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/