Minutes February 18, 199290
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 18, 1992
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, Chew, Perry, Smith and Trent.
ABSENT: None
1. The coUncil convened into the Executive Session to discuss
legal matters (considered action in Texas Waste Manaqement vs. City
of Denton and considered action in GillisDie vs. City), real estate
(discussed acquisition of land for recreational facilities) and
personnel/board appointments (considered appointments to the
Building Code Board, Cable T. V. Advisory Board, the Plumbing and
Mechanical Code Board and the Airport Advisory Board).
Following the conclusion of the Executive Session, the Council
convened in open session in the Council Chambers.
1. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding
the City's Capital Improvement Plan and budgeting process.
Corrie Gil, Management Services Administrator, presented the
background on the CIP process in relation to the budget process.
She presented the process for the CIP details. There would be
better identification and better tie of operation and maintenance
costs related to each capital project - annual information rates by
expenditure category. Additional projects were added to the five
year plan based on information received from a recent public
hearing. The recommendations received by the Planning and Zoning
Commission were based on the following criteria: (1) public
safety, health and life, (2) legal requirements, liability or
mandate, (3) quality and reliability of current service level, (4)
economic growth and development (5) recreational, cultural and
aesthetic value.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins stated that there was an error in the backup
materials. There was a statement attributed to the Denton State
School regarding a project and it should have a project concerning
State School Road.
Council Member Trent asked how citizen recommendations were handled
regarding specific problems.
Gil replied that each of those items would be listed as a project,
analyzed by cost information and if they pertained to a utility
area, would be forwarded to the Public Utilities Board or if a
general government area, would be forwarded to the Executive Staff
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 2
for analysis and recommendations. Ail would then be forwarded to
the Planning and Zoning Commission which would give their
recommendations to the City Council.
2. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding
the establishment of a University Students Advisory Committee and
gave staff direction.
Jesus Nava, Assistant to the City Manager, reported that there had
been two meetings with the students thus far. The students had
given the idea a great deal of thought and were well prepared with
several ideas on how the committee should work. They had ideas on
representation and how it should be balanced between UNT and TWU.
The proposed board would have seven members, three from UNT and
three from TWU. Terms would be for a year starting July 1 which
coincided with the terms of the City's boards and commissions.
The Student Government Associations from each of the universities
would be responsible for providing three names plus one alternate
name to the Council. In even numbered years, UNT would provide the
chair and in odd numbered years, TWU would provide ~the chair. A
suggestion was made to have an ex-officio seat or seats be
available for high school representation. The universities would
select their representatives in spring when they had their election
of officers in the Student Government Associations. Those names
would be submitted to the Council for the appointment process. The
body would be advisory to the Council and would be responsible for
deliberating issues affecting students and the student community.
They would be allowed to appoint working committees to assist them
in getting their work done. They would meet regularly and
especially once a semester with the Council in a joint work
session. The first annual meeting would be during the summer after
the Council appointments. Starting with the fall semester, the
board meetings would be in September, October and November. During
the spring, the board would meet in February, March and April.
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that this was a suggestion from
the university students from UNT and TWU. It was their proposal to
the Council which the Council could discuss and make adjustments to
before it was returned in an ordinance or resolution form.
Council Member Alexander stated that he had a concern regarding the
status of the high schools. He did not like ex-officio positions
and was not sure that the high school students would respond
favorably to that proposal. There might be a need for a separate
board for the high school students or to make them a part of the
grouD that came to the table in the student advisory board. He did
not feel the high school students should be in an ex-officio
capacity.
91
9¸2
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 3
Nava replied that the discussion was more of one in which the
university students wanted to include the high school students.
This was just one of the suggestions.
Council Member Perry felt that the creation of an advisory board by
the Council was a serious matter in that once created, it had the
ability to directly participate in the government of the City. He
had several questions concerning the formation of such a board -
would the student committee be interposed between the Council and
the Administration on student issues and would it be interposed
between the Council and the Board of Regents of the universities on
student issues. He felt the questions were important as once
created, the board would have the power to give advise, discuss,
consult with and to recommend to the Council. The Council did have
relationships with all of the bodies at the universities. He felt
that it should be a committee with a name such as Student
Intergovernmental Committee rather than an advisory board. He had
a concern with placing that type of committee on the same level
with such boards as the Public Utilities Board or the Board of
Adjustment. He felt the formation of such a committee and its
dealings needed to be on a serious level. Additional concerns
included the jurisdiction of the committee and what issues it would
address. Issues which affected students would affect everyone. He
questioned the need for such a committee in view of the fact that
every student had access to the Council, had access to the floor of
the Council and had access to every board and commission of the
City as did any citizen. He asked for a clarification on needs,
purposes, interposition with other bodies at the universities,
functions, and areas of jurisdiction. He suggested having the
student body form a committee and enter into a relationship with
the Council on an informal basis for a year and run it on a trial
basis. Problems could then be worked out before the Council
formally established such a committee. He urged the Council to
take time to look at the issue and give it a trial basis test so
that if the Council decided to carry it forward it would be on a
sound basis.
Nava replied that the draft of the committee followed the draft of
other Council committees particularly the Beautification
Commission.
Council Member Smith stated that there needed to be a statement of
purpose of the committee, particularly if the committee could
create additional committees to carry out the purpose of the board.
She needed to know what that purpose would be in a distinct
statement.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 4
93
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins stated that she had a concern with the high
school students. There might be a good rational for bringing in
the high school students in one manner or another but the Council
had not discussed that with staff and was not a step she was
prepared to take without more information and a rational for
including the high school students.
Council Member Trent stated that he appreciated the comments from
the university students when they spoke to Council and that they
were serious students. In response to one of the concerns which
Council Member Perry had, there were some current boards and
commissions which did very little and the Council was not upset
about that. He felt that there might be boards in which the
members did not know they were members of that board. He did not
have a problem with constituting a student advisory committee and
felt that if the students on the committee did a good job, it would
make everyone look good. If they did a bad job, the committee
would not exist. He was in favor of proceeding.
Council Member Smith stated that if an ordinance were prepared, she
wanted a statement of purpose included which would give a clear
idea of the purpose of the committee. She questioned having the
first meeting in July as many of the students were not in town in
July. She also questioned whether students would run for these
positions as they would for positions on the student government or
would they be chosen by the individuals who would be elected.
Nava replied that the election of the officers occurred in the
spring and felt that after the new incoming officers were elected,
names could be solicited and submitted to Council.
Council Member Chew stated that a definite statement of purpose was
needed and that the name of the committee needed to be discussed.
That needed to be very clearly determined.
Council Member Perry stated that whatever plan was presented needed
to be clear in regards to whether or not the body would be
interposed between the Council and any other governing body at
either university. He wanted that clear to begin with so that
there would not be any jurisdictional problems. He could not see
it as being interposed but wanted it clear and a matter of record
to begin with that the committee would in no way be interposed
between the Council and other governing bodies. He did not know if
that would be possible. This body would not be a quasi-governing
body, it would be a real governing body. He again urged the
Council to take some time to run the committee on an informal basis
to see how well it worked before it was given a full standing with
the Council. He had seen the Council Chambers full of students on
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 5
issues which they were concerned about which was to the point that
they had their rights to ~come before the Council. They did not
need a special committee or group on anything which concerned their
needs. They already had every opportunity to participate in a
government as it affected them. There needed to be demonstrated
the need for such a committee.
Council Member Alexander felt that there were a number of viable
points raised by Council. Nava had mentioned that the model used
to draft some of the proposed language was from the Beautification
Commission model and he noted that that Commission was originally
established as an ad hoc committee and worked in that capacity for
a number'of years before the Council made it a formal commission.
A critical question was to be careful on where the sovereignty was
in the Denton city government. The sovereignty needed to reside
with all of the people of the City including the students. The
only way to exercise that sovereignty was at the ballot box on a
referendum or electing council members. He felt it was important
to maintain the opportunity for students to come to Council and be
heard. The Council needed to be careful that by establishing some
kind of advisory committee that rights of students to speak to the
Council were not disenfranchised.
Mayor Castleberry felt it was a good idea for a committee. He
stated that there were a number of items which needed to be
clarified and brought back to Council at the next meeting, if
possible.
Nava listed those items as:
- high school representation
- statement of purpose of the board
- name of the board
Council Member Perry stated additional items were:
- needs
- interposition with other university bodies
Mayor Castleberry stated that it might not be possible to bring the
issue back to Council within one week but if not, to bring it back
at the first meeting in March.
Council Member Perry stated that he saw no reason why the
alternative of a trial basis for the committee should not
thoroughly discussed with the ~tudent~. He was very serious about
such a trial basis and wanted a serious response as to why a trial
period would not be in order.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 6
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins felt it was not necessary to have the item on
the table by the first meeting in March. She felt that there
needed to be a work session on the item before an ordinance or
resolution were presented to Council.
Consensus of Council was that another work session on the item was
in order but not to wait until May or final exam time.
The Council convened into the Regular Session at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers..
PRESENT:
Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins; Council Members
Alexander, Chew, Perry, Smith and Trent.
ABSENT: None
1. Pledge of Allegiance
The Council and members of the City Council recited the Pledge of
Allegiance.
2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of the Regular
Sessions of January 21, 1992 and February 4, 1992 and the Special
Call Session of January 26, 1992.
Perry motioned, Chew seconded to approve the minutes as presented.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked that the minutes be separated as she
was not present for two of the meetings.
Perry amended his motion, Chew amended his second to approve the
minutes of the January 21, 1992 and January 26, 1992 meetings. On
roll vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye",
Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously with Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins abstaining as she was not
present for the meetings.
Smith motioned, Chew seconded to approve the minutes of February 4,
1992 as presented. On roll vote, Trent "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith
"aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye".
Motion carried unanimously with Council Member Alexander abstaining
as he was not present for the meeting.
3. Resolution of Appreciation for Raymond Short.
95
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 7
The following resolution was considered:
RA92-004
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR RAYMOND SHORT
Perry motioned, Chew seconded to approve the resolution. On roll
vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye",
Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion
carried unanimously.
4. The Council received a citizen report from J. Quinn Brisben
regarding federal/city revenue sharing.
Mr. Brisben stated that he was the socialist candidate for
President. He stated that municipal government was the government
closest to the citizen. He was well aware that municipal
government was being starved for revenue and revenue at that level
was primarily raised through property tax. Property tax no longer
reflected the real wealth of a city. A new form of government was
needed. He proposed a metroplex government and a municipal income
tax for people who worked in Denton but lived outside the City
limits. He also felt that there needed to be more revenue sharing
from the federal government.
Mayor Castleberry acknowledged Leadership Denton in attendance at
the meeting.
5. Public Hearings
A. The Council held a public hearing with regards to the
proposed annexation of 23.059 acres located on Forrestridge Drive,
north of Ryan Road.
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that this
was the second public hearing on the proposed annexation. At the
first public hearing the petition was amended to annex 23 acres
instead of 69 acres. The schedule for annexation had been amended
which required a special meeting on March 11, at 4:00 p.m. The
purpose of the public hearing was to receive input about the
annexation and the service plan associated with the annexation.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
No one spoke in favor.
No one spoke in opposition.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 8
The Mayor close the public hearing.
Council Member Perry asked if the City would be installing the
utilities in the area, etc.
Robbins replied that the utilities would be provided by the City
but the cost of the utilities and much of the construction would be
done by the developer as they were required to support the
subdivision.
B. The Council held a public hearing and considered the
preliminary replat of 4.082 acres, being Lot i-R, Block 9 of the
Alex Robertson Addition from Lot 1, .289 acres of Jennette Street
right-of-way and approximately 3.538 acres of unplatted land. The
site was at the northeast corner of Crosstimbers and Mill Streets,
adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad. (The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval 5-0 at its February 12, 1992
meeting.)
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that the
site encompassed the Fred Moore Day Care Center and a large brick
building which formerly housed a high school. Public improvements
included approximately 960 feet of concrete sidewalk along Mill and
Cross Timber, and a fire hydrant next to Mill Street. The building
was proposed to be used by the D.I.S.D. for a school. Currently
the land was zoned for multi-family use in which a public school
was allowed by right. Some parking would take place on the to be
abandoned portion of Jennette Street. The recommendation from the
Planning and Zoning Commission included the conditions of final
abandonment of Jennette Street, and the showing of an adequate
easement on the side of the property. Approximately .289 acres of
right-of-way would be considered for abandonment at the Council
meeting of March 3, 1992.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
No one spoke in favor.
No one spoke in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Hopkins motioned, Alexander seconded to approve the preliminary
replat. On roll vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye",
Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye".
Motion carried unanimously.
98
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 9
6. Consent Agenda
Council Member Trent asked that Items 6.A.1. and 6.A.2. be pulled
for separate consideration.
Smith motioned, Chew seconded to approve the Consent Agenda
excluding Items 6.A.1. and 6.A.2. 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:
Bid #1318 - Aerial Bucket Device
Bid #1319 - Medical Supplies
Bid #1328 - Pavement Patching Machine
B. Tax Refunds
Considered approval of a tax refund to First State
Bank of Denton for $1,585.29.
Considered approval of a tax refund to United Title
Company for $508.57.
Considered approval of a tax refund to Wise County
Title Company for $614.01.
Item 6.A.1. was considered.
Council Member Trent expressed a concern that a second bid had not
been received on this item and suggested that an additional bid was
needed before it was approved. He had done some checking on the
item and had received information that the bid might be excessive.
There had been a second bid received but it was for a used piece of
equipment. He had asked if a used piece of equipment was less
efficient than a new piece of equipment. The answer he received
was that as long as the warranty was there, a used piece of
equipment was sometimes as good as a new piece and would cost about
half the cost of new equipment.
City Manager Harrell replied that the actual cost of the equipment
was $104,990 on a 60 month lease/purchase arrangement with Xerox.
Other materials and maintenance costs were included in the package.
There was one other proposal received on the equipment for a used
piece of equipment. The Data Processing Advisory Board had
recommended the new equipment as opposed to the used equipment.
Back-up information also provided the detailed budget information
reviewed during the budget process and the ranking of the various
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 10
packages which went to Council when the Council approved this as
part of the annual budget~ The actual net cost to the City would
be about $16,000 per year because some of the other expenditures
would be off-set by not having forms printed out-of-house.
Gary Collins, Director of Information Services, stated that bids
were sent out to four bidders. Two did not bid on the project.
The actual cost of the equipment over five years would be $104,990
compared to the used equipment of $76,470. The bid for the used
equipment was good only until February 14 which did not coincide
with a Council meeting and the maintenance cost, which was part of
the package, could not be guaranteed by Xerox over the 60 month
period. The maintenance cost from Xerox was locked in for a 60
month period. There was a liability with used equipment which was
not present with new equipment. The original time for the bid
process had been extended for the bidders of the used equipn~en~o
'~ther bids could be sought but Collins felt that the results~w~u!d_~
hot be different. There was a $20,000 trade-in offer which e~p~e~
at the end of the month.
council Member Trent felt that with a purchase of $104,000 there
needed to be more than one bid. In looking at the totals, the
equipment would not be leased/purchased without the maintenance
program and could not be gotten without the usage charge. That put
the price at $231,000. It did not come through the budget at
$231,000. It came through the budget as $54,977.
Collins replied that during the budget discussion it was explained
that the figure represented the first year of cost of a five year
lease purchase.
Discussion continued as to what other cities with main frame
printers used and what response they received from bidders.
City Manager Harrell stated that if the Council desired, the
purchase could go back for another bid. He stated that part of the
proposal included a $20,000 trade-in for a piece of outdated
equipment. He was doubtful that the equipment was worth that much
and there was a deadline on the proposed trade-in.
John McGrane, Executive Director for Finance, stated that Xerox had
a promotional program through February. They were allowing $20,000
for an old Wang printer which would be honored through February.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked to hear from the Chair of the Data
Processing Advisory Board.
100
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 11
Jim Kuykendall, Chair-Data Processing Advisory Board, stated that
this was an excellent opportunity for the City to save money. He
did not know what else could be done to get more bidders. Four
were contacted. Only two submitted a bid. There had been much
discussion regarding the new equipment versus the used equipment.
There were technical issues associated with older equipment. The
equipment must be reliable.
Trent motioned to hold the bid until a second bid could be
received. The motion died for lack of a second.
Chew motioned, Alexander seconded to approve 6.A.1. 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.
A. Bids and Purchases
1. RFSP #1317 - Laser Printer
Item 6.A.2. was considered.
Council Member Trent stated that he did not see the need for a
survey crew to have a suburban. Perhaps a used vehicle could be
purchased instead of a new vehicle. He did not see any reasons why
the vehicle would need power windows, etc.
Tom Shaw, Purchasing Agent, stated that the vehicle was a very
plain unit. It had only power steering and power brakes and no air
conditioning was included. It was a white vehicle with a four
speed transmission. The problem with bidding a used vehicle was
that it could be gone by the time it went through the bidding
process. A suburban was requested for security reasons. There was
not enough room for three men in a cab of a truck together with all
of the expensive equipment that the survey crew needed.
Alexander motioned, Chew seconded to approve 6.A.2. 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.
A. Bids and Purchases
2. Bid #1311 - Pickup Truck, Van (Item #5 only)
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 12
101
7. 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. (5.A.1. - RFSP
#1317)
The following ordinance was considered:
No. 92-028
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 FORAN 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.
B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance accepting
a competitive bid and awarding a contract for purchase of
materials, equipment, supplies or services. (5.A.2. - Bid #1311,
5.A.3. - Bid #1318, 5.A.4. - Bid #1319, 5.A.5. - Bid #1328)
The following ordinance was considered:
No. 92-029
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A
CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR
SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
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 ordering
an election to be held in the City of Denton, Texas, on May 2,
1992, and, if a runoff election was required, on May 30, 1992, for
the purpose of electing council members to the City Council of the
City of Denton, Texas to Places 5 and 6 and electing a Mayor to
Place 7; ordering that the punch card electronic voting system be
used; designating voting places and appointing election officials;
and providing for notice of-the election.
102
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 13
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked about the date for the runoff election.
Jennifer Walters, City Secretary, stated that the State Legislature
had changed the dates for municipalities to hold a runoff. The
previous dates had been either the last or the second to the last
Saturday in May. The new date was no earlier than 20 days or later
than 30 days from the final canvas of the main election. In order
to have the runoff on a Saturday, the date would have to be May 30.
Discussion was held on possible ways to hold the runoff earlier.
The following ordinance was considered:
No. 92-030
AN ORDINANCE ORDERING AN ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE CITY OF
DENTON, TEXAS, ON MAY 2, 1992 AND, IF A RUNOFF ELECTION IS
REQUIRED, ON MAY 30, 1992, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ELECTING COUNCIL
MEMBERS TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, TO
PLACES 5 AND 6 AND ELECTING A MAYOR TO PLACE 7; ORDERING THAT
THE PUNCH CARD ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEM BE USED; DESIGNATING
VOTING PLACES AND APPOINTING ELECTION OFFICIALS; PROVIDING FOR
NOTICE OF THE ELECTION; AND PROVIDING FOR 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 Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion
carried unanimously.
D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving
a settlement agreement and release between the City of Denton and
Washington National Insurance Company.
Council Member Trent asked that the agreement be made public.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that the agreement was public. It
was an ordinance which settled a lawsuit between the City of Denton
and Washington National Insurance Company. The lawsuit was filed
alleging a claim of approximately $200,000 and the approved
settlement was for $175,000.
Council Member Trent stated that he was against the settlement. Of
the $175,000 which would be recovered, the attorneys fees would be
$58,579. Thus the City would be receiving only $116,000. He felt
that the fees were too high.
The following ordinance was considered:
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 14
103
No. 92-031
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVING A
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON
AND WASHINGTON NATIONAL CASUALTY AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Trent "nay", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye",
Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion
carried with a 6-1 vote.
E~ The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute an amendment to a wholesale water
supply agreement between the City of Denton and the Town of
Corinth, Texas. (The Public Utilities Board recommended approval.)
Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that Corinth
requested an amendment to their water contract in order to reduce
their annual water demand from Denton. They wanted to install a
well for peak times and use Denton for their base water needs. A
task force of the Public Utilities Board reviewed this issue and
responded affirmatively with certain criteria.
Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked if the wells had been dug yet and if
all the previous questions raised had been considered.
Nelson replied that the wells were not done yet. Corinth was
waiting for Denton to act on the amendment before they began the
wells. They would proceed with the well in early fall.
The following ordinance was considered:
No. 92-032
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO
A WHOLESALE WATER SUPPLY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON
AND THE TOWN OF CORINTH, TEXAS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
Trent motioned, Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye",
Chew "nay", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion
carried with a 6-1 vote.
104
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 15
8. Resolutions
A. The Council considered approval of a resolution approving
revised City policies regulating smoking and the use of smokeless
tobacco products by City employees.
The following resolution was considered:
No. R92-010
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVING REVISED
CITY POLICIES REGULATING SMOKING AND THE USE OF SMOKELESS
TOBACCO PRODUCTS BY CITY EMPLOYEES; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
Trent motioned, Perry seconded to approve the resolution. On roll
vote, Trent "aye", Alexander "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye",
Chew "nay", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion
carried with a 6-1 vote.
B. The Council considered approval of a resolution approving
the GTE Southwest Extended Area Service for the Denton exchange and
authorizing the Mayor to sign all necessary documents.
Jesus Nava, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that this item
was present to Council in early January. The proposed resolution
would approve extended area service for the Denton exchange.
The following resolution was considered:
No. R92-011
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON
APPROVING THE GTE SOUTHWEST EXTENDED AREA SERVICE FOR THE
DENTON EXCHANGE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN ALL
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS.
Trent motioned, Alexander 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.
9. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
City Manager Harrell did not have any items for the Council.
10. There was no official action on Executive Session items
discussed during the Work Session.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
February 18, 1992
Page 16
105'
11. New Business
The following items of New Business were suggested by Council
Members for future agendas:
A. Council Member Trent felt that the access roads along I35
were extremely dirty and suggested the City street sweeper clean
the area.
B. Council Member Trent stated that there were still
barricades on Dallas Drive from the beautification project and
asked that they be removed.
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that the Dallas Drive project
was a State Highway project and their contractor. They would be
contacted to remove the barricades. He also stated that the access
roads were the responsibility of the State and suggested first
trying to get the State to clean the area instead of the City doing
it. In the past, whenever the City did a State responsibility, it
seemed that the State would not do it again. He suggested
contacting the State first and if nothing was done, then have the
City do the work.
12. The Council convened into the Work Session to discuss legal
matters (considered action in Texas Waste Manaqement vs. city of
Denton and considered action in Gillispie vs. City), real estate
(discussed potential acquisition of land for recreational
facilities) and personnel/board appointments (considered
appointments to the Building Code Board, Cable T. V. Advisory
Board, the Plumbing and Mechanical Code Board and the Airport
Advisory Board and consulted with the Municipal Judge regarding
goals and objectives for 1992.
The Council reconvened into open session and took the following
action:
A. Hopkins motioned, Perry seconded to appoint Jim Risser to
the Airport Advisory Board. On roll vote, Trent "aye", Alexander
"aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and
Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
~NNI~E~ALTERS, CItY ~EC-RETARY
~ITY OFOgENTON, TEXAS ACC00045