Loading...
Minutes December 17, 1991CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 17, 1991 The Council convened into the Work Session at 5:15 p.m. in 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 (considered action in City of Denton v. Washington National Insurance Company, considered settlement offer in claim of Alphonsus Ottih, considered settlement offer in claim of University of North Texas, and considered action in re: Flow), real estate (considered leases with Cooke County College and Morrison Milling Company), and personnel/board appointments. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins left the meeting during the discussion of in re: Flow. 2. The Council received a report and held a discussion on the Adopt-A-Spot program and other projects of the Keep Denton Beautiful Program. John Cooper, Chair-Beautification Commission, stated that currently 29 groups had completed adoption agreements for Adopt-A-Spot with additional inquiries. There would be a reception honoring those who adopted a spot in the near future. The City had submitted an application to become a Tree City USA. The Commission had been notified that a designated Tree Board was needed prior to approval of the City's application. It was recommended that the Beautification Co~xsslon be appointed the Tree Board for the program. A second annual Christmas Treecycle program would be held on Saturday, January 4, 1992. A number of local businesses had agreed to participate in the publicity of the program, and an insert would be included in the December utility bills. The benefit received from the City with this program was approximately $3,150. For every $1.00 spent by the City on the program, $3.15 was returned. 3. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding an update on the Americans With Disabilities Act. Max Blackburn, Risk Manager, stated that the Americans With Disabilities Act was not much different than the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. One difference was that the Americans with Disabilities Act was rallying point for individuals who were impaired or disabled. Always before the different groups were split. There were five titles of the Act: (1) Title I - Employment - prohibited discrimination in employment against a qualified individual with a disability in the terms and conditions of City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 2 employment; (2) Title II - Public Service - prohibited discrimination by a public entity in providing public services to an individual with a disability. This title also required that forms of public transportation be made accessible to individuals with disabilities, (3) Title III - Public Accommodations and Services Operated by Private Entities - prohibited private entities from discriminating against a qualified individual in providing public accommodations and services, (4) Title IV - Telecommunications - required that common carriers of interstate wire or radio communications provide technological accommodations for individuals with hearing and speech impairments, (5) Title V - Miscellaneous Provisions - contained various additional provisions of the ADA. Titles I and II would have the most impact on the City, especially in the area of employment and the accessibility of all government facilities, services, and communications for people with disabilities. Title I would be effective July 26, 1992 with provisions for cities effective January 26, 1992. Title II would be effective January 26, 1992 for city facilities open to the public. Title I would be monitored by the EEOC. City job descriptions, job announcements, application review, interviews, conditional job offers, medical exams - job fitness evaluations, reasonable accommodations were tasks and concerns which the City needed to deal with in regards to Title I. Title II would be monitored by the Department of Justice. Title II involved identifying portions of all building which did not comply with ADA, budget costs for those corrections and the development of a transition plan for implementation of those corrections. The approximate cost to comply with ADA was $60,000 over three years. The Task Force recommendation was to spend $15,000 this current year to comply with some obvious problems such as an assistive hearing system in the Council Chambers. Council Member Alexander stated that he was surprised at the estimate of only $60,000. Blackburn replied that the City had kept up with the 1973 provisions so that there was not a large amount of non-compliance issues. 4. The Council was to receive a report and hold a discussion regarding a tentative schedule for converting the Moore facility to a law enforcement complex. This item was considered during the Regular Session under Miscellaneous Matters from the City Manager. City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 3 5. The Council was to receive a report and hold a discussion regarding a review of correspondence with the Upper Trinity Regional Water District and give staff direction. This item was considered during the Regular Session under Miscellaneous Matters from the City Manager. The Council convened into the Regular SessiOn at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. PRESENT: ABSENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins; Council Members Alexander, Chew, Perry, and Smith. Council Member Trent 1. Pledge of Allegiance The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Consent Agenda Council Member Trent joined the meeting during the reading of the Consent Agenda. Hopkins motioned, Smith 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. A. Bids and Purchase Orders: 1. Bid $1295 - 1500 KVA PM Transformer 2. Bid #1301 - Chemical Storage Tanks 3. Bid #1306 - Trees-Container Grown e Bid #1303 - Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Phase I Improvement Equipment Preselection (Item #3 only) (The Public Utilities Board recommended approval.) 5. P.C. #21291 - Computer Associate Services (The Data i Processing Advisory Board recommended approval.) City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 4 So P.O. #21290A - EIS Support Services (The Data Processing Advisory Board recommended approval.) P.O. #21292 - D. B. Microwave (The Data Processing Advisory Board recommended approval.) 3. Ordinances A. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance accepting a competitive sealed proposal and awarding a contract for purchase of materials, equipment, supplies or services. (2.A.1. - Bid #1295, 2.A.2. - Bid #1301, 2.A.3. - Bid #1306) The following ordinance was considered: 91-190 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. Smith motioned, Chew 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 accepting competitive bids and providing for the award of contracts for public works or improvements. (2.A.4. - Bid #1303, 2.A.6 - P.O. #21290A, 2.A.7. - P.O. 21292) City Manager Harrell stated that 2.A.6. and 2.A.7. should have been pulled from the Consent Agenda. He asked that the ordinance be amended to delete those two purchase orders. The following ordinance was considered: 91-191 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDSAND PROVIDING FOR THE AWARD OF CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 5 Hopkins motioned, Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance as amended. 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 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. (2.A.5. - P.C.#21291) The following ordinance was considered: 91-192 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 STATELAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE. BIDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry 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. D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance declaring a surplus of net revenues of the Electric Utility due to decreased fuel costs; ordering a refund to certain utility customers; prescribing conditions and procedures for making such rebates. Bob Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities, stated that in the 1990-91 fiscal year, the average variable cost of purchased power and natural gas was estimated to be 1.9 cents per KWH. Due to lower than expected natural gas costs, excellent operations and lower costs at TMPA and some improved efficiencies of plant operations, the variable cost was less than budgeted, resulting in average variable energy costs of approximately 1.6 cents per KWH. The Public Utilities Board recommended that this amount be refunded to all current customers on the Denton System in the amount of 0.3 cents per KWH. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked if all legal questions had been taken care of. Nelson replied yes. The following ordinance was considered: City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 6 91-193 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, DECLARING A SURPLUS OF NET REVENUES OF THE ELECTRIC UTILITY SYSTEM DUE TO A DECREASE IN FUEL COSTS; ORDERING A REFUND TO CITY'S UTILITY CUSTOMERS; PRESCRIBING CONDITIONS AND PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED IN SUCH REBATES; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Chew 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. E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance amending Article II of Chapter 28 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas ("Building Code") to provide for amendments and deletions to the Uniform Building Code, 1985 Edition, previously adopted as the Building Code of the City of Denton, repealing all ordinances in conflict herewith; and providing for a penalty in the. amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof. Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that the Council had reviewed this ordinance at an earlier meeting. There appeared to be no problem with the re-roofing permit fee and the Certificate of Occupancy issuance fee. The Council did have some concern regarding the plan review fee for building permits. Council had asked for additional information which staff had provided. He felt there were three or four fundamental policy issues associated with the ordinance. First was revenue which began the process during the major budget issue discussions. Second was cost for service for which an analysis had been done comparing other cities. He presented a chart with examples of what the fee was for three different kinds of building permits, what the current fee was, what the proposed fee would be, what the amount of increase was, what the average was and what the cost of service was to do the plan review. Council Member Trent stated that some people felt this was an impact fee. Robbins replied that technically it was not an impact fee as defined by State law. The fee was not one. which would be paid at the time of building permitting for some capital improvement. The fee would be paid for the service. Council Member Trent stated that he had heard that the plan review fee was being charged due to the amount of time that it took a person to review a plan. City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 7 ' Robbins replied that fundamentally the plan review fee was the cost involved to pay the person to do the plan review. City Manager Harrell stated that the planning and building fees were put into effect in an attempt to collect~ the out-of-pocket costs that it took to process a particular fee or undertake a particular activity. The Council's policy was that those kinds of efforts should pay for themselves. The City should do the work and there was some public interest involved but the City should recover enough money so that the City was not out-of-pocket and the general taxpayer subsidize that effort. An impact fee was a charge placed on a new home to help pay for water, sewer and transportation services but not to cover City staff time in processing a particular application. Council Member Trent stated that during the budget process he had indicated that these types of fees were sending the wrong signal to the builders in Denton. Denton was not in a boom situation and any kind of an increased fee was sending the wrong signal at a time. when the housing industry in Denton was making a comeback. He felt that there had been no opportunity to hear from the builders on this issue. He felt a public hearing was in order. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins stated that the issue had been discussed during the budget process. She had a concern with the one and two family residential fee. Was the proposed rate in excess of the average of the area fees. She felt that it would not encourage the building of one and two family dwellings. Why was Denton so much in excess of the area communities. Council Member Trent felt that some of the reason was because Denton was being compared to cities in the Metroplex like Fort Worth and Dallas. There were cities in the Metroplex which did not have a plan review fee such as Garland, Richardson, and Grand Prairie. For those cities which did have the review fee, they did not have the problem getting the appraisals on the houses which was evident in Denton. Council Member Alexander stated that a discussion was needed relative to the philosophy behind the fees. He wanted the total fee to be close to a reasonable average within the Metroplex. There were costs involved in doing those services and the City should not subsidize through taxpayers revenues, the operation of the building sector within the community. The question was who was going to pay. It would either be the City of Denton through taxpayers money or it would be the people who used that particular service. That was discussed in some detail during the budget process. A commitment was made when the budget was adopted that City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 8 the City was going to move ahead with these numbers in these areas. He felt that the Council needed to follow through with that commitment with those figures. Council Member Perry felt that signals were being sent to taxpayers other than home builders that the cost of doing business was one figure and the City would ask the general taxpayers to subsidize to a certain extend the cost of doing business. If the City were trying to make a profit on the review, the situation would be different. Other positive signals had been sent to the builders such as the expediting of permits. Mayor Castleberry felt that Gainsville might be more in Metroplex which Denton was. perhaps McKinney, Sherman and line with the distance from the Council Member Alexander stated that he felt comfortable adding McKinney but not Sherman and Gainsville as they were not in the Metroplex. He wanted a review of the Metroplex market and Sherman and Gainsville were not in that market. Mayor Castleberry stated that he had received calls from the people affected by these fees who would like to have a public hearing on the issue. He felt it would be well to have such a public hearing. Council Member Perry stated that the Council had had a public hearing which included these figures during the budget process. The Building Code Board had reviewed the figures. In the budget process, the Council had directed staff to prepare the fees. There had been discussion on these figures from since approximately May to December. There had been plenty of opportunity, including public hearings, for input from the various people who would be directly affected. He felt there had been adequate time for people to be heard. Mayor Castleberry stated that his concern was that this area was not "noticed" during the budget process. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked if the ordinance could be adopted except for the residential portion. Joe Morris, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the ordinance was written so that it could be separated. The following ordinance was considered: City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 9 91-194 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE II OF CHAPTER 28 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ("BUILDING CODE") TO PROVIDE FOR AMENDMENTS AND DELETIONS TO THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, 1985 EDITION, PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED AS THE BUILDING CODE FOR THE CITY OF DENTON, REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Hopkins motioned, Trent seconded to adopt the ordinance except for that portion referring to residential one and two family dwellings. The fee would remain the same until further review for one and two family dwellings. Mayor Castleberry stated that Jerry Cott, GoVernment Relations Committee-Chamber of Commerce, had asked to address the Council. Council Member Perry questioned the consequences of the motion. Robbins replied that there would be a non-residential building permit fee adopted at 50%, a $10 certificate of occupancy fee and a $20 reroofing fee. There would be no change in the fee for any occupancy on any table that was one or two family. Council Member Alexander asked if the budget were not adopted on the schedule proposed by the ordinance. City Manger Harrell stated that when the budget was adopted, the major policy issue called for a 50% plan review fee across the board. The Building Code Board felt that 50% was too much of an increase for one and two family dwellings. It was felt that the fee should be scaled back to 20% and the other fee at 50%. Trent motioned to suspend the Council rules to allow a citizen to speak to Council. Motion died for lack of a second. On roll vote of the main motion, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "nay", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion carried with a 5-2 vote. Perry motioned, Smith seconded to suspend the Council rules to allow a citizen to address Council. On roll vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Cas~leberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Jerry Cott, Government Relations Committee-Chamber of Commerce, stated that the public did not come to the budget meetings. There City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 10 was a perception that the fees went beyond the department that they would be used for. That they were going to supply the funds for government other than the Planning Department. He felt there needed to be more public input regarding items such as this. It would provide for better public relations. F. The Council considered adoption of adoption of an ordinance amending Section 2-81 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton relating to the duties and functions of the Beautification Advisory Commission; providing for the adoption of powers and duties of the Commission; and providing for a repealing clause. The following ordinance was considered: 91-195 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2-81 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON RELATING TO THE DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF THE BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY COMMISSION; PROVIDING FOR THE ADOPTION OF POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION; PROVIDING FOR A REPEALING CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Alexander 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. G. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving a release and settlement agreement for pending litigation between the City of Denton and Michael L. Gorder. Smith motioned, Hopkins to adopt the ordinance. Council MemBer Trent asked if Mr. Gorder owed the City any money before he was given the settlement check. City Attorney Drayovitch stated that she would check into that for the Council. Smith withdrew her motion and Hopkins withdrew her second. The ordinance was pulled from consideration, H. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance adopting the recommendations of William M. Mercer, In~QrpQrat~d for implementing a salary structure and salary management program for the City of Denton; prescribing the number of positions in each 11 city of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 11 classification of fire fighter and police officer; approving revisions to written City policies designed to implement this program; and authorizing and directing the City Manager to expend monies approved in the budget for fiscal year 1991/92 to fund the Mercer Salary Management Program. Tom Klinck, Director of Personnel, stated that in the 1988-89 and 1989-90 budgets, the Council approved funding for a comprehensive compensation and classification program study. The recommendation included a salary range comprised of 13 grades; a salary structure for positions governed by Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Cod~;.and salary structuresf~r Seasonal, Temporary, and Executive positions. Personnel policies had been revised to reflect the Mercer recommendations. The recommendations include bringing all employees to at least the new minimum salary of the assigned position and grade, and granting all others a 3% group increase, as approved in the 1991-92 budget. Council Member Trent stated that he did not vote for this during. the budget process as he had the perception that the city of Denton would soon be in a similar position as Pontiac, Michigan. He felt the pay raises were too high. He felt it was better to have a good paying job and not be paid what the worker was worth than to have the pay for what the worker was worth but next year not have a job. The following ordinance was considered: 91-196 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ADOPTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF WILLIAM M. MERCER, INCORPORATED FOR IMPLEMENTING A SALARY STRUCTURE AND SALARY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF DENTON; PRESCRIBING THENUMBEROF POSITIONS IN EACH CLASSIFICATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS AND POLICE OFFICER; APPROVING REVISIONS TO WRITTEN CITY POLICIES DESIGNED TO IMPLEMENT THIS PROGRAM; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPEND MONIES APPROVED IN THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR1991/92 TO FUND THE MERCER SALARYMANAGEMENT PROGRAM; AND DECLARING 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. 12 City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 12 4. Resolutions A. The Council considered approval of a resolution requesting the Governor of the State of Texas to designate the North Central Texas Council of Governments to be the Metropolitan Planning Organization of the City of Denton pursuant to the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended. Council Member Chew left the meeting with a potential conflict of interest. Mayor Castleberry stated that Council Member Chew was a member of the Board of Directors for SPAN and had left the meeting with a potential conflict of interest. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that Items 4.A. and 4.B. dealt with the transition from different sources of transportation funding. Council had asked staff to obtain additional information from Lewisville regarding the steps they would take in deciding who would become the grantee - either the Texas Department of Transportation or the City of. Lewisville. Lewisville City Council decided to have the City become the grantee. Item 4.B. specifically named the grantee and the Council would have to complete the resolution by naming that grantee. The following resolution was considered: R91-074 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF TEXAS TO DESIGNATE THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS TO BE THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION OF THE CITY OF DENTON PURSUANT TO THE URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ACT OF 1964, AS AMENDED; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Alexander motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. B. The Council considered approval of a resolution requesting that the Texas Department of Transportation designate a recipient and grantee of Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) program funds for the Denton Urbanized Area. The following resolution was considered: City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 ~ ~ Page 13 13 R91-075 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS REQUESTING THAT THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DESIGNATE A RECIPIENT AND GRANTEE OF URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION (UMTA) PROGRAM FUNDS FOR THE DENTON URBANIZEDAREA; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Trent otloned, Alexander seconded to approve the resolution designating the City of Denton as the recipient and grantee. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins felt that there would be problems with the City being the designee and the City should respect SPAN's request. She felt it would involve a great deal of staff time and in the future, would require an additional person to deal with the grants. She was not in favor of the City being involved. Mayor Castleberry felt that it would be to the benefit of both Lewisville and Denton if Denton were the designee. Council Member Perry felt it would formalize the relationship already in existence. Council Member Trent asked if the City of Denton were the designee now, could it be changed in the future. city Manager Harrell replied that it could be changed at a later date. Council Member Trent felt that if the City of Denton and the City of Lewisville were both the recipients, it would enable better coordination as opposed to a split with the State and a city being designated. City Manger Harrell replied that such a situation would not affect the City but it might affect SPAN. Council Member Alexander stated that it was important for the City to make a statement regarding its interest in urban transportation in the City of Denton. He felt the City needed to look at the overall transportation needs of Denton. On roll Hopkins "aye". vote of the main motion, Trent "aye" Alexander "aye" "nay", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry Motion carried with a 5-1 vote. Council Member Chew returned to the meeting. 14 City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 14 C. The Council considered approval of a resolution offering conditional support of the proposed extension at the Fort Worth Alliance Airport. Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, stated that there had been a change in the resolution Council had received in their packet. The new resolution indicated that the Perot Group had requested that the City adopt a resolution in support of the amendment. City Manager Harrell stated that the resolution was conditional upon receipt of written documentation from the FAA that all of Denton's airport airspace, including any expansions, would not be adversely affected now and in the future. The following resolution was considered: R91-076 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS OFFERING CONDITIONAL SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED EXTENSION AT THE FORT WORTH ALLIANCE AIRPORT; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Hopkins motioned, Trent 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. D. The Council considered approval of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an interlocal agreement with the County of Denton for the construction of improvements to Jim Christal Road from Masch Branch Road to Interstate Highway 35E. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that all of the details of the agreement had been worked out and incorporated in the document. He suggested an addition to the document in the first "whereas" using the wording "a two lane asphalt road built to City of Denton specifications". The following resolution was considered: R91-077 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF DENTON FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO JIM CHRISTAL ROAD FROM MASCH BRANCH ROAD TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35E; PROVIDING FOR REINBURSEMENT TO THE CITY; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 15 15 Perry motioned, Smith 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 carriedunanimously. E. The Council considered approval of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an interlocal agreement with the County of Denton for the construction of improvements to Ryan Road from Farm to Market Road 1830 to Far~ to Market Road 2181 and providing for reimbursement to the City. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, suggested the same type of wording be added to the agreement "a two lane asphalt road built to City of Denton specifications". The following resolution was considered: R91-078 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF DENTON FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO RYAN ROAD FROM FARM TO MARKET ROAD 1830 TO FARM TO MARKET ROAD 2181; PROVIDING FOR REIMBURSEMENT TO THE CITY; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Hopkins motioned, smith 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. 5. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, presented the following item: A. The AnnualEmployee christmas Luncheon was Friday and the Council was invited to attend. The Council considered the Work Session items not discussed previously. 4. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding a tentative schedule for converting the Moore facility to a law enforcement complex. Bruce Hennington, Superintendent of Facility Management,' stated that staff would like to begin developing detail plans for the Law Enforcement/Court Complex which was the first step of Phase I in the overall space program. It had become very important to proceed 16 City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 16 with the Moore Building Phase I as the City had some urgent interest in leasing some of the leftover space. In order to proceed with the detail plan, an architect was needed to continue with design development, document preparation, bidding, and contract administration. It was felt that that could be accomplished by amending the existing architect's contract. A program analysis would provide a detailed plan of walls, furniture needed, location of departments and would fine tune the phasing. The schematic design would work with staff for details on design plus floor plans of old City Hall and the current City Hall. Spacing and time was needed to do all the moves for staff and citizens. City Manager Harrell stated there was one critical item which was the amendment of the current architect contract. The Council could start the selection process again for an architect or amend the current contract for Corgan Associates. Staff was recommending to amend the current contract. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the staff recommendations. CounCil Member Perry asked if there would be a designated person to work with the architect. Hennington replied that the Construction Review Committee would review the progress of the architect and there would be a building superintendent working on the project. 5. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding a review of correspondence with the Upper Trinity Regional Water District and gave staff direction. Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that a letter had been received from the Upper Trinity Regional Water District for Council review and consideration. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked if Nelson was referring to the letter included in the Council packet. Nelson replied that the letter did not address the contract which the City of Denton had sent to the District. The letter indicated that the District had appointed a three member negotiating task force to work with Denton on a contract. It was asked that the City likewise appoint a negotiating task force to work On this contract. The District included a list of eleven items as a basis for an agreement. City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 17 Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked if there had been any response regarding the wholesale contract. Nelson replied not from the treatment services contract. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins indicated there were pros and cons regarding such a committee. She was concerned that it might be an attempt to divide the Council. She also questioned whether the City should be negotiating the contract. She would have a problem with a non- majority group of the Council agreeing to any items already discussed. She felt an offer had been made and the City should standby it. She felt the City Manager, City Attorney and Utility Director should represent the City and work with the Upper Trinity Regional Water District. No Council should be involved. Council Member Chew agreed. Council Member Smith felt that the letter indicated that the District had never seen the contract which the City just sent them. Had the District seen that contract. Nelson replied yes they had seen it and had expressed to him that they would rather not acknowledge the contract. Mayor Castleberry felt that the consensus of the Council was to have the staff continue to negotiate the wholesale contract and the Council was not interested in a Council com-[ttee to work with the District. Hopkins motioned, Perry seconded that a letter be drafted under the Mayor's signature indicating that the City Manager, City Attorney and Utility Director would be the City's negotiating team and any response to the earlier contract should be made through them to the Council. On roll vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 6. There was no official action on Executive Session items discussed during the Work Session. 7. New Business The following items of New Business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas: A. Council Member Trent asked about the status of televising the Council meetings. 17 18 City of Denton City Council Minutes December 17, 1991 Page 18 City Manager Harrell replied that it was on hold until after the results of the Citizen Survey, which had a question regarding that issue, had been received. B. Council Member Perry asked about improving the lighting in the Council Chambers. C. Mayor Castleberry asked about the signs which the Denton County Historical Commission had inquired about. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that according to the Highway Department, which had jurisdiction over the signs, the signs were no longer in existence and were not of the age which the Historical Commission thought. 8. The Council convened into the Executive Session to discuss legal matters (considered action in City of Denton v. Washington National Insurance Company, considered settlement offer in claim of Alphonsus Ottih, considered settlement offer in claim of University of North Texas, and considered action in r~), real estate (considered leases with Cooke County College and Morrison Milling Company), and personnel/board appointments. No official action was taken. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. CITY OF DENTON, TE~S ACC00025 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS