Loading...
Minutes September 03, 1991The Council convened into the Work Session at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins: Council Members Alexander, Chew, Perry, Smith and Trent. ABSENT: None 1. The Council convened into the Executive Session to discuss legal matters (held a discussion regarding in re: Flow and considered filing litigation against the State regarding redistricting), real estate and personnel/board appointments. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins left the meeting during the discussion in re: Flow. 2. The Council received an interim report from and held a discussion with the Stormwater Utility Committee. Bob Coplen, Chair-Stormwater Utility Committee, stated that the Committee was made up of 15 voting members. They operated under certain rules of operation which included a quorum of 75% of the members needed to be in attendance and a majority vote was required to approve a motion. The Committee felt that their charge was two fold. Phase I was to determine if the City should continue to fund the current drainage system operation through the General Government Fund or establish a utility and collect the revenues by assessing user fees. After two half day work sessions the Committee voted 9 in favor and 6 undecided to pursue the concept of a storm water utility and reserved the right to Continue the current funding method. Phase II was to establish preliminary policy guidelines which would be attached to the final recommendation if the Committee felt that the City should pursue the establishment of a storm water utility. After two half day meetings, the Committee made the following preliminary decisions: (1) residential should be charged as single family units, a fee would be assessed to the occupant and if the property were vacant, the owner would be assessed the fee; (2) mobile homes would be charged as single family units, a fee would be assessed to the individual responsible for the utilities, and if the owner were responsible for the utilities, he would only be charged for those lots occupied by a mobile home: (3) apartment fees would be determined by a formula which would include the number of units within the complex and the impervious acreage, a fee for each complex would be calculated on an individual basis, a fee would be assessed to the occupant, if he were responsible for the utilities, and the fee would be assessed to the owner, if the owners was responsible for the utilities, the owner would have a limited liability regarding vacancies. In upcoming meetings, the Committee' would be considering commercial, churches, universities, DISD and city/county/state buildings. 326 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 2 Council Member Trent asked if the impervious acreage formula was applied tO any of the other categories. Coplen replied that the Committee started with a formula for residential category but decided that it was not cost effective for impervious acreage for residential categories. Outstanding issues included exemptions, what should the fees cover, a monthly rate as opposed to a tier schedule, limited apartment owner liability and how other cities were handling the issue. Caplen summarized that there were would be two meetings in September and that the Committee hoped to finish recommendations at that time. He cautioned that each decision they made would be reviewed against previous decisions for consistency and fairness to each element of the City. Strong discussion on each item might delay the project. 3. The Council received a presentation, held a discussion and gave staff tentative direction regarding the proposed 1991--92 electric rate recommendations and related issues. Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that the major electric issues which remained were (1) the Public Utilities Board's proposed 3% reduction in electric rates which would reduce the Energy Cost Adjustment from 1.9~ to 1.7~ KWH effective October 1, 1991. It would save the City's customers about $1.5 million and (2) vacant positions which Nelson indicated currently there were 13 positions vacant which represented $379,000 in fiscal 1992. City Manager Harrell stated that of those 13 positions, staff anticipated leaving 10-11 vacant during the next year. Ten positions represented $300,000 and eleven positions represented $351,000. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the 3% reduction of electric rates effective October 1, 1991. The vacant positions were to remain in the budget and unfilled as long as necessary. The money for those positions would remain in reserve for a possible rate reduction later in the year. Item fi4 and ~5 were considered after the regular session. The Council convened into the Regular Session at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Council Members Alexander, Chew, Perry, Smith and Trent. ABSENT: '' Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 3 Pledge of Allegiance The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins joined the meeting. 2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of the Regular Session of July 23 and July 30, 1991 Smith motioned, Alexander seconded to approve the minutes as presented. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye." Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously with Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins abstaining. Citizen Reports A. The Council received a citizen report from Joe Dodd regarding the sign ordinance and a workable compromise. Mr. Dodd stated that he felt there could be a workable compromise worked out regarding the sign ordinance. One of those solutions might be that if a sign were other wise legal, the replacement of comparable materials should be allowed. He asked the Council to consider such an amendment. B. The Council received a citizen Rosemary Killiam regarding Loop 288 and situation. report from Dr. the neighborhood Dr. Killiam presented a video tape of her property and the proximity of the Loop extension to her property. She felt that there was misinformation regarding the project. She had spoken with representatives from the Highway Department who had informed her that there would be no money available for a sound barrier and that environmental studies were not planned. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager had informed her that the studies were going to be done. Svehla had thought that the project was at least 100' from her property line and when he came out to measure, it was under 60' from the northernmost property line. The property owners in the area were not notified of the pro,eot and she wanted answers on how the project would affect the neighborhood. Mayor Castleberry asked staff to make a summary on the issue. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated he had met with the engineer in charge of the project and had been informed that the Department was doing a study for sound barriers which was one of the options presented by Dr. Killiam. He suggested the parties involved meet with the Highway Department as they were in charge of the project. 327 328 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 4 Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked that the Council be kept informed of further developments. Mayor Castleberry presented Volunteer Month. a proclamation for Literacy 4. The Council considered a request from Mo Joiner, representing Denton Youth Football, requesting a release from their past due obligations for 1990, reduced fees for 1991 and the institution of a payment schedule for the remaining fees for 1991. Mr. Joiner stated that there was an economic crunch in Denton. He was not asking for funding. He was asking for relief and help to keep the program alive. Council Member Perry asked if any fees were collected last year. Joiner replied no, not from football.. They had never paid them in the past and hoped not to pay them this year in order to try and keep the program alive. Council Member Perry asked if "never" referred to the beginning of the program. Joiner replied since the fee was implemented. He. understood that the Football League had never paid it the fee. Council Member Smith asked Joiner what he specifically was asking for from the Council. Joiner replied that he was asking for a one year referendum from the fees in 1992 to give the leagues a chance. He also represented two baseball leagues, a soccer league and girls softball in addition to football. If Council felt revenue needed to come from the Parks after 1992, he would be willing to discuss it. But he felt that the Council needed to give the program a break. The programs were co-sponsored by the City of Denton. They ran the programs for the City with volunteers. Council Member Smith stated that Joiner was suggesting that the City receive no fees from football nor any other organization. Joiner replied not from anyone in the Parks. If the City ran the program and funded the program, then it had the right to set the fee. If the City was putting out money to run the program, then it could set the fee. He was speaking for the volunteer programs. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 5 Council Member Chew asked if Joiner was requesting the City waive the fees for the Denton Youth Football. Joiner replied yes. City Manager Harrell presented the history of the issue. The administrative fee began in 1983 during the cost of service study done by an outside firm. At that point in time, the firm recommended that the City institute a $15 activity fee which would apply to any individual who happened to use a City facility in connection with some kind of organized program such as a craft program, in a recreation program, or a participant in a youth sporting event. At that point the Council decided that rather than have a $15 fee, .a $5 fee would be assessed which went into effect in 1983. When that was initially applied, it was not applied to the athletic programs. The reasoning for that was not clear but it was applied to all other activities except for the athletic programs. That matter was brought to the attention of the Council in the budget discussion in 1989 and at that point in time, the Council made the decision to include the athletic programs. The reasoning behind the administrative fee was to help the City recoup just a small amount of the expenses incurred with general tax dollars to support the program. The maintenance costs for all athletic fields totalled approximately $175,000 per year. The administrative charges from the athletic programs brought in approximately $12,000 per year to the City. The other youth activity programs in the community had paid and were up-to-date on last year's administrative fee charges. The only group at this point which still had not paid fees from last year was the Youth Football program. Current decision making of the Council and in all the communications with all of the youth sports events, the City had been consistent in reporting the Council's policy as adopted in budgets. That policy was that all participants using all of the City's recreation facilities for organized programs, senior citizens or recreation programs, the $5 administrative fee was charged. Staff was needing direction from Council. The Parks Department was getting ready to schedule fields for Youth Football. They had not paid the fee for last year. Staff needed to know how Council wanted staff to proceed regarding that problem and what to do for the current year, Staff had communicated a number of times this past year regarding the problem with the organization. Council Member Perry stated that Joiner had used a figure of $40 and the Manager had used an administrative cost of $5. City Manger Harrell replied that Joiner was probably talking about their entire fee. 329 330 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 6 Joiner stated that the fee to play football was $40. That was what they paid for the program and none of the money came from the City. The parks were maintained by the City but when the citizens passed the bond election, he thought that's what they were for, for the kids. He did not disagree with the fee. He was just in a budget crunch just like the City and had no other way. The money they had been paying in did not go to help the parks, it went in the General Fund. If the City needed to draw money from the park, it should be put back for those kids. He wanted the Council to understand that there was an economy switch in this City. In previous years he could raise all the money he needed for the program. That was not the case any longer. They could not raise the funds, stay alive and pay the City fees. They were asking for some sort of relief for 1991-92 fees to try to save the programs. He did not think Dixie Boys Baseball had paid their fees. Council Member Trent asked for the amount due from the organization. City Manager Harrell replied that last year's fee totalled approximately $1250 - $1300 giving them credit for scholarships awarded. Council Member Trent stated that at the most $1300 was due'from the organization. City Manager Harrell replied correct. Council Member Trent stated that he supported what Joiner was asking. In all fairness to that program, the Council needed to grant him relief because last week it was indicated by Council that they were willing to subsidize other sports programs by as much as $40,000 per year. To be consistent, he felt the Council should support Joiner in his request. Trent motioned, Chew seconded that the Council should go on record indicating that it was going to provide Denton Youth Football with the relief requested for the funding of past years to include 1991. Mayor Castleberry questioned was the relief for 1991 or for past fees. Trent indicated that as he understood the item, relief was sought from past due obligations for 1990 and reduced fees for 1991 to include whatever was remaining for 1991. Mayor Castleberry asked if that was part of Trent's motion. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 7 Council Member Trent replied yes. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins stated that she had no problem if the Council decided not to charge the fees. But she did have a problem in relieving Mr. Joiner and continuing to charge the other programs. If Youth Football did not pay the fees from last year, then the Council needed to rebate everyone else who did pay the fee. The fee would not be in the next years budget but the amount would have to be made up to give back to the other organizations. It was not fair for the Council to treat them any differently. The administrative fee did not cover the cost, it simply helped pay back in a little toward the administrative fee. She did not have a problem with asking the Park Board to review the issue. She felt it was grossly unfair to expect everyone else to pay the fee and not expect Football to pay it. Council Member Alexander asked for a point of order. He was not sure Council could deal directly with the issue as it might only be an information item. He felt it was a larger policy issue than just for the Football Association. Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, stated that wording on the agenda permitted the Council to discuss the item and take action. She stated that the decision did have Other implications, one of which would be that it would set an example to other organizations which had paid the fee and could possibly affect the City's ability to collect the fees in the future. Council Member Trent withdrew his motion based on Council discussion to allow further investigation. Council Member Perry asked if the issue had any bearing on the $40 fee that was charged to each child. Joiner replied no, that was what it took to 'raise and run the program. The $40 fee was what was used to run the program, pay for the umpires, the trophies, etc. Council Member Smith asked where the additional .money to run the program came from. Joiner replied that part of it came from sponsors. If a parent could not afford the $40, the child was enrolled anyway. Council Member Chew withdrew his second. Mayor Cas%'leberry questioned Joiner that the organization was collecting fees now which would be a part of the $5 fee toward the City fee. 331 3'32 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 5. 1991 Page 8 Joiner replied yes that the organization was collecting the $40 fees now. Mayor Castleberry asked if part of that $40 was the City fee. Joiner replied that it was part of what the City was wanting but that they did not count it as such. Council Member Perry asked what the $40 fee represented. Joiner replied that it covered a jersey, officials, cheer-offs, pompoms, the entire program. He stated that he was not prepared to itemize where all the money went but he could give Council a financial statement showing that it was spent. The organization spent $4,000 more than it had last year. That's why he took the program over in debt. Consensus of the Council was to discuss the item further at a later Council meeting. City Manager Harrell asked if staff should proceed to schedule games for the organization until the issue was decided. Consensus of the Council was to schedule practices and games for the organization and place the item on the next Council agenda. Public Hearings A. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance amending the boundaries of the Oak/Hickory Historic District to exclude three houses on property located at 604 W. Hickory, 602 W. Hickory and 109 Williams. (Planning and Zoning Commission, at its July 25, 1991 meeting, recommended denial. 4-3 Vote) The Mayor opened the public hearing. Sally Mudd, owner of the properties, stated that the houses were old but did not consider them historical. The houses were included in the Historic District and she would like to have those houses excluded from the District. The area of the District where her houses were located was not particularly historical with apartments and office buildings in the nearby area. She did not feel the houses belonged in the Historic District. She wanted to repair the houses with vinyl siding and would not be able to do so if they remained in the District. She would have to paint them instead of using the siding. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3. 1991 Page 9 Council Member Trent stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission had denied the request and felt that by allowing the properties to be excluded would damage the integrity of the Historical District. Mudd replied that if her houses were in a different block, the situation would be entirely different. She did not ask to be included in the District and felt it had lowered the value of her land. Mayor Castleberry asked if Mudd wanted to be a part of the District. Mudd replied no. Mayor Castleberry asked her if she had ever taken advantage of any of the tax advantages. Mudd replied that she did not know about those benefits and felt that the Historic Landmark Commission should have some type of guidelines for people who were in the District. There were-many restrictions being in the District which she did not know about. Council Member Perry asked Mudd if she was now aware of tax benefits. Mudd replied she was aware somewhat but had not pursued that as of yet. She stated that her house on Williams Street was very close to an apartment house which was not included in the District. She felt that was unfair. Council Member Smith asked how long it would be before the houses would meet the historical age limit. Mudd replied that she did not know. Her houses were old frame rent houses which were built in the late 1940's. She wanted to fix the houses so that she would not have to paint them every four to five years. She would not change the houses but could not afford to paint them every four to five years. Mayor Castleberry asked if she wanted to put siding on the houses. Mudd replied yes. 333 334. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 10 Mike Cochran spoke in opposition. He felt it was more important to the community to preserve the Historic District than to exclude the houses from the District. Not wanting to paint the houses was not an important enough reason to exclude them from the District. Denton's Historical District included a wide range of houses and styles of architecture. These three houses were a dominant style of post-war era and did have a value. Painting as opposed to vinyl siding would detract from the District and would change the lines of the houses. He asked the Council to vote against excluding the houses and preserve the Historic District. Council Member Smith asked if the house immediately to the west of the Mudd property was the same type of style. Cochran replied yes that it had some transition styles in it. Council Member Smith asked if that house was within the District. Cochran replied yes. Council Member Trent asked if Cochran's basic opposition was to the materials requested to renovate the house. Cochran felt that that issue was separate. The main issue was the removal of the houses from the District. According to all of the preservation briefs he had read, siding covered over the detail of the house which gave it its definition. The houses had not been painted for probably 10 years and wood homes need painting more than that. He asked if it were a compelling reason to not want to paint the houses to threaten the integrity of the Historic District, The Mayor closed the public hearing. Jane Biles, Main Street Manager, stated that on May 29, 1991, the Mudd's applied to the Historic Landmark Commission for a Certificate of Appropriateness to apply vinyl siding to their houses. The application was denied with a unanimous vote. The ordinance stated that existing wood facades must be preserved as wood facades. Instead of appealing their certificate of appropriateness, the Mudd's requested to have their properties removed from the District. The Historic Landmark Commission denied the petition for removal as did the Planning and Zoning Commission. Biles presented slides of the area which showed the properties in question as well as similar style houses which had been renovated. As the Planning and Zoning Commission had denied the petition for removal, six Council votes were required to approve the petition. Denton's Historic District was recognized on a state level as in encompassed a variety of styles of residential homes, City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 11 Mayor Castleberry asked if the lawyer's building on the corner of Denton and West Hickory was in the Historic District. Biles replied yes it was included. In terms of drawing boundaries, it was best to keep the lines contingent. There were some buildings in the District which did not have historic value. Mayor Castleberry asked if that was a reason for building it in the Historic District. Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that the building had been built before the District was formed. Mayor CastleberrY asked about the apartment building on Williams Street. Robbins replied that the apartment building on Williams and West Oak was not in the Historic District. Council Member Alexander stated that one of the primary motivations for the configuration of the lines was that reasonably straight lines were trying to be formed. It was recognized that not all properties within the District had equal historic value. Council Member Trent asked if there were any other requests like the Mudd's who were in the Historic District and who were asking to be excluded from that District. Biles replied that staff had called several cities to try and find out how they had handled similar problems and did not find any situations of individuals requesting to be removed from the District. Council Member Trent questioned what would be the problem if a section of the District were cut out for someone who did not want to be a part of the District. Biles replied that it would set an example for other individuals to request to be excluded. Mrs. Mudd was allowed a five minute rebuttal. She stated that she did not have old historic houses. She had older homes which she wanted to fix up. The difference between painting the houses and installing the siding was $4,000. The vinyl was more expensive but would not require the maintenance that painting would. She did not feel these houses belonged in the District. 335 336 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 12 Hopkins motioned to exclude the homes from the Historic District and 'pass the ordinance as presented due to the fact that removing them did not remove anything in the middle of the District. If the homes were in a different location, in the middle of the District, she would feel differently. Smith seconded the motion. Council Member Alexander stated that he would vote against the motion. He felt the Council needed to look at the long term effect of excluding properties from the District. He felt that to exclude the homes would change the nature of the District. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "nay," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "nay," Perry "nay." and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion failed with a 4-3 vote as six affirmative votes were required. Consent Agenda Perry motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. 1. Bid %1266 - Cleaning of Boiler Ele6tric Production 2. Bid %1272 - Distribution Transformer 3. Bid %1275 - Infrared Imaging System 4. Bid %1278 - Tire Cutter 7. Ordinances A. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance accepting a competitive sealed proposal and awarding a contract for the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies or services. (6.A.1. - Bid %1266, 6.A.2. - Bid ~1272, 6.A.3. - Bid %1275, 6.A.4. - Bid %1278) The following ordinance was considered: NO. 91-135 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING A COMPETITIVE SEALED PROPOSAL 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. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 13 Chew motioned, Hopkins seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract between the City of Denton and J. Robert McLain relating to consulting services. (The Public Utilities Board recommended approval.) Howard Martin, Director of Environmental Operations and Financial Administration, stated .that the original contract with Mr. McLain was based on 249 hours of consulting services for $9,960. Due to several factors, the rate study was not completed within the original contract value. An addendum to the contract of $4,040 was necessary to compensate the consultant for the additional work on both the cost of service study and rate design. This year a base-extra capacity modeling was used and required extra time. Once the recommendations were made, the Public utilities Board requested the staff and consultant review additional optiops for the Board's consideration. Mayor Castleberry asked if this was a miscalculation on the part of the consultant. Martin replied no that fifty three hours were additional hours requested by the Public Utilities Board and sixty four hours were additional hours training staff on how to use the computer model. Mayor Castleberry asked if this was additional work requested beyond the original contract or did the consultant error in his estimation of the time required on the project. Martin replied that fifty three hours were due to additional time requested by the Public Utilities Board and sixty four hours were required to help staff utilize and learn how to utilize the computer modeling so that in future years, when the rate design was done, staff would be able to utilize the computer modeling and develop the components needed to use the system. Council Member Trent stated that what the consultant had done differently added up to the additional hours. Martin replied yes that the sixty four hours was additional work that had been done in the past. Council Member Trent asked if this was a new concept which had been implemented. 337 338 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 14 Martin replied that it Was not entirely a new concept but it did go into much more detail than had been done in the past. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 91-136 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND J. ROBERT MCLAIN RELATING TO CONSULTING SERVICES; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Trent "nay," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "nay." Motion carried with a 5-2 vote. C. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance retaining the lawfirm of Lloyd, Goselink, Fowler, Blevins and Mathews. P.C. to represent the City of Denton in connection with the City's contract for water service to the Upper Trinity Regional Water District. (The Public Utilities Board recommended approval.) Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that several months ago the City had entered into a contract with the firm to review the contracts of joint participation with the Upper Trinity Regional Water District for the Ray Roberts Treatment Plant. After reviewing the issues raised by the firm the Council expressed concern about entering into a joint ownership agreement with the UTRWD and directed staff to discontinue ~oint ownership contract negotiations but determine from the UTRWD if they would be interested in a wholesale contract. Staff visited with the General Manager, Officers and some other members of the UTRWD, and they had generally expressed that they would prefer a joint ownership approach, but would consider a wholesale contract if a joint ownership contract was not possible. The City had wholesale water contracts with other entities and the staff had already modified those contracts in draft form in the process of developing the joint ownership contract. Staff felt it was important to seek outside legal assistance on such a wholesale contract if the Council authorized the staff to pursue negotiations for the wholesale concept. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 15 Mayor Castleberry asked if the firm would only be looking at a wholesale contract. Nelson replied correct. The contract had a basic form but would need to be refined. City Attorney Drayovitch stated that to bring in the final wholesale contract would not cost the entire amount. The amount would include negotiations and funds for a possible reexamination of a joint ownership if necessary. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins felt it was very important for staff to work with the outside attorney develop the contract for the City as they would draft it in terms which would be best for the City. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 91-137 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON RETAINING THE LAWFIRM OF LLOYD, GOSELINKo FOWLER, BLEVINS AND MATHEWS, P.C. TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF DENTON IN CONNECTION WITH THE CITY'S CONTRACT FOR WATER SERVICE TO THE UPPER TRINITY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT: AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. Council Member Alexander felt that there had been a consensus reached by the Council that they would not actively pursue the idea of a joint ownership arrangement but would pursue the wholesale arrangement. The Council did not say that it would never look at the limited partnership arrangement. He had concerns about the original proposal as it was initially presented and had not changed his mind on those points. He did feel it was important, in the spirit of regionalism and cooperation, that the City at least explore whether or not the Upper Trinity was willing to deal with the City on terms which the City felt were acceptable. Council Member Trent felt that it was not necessary to have lawyers represent the City in its initial discussions with the Upper Trinity to find out if they were interested in any other type of arrangement. Council Member Alexander felt that the key point was the need to discuss the issue again even before discussion with the upper Trinity in order to define the 'minimal points the City would require in a contract. 339 340 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 16 City Manager Harrell stated at a previous work session, four alternatives had been presented to Council - (1) the joint ownership concept, (2) a limited joint ownership which would take out the most objectionable portions of the joint ownership contract, (3) wholesale contract and (4) do nothing. Tentative decisions made by Council at that meeting were to not proceed any further with the joint ownership concept. There was some willingness to look at the wholesale contract concept but to not go '~ back to the Austin attorney until staff had checked with the Upper Trinity to determine that they would be interested in a wholesale arrangement. Staff had done that checking and the Upper Trinity was somewhat receptive. Staff now required authority to return to the Austin attorney to draw up the contract. Once that contract was presented, it did not preclude the Council to reconsider its earlier decision. If the Council wanted to reconsider the limited joint ownership and wanted to proceed with that option, there was not too much more legal work which needed to be done. City Attorney Drayovitch stated that even if the Council returned to a consideration of the limited joint ownership contract, the joint ownership contract included a reference to a separate wholesale contract which would be needed in any decision by the Council. Council Member Smith felt that in Council discussion a regional water plan outlook had been maintained. The Council did not feel it should go its own way, it was trying to work out a regional plan. Council Member Chew stated that the only option the Council ruled out was the joint ownership arrangement. Council Member Perry stated that the Council had also discussed the possibility of discussing the options with representatives from the Upper Trinity when it was appropriate. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," "aye." Motion carried unanimously. "aye," Hopkins "aye," and Mayor Castleberry Council Member Trent was not present following a short recess. 8. Resolutions A. The Council considered approval of to adopting Cable Television Public Access Rules. Television Advisory Board recommended approval.) a resolution (The Cable City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 17 Bill Angelo, Director of Community Services, stated that the Cable TV Board had been 'working Sammons Communications to define public access rules. This resolution would maintain local origination programming. The following resolution was considered: NO. R91-055 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ADOPTING CABLE TELEVISION PUBLIC ACCESS RULES AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Alexander motioned, Smith seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. Council Member Trent returned to the meeting. B. The Council considered approval of a resolution leasing parking spaces located on the Williams Trade Square. The following resolution was considered: NO. R91-056 A RESOLUTION LEASING PARKING SPACES LOCATED ON THE WILLIAMS TRADE SQUARE AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. C. The Council considered authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement between the City of Denton and the cities of Bridgeport, Bryan, Denton, Garland and Greenville, Texas for the sale and purchase of wholesale electric service. (The Public Utilities Board recommended approval.) Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that this was a contract for selling wholesale capacity -to a nearby city. Other cities Denton had contract with included College Station (100,000-110,000KW), Farmersville (5000 KW), Bowie (8,000-9,000KW) and now Bridgeport (9,000KW). The contract included a provision where Denton would build part of the substation and would receive an additional $1.25 for the substation. The rate had been designed to sell power and energy to Bridgeport at a price equal to the average cost of. · power and' energy of the four Texas Municipal Power Agency cities. The contract provided Bridgeport the option to become a member of the Texas Municipal Power Agency or another joint action entity created by one or more of the Texas Municipal Power Agency cities. 341 34 2 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 18 The following resolution was considered: NO. R91-057 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE CITIES OF BRIDGEPORT, BRYAN, DENTON, GARLAND AND GREENVILLE, TEXAS FOR THE SALE AND PURCHASE OF WHOLESALE ELECTRIC SERVICE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Trent "aye." Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," an4 Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. D. The Council considered approval of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement between the Texas Municipal Power Agency and the cities of Denton, Byran, Garland and Greenville. (The Public Utilities Board recommended approval.) Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that the agreement would allow for distribution of revenues collected .for the sale of power and energy to Farmersville. To date, TMPA had been billing Farmersville without an administration charge. The agreement would make TMPA the administrator for the billing and to pay TMPA a $300 monthly fee. It also provided the method for distribution of revenues among the four cities and the method used to amortize the construction cost over a five year period. The following resolution was considered: NO. R91-058 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY AND THE CITIES OF DENTON, BRYAN, GARLAND AND GREENVILLE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Alexander motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. ao The Council considered and discussed possible road projects for the County bond issue and gave staff direction. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3. 1991 Page 19 Rick Svehla. Deputy City Manager. stated that the County was considering holding a bond election for road improvements. Commissioners Hill and Cole had requested the City supply them with projects which the City thought would benefit Denton and also the County. A tentative list had been sent to the County with the understanding that the Council needed to finalize the list. The list included roads which were not in the City or if they were in the City. were on the outer extremes. After discussion. Council consensus was that the list presented was acceptable with the inclusion of Highway 2499. That list included: (1) Mayhill Road - Colorado to Highway 380; (2) Jim Crystal Road - Masch Branch to 1-35; (3) Hickory Creek Road - Teasley to F.M. 1380; (4) Ryan Road - F.M. 1830 to Teasley; (5) Fer£is and Hartlee Field Roads - Kings Row to Sherman Drive; (6) Underwood Road - Airport Road to F.M. 2449; (7) Robinson Road - Teasley Lane to State School Road; (8) Country Club Road - U.S. 377 to F.M. 1830. 10. There was no official- action on Executive Session items discussed during the Work Session Executive Session. 11. New Business The following item of New Business was suggested by Council Members for future agenda items: A. Council Member Trent asked for a report on recent security problems at the Municipal Airport. 12. The Council did not meet in Executive Session during the Regular Session. Following the conclusion of the Regular Session, the Council reconvened in the Civil Defense Room. Item ~4 from the Work Session was considered. 4. The Council received a presentation, held a discussion and gave staff tentative direction regarding proposed 1991-92 solid waste rate change recommendations and related issues. Bill Angelo, Director of Community Services. stated that there were two issues which remained unresolved relative to the solid waste budget. One was the proposed rate increase in the landfill rates for outside users and the second was the Citywide curbside recycling program. Council Member Perry asked who were the outside users of the landfill. 343 344 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 20 Angelo replied TWU, UNT and Texas Waste Management were examples of outside users of the landfill. Perry motioned, Chew seconded to proceed with the proposed rate increase. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously. Angelo stated that there was a concern regarding expanding the recycling program. The degree of participation in the current program was good and the amount of waste stream reduction in that particular area was better than the national average for similar communities. Over the course of the last several months there had been changes in technology and legislation which caused concern for expansion of the program. Expansion of the curbside~ recycling would require a rate increase of $1.20 per month per customer. This option would have a volume reduction of 2.7% at the landfill and extend the landfill life by 1.5 months. Other options were separation facility which would handle residential trash only. This would have a volume reduction of 10.8% and extend the landfill life by 6.5 months. Residential and commercial separation facility would have a 40% reduction and add two years of life to the landfill. Refuse derived fuel would have a 85% reduction and add 4.2 years of life to the landfill. There was a concern about what to do with the current program. Whether to continue the program at the same location, move the location or discontinue the program. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins felt that the program should not be increased at the present time. If the program were to continue, she felt it should be in a different section of the City if it would not be too expensive to change locations. Council Member Smith pointed out that moving the location would require the expense of educating the neighborhoods about the program. She felt that the Council would not want to send a false signal by stopping the program. Council Member Alexander pointed out the new legislation which was passed which would require cities to reduce waste by 40% by 1994. It might be wise to establish a task force to look at alternatives. Nelson asked if the Council could wait until t~e exclusive commercial service had started and then move on such a task force. Smith motioned, Alexander seconded to continue with the current program until the Utility Department felt it was important to begin a task force to study the alternatives. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "nay," Smith "aye," Chew "nay," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried with a 5-2 vote. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 21 5. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff tentative direction regarding the 1991-92 water/wastewater rate study and related issues. Howard Martin, Director of Environmental Operations and Financial Administration, stated that there were several issues still outstanding for the water/wastewater budget which staff needed Council direction. The rate study conducted this year indicated an 11.77% increase was needed across the board in the water area with a five block rate increase. The Public Utilities Board recommended a 10% increase which would keep the same block increase. Martin presented options to reduce the rate further. Those included (1) shifting the economic development plan lines from current revenue to bond funds, (2) increasing debt interest (13.41% rate increase), eliminating a proposed supervisory position at the water treatment plant (13.09% rate increase), (3) reduce the painting of the water tower by establishing a fund of $100,000 this year and $100,000 next year for the project (12.20% rate increase), (4) postponing the demolition of two wells (11.40% rate increase), (5) reducing miscellaneous waterline replacement from $311,000 to $100,000 (10.51% rate increase), (6) reducing waterlines street program from $216,000 to $55,000 (10.03% rate increase, (7) reducing the repayment of the loan to the Electric Department from $500,000 to $285,000 (7.49% rate increase) and (8) eliminating the repayment of the loan to the Electric Department (5.59% rate increase). Council held a lengthy discussion regarding these options and the effects on the community. Trent motioned, Castleberry seconded to approve the Public Utilities Board recommendation of a rate increase of 10.03% which included options %1-~6 as presented above. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "Kay," Hopkins "nay," Smith "nay," Chew "nay," Perry "nay," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion failed with a 2-5 vote. Chew motioned, Hopkins seconded to hold the water rate increase to 11.40% which represented options ~1 - 94 of the options presented above. On roll vote, Trent "nay," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "nay." Motion carried with a 5-2 vote. Martin stated that wastewater issues which were still outstanding were the level of rate increase and the methodology for calculating the wastewater volume charge. 345 346 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 22 The Public Utilities Board recommended a 15% rate increase, but had an option' of an 11.5% rate increase provided there was no change in the methodology of determining the wastewater volumes. The Public Utilities Board was recommending using a four month average and discarding the highest month. The present means of calculating used an average of the three winter months. Trent motioned, Chew seconded to continue with the current methodology of using three months to establish the wastewater volume charge. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "nay," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "nay," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried with a 5-2 vote. Following the conclusion of the Work Session items, Council considered the following item: 1. The Council held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding budget issues for the 1991-92 fiscal year. City Manager Harrell stated that the last item of budget deliberations was the staff's pledge to return to the decisions thus far made regarding the General Fund allocations. Those decisions included: Shortfall due to property value Use of additional General Fund reserve Eliminate General Fund Demolition of Substandard Structures Eliminate increase in Pool Fee Revenue Additional funding of SPAN Additional Tax Roll Supplement Decrease in Insurance cost Increase in Sales Tax Revenue Flow Hospital Reserve Additional 1/4~ to fund Debt Service for Building Improvement bonds $(310.000) 66,848 (243,152) 15,000 (228,152) (8,000) (236 152) (10,000) (246 152) 140,000 (106 152) 84,000 (22 152) 48,152 26 000 22,000 48 000 (48,000) City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 23 Council Member Alexander asked for a dollar amount needed to replace the Parks dollars if the Council decided to forgive the Denton Youth Football's debt. He would only do so by working with the tax rate to get it high enough to generate that amount of revenue. City Manager Harrell replied that if it were simply applied to administrative charges that were made to outside youth sports associations, $10,500 would be needed. That did not include Boy's Basketball which was a City operated program nor any other administrative fees charged for other types of activities. Betty McKean, Executive Director f.or Economic Development and Municipal Services, stated that the amount would be closer to $16,000. Mayor Castleberry asked what impact would this decision have on other programs. City Manager Harrell replied that if only the outside youth groups were used, it would be approximately $10,500 to $16,000. The policy would exclude only those programs. The administrative fee would still be charged for boy's basketball and for anyone else who signed up for a City program. If the deletion of the fee extended further, more money would be needed to make up that revenue. Council Member Smith stated that to be fair, those programs which had already paid their fees would have to be refunded that money. City Manager Harrell stated that then the problem would be greater as more money would be needed. And if other recreational programs were included the amount would be compounded. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins stated that she was not in favor of forgiving the amount due from the previous year. McKean stated that following the Council's Regular Session, she had met with Mo Joiner to try and develop options for repayment of the Football fees. A problem she saw was how long to defer the fees and could the City legally defer the fees. The Association wanted to be forgiven what was in arrears as there now was different leadership. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked if the Parks Board had considered the item. 347 348 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 24 McKean replied that it had not been to the Parks Board. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked how the Parks Board felt about relieving, deferring, not charging the fee. McKean replied that the issue had come up last week when staff discovered the football season was about to start and the Association still had not paid last year's fees. Council Member Chew felt the issue should be referred back to the Parks Board for their input. Mayor Castleberry asked if the City could legally allow the Association to begin their season with the understanding that they would work out a plan to pay what was in arrears. Council Member Smith stated that the position in correspondence to the Association was that if they did not pay the past due amount, they would not be able to start their new season. City Attorney Drayovitch stated that she felt the Council neede~ to be concerned that groups could be treated differently as long as there was a rational basis. But if there were no rational basis, the City would be leaving itself open for others to not pay the same amount. In regards to the question if it' were legal to defer payment, she did not see that it would be illegal. McKean stated that last year the Association advertised their fee at $35 and refused to pay the administrative fee to the City. This year the advertised fee was $40 and did not say as to whether $5 was for the administrative fee. Joiner had informed her that the extra $5 was not for the administrative fee and that they had no intention to pay the fee. The extra $5 was an inflationary fee. Mayor Castleberry stated that he felt the Council was indicating that the item should be referred back to the Parks Board or to McKean to work out prior payment and payment for next year. McKean pointed out that the season was scheduled to begin September 14, 1991. Mayor Castleberry stated that he felt the Association could begin their season while the payment details were worked out. Council Member Smith felt that the Council would be undercutting staff by allowing the Association to begin their season as all the correspondence by the staff had been that the new season could not:begin until the past due amount had been paid. Mayor Castleberry stated that the children would be penalized if the new season was not allowed to begin. City of Denton City Council Minutes September 3, 1991 Page 25 349 Council Member smith stated that it was not a good signal to the children to change the rules for the Association. Council Member Perry stated that he would like to know what the Association's concession stand collected and what the Association did with that money. Chew motioned, Trent seconded to defer the issue back to the Parks Board and to allow the Association to begin its new season while the details were being worked out. On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "nay," Hopkins "aye," Smith "nay," Chew "aye," Perry "nay and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried with a 4-3 vote. Perry motioned, Hopkins seconded to direct staff to prepare an ordinance setting the tax rate at $.6851 per $100 valuation. On roll vote, Trent "nay," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Smith "aye," Chew "aye," Perry "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. City Manager Harrell presented a review of the Mercer study and the implementation procedures. Those employees below the minimum would be brought up to minimum effective January 1, 1992. In addition, those employees who were eligible for step increases between October 1 and January 1 would continue to receive those increases. On January 1, 1992 anyone who had received less than a 3% salary adjustment because of either being brought up to minimum or because they received a step increase would receive the difference up to 3%. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m. C~Y SF~ETARY CITY OF~ DENTON. TEXAS CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS/ / 3441C