Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
December 8, 2009 Agenda
AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL December 8, 2009 After determining that a quorum is present, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas will convene in a Work Session on Tuesday, December 8, 2009 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Work Session Room at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: WORK SESSION 1. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding projects to be th included in Denton’s 111 Congress, 2nd Session Congressional Priority Project requests. 2. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the proposed City of Denton Health and Wellness Center. 3. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the annexation of eighteen (18) proposed areas including the costs related to providing municipal services. Following the completion of the Work Session, the City Council will convene in a Closed Meeting to consider the specific items listed below under the Closed Meeting section of this agenda. 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. CLOSED MEETING 1. Closed Meeting A. 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 property within the Denton Rail Corridor to the DART or 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 DART or DCTA. Consultation with the City’s attorneys regarding legal issues associated with the granting of said property 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. City of Denton City Council Agenda December 8, 2009 Page 2 Following the completion of the Closed Meeting, the Council will consider the following in Open Session: 1.PUBLIC HEARING A.Continuation of a public hearing on the Sale of the Denton Branch Rail Trail Corridor owned by the City of Denton to the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Authority (DART) for the purposes of reactivation of a rail line between Denton and Carrollton and consideration of an ordinance granting approval for the sale and transfer of the Denton Branch Rail Trail from approximately Mile Post 721.89 to Mile Post 729.5 for the purpose of a commuter railroad in accordance with Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code; and providing an effective date. 2. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION A.Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, authorizing the City Manager to execute a Contract of Sale by and between the City of Denton, Texas (“City”) and the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Authority (“DART”) transferring the Denton Rail Corridor, consisting of those lands described in that certain Quitclaim, dated August 9, 1993, County Clerk File No. 93-R0058485, as corrected by Correction Quitclaim Deed, dated June 1, 2001, County Clerk File No. 2001-R0057561, and as corrected by Correction to Correction Quitclaim Deed, dated June 28, 2001, County Clerk File No. 2001-R0076013, all recording references to the Real Property Records of Denton, Texas. B.Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, expanding and extending the term of a right of entry and possession, dated March 3, 2009, as extended on May 5, 2009, as extended and expanded on June 23, 2009, as extended and expanded on September 1, 2009, as extended on September 15, 2009, and as extended and expanded on September 22, 2009 and as extended on November 3, 2009 (as amended and extended, the “Right of Entry”) in favor of the Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) and authorizing DCTA to enter upon and take possession of certain real property of the City of Denton for the purpose of performing activity as described in the Right of Entry; and providing and effective date. 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 WORK SESSION ROOM IS ACCESSIBLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. THE CITY WILL PROVIDE SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED MEETING. PLEASE CALL THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 349-8309 OR USE TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING 1-800-RELAY-TX SO THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY’S OFFICE. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: December 8, 2009 DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CM/DCM/ACM: George C. Campbell, City Manager SUBJECT: Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding projects to be included in th Denton’s 111 Congress, 2nd Session Congressional Priority Project requests. BACKGROUND: Since fiscal year 2003, Denton has submitted priority project requests to our congressional delegation for discretionary funding based on the needs of the community and the appropriateness for federal consideration. Many of Denton’s initial requests were for transportation projects because of the delay in the reauthorization of TEA-21 and the need for improved roadways to handle Denton’s growing population. Denton requested funding assistance so that projects could be expedited to meet growing vehicular traffic. Since our first submission, Denton has diversified its request and to date has received in excess of $13.67 million in federal discretionary funds. However, these funds are becoming increasingly difficult to obtain due to the growing number of requests and a reduction of discretionary funding levels. Additionally, increased information and detail must now be provided to congressional representatives with each submitted project request. Most federal agencies require that the recipients of congressional discretionary funds submit a proposal for approval by the agency before the funds will be released. Generally, successful congressional discretionary funded projects receive between $100,000 and $1 million over a period of one to three years. thnd In preparation for compiling Denton’s 111 Congress, 2 Session congressional priorities, staff reviewed our project funding needs, as well as the FY 2010 congressional priority project requests. Below are staff’s recommended projects and funding amount for the City Council’s consideration. RECOMMENDATIONS: The recommendation from boards, committees and staff is that City Council approves these four thnd recommended projects as our 111 Congress, 2 Session Congressional Priorities. Airport Operating Safety Enhancements$890,000 Downtown Development Improvements $2,065,000 Public Safety Training Facility/Technology $200,000 DME AMI/Smart Grid Project $1,000,000 thnd 111 Congress, 2 Session Congressional Priority Projects December 8, 2009 Page 2 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW: The Airport Advisory Board has reviewed the Airport Operating Safety Enhancements request. The Public Utility Board has approved the Denton Municipal Electric (DME) AMI/Smart Grid Project. Respectfully submitted: John Cabrales Jr. Public Information/Intergovernmental Relations Officer th Attachment: 111 Congress, 2nd Session Congressional Priorities ùÓÈà íÖÖÓÙÓÛÐÉ ïÛÃÍÊ ïÛÃÍÊ ìÊÍ è×Ï ùÍÇÎÙÓÐÏ×ÏÚ×Ê ùÍÇÎÙÓÐÏ×ÏÚ×Ê ùÍÇÎÙÓÐÏ×ÏÚ×Ê ùÍÇÎÙÓÐÏ×ÏÚ×Ê ùÍÇÎÙÓÐÏ×ÏÚ×Ê ùóèã éèûöö ùÓÈà ïÛÎÛÕ×Ê ûÉÉÓÉÈÛÎÈ ùÓÈà ïÛÎÛÕ×Ê ûÉÉÓÉÈÛÎÈ ùÓÈà ïÛÎÛÕ×Ê ûÉÉÓÉÈÛÎÈ ùÓÈà ïÛÎÛÕ×Ê öÍÊ ÏÍÊ× ÓÎÖÍÊÏÛÈÓÍÎ ÌÐ×ÛÉ× ÙÍÎÈÛÙÈ èÛÚÐ× ÍÖ ùÍÎÈ×ÎÈÉ ìêíò÷ùèé ìûõ÷ ìÊÓÍÊÓÈà ìÊÍÒ×ÙÈÉ èÔ× îÍÊÈÔ è×ÄÛÉ ûÓÊÌÍÊÈ ÍÖ ùÔÍÓÙ× Ü»²¬±² ß·®°±®¬ øÜÌÑ÷ Ñ°»®¿¬·²¹ Í¿º»¬§ Û²¸¿²½»³»²¬ ø÷îèíî ïçîóùóìûð ûóêìíêè ø÷îèíî ïçîóùóìûð ûóêìíêè éÛÖ×Èà ÛÎØ é×ÙÇÊÓÈà ÷ÎÔÛÎÙ×Ï×ÎÈÉ öÇÎØÉ Î××Ø×Ø ÈÍ ÙÍÏÌÐ×È× ÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈÉ î ÈÔ ùíîõê÷éé ÎØ é×ÉÉÓÍÎ öÍÊ ÏÍÊ× ÓÎÖÍÊÏÛÈÓÍÎ ÌÐ×ÛÉ× ÙÍÎÈÛÙÈ ûÓÊÌÍÊÈ í å×ÉÈÚÍÇÎØ ÆÓ×Å ÍÖ ôÓÙÑÍÊà éÈ ÛÈ ú×ÐÐ ûÆ× Ü»²¬±² ܱ©²¬±©² Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ ׳°®±ª»³»²¬æ Ø·½µ±®§ ͬ®»»¬ ݱ®®·¼±® Ю±¶»½¬ ø÷îèíî øíåîèíåî ø÷æ÷ðíìï÷îè óïìêíæ÷ï÷îèé ûÊÈÓÉÈ Ê×Ø×Î×ÊÓÎÕ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ïÇÐÈÓÏÍØÛÐ èÊÛÎÉÓÈ öÛÙÓÐÓÈà ì ÈÔ ùíîõê÷éé ÎØ é×ÉÉÓÍÎ ûÊÈÓÉÈ Ê×ÎØ×ÊÓÎÕ ÍÖ ÌÍÉÉÓÚÐ× ÓÏÌÊÍÆ×Ï×ÎÈÉ ÈÍ ôÓÙÑÍÊà éÈÊ××È øíåîèíåî ø÷æ÷ðíìï÷îè óïìêíæ÷ï÷îèé ôÓÙÑÍÊà éÈÊ××È ùÍÊÊÓØÍÊ ìÊÍÒ×ÙÈ öÇÎØÉ Î××Ø×Ø ÈÍ ÙÍÏÌÐ×È× öÍÊ ÏÍÊ× ÓÎÖÍÊÏÛÈÓÍÎ ÌÐ×ÛÉ× ÙÍÎÈÛÙÈ øÍÅÎÈÍÅÎ ø×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈ ÷ÛÉÈÚÍÇÎØ ÆÓ×Å ÍÖ ôÓÙÑÍÊà éÈ ÛÈ ú×ÐÐ ûÆ× ë Ü»²¬±² λ¹·±²¿´ Ы¾´·½ Í¿º»¬§ Ì®¿·²·²¹ Ú¿½·´·¬§ ø×ÎÈÍÎ ê×ÕÓÍÎÛÐ ìÇÚÐÓÙ éÛÖ×Èà èÊÛÓÎÓÎÕ öÛÙÓÐÓÈà ê ÈÔ ùíîõê÷éé ÎØ é×ÉÉÓÍÎ ûÊÈÓÉÈ Ê×ÎØ×ÊÓÎÕ ÍÖ ÙÐÛÉÉÊÍÍÏ ÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕ ìÊÍÌÍÉ×Ø ÉÓÈ× ÌÐÛÎ ÖÍÊ ê×ÕÓÍÎÛÐ ìÇÚÐÓÙ éÛÖ×Èà èÊÛÓÎÓÎÕ öÛÙÓÐÓÈà ø×ÎÈÍÎ ê×ÕÓÍÎÛÐ ìÇÚÐÓÙ éÛÖ×Èà èÊÛÓÎÓÎÕ öÛÙÓÐÓÈà ûØÆÛÎÙ×Ø è×ÙÔÎÓÙÛÐ î××ØÉ ÷íù ÙÍÏÌÇÈ×ÊÉ ÛÎØ ÌÊÓÎÈ×ÊÉ æÓØ×Í ÉÇÊÆ×ÓÐÐÛÎÙ× ÙÛÏ×ÊÛÉ èÍÈÛÐ ìÇÚÐÓÙ éÛÖ×Èà é Ü»²¬±² Ó«²·½·°¿´ Û´»½¬®·½ ßÓ×ñͳ¿®¬ Ù®·¼ Ю±¶»½¬ ø×ÎÈÍÎ ïÇÎÓÙÓÌÛÐ ÷Ð×ÙÈÊÓÙ ûïó éÏÛÊÈ õÊÓØ ìÊÍÒ×ÙÈ è ÈÔ ùíîõê÷éé ÎØ é×ÉÉÓÍÎ ø×ÎÈÍÎ ïÇÎÓÙÓÌÛÐ ÷Ð×ÙÈÊÓÙ ÷ËÇÓÌÏ×ÎÈ ìÊÓÙ× ëèã èÍÈÛÐ èÍÈÛÐ öÇÎØÉ Ê×ËÇ×ÉÈ×Ø ÖÍÊ ìÊÍÒ×ÙÈ öÍÊ ÏÍÊ× ÓÎÖÍÊÏÛÈÓÍÎ ÌÐ×ÛÉ× ÙÍÎÈÛÙÈ ø×ÎÈÍÎ ïÇÎÓÙÓÌÛÐ ÷Ð×ÙÈÊÓÙ ç AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: December 8, 2009Questions regarding this report may be directed to DEPARTMENT: Finance/Risk Management Scott Payne at 349-7836 ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding the proposed City of Denton Health and Wellness Center. BACKGROUND The increasing cost of providing health benefits to employees, retirees and their respective dependents continues to be an ongoing challenge for most organizations. With the cost of medical care and prescription drugs continuing to increase at a faster rate than inflation, employers are faced with decisions to reduce benefits, increase premiums, or both, in order to pay for the rising cost of health care. -2010 budget, it was highlighted that while medical and prescription costs are projected to increase at a rate of 10% or more each year, the City has planned to increase its portion of the health plan funding by 6%. This gap will have to be made up through plan changes and increases in employee and retiree contribution levels. Several changes are already being implemented to take effect January 1, 2010. These include increases in Specialist and Emergency Room co-payments, an average 8.5% increase in monthly premiums and changes to the prescription drug program. Another cost cutting measure that was discussed during the budget process was the creation of a Health and Wellness Center, or Clinic, for all employees, retirees and dependents (members) that -funded health program. The clinic would provide high quality, low/no cost primary medical care services for those that choose to access it. The concept of employee clinics has been around for many years provided and focused more on occupational injuries. Over the last ten years or so, the scope of these clinics has expanded to function much like a family dependents. The theory is that by turning a component of the costs associated with health care into a fixed cost, employers can essentially provide the service more cost effectively than they can provide the benefit. Every office visit that can be diverted from the medical community generates hard dollar savings for the public entity. Agenda Information Sheet December 1, 2009 Page 2 For example, if the average cost to the plan for a physician annual operating cost for the clinic is $500,000, then it would take 4,167 office visits to break even. Spread over 253 operating days in a year, the hypothetical medical staff would need to see 16.47 patients per day. Of the clinics surveyed (See Exhibit 2), the average number of patients being seen is approximately 26 per day. And while this number is affected by the size of the medical staff, the number of exam rooms and other factors, 26 patients per day would generate an additional $300,000 in savings in this example. On a $10,000,000 health plan, that would equate to a 3% savings. And while that level of savings certainly helps to decrease the overall medical trend, there is still the potential for even greater, though harder to measure, savings that can be realized through a clinic. In other words, it is hard to quantify the heart attack that never occurs or the cost savings related to a member who never becomes an insulin dependent diabetic due to the intervention and medical management by the clinic staff. Areas where additional savings can occur include: Disease management many family practices simply have too many patients to be effective in the area of disease management. They do not have sufficient time to do regular follow up with those patients that are trying to manage a chronic disease condition like asthma, diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure/cholesterol, etc. Or if they are able to follow up, it may require many repeated office visits at the cost of $20 per being compliant with treatment programs. By removing the cost barrier, by making care easier to access, by having a manageable patient case load that allows for follow-up and developing a personal relationship with a physician, the clinic can have a major impact on the costs associated with chronic care. Wellness initiatives the clinic would provide for a mechanism to connect members to wellness opportunities at the point in time where it is most meaningful. If a member receives a new diagnosis of high blood pressure, high cholesterol, or diabetes the clinic would be able to refer members directly to wellness and/or disease specific programs that and other partners/resources. One potential staffing model for the clinic could include a designated Wellness Coach that could assist members with diet, nutrition, fitness and ongoing wellness outreach efforts. Medication prescribing patterns the medical staff of the clinic only have to worry about one prescription drug formulary instead of multiple formularies. This will allow them to become intimately familiar with which drugs are on what tiers in order to prescribe medications that have the best clinical outcomes while maximizing member and plan savings. In situations where there are no generic equivalents available for a specific drug, the clinic staff can prescribe a generic from within the same therapeutic class of drugs. It also without the need for intervention at the retail pharmacy level. Agenda Information Sheet December 1, 2009 Page 3 Physician and facility referrals the medical staff at the clinic will develop relationships with providers and facilities in the medical community. While the clinic can deliver high quality, basic medical care, the clinic will still need to make referrals out to orthopedics, cardiologists, diagnostic testing facilities and laboratories. These referrals will be made to those providers that also deliver high quality, cost effective services and will not be influenced by other factors. Accessibility for some employees, even the current $20 office visit copayment can be a barrier to them getting an annual wellness exam or accessing care when they are sick. cost barrier and by committing to see members at their scheduled appointment time, we can improve the access to basic medical care and thereby improve the overall health of our members. Absenteeism and presenteeism by increasing accessibility as indicated above, we can greatly reduce absenteeism and presenteeism related to illness. Additionally, by reducing wait times to see a medical professional we can reduce the time away from work to attend medical appointments. Resource for other medical related services the clinic can potentially be used for services like drug test specimen collection, pre-employment physicals, fire & police physicals, basic laboratory and x-rays and other procedures that are currently being contracted for. many employees do not have a true family physician and rely on facilities like Minor Emergency, CareNow or even the Emergency Room for their basic health care needs. By offering no cost, accessible health care services, the clinic has the opportunity to become a medical home for employees. This will result in better outcomes through prevention measures based on early detection and management of chronic conditions The idea for a clinic is certainly not on the of innovation as there are already many examples of public entity clinics in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area and throughout Texas. The cities of Abilene, Carrollton, Garland, Odessa, Rockwall and San Angelo all have very successful single entity programs while the City of Mesquite and the Mesquite ISD have partnered to create a joint clinic that includes a full service pharmacy. While providing essentially the same basic services, each clinic is still unique in terms of how it delivers the care and what ancillary services it offers. In many of the entities, the medical staff that runs the clinic are actually employees of the public entity, while others have contracted with companies that specialize in operating clinics to provide that service. Some clinics are staffed by doctors and some are staffed by passistants and/or nurse practitioners overseen by a Agenda Information Sheet December 1, 2009 Page 4 contracted Medical Director. Two of the above mentioned clinics (San Angelo and Mesquite) also have a fully staffed pharmacy that is run by the entity while another (Garland) will be providing basic X-ray services later in the year. In addition, the triage of on-the-job injuries, basic lab work, pre-employment drug testing, pre-employment and Fire/Police physicals is being performed by some clinics. There appea regarding the setup and scope of the clinic operation. Much depends on the goals, objectives and size of the organization. By turning these expenses into a fixed cost, it is important to be able to spread those costs over a sufficient number of patients in order to maximize savings. With approximately 3,000 members and almost 6,900 physician office visits in 2008, the City of Denton is large enough to support a clinic. However, if the City could find another entity (or entities) to partner with like the City of Mesquite and Mesquite ISD did, we would certainly be able to build a bigger clinic, with a larger medical staff and deliver additional services such as lab, X-ray and pharmacy. To that end, we have had preliminary discussions with Denton County and Denton ISD. Both entities have expressed interest in the idea and would like to have additional meetings to discuss the concept in greater detail. While the idea of building a bigger and better clinic is exciting, since both Denton County and Denton ISD have more members in their respective health programs than the City does, there is the risk that a program that was established to save the City money and provide a benefit to the City health plan members may become a DISD or Denton County program. In addition to the discussions with potential partners, we have presented the idea of an employee clinic to our employees in budget meetings, at a Leadership Team meeting, and in each of the open enrollment meetings that were recently held. We also included a question about the clinic in a wellness survey we conducted during the Employee Benefits & Wellness Fair. Of the 465 employees who completed the survey, 82% indicated that they were in favor of and would utilize an employee clinic. The most frequent questions we hear about the clinic are concerns that it will be mandatory to safeguarded and not shared with supervisors. There is no intention to make the clinic mandatory but to be an option for employees who may not have a primary care physician or who need to get in to see a physician more quickly. As for the PHI question, we will need to continue to assure the employees that every precaution that any physicians office would take to safeguard their PHI will be followed by the employee clinic staff and that the HIPAA laws still apply. Another comment that has been expressed is the concern that during these tough economic times where the City is looking at reducing costs, can we really afford to add the additional staff and infrastructure costs necessary to set up and run a first class employee health clinic? In order to address this concern we will need to continue the education process and show the hard dollar Agenda Information Sheet December 1, 2009 Page 5 savings and the potential savings by implementing a clinic. Unfortunately, even during times of economic uncertainty, the cost for medical care and prescription drugs continues to increase. These concerns, along with the many options that are available to develop an employee health clinic, all must be addressed. The purpose of this discussion with Council was to take a broad look at the concept of an employee health clinic and all the various models for how the service can be delivered. If the City Council still believes this is a worthwhile endeavor for us to pursue then we will begin having more detailed discussion with Denton County and Denton ISD on the size and scope of the clinic and continue the work to develop a budget, timeline and pro forma for the project to present to Council in early 2010. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The concept of a Health and Wellness Center has been discussed with the City Council during several of the FY 2009-2010 budget presentations. However, this is the first formal discussion of the topic. FISCAL INFORMATION The full cost to setup and operate a Health and Wellness Center is still being developed and will be presented to Council at a future meeting. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 PowerPoint Presentation Exhibit 2 Clinic Survey Spreadsheet Respectfully submitted: ______________________________ Scott Payne Risk Manager AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: December 8, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Planning ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT 2009 Annexation Plan Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding the annexation of eighteen (18) proposed areas including the costs related to providing municipal services. BACKGROUND On Tuesday, October 6, 2009, via a City Council work session, staff recommended the annexation of 17 areas totaling approximately 7,869 acres of land within the City of Denton Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ). The areas staff recommended included (except those with annexation agreements 15, 16, & 17), PAA2S, PAA3 and PAA4. During the work session, it was determined that PAA1 (containing approximately 1,165 acres) should also be considered for annexation due to its close proximity to the Denton Municipal Airport. At the conclusion of the presentation, the City Council directed staff to proceed with the process of annexing the aforementioned 18 areas, totaling approximately 9,035 acres. During the October 6, 2009 City Council work session, staff explained that Texas Local Government Code (Tx.LGC) §43.056 sets forth the requirements for the provision of municipal services for land that must be placed in a 3-year Annexation Plan, while Tx.LGC §43.065 establishes the requirements for the provision of services to land proposed for annexation but are exempted for the requirement of being placed in a 3-year Annexation Plan. In essence, both sections of the Tx.LGC requires the City to prepare a service plan that provides for to the annexed area no later than two and one-half (2½) years after the effective date of the annexation unless: (1)the City cannot reasonably provide certain services within that period; and (2)the City proposes a schedule for providing the services that extends not longer than four and one-half (4½) years after the effective date of the annexation. Id. at §43.056(b). Tx.LGC §43.056(c) defines "full municipal services" as "services provided by the annexing municipality within its full-purpose boundaries, including water and wastewater services and excluding gas or electrical service." Level of Services: Per Tx.LGC §43.056.(f).(3)., the Service Plan may not provide for services to the annexed area that would reduce the level of fire, police and emergency medical services within the city. In addition, the Service Plan must provide the annexed areas with a level of services comparable to or superior to the level of services available in other parts of the city with land-uses and population densities similar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in the area. However, if the area had a level of service equal to the services provided within the corporate boundaries of the city, the Service Plan must maintain that same level of services. Finally, if the annexed area had a level of service for maintaining the infrastructure of the area superior to the level of services provided within the city, the Service Plan must maintain the infrastructure of the annexed area at a level of services that is equal or superior to the level of services previously enjoyed in the annexed area. Id. at Tx.LGC §43.056(g). Immediate Services: The City is required to provide the following services on the effective date of the annexation: (1)Police protection; (2)Fire protection/EMS; (3)Solid waste collection; (4)Operation and maintenance of water and wastewater facilities in the annexed area that are not within the service area of another water or wastewater utility; (5)Operation and maintenance of roads and streets, including road and street lighting; (6)Operation and maintenance of parks; and (7)Operation and maintenance of any other publicly owned facility, building or service. At the conclusion of the presentation of the information germane to the provision of municipal services, the City Council requested that staff prepare a presentation regarding the anticipated cost of providing the services. Anticipated Cost to Serve Areas Proposed for Annexation: Due to the fact that several acres of the areas proposed for annexation will be subject to a development agreement in accordance with Tx.LGC §43.035, it is difficult to accurately state or to even estimate how much of the proposed 9,035 acres will be immediately annexed. Therefore, at this time, it is equally difficult to accurately state or estimate the cost to provide full municipal services. However, this report identifies the type of improvements, some potential costs, and cost factors of providing the level of services mandated by Tx.LGC §43.056 and §43.065. It also addresses anticipated new, additional, or upgrades to existing facilities that most likely will become necessary to manage the anticipated impact on public facilities. Keeping the above stated unknowns in mind, staff offers the following summary. Departments Anticipated Cost to Serve $238,500.00 Police To Be Determined Wastewater Utilities $367,405 Engineering and Transportation $167,511 Traffic Operations Signs and Markings $15,087,330 Parks and Recreation To Be Determined Water Utilities $52,800 Library Services $117,032 Code Enforcement $16,030,578 Total Page - 2 COST TO SERVE AREAS PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION The following is a more detailed department-specific analysis of the previous cost summary. PD OLICE EPARTMENT The areas proposed for annexation are either currently surrounded by existing police districts (as in the case of the donut holes) or are undeveloped property not serviced by the police department. Response times and service delivery within the donut holes would have little impact on current response times and service delivery. In some cases the district officer is currently driving through the proposed donut holes to respond to calls for service. The areas proposed for annexation along I-35 North (PAA2S, PAA3, and PAA4) will require additional police officers to maintain average response times and police patrols. Officers currently respond mostly to daytime traffic safety related concerns in the areas near the proposed areas. In addition, officers typically respond to calls related to disabled or abandoned vehicles. The proposed annexation will however, increase the call load and require an additional northern sector unit on each of the two (2) day shifts. One additional police vehicle can be shared by the officers. Therefore, with a slight personnel increase, the Police Department should be able to handle increased calls in all the areas proposed for annexation. The anticipated average response times for these areas are based on current department conditions and are illustrated in the following table: POLICE DEPARTMENT 2009 Annexation Classification Estimated Response Time Appropriate Response Time Priority7 minutes6 minutes Non-Priority14 minutes12 minutes Average17 minutes 16 minutes Cost to Serve Areas Proposed for Annexation Item Estimated Cost Two Police Officers $179,000 One Police Vehicle $59,500 Total $238,500 If all of the proposed areas are annexed, two (2) additional police officers and one (1) additional police vehicle will be required to meet the above appropriate average response times. The cost of each police officer is estimated to be $89,500 per officer (including salary, benefits, equipment, uniforms, training, and police academy), and the cost of the police vehicle is estimated at $59,500. There will be no need for any additional police stations or other facilities as a result of the proposed annexation, provided the clation does not exceed 130,000. This is based on an optimum officer to population ratio of two (2) Police Officers per 1,000 residents. Page - 3 PR ARKS AND ECREATION The Parks and Recreation Department has determined that the following existing neighborhood parks and recreational facilities are capable of serving the associated areas that are proposed for annexation: DH 1, 3-7 and DH-14 Denia Park and Recreation Center, Cross Timbers Park, Southlakes Park, Lake Forrest Park, Joe Skiles Park, and Water Works Park; DH-2 City of Krum parks, LBJ National Grasslands, North Lakes Park and Recreation Center, North Point, and Water Works Park; DH 8-DH-12 Mack/Roberts, MLK, Fred Moore, Milam, Briarcliff, Avondale, and Water Works Park; and PAA1, PAA2S, PAA3, PAA4, and DH-13 City of Krum Parks, LBJ National Grasslands (Wise Co.), North Lakes Park and Recreation Center, North Pointe, Clear Creek nature Center and Water Works Park. Notwithstanding the above existing facilities and provisions, it is anticipated that the proposed annexation will require funding to provide additional public facilities and the maintenance thereof. These facilities include neighborhood park(s), a recreation center(s), community park(s), city park(s), and the mowing of rights-of-way. It is also anticipated that the Parks and Recreation Department will need additional FTEs to maintain the facilities. The exact number and types of facilities, as well as the total FTEs that will be required are based on population. Per the adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan, the following additional park facilities will be needed to adequately serve the areas proposed for annexation: PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT Cost to Provide Adequate Public Facilities 2009 Annexation Minimum Unit Per Capita Required Facility Requirement Cost Ratio Cost Neighborhood Park (per acre) 5 $40,000 2.5/1,000 $200,000 Maintenance $5,375 $26,875 Recreation Center (per sq. ft.) 40,000 $250 1,000/1,000 $10,000,000 Maintenance $12 $464,000 Community Park (per acre) 16 $90,000 3-5/1,000 $1,440,000 Maintenance $6,987 $111,792 City Park (per acre) 25 $100,000 5-10/1,000 $2,500,000 Maintenance $6,987 $174,675 1 Mowing of ROW (miles) 30.22 $1,125 $169,988 Total $15,087,330 Page - 4 1 Right-of-way mowing is performed five (5) times annually, and is reflected in the above identified cost. It is also important to note that the City will be responsible for right-of-way mowing immediately upon annexation. It is also anticipated that the following additional personnel will be needed to properly serve the areas proposed for annexation: Neighborhood Park 0.21 FTE per 1,000 population; Community Park 0.42 FTE for per 1,000 population; City Park 0.83 FTE per 1,000 population; and Facilities 0.15 FTE per 1,000 square feet. F/EMS IRE There will be no additional cost to provide Fire/EMS services to the areas proposed for annexation since the City already serves most of the areas that are proposed for annexation. It has also been determined that no additional fire stations are required. However, the City stands to lose approximately $20,000 in revenue from Denton County that is currently being paid for fire/EMS services. ET NGINEERING AND RANSPORTATION The following table identifies the existing roads that will be impacted by the proposed annexation in terms of needed improvements or upgrades. Also identified is the associated $367,405 estimated cost per road to maintain current level of service. The total estimated cost is . ENGINEERING AND TRANSPORTATION Cost to Provide Municipal Services - 2009 Annexation Area St. Name Length CL. LN. Estimated Cost (GIS L.F.) Mile Mile PAA2S HAMPTON 45 0.01 0.02 $174.65 JACKSON 1,225 0.23 0.56 $4,754.30 LOVERS LN. 6,910 1.31 3.14 $26,818.13 MASCH BRANCH RD 4,437 0.84 2.02 $17,220.27 PAA3 BARTHOLD 10,011 1.9 4.55 $38,853.30 PAA4 BONNIE BRAE ST. 6,852 1.3 3.11 $26,593.03 GANZER 10,807 2.05 4.91 $41,942.62 MILAM RIDGE 2,630 0.5 1.2 $10,207.19 DH-1 JOHN PAINE 3,809 0.72 1.73 $14,782.96 DH-3 DAKOTA 978 0.19 0.44 $3,795.68 $5,142.41 SHELBY 1,325 0.25 0.6 CORBIN RD. 3,296 0.62 1.5 $12,791.98 SPRINGSIDE 1,832 0.35 0.83 $7,110.10 DH-4 BONNIE BRAE ST. 5,954 1.13 2.71 $23,107.83 Page - 5 Area St. Name Length CL. LN. Estimated Cost (GIS L.F.) Mile Mile DH-9 HICKORY 309 0.06 0.14 $1,199.25 HILLTOP 336 0.06 0.15 $1,304.04 OAK 663 0.13 0.3 $2,573.14 MEADOW 413 0.08 0.19 $1,602.88 SHILOH 1,655 0.31 0.75 $6,423.16 SWISHER 5,958 1.13 2.71 $23,123.36 EDWARDS 2,104 0.4 0.96 $8,165.75 DH-12 ARCHER 272 0.05 0.12 $1,055.65 BLAGG 4,354 0.82 1.98 $16,898.14 CUNNINGHAM 2791 0.53 1.27 $10,832.04 GEESLING 1,782 0.34 0.81 $6,916.05 GRISSOM 1,209 0.23 0.55 $4,692.20 MILLS 7,211 1.37 3.28 $27,986.33 TRINITY 5,498 1.04 2.5 $21,338.07 Total $367,405 94,666 feet 18 miles 43 miles Length = GIS Centerline Length (Lineal Feet) CL Mile = Mile (Lineal Feet divided by 5280 feet) LN. Mile = Length (Lineal Feet) x roadway width (24Ft average) divided by 10 feet (travel lane) divided by 5280 feet (mile) Estimated Cost (based on current Denton County costs) does not include equipment cost to perform current level of service It is anticipated that a maintenance crew of four (4) additional FTEs and one (1) additional Pothole Truck will be needed for maintenance purposes as a result of the proposed annexation. There are no improvements presently scheduled to be done at state or federal expense, nor are there any anticipated drainage improvements that will require local funding. There is no bridge or transportation facility information available from current maintenance entities at this time. The following table identifies the potential cost for placing signs and roadway markings along existing roads The total estimated $167,511 cost is . TRAFFIC OPERATIONS SIGNS AND MARKINGS Cost to Provide Municipal Services - 2009 Annexation Areas Location Future Needs Anticipated Cost PAA1 On ROW As development occurs. $1,216.00 PAA2S On ROW As development occurs. $70,815.00 PAA3 On ROW As development occurs. $470.00 PAA4 On ROW As development occurs. $29,352.00 DH-1 On ROW As development occurs. $235.00 DH-2 On ROW As development occurs. $10,084.00 DH-3 On ROW As development occurs. $500.00 DH-4 On ROW As development occurs. $21,016.00 DH-5 On ROW As development occurs. $0.00 DH-6 On ROW As development occurs. $0.00 Page - 6 Areas Location Future Needs Anticipated Cost DH-7 On ROW As development occurs. $0.00 DH-8 On ROW As development occurs. $0.00 DH-9 On ROW As development occurs. $10,010.00 DH-10 On ROW As development occurs. $0.00 DH-11 On ROW As development occurs. $566.00 DH-12 On ROW As development occurs. $23,247.00 DH-13 On ROW As development occurs. $0.00 DH-14 On ROW As development occurs. $0.00 Total $167,511.00 WU ATER TILITIES All the proposed annexation areas are within the City of Denton Water Service Area as defined by Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) Number 10195 as issued by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). In addition to the aforementioned, with regards to PAA2S and PAA3, the Bolivar Water Supply Corporation is dually certified in portions of these areas under CCN Number 11257. There is a known private water supply system in DH-9 area that serves the Green Tree Estates subdivision that is not recognized by the TCEQ as an active public water supply system or retailer. There is no CCN approved by the TCEQ for providing retail water service for this private water system. In addition, there is an inactive Water CCN holder (Number 12627) referred to as the Susie Lane Water System located in DH- 12. The following table identifies the existing water lines in the areas proposed for annexation; the location of the closest water lines if none are located within the proposed areas; the future needs of the proposed areas based on the C 2008 Water Distribution System Master Plan Upgrades Through 2032; and the anticipated date of constructing those lines. When possible to do so, the anticipated costs of constructing the water lines are also provided. WATER UTILITIES Cost to Provide Municipal Service - 2009 Annexation Proposed Existing Water Location of Nearest Future Needs Date Cost Areas Lines Within Area Water Line (Master Plan) PAA1 None 16" along Masch Branch 16" & 24" along Tom Between To Be Determined Rd. on the north end of Cole Road, Jim Christal 2017 and Airport, approximately Rd. and C Wolf Rd. 2032 3,300' away PAA2S 16" along FM 1173 N/A An additional 16" along 2017 To Be Determined and 8" along Lovers Ln. Hampton Rd. PAA3 16" along FM 1173 N/A 16" along I-35 Service Between To Be Determined Rd, Ganzer Rd. & 2017 and Masch Branch Rd. 2032 PAA4 16" along I-35 N/A 16" & 24" along FM 2017 To Be Determined Service Rd. and 12" 3163 along FM 3163 Page - 7 Proposed Existing Water Location of Nearest Future Needs Date Cost Areas Lines Within Area Water Line (Master Plan) DH-1 None 16" at the SE corner of 20" along FM 2449 2012 To Be Determined I-35W and FM 2449, approximately 4,050' away. DH-2 None 12" along Masch Branch 16" and 30" along Jim 2032 To Be Determined Rd. south of Hwy. 380, Christal Rd. approximately 1,500' away. DH-3 12" along Corbin Rd. N/A 12" along Spring Side 2017 To Be Determined and 8" along Shelby XX. Ln. DH-4 16" along Vintage N/A None N/A To Be Determined Blvd. and 24" along Bonnie Brae St. DH-5 16" along Hwy 377 N/A 20" along Country Club 2017 To Be Determined Rd. DH-6 8" line N/A 12" along northern edge To Be Determined of proposed annexation area DH-7 12" and 8" along N/A None N/A To Be Determined Teasely Ln. & along FM 2181. DH-8 12" along Edwards N/A None N/A To Be Determined Rd. DH-9 12" along Swisher N/A None N/A To Be Determined Rd. and 8" along Shiloh Rd. DH-10 None 12" along Trinity Rd. 12" along FM 426 2012 To Be Determined just south of Grissom Rd., approximately 1,500' away DH-11 None 12" along Orr Rd. 2017 To Be Determined 16" along the north side of FM 426, approximately 100' away DH-12 12" along Mayhill N/A 12" along Mills Rd., 2012, 2017 To Be Determined Rd. at Audra Ln., and along eastern edge of and 2032 16" along FM 426 Billy Ryan HS, and Grissom Rd. Geesling Rd. and Mayhill Rd. DH-13 None 42" along Loop 288 at 24" along FM 2164. 2017 To Be Determined N. Locust (FM 2164), approximately 3 miles away. DH-14 12" along Robinson N/A 20" along Robinson Rd. 2017 To Be Determined Rd. Page - 8 WWU ASTEATER TILITIES All the proposed annexation areas are within the City of Denton Sewer Service Area as defined by Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) Number 20072 as issued by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). The accepted employee to population ratio to adequately serve ALL the areas proposed for annexation is one (1) FTE per 1,738 residents. It is anticipated that a total of 2,136 residents will be immediately added to the c population is based on a ratio of 2.67 residents per household. The following table identifies the existing wastewater facilities within the areas proposed for annexation; the location of the closest wastewater facilities if none are located within the proposed areas; the future needs of the proposed areas based on the C Wastewater Collection System Upgrades Through 2032; and the anticipated date of constructing those facilities. When possible to do so, the anticipated costs of constructing the facilities are also provided. WASTEWATER UTILITIES Cost to Provide Municipal Service - 2009 Annexation Proposed Existing Waste Location of Nearest Future Needs Date of Anticipated Areas Water Lines Waste Water Line (Master Plan) Construction Cost Within Area PAA1 None Hickory Creek 24" wastewater line Between 2009 To Be Interceptor. 12" along Aeronica, just and 2013 Determined wastewater along south of Tom Cole Aeronica, just south of intersection Tom Cole intersection, approximately 3,200' away PAA2S None 8" wastewater line None N/A along Lariat Rd. PAA3 None Border Cowboy Lift Between 2017 To Be Station located along wastewater lines, and and 2018 Determined Barthold, just west of I-wastewater treatment 35 stop at Hills of Denton and will have to be extended to PAA4. PAA4 None Union 76 Lift Station 2017-2018 To Be located at Elm St., just wastewater lines, and Determined east of I-35, wastewater treatment approximately 1,600' away stop at Hills of Denton and will have to be extended to PAA5 Page - 9 Proposed Existing Waste Location of Nearest Future Needs Date of Anticipated Areas Water Lines Waste Water Line (Master Plan) Construction Cost Within Area DH-1 None 15" Wastewater line Hickory Creek 2009-2013 To Be located along Corbin Interceptor. 27" Determined Rd. between Spring crossing Corbin Rd. Side and Shelby, between Spring Side approximately 7,100' and Shelby away. DH-2 21" wastewater line - N/A N/A N/A To Be Hickory Creek Determined Interceptor, just south of University Dr. DH-3 15" wastewater line N/A Hickory Creek 2009-2013 To Be (Hickory Creek Interceptor Size 27 " Determined Interceptor) from just located just west of west of Corbin Rd./I-Corbin Rd./I-35W 35W Interchange. Interchange DH-4 24" wastewater line N/A Hickory Creek 2014-2018 To Be Hickory Creek Interceptor Size 36" Determined Interceptor located just just east of Vintage east of Vintage Subdivision. Subdivision. DH-5 27" Hickory Creek N/A Hickory Creek 2009-2013 To Be Interceptor located at Interceptor Size 42" Determined Country Club Rd. along Country Club crossing. Dr. DH-6 8" wastewater line N/A None N/A To Be Determined DH-7 Two 15" and a 10-inch N/A None N/A To Be Determined along Teasley Lane, the proposed annexation area. DH-8 21" and 24" sewer N/A State School 2009-2013 To Be lines located along Old Interceptor Size: 48" Determined Edwards Rd. sewer line along Old Edwards Rd. DH-9 None 8" sewer line along State School 2019-2030 To Be Swisher Rd., and Interceptor Size: 48" Determined existing force-main sewer line located along Pockrus Page Rd. 2,600' north of the 8" main located at east proposed annexation boundary line of area. annexation area. The existing force main is located 30' south of proposed annexation area. Page - 10 Proposed Existing Waste Location of Nearest Future Needs Date of Areas Water Lines Waste Water Line (Master Plan) Construction Within Area DH-10 None 8" sewer line along East Lakeview Interceptor 2014-2018 To Be McKinney St., Size 10" sewer line Determined approximately 2,500' along FM 426, away. approximately 2,700' west of proposed annexation area. DH-11 10", 12", 15", 21", and N/A Lakeview Interceptor 2009-2013 To Be 42" sewer lines. Size: sewer line Determined within the proposed annexation area. DH-12 6" sewer line along 30-" sewer line at NW Lakeview Interceptor 2014-2018 To Be Trinity Rd. corner of Prominence 10" sewer line along Determined and Mayhill, Trinity Rd. approximately 200' west of the proposed annexation area. DH-13 None 12" sewer line along Wastewater facilities 2017-2018 To Be Loop 288 at Stuart Determined Road, approximately 2 wastewater lines, and miles from proposed wastewater treatment annexation area. stop at Hills of Denton and will have to be extended to PAA4. DH-14 10" sewer line State School 2009-2013 To Be Interceptor Size - 30" Determined sewer line along Robinson Road, approximately 750' west of the proposed annexation area. SW OLID ASTE : Cost to Serve To accommodate the recent growth experienced by both residential and commercial collection service operations within the city, an additional route truck and driver were added in FY 2009. This addition has enabled the Solid Waste Department to provide adequate collection service for both the anticipated residential and the limited commercial accounts that will result from the areas proposed for annexation. As such, no additional vehicles or personnel will be required to service the proposed areas. Current Residential Rates vary based on the amount of each size cart in service at any given time and the number of active accounts being serviced. The standard cart size provided to a Page - 11 residential customer is a 60-gallon cart. Based on unaudited FY2009 Solid Waste Fund year-end expense information, the anticipated cost of service is $21.65 per month. Existing garbage and recycling collection service providers may continue to provide service to the customers for which there is a current service contract, for a period of no greater than two (2) years or until the end of the current contract term. All other customers will be provided service by the City upon annexation. Revenue Projection: Estimated revenue and expense per year for the first three (3) years after annexation is estimated to be: Year One $56,574; Year Two $113,169; and Year Three $171,468 DME ENTON UNICIPAL LECTRIC Multiple electric service providers are certified by the Public Utilities Commission of Texas (PUCT) to provide electric service to areas surrounding the city of Denton. Denton Municipal Electric (DME) is certified to serve portions of these areas in the ETJ. DME currently provides service within some of the areas proposed for annexation and has adjacent facilities or provides service to adjacent areas. Electric service can be provided to all the areas proposed for annexation in accordance with the DME Electric Service Guidelines as development occurs in and around the areas, with the exception of DH-13 where DME is not certified to provide electric service. The Service Guidelines also detail the DME line extension policy and allowance given to developers based on the anticipated level of service and load requirements. revenue justified depending on density and load. DME costs for providing service to the areas will be revenue funded and it is anticipated to be without impact to the existing customer base. Providing electric service is based on certification boundaries set by the PUCT and is not contingent on annexation. The following table highlights the current location of electrical services, future areas-specific needs, and potential DME responsibilities upon annexation. Page - 12 DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC Cost to Provide Municipal Service - 2009 Annexation Proposed Location of Electrical Services Future Needs Potential Date of Areas Responsibilities Construction PAA1 DME currently provides service to Distribution Street Lights As development areas adjacent to the proposed Facilities occurs annexation with facilities in the ROW of the street bordering the north boundary. PAA2S DME currently provides service to Distribution Street Lights As development areas adjacent to the proposed Facilities occurs annexation with facilities in the ROW of street bordering the south boundary. PAA3 DME does not currently provide Distribution Street Lights As development electric service within the proposed Facilities occurs annexation area. DME provides service across I-35 from the proposed annexation area. PAA4 DME does not currently provide Distribution Street Lights As development electric service within the proposed Facilities occurs annexation area. DME nearest DH-1 DME has facilities within the Distribution Street Lights As development proposed annexation area. Facilities occurs DH-2 DME currently provides service to Distribution Street Lights As development portions of the proposed annexation Facilities occurs area and adjacent areas. DH-3 DME currently provides service to Distribution Street Lights As development portions of the proposed annexation Facilities occurs area and adjacent areas. DH-4 DME currently has facilities within Distribution Street Lights As development the proposed annexation area and Facilities occurs adjacent areas. DH-5 DME currently has facilities located Distribution Street Lights As development within the proposed annexation area. Facilities occurs DH-6 DME currently has facilities located Distribution Street Lights As development within the proposed annexation area Facilities occurs and provides service to all adjacent areas. DH-7 DME currently provides service Distribution Street Lights As development within the proposed annexation area Facilities occurs and provides service to adjacent areas. DH-8 DME currently has facilities located Distribution Street Lights As development within the proposed annexation area. Facilities occurs Page - 13 Proposed Location of Electrical Services Future Needs Potential Date of Areas Responsibilities Construction DH-9 DME currently has facilities along Distribution Street Lights As development the ROW of the streets bordering the Facilities occurs proposed annexation area and provides service to adjacent areas. DH-10 DME does not currently provide Distribution Street Lights As development electric service within the proposed Facilities occurs annexation area. DME nearest DH-11 DME currently provides electric Distribution Street Lights As development service to areas adjacent to the Facilities occurs proposed annexation area. DH-12 DME currently provides service to Distribution Street Lights As development areas within and adjacent to the Facilities occurs proposed annexation area. DH-13 DME is not certified to provide Distribution Street Lights N/A service within the proposed Facilities annexation area. DH-14 DME currently provides service to Distribution Street Lights As development areas surrounding the proposed Facilities occurs annexation area. OSI THER ERVICE MPACT While not required by Tx.LGC §43.056 nor §43.065, it is important to note that the proposed annexation will impact the funding and resources currently allocated to other City departments such as Library Services, Code Enforcement and Community Development. Therefore, the following is provided. CD OMMUNITY EVELOPMENT After reviewing the areas proposed for annexation, it appears that the only significant affect on the Community Development Dbudget will be funding of the Minor Repair Program. This is due to the fact that DH-7 has a significant number of mobile homes which may be in need of repairs. However, based on the current number of units completed annually, this would only be an increase of two to three (2-3) units or approximately $15,000 in funding. D allocation of Community Development Block Grant funds is different each year; therefore, the funding available for programs like the Minor Repair Program is not known until the Federal allocation amounts are announced. CE ODE NFORCEMENT All of the areas proposed for annexation are not currently inhabited; nonetheless, they will need to be monitored regularly as uninhabited land is most likely to have abandoned structures, tall grass and weeds, and illegal dumping including piles of tires and junk vehicles. Based upon a field inspection of all the proposed areas, it is determined that approximately eighty-two (82) Page - 14 On November 16, 2009, staff performed site inspections of the areas identified to be annexed. During the inspection, approximately seventy five (75) substandard structures were identified. In addition, while all the areas proposed for annexation have violations, two (2) areas were found to be extremely distressed, i.e. severe dilapidation with numerous health and safety concerns. Two (2) additional areas also have major issues to be addressed, such as zoning issues, outside storage and junk vehicle violations, substandard primary or accessory structures, and lack of improved parking surfaces. If the goal is to provide the same level of code enforcement service in the proposed annexed areas as currently exists within the city (i.e. review of each property every two- to-three weeks), then two (2) additional Code Enforcement Officers will be needed to adequately address the needs in the newly-annexed areas. One (1) officer could begin in FY10-11 after the annexation nd of the exempted areas, while the second (2) officer could begin when DH7, DH9, and DH12 are annexed in 2013. Based on FY 09-10 cost estimates, the total expenditure for each additional officer is $77,032.00. An additional $40,000 will be needed for demolition of substandard structures and the associated costs of securing vacant structures, clearing of lots, performing title searches, posting Construction Advisory and Appeals Board hearing information in the Denton Record Chronicle, and regular and certified mail notifications to property owners. LS IBRARY ERVICES The estimated additional funding, personnel and materials needed to adequately serve the areas proposed for annexation is $52,800. This amount is based on the additional population figure of 2,136 which is based on a ratio of 2.67 residents per household. As the C currently maintaining a ratio of two (2) items per capita, another 2,000 items will be needed to maintain this standard of service delivery. According to the Public Library Data Service (PLDS) Statistical Report for 2008, the annual circulation per capita measure is 8.39. The PLDS also recommends that the full-time equivalent for library employees be maintained at an average of 81.5. The Denton Public Library (in the amount of square footage of its current facilities) falls below current recommended standards. The Denton Public Library also falls below the average of total staff serving a population of more than 100,000. Any increase in population will impact existing materials, facilities, and personnel. As the cpopulation currently exceeds 118,994, the proposed annexations increase the need for an additional library facility. ANTICIPATED AD VALOREM TAXES According to calculations conducted by the Finance Department based on information gathered ALL from the Denton County Tax Appraisal District, it is anticipated that if the proposed areas containing 9,035 acres are annexed, they will generate approximately $775,000 in additional tax revenue to the City. However, it is unlikely that the City will realize this full amount given that many of the parcels that are included in the areas proposed for annexation are appraised for ad valorem tax purposes as agricultural, or wildlife management uses under Subchapter C or D of Chapter 23 of the state Tax Code, or as timber land under Subchapter E of that chapter. Per Texas Local Government Code § 43.035.(b), the City may not annex any of the areas Page - 15 proposed for annexation that are appraised for ad valorem tax purposes as agricultural, wildlife management or timber land unless the City offers to make a development agreement with the landowner under Section 212. 172 that would: (1)Guarantee the continuation of the extraterritorial status of the area; (2)Authorize the enforcement of all regulations and planning authority of the municipality that do not interfere with the use of the area for agriculture, wildlife management, or timber; and (3)The landowner declined to make the agreement. In accordance with Tx.LGC 212.172, the City of Denton may make a written contract with an owner of land that is located in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the municipality to: (1)guarantee the continuation of the extraterritorial status of the land and its immunity from annexation by the municipality for a period not to exceed 15 years; (2)extend the municipality's planning authority over the land by providing for a development plan to be prepared by the landowner and approved by the municipality under which certain general uses and development of the land are authorized; (3)authorize enforcement by the municipality of certain municipal land-use and development regulations in the same manner the regulations are enforced within the municipality's boundaries; (4)authorize enforcement by the municipality of land-use and development regulations other than those that apply within the municipality's boundaries, as may be agreed to by the landowner and the municipality; (5)provide for infrastructure for the land, including: (A) streets and roads; (B) street and road drainage; (C) land drainage; and (D) water, wastewater, and other utility systems; (6) authorize enforcement of environmental regulations; (7) provide for the annexation of the land as a whole or in parts and to provide for the terms of annexation, if annexation is agreed to by the parties; (8) specify the uses and development of the land before and after annexation, if or annexation is agreed to by the parties; (9) include other lawful terms and considerations the parties consider appropriate. As such, all the parcels that are appraised for ad valorem tax purposes as agricultural, wildlife management or timber land will be offered a development agreement, and until each agreement, and annexations are finalized, it is impossible to anticipate the amount of ad valorem taxes that will be collected by the City. It is most likely that not all 9,035 acres that are proposed for Page - 16 annexation will actually be annexed. While this will result in a decrease in the amount of ad valorem tax revenue collected by the City, it also will result in a decrease in the total acreage to which the City of Denton will be required to provide full municipal services. ATTACHMENTS 1.Exhibit 1 Map of Potential Annexation Areas 2.Exhibit 2 Map of Potential Annexation Areas that Must be Included in an Annexation Plan 3.Exhibit 3 Texas Local Government Code § 212.172. Development Agreement Prepared by: Mark A. Cunningham, AICP Director, Planning and Development Division Respectfully submitted: Fred Greene Assistant City Manager Page - 17 EXHIBIT 1 Potential Annexation Areas 9,035 Acres Page - 18 EXHIBIT 2 Proposed Annexation Areas that Must be Included in an Annexation Plan (DH, 7, 9 and 12 1,605.68 Acres) Page - 19 EXHIBIT 3 ` Texas Local Government Code § 212.172. Development Agreement . (a)In this subchapter, "extraterritorial jurisdiction" means a municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction as determined under Chapter 42. (b) The governing body of a municipality may make a written contract with an owner of land that is located in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the municipality to: (1)guarantee the continuation of the extraterritorial status of the land and its immunity from annexation by the municipality for a period not to exceed 15 years; (2)extend the municipality's planning authority over the land by providing for a development plan to be prepared by the landowner and approved by the municipality under which certain general uses and development of the land are authorized; (3)authorize enforcement by the municipality of certain municipal land-use and development regulations in the same manner the regulations are enforced within the municipality's boundaries; (4)authorize enforcement by the municipality of land-use and development regulations other than those that apply within the municipality's boundaries, as may be agreed to by the landowner and the municipality; (5)provide for infrastructure for the land, including: (A) streets and roads; (B) street and road drainage; (C) land drainage; and (D) water, wastewater, and other utility systems; (6) authorize enforcement of environmental regulations; (7) provide for the annexation of the land as a whole or in parts and to provide for the terms of annexation, if annexation is agreed to by the parties; (8) specify the uses and development of the land before and after annexation, if annexation is agreed to by the parties; or (9) include other lawful terms and considerations the parties consider appropriate. (c) An agreement under this subchapter must: (1) be in writing; (2) contain an adequate legal description of the land; (3) be approved by the governing body of the municipality and the landowner; and (4) be recorded in the real property records of each county in which any part of the land that is subject to the agreement is located. Page - 20 (d) The parties to a contract may renew or extend it for successive periods not to exceed 15 years each. The total duration of the original contract and any successive renewals or extensions may not exceed 45 years. (e) A municipality in an affected county, as defined by Section 16.341, Water Code, may not enter into an agreement under this subchapter that is inconsistent with the model rules adopted under Section 16.343, Water Code. (f) The agreement between the governing body of the municipality and the landowner is binding on the municipality and the landowner and on their respective successors and assigns for the term of the agreement. The agreement is not binding on, and does not create any encumbrance to title as to, any end-buyer of a fully developed and improved lot within the development, except for land use and development regulations that may apply to a specific lot. (g) An agreement under this subchapter constitutes a permit under Chapter 245. (h) An agreement between a municipality and a landowner entered into prior to the effective date of this section and that complies with this section is validated. Page - 21 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: December 8, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation Department ACM: Fred Greene ______________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT Continuation of a public hearing on the Sale of the Denton Branch Rail Trail Corridor owned by the City of Denton to the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Authority (DART) for the purposes of reactivation of a rail line between Denton and Carrollton and consideration of an ordinance granting approval for the sale and transfer of the Denton Branch Rail Trail from approximately Mile Post 721.89 to Mile Post 729.5 for the purpose of a commuter railroad in accordance with Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommended approval of providing a railroad easement along the Denton Branch Rail Trail corridor on October 2, 2006. This approval was for a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) document between the City of Denton and Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) for the future construction of a Rail Commuter line between Denton and Carrollton. The Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) requested an easement on the Denton Branch Rail Trail in order to construct the rail commuter railroad from downtown Denton to Carrollton to connect with the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) light rail line. During the development of an agreement to start this construction, it has been determined through the line sale agreement with the Union Pacific Railroad, the railroad assigned its reversion interests to DART during a sale of several miles of underutilized rail lines in the Metroplex. DART acquired the Denton Branch rail line from Dallas to Lake Dallas at Burl Street in Corinth. The Union Pacific Railroad assigned any remaining rights they may have in the reversion of the corridor back to a railroad to DART during this purchase agreement. The Denton Branch Rail Trail is a rail banked corridor being used as an interim trail through the National Trail Act. The corridor is banked from abandonment as a railroad until it may be re- activated. With DART having the first ability to reactivate the line and having notified the City of its intent to do so, it is prudent to negotiate terms allowing the City to reserve easements for utilities and a new trail corridor, while allowing the two transit authorities to work through agreements on reconstruction of the railroad for rail commuter train service. State law as defined in Chapter 26, Protection of Public Parks and Recreational Lands, of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code requires that: (a) a municipality of this state may not approve any program or project that requires the use or taking of any public land designated and used prior to the arrangement of the program or project as a park unless the municipality, acting through its duly authorized governing body or officer, determines that: (1)there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use or taking of such land; and (2)the program or project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the land, as a park, resulting from the use or taking. (b) A finding may be made only after notice and a hearing as required by this chapter." Parks and Recreation Department and City staff have reviewed all possible alternatives in light of the planning to minimize harm, and recommends that the Council make the required findings. OPTIONS As discussed in Closed Session. RECOMMENDATION As discussed in Closed Session. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT Construction is projected to begin in 2010. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board gave its approval to a MOU at the October 2, 2006 meeting by a vote of 6 to 0. On November 2, 2009, the Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board came to a consensus that the City should go forward with the public meeting in regard to this particular matter. On December 1, 2009 Council continued this item to December 15. FISCAL INFORMATION Contracts relating to rail reactivation specify the purchase price of the subject rail corridor. EXHIBITS 1.Map 2.Park, Recreation and Beautification Board Minutes of November 2, 2009. Respectfully Submitted: Emerson Vorel, Director Parks and Recreation Department Prepared by: Bob Tickner, Superintendent Parks and Recreation Department ExhibitA DentonBranchRailTrail Mileposts721.5-729.5 HickoryStreet,MP721.5 PowerPlant DentonBranchRailTrail rightofway I-35E CityofDenton DentonBranchRailTrail rightofway ShadyShores CityofCorinth Walton BurlStreet,MP729.5 I-35E SwisherRdFM2181 DentonBranchRailTrail CityLimitline 1DRAFT Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board 2 Minutes 3 4November 2, 2009 5Civic Center Conference Room 6 7 Members present : Vicki Byrd, Allyson Coe, Derrick Murray, Janet Shelton, Jennifer Wages 8 Members absent: Carol Brantley, Mike Simmons 9 Staff present: Emerson Vorel, Jim Mays, Bob Tickner, Mary Aukerman, Amanda Green, Janie McLeod 10 Additional Staff present: City Attorney, Anita Burgess and KDB Group: Aimee Dennis, Jannibah, 11 Coleman Mendie Schmidt 12 13 Allyson Coe called the meeting to order at 5:58 p.m. 14 st 15 AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS: Jim Mays announced that the Parks Maintenance staff had won 1 nd 16 place in the TRAPS Region 2 Parks Rodeo and placed 2 in the entire Metroplex. 17 18 Since most of the KDB staff members are new, Aimee Dennis, KDB Program Manager, introduced herself 19 and the KDB staff, explaining their specific areas of responsibility. Aimee explained that, although the 20 three KDB staff members are paid through City of Denton Parks & Recreation, Keep Denton Beautiful, Inc. 21 is a non-profit organization. 22 23 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF October 5, 2009 MEETING: Derrick made a motion that the minutes 24 be approved as written, Jennifer seconded the motion and the minutes were approved with a vote of 5 to 0. 25 26 ACTION ITEMS: 27 Approval of 2010 Park Board Meeting Schedule a) – The exceptions to the Board meeting on dates 28 other than the first Monday of each month were reiterated. 29 30 MOTION: There being no further discussion, Jennifer made the motion to approve the 2010 Park 31 Board Meeting Schedule as presented; Janet seconded the motion and the schedule passed with a vote of 32 5-0. 33 34 Sale of Alcoholic Beverages At Mardi Gras b) – Janie explained that the Mardi Gras is an event that the 35 Rotary Club has held for several years, but, with the changes recently made to the Alcohol Ordinance, 36 this was the first event selling alcoholic beverages inside the Civic Center to be brought before the Park 37 Board for their approval. Emerson pointed out that only events open to the public will be presented to 38 the Park Board; private events, such as wedding receptions and Quinceañeras, need only the approval of 39 the City Manager or his designee, as they have in the past. Janie assured the Board that the Rotary Club 40 will comply with the other requirements needed for an event with alcohol, such as security and 41 insurance. 42 43 MOTION: There being no further discussion, Janet made the motion to approve the Mardi Gras event 44 with the sale of alcoholic beverages in the Civic Center, Jennifer seconded the motion and it passed with 45 a vote of 5-0. 46 47 PARKS PROJECT STATUS REPORT 48 Avondale Park Lighting and Landscape Improvements – The lights are up and operating, which 49 should help to abate vandalism. The sidewalk replacement will be next. 50 51 Briercliff Park Design and Development Project – The project is progressing. 1 Denton Branch Rail Trail Bridges Project – This project has been deferred to the City Attorney and 2 Engineering. There will be a pedestrian and bicycle bridge over 288. 3 4 Neighborhood Park Design: Preserve at Pecan Creek, Owsley Park and Wheeler Ridge – Bob 5 brought a concept plan for Wheeler Ridge trail layout. Part of the trail is in an elevated area. Seating 6 nodes are planned for various sites along the trail. Concept plans are also in the works for Preserve at 7 Pecan Creek and Owsley Park which will be presented to the Park Board when they are completed. 8 9 North Lakes Adult Soccer Field Development Project – There will be a public meeting at the North rd 10 Lakes Annex on Riney and Windsor on Thursday, December 3 at 6:30 p.m. for this project. The Park 11 Board is invited to attend. It is hoped that this project will got out for bids in March and be completed the 12 spring of 2011. 13 14 North Lakes Park Goldfield Tennis Center – This project is on hold as we look at options for its future. 15 16 Senior Center Renovation and Expansion Project – The Senior Center project is still on schedule with 17 completion estimated for January 2010. Asbestos abatement is done in the main building; walls are being 18 built. An open house will take place when the project is completed. Work in the parking lot is going on 19 as well. 20 21 Unicorn Lake Trail and Landscape Project – The trail is complete and lighted. The landscaping has 22 been held up because of the bad weather. October only had 4 workable days. It is hoped the project will 23 be completed November 2009. 24 25 KEEP DENTON BEAUTIFUL UPDATE 26 This year’s Tree GiveAway was very successful. All trees were give out by pre-registration. In the past it 27 had been first come, first served which resulted in long lines of cars. Times were given out with the on- 28 line registration in half hour increments, which helped get rid of the long lines. 29 30 PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 31 The minutes are presented in the Park Board packet for their review. 32 33 At this time, Allyson announced that the Board would go into Closed Session for the remainder of the 34 meeting to discuss the valuation and possible sale of park real property. City Attorney, Anita Burgess, led 35 the discussion. The Board came to a consensus that the City should go forward with the public meeting in 36 regard to this particular matter. 37 38 Upon completion of the discussion in Closed Session, Allyson announced that the meeting was once again 39 open to the public. 40 41 With no further business on the agenda, Allyson asked for a motion to adjourn. Janet made the motion to 42 adjourn, Carol seconded the motion and the meeting was adjourned at 7:02 p.m. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: December 8, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Transportation ACM: Howard Martin, Utilities, 349-8232 SUBJECT Consider the adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, authorizing the City Manager to execute a Contract of Sale by and between the City of Denton, Texas (“City”) and the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Authority (“DART”) transferring the Denton Rail Corridor, consisting of those lands described in that certain Quitclaim, dated August 9, 1993, County Clerk File No. 93-R0058485, as corrected by Correction Quitclaim Deed, dated June 1, 2001, County Clerk File No. 2001-R0057561, and as corrected by Correction to Correction Quitclaim Deed, dated June 28, 2001, County Clerk File No. 2001-R0076013, all recording references to the Real Property Records of Denton, Texas. BACKGROUND Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) representatives and City of Denton representatives have met for several months to negotiate terms and conditions relating to the proposed conveyance of the rail corridor identified for DCTA’s A-Train commuter rail service to DART. The City of Denton (Parks and Recreation) has ownership of approximately eight miles of the former Missouri Kansas Texas (MKT) rail right-of-way (ROW) as part of the Rail Banking program. Previous to initial construction of the A-Train, the Parks and Recreation Department utilized and maintained the ROW for the Denton Branch Rail Trail. Various City of Denton utilities occupy portions of the corridor in addition to the City Denton Water pipeline along the eastern boundary of the corridor for a 30-inch raw water line. On September 14, 2009 DART submitted a letter to the City of Denton providing written notice to exercise their option to repurchase the Denton Branch Line formerly owned by the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company (MKT ROW) for the amount of $10,000. City of Denton legal staff will present terms and conditions, to include provisions to preserve the 30-inch raw water line easement, of the proposed “Contract of Sale” as part of this agenda item. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW Staff has briefed the City Council on a proposed perpetual easement and conveyance of the corridor in multiple Closed Session meetings beginning February 2009. FINANCIAL The proposed agreement will require DART to pay the City of Denton the amount of $10,000 for the conveyance of the corridor. EXHIBITS 1.Draft Ordinance 2.Contract of Sale (Under Separate Cover) 3.DART notice letter dated September 14, 2009 Respectfully submitted: Mark Nelson Transportation Director AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: December 8, 2009 DEPARTMENT: Transportation Operations ACM: Howard Martin, Utilities, 349-8232 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT Consider the adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, expanding and extending the term of a right of entry and possession, dated March 3, 2009, as extended on May 5, 2009, as extended and expanded on June 23, 2009, as extended and expanded on September 1, 2009, as extended on September 15, 2009, and as extended and expanded on September 22, 2009 and as extended on November 3, 2009 (as amended and extended, the “Right of Entry”) in favor of the Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) and authorizing DCTA to enter upon and take possession of certain real property of the City of Denton for the purpose of performing activity as described in the Right of Entry; and providing and effective date. BACKGROUND The City of Denton (Parks and Recreation) has certain ownership rights to approximately eight miles of the former Missouri Kansas Texas rail right of way (ROW) as part of the Rail Banking Program. The Parks and Recreation Department currently utilizes and maintains this ROW for the Denton Branch Rail Trail and the Water Department has an easement along the eastern boundary of the corridor for a 30-inch raw water line. Additional City of Denton utilities also occupy easements in this corridor. Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) is requesting the City of Denton to provide a perpetual easement in the corridor to allow for the construction of the proposed regional commuter rail line between Denton, Highland Village, Lewisville and Carrollton. DCTA, City of Denton and representatives with Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) continue to negotiate terms and conditions of a proposed agreement that would establish operating rights for each entity accessing the corridor as well as preserve existing uses by the City of Denton relating to various utility and non-utility infrastructure. DCTA remains committed to initiating rail service between Denton and Carrollton as expeditiously as possible, necessitating construction activities begin as soon as possible along the corridor. City of Denton staff is recommending consideration of Amendment 7 to the initial 90- day Right of Entry and Possession (ROE) granted by Ordinance 2009-059 on March 3, 2009. A 30-day extension of the March 2009 ROE was extended by Ordinance 2009-118 on May 5, 2009. The ROE was amended by Ordinance 2009-149 on June 23, 2009 to expand the scope of construction to include construction activities permitted in Phase I of the corridor and extend the ROE for 70 days, terminating Tuesday, September 8, 2009. The ROE was later amended on September 1, 2009 by Ordinance 2009-195 expanding the scope of construction activities to include both Phase I and Phase II and extending the term until September 15, 2009. The ROE was amended on September 15, 2009 extending the term of the ROE outlined in Ordinance 2009-195 to September 22, 2009. The ROE was amended on September 22, 2009 by Ordinance 2009-241 to expand the scope of permitted construction activities and extend the term of the ROE until November 6, 2009 and the ROE was last amended by Amendment 6 on November 3, 2009 by Ordinance 2009-286. Amendment 7 proposes to extend the term of the ROE by approximately 90 days from December 14, 2009, terminating on March 16, 2010 or on the date the conveyance of the Rail Corridor from the City of Denton to DART. This term will coincide with a DART Letter of Assurance, waiving and releasing any rights or claims related to construction activities in the corridor, to be provided in advance of the December 8, 2009 meeting. Additionally, this agreement provides DCTA construction access to City of Denton property located adjacent to the Downtown Denton Transit Center where the proposed rail platform will be constructed (Platform Tracts). Staff briefed Council on October 20, 2009 and was provided direction to pursue transfer of these tracts to DCTA. This property will be conveyed to DCTA at a later date. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW Ordinance 2009-286, was adopted on November 3, 2009. Ordinance 2009-241, adopted September 22, 2009 extended the term to November 6, 2009 and expanded the scope of activities to include Phase III. Ordinance 2009-213 dated September 15, 2009 extending the term of the agreement outlined in Ordinance 2009-195 to September 22, 2009 (seven days). Ordinance 2009-195 dated September 1, 2009 expanded scope of activities to include Phase I and Phase II and extended the ROE by 14 days. Ordinance 2009-149, dated June 23, 2009, extended the ROE by 70 days to September 8, 2009 and expanded the scope of permitted construction activities to include Phase I of the corridor. Ordinance 2009-118 was adopted on May 5, 2009 extending the original 90-day ROE entry by 30 days. Ordinance 2009-059 was adopted on March 3, 2009 providing DCTA a 90-day Right of Entry and Possession to conduct limited pre-construction activities. Staff has briefed the City Council on the proposed perpetual easement for the corridor during Closed Session at multiple meetings between February 17, 2009 and November 17, 2009. Staff briefed the City Council on October 20, 2009 on the DCTA offer for the Platform Tracts. FINANCIAL The proposed agreement will require DCTA to submit a sum of $10.00 to the City of Denton in consideration for the right of entry and possession. EXHIBITS 1.Draft Ordinance 2.Ordinance 2009-286 Respectfully Submitted: Mark Nelson Transportation Director Page 2 • \\codad\departments\legal\our documents\ordinances\09\dcta roe rail line amended I I0309.doc ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: A r Page 3 of 3