Loading...
Minutes June 08, 1993 CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 8, 1993 The Council convened into the Special Call Session at 5:15 p.m. in the civil Defense Room. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem smith; Council Members Brock, Cott, Perry, and Miller. ABSENT: Council Member Chew 1. The Council convened into the Executive Session to discuss the following: A. Legal Matters -- Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S. 1. Considered offer of settlement in the matter of the application of Bolivar Water Supply Corporation for an amendment to CCN No. 11257; Docket Nos. 9824-C and 9447-C of the Public Utilities Commission. B. Real Estate -- Under Sec. 2(f), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S. Ce Personnel/Board Appointments -- Under Sec. 2(g), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S. Council Member Chew arrived during the Executive Session. 2. The Council received a presentation bY Hennington, Durham and Richardson (HDR) regarding the preliminary solid waste master plan and received a briefing on the scope of work regarding the proposed contract with HDR for engineering services for landfill permitting and design. Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that in the process of selecting a firm for this project, requests for proposals had been sent to a number of firms. Three firms were selected to make presentations to the Pubic Utilities Board and the Board selected two firms to prepare preliminary reports on how each would proceed with project. From that process, the Board selected the firm of HDR. HDR stated that the preliminary master plan was a product of the selection process. One of the next phases would be to develop the master plan in detail. The preliminary master plan was built on the work done by the technical committee as well as the Public Utilities Board. An integrated approach was proposed involving many types of solid waste activities. Specific programs were looked at which could be part of the integrated approach. Each program would focu~ on the idea of reducing the quantity of waste which would have to be disposed of in a landfill. Implementation of those programs and the resources required to implement the programs were also considerations. Goals and objectives of the City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 2 program included source reduction, recycling, composting, refuse derived fuel and the landfill. Each of these programs dealt with how much waste could be diverted away from the landfill rather than getting it in the landfill. Source reduction included public information, "Don't Bag It", business information, school initiatives, economic incentives, and household special waste. The recycling element dealt with residential, commercial and government incentives. It was suggested to continue with the drop-off program but to not enlarge the curbside service as it would be too costly. The composting element for residential and commercial entities included residential yard waste, commercial yard waste and municipal sewage sludge. The fourth element was a refuse derived fuel project in which commercial and residential waste would be taken to a processing plant in order to burn the appropriate materials in a combustion unit. This was a mid-to-long term option as the economics for such a project had to be considered. The landfill component of the program involved designing the facility to accommodate all of the prior elements suggested and to maximize the land area for total use. A priority was to maximize the landfill life. Council Member Miller felt that regarding the curbside collection, there was a difference between effectiveness of the program and public perception of the program. He asked HDR if they had any dealings with the public in terms of why curbside collection was not available, why it was beneficial not to have it, etc. HRD stated that it was a cost issue. Council Member Miller asked if HDR had any experience in getting that point across to the public. Some citizens were willing to pay to have curbside recycling. HRD replied that a good example was the Dallas program which was a subscription program to have curbside collection. The overall response was that the citizens did not want the service. Bob Coplen stated that it was imperative to have the community informed and th~ need for a long range plan for information for the citizens. HDR stated that the purpose of the preliminary master plan was to get the most cost effective program as soon as possible. Right now it was more cost effective to do other programs rather than residential curbside recycling. 3 City of Denton city Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 3 Council Member Cott stated that part of this would be a grand plan which would indicate all areas of recycling in terms of how much revenue would be received by area by year. The community would then know what it would cost for each of those pieces and what the whole program would cost. The CIP indicated that the intent was to not spend all of the funds for this program at this time. Bob Coplen replied that the first dollars were for the landfill. Recycling was the intermediate plan on how to improve the present program. The money was spread over a period of time only from a make sense standpoint. Only a preliminary plan was available at this time. Council Member Cott suggested that before this part of the project was started it was necessary have an idea on how the whole program was going to look. This could not be done in pieces and there was a need to know total loss in dollars for the community and give tax payers a choice if they wanted that loss or another choice. Coplen replied that all elements referred back to the landfill. Enough information was known that there was not enough time to wait until a total program was completed. It could be done in parallel but could not wait. Council Member Cott felt that that seemed to be a new thought of the Board because in the current CIP, the Board indicated that it planned to spend only $35,000 on the landfill engineering. Nelson replied that the majority of the contract would take place after 1994. Council Member Cott stated that in 1994 the forecast was for only $100,000 and in this CIP there was $135,000 for engineering for the landfill. How did it get to be $400,000. Nelson stated that those were very preliminary numbers when the CIP was developed in January. There was approximately $6 million for the entire development of the landfill. Charlie Watkins, Superintendent of Solid Waste, stated that the $100,000 was related to design work plus SLER work which was included in the figures. Coplen stated that the money which was previously proposed was driven by staff a~ far as Drojecting engineering needs. Everything from the different consultants indicated that more was needed. 4 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 4 Council Member Perry stated that the plan would be phased in over a period of five years. This was a very preliminary look at a plan which had been approved by the Public Utilities Board. This was a comprehensive concept of what to do with the landfill, a concept which he liked. Council Member Brock asked if the work of this firm would coordinate with the work of the task force. Nelson replied that the technical committee looked at the community and the types of wastes which it had. Based on that information, a preliminary plan was developed. HDR looked at that information to help determine the scope of the project. Phase I was the master plan, Phase II dealt with the current landfill and the Subtitle D documentation, Phase IIIA dealt with preliminary landfill design and consisted of approximately 466 hours of work. This would help define the major components of the work. Phase IIIB involved the design and landfill permitting which would be over 5100 hours of work. State regulations involved exact tasks which needed to be done in order to proceed correctly. This was a basic contract with an hourly rate times a multiplier. Council Member Cott asked if the hourly rates being charged for different levels of people and the actuals charged were known. Would a budget or actual hours be charged. Nelson replied actual hours would be charged. Council Member Cott suggested working out all of the details of the contract before starting. HDR replied that they would request reimbursement at direct cost. Council Member Cott felt that it should be detailed in the contract for the expenses. He would like to see a master plan sooner than later and agree on the whole concept before starting phase four. Nelson stated that the master plan scope of work would be presented to Council in July. He also mentioned that subcontractors allowed for a 10% override. Council Member Miller asked who determined the use of subcontractors, the City or HDR. Nelson replied that it would be coordinated with the City. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 5 HDR indicated that the work would not be done with subconsultants but rather technical work such as soil boring on the site would be done. Nelson stated that HDR only need to subcontract out technical work such as the drilling of holes to do the geotechnical work. Council Member Cott recommended paying any subcontractor directly. 3. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding automation for the Library, Police and Fire Department and gave staff direction. Lloyd Harrell, city Manager stated that this would be an introduction to the subject of computerizing the Fire Department, Police Department and Library. The current systems were causing major operation costs as those department were very behind in technology. This was a scheduled item for discussion at the Council's annual planning session and would be discussed further. Eva Peele, Library Director, stated that the problem was threefold. Approximately 1200 patrons went through the Library each day which often resulted in long lines. She described the present system which was for circulation only plus patrons did not have access to determine whether a book was available. The staff had to manually place a date due card in books which delayed checkout. The computerized system would put bar codes in the books and issue new cards with bar codes. Council Member Brock stated that an advantage of automation would be that if a patron wanted to order a book, he would know immediately if it were available and could check on a book in circulation. Council Member Perry indicated that automation would make libraries without walls. Citizens would have access to data bases which could be reviewed at home. Any citizen could use the system without charge. City Manager Harrell asked what other libraries in the area were automated. Peele replied Lewisville, Garland, Plane, and Carrollton were automated. Council Member Miller asked if the system would be a current system and meet the needs to upgrade the Library. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 6 Poole replied yes and that data base searches would eliminate the need for staff to hold books and could print out an article from the newspaper which now could not be done. City Manager Harrell stated that the effect of automation on personnel would be to not reduce existing staff as currently they were not able to handle some tasks. Over time the automation would have a positive effect on the need for personnel. The positive effect would be a long range effect. Council Member Miller asked for an estimate of transition period. Poole replied that it would be a retrospective conversion and that the Library would be closed only about two weeks. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, presented information regarding the police and fire automation. Part of the system would be a CAD, computer aided dispatch, system. This system would keep track of all the equipment, where it was, what kind of call it was on which would help the dispatcher determine what vehicles to send as incidents happen. The system was a very extensive system and staff had looked at systems similar to the City's. Carrollton and Lewisville had systems similar to what the City was considering. The basic hardware and software which was needed was approximately $850-860,000. Another part of the program was an "MDT" which was a T.V. screen and keyboard mounted in the patrol cars. There were different types of equipment to consider but it would cost approximately $1.5 million to upgrade the system properly. Mike Jez, Police Chief, stated that the new system would manage the volumes of information which the Department had. Much of that information was currently handled manually and with the automation a computer would do that work thus freeing up officers. The systems could interrelate the Department's data base and link all files in the program. Items in the property room could be bar coded in order to keep proper track of them and the system could interface with the City's GIS system. John Cook, FirQ ChiQf, ~tat~d that the ~y~tem weuld help determine the best route for the response vehicles to take, which streets were under construction, where a new fire hydrant was located or one which might be out of order. It could track the use of pieces of equipment to determine the need for future purchases. Council Member Perry asked if the court management system would be in the system. Jez replied that the jail and court could be added. 7 city of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 7 City Manager Harrell stated that it was part of the anticipated cost and that this item would be further discussed at the Council Planning Seminar. 4. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding a proposed amendment to the grass and weeds ordinance as it applied to properties over two acres in size and provided clarification to regulations in regards to wildflowers and gave staff direction. Due to time constraints, this item was considered during the Regular Session under Miscellaneous Matters from the City Manager. 5. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding a fixed asset inventory. Due to time constraints, this item was considered during the Regular Session under Miscellaneous Matters from the City Manager. 6. The Council received the results of the revised Budget Priority Questionnaire. Due to time constraints, this item was considered during the Regular Session under Miscellaneous Matters from the City Manager. The Council convened into the Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Smith; Council Members Brock, Chew, Cott, Perry, and Miller. ABSENT: None 1. Pledge of Allegiance The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Citizen Reports A. The Council received a citizen report from Derrell Bulls regarding Special Olympics. Dr. Bulls stated that he wanted to present Council with a final report on the two years of the Special Olympics. He detailed the participants involved in the Games. The City of Denton and surrounding areas supported the games while they were here. Executives of the City and City employees provided a vital part in the success of the games. He recognized those individuals who 8 city of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 8 spent a great deal of time to make the games successful and who spent a great deal of time on the Games: Mayor Castleberry - Development Officer; Alicia Mentel - Special Events; John McGrane - Financing; Brenda Burton - co-chair of Special Events; Darren Asher - Registration; Max Blackburn - Command Center; Gary Collins - Computer Systems; Harlan Jefferson - Finance; Kathy DuBose - Evaluation; Pam Livingston - Opening Ceremonies; Kathy Avery - Opening Ceremonies; Teresa Milam - Closing Ceremonies; Cirilo Pedorza - Closing Ceremonies; Rhonda Gattis - Awards; Brian Bender - Awards; Rolfe Fene - Awards; Steve Johnson and Reginald Seastrunk - Victory Dance; Richard Brewster - Olympic Town; Myra Anderson - Olympic Town; Nancy Gotcher - Clinics/Demonstration; Bob Tickner - Stage; Randy Peterson and Curt Stogsdill - Logistics. These were some of the City employees who gave of their time to make the games successful. He presented the Mayor with a letter of appreciation for all employees who helped with the games. 3. The Council considered a request from the Lone Star Barrel Racing Association for an exemption to the noise ordinance on Sunday June 13, 1993 from 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. Catherine Tuck, Administrative Assistant, stated that this was a request for a noise exemption for Sunday, June 13, 1993. There would be approximately 50-100 individuals at the event with youth and adult participants. No concessions would be sold at the event. Mayor Castleberry stated that only the loudspeaker would be used. Tuck replied that the loudspeaker would only be used in the rodeo arena. Mayor Castleberry stated that there were "Requests to Address Council" cards submitted. Kelvin Hoagland stated that he understood that the noise variance for the rodeo and other activities was for much later in the evening. As a resident of the neighborhood he was opposed to the noise. The neighbors had accepted the Fair but wanted to take a stand on other events at the Fairgrounds which went on later in the evenings. He was not opposed to this event but was opposed to a late night event. Mayor Castleberry stated that Mr. Hoagland was not against this event. Hoagland stated that he understood that this was an evening event but had no problem with the hours indicated for this particular event. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 9 Gene Truss stated that at the last Council meeting, the Fair Association had requested a variance from the nuisance ordinance for the annual Fair and Rodeo. The Neighborhood Association was not trying to not have the Fair working in Denton nor were they opposed to the Fair or events at the Fairgrounds. They were opposed to any nuisance factor which resulted from any event at the Fairgrounds. Until about a year ago, the neighborhood had enormous difficulties with nuisances from Fairground events. A petition had been delivered to the City Council about this and the City called a meeting regarding the problems. The Fairgrounds offered a wide variety of events which did not have nuisances associated with them. This was a major business enterprise in a neighborhood setting. Council Member Cott asked Mr. Truss if his comments represented the Neighborhood Association or were his own feelings. Truss replied both for himself and the North Denton Center Neighborhood Association. Council Member Cott asked if a vote had been taken and Truss' comments represented the views of the Association. Truss replied that his comments were based on many meetings held in the past and on petitions delivered to the Council. The Association had not met on this particular issue due to too short of a notice. The statements he presented were based on feelings of neighbors as presented to Council during the last year. A petition was circulated throughout the neighborhood in April of 1992 which asked the Fair Association to be more considerate to the neighborhood. Council Member Cott asked if the Neighborhood Association had met with the Fair Association recently to work out problems. Truss replied that there had been several meetings. A number of residents met with the Fair Association in the summer of 1990 when a rezoning issue was being proposed. At that time, they were very vocal about the nuisances associated with the Fair. They asked the Association to be more considerate of the neighbors. Mayor Pro Tem smith indicated that she and other Council Members had met with the Fair Association and the neighbors last year. Truss indicated that 1990 was the beginning of the meetings. In 1992 they had a meeting with the Association. They felt that the variance which the Association was granted for the Fair last year was abused in that a live band was at Fair Hall. 10 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 10 Council Member Cott stated that there was more than one event per year at the Fairgrounds. He suggested a discussion with the neighbors and the Fair Association regarding these issues. Mayor Castleberry stated that there were on-going discussions with the Association and the neighbors. Nancy Hard stated that a year ago the North Center Neighborhood Association was formed. She felt at that time when City Council Members visited with the group as well as members of the Fair Association that there was a genuine concern regarding the issues in the neighborhood. She listened as the Fair Association listed the benefits of the events held at the Fairgrounds. She had a problem with the granting of the exemption to the Fair for the upcoming Fair. There were no compromises on the side of the Fair Association and the neighborhood had to do all of the adjusting. The Fair could still operate economically and stay within the existing ordinance. If the Council allowed these variances she would see them as infringements on individual rights. Mayor Castleberry asked Hard if she had an objection to this particular request and the time of 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Hard replied that most of the variances bothered her late at night and not these hours. Meredith Hard indicated that he was speaking against the permanent variance of the noise ordinance and the temporary variance requested. He lived two blocks north of the Fair and had a problem with noise late at night. He asked Council to not allow variances to the noise ordinance as the ordinance was created to help citizens. He requested Council stay within boundaries of the current ordinance. Cott motioned, Miller seconded to grant the request. Council Member Miller stated that he understood the concerns of the neighborhood. The variances which were granted at the last meeting were one hour extra during the week and two hours extra on th~ weekend. The Fair Association had indicated a good faith effort to work on the noise problems. Other variances had been requested for noise, for street closures, etc. He felt that there were issues regarding the noise ordinance which the Council should work on. Council Member Perry stated that there was a need to continue to negotiate with the neighbors and the Fair Association. This request might have been done on a Saturday rather than a Sunday. He would like to see that kind of negotiating in order to 11 city of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 11 accommodate the neighbors. He would vote for the request as there was not a loud noise associated with the request. On roll vote, Brock "aye" Cott, "aye" Miller "aye", Smith "aye" Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 4. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the issuance, sale and delivery of City of Denton Utility System Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1993, and approving and authorizing instruments and procedures relating thereto. John McGrane, Executive Director for Finance, presented a summary of the refunding portion of the general obligation and utility system bonds. The General Obligation bonds would have an annual average savings of $55,000 worth of debt service over the life of the existing bonds. There would be a present value savings over the terms of those bonds of $519,687. The net interest cost for the general obligation bonds was 5%. The Utility Revenue bonds were done in two stages - a tax exempt and taxable refunding. Those were structured in that manner because of the legislation involved and because of some of the transferred proceeds with some prior refunding. The gross total combined present value savings would be $2,138,956 with an average annual savings in debt service of $190,000. The net interest cost for the taxable portion would be 6.1% and the net interest cost on the tax exempt portion would be 5.17%. These were negotiated refunded bonds which meant that prior to the consideration of this ordinance, staff worked with an underwriter to negotiate the interest on the bonds. If the bonds had been done in the traditional manner, the city would be paying approximately 10 basis points more. Council Member Cott asked about the window on the negotiated bid. McGrane replied that the bid was received Thursday and locked in Thursday evening. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 93-102 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, SALE, AND DELIVERY OF CITY OF DENTON UTILITY SYSTEM REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1993, AND APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING INSTRUMENTS AND PROCEDURES RELATING THERETO. 12 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 12 Cott motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 5. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the issuance, sale and delivery of City of Denton General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 1993A, and approving and authorizing instruments and procedures relating thereto. The following ordinance as considered: NO. 93-103 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, SALE AND DELIVERY OF CITY OF DENTON GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1993-A, LEVYING THE TAX TO PAY SAME, AND APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING INSTRUMENTS AND PROCEDURES RELATING THERETO. Chew motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 6. The Council considered approval of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute, on behalf of the City of Denton, an interlocal agreement with the City of Roanoke for the provision of services associated with the holding and disposing of dogs and cats for the City of Roanoke; and authorizing City personnel to collect fees associated with all interlocal agreements for services provided by the City pursuant to said agreements. City Manager Harrell stated that this was a standard contract similar to one the City had with other jurisdictions. Council Member Cott asked why the City was doing this. Nonie Kull, Environmental Health Services Manager, stated that it would offset a small portion of the cost to run the facility and it benefited both the citizens of Denton and Roanoke. Council Member Cott asked what was the additional revenue expected with this contract. Kull replied for the remainder of this year approximately $500. Council Member Cott asked about the cost associated with this contract. 13 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 13 Kull replied that there would be minimal costs. The more animals which were sheltered, the lower price when buying food in bulk, etc. Approximate cost was $290 for the remainder of the year. Council Member Cott requested that those two items be placed in the next year's budget. City Manager Harrell stated that the City had a similar current contract with Denton County and corinth. The philosophy was that currently there was extra room at the facility. Most of the costs of the facility were fixed costs. As long as there was space and it did not deny staff being able to take care of Denton animals, these contracts allowed the City to make some money. When it came to not having room, the city would not do contracts with the small cities. The following resolution was considered: NO. R93-035 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DENTON TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF DENTON, AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF ROANOKE FOR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE HOLDING AND DISPOSING OF DOGS AND CATS FOR THE CITY OF ROANOKE; AUTHORIZING CITY PERSONNEL TO COLLECT FEES ASSOCIATED WITH ALL INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE CITY PURSUANT TO SAID AGREEMENTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 7. The Council considered a motion indicating a preference for a firm to collect delinquent taxes and authorize the Executive Director for Finance to negotiate a contract for consideration by the City Council. City Manager Harrell stated that the Council had received a detailed presentation at a prior meeting regarding this program. If Council was prepared to do so, staff needed a recommendation for a preference for a firm to collect delinquent taxes for the city. The Executive Director for Finance would negotiate a final contract. Council Member Cott asked if either of the two firms or their local attorneys had any litigation against the City. 14 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 14 Mike Gregory - Heard, Goggin, Blair & Williams - stated that he did not have litigation in any form or fashion against the City nor did Curtis Loveless nor did Heard, Goggin, Blair & Williams. Neither of the two local attorneys nor the Heard lawfirm had represented any taxpayers or lienholders on any tax suit involving the City of Denton. Bryan Berry - Hayes, Coffey and Berry - indicated that the only suit involved with the City was a tree case. There was nothing else that he was aware of. Council Member Cott stated that he had information regarding the State Bar of Texas vs. Stephen Blair disciplinary petition. He asked for further information concerning that petition. Steve Blair - HGBW - stated that this issue was a matter regarding a former employee, Richard Lewis, who was the former coordinator of the Dallas County Commissioners Court. Mr. Lewis contacted a Superintendent of Schools in Alvin, Texas. This case was filed by a competing lawfirm, had been pressed by a competing lawfirm and had no substance to it. The Council received the petition before he did. A competing lawfirm sent the information to Council. It was filed in the wrong county and the firm was going to take it to court. He was not going to take any reprimands which had been offered to him. Competition was considered a good thing in most industries. In the legal industry there were some prohibitions on competition such as not contacting a client of another firm with a view of taking that client away. This was a public contract business and there was nothing wrong with letting clients know that firms wanted to compete on a bid basis. That was what they did. If the petition were read, that was what the accusation was. That the firm's intent in contacting that individual was wrong. They were invited to the community and attempted to inform the individual that they appreciated the opportunity to talk to him and that they wanted to be included should there be a bid on the contract. He was accused of soliciting business because Mr. Lewis was under his command. It was on the State Bar's desk for about two years and when a new group of individuals started in the office, it wa~ filed. H~ had talked with the individual who signed the petition who indicated that she "did not know anything about this case. It was just given to me." This lawfirm had represented the City for 6 years and had collected $4.7 million dollars for the City. If the Council was concerned about this grievance, there was a 30 day out clause in the contract. If he were convicted or found of any wrong doing, the City could terminate the contract. He was 100% confident that the case would be tried to a conclusion and there would be no finding of wrong doing. 15 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 15 Council Member Cott asked if staff was going to make a recommendation regarding a firm. City Manager Harrell stated that it had been the history of the Council in dealing with delinquent tax collection that staff had done two procedures. One was if there were some dissatisfaction with a particular firm and felt that they were not doing a satisfactory job of collecting delinquent taxes, it was brought to the attention of the Council and recommended that another firm be selected. If that had been the case in this particular instance, Council would have had that type of a recommendation from staff. Council did not have that kind of recommendation and staff felt that the present firm was doing an adequate job and felt that they were acting professionally and had a good working relationship with staff. The second criteria was that if staff felt that any of the three firms which had responded could not do an adequate job of collecting delinquent taxes which was not the case. Staff offered the three firms to Council, had them make presentations and staff did not feel that any of the three firms could not do a quality job for the City. Likewise, staff had no problem with the work done by the current firm. Staff would not be making a recommendation because neither of those criteria had come into play. Council Member Miller stated that the procedure for having a request for proposal after two years and at two year intervals had been the desire of the Council. John McGrane, Executive Director for Finance, stated that on the early contracts, the terms of the contract were set by Council both in the original and the last time a request for proposal was sent out. There was considerable discussion on the length of time and debate on performance. A two year contract was looked at with the option to renew without going back for a request for proposal. The contract could be extended for the same period of time of the original contract. The Council could set any time frame it wanted. Council Member Miller stated that it was the preference of the previous Council to do it on a two year basis and it was on that basis that a request for proposal was done this year. McGrane replied correct. Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked if there were any other comparisons which might be of help in making a decision. McGrane replied not that he was aware of. Ail three firms could do a good job for the City. ¸16 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 16 The firm of Heard, Goggan, Blair and Williams presented a historical comparison of the two firms in collecting for Denton County and Denton Independent School District. The firm of Hayes, Coffey and Berry stated that they were offering a program which would put the most money into the City treasury and detailed the work they had done over the last four years while collecting taxes for Denton County. This might be a time for a change. Neither the firm of McCreary, Veselka, Bragg and Allen nor the firm of Hayes, Coffey and Berry initiated the case against Mr. Blair. The State Bar was carrying the general notice. Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked Berry how they could collect over 100% as indicated on one of their handouts. Berry replied that it would be prior tax money coming in a fiscal year. Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated that the information on the third page of the handout "Original levy vs. collection of levy to date" was only for that year. Berry replied that on the collection levy to date was for what was collected for 1989. There was still 1.48% outstanding for 1989. Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated that that was compared to the City of Denton in which the rates were all very similar. Berry replied that the second page showed took all of the information into one. Gil Bragg -McCreary, Veselka, Bragg & Allen - stated that the DISD did change from his firm to Heard, Goggan, Blair & Williams. HGBW indicated that the first year collections increased $220,000. He had checked his records and his firm was paid during the first 6 months of that year on $230,047 in collections. Whatever figure was presented showing what was collected on behalf of the DISD during that first year, $230,000 was due to their efforts. Cott motioned, Chew seconded to award the contract for the collection of delinquent taxes to the firm of McCreary, Veselka, Bragg, & Allen. Mayor Castleberry asked if there was a representative from Perdue, Brandon, Fielder, Collin~ & M~t in order to give them a chance to speak. Mayor Castleberry indicated that there was no such representative present. 17 City of Denton city Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 17 City Attorney Drayovitch asked to clarify the motion. Was it to include direction for staff to prepare the appropriate contract for Council consideration. Council Members Cott and Chew agreed that the motion and second included that direction to staff. Council Member Cott felt that the Perdue firm needed to hire a local firm in Denton. Mr. Heard had some bad publicity, a community was involved with him and it was in the newspaper in the wrong way. Mr. Blair was being sued by the State Bar of Texas and his comment that if he did lose, the City had a 30 day cancellation clause was what helped Cott make his decision. Denton did not need to be in that kind of a position. He felt that the local attorneys did a great job for Denton as did the firm of Hayes, Coffey and Berry. He did not think the State Bar of Texas disciplinary petition was as light of piece of work as was presented. Council Member Miller stated that the review process was a request and a decision of the Council to put out a request for proposal every two years. That information had to be considered and not presumed ahead of time to have a change or not have a change. The information had to be looked at and determined what was best for Denton. He analyzed the information with four factors: (1) cost of service, (2) ability to work with staff, (3) local representation and (4) services rendered. (1) Cost of service - Texas law provided that outside legal services could be rendered at a maximum of 15% charge to the delinquent taxpayer so that the taxing entity would receive 100% of the tax dollar. All three lawfirms indicated an interest in the City's work with a 15% proposal. (2) Ability to work with staff - he had asked staff members if there were any reasons why they could not work with any of the three firms and was assured that there was nothing which would prevent staff from working with any one of these three firms. (3) Local representation - two of the firms had offices in Denton and the third indicated that they would open one if selected. Two of the firms had local attorneys associated with the collection firms. Some firms specialized in the collection of taxes for taxing entities. There was a varying degree of benefit from local attorneys associating with statewide firms. Without a doubt there was a considerable amount of pressure brought to bear against any decision making body in the State of Texas in these kinds of tax situations. Whether it was a city council, a school board or a commissioners court the decision to go with one statewide firm v~r~u~ with other in order to do business with local attorneys was very difficult. If only one local firm was involved, the decision would be simple. With two or more local law firms, the decision was more difficult. (4) Services rendered, taxes collected, 18 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 18 results - the Council had received material from three firms all indicating results. He had talked with a number of people in Denton, in the school system, the County, outside the County and in the State and was told that with these firms a good job could be expected from each one. A decision had to be based on what would be best for the City of Denton including the delinquent tax payers. Based on this, he supported the idea of negotiating the contract with the McCreary group. The Heard group had done a good job. One factor for his decision was the stated intention and commitment of the Hayes firm to be an active working partner with the McCreary firm and to commit its local resources to work with City staff. He felt it was absolutely imperative that there be no conflict of interest with either firms in terms of representing other clients relative to the City. The staff needed to negotiate a contract which would be administered for the City's program and make absolutely certain that there would be no conflicts of interest. The contract would be for two years and he expected performance in an outstanding manner to achieve results and performance which would influence future contracts. Council Member Brock stated that she would be voting against the motion for several reasons. She felt that it was good to have a review periodically but not to change firms without some solid reasons to do so. The Heard firm had done an outstanding job for the City and the taxpayers had benefited from their services. The individuals directly working with the City had had experience in government entities themselves. She also admired the Heard firm's efforts with minority hiring on the partner level and all levels. She felt they were doing a good job for the City and should continue. In staying with this firm, there would be no start up time, would not have to train anyone and would be familiar with City personnel. Council Member Perry stated that he would vote against the motion. The firm delivered good service and had done it with no complaints' against the firm. Council Member Chew agreed that the Heard firm had a good minority and f~mal~ r~pr~ntation. H~ had a problem wi%h glossing over statements when a direct question was asked. He felt that the Heard firm only told part of the story and that there was more than what the Council had looked at. Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated that she respected both firms. Her decision was based on the continuity which would be maintained with the current firm and the professionalism with which they had conducted themselves in Denton and the outstanding job they had done. She felt that changing would be some indication that the city of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 19 Council was not satisfied with their performance and in her case, that was not true. On roll vote, Brock "nay", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", smith "nay", Chew "aye", Perry "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 4-3 vote. 8. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. city Manager Harrell indicated that he had no other items other than the work session items not discussed earlier. The Council considered Work Session Item #4. 4. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding a proposed amendment to the grass and weeds ordinance as it applied to properties over two acres in size and provided clarification to regulations in regards to wildflowers and gave staff direction. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that this was an item which the Council asked to be discussed during a work session to see if there were any interest in modifying the high weeds and grass ordinance. cecile Carson, Keep Denton Beautiful Coordinator, stated that staff looked specifically at the area in question with properties of two acres or larger to see if there were possible recommendations which could be made to make the ordinance more flexible where properties had an agricultural use such as livestock on the property. The current ordinance required that a property which was over two acres in size be mowed 100 feet back from all public streets as well as from any adjacent property. Staff was recommending to continue to require mowing the area of the parkway between the property line and the curb or back street but to not require any area within a fence area to be mowed unless it was within 100 feet of a habitable dwelling. Slides of the proposed requirements were shown to Council. It was also suggested that hay not be considered a type of a crop because of the types of grasses which were grown. These generally grew quite tall and staff had received a number of complaints from residents who lived next to such types of crops indicating that they caused health and safety problems. Other crops would continue to be exempt. Regarding the wildflower proposal, it appeared that there was no definite time frame as to when they could be mowed as there was a varied growing season. It was suggested that the provision include that wildflowers would be ~mpt from the mowing Drovisions until the seeds had matured following the final blooming of the majority of the plants. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 20 Mayor Castleberry asked if at South Lakes Park, under the present ordinance, would the City be required to mow 100 feet. Carson replied that the City was exempt from the ordinance but tried to follow the provisions. In that case, the City would be required to mow the parkway area and 100 feet back from the fence. Council Member Miller asked if Council proceeded with this proposal, would it be less restrictive on all property owners. Would there be any area in which the provisions would be more restrictive than the existing ordinance. Carson replied that hay crops would be required to mow 100 feet back from residential structures and from business structures. Staff received complaints regarding fire protection and rodent control when the hay was allowed to grow next to occupied property. Miller motioned, Perry seconded to proceed with the ordinance modifications. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Council considered Work Session Item #5. 5. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding a fixed asset inventory. City Manager Harrell stated that this item came from the audit recommendations which the Council had received earlier in the year. Council decided not to wait until budget time to raise this issue but to solicit requests for proposals to conduct an audit prior to the end of the fiscal year. Kathy DuBose, Director of Accounting and Budget Operations, stated that the external auditor made a recommendation to Council which was a recurring recommendation to do a fixed asset inventory. Staff had assessed the City's needs and the request for proposal included not only the inventory of fixed assets but also a valuation of those fixed assets. Tagging of a~t~ wa~ included a~ well as bar coding equipment in order to continue the process. Four firms responded to the request for proposal and these proposals were assessed, the firms interviewed and references surveyed. The cost of the proposals varied greatly. Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked if the services were specified and were they identical. 21 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 21 DuBose replied that they were very close but that some of the asset systems were different. With one firm the training was expensive and valued $80,000 for keeping up with the assets which would be purchased from the time the inventory began to the end of the inventory. Council Member Perry asked if all bidders met specifications. DuBose replied yes. Mayor Castleberry asked about doing the inventory in-house. City Manager Harrell replied that his concern was that once the comprehensive fixed asset inventory was done for all of the City equipment, there needed to be a system designed which internally could keep up to date and keep current. He had been assured by the Finance staff that as part of-this proposal that kind of system would be installed and the software provided. This would allow an annual internal update each year. Council Member Brock asked if the city did not have to take the lowest bid. city Manager Harrell replied that this was a request for proposal as opposed to a bid arrangement. Based on a report to Council, staff would be able to negotiate a final contract with the recommended firm. DuBose indicated that an ordinance and contract would be presented to Council for consideration at the next meeting. Council considered Work Session Item #6. 6. The Council received the results of the revised Budget Priority Questionnaire. John McGrane, Executive Director for Finance, presented a revised budget priority questionnaire to the Council. The questionnaire had been done prior to the election and again after the election to accommodate any new members. A priority of response category was added and the last page had comments from Council. The last comment on the revised questionnaire was the only new comment. 9. New Business The following items of New Business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas: City of Denton City Council Minutes June 8, 1993 Page 22 A. Council Member Perry asked that Council review and discuss study sessions versus regular sessions and be clear on procedures of study sessions and regular sessions. Council Member Brock indicated that she was making a list of items for discussion at the planninq session and that item had been on her list. She felt that the CoUncil might need to reformat council meetings. City Manager Harrell stated that the facilitator of the planning session, Bob Saunders, would be communicating with the Council a questionnaire regarding topics to cover. B. Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked for a date for Council to clean their adopt-a-spot. After discussion, the date of Monday, June 21 was chosen. C. Mayor Castleberry indicated that Board appointments were effective July 1 and asked Council if they could have recommendations ready by June 29 for Council approval. After discussion it was decided that Board appoints would be made at the July 6th meeting. Other items to discuss would be how to deal with the TMPA appointment and a date for the Boards/Commission reception. Another consideration was the reception for former Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins. 10. There was no official action taken on Executive Session items discussed during the Work Session. 11. New Business This item was considered earlier in the meeting. 12. There was no Executive Session held during Session. the Regular With no further business, the meeting was adjourn at 9:45 p.m. ACC00122