Loading...
Minutes April 27, 1993'CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 27, 1993 The Council convened into the Work Session at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defence Room. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins; Council Members Brock, Chew, Perry, Smith and Miller. ABSENT: None 1. The Council convened into the Executive Session to discuss the following: A. Legal Matters 1. Considered legal action at 1800 Fort Worth Drive. B. Real Estate C. Personnel/Board Appointments 2. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding jurisdiction of juveniles charged with Penal Code and other state statute offenses and gave staff direction. Harlan Jefferson, Director of Treasury Operations, reported on the alternatives available to the City of Denton for accepting additional Class C juvenile offender responsibility. In February of 1993, the City of Denton stopped filing Class C juvenile offenders with the County Court-at-Law which left the city with a void for processing Class C juvenile offenders with the exception of traffic and public intoxication offenses. The only activities the city currently had in place were drug education programs in the school system and community based programs offered by the Police Department. The programs included the DFYIT (Drug Free Youth In Texas) program at the high school level, the DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) program for elementary through junior high level, and the PAL (Police Athletic League) in which any youth could participate but which also received youth referred from the county accused of Class A, B, and C misdemeanors. Mr. Jefferson also reported that the Police Department had one Juvenile Officer and one Child Abuse Officer. Mr. Jefferson requested the City Council to consider the basic program and responsibility the city assumed if the city expanded its jurisdiction for processing Class C juvenile offenders who have committed two or less misdemeanors punishable by fine only with the exclusion of traffic of public intoxication. The city had to be prepared to accept a case load of approximately 30 cases per month with no projection of the impact for the DISD Zero Tolerance policy. 367 city of Denton'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 2 The juvenile cases had to be filed separately and required closed hearings and to be kept off the city's current adult computer system. The future workload and activity of the Municipal Court was increased because more effort needed to be concentrated on the juvenile cases than adult cases. Mr. Jefferson stated that the Municipal Court workload had all ready increased because of such things as the STEP (Selective Traffic Enforcement Program) grant which generated an increase of 2700 tickets through March of the current year over last year. The city's revenue increased over 100% the last six months. However, overtime expenses increased in the Municipal Court area as well as expenses for temporary and seasonal employees. It was difficult for the Municipal Court to absorb the additional workload. Mr. Jefferson anticipated that if the city accepted the additional responsibility, the city needed to spend an additional $18,698 which included a part time judge, part time clerk, additional overtime for police officers, an additional personal computer, and an additional filing cabinet. Council Member Miller asked if the part time judge would only be needed for seven hours per week. Mr. Jefferson responded that the seven estimated hours was a more accurate estimate than the fifteen hours outlined in the back up materials. Mr. Jefferson stated that the advantages for accepting the additional responsibility included filling a void currently created because neither the County Court-at-Law nor the City were processing the cases; first and second time offenders were discouraged; and it assisted the community in dealing with the problem by making the city safer, increasing security, and enhancing the city image. The disadvantages for accepting the additional responsibility included no enforcement capabilities for processing the cases; and because of lack of enforcement, all advantages would not be realized. In an effort to strengthen enforcement capabilities, Mr. Jefferson outlined some diversion programs. One diversion program was a one dimensional program with one to two volunteer agencies in which juveniles were referred for volunteer services similar to the program conducted in Lewisville. The second option was a teen court which required a lot of community support for the effort. Mr. Jefferson discussed the advantages and disadvantages of a teen court as outlined in the back up materials. Both programs were completely voluntary. 368 city of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 3 Mr. Jefferson outlined staff recommendations which included immediate implementation of the basic program to deal with Class C juvenile offenders and appropriation of the $18,698 needed for implementation. The recommendation also included continued evaluation of the DISD Zero Tolerance policy and the affect on the Municipal Court workload, implementation of the one dimensional diversion program, and continued evaluation of the teen court option. The Mayor asked if the city had no recourse in juvenile cases when the juvenile decided not to pay the fine or chose not to participate in any other program. Mr. Jefferson stated that was correct. Jack Miller questioned how the $27,000 figure for loss of revenue was determined. Sandra White, Municipal Judge, stated that traffic cases and minor in possession cases currently handled by the Municipal Court for juveniles 17 to 21 could go to the teen court option. Under teen court legislation, juveniles over the 10 to 16 year old age group, as long as they were still enrolled in school, could opt to go to teen court resulting in a loss of revenue for the offenses. Council Member Miller asked if the city could force collection of fines for 16 year olds. Judge White stated that there was no way to force collection of a fine. In a teen court setting, the city could not collect a fine, but only a $10 administrative fee which most cities operating teen courts did not collect. If the Council established some sort of diversion program that allowed the juvenile to go another route other than a straight Municipal Court setting in front of the judge, the city had a possible revenue loss because the city could not collect any fines unless the fines were willingly paid. If a diversion program was set up, the city might have to allow the traffic cases and minor in possession offenses the option of going to the diversion program. Further discussion of the teen court program ensued. Council Member Hopkins stated that it was not the night to argue merits of teen court which required a lot of study, a commitment of money and a commitment on the part of the City Council and a lot of other agencies. The Council needed to discuss how to go forward with the current problem. 369 city of Denton April 27, 1993 Page 4 'C~ty Council Minutes Judge White stated that all sorts of strategic options needed to be determined such as using Council Chambers for the hearings and scheduling the hearings in the evening. Council Member smith stated that she concurred with Mr. Jefferson's recommendations and the city Council needed to commit to item #1 and work on the others. Council Member Brock stated that the City Council had no choice and needed to go ahead and work out the logistics. The Mayor questioned if the Council should wait until budget time to spend the $18,698 or implement immediately. The consensus of the Council was to implement immediately and requested the City Manager locate the funds necessary. Council Member Miller asked that of themoney needed would some of the costs incurred be a one time cost and the rest an annualized cost or for the remainder of the year. Mr. Jefferson stated that the $18,698 was an annual cost which included the computer and file cabinet which were one time costs. Judge White stated that the judge position listed was also requested in her next fiscal year budget. Council Member Hopkins stated she was in favor of going forward with item one. The Mayor questioned that when there was no recourse for a juvenile who did not pay the fine or carry out the judges orders could the offenders be referred to the juvenile court. Judge White stated that the city had no enforcement ability effort even if the juvenile did not show up. The Mayor questioned what would happen if the juvenile did not show up first time they were summoned to court. Judge White stated that the city continued to send summons through the mail and discussed further efforts attempting to have the juvenile appear. Mike Jez, Police Chief, questioned if in fact the juvenile did not appear and the city's juvenile officer worked with judges and their staffs could the city file a case for child in need of supervision and in turn file that with Judge Whitten's court. 370 City of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 5 Judge Whitten, County Court-at-Law #1, stated that not appearing was not sufficient grounds for filing a child in need of supervision, but she was willing to work with the city in setting guidelines for cases which could be transferred and she was willing to accept the cases. The Mayor questioned Judge Whitten that if the city undertook responsibility for the program and a problem occurred for which we had no enforcement ability, was her court willing to work with the Municipal Judge and take the case. Judge Whitten stated she agreed to take the case and offered to work with the city in setting protocol for such procedures. Council Member Chew stated that the majority of parents were responsible and appeared if summoned by the Municipal Court and the city was dealing with only a few problems. Council Member Brock requested that the Council set up a task force for diversion alternatives soon because of the affect on the entire community. The teen court issue required the cooperation and commitment of a lot of agencies and the general public. Council Member Hopkins recommended that the city gain cooperation of the DISD. Council Member Miller agreed that the City Council had an obligation to take jurisdiction in this matter. Mr. Jefferson stated that the adjusted cost for the rest of year was approximately $11,000. The Mayor stated that the city needed to communicate to the School Board the city's willingness to help, and the Chief had done good job working with them. The consensus of the council was to implement first recommendation. Council Member Chew requested that the committee for the alternative programs be placed on the next agenda to the look at the best program for Denton. 3. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the City's Animal Code and an update on the Texas Department of Health's action regarding Hartfelt Humane Society and gave staff direction. 371 City of Denton'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 6 Catherine Tuck, Administrative Assistant, provided a weekly update on activities dealing with Hartfelt. During the week, the Building Inspection Department made an initial inspection of Hartfelt Humane society. They were voluntarily allowed in by Steve Johnson, owner of the property, for the inspection. A letter was sent to Mr. Johnson explaining all of the violations of the plumbing and electrical codes which needed to be corrected and a time frame for each of those violations. There were serious plumbing and electrical code violations found at that inspection. Since that time, Mr. Johnson indicated to the Building Inspection Department that when they returned they would need a legal document to allow them entry. He would not voluntarily allow them to come onto his property. The Department secured an inspection warrant and served it on Friday, April 23, 1993. A follow-up inspection indicated that the majority of the serious electrical and plumbing violations were corrected. Staff would continue to follow-up to ensure that all remaining violations were corrected. Jerry Drake, Assistant City Attorney, had been in contact with the Texas Department of Health and the General Counsel's office. The letter authorized by Council to be sent under the Mayor's signature had been received by Dr. Murnane and Dr. Murnane forwarded that information to the General Counsel's office. A response to that letter had not yet been received. Nonie Kull, Environmental Health Services Manager, had been in contact with Dr. Murnane. Both the General Counsel's office and the Texas Department of Health's office indicated that they had not received any complaints since the date that the letter was sent informing Hartfelt to cease operations until they corrected all of their violations. Ms. Coe, Denton Humane society, indicated that they were working on compiling all of their information which would be forward to the Health Department. Tuck indicated that she had recently received a citizen complaint regarding a puppy adopted from Hartfelt which had died from Parvo. The adoption was done in the March time frame before the letter had gone out from the Heath Department. That information was forwarded to the Health Department but they did indicate that the adoption happened before their letter to the Society indicating that they should no longer be in operation. Council Member smith asked for the time frame for the adopted puppy. If the adoption occurred in March, was not one letter from the Health Department sent in February which indicated that if Hartfelt wanted to continue operation they needed to contact the Health Department for additional inspections. Tuck replied that the first letter in February indicated that there were some violations and at that time Johnson and Gil voluntarily released any animals to the City's Animal Control officers. That letter did indicate that additional inspections were needed before 372 City of Denton-City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 7 continuing to operate as a shelter. Council Member Smith stated that if a puppy was adopted in March, Hartfelt was operating then as a shelter. Tuck replied that it appeared that they were operating. The first letter was dated February 24, 1993. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked if Hartfelt was given a certain number of weeks to continue operation rather than having to close down immediately. Tuck read a portion of the letter from the Health Department "the Society has voluntarily suspended shelter operations. It is strongly recommended that you use this opportunity to correct deficiencies so that you can resume normal operations at the earliest possible date. The Department's policy is to make every effort to work with the non-compliance shelters. However, if satisfactory progress is not made, the Act does specify that an injunction may be obtained from the appropriate court." Ms. Coe, Denton Humane Society, stated that she had a video tape taken on March 17-18 which showed several puppies on the site. The puppy in question might be on the tape. She had an affidavit that a puppy was adopted from Johnson and Gil on March 18, 1993. Council Member Miller stated that he understood that there were still animals on the property. Tuck replied that there were approximately 12-13 animals on the property. Council Member Miller asked at what point could it be determined that the animals belonged to the property owners versus the individuals were still operating a shelter. If the individuals stated that they were no longer in operation, was there any legal recourse for the situation. Tuck replied that that was one of the reasons that the Denton Humane society's information was so important. They had indicated that they had evidence that Hartfelt was still operating and that was what the Texas Department of Health indicated they needed. As long as there was no evidence, it would be difficult to enforce. Ms. Coe indicated that her video was taken between 11:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m. to show that Hartfelt was sheltering animals overnight. The video indicated the date and time at which it was recorded. 373 city of Denton'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 8 City Manager Harrell stated that currently there was no city ordinance which gave the .City the authority to move against Hartfelt. Therefore, the only enforcement mechanism was to gather evidence and persuade the State to enforce the adopted State statute. An alternative, which some cities used, was to limit the number of animals which an individual could own privately. council Member Miller asked if the State knew that there were that many animals still on site. Tuck replied yes. Council Member Miller asked for the State's reaction to the number of animals still on site. Kull replied that the State had indicated that no one had recently complained about the animals present and Johnson had indicated that the animals on site were his own animals. Council Member Brock asked how much evidence was needed by the State since there was the video tape from the Denton Humane Society and the current letter of complaint. Kull replied that the State had not seen any of that information yet. They were aware that the information existed but had not seen it. Council Member Smith asked if money were accepted for the puppy. Ms. Coe replied yes that $35 was paid for the puppy. Johnson had given them medicine to help with the dog. There was a witness to the adoption and the individuals had gone to see the puppy on two separate occasions. Council Member Brock asked if the animal adoption was in violation of the State's order. Tuck replied that the first letter from the State indicated that Hartfelt voluntarily ceased operations and they strongly recommended such. The second letter, dated April 2, 1993, discussed the site visit, listed the violations found and in strong language, indicated that Hartfelt was to no longer operate until the violations were corrected. Tuck indicated that a survey had been done regarding what other cities in the area were doing with this type of issue. Most cities were not enforcing the Shelter Act and some cities had a limit on the number of dogs/cats which an individual could own. A provision missing in the city's ordinance was for any type of inspection. A multiple ownership ordinance City of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 9 would not be adequate without some type of inspection provision. Some cities also had kennel ordinances for commercial operations. After further discussion, consensus of the Council was to do some preliminary work on inspection ordinances already enacted in other cities. 4. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding revisions to the Budget Priority Questionnaire and gave staff direction. Kathy DuBose, Director of Accounting and Budget Operations, stated that there had been a format change on the budget questionnaire. The revised questionnaire would allow a Council Member to rank the different service areas and interest in the different service areas. Council Member Miller stated that the change added an important dimension to the questionnaire. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the changes. 5. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding an update on the Denton Municipal Airport and gave staff direction. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that there were two issues which he wished to discuss with the Council. The first dealt with the airport plan. The consultant for the Master Plan was to first deal with generating activity levels for the next twenty years. Those proposed activity levels showed continued increases in operations over the next twenty years. In conjunction with that, the Council of Governments and/or the FAA were looking at future options for DFW. The Airport Advisory Board had'been looking at continuing to lengthen the existing runway and looking into the future in terms of operations. The consultant gave the Board six to seven different options. The Board had concentrated on the option to ultimately build the existing runway to 7500 feet and look at a future runway of 10,000 feet. Projections of COG and the FAA indicated that more than one 10,000 foot runway might be needed. The Master Plan was a plan for ultimate operation of the airport. The second issue dealt with the Airport Zoning Commission which was the joint commission made up of three Planning and Zoning Commissioners and three Airport Advisory Board members. That Commission dealt with height restrictions and land use based on noise levels around the Airport. The Commission had discussed options for land use based on noise levels. The law allowed zoning land use up to five miles from the end of the runways and up to a mile and a half on either side of the runways. The outer zone 375 City of Denton C~ty Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 10 shown to Council was five miles from the end of the runways and included approximately 40 square miles. The inner zone dealt with use kind of issues such as kinds of residential uses which would be allowed. The Commission had the authority to exclude all residential uses in all of the 40 square miles which was not the thought of the Commission. The Commission was suggesting limiting that to a smaller area based on noise levels. In the bigger area, two suggestions included (1) requiring closer in areas some ty?e. of abatement such as soundproofing and (2) in the far areas, requiring a notice that it was an area which might someday be affected by airplane noise. This would make the area smaller for non- residential uses but would be proactive in advising people for future development. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the suggestions from the Commission. The Council convened into the Regular Session at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Council Members Chew, Perry, Smith and Miller. ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins and Council Member Brock 1. Pledge of Allegiance The Council and members of the audience recited the' Pledge of Allegiance. Council Member Brock joined the meeting. 2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 6, 1993 and the Joint Meeting of April 7, 1993. Smith motioned, Chew seconded to approve the minutes as presented. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. The Mayor presented a proclamation for "Frenchy Rheault Week". Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins joined the meeting. 376 City of Denton'City Council Minutes April 27,' 1993 Page 11 3. Citizens Report A. The Council received a citizen report from Joe Dodd regarding Charter revisions. Mr. Dodd stated that there were six areas of the Charter which he would like to personally change but at this meeting he would address two of them. The first was the concept of the Charter. The Charter should be a document which protected citizens by strictly listing the limited powers of government. Instead there was a poorly and loosely drafted outline of City power. He would like to change that concept. A second area and his primary focus for the evening was the "in arrears to the City" section of the Charter. It may have been that the drafters thought about taxes and thought about members of the City Council. But the wording, as he read it, applied to board members and to council members. The "arrears" was not only for taxes but was any debt to the city. He favored open government and was not sure that this subject was appropriate for open discussion. It had to do with reputations of persons willing to serve the City and had to do with potential litigation. He stated that he would raise some questions which he hoped would be discussed with the City Attorney behind closed doors. (1) What were the state requirements for public hearings and legal quorums. (2) Once a person was ineligible to hold whatever office he was in, did he have to go through the original process for retaking that seat or could he simply correct the problem and then be reinstated. He suggested that it did not work that way and once an individual was ineligible, he would stay ineligible and could not participate in the meetings which might cause a quorum problem. (3) What were "arrears"? Was it taxes, electric bills, parking and traffic fines, permits, or licenses. After those questions had been answered, he suggested the following actions. Make all future board/council members fully aware of the problem and all of the areas in which it could be a problem. Do the same with present board members and take any corrective action which would be necessary to make sure that meetings were legal and that the actions the Council took met State requirements. Open the Charter to repair all of its current problems as soon as possible. B. The Council received a citizen report from Tom Rogers regarding the release of the City of Denton ETJ for the Bishop property on Bishop Road and Bishop Road into Copper Canyon. Mr. Rogers, Council Member of the Town of Copper Canyon, stated that Copper Canyon would like to speak to Denton regarding property which was located in Denton's ETJ. The property owner had requested to be annexed into the Town of Copper Canyon. The property was adjacent to the proposed Highland Village annexation 377 city of Denton City Council Minutes April 27', 1993 Page 12 which the Council would be considering later in the meeting. The Town Council of Copper Canyon supported the request of Mr. Bishop to be annexed into their town. He asked the City of Denton to look favorably on the release of its ETJ to Copper Canyon. Council Member Miller stated that Copper Canyon was asking Denton to release this property from its ETJ so that Copper Canyon could annex that property. Denton along with many other cities in the area were interested in seeing Highway 2499 become a reality. The Town of Copper Canyon was not interested in having Highway 2499 go through the town boundaries. There was an attempt to work out a route which would not go into the Town of Copper Canyon. He asked if the Town Council of Copper Canyon could go on record as supporting the idea of Highway 2499 becoming a reality and a route which would go from the northern portion of Copper Canyon south'to the existing Highway 2499. Rogers replied that there had been numerous proposed routes for Highway 2499 throughout the last six years. A number of those routes were proposed to go through Copper Canyon's corporate limits. Copper Canyon had substantial concerns in regards to the Highway going though their corporate limits and from the beginning, the official position of Copper Canyon had been to support the extension of Highway 2499 outside the corporate limits of Copper Canyon. The Town had been working with Commission Scott Armey and the local property owners to find an acceptable area. One of the latest proposals from two years ago would have gone through the northeastern portion of Copper Canyon and right down Bishop Lane. This would have taken out one home and sizable portions of the yards of several homeowners. All which was needed to be done was to move the road 200' to the east and it would have been outside Copper Canyon and would have offered relief to the Bishop family. The Town of Copper Canyon had been working approximately one and a half years to get that accomplished. The Town had given Commissioner Armey a letter from the Mayor of Copper Canyon which stated that the Town supported the road outside the limits of Copper Canyon. A copy of that letter could be made available to Denton. Council Member Miller replied that it would be helpful to have that letter as it was one of the last areas to resolve. Rogers stated that the citizens of Copper Canyon preferred a rural lifestyle and Highway 2499 had been controversial in the town. City Manager Harrell stated that the letter was fine but asked Rogers if he felt the Town Council would go on record and adopt a resolution making a statement of support of Highway 2499 provided 378 City of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 13 it was outside the town limits of Copper Canyon. Rogers replied that he was only one member of the Council and could not speak for what the council might do. He felt that the Town would be willing to do that. The Town's position in six years had not changed. Doug Harp, Mayor - Copper Canyon, felt that this was an opportunity to receive into Copper Canyon property and individuals of like interest. There had been some preliminary discussions with representatives of Denton. The Bishop property was a portion of the parcel of property which was being considered for release to Copper Canyon. He saw this item as a related item to the proposed Highland Village annexation and was an opportunity for complimentary amendments for both cities. Council Member Miller asked Harp if he could ask the Copper Canyon Town Council to pass a resolution on the same basis in support of Highway 2499 if it were not in the town limits. Harp replied that there was a proposed resolution stating such on their next meeting of May 3, 1993. Karen Smith, property owner in the area, requested release of the property in Denton's ETJ. They wanted to be included in the Town of Copper Canyon as they had similar interests as residents of Copper Canyon. They were long time property owners and felt they should be able to have a voice in how the property would ultimately be used. Highway 2499 would be too close to their home with the present alignment. C. The Council received a citizen report from Willard Simpson regarding grievances against the City. Mr. Simpson was not present at the meeting. 4. Public Hearings A. The Council held a Dublic hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance rezoning a 299.9 acre tract from Planning Development District 91 and 92 to the Commercial District (C) with conditions on property located southeast of Loop 288 north of IH- 35E and west of Mayhill road. Z-93-005 (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval at its March 24, 1993 meeting, 6-0, with one abstaining.) Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that this was a rezoning of property currently zoned planned development. 379 City of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 14 There had been a series of blocks established within the planned development district indicating very generally what types of uses would be allowed. The current planned development showed some areas just for light industrial uses and some areas as multi-family two. The proposal did away with the requirement for site plans and continued a trend from site planning/detailed planning toward a situation of conditioned straight zoning. Instead of having a site plan required, there would be a series of ordinances with standards which would be required by the planned development. The proposed conditioned zoning limited the number of uses which would be allowed. Another condition was a forty foot building set back and a twenty foot no parking set back standard. Office zoning would be allowed but not light industrial and multifamily. The preliminary plan was on the Consent Agenda. The hospital site would be the first phase and the second phase would include relocating Colorado Blvd. along with current power lines. The Mayor opened the public hearing. John P. Wier, Consulting Engineer for the project, indicated that the proposal was for the relocation of the Denton Regional Medical Center. This would be part of the City's urban center which would promote further economic development in the area. The City would be able to accept the roadways and utilities already in place on the property. The Council would be considering the preliminary plat for the first phase of the hospital. The second phase would rebuild part of Colorado Blvd. and would relocate the current power lines. They were requesting commercial zoning with restrictions and many uses which might be allowed were eliminated. He requested approval of the proposal. No one spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 93-063 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICTS NO. 91AND 92 TO COMMERCIAL (C) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION WITH CONDITIONS FOR APPROXIMATELY 300 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED SOUTH OF LOOP 288, EAST OF 1-35 E AND GENERALLY WEST OF MAYHILL ROAD; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 380 City of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 15 Chew motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "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 the preliminary and final replats of Lots 12, 13, and 14, Block B, Canyon Lake Estates; into Lot 12R. The 6.102 acre tract was located on the east side of Canyon Road, approximately 2167 feet north of Milam Road (F.M. 3163), in Denton's extraterritorial jurisdiction. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval, 7-0 at its March 24, 1993 meeting.) Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that this was a replat of three lots into one and the relocation of a drainage easement. The Planning and Zoning Commission found that the replat conformed with City regulations and recommended approval. The Mayor opened the public hearing. No one spoke in favor. No one spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to approve the preliminary and final replats. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye.", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. C. The Council held a public hearing to consider the establishment of a storm water utility in regards to: 1. Considered approval of a resolution of intent regarding the establishment of a storm water utility. 2. Considered adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Code of Ordinances to establish a storm water drainage utility system; adopting Subchapter C of Chapter 402 of the Local Government Code (Municipal Utility Drainage Systems); and declaring drainage to be a public utility. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, presented some background history on the item. In December of 1990, the Council created a committee to (1) review and evaluate the necessity of establishing a storm water management utility for the City of Denton and submit an evaluation 381 City of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 16 to the Public Utilities Board which would include a recommendation of whether the City should pursue the establishment of such a utility. (2) if the Committee recommended the establishment of the utility, the Committee would provide recommendations to the Public Utilities Board for the most feasible method to establish that utility. The Committee worked during next year on those issues. After many meetings, the conclusion of the Committee was (1) to establish a storm water utility and incorporate it into the 1993 fiscal year budget and (2) to agree on a basic methodology to implement the fee. There was disagreement among the Committee members whether the fees were to be implemented in fiscal year 1993-94 or be implemented when the EPA storm water regulations went into effect for cities the size of Denton. Therefore, the Committee made no recommendation regarding the timing of the implementation of the fee. That recommendation went to the Public Utilities Board which reviewed it and endorsed the recommendation of the citizen committee to the City Council. On August 18, 1992 the Council had a public hearing regarding the establishment of the utility and not the establishment of fees and considered an ordinance to create such a utility. That ordinance was tabled and Council asked for additional information with additional work sessions on the issue. At this meeting the Council would consider the original ordinance which it had considered at its August 18, 1992 meeting. The ordinance would establish the drainage system of the City as a public utility and formally create a storm water utility. Operationally, it would not change any procedures. Several years ago, the supervision of storm drainage was transferred to the Utilities Administration Department. The ordinance would (1) allow staff to proceed to develop all of the data necessary to implement a fee schedule sometime in the future with some certainty that such a system would be adopted. The importance of that was that other cities, as they had developed the data necessary to implement the system (collecting data and measuring impervious surfaces on all commercial/industrial areas in a community), found that employing a consultant involved approximately $50,000-$60,000. There was no reason for the City staff to proceed to collect that information and to get ready to implement a fee schedule if the Council was not interested in creating the utility. The ordinance would make the statement that sometime in the future, at a time to be determined by policy decisions of the Council, that a storm water fee would be implemented. It allowed staff to work on the data. (2) The adoption of the ordinance set the stage for the Council to undertake serious policy debate with the new Council immediately after the election. Those policies would have to be thoroughly debated and included such issues as when should a utility fee be implemented, should there be a standard fee for residential units or should there be a tier schedule, what kind of property tax 382 City of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 17 reduction, if any, would accompany the implementation of a storm water utility fee and the purposes and use of storm water utility fees. These were policy debates which needed to happen provided there was a commitment from the Council to go forward with some type of utility. (3) Once the Council settled those policies and there was a system outlined which the majority of the Council was comfortable with and felt was an equitable system, the Council could have another public hearing process before the ordinance would go into effect. Individuals could comment on how to implement the fees and use such input for any modifications to the ordinance. The action at this meeting would allow staff to begin collecting the data necessary to implement and to start the policy debate the Council would have to make to determine the fee structure. There were some Council Members during work sessions who felt that if not all the details of the fee schedule were known, there should be some guiding principles for the utility which was what the proposed resolution did. It set forth Council intent which would be a guiding principle as Council formulated the fee structure. There was some confusion regarding when the City would come under the EPA regulations. The City's information was that the date when Denton would have to start complying with the EPA regulations was October 1, 1994. There were three items for Council consideration at this meeting. (1) The City Attorney had recommended that the Council, by motion, point out the three findings which were listed in the WHEREAS section of the ordinance. Those findings included that the Council would establish a schedule of drainage charges against all real property in the City subject to charges under the Act, provide drainage for all real property in the City on the payment of drainage charges except for property granted in exemption as authorized by the Act and would offer drainage service on non-discriminatory, reasonable and equitable terms. (2) Adopt a resolution of intent which would guide the establishment of the storm water utility. (3) Adopt the ordinance which would create the utility. The Mayor opened the public hearing. No one spoke in favor. Linnie McAdams spoke in opposition. She recognized the need for necessary funds for storm drainage but was not sure whether the City could afford this proposal. The proposed fee was a regressive tax and did not recognize the ability of the person nor the amount of income the person had to pay the fee. She felt that it would be possible to do a sample, looking at the property and the impervious surface, to give a better idea of the process and what citizens would have to pay. This kind of tax affected elderly individuals on fixed incomes, families on welfare and the working poor. She did 383: City of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 18 not want to put the poor in a situation of having to determine what to pay in regards to either their needs or a storm water drainage fee. She felt there was a need to do a sample of what the costs would be and how those costs would be assessed against individual property owners. While property taxes might be reduced, there would be direct out of pocket costs to the poor. She urged the Council to not approve the utility at this point and to do a sample first. Richard Hayes stated the study was started and committee was appointed to address the EPA storm water regulations. Those had not been promulgated yet and without them being promulgated he felt it was premature to initiate the debate. He encouraged the City to become a sponsoring agency for the Vision for Denton-21st Century and thanked the Council for their support of the Special Olympics. Mike Cochran was opposed to the utility and felt that it was a premature action. It was premature as there was no whole plan to look at. He had opposed the proposal which came from the Committee because of a question of equity. He saw no compelling reason to proceed at this point. The date of the EPA regulations was in question. He had been in contact with the EPA last week, this week and in the afternoon and the Engineers from Region Six were quite certain about the fact that the October 1994 date had nothing to do with the city of Denton as a whole. They indicated that in October of 1994 some things would happen but would be involved with municipally owned industries and not with communities as a whole. There was also a grace period of 18 months in which to act from when Phase One would go into effect and if the October. 1994 date was accurate, the city would have one and a half years before it would have to act. If the City created the utility and started charging for it, the City would have to stay in it for 5 years. He also had a problem with the transferring of a bond debt to a fee. If citizens knew that this was the way the bonds were going to be treated, they might have treated them differently when they came up for a vote. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked to hear from Sam Bush regarding the EPA regulations. Sam Bush, Manager of Environmental Systems for the North Central Council of Governments, stated that he had attended a number of meetings with the EPA staff. Part I was a year long process of data gathering for EPA and Part II was wet weather monitoring and other activities and preparing what to propose as management programs to EPA for a permit. Phase I dealt with all of the permit 384 City of Denton City Council Minutes April 27.,' 1993 Page 19 application processes which applied to cities over 100,000 population and a select group of industries. Phase II included anything which was not covered in Phase I. EPA was looking at whether to permit cities under 100,000 and other industries. The decision had not been made yet as to which entities would be required to obtain a permit. The October 1994 deadline was in the federal register. The storm water utility would have to be equitable and it did take a long time to develop. Some cities viewed the utility as a different option for funding storm water activities. Mayor Castleberry asked if October 1, 1994 would be the date for compliance. Bush replied that it appeared to be the date. Mayor Castleberry asked if some cities had already implemented such a utility. Bush replied that the cities of Arlington, Austin, Bedford, Dallas, Euless, Garland, and North Richland Hills had implemented a storm water utility. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked Bush if it were his best estimate that if it took eighteen months to get certificate, could fees be assessed during that period or would it be in October 1994. Bush replied that ideally EPA would have the regulations for Phase II written and adopted in October 1994. If, for instance, cities of 50,000 or greater population would have to do the same process as the larger cities, there would be a year to complete Part I and another six months to complete Part II. Council Member Miller asked if the fee structure was determined ahead of time or was it done in phases for the cities which had already established the utility. Bush indicated that he did not know. Several cities, because they needed the funding for the application process, implemented the utility to pay for that processing fee. Council Member Smith asked when the federal registry indicated October 1994. Was it in the original bill. Bush replied that it was not in the original bill as the original deadline was October 1992. That date had been extended several times to October 1994. 385 City of Denton'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 20 City Manager Harrell stated that there was some litigation involved in this entire matter which was holding EPA to implement the regulations. Bush replied that it was tied more to the issues regarding EPA allowing certain industries to be exempt. EPA missed a deadline and a way out was to extend the deadline only for municipalities under 100,000 population. Council Member Smith stated that she would have to vote against the issue. She objected to the resolution on the basis that one Council should not bind another Council to a prescribed course of action. She objected to the ordinance in that the driving force to start the task force was the EPA regulations and the need to meet those regulations. As that progressed, there was a shift in emphasis to doing regular storm water drainage which the City was currently doing out of tax funds. She also disagreed with the idea of moving debt into a fee structure. She used the analogy that to go with the package of the storm utility without a blueprint for the interior workings of it would be like buying a house with only the footprint and not any inside structures. The ordinance stated that it would be effective immediately upon passage and approval. That indicated to'her that it was not necessary to establish a utility instantly, that it could be established at any time and become effective immediately. She would prefer to establish the utility later when the workings of the utility were known. As to the application of fees, she agreed with the concept that it was really a tax. The fees would not be deductible from any income taxes while taxes were. The universities and schools were tax supported to begin with and it might be possible for a citizen of Denton to be paying his taxes which would be applied to the expenses of the universities and at the same time be charged a fee for something else. She also felt that staff erroneously assumed that if Council disapproved the ordinance that it would "desire to continue funding all present functions and future EPA mandated requirements of the storm water drainage utilities from ad valorem taxes". She had personally contacted the EPA and received the same report that on October 1, 1994 the mandates coming down would apply only to city owned industries. EPA was not sure what or when the mandates would apply to a city the size of Denton. The EPA indicated that the water emissions from Denton were constantly being monitored and unless Denton developed undesirable traits in the water, Denton would not be affected in near future. This could change but at this point Denton was not on the list. When and if the mandates were applied to Denton, the city would have several months to do the Part I application and a year to do Part II. she felt it was too hasty to form the utility now. 386 City of Denton'City Council Minutes April 27,' 1993 Page 21 Miller motioned, Hopkins seconded to adopt the three findings in the WHEREAS section of the ordinance as stated earlier by City Manager Harrell. Council Member Brock stated that she was concerned about several aspects of the proposal. One was that the basic purpose of the procedure was to shift from a tax funded process to a fee funded process. She was concerned that it would take an important function out of the pubic eye. It was much easier to raise a utility rate than it was to raise taxes. There were many important drainage projects and reclamation projects which needed to be done and there was no money to do those projects. It had been mentioned that the income from this fee could be used to reclaim land to solve some of the serious drainage problems in the city. She felt that these were items that if the public felt were important they should be funded with bonds which would be voted on by the public. A fee was not tax deducible and taxes were which was another way in which this was a form of double taxation. For businesses, a utility cost would be deductible as a business expense but it would not be for a homeowner. A person with many acres of land which were not developed would pay nothing while a small homeowner on a fixed income would pay. The City was not under a time frame to establish this utility and felt that it was not desirable at this time. Council Member Miller stated that it was very clear what the purpose was of the utility as indicated by the proposed resolution. The EPA was one of the reasons this was first discussed but it was not the only reason. Public hearings could be held for greater citizen input regarding the issue. The Council had talked about planning and future planning. He felt this was an important vehicle for future planning. In regards to savings, future debt issues would be issued as a utility debt issue rather than a general bond issue. There was nothing to say that a fee structure would not be as equitable as possible for all property owners. Council Member Brock stated that the establishment of a storm water utility would bind future councils as it would be five years before it could be discontinued. Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, stated that once the ordinance was adopted establishing the utility it would be effective for a minimum of five years. After five years of operation, the City could determine if it wished to discontinue the utility. Lee Allison, Director of Water Engineering and Operations, stated that it was not five years from the time the ordinance was passed establishing the utility but five years from the time the fee was 387 city of Denton'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 22 established. He read from the statute regarding the establishment and discontinuance of the utility. Council Member smith asked if the fee were established and used for drainage now, would that start the five years. Allison replied yes. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins stated that the proposal this evening would not start time clock. Allison replied yes that it would not start the clock. Council Member Chew asked the City Attorney to read the information he had from the document prepared by the Storm Water Utility Committee. City Attorney Drayovitch read from a paragraph on page 21 of the Final Report from the Storm Water Utility Committee presented in January of 1992 "another key element is the legislative process. Once a funding mechanism, tax or fee is established by ordinance, the municipality can not change the funding mechanism for five years". Mayor Castleberry stated that the Public Utilities Board recommended a four cent tax deduction if the storm water utility was implemented. Denton had the second highest tax rate in the metroplex with only Fort Worth being higher. It was important to try and broaden the tax base and felt that that was the only solution to get the tax rate down along with other alternative methods such as a storm water utility. He felt the Council should look ahead and that the ordinance was not setting any fees. He was concerned that if the issue was not passed, that Council would have to go back through the entire process again and use staff time again for this issue. council voted on the motion proposed by Council Member Miller formally stating the three findings of the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "nay", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "nay", Chew "nay", Perry "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion failed with a 3-4 vote. Item 4.C.1 and 4.C.2 were not considered for lack of a motion. 388 City of. Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27',1993 Page 23 5. Consent Agenda Perry motioned, Smith seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. A. Bids and Purchase Orders: Bid #1489 - IBM File Server Bid $1486 - General Construction and Renovation of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Recreation Center Change Order #5 - P.O. #26052A - Gracon Change Order Revision P.O. #26833A - Alan Nelson Architects B. Tax Refunds Ce 1. Citicorp Mortgage, Inc./Donald Rea - $676.21 Plats 6. Ordinances Considered the preliminary plat and comprehensive pedestrian access plan of Lots i and 2, Block 1, Denton Regional Medical Center Addition. The 35.933 acre tract was located northwest of Mayhill Road, between Interstate 35 and Colorado Blvd. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval at its March 24, 1993 meeting, 6-0, with one abstaining.) A. The Council consider adoption of an ordinance accepting a competitive sealed proposal and awarding a contract for purchase of materials, equipment, supplies or services. (5.A.1. - Bid #1486) The following ordinance was considered: NO. 93-064 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. 389 City of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27,-1993 Page 24 Smith motioned, Hopkins seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "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. (5.A.2. - Bid #1486) The following ordinance was considered: NO. 93-065 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE AWARD OF CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "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 execution of a change order to a contract between the City of Denton and Gracon; and providing for an increase in the contract price. (5.A.3. - P.O. #26052A) The following ordinance was considered: NO. 93-066 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CHANGE ORDER TO A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND GRACON CONSTRUCTION; PROVIDING FOR ANINCREASE IN THE CONTRACT PRICE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Smith motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment Number One to a contract between the City of Denton and Alan Nelson Architects; and providing for an increase in the contract price due to additional services relating to the design of improvements to the service center. (5.A.4. - P.O. #26833A) 390 City of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 25 The following ordinance was considered: NO. 93-067 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND ALAN NELSON ARCHITECTS; PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT PRICE DUE TO ADDITIONAL SERVICES RELATING TO THE DESIGN OF IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SERVICE CENTER; AND PROVIDING ANEFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance designating and establishing a school safety speed zone on portions of Linden Street, Fulton Street and Crescent Street near the Denton High School West Campus; reducing the maximum prima facie speed limit for such portions of said streets from thirty (30) miles per hour to twenty (20) miles per hour during certain hours; and providing a penalty of a fine not to exceed two hundred dollars ($200.00). (The Citizens Traffic Safety Support Commission recommended approval.) Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that this was a request for twenty mile an hour speed zones on Crescent, Linden and Fulton due to the change in the use of the campus. The school speed zones had been revoked when the high school had been moved and this was a request from the Denton School District to reestablish them. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 93-068 AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING AND ESTABLISHING A SCHOOL SAFETY SPEED ZONE ON PORTIONS OF LINDEN STREET, FULTON STREET AND CRESCENT STREET NEAR THE DENTON HIGH SCHOOL WEST CAMPUS; REDUCING THE MAXIMUM PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMIT FOR SUCH PORTIONS OF SAID STREETS FROM THIRTY (30) MILES PER HOUR TO TWENTY (20) MILES PER HOUR DURING CERTAIN HOURS; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF A FINE NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200.00); PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION ; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 391 City of Denton 'city Council Minutes April 27', 1993 Page 26 Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. F. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance designating and establishing a school safety speed zone on portions of Windsor Drive and Bell Avenue adjacent to Strickland Middle School Campus; reducing the maximum prima facie speed limit for such portions of said streets from thirty (30) miles per hour to twenty (20) miles per hour during certain hours; providing for a limited access lane on the south side of Windsor Drive between Inglewood and Bell Avenue; and providing a penalty of a fine not to exceed two hundred dollars ($200.00). (The citizens Traffic Safety Support Commission recommended approval.) Rick Svehla, Deputy city Manager, stated that this ordinance would establish a twenty mile per hour speed zone and a proposed limited access lane for bus loading and unloading of students. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 93-069 AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING AND ESTABLISHING A SCHOOL SAFETY SPEED ZONE ON PORTIONS OF WINDSOR DRIVE AND BELL AVENUE ADJACENT TO STRICKLAND MIDDLE SCHOOL CAMPUS; REDUCING THE MAXIMUM PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMIT FOR SUCH PORTIONS OF SAID STREETS FROM THIRTY (30) MILES PER HOUR TO TWENTY (20)MILES PER HOUR DURING CERTAIN HOURS; PROVIDING FOR A LIMITED ACCESS LANE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WINDSOR DRIVE BETWEEN INGLEWOODAND BELL AVENUE; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF A FINE NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200.00); PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Hopkins motioned, smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. 'On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "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 the retainer of the lawfirm of Lloyd, Gosselink, Fowler, Blevins, and Mathews, P.C. to represent the City in the case of Bolivar Certificate of Convenience and Necessity. Bob Nelson, Executive Director of Utility, stated that over the past several years the City had had some involvement with the Bolivar Water Supply Corporation and their desire to be certified 3 9 2 City of Denton City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 27 to serve water service in an area north of the City of Denton where the City presently had a single certified area. Bolivar wanted Denton to relinquish its certification in the area so that Bolivar could serve. They had extended lines in the area even though they did not have certification to do so and now in order to secure federal funds to extend and repair lines, the federal government required Bolivar to have an exclusive service territory in the area. Bolivar had filed an application before the Texas Water Commission for a single certified certificate of convenience and necessity and also requested that the City of Denton be decertified in those areas. Denton had protested that decertification and had applied for a' dual certification in the area north of Denton's existing area to Lake Ray Roberts. It was felt that legal assistance was needed from individuals in Austin who were directly involved in CCN proceedings. The contract was for services and the fees were standard legal fe~s. The overall cost of the contract was in the $25,000 range depending on the difficulty of the case. The State of Texas granted municipal governments extraterritorial jurisdiction areas in order to be able to orderly plan the areas around their communities for future development. They gave cities another tool to help plan with and that was certificates of convenience and necessity. If Denton lost certification in the area, the ability to plan for water in the area would be limited. As Denton annexed into the area and if Denton were decertified, a developer in the area or the City would be required to pay the cost of the lines already present and probably install new lines to accommodate the development. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 93-070 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON APPROVING THE RETAINER OF THE LAWFIRMOF LLOYD, GOSSELINK, FOWLER, BLEVINS AND MATHEWS, P.C. TO REPRESENT THE CITY IN PENDING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS STYLED APPLICATION OF BOLIVAR WATER SUPPLY CORPORATION FOR AMENDMENT TO CCN NUMBER 11257 AND APPLICATION OF CITY OF DENTON FOR AMENDMENT TO CCN NUMBERS 10195 (WATER) AND 20072 (SEWER); AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Chew motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 393 City of Denton City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 28 7. Resolutions A. The Council considered approval of a resolution by the Council of the City of Denton, Texas declaring its willingness to become a sponsoring agency for the "A Vision for Denton - The 21st Century" Project and offering various commitments to support this project. The following resolution was considered: NO. R93-024 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS DECLARING ITS WILLINGNESS TO BECOME A SPONSORING AGENCY FOR THE "A VISION FOR DENTON - THE 21ST CENTURY" PROJECT AND OFFERING VARIOUS COMMITMENTS TO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT; AND PROVIDINGAN EFFECTIVE DATE. Chew motioned, Perry seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Pat Gobble, United Way, thanked the Council for their support. B. The Council considered approval of a resolution by the Council of the City of Denton, Texas relinquishing in favor of the City of Highland Village 118.09 acres of land commonly known as Pilot Knoll Park within its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction so that the City of Highland Village may institute annexation proceedings with respect to such area. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that this was a request from Highland Village to annex this area which was adjacent to the area considered earlier in the meeting. The proposal would relinquish the City's ETJ and allow Highland Village to annex the property. There was some concern that some of the property might be in corinth's ETJ but an investigation revealed this was not the case. All of the property was in Denton's ETJ and would allow a corridor for the Highway 2499 project to be preserved. It would still meet with Copper Canyon's wish to maintain a posture of not having Highway 2499 in their corporate limits. Mayor Castleberry stated that a petition had been presented in opposition to the proposal. Council Member Perry asked Svehla if Denton had the same kind of assurances from Highland Village as from Copper Canyon about the 394 City of Denton 'City Council Minutes April 27', 1993 Page 29 corridor for Highway 2499. Svehla replied that Highland Village was one of the supporting cities and founding cities of the Highway 2499 task force. Highland Village had allocated funds for the project and were very supportive of the project. June Tyler asked to speak regarding the issue. She was opposed to the annexation of the property by Highland Village. Regarding Highway 2499, she had met with Commissioner Armey who indicated that he could condemn the property if it were left in Denton's ETJ. She would like to keep the property within Denton's ETJ until the Highway 2499 issue was resolved and then allow the residents of the area to determine where they wanted to reside. The area had a series of horse trails and access was through Pilot Knoll Park. She was concerned that if Highland Village took over the park area they would be denied access as they had in another instance. The life styles of Copper Canyon conflicted with Highland Village residents. She also had a problem with Highland Village's zoning and felt that it was too dense. Tom Rogers, Copper Canyon, stated that Copper Canyon's request for annexation of the Bishop property was brought on by the request of Highland Village for this annexation. The Bishop's did not want to be annexed into Highland Village and requested to be annexed into Copper Canyon. Highland Village and Copper Canyon had very different views of how they wanted their communities to be. He did not support the proposed annexation. Officials of Copper Canyon had contacted the Mayor and City Manager of Highland Village but to date had had no discussions with them. Copper Canyon had been denied a request from Highland Village to discuss the issue at a recent Highland Village council meeting. Copper Canyon was concerned that Highland Village might try and annex unincorporated areas and eventually surround Copper Canyon. Highland Village had indicated that they had no interest further west but were not willing to put such in writing. Another area of concern was zoning in the area. Copper Canyon did support Highway 2499 in the area. He felt a joint solution from Denton, Highland Village, Corinth and ¢oDDer Canyon would be beneficial as to what would haDDen in area. He requested that the City not release any property in the area until an agreement could be reached among the adjoining cities. Doug Harp, acting MayOr of Copper Canyon, stated that this was an important issue to Copper Canyon. He was asking for a deferent of action on the issue until all involved could discuss the issue. Passage of the proposed resolution might compromise Copper Canyon's opportunity to reach an equitable agreement with the other communities. Copper Canyon had a resolution of support for Highway 395 City of Denton'City Council Minutes April 27,7 1993 Page 30 2499 on its next agenda as evidence of their good faith to consider this important issue. Mayor Castleberry asked if it would be more agreeable to Copper Canyon if a motion were made to change the resolution to indicate that the property were to be dedicated to Highway 2499. Harp replied that the aspects of annexation and release of ETJ were complex from a legal point of view. Copper Canyon wanted some assurance in the resolution that they would have the right of first refusal for the release of ETJ which was being considered for the Town of Copper Canyon. Copper Canyon recognized the importance of Highway 2499 and the inevitability of Highway 2499 but they would like to manage that change as best as possible. Council Member Miller stated that Rogers and Harp had asked Denton to pass a resolution to release some of Denton's ETJ to Copper Canyon. Harp asked for a coordinated action. Rogers asked that the two ETJ's be released at the same time. He had a concern that if Highland Village was allowed to annex property in the area that when it came time to release the next ETJ, they would want to claim that property as well. Council Member Miller asked if there were any overlap of the two pieces of property. Rogers replied that there was no overlap. It was mutually agreeable to use Bishop road as a dividing line. Copper Canyon would like to use the east side of Bishop Road as the cut off point and allow Copper Canyon to annex Bishop Road. City Manager Harrell stated that from a staff standpoint they had taken a position with both cities that Denton could not 'foresee logically that these two tracts should be a part of Denton. A paramount effort in releasing ETJ was to do whatever could be done to guarantee that Highway 2499 would be built. In the case of Highland Village, they had been a staunch supporter of Highway 2499. They had started the timetable from an annexation standpoint. The Council must release the property in order to have them complete the annexation. Council Member Miller asked if it would be appropriate for Council to approve this resolution and direct staff to proceed working with Copper Canyon in affecting the ETJ transfer as requested by Copper Canyon. 396 city of Denton'City Council Minutes April 27, 1993 Page 31 Svehla stated that as soon as Denton had the Copper Canyon resolution, a resolution would be brought to Council for consideration to give the Bishop ETJ to Copper Canyon. The following resolution was considered: NO. R93-025 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON RELINQUISHING 118.09 ACRES OF LAND COMMONLY KNOWS AS PILOT KNOLL PARK WITHIN ITS EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION TO THE CITY OF HIGHLAND VILLAGE SO THAT HIGHLAND VILLAGE MAY INSTITUTE ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS WITH RESPECT TO SUCH AREA; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Miller motioned, Chew seconded to approve the resolution to Highland Village. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Miller motioned, Perry seconded to direct staff to proceed to work with the cities of Copper Canyon and Highland Village for an agreement that Denton would release to Copper Canyon the territory presented tonight which was in Denton's ETJ and that this as well as the previous resolution tie in with the desire of all of the cities to see a successful conclusion of the routing of Highway 2499. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 8. The Council considered a motion regarding the request of sheila Alexander relating to a paving lien. Chew motioned, Miller seconded to deny the request. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "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 presented the following items: A. John McGrane, Executive Director for Finance, had met with GTE and they were agreeable to discuss possible amendments to the franchise. B. He and the Mayor attended a legislative briefing from TML and had received good new on three pieces of legislation. General legislation for cities look good at this point. Denton's municipal 397 city of Denton City Council Minutes April 27', 1993 Page 32 court bill was just filed, had been heard by Committee and passed out to the House with a "do pass" recommendation and put on the consent calendar for House. There were still some questions with the Senate. The sales tax bill passed the House and was scheduled the next day for a hearing in front of the Finance Committee in the Senate. Fort Worth was trying get permission to pass such a sales tax amendment on Denton's bill. C. Early voting ended today with 1461 people voting during the early voting period compared to 1146 last year. Today alone 464 people had voted. 10. There was no official action taken on Executive Session items discussed during the Work Session Executive Session. 11. New Business The following items of New Business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas: A. Council Member Smith asked for more information regarding the items Mr. Dodd mentioned in his presentation. B. Council Member Brock asked to examine the tree preservation ordinance with a public hearing at some point. The Council might consider protecting various types of special trees. She would like to consider the possibility of having the permit for the removal of very large trees approved bythe Planning and Zoning Commission. C. Council Member Miller stated that the Fry Street Fair event was a good event due in part to Council preplanning. He suggested beginning similar discussions regarding the North Texas State Fair. D. Mayor Castleberry stated that he had appointed George Hubbard to the Denton Housing Authority. 12. There was no Executive Session held during the Regular Session. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. 398 City of Denton City Council Minutes April 27','1993 Page 33 BETTY W~L~,IAMS DEPUTY CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS J~NIFE~FWAI~TERS - ' ~7Y S~RET~Y CTTY OF DENTON, TEXAS ACC0010A BOB' CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR/ CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS/