Minutes August 24, 1993232
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
August 24, 1993
The Council convened into the Work Session of the city Council on
Tuesday, August 24, 1993.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Smith; Council Members
Brock, Chew, Cott, Perry, and Miller.
ABSENT: None
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 litigation against the design architects
of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Recreation Center.
2. Considered claim of Charlotte Summers.
Real Estate -- Under Sec. 2(f), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S.
Personnel/Board Appointments -- Under Sec. 2(g), Art.
6252-17 V.A.T.S.
2. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding
the City's solicitation ordinance and gave staff direction.
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that State law prohibited
solicitation in the roadway. There was a provision that a local
governing authority could grant an exception to charitable
organizations. The important point to remember was that if Council
decided to grant the exception to one organization, then the
exception would have to be applied uniformly to all charitable
organizations meeting the requirements. The criteria would be
uniformly applied to all charitable organizations.
Catherine Tuck, Administrative Assistant, stated that the Council's
background information indicated four ordinances from other cities
regarding this issue, options which other cities had included
liability insurance, proof, of charitability, and time and place
regulations. Some cities required proof of insurance for the
organizations and some required a liability waiver. Some cities
required some proof of charitability with IRS documents or an
indication of where the money was spent. Time and place
regulations and hours were included in some ordinances. Some
ordinances limited the solicitation to daylight or not on a Sunday.
Length of time was also addressed in some of the ordinances.
Miscellaneous provisions included the wearing of safety vests,
specific intersections where the activity would occur, and no
walking on the roadway. State law would allow the City to repeal
the existing ordinance but would be subject to each individual
233
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 2
group requesting permission to solicit. If the ordinance were
repealed, staff felt that some type of permitting process would be
best in order to treat each organization in the same manner.
Council Member Miller stated that an organization would have to
meet all requirements.
Council Member Brock stated that she would like to see the
ordinance changed to allow, under carefully controlled situations,
some solicitation of the type suggested for the MDA campaign.
Minimal requirements such as obtaining a permit well ahead of time,
showing proof of tax exempt status, showing proof of contributions
going to charity, wearing safety vests, where to stand and solicit
would have to be addressed.
Council Member Chew agreed and liked the Lewisville ordinance.
Council Member Miller felt that the following options were
important: proof of insurance, proof of charitability, time and
place such as 7:00 a.m.- 7:00 p.m., restriction of days to Monday
through Saturday, 3 days of solicitation per request with 2
requests per year, specific intersections within the City where
solicitation would be allowed, a required 30 day time frame to
obtain the permit, a contact person, a description of solicitation
methods, and each person on the solicitation drive providing
certification of not having been convicted of a crime.
Council Member Perry stated that he was not in favor of rewriting
the ordinance. Permitting charitable organizations to solicit on
the roadways was too much of a liability to citizens and to the
City.
Council Member Cott stated that he was not in favor of a 30 day
permit period as the fire fighters would need a permit sooner than
that.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith felt that it would not be possible to do
anything by Labor Day and agreed with Council Member Perry that she
was not sure she wanted to reopen this issue.
Council Member Miller stated that this was the reason he had asked
for the information. The surveyed cities did not have many
requests for the past year. University Drive had students
soliciting for car washes practically every weekend. He did not
want to rush through the process but wanted at least to see an
ordinance for consideration.
234
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 3
Council Member Chew felt that the current ordinance was only
stopping the fire fighters and not students on car washes.
Council Member Perry indicated that he was not clear on how the
City would get around State law but was not willing to undertake
the project.
Council Member Brock stated that all charitable organizations would
be eligible but most would not want to go through the conditions of
the ordinance. The restrictions would lower the numbers without
discriminating against any organization.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated that the current ordinance needed to be
enforced stricter. Last year the Council had discussed contacting
the high schools, churches and other organizations to explain that
this type of activity could not be done. She felt that greater
enforcement was needed.
Tuck replied that she had met with the high school, the junior high
schools, sent letters to churches and the university students.
Enforcement was done as a list of priorities. The ordinance was
enforced as best as possible.
Mayor Castleberry asked if, under the current ordinance, a citizen
would step off a median into the path of a car, would the City have
any liability.
Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, stated that the City would have no
liability at this time.
Council Member Cott stated that the ordinance needed to be strong
but that this was also a unique situation. He asked for the
possibility of having the ordinance ready by the next meeting for
consideration.
city Attorney Drayovitch replied that their research had indicated
that it would be better not to impose requirements such as
liability and insurance requirements as a condition for a permit.
The Supreme Court upheld that that was a prior restraint where a
city or county tried to impose such a condition on granting a
parade permit. She would recommend not including such a provision.
Council Member Miller felt that this was a different set of
circumstances as a parade permit.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that State law did not authorize a
city to impose any other conditions. It merely stated that a
'person may not stand on the roadway for charitable contributions
235
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 4
unless a city authorized him to do so.
Council Member Miller felt that it would be a good idea to try and
impose those restrictions.
Council Member Perry felt that such solicitation impeded the smooth
flow of traffic and created hazardous situations in the city. He
felt it was an issue of public safety and public access to the
streets.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked if a permit could not require insurance
and an individual were allowed to solicit, what would that do to
the city's liability if an accident happened.
City Attorney Drayovitch replied that she would ask the Council to
allow her to defend strongly against such a suit. She felt that it
was very unlikely that the City would be held liable in such a
situation. She had visited with attorneys from the State and had
looked at the statute and federal cases regarding the issue.
Council would need to word very carefully any ordinance regarding
the issue. If the ordinance would allow ~haritable organizations
to solicit on the roadway, it had to be a blanket waiver. If an
organization represented itself as charitable it would have to be
allowed to solicit.
Council Member Cott suggested preparing a draft ordinance with the
provisions indicated earlier by Council Member Miller.
Mayor Pro Tem smith and Council Member Perry were not in favor of
preparing such an ordinance. '
Council Member Chew and Brock agreed to proceed with a draft
ordinance with liability and insurance as suggested.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that State law did not require an
ordinance. Council could repeal the existing ordinance and could
grant on a voice vote to allow the event to occur.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with a draft ordinance but
to not rush the process.
3. The Council held a discussion and gave staff direction
regarding budget issues and budget questions for the 1993-94 fiscal
year.
Due to time constraints, this item was considered during the
Regular Session under Miscellaneous Matters from the City Manager.
236
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 5
The Council convened into a Special Call Session on Tuesday, August
24, 1993 in the Council Chambers.
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. Public Hearings
A. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption
of an ordinance rezoning a 3.463 acre tract of land from the
Agriculture District to the Office or Office with conditions
district. The tract was located adjacent to IH-35N at the northern
end of Colonial Drive. Z-93-013 (The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended denial of Office and approval of Office with
conditions 4-1.)
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning and Development,
stated that this was an amended petition since the Planning and
Zoning Commission made a recommendation to Council. The Planning
and Zoning Commission recommended denial of straight office and
recommended office with conditions. The amended petition was
consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation
without the bufferyards. The Council had four options to consider
with the proposal - (1) deny the zoning outright, (2) approve the
p~titioner's request which was office with conditions without the
bufferyard and would take 6 votes as the 20% rule was in effect,
(3) approve the zoning as recommended by the Planning and Zoning
Commission which the proposed ordinance reflected which would also
take 6 votes, or (4) change the conditions and approve office with
conditions which would also take 6 votes. Denial of the proposal
would only take a majority vote with any other action requiring 6
votes. The proposal could also be postponed if the Council needed
additional information. Robbins indicated the uses which were
allowed by the Planning and Zoning Commission,s recommendation.
The only use allowed would be a professional or administrative
office. The office front yard set back requirement was 25' with a
recommended set back from the Planning and Zoning Commission and
approved by the applicant of 40'. There would be no parking within
20' feet of IH35. The sideyard was 10' in straight office zoning
and the recommendation was 25'. The rear yard set back next to a
237
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 6
residential use was 10' and it was recommended at 25'. In the
straight office zoning there was no height limit but this
recommendation was for a 2 story height limit. One of the major
issues dealt with the bufferyard. The bufferyard was a
recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission as they
followed the Denton Development Plan's policies for a zoning case.
The proposal violated two major policies of the Denton Development
Plan. When the general proportionate share of intensity was
violated, there were three options for deciding that case.
Disappropriate share allocation was not applicable as the study
area was already over allocated. There was an option to amend the
plan and change standards within the plan. The next step would be
to follow the least intense, most logical use in the application of
the other policies. The Planning and Zoning Commission's
recommendation, in this district with the conditions proposed, was
the least intense most logical land use for that area. The
Planning and zoning Commission recommended a bufferyard with 16
trees in a 20' wide area with a fence. The DENCO 911 took
exception to that bufferyard. Robbins felt that the cost estimate
might be high but he could not disagree that that might be the cost
for the entire site. It probably would not be the cost to DENCO
911 or any smaller development which would go in the area. One of
the proposed conditions recommended no access to Colonial so that
there would be no additional traffic on the residential streets but
more on the frontage road.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Jim Ferguson, Vice-Chair of the DENCO Area 911 Board of Managers,
stated that the Board had discussed how to better utilize the money
it received for the 911 area. Currently DENCO leased office space
but the Board decided to purchase a building or build one rather
than lease. A location on IH35 was preferred in order to be
accessible. There was not any existing structure or blank piece of
property which would beat the price which was asked for the
proposed property. Staff had been very helpful with this
development. At no time did the Board say that they were not going
to do what was required of them. They had met with the neighbors
and listened to their concerns. He felt that the neighbors were
not opposed to 911 but were concerned with what would be done with
the rest of the property. At no time did 911 indicate that they
would not comply with any ordinance of the city and they were
willing to do what was required. In regards to the recommendation
of a bufferyard, 911 was willing to do a fence but felt that the
requirement of a bufferyard was too costly. They were asking
consideration to come to Denton and would be a good neighbor.
238
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
page 7
Olive Stephens, Secretary of the DENCO Area 911 Board of Managers,
stated that she had been with the 911 Board since its beginning.
She spoke in favor because 911 needed a home and wanted to come to
Denton as it was centrally located in the County. It was felt that
if 911 had a facility of its own, there would be more money for
development of a better system for Denton County. She requested
consideration of the request.
John Porter, owner of the property, stated that he was in favor of
the request. He had cleaned up the property and could not
understand why the neighbors and 911 could not get together and end
up with a beautiful building which would be an asset to Denton.
Randy Corbin, Chair of the DENCO 911 Board of Managers, stated that
they had been located in Lewisville since the beginning of the
District. The proposal was a very good sound request. They had
compromised the zoning from general retail to straight office on
the tract. It might be that they would need the whole tract. The
proposal did not ask for any exception from the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommendation except for the bufferyard. A fence was
required because of the transition between the zoning districts
which they would install. The plan was for a professional
attractive building which would represent the District to the
community as a professional organization. He believed that this
was the best use of the property. He felt the property would not
remain vacant and would not become residential property.
Russell Bates stated that this was a zoning issue and a bufferyard
issue. On January 20, 1993 Mike Pedigo met with City staff and it
was determined to request General Retail zoning with conditions
from the MXD approach. On March 16, 1993 911 met with the
neighbors for feedback and input. On May 3, he was hired by 911 to
assist with the platting process and preparing engineering data.
There was another neighborhood meeting on June 3, 1993. After that
meeting 911 changed the request to office zoning. The full Board
met on June 9 to discuss the local meeting and sent a letter to
City staff indicating that a bufferyard would be a burden. The
Planning and Zoning Commission included the bufferyard restriction
in the zoning request.
Chuck Carpenter, Denton Chamber of Commerce, stated that he was
speaking on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce. He felt this
proposal fit into the key element of the I35-W joint promotion.
This was headquarters relocation material. The Chamber had worked
hard to get headquarters of various organizations in the area. He
felt this would be good use of the land. The Chamber considered the
request as it applied to the removal of the bufferyard. He had not
heard anything that was not reasonable as far as the proposal was
239
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
page 8
concerned. He was comfortable that 911 would be a good neighbor
and would use good judgement when they sold the unused portion of
the property.
Mike Pedigo, Executive Director of 911, presented the organization
and the duties of 911. The Board had set some parameters for the
type of property they needed which included being easily accessible
and in a good location for all cities, flexibility with the
proposal as they would not build on the property until 1996 and
good fiscal responsibility in regards to price of the property.
They had looked at property all over the County and this was the
best that fit those parameters. The office zoning was favorable to
them and if they did not use all of the property, any other
proposal would have to fit into those guidelines. The restrictions
proposed by the Planning and Zoning Commission were agreeable with
the Board except for the bufferyard requirements which did not fall
within their financial needs. The Board could not pay the
additional 56% cost for the bufferyard.
John Scott spoke in opposition. He stated that 911 had worked with
the neighbors in a very professional manner. The neighbors felt
that it would be wonderful to have 911 in Denton but objected to
the selection of this site. It was not an appropriate zoning
change near a stable neighborhood. Several residents in the area
were working on improvements to their homes and there was a great
concern over the long range consequences for zoning change.
George Smith stated that he was impressed with the dedication of
the Council. As a long time resident of Denton, he was not in any
way against progress or against 911. He felt 911 would be an asset
to any community. He moved into his home 20 years ago and had seen
the neighborhood change over the years. He had lived with a change
in property values which were going down and traffic increasing.
There were not many sale signs in the neighborhood as it was a very
stable neighborhood. There was much commercial property in Denton
and he asked the Council to protect the integrity of the
residential neighborhood. The Council had the opportunity to show
that citizens counted and that the goal was not to bring business
to Denton at any cost.
Michele Winsor stated that no one speaking in favor of the request
lived in the area of the tract in question. In 1973 the Denton
Community Development Department recommended that a
reclassification be disapproved due to the already zoned acreage
south of Thunderbird and any further encroachment would be
detrimental to the existing single family homes. As o~ today the
neighborhood had expanded to a much greater degree of stability.
'This was a low density area and the proposed spot rezoning would
240
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 9
exceed by an extreme amount the current intensity trips. The
separation policy was also violated. She felt that the tract
should remain as it was which was the least intense most logical
use for the property. As the proposal was stated there was too
much ambiguity and flexibility for the remaining portions of the
acreage.
Barbara Vance stated that when they bought their lot in 1965 the
zoning was such that they knew that the apartments would be built
and that the current office zoning would be retail for their
protection to buffer them from businesses. Her husband had been
one of the members of the committee which worked on the Denton
Development Guild indicating that Payne Drive would be the dividing
line between residential and commercial development. She had a
problem with citizens giving their time to the community and then
disregarding the plans suggested. She favored leaving the property
as it was.
Barry Walters stated that he lived adjacent to the property in
question. He had nothing against 911 but was not in favor of the
location for their office. If 911 was not going to build until
1996 or 1997, there would be plenty of office space available with
the hospital moving out across the street. He indicated that he
was concerned about the integrity of the neighborhood. There would
be three houses trapped between commercial zoning. The property
values in the area had already devaluated with the building of
homes of lesser value in the area. The neighbors were also
concerned about what 911 would do with the property it was not
going to use.
John Cooper spoke in opposition stating that he wanted to protect
the value of his home. He had heard that this was the best deal
which 911 could find and raised the question that it really was
just the cheapest property which would suit their needs. Only 1000
yards north of this property was a planned development already
zoned for this type of use. There were other properties which were
available to meet 911's needs. This was also the first time he had
heard from 911 that they would possibly not sell any of the
acreage.
Mayor CastleberrY indicated that there were two speaker cards from
John Upchurch and Phil Winsor noting their objections but not
wanting to speak.
Mike Pedigo was allowed a five minute rebuttal. He stated that the
zoning case was not about speculation and other parcels available.
He did not feel that the valuation of property was the market's
fault and was not 911's fault and that 911 would not devaluate the
241
City of Denton city Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 10
surrounding property.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Council Member Miller asked where the building would be placed for
911.
Pedigo replied that at this point there was no site planning or
platting completed. They did not want to invest in that until they
had purchased the property.
Council Member Miller asked what the normal landscaping would
require.
Robbins replied that assuming that the property was already zoned,
only a 6' wooden or masonry fence would be required.
Council Member Miller indicated that someone had stated that 911
might use the whole piece of property for 911.
Pedigo replied that 911 did not need the entire parcel and could
not buy only a portion of the property. The maximum need at this
time would be 10,000 square feet.
Council Member Miller asked about 911's position regarding the
bufferyard. Was there a position somewhere between the fence and
a Class D bufferyard which would be acceptable.
Pedigo replied that he was not in a position to make a change
without Board approval but felt that there was no middle ground at
this time due to finances.
Council Member Cott stated that the MDX and the associated
bufferyards had not been assigned by Council and was therefore
still theoretical.
Robbins replied true but that there had been a number of
bufferyards added to other cases. There had been additional
bufferyard requirements in other conditioned zoning districts such
as Hunter's Ridge.
Council Member Cott stated that that concept of a bufferyard was
not yet approved as an acceptable transition between types of
zoning. It had been used in certain cases but was not mandatory.
Robbins replied correct.
242
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 11
Council Member Perry asked what the proposed zoning would do to
density and intensity of the tract.
Robbins replied that density was not affected. There was an
intensity violation of significant proportions with the proposal.
Actual trips would only be on the frontage road as no access was
allowed on Colonial.
Mayor Castleberry stated that all traffic would be from the service
road.
Robbins replied correct.
Mayor Castleberry stated that this property might not be developed
as residential property.
Robbins replied that this property could be developed as other than
single family use.
Mayor Castleberry asked if the recommendation received by Council
had been suggested by staff to the Planning and Zoning Commission
or was it Planning and Zoning's recommendation.
Robbins replied that it was a staff recommendation and had been
part of the recommendation since the beginning off the proposal.
Mayor Castleberry asked for the difference between the proposed
bufferyard and the current ordinance.
Robbins replied that the proposed bufferyard would have 16 trees
per 100' in a 20' wide area plus a fence. Assuming the property
was zoned, the current standard was only a 6' fence.
Council Member Miller stated that there was a landscaping
ordinance. Would there not be requirements for other trees besides
a fence as part of that ordinance.
Robbins replied correct.
Council Member Miller asked where those trees would be planted
Robbins replied they would only be in the front of the building.
Council Member Perry stated that residents in the area had been
taxpayers in the City from 7-40 years. The 20% rule was not just
barely over the rule as almost all of single family homes voted
against the proposal. The proposal exceeded intensity and he was
uneasy of what would be done with the property as one Council could
243
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 12
not bind another Council. Maintaining the integrity of the
neighborhood was very important.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated that someone had indicated that 911
would be paying ad valorem taxes.
Pedigo replied that they would not be paying ad valorem taxes as
they were a governmental entity.
Council Member Miller stated that if 911 sold the other pieces of
property they would be subject to ad valorem taxes if they were not
a governmental entity.
Pedigo replied yes.
Miller motioned, Cott seconded to adopt the ordinance as
recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission without the
requirement of the bufferyard.
On roll vote, Brock "nay", Cott "aye",' Miller "aye", Smith "nay",
Chew "nay", Perry "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion
failed with a 3-4 vote.
3. The Council considered a motion to approve the 1993-94 Denton
Convention and Visitors Bureau budget as presented and submitted to
the City Council.
City Manager Harrell stated that Items 3-7 were approval of the
budgets whi.ch had been previously reviewed with Council by the
recipients of the hotel/motel tax.
Smith motioned, Chew seconded to approve the budget of the Denton
Convention and Visitors Bureau. 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 a motion to approve the 1993-94 Denton
County Historical Museum budget as presented and submitted to the
City Council.
Cott motioned, Brock seconded to approve the budget of the Denton
County Historical Museum. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye",
Miller "aye", smith "aye", Chew "nay", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote.
5. The council considered a motion to approve the 1993-94Denton
County Historical Foundation budget as presented and submitted to
the City Council.
244
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 13
Brock motioned, Cott seconded to approve the budget of the Denton
County Historical Foundation. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott,
"aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "nay", Perry "aye", and
Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote.
6. The Council considered a motion to approve the 1993-94 Greater
Denton Arts Council budget as presented and submitted to the City
Council.
Perry motioned, Smith seconded to approve the budget of the Greater
Denton Arts Council. 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 to approve the 1993-94 North
Texas State Fair Association budget as presented and submitted to
the City Council.
Cott motioned, Miller seconded to approve the budget of the North
Texas State Fair Association. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott,
"aye", Miller "aye", Smith "nay", Chew "nay", Perry "nay", and
Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 4-3 vote.
8. Ordinances
A. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving
the 1993 appraisal roll for the Denton Central Appraisal District.
John McGrane, Executive Director for Finance, stated that this was
the roll from the District which indicated the values of the
properties located in the City. Under State law, the City was
required to have the governing body approved that roll.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 93-149
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING THE 1993
APPRAISAL ROLL AND PROVIDINC FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Perry motioned, Chew 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.
245
city of Denton city Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 14
B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute a contract between the City and
William and Elizabeth Holland for the purchase of real property.
(The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval.)
Bob Nelson, ~xecutive Director for Utilities, stated that the
property was located near the current landfill on Foster Road.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 93-150
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY AND WILLIAM AND
ELIZABETH HOLLAND FOR THE PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY;
AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
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.
C. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
establishing fees to be charged for emergency ambulance services in
the City as provided for in Sec. 27-102 of Article IV of Chapter 27
"Vehicles for Hire" of the Code of ordinances of the City of
Denton, Texas; and repealing all ordinances in conflict herewith.
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that this ordinance had
been discussed at a prior Council meeting and would raise the fees
from $120 to $200. Several area cities had been surveyed and this
was a middle increase in comparison with those cities. The
increase also included costs of non-recyclable drugs, etc.
Council Member Chew reiterated his position as discussed at a prior
meeting concerning the other entities not paying their fair share.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 93-151
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, ESTABLISHING FEES
TO BE CHARGED FOR EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICES IN THE CITY AS
PROVIDED FOR IN SEC. 27-102 OF ARTICLE IV OF CHAPTER 27
"VEHICLES FOR HIRE" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
DENTON, TEXAS; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
246
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 15
Miller motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew
"nay", Perry "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
with a 5-2 vote.
9. Resolutions
A. The Council considered approval of a resolution regarding
the 1993-94 budget of the Central Appraisal District.
City Manager Harrell stated that State law required the City's
approval of this budget.
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R93-048
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVING THE 1993-
1994 BUDGET OF THE DENTON CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT; AND
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Miller motioned, Cott seconded to approve the resolution. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew
"aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
10. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
The Council considered Item #3 from the Work Session.
3. The Council held a discussion and gave staff direction
regarding budget issues and budget questions for the 1993-94 fiscal
year.
City Manager Harrell stated staff would be reviewing the answers to
all of the questions posed by Council during budget deliberations.
Next week there would be a formal public hearing concerning the
budget during the regular Council meeting and the following week
would be a review of th~ r~maining major budget i~ues needing to
be resolved.
John McGrane, Executive Director for Finance, reviewed the
Council's questions and answers.
1. Legal Services - Zoning Ordinance
Council Member Cott asked about the amount in the budget for this
item.
247
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 16
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that there
were two costs associated with this item. The $121,950 was a value
or cost of what had been done since 1990. That was done without
any packages in the budget so it had no fiscal impact. The $10,600
was a value cost for what it would take to complete the project.
2. Recycling Coordinator Position - Zoning Cases - Planning
Revenues/Fees - Code Enforcement/cost containment - Main Street/
downtown investment.
Council Member Perry asked for a clarification of the $500,000 for
Main Street.
Robbins replied that that
investment to be made to the
Street Program.
was the
1993-1994
estimate of the private
fiscal year for the Main
3. Copy Equipment Analysis
4. Laylor Fund Recipients - projected use of fund balance
5. Purchasing - Use of Bar Codes
6. Parking Meter Receipts - enforcement
7. Athletic Fields/total operation cost - Alcohol sale at Parks -
Recreation fields - alternative turf methods - MLK staffing
Council Member Chew asked for consideration of placing a full-time
staff person at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Recreation Center to
address some ethnic needs as well as other concerns of the
neighborhood. He felt more information was needed in regards to
having a full-time staff person at that Center.
City Manager Harrell stated that this would be an additional major
issue and he would develop more information.
8. ADA Compliance
Council Member Miller asked if the Library problem was addressed as
a budget issue.
Bruce Hennington, Facilities Manager, stated that they were in the
process of detailing options for the Council and felt that it could
be done in this budget year and would not lose the historic doors.
Council Member Cott asked if the ADA work had to be this year or
was there a time frame to do the work.
248
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 17
Hennington stated that by law if there was a yearly plan to do the
projects, they did not have to be done all at once.
City Manager Harrell stated that the $19,000 which was included in
this budget was the portion of the plan coming due next year.
Council Member Perry stated that the Library had suffered
considerable cuts in the past several years. He would like to see
Council consider restoring the previous cuts in such areas as the
children/adult books.
City Manager Harrell referred to pages 78-79 of proposed budget
which indicated the packages which were included in the proposed
budget. There were a number of library packages which were
designated as restoration packages. Those would be coming back
into the budget such as adult library books. Pages 80-82 were
packages which were not included in the proposed budget. There
were no library restoration packages in that area but were some new
packages which were requested but not funded.
9. Denton Municipal Complex - cost analysis
Council Member Cott asked if it were intended that any expenditures
in the Complex would be funded with a certificate of obligation or
bonds.
City Manager Harrell stated that all capital items would be funded
with a combination of certificates of obligation and bonds. All
operation and maintenance expenses would come out of the general
operating budget. The budget included operation and maintenance
expenses to activate the Center when completed.
Council Member Brock asked how long it was anticipated to pay off
the certificates of obligation with the associated rental of the
Center.
McGrane replied approximately 10 years.
10. City Hall West - cost analysis.
11. Facilities Management - maintenance budget
12. Tuition Reimbursement - Pay Plan - Incentive Award Program
City Manager Harrell stated that these items would be included in
the major budget issues.
13.' Response to Memo from Fire Fighters
249
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 18
Mayor Castleberry indicated that there was a citizen request to
speak card on this item.
Ken Gold presented Council with a handout regarding a prior memo
which was included in the agenda backup materials. He stated that
very few fire fighters would receive step raises for a second year
with the proposed budget. He questioned the benefit statement that
the City paid 14% of the firefighters pension. He felt that the
benefits adjustment was pay, not a pension pick-up or a payment to
a pension fund. His last issue related to staffing at the fire
stations indicating that staffing at the stations was too low.
City Manager Harrell stated that the discussion regarding the
contribution to pension was one of semantics. If it were said that
the City did not contribute 15% to the fire fighters, then it had
to be said that the city did not contribute 10% to the other
employees. There was an inequity in the amount in either case.
14
15
16
Utility rate comparisons
Wastewater budget - revenues over expenditures
Sanitation ROI
17 Water Tower - CIP
18 Visioning
19 Recycling long range planning/costs
Council Member Miller stated that the numbers on Table I included
in the back-up did not add up.
Bill Angelo, Director of Community Services, stated that there was
a typographical error in the Table.
Council Member Miller asked if the City did not have a grant with
the waste oil collection program.
Angelo replied yes but there would be no income from that program.
With the $20,0000 grant received from the Texas Water Commission,
$6,000 would be designated for a contingency fund for contaminated
oil.
20. Fire - communication needs
21. Fire - fire loss comparisons
250
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993.
Page 19
Council Member Perry asked about the Opticom
particular on the corner of Carroll and Hickory.
22. Disabled Persons Exemptions
System and in
23. 1992-93/1993-94 Budget Comparisons
Council Member Miller asked how many net people were propOsed to be
added which would impact the budget.
City Manager Harrell replied five full time equivalents in the
general fund and seven in the solid waste department with three
less positions in the rest of the utility department.
Council Member Brock asked why prospects for income seemed better
this year than last when the ad valorem tax rolls were down greater
this year than last year.
McGrane replied that it probably was the comparison from the
preliminary roll to the certified roll as the certified roll did
not indicate that.
24. Keeping tax rate
City Manager Harrell stated that in order to keep the tax rate at
$.7180 as opposed to the recommended effective rate of $.7490, it
would be necessary to reduce the proposed tax rate by $.035 cents.
This would translate to finding additional cuts or revenue
enhancements totalling approximately $562,000. In order to share
the cuts with all of the departments, all of the new packages would
be eliminated from the proposed budget totalling approximately
$342,000. To that amount, $75,000 could be added from an
adjustment to the compensation program and $13,000 could be added
from eliminating the additional Over 65 exemption. Even with those
cuts, the budget would still be $112,000 short and Council would
need to look at revenue estimates or the fund balance to make up
the difference. The difference could be made up all from the fund
balance but it would not be prudent to do so as the level would
then fall below the 10% level. That was the type of eut~ which
would be necessary to be able to achieve that goal. The reason the
budget was proposed at the effective tax rate was due to the growth
in sales tax.
Council Member Cott stated that the effective tax rate allowed the
same amount of money to be spent as last year. The difference was
that there was not the same assets as last year. In most
organizations, when the assets went down, the spending went down
also.
251
city of Denton city Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 20
Council Member Miller asked how the city had less assets.
Council Member Cott replied that there was less assessed valuation.
Council Member Miller stated that that was the source of the City's
revenue. The assets were parks, buildings, etc.
Council Member Cott stated that the ad valorem tax was based on
assessed valuation. If the City took from the retailer in the
source of added sales tax, then other areas needed to be reduced as
well.
Council Member Miller felt that the City was adding assets on the
basis of what to service and maintain. The new park was an asset
with maintenance requirements which required revenue.
Council Member Brock stated that the retailers would not be paying
the additional sales tax. It would be the consumers.
Council Member Miller also stated that there was a task force which
had been appointed to study the sales tax issue and a decision had
not been made yet.
McGrane stated that the final questions dealt with issues which the
Council had raised earlier.
Mayor Castleberry asked how it was that Ft. Worth would not be
increasing their health insurance. There were some areas in the
specialist areas which had increased greatly under the new plan.
He asked if any of those areas had increased again.
Tom Klinck, Director of Personnel, stated that that would be part
of the recommendation which would come before Council.
Mayor Castleberry asked which specialist areas had increased the
most.
Klinck replied with Sanus and the gate keeping system, the claims
were approximately $1.4 million. Because of concern of delivery of
service and access of service, it was recommended to go with a
fully-insured program with an expanded list of doctors and returned
70% of the dollars to the community. As a result of that,
utilization did increase the first year with no gate keeping
system, claims that year were approximately $2.1 million. This
past January there was seen a reduction in claim costs and a better
plan in terms of dollars spent. Part of the renewal would include
a gate keeping system for referral to specialists.
252
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 24, 1993
Page 21
11. There was no official action on Executive Session items
discussed during the Work Session Executive Session.
12. New Business
The following items of New Business were suggested by Council
Members for future agendas:.
A. Council Member Perry asked for a discussion regarding the
Opticom system.
B. Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated that there had been some
resignations from several boards/commissions and asked for the
procedure to fill those positions.
C. Council Member Miller reminded the Council of the meeting
with Congressman Sarpalius.
D. Mayor Castleberry asked for Council representatives to
work with staff to work on the reception for September 11, 1993.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith and Council Member Brock volunteered to work
with staff.
13. There was no Executive Session held during the Regular
Session.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned 10:25 p.m.
iTTI'P~wALTERS
S~RETARY
~F DENTON, TEXAS
ACC00143