee schedule amendment. EXHIBITS 1. SUP Application Checklist 2. In-fill Special Purpose District Map 3. Ordinance Prepared by: Respectfully submitted: Ron Menguita Mark Cunningham Planning Supervisor Director of Planning and Development EXHIBIT 1 Í°»½·º·½ Ë­» л®³·¬ øÍËÐ÷ º±®æ ر³» ±½½«°¿¬·±²­ ¬¸¿¬ ®»¯«·®» ¬¸» ¿°°®±ª¿´ ±º ¿ ÍËÐå ß¼«´¬ ¼¿§ ½¿®»å ݸ·´¼½¿®»ô ¼¿§ ½¿®» ¸±³»å Ù®±«° ¸±³»­å ß½½»­­±®§ ¼©»´´·²¹ «²·¬­å ¿²¼ ß²§ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ©·¬¸·² ¬¸» ײ󺷴´ Í°»½·¿´ Ы®°±­» Ü·­¬®·½¬ ¬¸¿¬ ®»¯«·®» ¬¸» ¿°°®±ª¿´ ±º ¿ ÍËÐò ß ½¸·´¼½¿®»ô ¼¿§ ½¿®» ¸±³» ·­ ¿ º¿½·´·¬§ ¬¸¿¬ °®±ª·¼»­ ½¿®» º±® ­»ª»² ¬± ¬©»´ª» øéó ±©² °®»­½¸±±´ó¿¹»¼ ½¸·´¼®»²÷ ·² ¿ ®»­·¼»²¬·¿´ ¼©»´´·²¹ò ß °®»­½¸±±´ó¿¹»¼ ½¸·´¼ ·­ ¿ ½¸·´¼ ì §»¿®­ ±º ¿¹» ±® §±«²¹»®ô ±® ¿ ë §»¿® ±´¼ ©¸± ¸¿­ ²±¬ ­¬¿®¬»¼ ­½¸±±´ò ß ½¸·´¼½¿®»ô ¼¿§ ½¿®» ¸±³» ·­ °»®³·¬¬»¼ ·² ¬¸» ÒÎóïô ÒÎóîô ÒÎóíô ÒÎóìô ¿²¼ ÒÎóë ¦±²·²¹ ¼·­¬®·½¬­ ¸±©»ª»®å ¬¸» ¿°°´·½¿²¬ ³«­¬ º·®­¬ ±¾¬¿·² ¿ ÍËÐò ̸» º±´´±©·²¹ ³¿¬»®·¿´­ ³«­¬ ¾» ½±´´¿¬»¼ô ¾«²¼´»¼ ¿²¼ ­·¬» °´¿²­ º±´¼»¼ ©¸»² ­«¾³·¬¬»¼æ Í°»½·º·½ Ë­» л®³·¬ øÍËÐ÷æ Ѳ» øï÷ Ì®¿²­³·¬¬¿´ ͸»»¬ Ú±«®¬»»² øïì÷ °¿½µ»¬­ ·²½´«¼·²¹ ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹æ ¿ò˲·ª»®­¿´ ß°°´·½¿¬·±² ¾ò ½òЮ±¶»½¬ Ò¿®®¿¬·ª» øÍËÐ ¼»­½®·¾·²¹ ¸±© ¬¸» °®±°±­»¼ ®»¯«»­¬ ³»»¬­ ¬¸» ¿°°®±ª¿´ ½®·¬»®·¿ ·² Í«¾½¸¿°¬»® ê ±º ÜÜÝ ¿²¼ ·­ ½±²­·­¬»²¬ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» °«®°±­» ¿²¼ ·²¬»²¬ ±º ¬¸» Ü»²¬±² д¿²ò λº»® ¬± ¬¸» Ю±¶»½¬ Ò¿®®¿¬·ª» ¹«·¼»´·²» ¿¬¬¿½¸»¼÷ò ¼òݱ³°´»¬»¼ Í«¾³·¬¬¿´ ݸ»½µ´·­¬ »òݱ³°´»¬»¼ Í·¬» д¿² ͬ¿²¼¿®¼­ ݸ»½µ´·­¬ ºòÔ»¹¿´ Ü»­½®·°¬·±² ¹òݱ°·»­ ±º Ü»»¼ ±® ±©²»® ¿«¬¸±®·¦¿¬·±² ´»¬¬»® Ѳ» øï÷ ÝÜóÎÑÓ ½±²¬¿·²·²¹ ¿´´ ­«¾³·­­·±² ³¿¬»®·¿´ ¿­ ¿ ÐÜÚ ¼±½«³»²¬ Ò±¬»æ ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ײº±®³¿¬·±² ³¿§ ¾» ®»¯«·®»¼ ¾§ Ý·¬§ ­¬¿ºº ¼«®·²¹ ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬ ®»ª·»©òײ ¿¼¼·¬·±² ¬± ¬¸» ¹»²»®¿´ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ¬¸¿¬ ³«­¬ ¾» ­¸±©² ±² ¬¸» ­·¬» °´¿²ô ¼»¬¿·´»¼ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²ô ¿­ ·¬ °»®¬¿·²­ ¬± ¬¸» ®»¯«»­¬ ³¿§ ¾» ®»¯«·®»¼ò ͬ¿ºº ©·´´ ¼·­½«­­ ¿²§ ¿¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ¼»»³»¼ ¿°°®±°®·¿¬» ¿²¼ ²»½»­­¿®§ ¬± °®±½»­­ ¬¸» ¿°°´·½¿¬·±² ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ¿°°´·½¿¬·±² ¾¿­»¼ ±² ¬¸» ­°»½·º·½­ ±º ¬¸» ¿°°´·½¿¬·±² ­«¾³·¬¬»¼ò × ¸¿ª» ®»ª·»©»¼ ¬¸» ½¸»½µ´·­¬ ¿²¼ ¿´´ ­«¾³·¬¬¿´­ º±® ½±³°´»¬»²»­­ ¿²¼ ¿½½«®¿½§ò ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ Í·¹²¿¬«®» Ü¿¬» ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ Ю·²¬ Ò¿³» Í«¾³·¬¬¿´ ݸ»½µ´·­¬ п¹» ï ±º ï ó Subchapter 7 Development Code Ú·¹«®» íëòéòïìòî 7-66 ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Planning and Development ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT - S09-0002 (Villas at North Lakes) Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton, Texas, approving a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for forty-six (46) attached and fifty-four (54) detached single family dwelling units on approximately 30.7 acres located within a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district on the southwest corner of Hinkle Drive and Windsor Street; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. (S09-0002) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of this request (5-0). BACKGROUND In accordance with Section 35.5.2.2 of the Denton Development Code (DDC), single-family detached dwelling units are permitted by-right within the NR-3 zoning district. However, an attached SUP is required for single-family dwelling units within the NR-3 zoning district. The proposed development consists of both single-family attached and detached units as shown on the attached site plan (See Exhibit 6). Per Section 35.6.4 of the DDC, an SUP may be granted if the proposed use conforms, or can be made to conform through the use of conditions to meet the standards established in the NR-3 zoning district. This proposed development will have an average lot size of 10,000 square feet for the detached units and 4,856 square feet for the attached units. The average lot size of 10,000 square feet proposed for the detached units is similar to the existing residential developments within the immediate area. To the west of the subject property is a Neighborhood Residential 6 (NR-6) zoning district developed with minimum lots sizes of approximately 10,200 square feet. The proposed average lot size for the attached single-family units is smaller than the existing surrounding residential development. However, the overall development as conditioned by a previously approved Overlay District and the proposed site plan will create a diverse housing opportunity for the area and is compatible with the surrounding developments. The conditions as proposed will also ensure that this development conforms to the standards established within the NR-3 zoning district. As of this writing, staff has received two (2) responses from property owners within 200 feet of the subject property in opposition to the request. Public notification information is provided in Exhibit 5. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW On February 6, 2007, the City Council approved an ordinance (Ord No.2007-032) for a zoning change from Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) district to a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR- 3) district with overlay conditions as follows: a. The woods along the south and east boundary of the site will be preserved. b. decorative finial at the corner of each lot will be installed along the perimeter of the site. Rows of shrubbery between the fence and sidewalk will be installed to obtain privacy. The distance from the fence and back of sidewalk will be a minimum of 12 feet. The developer, and later an H.O.A, will take responsibility for maintenance and irrigation of the approximately 3- acre perimeter landscape area. c. Except for glazing, doors, and trim, the exterior of the homes shall be vitrified clay brick or stone for all vertical surfaces with a direct load path to the foundation. d. The following restrictions and conditions shall apply to single-family detached homes: Street right-of-way shall be a minimum of 56 feet. Î Parkway width shall be a minimum of 9 feet Î Sidewalk width shall be a minimum of 5 feet. Î Front yard setback shall be a minimum of 15 feet. Î Side yard setback shall be a minimum of 6 feet. Î Rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 10 feet, except for Rear Entry Garages. Î Rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 20 feet if garages are accessed through Î the rear of the property. Front Entry Garages shall be setback 12 feet from the front most wall of that unit. Î Three car Garages shall not face the street. Î May 20, 2009 Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing. This item was tabled from the August 4, 2009 City Council meeting. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted 2. Approve subject to conditions 3. Deny 4. Postpone consideration 5. Table item 2 RECOMMENDATION denial The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends of this Specific Use Permit request (5-0). approval The Development Review Committee (DRC) recommends of this Specific Use Permit request subject to the following conditions: 1. The approval of this Specific Use Permit shall not grant any waiver to the Overlay conditions approved with Ordinance number 2007.032. 2. The site plan as submitted and shown on Exhibit 6 shall be binding and guide the development of this Specific Use Permit. 3. All single family attached development shall conform to the requirements of the site plan attached hereto and incorporated by reference as Exhibit B; however, any other use permitted by right under the NR-3 zoning classification and use designation, including the single family detached uses shown therein, are not subject to any restrictions imposed or implied by the attached site plan, and are subject only to the general zoning restrictions imposed for the NR-3 zoning district classification and use designation by the Denton Development Code. 4. The applicant shall provide a minimum 50 foot landscape buffer along Windsor Street and Hinkle Drive and a minimum 30 foot landscape buffer along the southern property boundary as shown on the site plan. 5. The applicant shall preserve all trees currently existing on the western property boundaries or the trees can be removed through sufficient mitigation methods approved EXHIBITS 1. Staff Analysis 2. Location Map 3. Existing Zoning Map 4. Future Land Use Map 5. Notification Information 6. Proposed Site/Landscape Plan 7. Site Photographs 8. Letter From Applicant 9. Letters in Opposition 10. May 20, 2009 Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 11. Ordinance 3 Respectfully submitted: Mark Cunningham, AICP Director of Planning and Development Prepared by: Nana Appiah, AICP Senior Planner 4 EXHIBIT 1 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS CASE NO.: S09-0002 DATE TO BE CONSIDERED: August 18, 2009 LOCATION: Southwest corner of Hinkle Drive and Windsor Street APPLICANT: Wade Trim 920 S. Main, Suite 170 Grapevine, TX 76051 OWNER: The Rayzor Company 400 W. Oak Street, Suite 200 Denton, TX 76201 ZONING DISTRICT: The subject property is located in the Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district. COMPREHENSIVE The subject site is located within the Existing Land Use future land PLAN DESIGNATION: use designation. SITE AND The site is currently undeveloped. SURROUNDINGS: North: Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) North Lakes Park South: Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) Senior Living Facility. East: Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) and Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) Single family developments and Senior Living facility. West: Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) and Neighborhood Residential 6 (NR-6) North Lakes Park and Single family developments. BACKGROUND The existing zoning designation (NR-3) on the property allows the INFORMATION: development of single family detached units by right and single family attached units through approval of an SUP. The purpose of this request is to develop 46 single family attached and 56 single family detached units. ANALYSIS: Existing Land Use Comprehensive Plan The subject site is located in the designation Analysis: within the Denton Future Land Use Plan. Per the Denton Plan, new developments within an existing residential land use category should be developed to be compatible with patterns and designs to the standards established within the neighborhood. In addition, The Plan 5 recommends that the existing residential development within the neighborhood be vigorously protected and preserved. This development is for single family attached and detached units. The approval of this request will not alter the patterns and design standards within the established neighborhood. This area of the park is mainly used as open space for passive recreation such as walking and running. To the south is a senior living facility. To the east are single family residential developments. The proposed single family development of two housing types will not be detrimental to preserving the existing neighborhood. The development will enhance the general character of the neighborhood by providing opportunities for diverse housing types increasing the sustainability of the community. Development The property is located in the Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) Code/Zoning Analysis zoning district. The NR-3 zoning district is a subcategory of the Neighborhood Residential Land Use. Per Subchapter 35.5.2.1 of the DDC, the purpose of the Neighborhood Residential Land Use is to protect existing neighborhoods and ensure that any new development is compatible with existing land uses, patterns, and designs. Approval of this development will not alter the character or design patterns of the existing residential developments. In addition, there is an overlay restriction which will further restrict the development of this property to ensure that the development is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Per Subchapter 35.5.2.2 of the DDC, single family attached dwellings are permitted with approval of an SUP. The criterion with which approval of an SUP is evaluated are set forth in Subchapter 35.6.4 of the DDC. An analysis of the approval criteria is presented under the Findings below. DEPARTMENT AND The Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed this AGENCY REVIEW: request for an SUP and provided the following relevant comments. All the DRC comments were addressed by the applicant. FINDINGS: Pursuant to subsection 35.6.4.B. a specific use permit shall be issued only if all of the following conditions have been met: 1.That the specific use will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity; 6 Granting the SUP would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity. The proposed request is for a single family development which includes detached and attached units. The average lot size for the detached units is 10,000 square feet. This lot size is not out of character with the surrounding residential developments. To the west of the property is a Neighborhood Residential 6 (NR-6) developed with an average lot size of 10,200 square feet. The minimum lot size for the attached units is 4,856 square feet. This average lot size is smaller than the surrounding residential development. However, the overall development as conditioned by a previously approved Overlay District and the proposed site plan will create a diverse housing opportunity for the area and is compatible with the surrounding developments. 2.That the establishment of the specific use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property; Granting the SUP would not impede the normal and orderly development of the surrounding vacant property. The proposed single family development with attached units is surrounded by a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR -3) zoning to the east and Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to the south. A Neighborhood Residential 6 (NR-6) district is located approximately 470 feet to the west of the subject site. Both the NR-6 and NR-3 districts are already developed with single family homes. South of the property is also developed as a senior living f Lakes Park. 3.That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary supporting facilities have been or will be provided; Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary supporting facilities have been evaluated by the DRC and have been deemed adequate to support this use. 4.The design, location and arrangement of all driveways and parking spaces provides for the safe and convenient movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic without adversely affecting the general public or adjacent developments; 7 The DRC has reviewed the proposed vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The proposed development will not have an adverse affect on the general public or adjacent developments. According to the Engineering Department, a traffic study may be required during platting of this property if it is determined that the daily trip generation for this development exceeds 1,000 or 100 PM Peak Hour trips. The applicant has met the required parking standards as outlined in Subchapter 35.14.4 Parking Standards. Based on the 8) and shown on the site plan, the proposed development will require 200 parking spaces. The site plan submitted shows two means of ingress and egress to the development. One access is on Windsor Street and the other on Hinkle Drive. According to the applicant, the main access to the site will be through Hinkle Drive, Windsor Street will be utilized for right-in/right-out emergency access only. 5.That adequate nuisance prevention measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration; Dust, noise and vibration will occur during the construction of the proposed development. However, dust, noise and any vibration associated with the construction of the proposed development will stop once the proposed development is constructed. Section 20 of Ordinance also requires dust, noise and odor control during construction. 6.That directional lighting will be provided so as not to disturb or adversely affect neighboring properties; and All new lighting will comply with the standards and regulations under Subchapter 13 in the Denton Development Code. This requirement will be met during the platting, construction plan, and building permit approval process. 7.That there is sufficient landscaping and screening to ensure harmony and compatibility with adjacent property. The proposed development will meet all landscaping and tree preservation regulations under Subchapter 35.13.7, Tree Preservation and Landscape Requirements Standards, in the 8 Denton Development Code. In addition, the applicant proposes to provide a 50 foot landscape buffer along Windsor Street and Hinkle Drive and a 30 foot landscape buffer along the southern property boundary as shown on the site plan. 9 EXHIBIT 2 Location Map Site 10 EXHIBIT 3 Existing Zoning Map Site 11 EXHIBIT 4 Future Land Use Map Site 12 EXHIBIT 5 Notification Map íÈÛÑÔÚïÎÉÔ×ÔÚÜÉÔÎÏùÜÉØ     ïÈÐÛØË EXHIBIT 6 ôÏîÍÍÎÊÔÉÔÎÏ  ôÏ÷ÜÇÎË  ïØÈÉËÜÑ  EXHBIT 6 13 Exhibit 6 Site /Landscape plan 14 EXHIBIT 7 Site Photographs Photograph looking north from the subject property Photograph looking south from the subject property Photograph looking east from the subject property EXHIBIT 8 Letter From Applicant 16 EXHIBIT 9 Letters in Opposition 17 18 ̸·­ °¿¹» ´»º¬ ¾´¿²µ ·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§ò AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Planning and Development ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT S09-0006 (Rayzor Gas Wells): Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton, Texas, approving a Specific Use Permit to allow for gas well drilling and production on property located on a three (3) acre site on the west side of Bonnie Brae Street, north of Scripture Street, within the Town Center of the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District with a base zoning of Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU); and providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. (S09-0006) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of this request (4-0). BACKGROUND In accordance with Subsection 35.5.2.2 and 35.22.3 of the Denton Development Code (DDC), gas wells are permitted with an SUP within the NRMU zoning district. The Rayzor Ranch Town Center Overlay District, Ordinance Number 2008-284 also requires an SUP for gas well drilling and production. Per Subsection 35.6.4 of the DDC, an SUP may be granted if the proposed use conforms (or can be made to conform through the use of conditions) to the standards established in the NRMU zoning district. It has been determined that the proposed use will conform to the NRMU district subject to recommended conditions of approval and the Rayzor Ranch Town Center Overlay District restrictions. The property is currently undeveloped. The site plan submitted shows one access to the site which aligns with the future location of Panhandle Street. According to the applicant, the proposed access will be utilized temporarily until the portion of Panhandle which abuts the northern portion of the site is constructed. The Planning Department sent certified notices of the public hearing to five (5) property owners within 200 feet and twenty two (22) courtesy notices to residents within 500 feet of the subject property. As of this writing, staff received two (2) responses from property owners within 200 feet of the subject property in favor of the request. Public notification information is provided in Exhibit 5. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW On November 4, 2008, the City Council approved an Ordinance (Ord No 2008-284) amending the development standards for the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District to allow gas well drilling and production through the approval of a Specific Use Permit. June 17, 2009 Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing. This item was tabled from the August 4, 2009 City Council meeting. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Approve subject to conditions. 3. Deny. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. RECOMMENDATION approval The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends of this Specific Use Permit subject to the following conditions: 1. The approval of this Specific Use Permit shall not grant any waiver to the overlay conditions approved with Ordinance No. 2008-284. 2. The applicant shall install a screening fence along the northern, southern and western boundaries of the site and buffer on the portion of the site along Bonnie Brae Road. 3. , as conditioned, shall be constructed within 30 days after drilling operations are complete or planted during the first dormant season after drilling, if approved by the City Landscape Administrator. 4. If screening or landscaping is damaged or removed during fracturing or refracturing operations, the operator of the gas well shall be responsible for replacing the damaged or removed portions of the landscaping. 5. The site plan as submitted and shown in Exhibit 6 shall guide the development of gas wells on the subject site. 6. Prior to the issuance of a gas well permit and the commencement of operations, the operator shall submit a noise management plan to the Development Review Committee for review and approval, detailing how the equipment used in the drilling, completion, transportation, or production of the wells complies with the maximum permissible ambient noise levels. The maximum permissible ambient noise level shall not exceed ninety (90) decibels as measured three hundred (300) feet from the boundary of the drill site. 7. Prior to the issuance of a gas well permit, the operator shall be responsible for establishing and reporting to the City a continuous seventy-two (72) hour pre-drilling ambient noise level. The seventy-two (72) hour study shall include at least one twenty- four hour reading during a Saturday or Sunday. The operator shall use the prior established ambient noise level for the installation of any new noise generation equipment unless the operator can demonstrate that the increase in the ambient noise level is not associated with drilling and production activities located either on or off-site. 8. The sound level meter used in conducting noise evaluations shall meet the American associated recording and analyzing equipment which will provide equivalent data. 9. A citation may be immediately issued for failure to comply with these conditions. However, if the operator is in compliance with the approved noise management plan, and a violation still occurs, the operator will be given twenty-four (24) hours from notice of non-compliance to correct the violation from an identified source before a citation is issued. Additional extensions of the twenty-four (24) hour period may be granted in the event that the source of the violations cannot be indentified after reasonable diligence by the operator. 10. The operator of the gas well shall instruct and ensure that employees involve in the operation of the gas wells park vehicles on-site only. approval The Development Review Committee recommends of this Specific Use Permit as conditioned. EXHIBITS 1. Staff Analysis 2. Location Map 3. Existing Zoning Map 4. Future Land Use Map 5. Notification Information 6. Proposed Site Plan 7. Rayzor Ranch Overlay District Concept Plan 8. Rayzor Ranch Overlay District Master Site Plan 9. Site Photographs 10. Letter from Applicant 11. Letters of Consent from Property Owners 12. June 17, 2009 Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 13. Ordinance Prepared by: Nana Appiah, AICP Senior Planner Respectfully submitted: Mark Cunningham, AICP Director of Planning and Development EXHIBIT 1 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS CASE NO.: S09-0006 DATE TO BE CONSIDERED: August 18, 2009 LOCATION: West side of Bonnie Brae, north of Scripture Street. APPLICANT: Range Production Company 100 Throckmorton, Suite 1200 Forth Worth, TX 76102 OWNER: Allegiance Hillview, L.P 14881 Quorum Drive, Suite 950 Dallas, TX 75254 ZONING DISTRICT: The subject property is located within the Town Center of the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District with a base zoning of Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU). COMPREHENSIVE The subject site is located within the Neighborhood Centers future PLAN DESIGNATION: land use designation. SITE AND The site is currently undeveloped. SURROUNDINGS: North: Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU), Rayzor Ranch Overlay District Undeveloped land South: Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D), Rayzor Ranch Overlay District Undeveloped Land. East: Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) City of Denton McKenna Recreation Park/Single family homes. West: Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D), Rayzor Ranch Overlay District Undeveloped Land. BACKGROUND The property is located in the NRMU District and the Town Centers INFORMATION: of the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District. As a requirement of the Overlay District, gas well drilling and production are permitted with an SUP. ANALYSIS: Neighborhood Centers Comprehensive Plan The subject site is located in the Future Land Analysis: Use designation. Per the Denton Plan, new neighborhoods may develop in traditional patterns. Mixed-use and mixed housing types will be allowed to develop in a p In addition, Mixed-uses are recommended to be oriented inwardly, focusing on the center of the neighborhood. These neighborhoods will exemplify the interrelationship between quality of development, density, services and provision for adequate facilities. The plan also recommends that areas designated as Neighborhood Centers should contain uses necessary to support the surrounding neighborhood. The uses could include service-oriented retail such as small grocery, hair salon, dry cleaner or small professional offices. Residential uses may occur at higher densities with townhomes or residential flats located above service oriented uses. This request is for gas well drilling and production on approximately three acres. According to the applicant, the site will be reduced to two acres after drilling operations are complete. The remaining one acre will be reclaimed. According to the concept plan for the Rayzor Town Center Overlay District, single family attached units are proposed to the north and offices to the west and south of the subject site. The development of the site for gas well drilling and production will not impede the general purpose of the Neighborhood Centers. Development The property is located in the Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use Code/Zoning Analysis (NRMU) zoning district. The NRMU district is a subcategory of the Neighborhood Residential Land Use. Per Subsection 35.5.2.1 of the DDC, the purpose of the Neighborhood Residential land use is to preserve and protect existing neighborhoods and to ensure that any new development is compatible with existing land uses, patterns, and design standards. The property is also located within the Town Center of the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District. Per Subsection 35.7.13.8 of Ordinance Number 2008-284 of the Rayzor Ranch Overlay District, the NRMU regulations shall guide the development of the Town Centers within the Rayzor Ranch Overlay district. The property to the north, south and west are undeveloped. Approval of this request, subject to conditions, will not be detrimental to any existing residential development to the east. Per Section 3406 of the any residential development approved after the drilling and production of gas wells on the subject site shall be required to be set back a minimum of 300 feet from the wellheads to protect the development from any adverse affects of this request. The properties located to the east of the subject site, across Bonnie Brae Street include thark and a single family home. The active recreation area of the park is located approximately four hundred and fifty (450) feet and the single family home is located approximately two hundred and eighty four (284) feet from the proposed wellheads. Per Section 35.22.3.B of the DDC, written consent is required from property owners for the location of gas wellheads within two hundred and fifty (250) feet to five hundred (500) feet of a residential structure. The applicant has provided two signed consent agreement documents from residential structure property owners within 500 feet of the proposed gas wellhead sites (See Exhibit 11). DEPARTMENT AND The DRC reviewed this request for an SUP and provided relevant AGENCY REVIEW: comments to the applicant. All the DRC comments were addressed by the applicant. FINDINGS: Pursuant to Section 35.6.4.B of the DDC, a specific use permit shall be issued only if all of the following conditions have been met: 1.That the specific use will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity; Granting the SUP would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity. The proposed gas well drilling and production is part of the Rayzor Ranch Town Center Overlay district. Currently, the surrounding properties in the immediate vicinity to the north, south, and west are undeveloped. The current concept plan for the vicinity of the subject site of the Rayzor Ranch Overlay district shows proposed offices to the south and west and single family residential to the north. development shall be required to be set back a minimum of 300 feet from the gas wellheads. In addition, the current concept plan for the Rayzor Ranch Overlay designates the subject site for gas well development with an SUP. family home. According to the applicant waivers have been acquired from property owners located within 500 feet of the gas wellheads. 2.That the establishment of the specific use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property; Granting the SUP would not impede the normal and orderly development of the surrounding undeveloped property. There are proposed developments in the vicinity of the subject site. These developments shall be required to be set back a minimum of 300 feet from the gas wellheads. In addition, staff is recommending a Brae. This condition will reduce any negative impact this development may have on the surrounding properties. 3.That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary supporting facilities have been or will be provided; Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary supporting facilities have been assessed by the DRC and have been deemed adequate to support this use. 4.The design, location and arrangement of all driveways and parking spaces provides for the safe and convenient movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic without adversely affecting the general public or adjacent developments; The proposed gas well development will have one access onto Bonnie Brae Street. The DRC has reviewed the proposed vehicular access to the site and have determined that the proposed driveway to the site has been designed for the safe and convenient movement of vehicular traffic. 5.That adequate nuisance prevention measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration; Dust, noise and vibration will occur for a short period during the construction of the driveway, drilling, and completion of the gas wells. However, dust, noise and any vibration associated with the development of the site and drilling of the wells will be limited once the proposed development is completed. In addition, inance requires dust, noise, and odor control during construction. 6.That directional lighting will be provided so as not to disturb or adversely affect neighboring properties; and All new lighting will comply with the standards and regulations of Subchapter 13 in the Denton Development Code. This requirement will be met during the gas well plat approval review process. 7.That there is sufficient landscaping and screening to ensure harmony and compatibility with adjacent property. The proposed gas well development will meet all landscaping and tree preservation regulations in Section 35.13.7 of the DDC, Tree Preservation and Landscape Requirements Standards as modified by the Overlay District. In addition, staff is recommending a type along Bonnie Brae and a fence around the entire subject site. EXHIBIT 2 Location Map Site EXHIBIT 3 Existing Zoning Map NRMU NR-3 Site RCC-D EXHIBIT 4 Future Land Use Map Site EXHIBIT 5 Notification Map íÈÛÑÔÚïÎÉÔ×ÔÚÜÉÔÎÏùÜÉØ       ôÏîÍÍÎÊÔÉÔÎÏ ôÏ÷ÜÇÎË   ïØÈÉËÜÑ EXHIBIT 7 Rayzor Ranch Overlay District Concept Plan EXHIBIT 8 Rayzor Ranch Overlay District Master Site Plan EXHIBIT 9 Site Photographs Looking north towards subject property Looking south towards subject property EXHIBIT 10 Letter From Applicant EXHIBIT 11 Letters of Consent from Property Owners AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Finance ACM: Jon Fortune ______________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT Consider approval of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas placing a proposal on the September 22, 2009, City Council public meeting agenda to adopt a 2009 Tax Rate that will exceed the lower of the rollback rate or the effective tax rate; calling two public hearings on a tax increase to be held on September 8 and September 15, 2009 and calling a budget public hearing on the Fiscal Year 2009-10 Annual Program of Services of the City of Denton to be held on September 1, 2009; requiring publication of a notice of the public hearings in accordance with providing an effective date. BACKGROUND The Texas Constitution and Texas Property Tax Code require taxing units to comply with specific guidelines in adopting tax rates. The guidelines are related to a concept known as truth-in-taxation. This concept is a way to make taxpayers aware of tax rate proposals and allow tax payers in certain circumstances, to roll back or limit a tax increase. The truth-in-taxation guidelines require taxing entities to calculate and publish their effective and rollback tax rates. The effective rate is the calculated rate that would provide the taxing unit approximately the same amount of revenue it received in the previous year on properties taxed in both years. This rate excludes taxes on properties no longer in the taxing unit and also excludes any growth due to new property v effective rate is $0.710766/$100 valuation. The rollback rate is a calculated maximum tax rate amount prior to voter approval. The rollback rate divides the total property tax revenue into support for maintenance and operations (M&O) taxes and debt service taxes. It provides approximately the same amount to revenue it spent in the previous year for maintenance and operations expenses, plus an extra eight percent. If a taxing unit adopts a tax rate higher than the rollback rate, the voters have the option to petition for an election s 2009 rollback rate is $0.749135/$100 valuation. In compliance with state law, staff published the effective and rollback rate calculation in the Friday, August 7th Denton Record Chronicle. Agenda Information Sheet August 18, 2009 Page 2 The proposed 2009 tax rate is $0.66652/$100 valuation, which does not exceed the effective rate and remains unchanged from the 2008 tax rate. If the City Council considers adopting a tax rate that is higher than the recommended $0.66652 and exceeds the effective tax rate of $0.710766, state law would require the governing body to vote to place a proposal to adopt the rate on an agenda. In addition, state law requires that two public hearings be held on the proposed tax increase, with the second hearing occurring three to 14 days after the first. Publication of quarter- page notices informing the public of the hearings and the publication of a quarter-prior to the adoption of the tax rate are also required. states the percentage by which the proposed tax rate exceeds the lower of the rollback or effective tax rate, the dates of the two public hearings, and the date, time and location, including mailing address, where the governing body is scheduled to vote on the tax rate and the revenue comparisons. Besides publication in the Denton Record Chronicle, this notice would http://www.cityofdenton.com and air on the public access channel. In addition to the state requirements for the truth in taxation legislation, the City Charter and Chapter 102 of the Texas Local Government Code require the City Council to set a public hearing on the FY 2009-10 Annual Program of Services. In compliance with the Charter and Chapter 102, we are also required to publish a notice of the public hearing in the Denton Record Chronicle not th earlier than the 30th day or later than the 10 day before the date of the public hearing. The would need to be published in the Denton Record Chronicle. It would also need to be http://www.cityofdenton.com and air on the public access channel. The attached Notice of Public Hearing on the Tax Increase and Notice of Tax Revenue Increase have not been completed since staff has not yet been directed by Council to increase the proposed tax rate. These notices and this item have been included on the Council Agenda in the event that Council directs staff to propose a tax rate greater than the effective rate. If the Council does not direct staff to increase the proposed tax rate, this item will not be necessary. Further, if the th Council does not provide notice to increase the tax rate at the August 18 meeting, the truth in taxation guidelines will prevent the Council from increasing it at a subsequent meeting prior to the nd budget being adopted on September 22. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE August 18, 2009 Vote to Place Proposal on Future Agenda if the City Council Adopts a Tax Rate that Exceeds the Effective or Rollback Tax Rate September 1, 2009 Hold Public Hearing on the Budget September 8, 2009 Hold First Public Hearing on Tax Rate (If Necessary) September 15, 2009 Hold Second Public Hearing on Tax Rate (If Necessary) September 22, 2009 Adopt Tax Rate Agenda Information Sheet August 18, 2009 Page 3 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW On Thursday, August 6, 2009, the City Council was provided information regarding the proposed FY 2009-10 Proposed Budget, including the proposed tax rate. FISCAL INFORMATION The proposed tax rate is included in the FY 2009-10 Proposed Budget. EXHIBITS 1. Notice of Public Hearing on Tax Increase 2. Notice of Tax Revenue Increase 3. Notice of Public Hearing on Budget 4. Resolution Respectfully Submitted By: Bryan Langley Director of Finance    ê×Æ   îÍÈÓÙ×ÍÖìÇÚÐÓÙô×ÛÊÓÎÕÍÎèÛÄóÎÙÊ×ÛÉ× ÎÛÏ×ÍÖÈÛÄÓÎÕÇÎÓÈ èÔ×ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÅÓÐÐÔÍÐØÈÅÍÌÇÚÐÓÙÔ×ÛÊÓÎÕÉÍÎÛÌÊÍÌÍÉÛÐÈÍÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ÈÍÈÛÐÈÛÄ Ê×Æ×ÎÇ×ÉÖÊÍÏÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÓ×ÉÍÎÈÔ×ÈÛÄÊÍÐÐÓÎÈÔ×ÌÊ×Ù×ØÓÎÕÈÛÄÃ×ÛÊÚÃÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÌ×ÊÙ×ÎÈÌ×ÊÙ×ÎÈÛÕ×ÚÃÅÔÓÙÔÌÊÍÌÍÉ×Ø ÈÛÄÊÛÈ××ÄÙ××ØÉÐÍÅ×ÊÍÖÊÍÐÐÚÛÙÑÈÛÄÊÛÈ×ÍÊ×ÖÖ×ÙÈÓÆ×ÈÛÄÙÛÐÙÇÐÛÈ×ØÇÎØ×ÊùÔÛÌÈ×Ê èÛÄùÍØ×ãÍÇÊÓÎØÓÆÓØÇÛÐ ÈÛÄ×ÉÏÛÃÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ÛÈÛÕÊ×ÛÈ×ÊÍÊÐ×ÉÉ×ÊÊÛÈ×ÍÊ×Æ×ÎØ×ÙÊ×ÛÉ×Ø×Ì×ÎØÓÎÕÍÎÈÔ×ÙÔÛÎÕ×ÓÎÈÔ×ÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÍÖÃÍÇÊ ÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃÓÎÊ×ÐÛÈÓÍÎÈÍÈÔ×ÙÔÛÎÕ×ÓÎÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÍÖÛÐÐÍÈÔ×ÊÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃÛÎØÈÔ×ÈÛÄÊÛÈ×ÈÔÛÈÓÉÛØÍÌÈ×Ø ØÛÈ×ÛÎØÈÓÏ×Ï××ÈÓÎÕÌÐÛÙ× ØÛÈ×ÛÎØÈÓÏ×Ï××ÈÓÎÕÌÐÛÙ× èÔ×É×ÙÍÎØÌÇÚÐÓÙÔ×ÛÊÓÎÕÅÓÐÐÚ×Ô×ÐØÍÎÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÛÈÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ èÔ×Ï×ÏÚ×ÊÉÍÖÈÔ×ÕÍÆ×ÊÎÓÎÕÚÍØÃÆÍÈ×ØÍÎÈÔ×ÌÊÍÌÍÉÛÐÈÍÙÍÎÉÓØ×ÊÈÔ×ÈÛÄÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ÛÉÖÍÐÐÍÅÉ öíê ûõûóîéè ìê÷é÷îèÛÎØÎÍÈÆÍÈÓÎÕ ûúé÷îè èÔ×ÛÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÍÖÛÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ×ÔÍÏ×ÉÈ×ÛØÓÎÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÐÛÉÈÃ×ÛÊÅÛÉÛÆ×Ê ÛÕ×ÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÍÖÛÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ×ÔÍÏ×ÉÈ×ÛØÓÎÈÔ×ÈÛÄÓÎÕÇÎÓÈÖÍÊÈÔ×ÌÊ×Ù×ØÓÎÕÈÛÄÃ×ÛÊØÓÉÊ×ÕÛÊØÓÎÕÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ×ÔÍÏ× ÉÈ×ÛØ×Ä×ÏÌÈÓÍÎÉÛÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ×ÍÎÐÃÈÍØÓÉÛÚÐ×ØÌ×ÊÉÍÎÉÍÊÌ×ÊÉÍÎÉÃ×ÛÊÉÍÖÛÕ×ÍÊÍÐØ×ÊúÛÉ×ØÍÎÐÛÉÈÃ×ÛʪÉÈÛÄÊÛÈ× ÍÖÌÊ×Ù×ØÓÎÕÃ×ÛʪÉÛØÍÌÈ×ØÈÛÄÊÛÈ×Ì×Ê ÍÖÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÈÔ×ÛÏÍÇÎÈÍÖÈÛÄ×ÉÓÏÌÍÉ×ØÐÛÉÈ Ã×ÛÊÍÎÈÔ×ÛÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÔÍÏ×ÅÛÉÈÛÄÍÎÛÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÍÖÛÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ×ÔÍÏ×ÉÈ×ÛØÓÎÈÔ×ÈÛÄÓÎÕ ÇÎÓÈÖÍÊÈÔ×ÌÊ×Ù×ØÓÎÕÈÛÄÃ×ÛÊØÓÉÊ×ÕÛÊØÓÎÕÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ×ÔÍÏ×ÉÈ×ÛØ×Ä×ÏÌÈÓÍÎÉÛÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ×ÍÎÐÃÈÍØÓÉÛÚÐ×ØÌ×ÊÉÍÎÉÍÊ Ì×ÊÉÍÎÉÃ×ÛÊÉÍÖÛÕ×ÍÊÍÐØ×Ê èÔ×ÛÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÍÖÛÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ×ÔÍÏ×ÉÈ×ÛØÓÎÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÈÔÓÉÃ×ÛÊÓÉÛÆ×Ê ÛÕ×ÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÍÖÛÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ×ÔÍÏ×ÉÈ×ÛØÓÎÈÔ×ÈÛÄÓÎÕÇÎÓÈÖÍÊÈÔ×ÙÇÊÊ×ÎÈÈÛÄÃ×ÛÊØÓÉÊ×ÕÛÊØÓÎÕÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ×ÔÍÏ×ÉÈ×ÛØ ×Ä×ÏÌÈÓÍÎÉÛÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ×ÍÎÐÃÈÍØÓÉÛÚÐ×ØÌ×ÊÉÍÎÉÍÊÌ×ÊÉÍÎÉÃ×ÛÊÉÍÖÛÕ×ÍÊÍÐØ×ÊóÖÈÔ×ÕÍÆ×ÊÎÓÎÕÚÍØÃÛØÍÌÈÉÈÔ× ×ÖÖ×ÙÈÓÆ×ÈÛÄÊÛÈ×ÖÍÊÈÔÓÉÃ×ÛÊÍÖÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÌ×Ê ÍÖÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÈÔ×ÛÏÍÇÎÈÍÖÈÛÄ×ÉÓÏÌÍÉ×ØÈÔÓÉÃ×ÛÊÍÎÈÔ× ÛÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÔÍÏ×ÅÍÇÐØÚ×ÈÛÄÍÎÛÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÍÖÛÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ×ÔÍÏ×ÉÈ×ÛØÓÎÈÔ×ÈÛÄÓÎÕÇÎÓÈ ÖÍÊÈÔ×ÙÇÊÊ×ÎÈÈÛÄÃ×ÛÊØÓÉÊ×ÕÛÊØÓÎÕÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ×ÔÍÏ×ÉÈ×ÛØ×Ä×ÏÌÈÓÍÎÉÛÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ×ÍÎÐÃÈÍØÓÉÛÚÐ×ØÌ×ÊÉÍÎÉÍÊÌ×ÊÉÍÎÉ Ã×ÛÊÉÍÖÛÕ×ÍÊÍÐØ×Ê óÖÈÔ×ÕÍÆ×ÊÎÓÎÕÚÍØÃÛØÍÌÈÉÈÔ×ÌÊÍÌÍÉ×ØÈÛÄÊÛÈ×ÍÖÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÌ×Ê ÍÖÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÈÔ×ÛÏÍÇÎÈÍÖÈÛÄ×É ÓÏÌÍÉ×ØÈÔÓÉÃ×ÛÊÍÎÈÔ×ÛÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÔÍÏ×ÅÍÇÐØÚ×ÈÛÄÍÎÈÔ×ÛÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÍÖÛÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ× ÔÍÏ×ÉÈ×ÛØÓÎÈÔ×ÈÛÄÓÎÕÇÎÓÈÖÍÊÈÔ×ÙÇÊÊ×ÎÈÈÛÄÃ×ÛÊØÓÉÊ×ÕÛÊØÓÎÕÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÙ×ÔÍÏ×ÉÈ×ÛØ×Ä×ÏÌÈÓÍÎÉÛÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ×ÍÎÐÃÈÍ ØÓÉÛÚÐ×ØÌ×ÊÉÍÎÉÍÊÌ×ÊÉÍÎÉÃ×ÛÊÉÍÖÛÕ×ÍÊÍÐØ×Ê ï×ÏÚ×ÊÉÍÖÈÔ×ÌÇÚÐÓÙÛÊ××ÎÙÍÇÊÛÕ×ØÈÍÛÈÈ×ÎØÈÔ×Ô×ÛÊÓÎÕÉÛÎØ×ÄÌÊ×ÉÉÈÔ×ÓÊÆÓ×ÅÉ éÌ×ÙÓÛÐìÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎÉÓÖûÌÌÐÓÙÛÚÐ× ùÊÓÏÓÎÛÐòÇÉÈÓÙ×ïÛÎØÛÈ×ÇÉ×ÖÍÊÙÍÇÎÈÓ×ÉÓÖÛÌÌÐÓÙÛÚÐ× ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÓÎÈÔ×ÌÊ×ÆÓÍÇÉ ÏÍÎÈÔÉÚ×ÕÓÎÎÓÎÕÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÖÍÊÈÔ×ÏÛÓÎÈ×ÎÛÎÙ×ÛÎØÍÌ×ÊÛÈÓÍÎÉ ÙÍÉÈÍÖÑ××ÌÓÎÕÓÎÏÛÈ×ÉÉ×ÎÈ×ÎÙ×ØÈÍÈÔ×è×ÄÛÉø×ÌÛÊÈÏ×ÎÈÍÖùÊÓÏÓÎÛÐòÇÉÈÓÙ×ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝùÍÇÎÈà éÔ×ÊÓÖÖÔÛÉÌÊÍÆÓØ×ØÓÎÖÍÊÏÛÈÓÍÎÍÎÈÔ×É×ÙÍÉÈÉÏÓÎÇÉÈÔ×ÉÈÛÈ×Ê×Æ×ÎÇ×ÉÊ×Ù×ÓÆ×ØÖÍÊÊ×ÓÏÚÇÊÉ×Ï×ÎÈÍÖÉÇÙÔÙÍÉÈÉ ÷ÎÔÛÎÙ×ØóÎØÓÕ×ÎÈô×ÛÐÈÔùÛÊ×÷ÄÌ×ÎØÓÈÇÊ×ÉÇÉ×ÓÖÛÌÌÐÓÙÛÚÐ× èÔ×ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÉÌ×ÎÈÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÖÊÍÏÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÈÍÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÍÎ×ÎÔÛÎÙ×Ø ÓÎØÓÕ×ÎÈÔ×ÛÐÈÔÙÛÊ×ÛÈÈÔ×ÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ØÏÓÎÓÏÇÏ×ÐÓÕÓÚÓÐÓÈÃÉÈÛÎØÛÊØÉÐ×ÉÉÈÔ×ÛÏÍÇÎÈÍÖÉÈÛÈ×ÛÉÉÓÉÈÛÎÙ×öÍÊÈÔ×ÙÇÊÊ×ÎÈÈÛÄ Ã×ÛÊÈÔ×ÛÏÍÇÎÈÍÖÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ÛÚÍÆ×ÐÛÉÈÃ×ÛʪÉ×ÎÔÛÎÙ×ØÓÎØÓÕ×ÎÈÔ×ÛÐÈÔÙÛÊ××ÄÌ×ÎØÓÈÇÊ×ÉÓÉÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ    ê×Æ    îÍÈÓÙ× ÍÖèÛÄê×Æ×ÎÇ×óÎÙÊ×ÛÉ× èÔ×ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ÎÛÏ×ÍÖÈÛÄÓÎÕÇÎÓÈ ÙÍÎØÇÙÈ×ØÌÇÚÐÓÙÔ×ÛÊÓÎÕÉÍÎÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÛÎØÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ØÛÈ×ÍÖÉ×ÙÍÎØÔ×ÛÊÓÎÕ ÍÎÛÌÊÍÌÍÉÛÐÈÍÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ÈÔ×ÈÍÈÛÐÈÛÄÊ×Æ×ÎÇ×ÉÍÖÈÔ× ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ÎÛÏ×ÍÖÈÛÄÓÎÕÇÎÓÈ ÖÊÍÏÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÓ×ÉÍÎÈÔ×ÈÛÄÊÍÐÐÓÎÈÔ×ÌÊ×Ù×ØÓÎÕÃ×ÛÊ ÚÃÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÌ×ÊÙ×ÎÈ Ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈÛÕ× èÔ×ÈÍÈÛÐÈÛÄÊ×Æ×ÎÇ×ÊÛÓÉ×ØÐÛÉÈÃ×ÛÊÛÈÐÛÉÈÃ×ÛʪÉÈÛÄÊÛÈ× ÍÖÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÖÍÊ×ÛÙÔ ÍÖÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÅÛÉ ÈÛÄÊÛÈ×ÖÍÊÈÔ×ÌÊ×Ù×ØÓÎÕÃ×ÛÊ ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ÈÍÈÛÐÛÏÍÇÎÈÍÖÈÛÄ×ÉÓÏÌÍÉ×ØÖÍÊÈÔ×ÌÊ×Ù×ØÓÎÕÃ×ÛÊ èÔ×ÈÍÈÛÐÈÛÄÊ×Æ×ÎÇ×ÌÊÍÌÍÉ×ØÈÍÚ×ÊÛÓÉ×ØÈÔÓÉÃ×ÛÊÛÈÈÔ× ÌÊÍÌÍÉ×ØÈÛÄÊÛÈ×ÍÖÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÖÍÊ×ÛÙÔ ÍÖÈÛÄÛÚÐ× ÌÊÍÌÍÉ×ØÈÛÄÊÛÈ× ÆÛÐÇ××ÄÙÐÇØÓÎÕÈÛÄÊ×Æ×ÎÇ×ÈÍÚ×ÊÛÓÉ×ØÖÊÍÏÎ×ÅÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈà ÛØØ×ØÈÍÈÔ×ÈÛÄÊÍÐÐÈÔÓÉÃ×ÛÊÓÉ ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ÓÎÉ×ÊÈÛÏÍÇÎÈÙÍÏÌÇÈ×ØÚÃÏÇÐÈÓÌÐÃÓÎÕÌÊÍÌÍÉ×ØÈÛÄÊÛÈ×ÚÃÈÔ× èÔ×ÈÍÈÛÐÈÛÄÊ×Æ×ÎÇ×ÌÊÍÌÍÉ×ØÈÍÚ×ÊÛÓÉ×ØÈÔÓÉÃ×ÛÊÛÈÈÔ× ÌÊÍÌÍÉ×ØÈÛÄÊÛÈ×ÍÖÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÖÍÊ×ÛÙÔ ÍÖ ÌÊÍÌÍÉ×ØÈÛÄÊÛÈ× ÈÛÄÛÚÐ×ÆÛÐÇ×ÓÎÙÐÇØÓÎÕÈÛÄÊ×Æ×ÎÇ×ÈÍÚ×ÊÛÓÉ×ØÖÊÍÏÎ×Å ÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃÛØØ×ØÈÍÈÔ×ÈÛÄÊÍÐÐÈÔÓÉÃ×ÛÊÓÉ ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ÓÎÉ×ÊÈÛÏÍÇÎÈÙÍÏÌÇÈ×ØÚÃÏÇÐÈÓÌÐÃÓÎÕ ÌÊÍÌÍÉ×ØÈÛÄÊÛÈ×ÚÃÙÇÊÊ×ÎÈÈÍÈÛÐÆÛÐÇ× èÔ×ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ÕÍÆ×ÊÎÓÎÕÚÍØÃÍÖÈÔ×ÈÛÄÓÎÕÇÎÓÈ ÓÉÉÙÔ×ØÇÐ×ØÈÍÆÍÈ×ÍÎÈÔ×ÈÛÄÊÛÈ×ÈÔÛÈÅÓÐÐÊ×ÉÇÐÈÓÎÈÔÛÈÈÛÄ ÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ÛÈÛÌÇÚÐÓÙÏ××ÈÓÎÕÈÍÚ×Ô×ÐØÍÎÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ØÛÈ×ÍÖÏ××ÈÓÎÕ ÛÈÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÛÈÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ ÐÍÙÛÈÓÍÎÍÖÏ××ÈÓÎÕÓÎÙÐÇØÓÎÕÏÛÓÐÓÎÕÛØØÊ×ÉÉÈÓÏ×ÍÖÏ××ÈÓÎÕ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON BUDGET The City Council for the City of Denton, Texas, will hold a public hearing on the Fiscal Year 2009-10 Annual Program of Services (Budget), on Tuesday, September 1, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, located at 215 East McKinney Street in Denton, Texas, 76201. The meeting will be held for the purpose of receiving community input on the Budget. THIS BUDGET WILL RAISE MORE TOTAL PROPERTY TAXES THAN LAST YEARS BUDGET BY $243,612, or 0.58%, AND OF THAT AMOUNT $1,864,151 IS TAX REVENUE TO BE RAISED FROM NEW PROPERTY ADDED TO THE TAX ROLL THIS YEAR. All interested citizens are encouraged to attend and express their views. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CM: George Campbell, City Manager SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing a contract for election services with Denton County, Texas, performed by and through its Election Administrator to conduct a November 3, 2009 election concerning amendments to the City of Denton Charter; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND In order to hold a Charter election on November 3, 2009, the City must contract with Denton County to provide election services and functions to hold a joint election on that date. Sections 31.092 and 31.093 of the Texas Election Code allows for such a contract. Don Alexander, Denton County Elections Administrator, will provide coordination and supervision of the election through the City Secretary’s Office. FISCAL INFORMATION Estimated cost of the election is $15,996.40. Costs of services are prorated for ballots based on the City of Denton precincts voting. Costs of labor and election supplies are split 50/50 with Denton County or other calculated rate if additional jurisdictions participate within the City of Denton boundaries. The City pays 100% of all programming fees. Respectfully submitted: Jennifer Walters City Secretary Denton County Elections Administration November 3, 2009 Constitutional Amendment Election Early Voting Locations Dates and Times Monday - Friday October 19 – 23 8:00a – 5:00p Monday – Wednesday October 26 – 28 8:00a – 5:00p Thursday – Friday October 29 – 30 7:00a – 7:00p Steven Everett Copeland Government CenterLewisville Municipal Annex 1400 FM 424, Cross Roads 1197 W. Main Street, Lewisville Justin Municipal Building Carrollton Public Library 415 N. College, Justin 4220 N. Josey, Carrollton Joseph A. Carroll Admin. Building Frankford Town Homes 401 W. Hickory, Denton 18110 Marsh Ln., Dallas North Texas State Fair Grounds – Fair Hall Flower Mound Police and Court Building 2217 N Carroll Blvd., Denton 4150 Kirkpatrick, Flower Mound Highland Village City HallLake Dallas City Hall 1000 Highland Village Rd., Highland Village 212 Main Street, Lake Dallas Friendship Baptist Church Sanger First Baptist Church th 4396 Main, The Colony 708 S. 5 St., Sanger The following early voting sites will ONLY be open the dates and times listed: Frisco Lakes Amenities Center Monday – Wednesday October 26 – 28 8:00a – 5:00p 7277 Frisco Lakes Dr., Frisco Thursday – Friday October 29 – 30 7:00a – 7:00p Roanoke Community Center Monday – Tuesday October 19-20 1:00p – 5:00p 312 S. Walnut, Roanoke Thursday – Friday October 22-23 1:00p – 5:00p Monday – Tuesday October 26-27 1:00p – 5:00p Thursday – Friday October 29-30 1:00p – 5:00p Trophy Club MUD 100 Municipal Drive, Trophy Club Thursday – Friday October 29 – 30 7:00a – 7:00p THE STATE OF TEXAS II CONTRACT FOR COUNTY OF DENTON ELECTION SERVICES CITY OF DENTON BY THE TERMS OF THIS CONTRACT made and entered into by and between the City of Denton, as duly authorized by the City Council hereinafter referred to as the Council, serving by and through its City of Manager, as duly authorized by the Council, and Denton County, Texas acting by and through its Elections Administrator hereinafter referred to as the Contracting Officer, pursuant to the authority of Section 31.091, of the Texas Election Code, agree to the following particulars in regard to coordination, supervision and running of the City of Denton, November 3, 2009, Charter Election in Denton County. THIS AGREEMENT is entered into in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises hereinafter set out. IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: I. DUTIES AND SERVICES OF CONTRACTING OFFICER. The Contracting Officer shall be responsible for performing the following duties and shall furnish the following services and equipment: A. The Contracting Officer shall arrange for appointment, notification (including writ of election), training and compensation of all presiding judges, alternate judges, the judge of the Central Counting Station if required and judge of the Early Voting Balloting Council. a. The Contracting Officer shall be responsible for notification of each Election Day and early voting presiding judge and alternate judge of his or her appointment. The presiding election judge of each polling place will use his/her discretion to determine when additional manpower is needed during peak voting hours. The Contracting Officer will determine the number of clerks to work in the Central Counting Station and the number of clerks to work on the early voting ballot board. The Contracting Officer with the approval of the Council shall utilize election judges appointed by the Denton County Commissioners Court. b. The Contracting Officer shall compensate each election judge and worker. Each judge and worker shall receive compensation per hour for services rendered based on rates set by Denton County Commissioners Court. c. Election Judges shall attend the Contracting Officer’s school of instruction (Elections Seminar) to be held October 31, 2009 in the Denton County Administration Building, 401 West Hickory, Denton 76201 or other location to be announced at 9:00 a.m. d. Election judges shall be responsible for picking up and returning election supplies. Compensation for this pickup and return will be $25.00. B. The Contracting Officer shall procure, prepare, and distribute ballots, election kits and election supplies. - 1 - a. The Contracting Officer shall secure election kits that include the legal documentation required to hold an election and all supplies including locks, pens, magic markers, etc. b. The Contracting Officer shall secure all tables, chairs, duplication ballots, and legal documentation required to run to the central counting station and/or early voting ballot board. c. The Contracting Officer shall provide all lists of registered voters required for use on Election Day and for the early voting period required by law. The Election Day list of registered voters shall be arranged in alphabetical order by polling place in lieu of alphabetic by each precinct in each polling place. The Contracting Officer may use the computer database for the list of registered voters during early voting. d. The Contracting Officer shall procure and arrange for the distribution of all election equipment and supplies required to hold an election. 1. Equipment includes the rental of voting machines, ballot boxes, transfer cases, voting signs, and directional poles and tote boxes. 2. Supplies include ballots, sample ballots, early voting mail ballots, pens, tape, markers, etc. C. The Elections Administrator of Denton County, Texas, shall be appointed the Early Voting Clerk by the City of Denton for the election in Denton County. a. The Contracting Officer shall supervise and conduct Early Voting by mail and in person and shall secure personnel to serve as Early Voting Clerks. b. Early Voting by personal appearance for the City of Denton November 3, 2009, Charter Election in Denton County shall be conducted on weekdays beginning Monday, October 19, 2009, and continuing through Friday, October 30, 2009. Times are as th follows: October 19, 2009 through October 28th, 8:00am to 5:00pm; October 29 through October 30th, 7:00am through 7:00pm. Locations and times of voting by personal appearance shall be as per Denton County Elections Memo at Annex B. c. All applications for an Early Voting mail ballot shall be received and processed by the Denton County Elections Administration Office, P.O. Box 1720, Denton, Texas 76202. 1. Applications for mail ballots erroneously mailed to the City of Denton shall immediately be faxed to the Contracting Officer for timely processing. The original application shall then be forwarded to the Contracting Officer for proper retention 2. All Federal Post Card applications (FPCA) will be sent a mail ballot. No postage is required. d. All Early Voting ballots (those cast by mail and those cast by personal appearance) shall be prepared for count by the Early Voting Ballot Board in accordance with Section 87.000 of the Texas Election Code. The presiding judge of this Board shall be ____TBA________. The Board shall meet for preparation of the early voting ballots on (as ordered by Commissioners Court.) D. The Contracting Officer shall arrange for the use of all Election Day polling places. The City of Denton shall assume the responsibility of remitting 50% of the cost of all employee - 2 - services required to provide access, provide security, or provide custodial services for the early voting and election day polling locations used that are located within the City, Denton, Denton County Texas. E. The Contracting Officer shall be responsible for tabulation of the voted ballots in accordance with Section 127.000 of the Election Code and of this agreement. Counting Station Manager shall be the Elections Administrator of Denton County, Texas. The Tabulation Supervisor and Tabulation Operator shall be provided by the Denton County Elections Administration Office and paid as a contract expense. a. The tabulation supervisor shall prepare, test and run the county’s tabulation system in accordance with statutory requirements and county policies, under the auspices of the Contracting Officer. b. The Public Logic and Accuracy Test of the electronic voting system shall be (will be given at a later date) conducted on by the Contracting Officer. (This date is subject to change based on receipt of jurisdiction ballot information and programming. If date is changed, you will be notified at least 48 hours prior to test) c. Election night reports will be available to Council at the Elections Office on election night. d. The Contracting Officer shall prepare the unofficial canvass report after all precincts have been counted, and will provide a copy of the unofficial canvass to the Council as soon as possible after all returns have been tallied. e. The Contracting Officer shall be appointed the custodian of the voted ballots and shall retain all election material for a period of 22 months. 1. Pending no litigation and as prescribed by law, the voted and unused ballots shall be shredded or recycled 22 months after the election. 2. The Council can obtain the list of registered voters from the Elections Administration Office during this retention period. Pending no litigation and if the Council does not request the lists, the Contracting Officer shall destroy them 22 months after the election. f. The Contracting Officer shall conduct a partial manual count as prescribed by Section 127.201 of the Texas Election Code and submit a written report to the Council in a timely manner. The Secretary of State may waive this requirement. If applicable, a written report shall be submitted to the Secretary of State as required by Section 127.201(e) of the aforementioned code. II. Duties and Services of the Council . The Council shall assume the following responsibilities: A. The Council shall prepare the election orders, resolutions, notices, justice department submissions, official canvass and other pertinent documents for adoption by the appropriate office or body. a. The Contracting Officer shall publish and post the Notice of the Public Logic and Accuracy Test of the electronic voting system and one press release. The Contracting Officer shall also prepare a certification of tabulation and an unofficial canvass reports that will assist the Council with the official canvass. - 3 - b. The Council assumes the responsibility of posting all notices and likewise posting the schedules for Early Voting and Election Day. B. The Council shall provide the Contracting Officer with the ballot wording and Spanish interpretation. a. The Council shall deliver to the Contracting Officer as soon as possible, but no later than 10:00am Friday, September 4, 2009, the official wording in English and Spanish for the Council’s November 3, 2009, Charter Election. b. The Council shall approve the “blue line” ballot format prior to the final printing. C. The Council shall post the publication of election notice by the proper methods with the proper media. D. The Council shall prepare and submit to the U.S. Department of Justice under the Federal Voting Rights act of 1965, any required submissions on voting changes. E. The Council shall compensate the Contracting Officer for any additional election costs incurred in the process of running this election or for a re-count this election may require. F. The Council shall submit with this signed contract a deposit of 90% of the estimated election cost. The contract will not be accepted without this deposit. G. The Council shall pay a prorated cost of conducting the said election, plus the 10% administrative fee, pursuant to the Texas Election Code, Section 31.100, within 30 days from the date of final billing. H. The Council shall provide the Contracting Officer with a “final” list of the jurisdictions allowed to vote in this election. This list will be provided to the Contracting Officer no (Date/Time will be provided at a later time). later than III. Cost of Services. Costs of services will be prorated for ballots based on the City of Denton precincts voting. The City of Denton will reimburse 50% of ballot printing costs. Costs of labor and election supplies will be split 50/50 with Denton County or other calculated rate if additional jurisdictions participate in the City of Denton, City area of Denton County. The City of Denton will pay 100% of all programming fees. See Annex A attached. IV. General Provisions. - 4 - A. Nothing contained in this contract shall authorize or permit a change in the officer with whom or the place at which any document or record relating to the Council’s November 3, 2009, Charter Election is to be filed or the place at which any function is to be carried out, or any nontransferable functions specified under Section 31.096 of the Texas Election Code. B. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will provide copies of all invoices and other charges received in the process of running said election for the Council. C. If the Council cancels their election pursuant to Section 2.053 of the Texas Election Code, the Contracting Officer shall be paid a contract preparation fee of $75. An entity canceling an election will not be liable for any further costs incurred by the Contracting Officer in conducting the November 3, 2009, Charter Election. D. The Contracting Officer shall file copies of this contract with the County Judge and the County Auditor of Denton County, Texas. WITNESS BY MY HAND THIS THE __________ DAY OF ____________________, 2009. DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS By: ______________________ Don Alexander Elections Administrator Denton County, Texas WITNESS BY MY HAND THIS THE __________ DAY OF ____________________, 2009. ____________________________________ George C. Campbell Denton City Manager - 5 - AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: August 18, 2009 DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CM: George Campbell, City Manager SUBJECT Consider nominations/appointments to the City’s Boards and Commissions. BACKGROUND The following boards/commissions require nominations: Construction Advisory and Appeals Board – nomination from Council Member Engelbrecht. Historic Landmark Commission – a nomination from Council Member Watts and an “All” position for the entire Council. Zoning Board of Adjustment – two “All” alternate positions for the entire Council. If you require any further information, please let me know. Respectfully submitted: Jennifer Walters City Secretary S:\City Secretary\Boards & Comm\Agenda Info Sheet for Vacancies 8-4-09.doc S AOur DocumentslOrdinanccs1091SchoolZone Ldoc SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, the official newspaper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2009. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: P'~~ ~ L)'n i7~5 < Page 2 of 2