Minutes September 17, 1991350
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 17, 1991
The 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, Perry, Smith and Trent.
Absent: Council Member Chew
1. The Council convened into the Executive Session to discuss
legal matters (considered the claim of Mr. and Mrs. Gamble,
considered the claim of Mr. and Mrs. Harp and considered action in
re: Flow), real estate, and personnel/board appointments.
Council Member Chew joined the meeting.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins left the meeting during the discussion of in
re: Flow.
2. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding
legislation passed by the 72nd Legislature that might have an
impact on the Municipal Court procedurally, fiscally or both.
Sandra White, Municipal Judge, stated that there were many items
passed by the Legislature which potentially affected Municipal
Court. One bill which she wanted to spend some time on was Senate
Bill 883. This bill amended Article 14.06 of the Texas Code of
Criminal Procedures and allowed a peace officer who was charging a
person who was committing a Class C Misdemeanor under the Penal
Code would be able to issue a ticket rather than putting them in
jail. The bill specifically excluded public intoxication offenses.
She felt the bill was significant as the Legislature and Courts
were consistently telling Municipal Courts that Class C
Misdemeanors did not carry a penalty of jail time and did not want
the Courts to put those offenders in jail. Under the Penal Code,
if the officer viewed the offense, he did not have to take the
person to jail. He could issue a ticket. That kind of procedure
was known as "field release." She felt the City should utilize
SB$33 as 'much as possible to avoid incarceration and reduce the
amount of paper work the Court and Police Department would be
required to do. White reviewed a flow chart of jail cases and non-
jail cases including a comparison of amounts of fines collected in
jail and non-jail cases.
City Manager Harrell suggested that the Judge work with Chief Jez
on how best to implement the new legislation. On the surface the
procedure looked good, but input from the chief would help
determine if there were any adverse implications to the procedure.
351
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 2
Another change allowed cities under 850,000 population to add an
additional cost up to $5.00 for parking tickets. If a city added
this fee, the funds collected had to be used for school crossing
guard programs and if a city did not have a school crossing
program, the funds needed to be used for health, drug education of
children. She needed direction from Council whether to implement
that additional fee.
City Manager Harrell stated that the administrative charge for the
school crossing guards was the responsibility of the School
District. In the Major Budget Issues, there were items to increase
parking fines for people who did not pay promptly.
White stated that she needed to know how the Council wanted to
proceed with this new legislation.
Mayor Castleberry suggested referring the issues to the Council
Subcommittee and have them make recommendations to the Council.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins felt that the City Manager, Finance Director,
Chief of Police and the Judge needed to provide input into the
issues.
consensus of the Council was to have staff work on the issues and
bring back recommendations at the second meeting in October.
The Council then convened into the Regular Session at 7:00 p.m. in
the Council Chambers.
Present: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins; Council Members
Alexander, Perry, Smith and Trent.
Absent: Council Member Chew
1. Pledge of Allegiance
The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of
Allegiance.
Council Member Chew joined the meeting.
Item #3 was considered.
3. Presentation of Award to Mr. Trent Young
Bob Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities, stated that Mr. Young,
a former City employee, had been working on a job site with a Lone
Star Gas employee. The Lone Star Gas employee had slumped over in
his work area. Mr. Young found the employee and began giving him
CPR and had others call for the paramedics. Because of his quick
352
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 3
actions, the employee was revived. Mayor Castleberry presented Mr.
Young with a Resolution of Appreciation and Nelson presented him
with a plaque of appreciation.
Mayor Castleberry presented proclamations for American Business
Women's Day and Edward Hackford Day.
The Council returned to the regular agenda order.
2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of the Regular
Session of August 6, 1991.
Perry motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve the minutes as
presented. Motion carried unanimously.
4. Citizen Reports
A. The Council received a citizen report from Jesse Coffey
regarding the 1991-92 budget.
Mr. Coffey stated that on August 27, 1991 the Council held a public
hearing regarding the budget. He was present for that public
hearing and had asked several questions concerning the budget.
City Manager Harrell corresponded with him on September 5, 1991 and
answered two of the questions proposed at that time. He wrote back
to the City Manager on September 12, 1991 and asked the questions
again. As he walked into the meeting this evening, he was given an
envelope with the Manager's reply. His letter was dated the 12th,
and delivered the 12th or 13th. The Manager replied as quickly as
he could to his questions. Coffey stated that he had not had time
to examine the correspondence as fully as he liked and asked if he
could ask the questions and have the Manager reply.
Mayor Castleberry replied that it could be done as long as it
remained in the 5 minute time frame allowed for citizen reports.
Coffey stated that he understood that the City had $50 million in
cash and reserves uncommitted. Was that correct and if correct,
why was it necessary to have 40% of the City's annual budget in
cash reserves.
Mayor castleberry replied that it was answered in the Manager's
letter.
City Manager Harrell stated that the $50 million Coffey referred to
was the retained earnings within the utility fund. As of August
31, 1991, there was approximately $27.4 million in ~aeh and
investments which currently could be deemed to be undesignated.
One million dollars was encumbered for the cost of contracts and
goods or services. The remaining portion of the retained earnings
353
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 4
within the Utility fund was earmarked for long term debt payments,
capital projects or restricted bond covenant indentures pledged to
bond holders when bonds were sold. A good portion of the retained
earnings were needed for cash flow purposes within the utility
system. The system was running approximately 45-60 days behind
time from the point of billing for utility revenue until that
revenue was received. A portion of those funds were used for that
basis.
Coffey asked the Manager to elaborate on his sentence "this amount
is set aside when the City enters into contracts to make sure those
dollars are not spent on something else."
Mayor Castleberry stated that the Manager could answer the question
but that then Mr. Coffey's five minutes had elapsed.
City Manager Harrell replied that that was in reference to the
amount of the $1 million of the $27.4 that had to be set aside as
encumbered amounts when the city entered into contracts to make
sure. those dollars were available. Once a contract had been
entered into even though that was in the fund balance or retained
earnings within the Utility Department, that money was set.aside
and was not available for expenditures.
Coffey stated then that the City had $26.4 million in cash and
investments. Was that in addition to or did it include the $47
million cash reserve fund.
City Manager Harrell replied that it was inclusive of that money.
Coffey replied that the $47 million included the $26 million.
City Manager Harrell replied correct.
Coffey stated that the Manager had mentioned long term debt
payments, capital projects, commitments related to unperformed
contracts and restricted bond indenture. Those were not in the
proposed Annual Program of Services. The $50 million was over and
above the current income.
Mayor Castleberry stated that Mr. Coffey's five minutes were over
and that the Council did follow that rule.
Council Member Trent stated that he would like to hear the answer
to the question.
Mayor Castleberry stated that he felt the question had been
answered. He asked Coffey if his question had been answered.
Coffey replied that it answered his first question. He had six
354
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 5
more he wanted to ask.
Mayor Castleberry stated that the Council did follow the five
minute rule.
Coffey asked if it would be possible to come back at a later date
before the final budget was approved in order to get these items on
the record for the general public.
Mayor Castleberry stated that tonight would probably conclude the
Council's budget procedure. Coffey was welcome to return at any
time and follow the usual policy for a citizen report.
Council Member Trent asked Coffey if he felt that there were funds
in the budget that had not been plainly presented as being
available.
Coffey replied that that was correct. He was bothered that
throughout the Program for Annual Services as presented to the City
Council, there was talk about hard times, employee raises to meet
inflationary times. There was no inflation in Denton. The economy
in Denton had been flat for five years. In that period of.time,
there had been a $9 million increase in personnel salaries. With
$50 million in the bank, he did not understand why a tax increase
was needed.
Mayor Castleberry stated that in order to continue the discussion,
there would have to be a consensus of the Council. Hearing none,
he thanked Mr. Coffey for his remarks.
B. The Council received a citizen report from Mark Fleege
regarding a city initiative for a zoning case.
Mr. Fleege stated that he was representing the Township II-Hopkins
Hills Homeowners Association requesting the City Council,s
assistance in initiating a zoning change. The Homeowners
Association requested a clarification and updating of existing
zoning in the Township II area. The updating needed to reflect the
existing uses. The Homeowners Association requested re-zoning of
the last part of the undeveloped San Jaointo Plaza to reflect the
retail/office use that was currently in place. The PD-6
designation now in place posed problems that could lead to a repeat
of the Pep Boys controversy.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked if this was related to a park issue.
Fleege replied no that it was the undeveloped area between Pep Boys
and the San Jacinto Plaza.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked if the homeowners were trying to take __
355
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 6
the property out of the retail use.
Fleege replied no that they realized that it would be developed but
under PD-6 the category was too broad.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked about the property owners of the site.
Fleege replied that he understood that as the zoning process took
place, the property owner would have a chance to respond. They
were asking the City to begin the process. As a neighborhood, they
did not have the funds to approach the City to begin the rezoning.
City Manager Harrell stated that the item had been discussed bythe
Planning and Zoning Commission last week and they voted to initiate
a city case regarding the item.
Fleege stated that it was part of an educational process to alert
the Council to the neighborhood's feelings regarding the issue.
They would like to see this done as quickly as possible.
4A. The Council considered accepting a recommendation from the
Parks and Recreation Board regarding the administrative fee for
parks programs and regarding the request by the Denton Youth
Football Association for waiver and/or delayed payment of fees.
city Manager Harrell stated that per Council's direction, this
issue had been refereed to the Parks and Recreation Board. That
Board had met the previous evening and the minutes of that meeting
were available for Council review.
Betty McKean, Executive Director for Economic Development and
Municipal Services, stated that the Board had spent several hours
on debate and hearing testimony regarding the issue. One of the
issues had been from the Denton Youth Football Association which
had asked to be relieved of an outstanding debt on their
administrative fee for the past season. The estimate of the amount
due was $1300. In addition, a concern had been raised by some
members of the Council that if that amount of money were forgiven,
that consistency of treatment for the other athletic associations
was necessary. If the Council were to waive the youth football
fees, the amount was approximately $1300. Other self-managed youth
programs and the amount of their fees included soccer with two
seasons ($700, $3,360); Boy's Baseball ($2,300); Little League
($2,500); and Girl's Softball ($875). The subtotal was $11,035.
The other issue was whether to consider adult programs and other
kinds of programs. A larger issue before the Council was the
necessity or the appropriateness of having the administrative fee
at all. Options to consider would include (1) continue under the
current philosophy with the administrative fee; (2) discontinue the
administrative fee for youth athletic associations only, reducing
356
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 7
revenue by $12,000 and possibly increasing the tax rate by .000627
or an equivalent amount of budget cuts; (3) discontinue the
administrative fee for all self-managed associations, reducing
revenue by $14,800 and increasing the tax rate by .000773 or an
equivalent amount of budget cuts; and (4) discontinue the
administrative fee for all department sponsored activities,
reducing the revenue by $30,000 and increasing the tax rate by
.001568 or an equivalent amount of budget cuts.
Dalton Gregory, Chair-Parks and Recreation Board, stated that on
November 14, 1988, the Parks Board unanimously voted to oppose the
assessment of an additional $5 administrative fee to athletic
participants. On September 16, 1991, the Parks Board again
unanimously voted to drop the $5 administrative fee for self-
managed youth athletic participants. They were opposed to the fee
for several reasons. The fee had increased the cost to
participants to the youth and their families. These costs had made
it difficult for some families to participate in the programs. The
fee had not resulted in better or improved services to the
participants. During the same time that the fees were first
assessed in 1988, the City was cutting back on its financial
support to the youth athletic groups by dropping its payment for
officiating. The fee had created a hardship for the many
volunteers who helped operate the self-managed sports programs.
They had to raise more scholarship dollars per child and had to
provide more scholarships due to the overall higher cost to each
participant. It was for those reasons, the Parks Board recommended
that the Council drop the administrative fee to all of the self-
managed youth programs. On a larger scale, he wanted to recommend
that the Council and staff join with the Parks Board in rethinking
the philosophy of trying to make parks and recreation (leisure
services) a source for generating revenue.
Council Member Trent stated that at the Parks Board meeting, one.of
the items decided was to eliminate the fees but not do it through
a tax increase. A motion was made to do it but to find the revenue
in other ways. A list was presented to the Parks Board containing
possible cuts which had been rejected by the Board. The Board had
asked for a second list. Had that been received yet.
Gregory replied that the Board had not received the list yet and
did not expect to receive it so soon. He stated that the Board had
been asked by staff to suggest recommendations to recoup the
$12,000 and the Board was unable to come to any consensus. They
were unable to come to a consensus that a tax increase would be
appropriate. If a tax increase were to happen to recoup the
$12,000, it would cost the taxpayer of a $100,000 only $.63. The
Board was not able to come to a consensus regarding the best way to
recoup the money and were uncomfortable with the list that was
given. He personally was uncomfortable with the idea of the Parks
357
City of Denton City council,Minutes,
September 17, 1991
Page 8
and Recreation Department having to make up the $12,000.
Council Member Smith stated that the Board did not ask that the
fees for the adult self-managed programs be dropped.
Gregory replied that that was correct. They did not directly
address the issue of adult recreation programs. They responded to
two questions regarding whether the past due fees should be
collected and whether the fee should be continued.
City Manager Harrell asked for the recommendation from the Board
regarding the past due fees.
Gregory replied that the Board recommended that the Association be
requested to pay the past due fees.
Council Member Perry asked if the Board considered any places at
all in the Parks and Recreation budget where it would recommend
dropping any programs or any part of the budget to offset the
$12,000. He felt Gregory was indicating that the Board did not
want to drop any of the programs and would like to expand programs.
Gregory replied that that was correct. They did not want to see
one program cut so that another program could survive.
Council Member Alexander replied that the Council was also
proponents to expand services but the budget had to be balanced.
He felt that the citizens had indicated that they wanted the City
to provide high quality services and when necessary were willing to
pay for those through the taxes required to make that possible. He
pointed out that while the $5 administrative fee was a significant
amount of money, it was a small portion of the amount of money that
the City helped to provide for making parks and recreation services
available. It was a small portion of the fee that was required for
youth to sign up for the programs.
Mayor Castleberry stated that the Council had asked Mo Joiner to
present Council with a financial statement. He asked Joiner if he
wished to make any additional comments regarding the financial
statement he had presented Council.
Joiner stated that the statement had been given to the City and a
copy should be in the Council's packets.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins felt that the Parks Board had made a fair
recommendation and that Boy's Football must pay the fees due that
all of the other organizations had paid. She would look to them to
make a payment schedule with Ms. McKean. They needed to pay the
fees as all of the other organizations had paid the fee and it was
the only fair thing to do.
358
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 9
Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to require Denton Youth Football to
pay the fees owed for the past year and that there no longer be $5
fees for any other youth sports beginning with the current year.
Council Member Perry stated that he could not vote for that motion
as he felt there were two separate issues and would require two
separate motions.
Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to require Denton Youth Football to
pay the past due fees which could be paid through a payment
schedule throughout the year. On roll vote, Trent "aye", Alexander
"aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and
Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to eliminate the $5 administrative
feel for self-managed youth sports programs. On roll vote, Trent
"aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "nay", Chew "aye",
Perry "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 5-
2 vote.
Trent motioned, Hopkins seconded to direct staff to find a place
from which to take the money and not increase taxes.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that this item was related to a
budget item later in the agenda and perhaps the Council wished to
wait until that time to make such a motion.
Council Member Trent withdrew his motion and Hopkins withdrew her
second.
5. Public Hearings
A. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption
of an ordinance approving the rezoning of a 25.58 acre tract of
land from Planned Development No. 110 to Conditioned Light
Industrial District on properties located on the south side of US
Highway 77, north and south of State Highway Loop 288 (under
construction). Z-91-013 (The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval with conditions.)
Karen Feshari, Urban Planner, stated that there two tracts of land
located on the south side of U.S. Highway 77, north and south of
State Highway Loop 288 (under construction). The property was
located in the Northern Urban Center. Loop 288 was scheduled to be
completed in 1992, access on Highway 77 frontage would be limited
to two points, one on each tract, sidewalks would be required on
both Highway 77 and Loop 288 frontages as well as any interior
public streets, Highway 288 frontage roads would be constructed
through the area. If the developer desired access to Loop 288, he
would be required to either participate, fund, or build the
359
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991 ~
Page 10
frontage roads for Loop 288. A detailed drainage analysis would be
required during the platting process to determine the extent of any
additional off-site improvements needed. On March 18, 1986, the
Council approved the rezoning of the site from the agricultural
district to the planned development district for the purpose of a
mixed use development consisting of office, commercial, and retail
uses. Ordinance No. 86-63, which governed this tract of land, was
passed with a number of conditions. The following were of concern:
(1) proposed building heights should not exceed five stories, (2)
proposed maximum building coverage should not exceed fifty percent
of the area of the tract and the maximum coverage of all buildings,
drives, and parking areas should not exceed eighty percent of the
area of the tract on which they were to be built, (3) the maximum
floor area within all buildings should not exceed 1 million square
feet, and (4) proposed land uses should be limited to office,
hotel, bank, movie theater, gasoline service station, parking lot
or garage, medical center or hospital, convenience store, and
retail and shopping center uses. Pertaining to condition one,
there was no regulation in a light industrial district. However,
these parcels fell under the regulations of the Federal Aviation
Administration height restrictions. The adjacent Hillcrest Center
was recently approved with a maximum height of 20 stories and it
was suggested that the restriction to 5 stories on this property be
amended to be consistent with the Hillcrest Center. The second
condition was placed on the site because there was no regulation in
the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to building coverage and floor to
area ratios for commercial and retail type uses. The Planning and
Zoning Commission recommended that the floor to area ratio be
restricted to a 1:1 ratio. The third condition capped the floor
areas at i million square feet. In order to encourage a transition
between Hillcrest and PD 115, staff suggested that the floor to
area ratio be 1:1 which would allow for 1,110,780 square feet. In
reference to the allowed uses, the applicant had requested that
some of those uses allowed by right be prohibited as a condition in
the proposed rezoning. An additional condition pertaining to
setbacks should be considered. In order to maintain consistency
with the property adjacent to this, staff suggested that the
setbacks along Loop 288 be 40 feet and that no parking be allowed
in that 40 foot setback area. In general, this rezoning would be
in compliance with the policies of the Denton Development Plan if
approved with the recommended conditions.
Council Member Perry questioned the amount of conditions.
Feshari replied that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
the approval with only three conditions. Staff had incorporated
the other conditions associated with the Planned Development.
City Manager Harrell indicated that this was a conditioned zoning
case as opposed to a planned development. Conditioned zoning had
360
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 11
more recommendations with conditions. There
conditions than a planned development but more
zoning.
would be less
in just straight
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Dennis Jerkey, representing the Perot Group, stated that the light
industrial zoning was appropriate for the land use. Adjacent land
uses were compatible and the existing zoning was very limiting.
They did not have any problem with the conditions placed by the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
No one spoke in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
The following ordinance was considered:
91-138
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR
A CHANGE FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) TO LIGHT
INDUSTRIAL-CONDITIONED (LI-C) ZONING DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 25.5 ACRES OF LAND
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 77; PROVIDING
FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR
VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR ANEFFECTIVE DATE.
Perry motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance with the
stated conditions. 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 held a public hearing and considered adoption
of an ordinance approving a rezoning on .1844 acres of land located
at the southeast corner of Austin and Oakland Streets from the "NS"
Neighborhood Service District to the "GR" (C) General Retail
District (Conditioned). Z-91-014 (The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval.)
Karen Feshari, Urban Planner, stated that the property was located
in a Moderate Activity Center. The building was on the tract of
land built approximately 50-60 years ago bythe applicant's father.
There was no history in the zoning files establishing when this
tract was rezoned to Neighborhood Service. However, it was
probable that when the City rezoned by map in 1969, this tract was
zoned according to the existing use of the property. The applicant
was requesting a rezoning of the tract to allow for a sandwich shop
serving beer and wine. This was not an allowed use in the
Neighborhood Service District. There was a need for an eating
361
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 12
establishment near TWU and there was reasonable assumption that a
significant amount of the traffic would be pedestrian. The
additional use would not adversely impact the surrounding
neighborhood. The public interest would be served by allowing a
small eating establishment in the area. The Board of Adjustments
granted a request for a variance to the parking regulations for the
site. Specific conditions for the rezoning included allowed uses
be in compliance with the table of Permitted Uses and the gross
floor area on the site would not exceed 6200 square feet.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Larry Green, speaking for the applicant,
need for an eating place in the area.
served at a later date but not initially.
stated that there was a
Beer and wine would be
They were requesting a
zoning change for a sandwich shop which was not currently allowed
in the neighborhood service district.
No one spoke in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Council Member Trent asked if the applicant had any concerns
regarding the conditions imposed on the rezoning.
Feshari replied that Mr. Kornblatt, property owner, had indicated
to her that he had no problems with the conditions.
The following ordinance was considered:
91-139
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR
A CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE (NS) TO GENERAL
RETAIL-CONDITIONED (GR-C) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION
AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 0.18 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF AUSTIN AND OAKLAND STREETS; PROVIDING
FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR
VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FORANEFFECTIVE DATE.
Trent motioned, Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance with the
stated conditions. On roll vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye",
Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
6. Consent Agenda
Mayor Castleberry
consideration.
indicated that Item 6.A.4. was pulled from
362
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 13
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins requested information concerning Items 6.A.1.
and 6.A.2. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins stated that backup information
for those two items was confusing as different amounts were shown
on the ordinance as opposed to the backup information. The proposed
accepted bid was more than the iow bid on the bid sheet for the
transformer.
Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that
transformers were evaluated for losses over the entire life of the
transformer. Those losses included a core loss or a winding loss.
Those losses affected the end price for the unit. This was a case
where the lower capital price, in the long evaluated price, was not
the best bid.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked about the lowboy trailer.
invoice in the backup for $161,930 as opposed to
indicated in the ordinance.
There was an
the $46,500
Nelson indicated that currently the City was renting a lowboy to
get a transformer to a site. The cost of the lowboy was $100/day
and had been rented for 100 days. The invoice was in the backup
for a comparison of how much a new lowboy would cost.
Council Member Trent asked if the City was currently renting a
lowboy why did it have to buy one at this time.
Nelson replied that it was very costly to rent the lowboy.
Currently they had spent $42,000 to rent a lowboy and this one to
buy was $46,500 which could be used again instead of having to pay
the rent cost over and over.
Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as
presented. Motion carried unanimously.
A. Bids and Purchase Orders:
2.
3.
5.
Bid #1265 - 1500 KVA Station Transformer
Bid ~1279 - Lowboy Trailer
Bid #1285 - Disk Drive
P.O. #15873 - IBM
.7.
6. P.O. #15868 - American Management System
Ordinances
A. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance accepting
a competitive sealed proposal and awarding a contract for the
363
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 14
purchase of materials, equipment, supplies or services. (6.A.1. -
Bid ~1265, 6.A.2. - Bid #1279, 6.A.3. - Bid #1285)
The following ordinance was considered:
91-140
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.
Chew motioned, Alexander 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 providing
for the expenditure of funds for purchases of materials or
equipment which are available from one source in accordance with
the provisions of state law exempting such purchases from
requirements of competitive bids. (6.A.5. - P.O. #15873, 6.A.6. -
P.O. #15868)
The following ordinance was considered:
91-141
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR
PURCHASES OF MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE AVAILABLE
FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF
STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF
COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Hopkins motioned, smith 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.
C. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute Amendment No. 3 to the agreement
of February 16, 1988 between the City of Denton and Freese and
Nichols, Inc., relating to professional engineering services for
Lake Ray Roberts Offsite Water Transmission Facilities. (The
Public Utilities Board recommended approval.)
Lee Allison, Director of Water Utilities and Engineering Division,
stated that Freese and Nichols, Inc. was in the process of
completing the detail design of the Hartlee Field Road Booster Pump
364
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 15
Station. Refinements were made to the preliminary design during
this phase as well as preparing the construction drawings and
specifications. At the review meeting of February 1, 1991, staff
identified three design adjustments resulting in lower total costs
which included bridge crane, variable frequency pump and fire
sprinkler system. The bridge crane would allow movement of various
parts around the pump room in a smaller building. Without a bridge
crane, the building would have to be at least four feet wider to
accommodate a portable hoist. The variable speed pump would
improve the ability to pump into the distribution system
economically during a variety of demand and pressure situations.
The fire sprinkler system was included at the request of the Denton
Fire Department.
The following ordinance was considered:
91-142
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT
NO. 3 TO THE AGREEMENT OF FEBRUARY 16, 1988 BETWEEN THE
CITY OF DENTON AND FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC. RELATING TO
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR LAKE RAY ROBERTS
OFFSITE WATER TRANSMISSION FACILITIES; AUTHORIZING THE
EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Alexander motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye",
Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayo~ Castleberry "aye". Motion
carried unanimously.
D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing payment to Leroy Whitlock and Hazel Whitlock for
easement acquisition (Ray Roberts Transmission Water Line Project.)
Dave Ham, Manager of Construction Projects, stated that easements
would be required from 20 property owners from Denton to Ray
Roberts. This was the first of those easements.
Council Member Trent asked for the total cost of all the easements.
Ham replied approximately $267,000.
The following ordinance was considered:
365
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 16
91-143
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF A UTILITYEASEMENT
FROM HAZELAND LEROYWHITLOCK; AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF
FUNDS AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Hopkins motioned, Trent 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.
E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance adopting
the budget for the City of Denton, Texas, for the fiscal year
beginning on October 1, 1991, and ending on September 30, 1992.
City Manager Harrell stated that out of the budget discussions,
Council had made specific amendments to the proposed budget. Those
amendments had been incorporated into the various appropriations
listed in the ordinance. Based upon the earlier decision made by
Council regarding the $5 administrative fee, another decision was
still needed. Under the General Fund category in the ordinance,
there was an expenditure allocation of $28,232,919. The Council
had two options regarding the $12,000 which had been deleted by the
earlier decision. If it was the Council's desire to recoup that
$12,000 decrease by reducing expenditures someplace in the General
Fund budget, the appropriate action would be to amend the General
Fund appropriation by $12,000 and would read $28,220,919. Staff,
at the next formal meeting, would return with specific
recommendations on where that should be implemented, department by
department. Another option was to delete it and Council tell staff
which departments the dollars would come from. If the Council did
not want to reduce expenditures but would rather do a small
adjustment in the tax rate to recoup the $12,000, it would be
appropriate at this point, to keep the figure at $28,232,919.
Council Member Trent asked if it was not true that the funding for
the Campus Theater that the Council voted to allocate for utility
expenses had now been given back to the City for at least the next
year based on the Arts Council delayed start date. And if that
were true, the amount of that return funding was $21,000 which
would more than pay for the $12,000 shortfall incurred by doing
away with the administrative fees. He felt that that was one
solution to finding money without resorting to a tax increase.
City Manager Harrell replied that the City had in place a contract
with the Greater Denton Arts Council that the Council would pay a
set amount each month starting in October in support of utility
costs for the Campus Theater. That contract was in existence and
would continue to be so. The Arts Council had indicated to the
366
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 17
City, in conversations, that it was their intention that when they
received the monthly payment, that they would deduct the amount of
actual utility costs on the Campus Theater and would return the
balance until they actually commenced reconstruction of the
building. There was no legal obligation on the Arts Council to
return the funds to the City. They had just indicated that that
was their intention.
Council Member Trent felt that it was the moral thing for them to
do based on their delayed start date. He did not think that their
utilities, at this stage, when they had not even begun yet, would
exceed $10,00.
City Manager Harrell replied that he thought that was a fair
assumption.
Council Member Trent felt that that was a fair place to look for
money that had already been budgeted that would not result in a tax
increase and did not think the money had been designated to go
anywhere else.
City Manager Harrell stated that the budget had $21,000 to the
Campus Theater towards utility payments. That was an expenditure
obligation. The Arts Council had indicated that it was their
intention that they wanted the City to make that payment and then
they would return the unused amount back to the City. If the
entire Council felt that that was where they wanted to get the
money, then it might be possible to reduce the fund balance by
$12,000 knowing that at least $12,000 would be returned from the
Arts Council.
Council Member Trent stated that he realized that it was not a
permanent solution. It was a temporary fix which would not require
a tax increase.
City Manager Harrell stated that other alternatives might be to
take the money from the contingency fund. In the past, when this
issue had been raised and the Park Board had come to the City
making a request that the administrative fee be eliminated, the
challenge had been to the Park Board to examine the Parks and
Recreation budget to try and identify the like amount of
expenditure reductions in their budgets which could be implemented
if the revenue source was given up.
Council Member Trent stated that he was not in favor of that
alternative as the Board had already been given a list of nine
proposed budget reductions, none of which were acceptable to the
Parks Board.
Council Member Perry stated that he felt it was not correct to
367
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 18
commit funds already committed in another area. He suggested
taking $12,000 from the General Fund and ask the staff to present
the Council with specific recommendations.
Council Member Alexander felt that one possible solution was to
identify $12,000 within one of the contingency areas and indicate
a reduction in the budget for that amount and work on the
assumption that the money which might be available from the return
of funds from the Campus Theater would then return to that
contingency fund. He proposed that alternative as he was very much
in favor of keeping the reserve fund at 10%.
The following ordinance was considered:
91-144
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF DENTON,
TEXAS, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING ON OCTOBER 1, 1991,
AND ENDING ON SEPTEMBER 30, 1992; AND DECLARING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Alexander motioned, Chew seconded to amend the proposed budget
document to reduce the Manager's contingency fund by $12,000 and
that was done with the expectation that the process relating to the
Campus Theater would occur as described.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that John McGrane, Executive
Director for Finance, advised her that Exhibit A should also be
amended as Section II of the ordinance reflected the appropriation
but there also had to be a corresponding reflection of that loss of
revenue.
McGrane stated that the ordinance provided for two items. One was
that revenues were not appropriated. Only expenditures were
appropriated. As the City Manager explained, the total expenditure
would be made to the Arts Council. The money received back would
be in the form of revenue. Because Exhibit A amended the original
proposed document, he suggested under the General Fund revenues to
increase miscellaneous revenues by $12,000. That way there would
be the total appropriation for expenditures and would have the
offset in the revenue.
Alexander amended his motion to include the recommendation by
McGrane instead of his original motion. The substitution was
agreeable with Chew's second. On roll vote, Trent "aye", Alexander
"aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and
· Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Chew motioned, Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance as
amended.
368
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 19
Council Member Trent stated that he could not support nor would he
vote for the budget. There were several reasons why he could not
support the budget. The first one was that he felt the Council had
not heard, at least to his satisfaction, the kind of input that the
Council needed from the citizens of Denton. He did not know the
reasons. He recalled hearing one citizen speak to the budget and
that same citizen who spoke two weeks ago spoke this evening and he
was pretty much cut off and told that his time was up. The other
reason he could not vote for the budget was that it was not a zero
based budget. There were things in the budget which were hidden
from the taxpayers. There were things in the budget which were
there that only department heads and the City Manager knew about.
Early in the budget process he had asked to have several of the
department budgets presented in a zero based fashion and he was
told that it would occur. But it did not happen. He had to
conclude that there were reasons why those budgets were not
presented that way. The other reason he could not vote for the
budget was because he did not feel as though the monies which were
about to be spent had been legitimized. There was money for travel
and the like for Council and staff which, in his opinion, were to
be spent indiscriminately. When people who spend the taxpayers
money, could spend $168 a night for a hotel room, he was appalled.
He did not condone that and that was another reason why hecould
not vote for the budget. He requested a roll call vote on the
budget.
Council Member Chew asked Council Member Trent what was hidden in
the budget. He had not missed any budget hearings and wanted to
know what was hidden.
Council Member Trent replied the money for the Campus Theater.
Council Member Chew stated that that was not hidden.
Council Member Trent asked what that money was going to be spent
for when it was returned. It had not been designated.
Council Member Chew replied that he wanted to hear everything Trent
accused the Council accepting which was hidden in the budget. He
wanted it itemized.
Council Member Trent replied that the other large portion of the
budget which had not been accounted for would be where would the
money go for the Electrical Utility positions which were budgeted
but would not be filled. The rate payers were providing funds for
those positions which would not be filled and yet why was money
extracted from rate payers which was not needed. That was not a
budgeting process.
Council Member Chew stated that Trent had gone to the newspaper
369
City of Denton City Counci!Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 20
with accusations and he wanted to know what was hidden. Those
positions had already been justified by the Utility Board and the
Utility Director. It was time for the people to know that the
Council was not locked in step with anyone. There were six people
on the Council who voted in favor of the budget and one person's
opinion. He highly resented Trent's actions.
Mayor Castleberry stated that during the budget discussion, the
Council had discussed the 10 positions. In his understanding, that
money, approximately $376,000, would be placed in a reserve fund.
That reserve fund along with the money received from TMPA would
possibly allow another rate decrease in December or January.
Council Member Chew replied that was correct.
Council Member Alexander stated he specifically recalled the
Council discussing that issue during the budget process. He
recalled that he urged the Council to not take the positions out of
the budget because he felt it was very important, with the large
utility system the City had, that the Council allow the management
of that system sufficient flexibility to make decisions about what
positions might need to be filled and which ones might not. .Those
positions were not hidden. They were a very definite, open and
well discussed portion of the budget process.
Council Member Smith agreed. Those positions had been discussed at
great length and did not feel those were hidden at all.
Council Member Trent replied that a business was not run that way.
A household was not run that way. Why should the City be run that
way.
Council Member Smith replied that she believed they were discussing
hidden figures. Those were not hidden. The Campus Theater
contribution was also not hidden. Was there something specific
which was hidden.
Council Member Trent replied that in his estimation, when money was
taken which was not needed, that it provided a way to put money
where it was not needed and would not be spent that way.
Council Member Perry stated that there were items he felt were
important for the City such as high tech equipment for public
safety departments. Those items could not be done in this budget.
He felt that budget was not a rich kind of budget. It lacked a few
items which the Council would like to have but the money was not
available.~
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins called the question.
370
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 21
On roll call vote, Trent "nay", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye",
Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye".
Motion carried with a 6-1 vote.
F. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance levying
the ad valorem tax of the City of Denton, Texas, for the year 1991,
on all taxable property within the corporate limits of the City on
January 1, 1991, not exempt by law; providing revenues for payment
of current municipal expenses, and for interest and sinking fund on
outstanding City of Denton bonds; providing for limited exemptions
of certain homesteads and providing for enforcement of collection.
City Manager Harrell stated that the ordinance represented the
preliminary decision made by the Council to set the tax rate at the
$.6851 level. The blanks in the ordinance would be filled in at
$.6851, $.4690 and $.2161 if the Council desired to keep the tax~
rate at $.6851. He stated that the tax rate represented a $.02
level below the effective tax rate which gave the City less revenue
to operate next year than the current year. The City was the only
taxing jurisdiction in the City which was proposing a tax rate
which was below the effective rate.
The following ordinance was considered:
91-145
AN ORDINANCE LEVYING THE AD VALOREM TAX OF THE CITY OF
DENTON, TEXAS, FOR THE YEAR1991, ON ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY
WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY ON JANUARY 1,
1991, NOT EXEMPT BY LAW; PROVIDING REVENUES FOR PAYMENT
OF CURRENT MUNICIPAL EXPENSES, AND FOR INTEREST AND
SINKING FUND ON OUTSTANDING CITY OF DENTON BONDS;
PROVIDING FOR LIMITED EXEMPTIONS OF CERTAIN HOMESTEADS;
PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT OF COLLECTIONS; PROVIDING FOR
A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Hopkins motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance with the
figures presented.
Council Member Trent stated that he would like to vote for the
ordinance as it contained the exemption for individuals over 65,
but because of the listed tax rate, he could not vote for it.
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.
G.. The Council considered adoptio'n of an ordinance amending
the Schedule of Rates for water services. (The Public Utilities
Board recommended approval.)
371
City of Denton city Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 22
City Manager Harrell stated that the ordinance had been prepared in
accordance with the recommendations as approved by the City Council
during budget discussions.
The following ordinance was considered:
91-146
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF RATES FOR WATER
SERVICE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Alexander 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 "aye". Motion
carried with a 6-1 vote.
H. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance amending
the Schedule of Rates for sewer services. (The Public Utilities
Board recommended approval.)
City Manager Harrell stated that the ordinance had been prepared in
accordance with the earlier decisions made by the Council in budget
discussions.
The following ordinance was considered:
91-147
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF RATES FOR SEWER
SERVICE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Perry 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 "aye". Motion
carried with a 6-1 vote.
I. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
establishing rates for the use of the City's sanitary landfill site
as authorized by Chapter 12 of the Code of Ordinances of the City
of Denton. (The Public Utilities Board recommended approval.)
The following ordinance was considered:
91-148
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON ESTABLISHING RATES FOR THE
USE OF THE CITY'S SANITARY LANDFILL SITE AS AUTHORIZED BY
CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON;
372
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 23
AND PROVIDING FORAN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Chew motioned, Hopkins seconded to adopt the ordinance. 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.
J. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
designating depositories for City funds for a term beginning
October 1, 1991 and ending September 30, 1993.
Harlan Jefferson, Treasurer, stated that the current depository
contract would expire September 30, 1991. Request for proposals
were sent to all Denton banks, and advertised in the local paper.
This agreement was for the day-to-day banking services of the City
of accounts payable activities, payroll checks, deposits of utility
payments, etc. Two bids were received from Bank One, Denton and
First State Bank of Denton. Staff was recommending to retain the
operating account program with First State Bank of Denton. They
were also recommending that the City continue to maintain banking
relationships with the following financial institutions: Bank One,
Denton; Bank one, Dallas; North Texas Savings; NCNB, Dallas, NCNB,
Fort Worth; and Team Bank, Fort Worth.
The following ordinance was considered:
91-149
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON
DESIGNATING DEPOSITORIES FOR CITY FUNDS FOR A TERM
BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1991 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1993.
Trent motioned, Alexander 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.
8. The Council considered approval of a reduction in the Energy
Cost Adjustment from 1.9 cents per KWH to 1.7 cents per KWH. (The
Public Utilities Board recommended approval.)
Chew motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve the reduction. On roll
vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye",
Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion
carried unanimously.
9. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
A. The Council received a report and held a discussion
regarding security procedures at the Municipal Airport.
373
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991 ~ ~
Page 24
Mike Jez, Chief of Police, stated that the recent thefts at the
Airport represented approximately $30,000. There were several
recommendations to help solve the problem at the Airport. Those
included (1) hiring off-duty police officers or a private security
firm to patrol the Airport, (2) considering video surveillance and
alarm systems installed at the Airport, and (3) increasing random
patrols at the Airport with the available police personnel. An
extensive crime prevention security survey was another possibility
to look at key control and accessibility of Airport facilities both
public and private, individual aircraft security, utilization of
alarm and video surveillance systems to deter unauthorized entry
and thefts, control of all access roadways and security lighting in
the Airport area.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked why the Airport Board or the Airport
Manager had not requested additional patrols.
Jez replied that he had met with staff on at least two occasions in
the past two years. Changes had been made but more dialog was
needed.
.Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that in discussion with
the Airport Board, a concern had been expressed over the tight
budget situation. Some of the options were costly and that money
was not readily available. The crime prevention unit was out
several years ago and changes were made. It was time to have the
unit out again to look at the situation.
Council Member Trent asked how much a video surveillance system
would cost.
Jez replied approximately $10,000 but a better estimate would be
known after the security survey had been completed.
Council Member Trent felt if there were many more instancesat the
Airport, the insurers would not insure an airplane at the Denton
Airport. That would result in a loss of revenue to the City. Some
aircraft had already been moved to other airports.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the security survey.
B. City Manager Harrell reported to Council a situation
regarding a hackberry tree which the City had removed. Staff
examined the procedure and concluded that staff had followed
procedures in the ordinance which called for the staff to determine
whether, a tree was dying and would not survive and could remove the
tree. Staff should have obtained a written permit to remove the
tree once the determination had been made. The paperwork trail had
not been followed. The decision point would have been the same
374
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 25
whether the permit had been obtained or not.
Council Member Trent asked who was qualified to make the decision
that the tree was dead.
City Manager Harrell replied t~at there was an employee who was
primarily responsible for removing trees. He had been on the job
for 17 years. He had made the decision and Harrell supported that
decision.
A citizen in the audience questioned why the tree was removed in
the first place.
Mayor Castleberry requested Harrell to respond to the citizen's
question.
Harrell replied that the tree was removed in accordance with a
complaint filed by the City stating that various limbs were falling
on vehicles. A substantial amount of the tree was dead and in
accordance with the tree preservation ordinance, the criteria was
followed to remove the tree.
council Member Trent stated that he had spoken with a member of the
Planning staff who had assessed the tree a week ago. That staff
member had indicated to him that the tree was not dead and just
needed trimming.
City Manager Harrell replied that he stood by his report and the
documentation given in the report which indicated that over a foot
of the tree was dead. It was a dying tree and was judged to be a
hazard to the property.
10. There was no official action taken on Executive Session items
considered during the Work Session.
11. New Business
The following items of New Business were suggested by Council
Members for future agendas:
A. Council Member Smith updated the Council on the situation
regarding the Loop 288 extension and the neighborhood. The
residents, City staff and representatives from the Highway
Department had met and she felt good progress had been made in
understanding everyone's positions and reached a good level of
communication.
Council Member Trent asked if it looked like someone was going to
investigate a noise wall and if so, did it look like it was going
to happen.
375
City of Denton City Council Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 26
Council Member Smith replied yes and that the representative from
the Highway Department would investigate answers to several
questions the residents had and all involved would meet again in a
month.
B. Council Member Perry stated that he was pleased regarding
the recent Economic Development meeting held at the Chamber. A
representative from Sally Beauty commended the City staff on the
cooperation they had received in locating the business.
C. Council Member Smith asked for an October meeting for
discussions within Council as discussed at the earlier Council
planning session.
After discussion, consensus of Council was to delay the session
until a date in November and to hold the session in Denton.
12. The Council did not meet in Executive Session during the
Regular Session.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
J~NIFER/ALTERS
C~ITY OF' DENTON, TEXAS
CITY OF DENTON, TEXA~