Minutes April 16, 199160
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
APRIL 16, 1991
The Council convened into the Work Session at 5:15 p.m. in the
Civil Defense Room.
PRESENT:
Mayor Castleberry;
Members Alexander,
Trent.
Mayor Pro Tem Boyd; Council
Ayer, Gorton, Hopkins and
ABSENT: None
1. The Council convened into the Work Session to discuss
legal matters (considered action in Kelsoe v. City), real
estate, and personnel/board appointments (considered
appointments to the Building Code Board, Community Development
Block Grant Committee, the Electrical Code Board, the Historic
Landmark Commission, the Human Services Committee, the Downtown
Advisory Board and the Sign Board of Appeals.)
5:45 p.m.
1. The Council received a report .and held a discussion
regarding a recommendation on median construction for Loop 288
and gave staff direction.
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that the Highway
Department had notified the City that plans were being
formulated for the design of Highway 288 and asked how the City
would like the medians. Staff was recommending raised medians.
Consensus was to proceed with the raised medians.
2. The Council received a report and held a discussion
regarding the space plan and gave staff direction.
Steve Brinkman, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated that
the study would inventory all of the City's present facilities,
identify existing constraints in the various buildings and
develop a fifteen year forecast for future personnel/facility
requirements with a list of future needs for space
requirements. Also recommendations for renovations and repairs
would be developed. Seven proposals were received for the
project. Staff was recommending Corgan Associates who had
submitted a proposal not to exceed $72,500 for the project.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with a contract for
Corgan Associates.
3. The Council received a report and held a discussion
regarding the proposed contracts with Waste Management of Texas
regarding the transfer of assets and the construction and
operation of a transfer station.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 2
Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that one
more analysis had been done as to what the terms of the
contract were and what that did to the residential rates. Four
basic concepts were analyzed. These included sell the
commercial and sign the transfer station contract which would
be completed by October 1993, sell the commercial and contract
for a transfer station which would be completed by October
1995, sell the commercial and keep the landfill, and continue
status quo. A detailed analysis was included in the agenda
back-up materials.
Council Member Ayer asked that in the scenario where the
landfill would be closed in 18 months which would mean that in
addition to what was currently put in the landfill, an extra
650,000 cubic yards of Waste Management's waste would be
included. Was that not a substantial increase in the flow into
the landfill and did the City have the equipment and manpower
to handle such an increase.
Nelson replied that approximately $200,000 per year would be
added for equipment and manpower.
Council Member Ayer stated that the contract indicated that 180
days after Waste Management received its permit for the
transfer station, Denton had to stop putting waste into its
landfill. What would happen if, when that time came, the
landfill were not full.
Nelson replied that at that point they would be close enough to
the closure that it would be up out of the ground and there
were would be a pit to put a top on.
Council Member Ayer stated that the "profit" for the City
increased dramatically after the 2001. Would that kind of
escalation continue after the year 2005.
Nelson replied it was possible but that it was hard to hold the
rates that high.
Council Member Hopkins asked if the cost of a new landfill was
included in the figures for Scenario 8.
Nelson replied yes that in 1996 there would be an increase in
the rates for the landfill costs.
Council Member Hopkins stated that Option 1 would reject both
contracts and continue status quo. The previous assumption was
that that could not be done and stay in competition. Was it
possible to have competitive rates and not lose money.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 3
Nelson replied that it depended on the marketing effort of the
competition.
Council Member Hopkins stated that when the bid process was
first authorized, the City had a great concern regarding its
liability with the landfill and Subtitle D. She understood
that in reality, the City still retained liability even if the
landfill were closed. With the transfer station agreement, the
costs could be increased as regulations indicated and the City
was still liable for its waste.
Nelson replied that there was a question on how liable the City
would be for its waste. Generally, the City would take the
position that if it had another commercial hauler hauling from
the City to another site, that it was the hauler's
responsibility and the landfill operator's responsibility to
dispose of the waste properly. There had been court cases
where suits had been filed on the solid waste operator and the
city. He felt that the City had the liability for the current
landfill and what was in it but tha~ the sooner it was
eliminated, the less the City would be liable.
Council Member Trent stated that the contract would provide a
partner for the City which would reduce the liability for the
City.
Council Member Ayer stated that the assumption was that all
solid waste would go the the DFW landfill. What would happen
if the DFW landfill closed before the end of the contract terms.
Nelson replied that it would be Waste Management's
responsibility to find another location at the $5.20 rate.
Council continued its discussion regarding franchises, rates
and heavy pick-up for special items.
The Council then convened into the Regular Session at 7:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers.
PRESENT:
Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Boyd; Council
Members Ayer, Gorton, Hopkins and Trent.
ABSENT: Council Member Alexander
1. Pledge of Allegiance
The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of
Allegiance.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 4
The Mayor presented the following proclamations:
National Organ and Issue Donor Awareness Week
National Dance Week
Citizens Reports
A. The Council received a citizen report from Cindy
Wood regarding bicycle safety.
Ms. Wood stated that her son recently had a bicycle accident
and as he was wearing a helmet, was not injured as severely as
he might have been. She requested the Council to look into a
bike helmet law, asked that safety lanes be marked for bicycle
riders and that bicycle riders use a bike flag.
B. The Council received a citizen report and
petition from Gay Racina regarding Loop 288 construction.
Ms. Racina stated that she wanted to discuss the construction
of a section of Loop 288 directly behind the streets of Selene,
Neptune, and a portion of Redstone. She had a petition signed
by approximately 40 property owners and residents of the area.
She presented information regarding the history of the Loop
project. She felt that information regarding the project was
limited and difficult to obtain. There had been no
notification that the original north route had been changed.
In some sections, the new alignment would come within 40' of
property lines. The residents were concerned about the
devaluation of their property and asked that the construction
be moved away from residential development. She asked for a
review of the design, what interchanges were being proposed,
what safety lighting was being considered. If the alignment
could not be moved, the petitioners asked that all safety,
health and privacy measures be addressed plus a fair dollar
restitution be made to each homeowner affected for proximity
damages.
C. The Council received a report from C. C. Sexton,
member of the Cable T.V. Advisory Board, regarding the
televising of City Council meetings.
Ms. Sexton stated that her recommendation to the Council was to
tape the Council meetings on cable television. She felt it
would provide an opportunity for citizens to participate in
City government. There had been many technological advances
made in the last few years with new cameras which would not
need more lighting and not hot lighting. There was money
available immediately in the form of a $60,000 grant from
Sammons. She requested the Council to approve a Minute Order
authorizing the cable casting of Council meetings.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 5
Mayor Castleberry stated that since this was not an action
item, it could not be handled at this meeting.
Sexton stated that she understood the Council could take action
on a Minute Order item as the Council had received information
on the item and as it was part of the City's legal franchise
agreement with Sammons.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that Ms. Sexton was correct
that it was a part of the City's franchise agreement with
Sammons. However, in order to meet the requirements of the
Texas Open Meetings Act, the City Council could not take action
inconsistent with that listed on its agenda. The agenda listed
that the Council would receive a report and did not provide for
discussion, consideration or taking action.
D. The Council received a citizen report from
Suzanne Bloxson regarding Texas Waste Management.
Ms. Bloxson stated that she was in opposition to both Texas
Waste Management contracts. She paid taxes so that her city
government would provide her with essential services.
Government services were a civic responsibility. She was not
comfortable with a 15 year contract and felt that the City was
going a good job.
E. The Council received a citizen report from Dale
Branum regarding the sale of the City's commercial solid waste
system.
Mr. Branum stated that the Waste Management contracts did not
sound like a good deal to him. It sounded like it would cost
more and would have less service in a short period of time. He
did not feel Denton would benefit from Waste Management's
economy of scale. He felt Waste Management would be slower to
respond to complaints as they were so large. He felt local
control, local management and local service were better. The
bottom line for Waste Management would always be maximum
profit. He felt that what was needed was more innovation and
more self-reliance. He urged the Council to come up with a
better solution.
F. The Council received a citizen report from Ed
Morrison regarding the City's landfill.
Mr. Morrison stated that he had been authorized to include the
support of Frank Martino, Russell Newman Co., regarding his
remarks. He had a concern for the quality of life for the
community as by his personal observation, Waste Management had
no concern of the cleanliness of the community. Each of these
businesses were exponents for the free enterprise system.
Commercial and industrial costs would double and there would
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 6
not be much control in the years to come. Two-thirds of the
community's solid waste was generated by industry and
commercial entities, all commercial interest would eventually
pay for the contracts. There were tremendous high technical
changes occurring in solid waste handling and he felt the City
was selling a valuable asset with strong promises of greater
value in future years. Russell-Newman, Tetra Pak, Peterbilt,
Victor Equipment Co., and the Andrews Corporation unanimously
expressed desire to have the City continue solid waste
disposition. All the above mentioned companies agreed that the
matter of solid waste handling and/or landfill sale deserved
more time and more study and review. They were in favor of the
City declining the proposed contracts and united~ without
exception, preferred to retain the City service for the
handling of their industrial trash.
Mayor Pro Tem Boyd stated that at two earlier public hearings,
the business community, as represented by the Chamber of
Commerce and other individuals, indicated that they didn't care
about the potential increase in costs that might come from a
transfer to Waste Management. He was hearing from Mr. Morrison
that that was a concern. Was that a general concern in the
business community.
Morrison stated that he did not think that increased costs
could be escaped whether the City retained the system or not.
He felt that the City could better manage the results and that
they could get more for their dollar.
Mayor Pro Tem Boyd asked if the maintenance of cost at a
reasonable level important to the business community.
Morrison replied that the City's solid waste department did a
satisfactory service. A certain amount of increased cost could
be expected from year to year. If there were no control on
services, then there would be no control on costs.
Mayor Pro Tem Boyd stated that speakers from the business
community at the two previous public hearings were fairly
uniform in their feeling, that the City would not be able to
maintain high quality service. Was that his experience.
Morrison replied that the City could be a better job than a
commercial entity. He felt that the City did do a better job
than a commercial entity.
Council Member Gorton stated that members of the Governmental
Relations Committee had stated to the Council the need to
privatize. His company, at this point in time, did not favor
the position of selling to Waste Management.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 7
Morrison replied his company and all of the industries he named
did not favor the sale to Waste Management.
G. The Council received a citizen report from Joyce
Poole regarding the City's commercial solid waste system.
Ms. Poole stated that over and over there seemed to be the
feeling that the City was facing near destruction if it did not
make plans immediately to close the landfill and enter into a
contract with Waste Management no matter what the outcome or
cost to the citizens. The residents were tired of this kind of
scenario. The City's Utility Director and records of the
Public Utilities Board minutes indicated that the landfill was
in compliance with the Subtitle D regulations. According to
the Utility Director, there were 5.5 million cubic yards of
space left in the landfill. Almost 2 million was already
permitted and 3.5 million cubic yards was available. At the
rate of $3.45 per cubic yard, revenue of almost $19 million
would be generated. There may be other opportunities in the
future. She had petitions signed by citizens who were not in
favor of the City selling to Waste Management. She urged the
Council to reject both contracts.
H. The Council received a citizen report from Mike
Cochran regarding the City's commercial solid waste system.
Mr. Cochran felt that the effects of the transfer station
agreement on residential rates was very important. He stated
that currently the City had approximately 80,000 cubic yards of
residential waste per year at a rate of $3.00 per cubic yard
which equaled $24,000 per year. The transfer station rate
would equal $416,000 per year considering the $5.20 rate which
would be an increased cost to residential rate payers of
$176,000 per year. He understood that Texas Waste Management
would take Denton's waste to its DFW landfill for the next 20
years. He questioned where the waste would go after that
landfill was full as he understood that it had only 11 years
left until it was full. Waste Management had the reputation of
playing hardball. He was concerned that Waste Management would
be undercutting the rates in order to make the City's
commercial system less viable and weaken it.
I. The Council received a citizen report from Lovie
Price regarding the City's commercial solid waste system.
Ms. Price felt that Denton should take the responsibility to
take care of its own waste and that the City did a good job
collecting the waste.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 8
J. The Council received a citizen report from Don
Fielding regarding the City's commercial solid waste system.
Rev. Fielding expressed an objection to letting any contract
for waste/garbage control at this time. That objection
included the fact that Texas Waste Management was affiliated
with Waste Management, Inc. Waste Management, Inc. had
received severe criticism for its poor environmental operations
in other areas. He urged the Council to reconsider the
contract.
Council Member Alexander joined the meeting.
Fielding continued that he felt the issue had not been studied
carefully enough and if it had been studied, the results had
not been well communicated to the public. What were the
alternatives other than the contract with Waste Management.
Mayor Pro Tem Boyd asked Fielding if he knew the Council had
appointed a citizen group to study the issue for several
years. The group reported back to the Council that the City
could not compete with other waste haulers.
Council discussed with Rev. Fielding the SWAC recommendation
and the Public Utilities Board's recommendation regarding the
issue and the amount of research that had been done on the
issue.
K. The Council received a citizen report from Art
Anderson regarding a proposal for solid waste service from
Sentry Environmental.
Mr. Anderson stated that a letter of intent had. been sent to
the City from Sentry Environmental which offered to dispose of
the City's residential waste $3.00 per cubic yard gate fee.
That would be effective when the site was permitted and became
operational. There was a discrepancy between the transmittal
letter and the letter of intent with respect to the number of
days the City would have to cancel the contract. He wanted to
assure the Council that the 10 day time frame in the letter of
intent was the time frame Sentry intended. The 30 day
reference in the transmittal letter was his error.
Council Member Gorton requested an update on the status of the
license.
Mr. Anderson replied that the preliminary report had been filed
and had been reviewed by the Technical and Engineering
Divisions of the Texas Department of Health. The final report,
which incorporated all the comments and revisions, had been
prepared and was being reviewed by their legal department.
6¸8
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 9
Council Member Gorton asked for a time frame for final approval.
Anderson replied that once the final report had been submitted,
there was a 30 day time frame in which the Texas Department of
Health reviewed the report and sent out for comments. The
public hearing would be held after that. Average time was one
year to 18 months.
L. The Council received a citizen report from a
representative of Texas Waste Management regarding the proposed
sale of the City's commercial solid waste system.
Mickey Flood, President-Texas Waste Management, stated that a
question had been asked of what other cities were doing. He
stated that Dallas and Fort Worth were getting out of the
business and putting the commercial business in a competitive
situation. A comment had been made that government had the
obligation to provide. Did government have an obligation to
pay more and charge the citizens more for the same level of
service. The liability factor had been mentioned. Flood
stated that the City would be getting out of the liability
issue for commercial waste with the transfer station. All
commercial haulers were paying an 8% franchise to the City of
Denton. He stated that the president of Peterbilt did not want
an exclusive arrangement.
The Council allowed Joe Dodd to present a citizen report that
was not listed on the agenda as he had requested such but had
been left off the agenda.
Joe Dodd presented a citizen report regarding revised Council
procedures. The ordinary procedure to present items to the
Council was to hold a public hearing followed by a staff
report, the Council would discuss the item, there would be
another meeting without a public forum followed by a vote.
Citizens would discover that they did not like what had
happened and would schedule citizen reports and try to have the
vote changed. Dodd was suggesting a simpler procedure which
might be called a citizen temporary veto. Whenever the Council
was about to take a final action, the Mayor would read a clause
stating "without objection". If any citizen present oDjected,
a delay until the next regularly scheduled meeting would be
triggered which would involve a public hearing before the final
action was taken. A two-thirds vote of the Council could
override a citizen objection.
Council Member Trent asked Dodd to present his proposal in
writing to the Council.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 10
Council Member Gorton requested to reorder the agenda and
consider items 5.G. and 5.H.
Council expressed concerns that individuals might not be
present yet at the meeting as the items were originally
scheduled for later in the meeting and that there were citizens
present for public hearings who had been waiting and who were
scheduled first on the agenda.
Council Member Gorton withdrew his request.
Public Hearings
A. The Council held a public hearing and considered
adoption of an ordinance approving a development plan by
rezoning a 7.494 acre tract of land from SF-7 (single family
residential) to Planned Development on property located at the
southeast corner of Bernard and Collins for the purpose of an
88 multi-family unit development. (The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval). Z-91-002
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Dale Irwin, speaking as a prospective property owner and
developer, stated that the development would be low density
apartments of not more than 88 units. He described the
development and stated that parking would be 30% more than
required. Fifty percent of the building would be brick and
recreational facilities would be provided.
Randy Looney spoke in opposition to the development. He lived
directly across the street from the proposed development and
felt that there were too many apartments in the area now.
Traffic was heavy on Collins and Bernard and it was difficult
getting in and out of his driveway. The entrance of the
development was on Bernard Street which would come very close
to his front yard and he felt there would be too much noise and
traffic. He wanted to see the property used for something else
other than multifamily and felt that the development would
devaluate his property.
There was no rebuttal by petitioner.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Karen Feshari, Urban Planner, stated that the property was
located in a low intensity area. Road improvements would be
constructed to the development prior to any development on the
property. Drainage was a major issue as there was severe
flooding in the area. The closest storm sewer facility was on
70
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 11
Eagle Drive, a system which was over capacity. Detention would
be required on site with a pond designed with a multiple outset
structure detaining water for all storms up to a 100 year
storm. Drainage improvements would be required throughout the
area with the type of improvements required to be governed by
the amount of water passing through on a ten year storm. The
drainage improvement would be constructed in a drainage
easement outside of the existing utility easement. An 80
foot setback along the southwest corner of the lot to act as
buffering to the residential dwellings and six foot high
evergreen shrubbery would be constructed to act as screening.
Feshari reviewed the staff analysis of the proposal which was
included in the agenda back-up materials.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 91-058
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING A
CHANGE FRO~ ONE-FAMILY (SF-7) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
(PD) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE
DESIGNATION FOR 7.4 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BERNARD AND COLLINS STREETS;
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DISTRICT; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Trent motioned, Hopkins seconded to adopt the ordinance. On
roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye, Gorton
"aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
The Council took a short recess.
Council Members Trent and Gorton and Mayor Pro Tem Boyd left
the meeting.
B. The Council was to hold a public hearing and
consider adoption of an ordinance approving a detailed plan by
amending Planned Development 28 and by rezoning a portion of
land zoned light industrial comprising a total of 1.59 acres of
land for the purpose of a Braum's Ice Cream Store on property
located at the southeast corner of Sadau Court and Colorado
Boulevard. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval). Z-91-001
This item was pulled by petitioner.
C. The Council held a public hearing and considered
a replat of Lot 1 and additional unplatted land into Lot 1R,
Block A, Denton Bible Church addition. The site was on
University Boulevard, immediately west of its intersection with
the proposed Nottingham Drive extension. (Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval.)
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 12
¸71
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Bud Hauptman, Metroplex Engineering, stated that the Church had
a facility on a portion of the property and was wanting to
build a new sanctuary on a portion of the property. As the
Church had already plotted the property where the existing
sanctuary was located, they were required to replat the entire
property.
Council Member Trent returned to the meeting.
No one spoke in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Owen Yost, Urban Planner, stated that this was a 9.624 acre
tract located on the south side of University Drive immediately
west of the proposed Nottingham Drive. The property was zoned
single-family and development was anticipated for a place of
worship, buildings for ancillary functions and the related
parking area.
Council Member Gorton and Mayor Pro Tem Boyd returned to the
meeting.
Hopkins motioned, Alexander seconded to approve the replat. On
roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton
"aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
D. The Council held a public hearing and considered
approval of a resolution which amended the Denton Development
Plan by adding proposed greenbelts to the Concept Map and by
adding greenbelt specific area policy, and which adopted a
strategic issue work plan for flood plain management and
greenbelts.
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that the
resolution would amend the Denton Development Plan by adding
the 100 year flood plain as a proposed greenbelt. It added a
section of policy and adopted a work plan.
Council Member Gorton stated that under "recommendations", the
Chamber of Commerce-Governmental Affairs Committee had endorsed
the plan. He questioned the duties of the Committee, how the
members were selected, and what the voting membership was. He
expressed concern about the makeup of the Committee and the
voting powers of the group.
Barbara Russell, Chamber of Commerce, stated that she would get
back with Council Member Gorton concerning his request.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 13
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
No one spoke in favor.
No one spoke in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R91-025
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT PLAN BY
ADDING A GREENBELT AREA ON THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT PLAN
CONCEPT MAP; ADOPTING SPECIFIC AREA POLICIES FOR
GREENBELTS; APPROVING A STRATEGIC ISSUE WORK PLAN FOR
GREENBELTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Alexander motioned, Ayer seconded to approve the resolution.
On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander 'aye," Hopkins "aye,'
Gorton "aye,' Ayer "aye," Boyd 'aye," and Mayor Castleberry
"aye." Motion carried unanimously.
Item 5.F. was considered.
5. Ordinances
F. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Coopers and
Lybrand to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the City's
employee health insurance and develop recommendations for the
1991/92 budget.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 91-064
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND COOPERS &
LYBRAND, INC. RELATING TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR A
COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION OF THE CITY'S EMPLOYEE HEALTH
INSURANCE PROGRAM; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF
FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Boyd motioned, Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance. On
roll vote, Trent 'aye,' Alexander "aye," Hopkins 'aye,' Gorton
"aye,' Ayer "aye,' Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleb~rry 'aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 14
73
Council considered Item 5.I.
5. Ordinances
I. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute a contract for the collection
of delinquent taxes.
Mayor Pro Tem Boyd left the meeting with the possibility of a
conflict of interest.
Council Member Trent questioned the possibility of putting the
contract out for Request for Proposal which would allow more
than one firm to bid on the contract.
Trent motioned to table Item 5. I. until a RFP could be put
together.
Council Member Hopkins asked if there would be a problem with
timing if the item were to go out for bids at this time.
John McGrane, Executive Director for Finance, statea that there
would be no problem in going for RFP at this time. The current
contract did not expire until the end of June.
Trent motioned to table the item until an RFP could be put
together. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins
"aye," Gorton "aye," Ayer "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
Hopkins motioned, Trent seconded to move forward with bids for
the delinquent tax process. On roll vote, Trent "aye,"
Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton "aye," Ayer "aye," and
Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Pro Tem Boyd returned to the meeting.
Item 5.G. was considered.
5. Ordinances
G. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute documents necessary to close
an asset purchase agreement between the City of Denton and
Waste Management of Texas, Inc., for the sale, transfer and
assignment of the City's commercial solid waste operations.
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that staff was
prepared to answer any questions Council might have.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 15
Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that a
question had been raised regarding the franchise license fee.
The fee was 8% and was developed approximately a year and a
half ago. There was approximately $77,000 coming out of the
solid waste fund which was being used for mosquito spraying and
litter crews. The fee would help pay for those expenses. It
was estimated that there was approximately $1 million worth of
other commercial hauler business in Denton at the time and the
8% fee would just cover the $77,000. The fee was put into
place January 1 ana collected $46,000. This year it was
estimated that $48,000 would be collected. That $48,000 did
not cover the total cost of mosquito spraying and litter
crews. Regardin9 the operation of the landfill, the operating
cost for 1991 was estimated at $1.4 million and $1.7 million
for 1992.
Mayor Castleberry stated that he often received certified
letters from the Texas State Health Departments regarding the
landfill. He asked Nelson to elaborate on those letters.
Nelson replied that the letters fell into a range of different
issues. Inspectors came out at least once a month. Some
letters were good and some letters pointed out problems at the
landfill.
Council Member Gorton asked about the severability of the two
contracts.
Nelson stated that if Council Member Gorton was asking if the
two contracts were severed, they could be handled
individually. The resolution was established where if the
Council did not approve the sale of the commercial system, then
City Attorney Drayovitch continued that the Mayor was not
authorized to execute the transfer station agreement until the
closing of the asset purchase agreement.
Council Member Gorton questioned the bid bond extension.
City Attorney Drayovitch replied that there was a problem
regarding the bid bond which arose from a letter received April
4, 1991. It was brought to the attention of Waste Management
and they had been asked to correct the problem. Waste
Management had provided the City with a letter but it was still
somewhat ambiguous. The Austin counsel and she believed that
Mr. Flood should affirm before the Council tha~ he intended to
honor the conditions of the bid which provided that upon award,
Waste Management would agree to comply with the terms of the
bid and to fulfill the terms of the bid within 30 days after
the Council notified Waste Management or they would forfeit the
amount of the bid bond.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 16
75
Council Member Gorton asked if that document needed to be
executed before a vote was taken.
Drayovitch replied that Austin counsel advised that Mr. Flood
make that statement. She had drafted the language from the bid
and it was ready for him to sign.
Mayor Castleberry asked Mr. Flood to come forward.
Mr. Flood stated "so affirm."
Council Member Alexander questioned the definition of "special
waste" as there was language in the contract which indicated
that Waste Management would have the right to reject "special
waste" was they defined such. That left a lot of open area.
He requested information regarding what was currently done with
"special waste" in the City.
Council Member Gorton left the meeting.
Nelson replied that "special waste" were items which required a
special type of facility to handle on the floor of the transfer
station. Something which would not fit into a truck and was
not normal waste.
Council Member Gorton returned to the meeting.
Council discussed "special waste" requirements including what
was currently done with the City's "special waste" and what
Waste Management would do with those items.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated upon discovery of the
administrative issue with the bid bond, one section of the
ordinance was revised to accommodate that information. The
revision indicated that the bid was awarded to Waste Management
and they were instructed to comply with the terms of the bid.
Council Member Trent felt that the Council was about to vote on
an issue that many cities in the country were dealing with.
That issue was getting out of the solid waste/landfill business.
Trent motioned approval of Item 5G.
Hearing no second, the Mayor seconded the motion.
Council Member Ayer stated that in his judgment the facts were
on the side to reject the contract. He recently had attended a
meeting of the Upper Trinity Regional Water District Board at
which a representative of the North Texas Council of
Governments presented a study that COG had been involved in for
at least two years on a regional study of solid waste. The
representative from COG stated that the study was guided by the
legislation pending before the State Legislature which sought
to develop a plan for the handling solid waste in
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 17
the State of Texas. The proposed legislation had a four point
plan: (1) a minimization of solid waste flow such as not
bagging lawn clippings, (2) maximizing recycling, (3) treatment
of solid waste in various ways such as incineration, and (4)
the use of landfills. The legislation would require each
governmental entity to develop a plan for implementing this
program. As such, the City would be required to develop such a
plan. No where in the legislation was any responsibility
placed on any private company or corporation to develop or to
implement such a plan. The responsibility for meeting these
requirements would rest upon the local government. The COG
representative stated "privatizing does not reduce or eliminate
municipal responsibility for meeting state requirements." Ayer
felt it would be best to keep all options open and that it
would be unwise to saddle the City with a 15 year obligation
when there was so much more to decide on these important issues.
Council Member Alexander stated that when the Council first
began to look at the issue and that after the Council had heard
the input from the initial public hearing a year ago and heard
the citizens talk about the fact that they were not inclined to
see anyone be an exclusive provider, it was his initial
inclination to vote in favor of the sale. During the last
public hearing, he had a very strong sense that a great many
residents in the City of Denton really believed that it was not
in the best interest of the City to sell the commercial solid
waste system. The citizen input had been overwhelmingly in
favor of keeping the commercial solid waste system in Denton
and for continuing the City's present structure. Alexander
felt that one of the things which would determine the City's
future economic development was whether or not the City could
assure, on a consistent basis to prospective new businesses,
that the quality of services in Denton would remain high in all
areas. He believed that if the City could continue to provide
commercial solid waste service and that it was done
aggressively and well, that the City could out compete anyone
in that process. He would vote to reject the contract and
appreciated the alternatives presented by Texas Waste
Management.
Council voted on the motion. On roll vote, Trent "aye,"
Alexander "nay," Hopkins "nay," Gorton "nay," Ayer "nay," Boyd
"aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion failed with a 4-3
vote.
City of Denton City Council Agenda
April 16, 1991
Page 18
77
H. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor, subject to applicable provisions of
Article IV of the Charter of the City of Denton, Texas and to
other conditions to execute a transfer station agreement
between the City of Denton and Waste Management of Texas, Inc.
requiring Waste Management of Texas to acquire, construct and
-operate a transfer station for handling solid waste.
Boya motioned, Alexander seconded to reject the ordinance. On
roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton
"aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
The Council returned to the regular agenda order.
Consent Agenda
Boyd motioned, Gorton seconded to approve the Consent Agenda.
Motion carried unanimously.
A. Bids and Purchase Orders:
1. Bid #1223 - Pecan Creek Sanitary Sewer
2. Bid #1229 - C. I. P. Utilities Waterline
3. Bid #1231 - Personal Computers Hardware,
Software & Accessories
4. Bid #1234 - 16' Diesel Riding Mower
5. Bid #1239 - Air Switches
6. Bid #1240 - Distribution Transformers
7. P.O. #12676 - Eastern Electric Apparatus
Se
Change Orders - P.O. #17167 and P.O. #17168
- Martin K. Eby
9. Bid #1210 - Data Logger
B. Tax Refunds
Ce
1. Considered approval of a tax refund for
Title Resources for $611.93.
Plats and Replats
Considered approval of the preliminary
replat of the Golden Triangle Mini-Mall
Addition: from Lots 8, 9, and 10; into
Lot~ 9R and 10R, Block A. (The Planning and
Zoning Commission recommended approval.)
78
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 19
5. Ordinances
A. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
accepting competitive bids and providing for the award of
contracts for the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies or
services. (4.A.3. - Bid #1231, 4.A.4. - Bid #1234, 4.A.5. - Bid
#1239, 4.A.6. - Bid #1240, 4.A.9. - Bid #1210))
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 91-059
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A
CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT,
SUPPLIES OR SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF
FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Boyd motioned, Gorton seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton
"aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
accepting competitive Dids and providing for the award of
contracts for public works or improvements. (4.A.1. - Bid
#1223, 4.A.2. - Bid #1229)
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 91-060
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND PROVIDING
FOR THE AWARD OF CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR
IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS
THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Boyd motioned, Gorton seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Trent 'aye,' Alexander 'aye," Hopkins 'aye," Gorton
"aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye.'
Motion carried unanimously.
C. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
providing for the expenditure of funds for emergency purchases
of materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance
with the provisions of state law exempting such purchases from
requirements of competitive bids. (4.A.7. - P.O. #12676)
The following ordinance was considered:
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 20
79
NO. 91-061
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS
FOR EMERGENCY PURCHASES OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT,
SUPPLIES OR SERVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS
OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM
REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Boyd motioned, Gorton seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton
"aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the execution of change orders to a contract
between the City of Denton and Martin K. Eby; and providing for
an increase in the contract price. (4.A.8. - P.O. #97167, P.O.
#97168)
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 91-062
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CHANGE
ORDER TO A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND
MARTIN K. EBY; PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE
CONTRACT PRICE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Boyd motioned, Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance. On
roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton
"aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
amending Section 25-7 of Article I, Chapter 25 of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas redesignating Section
25-8 of Article I, Chapter 25 of the Code of Ordinances of the
City of Denton, Texas as Section 25-9; adding provisions to
Article l, Chapter 25 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Denton, Texas, and designating same as Section 25-8; revising
tap and loop installation fees, and meter relocation fees;
providing for the issuance of permits for tap and loop
installation; establishing charges for work not specified;
providing for the installation or inspection of water taps
dedicated exclusively to fire sprinkler systems without charge
or at reduced cost.
80
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 21
David Ham, Manager of Construction Projects, stated that tap
and loop fees had not been increased since 1984. These fees,
at this time, were highly subsidized by the Utilities
Department. The Utilities staff had met with a group of
plumbers and developers through the Chamber of Commerce
Economic Development Committee to develop the ordinance. Key
provisions were (1) increased tap and loop fees over a two year
period at 50% each year to arrive at a self-supporting fee
structure, (2) provided for citizen privatization of tap and
loop fee construction in addition to City installed
construction, (3) installed fire sprinklers taps free in order
to encourage installation of fire sprinkler systems, and (4)
gave a refund to a customer if tap and loop fees were less to
construct by City forces than estimated advance paid fee
indicated. The Public Utilities Board recommended approval.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 91-063
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25-7 OF ARTICLE I,
CHAPTER 25 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
DENTON, TEXAS; REDESIGNATING SECTION 25-8 OF ARTICLE
I, CHAPTER 25 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
DENTON, TEXAS AS SECTION 25-9; ADDING PROVISIONS TO
ARTICLE I, CHAPTER 25 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AND DESIGNATING SAME AS SECTION
25-8; REVISING TAP AND LOOP INSTALLATION FEES, AND
METER RELOCATION FEES; PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF
PERMITS FOR TAP & LOOP INSTALLATION; ESTABLISHING
CHARGES FOR WORK NOT SPECIFIED; PROVIDING FOR THE
INSTALLATION OR INSPECTION OF WATER TAPS DEDICATED
EXCLUSIVELY TO FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS WITHOUT CHARGE
OR AT REDUCED COST; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT HEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE
MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $500.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF;
PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND DECLARING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Boyd motioned, Ayer seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton
"aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 22
81
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, presented the following
information:
A. The Mayor had met with members of the Perot Group
to discuss a foreign trade zone. The Group had requested a
letter of support from the City of Denton regarding this trade
zone. With Council's permission, staff would draft a letter of
support for the Mayor's signature.
Council discussed the issue centering on whether or not this
was an abatement issue. Several of the Council Members felt
this was a hurried issue and were uncomfortable authorizing the
Mayor to sign a letter of Council support until they had more
details on the issue. The Mayor could provide his personal
support but not the support of the entire Council until staff
and Council had more time to investigate the issue.
B. There would be a special meeting April 23, 1991
to allow the Council to discuss board appointments. The
foreign trade zone issue could also be included in that meeting.
Council Member Gorton asked that the County position and DISD
position be included in the information presented at the next
meeting.
C. There would be a special meeting April 30, 1991
to consider the sprinkler ordinance and the space plan.
D. Court of Record - City Attorney Drayovitch stated
that a request had been sent to Representative Horn regarding
amendments and the three County Court-at-Law Judges had been
contacted to discuss the legislation. The Judges voiced
several valid concerns. The City would work with the Judges to
obtain an amendment regarding a technical issue regarding a
statement of facts on appeal. The concern was that the
Court-at-Law Judges did not want to have to hear appeals again
which would be supportive of the City's goals.
7. There was no official action taken on Executive
Session items discussed during the Work Session Executive
Session.
8. New Business
The following items of New Business were suggested by Council
Members for future agendas:
A. Mayor Pro Tem Boyd indicated that he would like
staff to look into a helmet law, the televising of Council
meetings and the proposal for the City to become the exclusive
provider for the solid waste service in the City.
82
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 16, 1991
Page 23
B. Council Member Alexander echoed Boyd's request
for the City exclusive contract and asked that it be presented
as soon as possible.
C. Council Member Gorton wanted staff to look into
the concerns expressed by Mrs. Racina in her citizen report.
9. The Council did not meet in Executive Session during
the Regular Session.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:00
p.m.
JE~I FER~ALTERS
ci%% S .C TARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAY~R -~
CITY OF DENTON, TEX~S
/
3381C