Minutes October 04, 1994CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
October 4, 1994
The Council convened into a Closed' Meeting on Tuesday, October 4,
1994 at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members
Cott, Perry, and Smith.
ABSENT: Council Members Chew and Miller
Closed Meeting:
5:15 p.m.
A. Legal Matters -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.071
Considered action in John Marie Preston v. City of
Denton and Jaqoe-Public Company.
2. Considered action in Cohaqen, et al. v. City.
B. Real Estate -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.072
Ce
Personnel/Board Appointments -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE
Sec. 551.074
Considered transition of City Attorney to Part-time
Municipal Judge.
The Council convened into a Work Session on Tuesday, October 4,
1994 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members
Cott, Perry, and Smith.
ABSENT: Council Members Chew and Miller
6:00 p.m.
1. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave
staff direction regardiDg adoption of a proposed."Off-duty Injury
or Illness" policy (107.05).
Mary Ann Stout, Human Resources Specialist, stated that the purpose
of this policy was to coordinate salary continuation and to uniform
the benefits administration when an employee was unable to perform
his job duties or unable to work for an extended period of time due
to an off-duty injury or illness. It gave a supervisor the
opportunity to evaluate whether the position should be filled after
an employee was~ unable to perform his job for at least six
consecutive months. This policy applied to regular full-time and
regular part-time employees and followed applicable Federal and
State laws. Council would consider this item on October 18th and
116
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 2
the policy, if approved, would be effective November 1, 1994.
Council Member Cott asked if it were usual that an off-job injury
was covered in this manner.
Stout replied correct. This policy would put in writing what the
city had been practicing.
Consensus of the Council was to return the item for formal Council
consideration.
Council Member Cott asked about the cost of the policy.
Stout replied that this was a cost effective policy as it allowed
supervisors to evaluate position openings after an employee was not
able to work for more than six months. There were no additional
costs as the benefits administration would apply regardless.
City Manager Harrell stated that the City had the possibility of
saving money and this policy gave a method to terminate an
employee, for a business necessity, after a long-term disability.
2. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave
staff direction regarding adoption of a proposed "Reduction In
Force" policy (109.04).
Tom Klinck, Director for Human Resources, stated that the policy
statements would provide the Council with guidance and direction
for the City Manager with regard to service areas to continue and
service areas to reduce, particularly when economic times and other
conditions necessitated the consideration of reducing staffing in
various parts of the City. As a part of the budget process, the
City Manager would then recommend positions and incumbents for
elimination for the Council's consideration. There would be a
reasonable attempt to integrate those employees into other
departments and positions, provide help with outplacement and
provide severance pay. Procedures involved in this policy stated
that department directors would prepare a reduction-in-force plan
as part of the budget to be presented to the City Manager. The
specific criteria used with the reduction-in-force plan and to
identify the positions which might need elimination were the
overall service delivery in the organization and within the
department, employee productivity, skills, knowledge and abilities
and length of service. Outplacement assistance would include
counseling; ~ar~er ~oun~ling; r~sume update assistance; assessment
of strengths; skills, etc.; job search guidance; and job interview
skills.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 3
City Manager Harrell stated that the policy was an attempt to be
proactive by the City. Currently there was no policy in place to
handle a reduction in force. There was no anticipation that this
policy would be used in the future but it was necessary to have an
approved policy in place should the need arise.
Consensus of the Council was to return with the policy for formal
consideration.
3. The Council held a discussion and gave staff direction
regarding the desirability of forming a Capital Improvements
Citizen Committee.
City Manager Martell stated that during the budget discussions,
Council Member Smith had asked for consideration of the formation
of a CIP study committee. Staff had prepared a rough draft of a
resolution for Council to consider in the future. Staff was asking
whether the Council desired to go forward with such a resolution
and if so, were there any modifications needed to be made to the
resolution. Section I called for the appointment of a 50 member
CIP committee. This was not a set number and could b · changed per
Council's direction. Section III dealt with some of the concerns
regarding fire needs. After the committee was appointed, the
committee would issue two reports. One would be an interim report
concentrating on the CIP needs within the Fire Department which
were being recommended by the Committee. The Fire Department needs
would be presented early so that once the Council had the data from
the Committee as to what future CIP improvements were envisioned,
that information would be helpful as the Council took up the fire
manning issue. A final comprehensive report would be submitted at
a later date. After this year, the City would be out of 1986 bond
money and in order to keep the CIP schedule going, some type of
bond election would be needed within the nex~ year. It was felt
that the Committee would come back to Council with a recommended
program to present to the Denton voters after it was reviewed by
the. City Council.
Brock m0t~oned, Cott seconded to postpone this item until the
October 18th meeting When all Council Members would be present. She
felt it was important enough to be heard and discussed by the
complete Council.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that four affirmative votes would
be needed for that motion.
on roll vote, Brock "aye", COt~ "aye", Smi~ "nay", Perry "nay",
and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion failed with a 2-3 vote.
City of Denton City Council Minutes.
October 4, 1994
Page 4
117
Council Member Smith proposed to delay the item longer than October
18th. She felt that there were obvious serious divisions on the
Council as to what direction was needed to take with many of these
issues. She hoped that the Council could take some time to try to
come to some sort of consensus of thought on what the direc%ion
should be. She had hoped that the Council could move forward
quickly with some kind of movement on the entire situation and the
issues. The CIP needs were obvious and there was a need to decide
fire station locations and there was a need for more equipment for
the Fire Department as well as large drainage problems in the
community. The CIP project was more involved than just the Fire
Department and its needs. If it took a month or more to work this
through the Council, then that time was needed. She would like to
see the Council be able to come to a better agreement among
themselves. She felt it would be unfair to the Denton citizens to
form a commission in the very near future when the Council did not
have an agreement of purpose among themselves. Delaying the
project might give the Council the opportunity to reach some sort
of agreement and establish a direction for a task force. She felt
that the Council needed to move ahead for all citizens and must
meet the .needs and concerns of all the citizens of Denton. No
matter where the citizens lived and no matter what ty~e of business
they did, the Council was charged with the responsibility for
everyone. The Counci~ must proceed in a rational, sane, and
informed manner. That was the only way that the Council would come
to a rational, informed decision. Speed was of some essence
because of the issues involved.
Council Member Cott felt that the process was"too long as proposed
by Council Member Smith. During the recent fire on the Square,
there were 68 Denton fire fighters on duty along with fire fighters
from Krum and Argyle. Those personnel had long hours to work,
especially with the second fire. He felt there was a need for six
fire fighters now and then a committee was needed. He also felt
that drainage was important to the citizens of Denton. He again
recommended that six fire fighters be added and then proceed with
the issues of the committee.
Mayor Castleberry stated that the only decision the Council could
make was regarding the direction for a CIP Committee.
Council Member Smith suggested postponing the consideration of a
committee until November.
Council Member Perry felt that this issue was some~ing which the
Council needed to move forward with as the CIP issues were
important to all citizens. He was concerned about Section III and
felt that it should be removed as a special consideration. He
119
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 5
suggested deleting Section III and instead have interim reports
made to Council from all departments affected by the CIP program.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock felt that the real problem was that there was
the need to separate the issue of fire staffing from the whole CIP
issue. She was convinced that there was a need for additional
fire/EMS staff even if facilities were not expanded. She was
concerned as she felt that public perception in this area was
important. Before anyone invested anything in rebuilding on the
Square or in building anything anywhere in Denton, he had to feel
that the City' was committed to adequate fire protection. The
Council believed and knew that the City was committed to adequate
fire protection but she felt that the feelings and opinions of
those who might be having some questions, had to be taken
seriously. She was afraid that putting the fire issues in the
context of a CIP gave the impression that the Council did not want
to do anything about any possible shortages in the fire protection
program. The Council did not need a CIP committee to tell them
that additional library staff, policemen, or an additional position
in the Planning Department were needed. She felt that the Council
needed to take action on expanding the fire fighting/EMS force as
a separate issue from any CIP issue. She hoped that that position
was not considered irrational, insane or irresponsible. She felt
that the two issues needed to be separated and to deal with the
immediate issue of whether there was adequate fire staff.
Smith motioned, Perry seconded to have this item placed on the
Council's first meeting in November. In the meantime, she wished
the Council could try to come to some consensus regarding the
issue.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that the fire staffing issue was not a
CIP issue and should be separate from the CI~ issue.
Mayor Castleberry stated that he agreed with Council Member Smith
and that there was a need for a period of time to give additional
thought to the issues.
On roll vote, Brock "nay", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye",
and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 4-1 vote.
The Council convened into a Regular Session on Tuesday, October 4,
1994 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members
cott, Perry, and Smith.
Council M~mbers Chew and Miller
120
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 6
7:00 p.m.
1. Pledge of Allegiance
The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of
Allegiance.
2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of the August
2, 1994; the August 9, 1994; and the August 16, 1994 City Council
meetings.
Perry motioned, Brock seconded to approve the minutes as presented.
, "aye", Smith "aye" Perry "aye"
On roll vote, Brock "aye" Cott, , ,
and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Castleberry presented the following proclamations:
National Business Womens Week
Cocchhetti Days in Denton
Quality Month
Public Power Week
National Fire Prevention Week
3. The Council considered approval of a resolution designating a
"Wall of Honor" acknowledging the many contributions of City
employees.
City Manager Harrell stated that the "Wall of Honor" was a place to
recognize employees who provided quality service to the citizens of
Denton. The "Wall of Honor" would display letters received from
citizens acknowledging an outstanding effort of a particular city
employee.
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R94-057
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OP DENTON, T~Y~A~, DESIGNATING A ~'WALL
OF HONOR" ACKNOWLEDGING THE MANY CONTRIBUTIONS OF CITY
EMPLOYEES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
smith motioned, Perry seconded to approve the resolution. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 7
4. Citizen Requests
A. The Council considered approval of a
temporarily closing Sun Valley Drive between Stuart
Yellowstone Street on Friday, October 14, 1994.
resolution
Road and
Joseph Portugal, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that this
resolution would authorize the temporarily closure of Sun Valley
'Drive from Yellowstone to Stuart Road for the Ginnings Fall
Festival. This would provide save passage for students and
families at the function.
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R94-058
A RESOLUTION TEMPORARILY CLOSING SUN VALLEY DRIVE BETWEEN
STUART ROAD AND YELLOWSTONE STREET ON FRIDAY, OCTOBER 14,
1994; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, Smith seconded to approve the resolution..On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
B. The Council considered approval of an exception to the
noise ordinance for construction work to occur after 10:00 p.m. on
Teasley Lane. .
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that the Brown and Root
Company was working on Teasley Lane and needed to saw the concrete
for the road. This needed to be done later in the evening hours.
The request was for an eight month period to cover all of the
pouring season and that the pouring would not be late every
evening.
council Member Perry asked for the days of the week for the
exception.
Svehla replied that the exception would be for Monday through
Friday with no work on the weekends.
Smith motioned, Perry seconded to grant the exception. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry '~aye'!. Motion carried unanimously.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 8
5. Citizen Reports
A. The Council received a citizen report from Jim Powers
asking the Council to rescind the sign ordinance against flying the
American flag on his automobiles.
Mr. Powers stated that he had exhausted almost every avenue in the
City for the right to fly the American flag on his property at his
place of business. He had been harassed just recently as two days
ago. when he tried to comply with City regulations and the sign
ordinance. He was on vacation and two associates installed an
American, Texas, and corporate flag. They made a mistake and used
the existing flag posts which were under the grandfather clause and
moved them back approximately 18 inches from the highway so as to
put them in a more rigid position. Two days ago he was told that
those flags had to be removed and installed according to the sign
ordinance regulations. He had received information both pro and
con regarding the issue and would like to make a deal with the
City.
There were much lesser items on the ball~t which the
citizens voted on than the pr~de and honor of the American flag. He
suggested putting the
issue on a ballot. The D~nton Record-
Chronicle conducted a s~rvey for three hours regarding the issue
and the total was 90-17 in his favor. If the Council did not step
in and help him, then the Council did not have a sense of shame and
no sense of decency. He wanted to fly his flags in an orderly
manner and conduct his business.
B. The Council r~ceived a citizen report from Joe Dodd
regarding one fire fighting hero.
Mr. Dodd stated that he wanted tonominate a hero and that would be
hard to do as he was not here at the meeting. The fire fighting
problem in Denton was not a new emergency that required immediate
attention. It was a long standing problem that had reached a
critical point. People could be killed in some fire circumstances.
Whatever the cost for more men, it would be worth..it just to save
pieces of people's lives. Another problem was the political
posturing on the issue. The longer this went on, the longer it
would take to correct the problem. It appeared to him that there
were three votes on CoUncil locked in favor for the fire protection
which he felt was needed and that there were three votes locked in
to studying the issue as part of a longer problem. There was one
vote not locked in and he wanted to nominate that person to a hero
status. He wanted to nominate Mark Che%, as a hero and urged him to
accept the nomination.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 9
6. Public Hearings
A. The Council held a public hearing with regard to the
proposed annexation and zoning of a 263 acre tract located north of
Jim Christal Road and west of Masch Branch Road. (A~66)
Harry Persuad, Senior Planner, stated that this was the second of
two pubic hearings required by law. Staff had been working with
residents and was trying to address some of their concerns.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
No one spoke in favor.
Nedra Mitchell stated that she and her neighbors were in opposition
to this annexation. Her first question was what was the purpose of
this proposed annexation.
Persuad stated that the purpose was to include a donut hole which
existed in the City limits. The tract of land was surrounded on
all sides by the City limits and the City was trying to regulate
those lines so as to have contiguous lines around the City.
Mitchell asked why the annexation had to take place now when the
area was populated.
Mayor Castleberry stated that during the Council's planning
session, Council became more aware of areas which were encircled by
the City and this was the reason for the annexation proposal.
Mitchell asked if delaying the annexation would jeopardize the
Airport Master Plan.
Mayor Castleberry replied no.
Mitchell asked if the annexation were approved, would it give the
City any additional control over the area which the City did not
already have through its extraterritorial jurisdiction and the
Airport regulations.
Persuad stated that the City was authorized to enforce its
regulations and to provide services to its areas incorporated
within its limits. In that manner, the City would have more
control over land use and new development in this area as well as
provide a better quality Of life.
Mayor Castleberry stated that such services included police and
fire protection, and solid waste collection.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 10
Robert Nobles stated that he lived in the proposed annexed area.
His wife was a lifetime Denton resident and he was in the cattle
business. He was opposed to this annexation as there would be no
benefits to him. He wanted to know about the City ordinance
regarding fences. He understood that the City ordinance prohibited
barbed wire in the city limits. He had much barbed wire around his
property and had breeding animals including bulls which also were
not allowed in the City limits. In the City limits, there was a
requirement to have approval for tree removal which also had no
benefit from his standpoint. This was agricultural land and he did
not feel that it would be developed in his lifetime. He also had
a swimming pool and asked where that would fall in the City
ordinances for chemical treatment, etc. He asked if he would have
to install curb, gutters and sidewalks.
Mayor Castleberry stated that he was not sure that staff could
answer all the resident's questions at this point in time. Staff
would return to the residents with the answers to their questions.
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning and Development,
stated that the property would be exempt from sidewalks, curbs and
gutter until there was development on the property.
Nobles stated that this was a rural community and he did not want
to be annexed.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked if there was a City ordinance prohibiting
barbed wire in the City.
Robbins replied yes that an issue would be if the property would be
grandfathered and staff was researching that situation.
Gerald Mitchell stated that this area had a voluntary annexation in
1986 on three different tracts of property. There were ten homes
in the proposed annexation area, four of which were in Zone 2 of
the Airport, one was already in the city limits and the other five
would be brought into thm City with this proposal. The City would
be losing money with this annexation as the services would cost too
much for the number of homes. The residents in this area were
active members of the Denton community but did not want to be
annexed into the City. His questions dealt with water and sewer
services to be provided, and studies done regarding the feasibility
of developing the land.
Brian Walding stated that he understood the reason for this
proposal was to remove donut holes within the City limits. There
was a line on Jim.Christal Road which was not in the City limits
and he asked why that area was not being annexed.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 11
Persuad stated that that area was currently outside the City limits
and staff had not looked at that tract at that point in time.
Walding stated that the Service Plan indicated that they would
receive fire protection within the limitations of available water.
He asked what was the limitations of available water for the area
and how close was the nearest fire station. He asked if the City
could guarantee the same level of protection as far as fire
protection as they were receiving from Krum and Ponder. He asked
if his fire insurance premiums would go down if he was annexed.
The Service Plan indicated that they would not receive the same
services until ultimate development and he asked for a definition
of ultimate development.
Robbins stated that that was a general statement which represented
the issue in the State law about different levels of service. When
the City annexed, it did not have to provide the same level of
service uniformly to every type of development. Under State law,
the City was allowed to have different levels of service, depending
on the land use and density. Ultimate development meant standard
residential subdivisions or commercial development.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock where the current water and sewer lines
extended in this area.
Persuad stated that he understood the water lines currently went as
far as the corner of Jim Christal Road and Masch Branch Road.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked if the City could enforce its airport
zoning in areas not within the city limits.
Persuad replied yes that those regulations could be enforced
outside the city limits.
James Wetzel stated that he had several questions regarding the
annexation and was opposed to the annexation. The Service Plan
indicated that the area would receive routine services using
existing personnel and equipment for police protection. Would this
service be taken from other parts of the City in order to assist
this area. The Service Plan also stated that they would not receive
full service until ultimate development and he wanted to know when
that would be. He felt that the service indicated that they would
change from the County Sheriff to the City police and he asked how
often would they be patrolled.
Mayor Castleberry stated that staff could not answer all of his
questions at this meeting as they would have to do some research
regarding the questions.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 12
Wetzel asked what benefit he would receive for this annexation.
The resident's tax rates would double when annexed into the City.
Council Member Perry stated that he would like to know what the
Council would be required to do on Egan Road and an additional road
'in the area to ~ave improvements made and how far down the lane
would the Council be required to maintain that road.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that she had lived south of I35 for a
long time and for a long time there was only a dirt r~ad there as
the area was not developed enough to justify paving in the area.
She did not have curb and gutter along her r~ad and no real
.drainage along that road. Her area was a transition from a rural
area to a developed are~.
Freda Wetzel stated that he~ concerns dealt with how lona it would
b~ ~efo~e water and sewer lines were extended to withi-'~nna ~-A~
ncr nom.. th.r. was a .1986 ann,x tio of
there any study done to ascertain the feaslbillt~ to develop the
land before annexation was granted or was it a voluntary
annexation. Had anyone determined what percentage of the land was
below the flood plain and what percentage of land which could not
be sold would developers normally accept in' their feasibility
studies. Had the utility engineers devised a method of containing
Hickory Creek so that it would not'destroy Denton s Sewer lines as
it had in the recent past.
Was there anything in the works which
would accelerate the development time table sooner than the y~ar
2015 ~s projected in the Denton Airport Master Plan. The Service
Plan indicated that the area would receive the same level of
service as available to comparable areas within the City.. She
asked what services were now provided to those comparable a~eas and
where were those areas.
Howard Harper stated that he had most of the same concerns as had
already been expressed. He bought his property in 1981 and in 1988
he wanted to build a home on the site. When they went to apply for
building permit,
a they were informed that.they would hav~ to
c~nstruct a sidewalk as the property was in the City limits.
Research indicated that that was correct and when he asked for a
variance, he was denied. The west end of the sidewalk would not
connect until it reached~ecatur and the east side would connect at
McKinney. He felt that it would not be feasible to build on that
side and chose another location. City codes affected individuals
even in the country. He was still waiting for a full compliment of
City services even when paying City taxes.
Carolyn Harper stated that her questions were on cost
considerations. How would this annexation affect the City's budget
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 13
and how much in taxes would the City receive as opposed to the cost
of services provided. Would the income offset the cost of the
annexation and if not, why was the annexation feasible.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that he had two speake= cards from
individuals who did not wish to address the Council. Mark and
Linda Cole indicated that they would pay City taxes if they would
be entitled to the same benefits as other tax payers. Jimmy Lou
Nobles felt that the proposed annexation would be an extreme
hardship on their cattle business.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Mayor Castleberry stated that there was a set procedure for
annexations and this was strictly a public hearing on the proposal.
B. The Council held a public hearing with regard to the
proposed annexation and zoning of a 68 acre tract located north of
Ryan Road and east of Forrestridge Drive. (A-67)
Harry Persuad, Senior Planner, stated that this was another
proposal to annex a 68 acre tract north of Ryan road. This was the
second of two public hearings as required by State law. Staff met
with the residents of the neighborhood last evening. There were
still some questions from that meeting that staff was researching
such as a situation of a swim~ing pool and the possibility of
retrofiring it with fences and gates.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
No one spoke in favor.
Stanley Ratliff stated that he had recently attended a neighborhood
meeting with City staff and that staff was very well prepared.
Police service was currently provided by the Denton County
Sheriff's Department and after annexation, would be provided by the
City of Denton. Currently they received fire protection from the
Argyle volunteer department and after annexation only service
providers would change. The Service Plan indicated that water and
wastewater services would be extended to the area in accordance
with the City's Master Plan. Currently City water was'available to
them providing they extended the line from the existing termination
point at Forrestridge and Ryan Road which was approximately 1200
feet from his-property. The cost of such an extension was
estimated at $35,000. He was already receiving and paying for
solid waste collection. Presently Ryan Road was maintained by the
County and annexation would not affect that situation. Leisure
Lane would remain a.private road. He had been told that the City
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 14
would enforce all applicable codes and regulations as of the
effective date of annexation. This meant, that among other things,
the stray cats they fed would be unlicensed and unregistered pets.
Staff was investigating the requirement of whether he would need a
fence around his pool. His pool was 150 feet from ~earest house
which was his own home. In a cost benefits analysis, there would
be a cost for this annexation but no benefit for the residents in
the proposed annexation. The area would not be subdividing and
residents would receive no benefit from the annexation.
David Carlson stated that he was concerned about the lifestyle
change which would result from annexation. When he did not live in
the City, he did not expect to have certain services such as City
water, sewer, lights and sidewalks. He had no plans to develop his
property any further. When he asked why the area was being
annexed, he was told it was to square up the City boundaries. What
benefit did the City receive for a square boundary. He was
concerned because the Council was elected by citizens and the job
of the Council was to represent the citizens of Denton. He felt
there was a large benefit for the City and did not know of a voice
on the Council for him. The annexation had the potential of
financially harming the families in the area.
Tammie Carlson stated that this annexation would have a large
impact on her. If the City needed money, she would donate the
equivalent money in order to not be annexed. There were many trees
and a private pond in this area with few paved roads. It was a
rural community which was what it was meant to be. The residents
would receive no benefits but the City would receive property
taxes. She invited the Council to come out and talk with the
residents and walk the property. She asked the Council to help
keep this a rural community as it was intended to be.
Ray L. Baker stated that the 68 acres of proposed annexation was
unique to Denton. He moved there due to the park-like country life
style environment. There were eleven families in the area and most
property was in 4-7 acre parcels. The property ,was already
developed except for one area. There was no intention to develop
the property further and this created problems for individuals due
to the inability to get services in the area. His greatest concern
was the lifestyle change which would occur with the annexation.
Certain ordinances of the City would require them to change many of
their properties. There were many unique and unusual circumstances
in the area which could not be addressed. He wanted to protect the
lifestyle and environment they had maintained for the past 20-40
years. He requested that the Council look at each individual case.
city of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 15
Robert Heilig stated that he selected the area due to the lifestyle
and now found that it could be changed. His biggest problem was
the use of his well agreement. If annexed, his well agreement
stated that he would no longer be supplied water from the well as
it would be available from the City. He would have to'bring water
an additional 1200 feet from a neighboring development to get his
water at a cost of $35,000. His current septic system would have
to hook up to City sewer at a total cost of $32,000. The Service
Plan had to provide a program under which the municipality would
provide full municipal services in the annexed area within 4 1/2
years of the date of annexation and the Service Plan he had did not
show that. The area already received fire and police protection
and the residents were in opposition to the annexation.
Frederick Opaskey stated that he had a business which he ran out of
his home and if annexed into the City, there would be many
restrictions placed on the future development of his business.
There were two homes on E1 Paseo which would benefit by being
annexed as they wanted to subdivide that property. His real estate
attorney indicated that this proposed annexation was probably due
to the desire of one of those areas to subdivide. Those two homes
probably should Nave been in the City limits several years ago. He
suggested annexing those locations and leave the rest of the area
alone. That would be a good compromise between the residents and
the City and asked if it would be possible.
Mayor Castleberry stated that that was not part of this annexation.
Opaskey stated that he did not understand that response.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that there was a set procedure which
had to be followed according to State law. The City was not
allowed to swap one area for another. ·
Opaskey stated that it was all or nothing for this annexation.
Mayor Castleberry s~ated yes under this current annexation
proposal.
Opaskey asked if it could be changed.
Mayor Castleberry replied yes.
City Manager Harrell stated that if the Council desired to modify
the plan, they would have to start the annexation process from the
beginning. The procedure would be to deny this annexation requesu
and then start the procedure again with different boundaries.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 16
Opaskey asked the Council to vote no on this annexation and start
again. A new process would benefit two individuals but would not
benefit those in the proposed annexation.
Council Member Cott asked how picking someone else and sacrificing
them would benefit anyone.
Opaskey stated that the real estate attorney he had talked to
stated that this action was obviously brought about by someone
wanting to subdivide. One particular party did not live in the
City of Denton and he wanted to sell the property.
Council Member Cott ~dicated that he did not understand.
Opaskey stated that there were two houses on E1 Paseo. The owners
of those two houses would benefit from annexation while the rest of
the area would not benefit.
Council Member Cott stated' that as he saw it, that was how it
happened in E~rope in the 1930's and '40's.
Opaskey asked Council Member Cott what he meant by, that remark.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that no property owner initiated this
annexation. This was from the Council and the staff in
anticipating future development. There might people in this area
who would benefit but benefit depended on each person's private
plan. The proposal was not initiated by a property owner.
Opaskey asked the Mayor to have Council Member Cott ex~lain his
remark about what happened in Europe as'he did not like that type
of remark.
..~Council Member Cott replied that like it or not, he had made the
remark.
Mayor Castleberry asked Opaskey to continue with his presentation.
0paskey stated that he wanted the Council to see the residents
point of view and was not belligerent to the Council.
Cathy Opaskey stated that the residents were trying to make a point
that it was not only taxes or services that they may or may not get
but that they were.not a part of Montecito del Sur and were not a
part of Forrestridge. Their homes were not that size-and they
bought their property to be in the country. The area had a totally
different lifestyle and annexation would change their lifestyle.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 17
Melba Gene Ryan stated that she had lived in the area for 29 years
and asked not be annexed. Currently the property was zoned
agricultural. They had a ranch across the road and five acres were
used for large bales of hay.. Those five acres were cut off from
the rest of their property when they gave a right-of-way for Ryan
Road.
Ron Crownover stated that he had a concern as he had moved to the
country and the City had grown out to them. In the middle of the
property was a lake which had a flowage problem since improvements
were made to the Montecito Lake. There were three families in a
different setting than the eight families across the lake in a
small subdivision. Those families had some City services. There
were two businesses in the area which might be affected by this
decision. He was a large animal veterinarian and it was important
for him to be able to bring in animals during the course of his
work. He was concerned about the ordinance which regulated the
number of animals per square feet, the number of animals, etc.
Part of the 68 acre tract was affected severally and part was not
affected at all. If the property was annexed, the residents would
need to know the restrictions on the businesses in the area
including his business.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that he had speaker cards from
individuals who did not wish to address the Council from Karen
Baker, Rosemary Ratliff, Janet and Larry Douglas, and James Yost.
Wayne Ryan stated that he was in opposition to the rules and
regulations which this annexation might pose to his property. If
annexed, he might have to cease hi's ranching operations. He asked
for Council's vote and support to delete this annexation.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
C. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption
of an ordinance rezoning a 15.67 acre tract located on the
northwest corner of FM 2181 and Hickory Creek Road from Planned
Development District (PD114) to Agricultural District (A). (The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 7-0).
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning and Development,
stated that this was a. rezoning from a planned development
district. The planned development was for a televangelism facility
which would not occur. The land owner was reque~ting to revezt the
zoning to agricultural development. This was the third zoning on
this tract.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 18
Karen Mitchell stated that she was representing the ministries and
would answer any questions.
No one spoke in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Mayor Pro Tem B~ock asked if the ministries were still owners of
the property but no longer planned to develop the property.
'Robbins stated that he assumed that that was the case. There was
a planned development detailed plan approved to build a facility.
The f~llowing ordinance was considered:
NO. 94-184
~N ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A
CHANGE FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 114 (PD-114) TO
AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE
DESIGNATION FOR A 15.67 ACRE TRACT LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF F.M. 2181 AND HICKORY CREEK ROAD; PROVIDING FOR A
PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS
THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, Cott seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
D. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption
Qf an ordinance rezoning a 0.3825 acre tract located on the east
side of WOodrow Lane approximately 510 feet south of McKinne¥
Street from Multi-family Dwelling Distri6t '(MF-1) to Office
Conditioned District [O(c)[. (The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval 7-0) Z-94-022
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning and Development,
stated that this was conditioned zoning for this property. There
was a 5,100 square foot limitation on the district related to the
existing intensity. There would be no increase in intensity trips
with the zoning. There was a two story height limit and additional
landscaping set backs for the property. This was the first minor
plat which staff could approve and had been reviewed by the
Development Review Committee. With the approved change, the
~=andardm for fire hydrant spacing were changed.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 19
Tom Whitlock,
office on the
placed on the proposal. '-'He felt that the area needed
developed and he would place an office on the property.
No one spoke in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 94-185
property owner, stated that he wanted to build an
property. He had accepted all of the conditions
to be
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A
CHANGE FROM MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT (MF-1) TO OFFICE
WITH CONDITIONS [0(C)] ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE
DESIGNATION FOR A 0.3825 ACRE TRACT OF LAND LOCATED ON WOODROW
LANE APPROXIMATELY 510. FEET SOUTH OF EAST MCKINNEY STREET;
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR
VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Smith motioned, Perr~ seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye", Perry"aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried ~nanimously.
7. The Council considered a variance to Section 34-114(17) of the
Subdivision and Land Development Regulations for Lot 1, Block A, of
the Fred Hill Addition. The 1.781 acre site was located on the
south side of Hickory Street at Bradshaw Street. (The Planning and
Zoning Commission recommended denial 5-0).
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning and Development,
stated that this varianc.9 was associated with platting. The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial with separate
recommendations. The plat was approved in 1984 but for unknown
reasons, it was not recorded. When the plat was approved,
sidewalks would not have been required on the south side of
}iickory. At one time, staff considered applying'the rules
applicable in 1984~but found that this was legally inappropriate.
The Planning and Zoning Commission did not believe that the
variance request met the standards .associated with the area of
uniqueness. There was no ~nlque sitUation associated with the
topography or the way the sidewalks normally would be built or a
condition uncommon...to this area as to other locations.
council MemDer Smith asked =hat ~he'£ac= ~hat it was not known what
happened to the original plat not be an unusual circumstance which
would have some bearing on the case. She also asked why the 1984
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 20
rules would not apply.
Robbins stated that a variance standard
feature.
applied to a physical
Council Member Smith stated that there was nothing which applied to
situational circumstances.
Robbins stated that staff attempted to take that into account and
~uuzz recommenaa=}on =o no= require sidewalks. It was found that
that was legally inappropriate without a variance procedure.
variance language did not deal with a situational issu. but ra~
~ddressed the physical characteristics as related to the required
Improvement.
Council Member Smith asked why the 1984 rules would not apply.
Robbins stated that at one point, staff was working not on a
variance but rather a finding that it would be grandfathered, That
was not legally appropriate. The variance procedure had to be used
and Council could use its best judgement on what was a unique
situation.
Fred Hill stated that this situation came about as a result of his
not checking on the details.
· In 1983 he received approval of the
plat and planned to build shop on the site. In the process of not
building that shop, he did not follow up on the platting. He had
paid. all the necessary' fees an9 had gone before the Zonin
and eit_ hat -v. rythlng had b..n compi.t.d. Upo
n~lng several mort=ns ago, he found that the process had not been
completed. Currently he could not get the same value for the
property as what he paid for it. To de¥~lop sidewalks would
further depreciate the value and investment an the property. He
requested that Council give the request favorable consideration.
Greg Edwards stated that he represented Mr. Hill in 1984. The
Development Review Committee had been very helpful in trying
resolve this si~ua~ion. His research on =his issue indicated that
someone in the City did not file the plat. At that time, the
Planning and Zoning Commission would not review the plan until all
copie~ had been signed. Mr. Hill had done everything the City had
asked but he did not check to make sure the City did all they were
to do.
Council Member Perry stated that no one had a copy of the plat or
a record of the plat.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 21
Edwards stated that that was correct. In 1984 the company was
known as Fields, Edwards and Associates. Mr. Fields sold the
business to Metroplex Engineering. The company grew larger and had
a large number of employees in the mid-1980's. As the economy went
down and the number of employees, reduced, records were taken to
separate areas and many were stored in a miniware house, damaged or
thrown out. There were no records on this particular file.
Cott motioned, Smith seconded to permit the variance.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that the uniqueness of the variance
did have reference to the actual condition of the property and this
being the case, if Council desired to visit about this matter and
receive s~me legal advise at a different time, she would be happy
to meet with Council.
Mayor Castleberry stated that that discussion would not be in open
session.
City Attorney Drayovitch replied correct. The rulesfor variances
of subdivision ordinances required that the applicant, for a
variance demonstrate the existence of five specific criteria in
order to qualify for obtaining the variance. It was a unique
situation that the plat was not filed. However, the subdivision
ordinances when they rpferenced unique, referred to a feature of
the property and not an act.
Council Member C0tt asked for the proper language in order to grant
the variance.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that if Council would like to defer
the issue to the next meeting, staff Could research the situation
further.
Cott withdrew his motion and Smith withdrew her second.
Cott motioned, Brock motioned to postpone the issue until the
October 18th Council meeting, ox~ roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott,
"aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye".
Motion carried unanimously.
Edwards suggested that staff might consider extending the
preliminary plat and approve the plat based on the 1984 preliminary
plat. Generally to extend a plat it had to bu within two years,
but that did not prohibit the City from extending a plat past that
time. It was his understanding that the City Gould ex4:end e plat
up to 10 years. This might be an alternate avenue to grant the
sidewalk variance.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 22
8. Consent Agenda
Smith motioned, Perry seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as
presented. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye",
Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously. ·
A. Bids and Purchase Orders:
9. Ordinances
P.O. #47824 - Rain
fittings
for Rent - Pumps,
pipes and
A. The ~ouncil considered adoption of an ordinance providing
for the expenditure of funds for emergency purchases of materials,
equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the provisions
of state law exempting such purchases from requirements of
competitive bids. (4.A.1. - P.O. #47824)
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 94-186
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR 'THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR
EMERGENCY PURCHASES OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES- OR
SERVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW
EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE
BIDS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
merry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the~ordinance, on roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving
guidelines for operation of the City of Denton Homeowner
Rehabilitation Program and eligibility criteria and authorizing
expenditures in excess of $15,000 for projects meeting' program
guidelines and criteria.
Nancy Baker, Housing Rehabilitation Specialist, stated that there
was a State statute which required City expenditures for projects
and purchases in excess of $15,000 to be authorized by the City
council. Rehabilitation projects were approved by Council in the
1994 Final Statement. Guidelines for homeowner rehabilitation
programs delineate eligibility criteria for both client selection
and project expenditures. Approval of this ordinance would provide
the Community Development Office with compliance with the State
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 23
statute.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 94-187
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS,
APPROVING GUIDELINES FOR OPERATION OF THE CITY OF DENTON
HOMEOWNER REHABILITATION PROGRAM AND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA;
AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURES IN EXCESS OF $15,000 FOR PROJECTS
MEETING PROGRAM GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA; AND PROVIDING FORAN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Perry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
. C. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving
guidelines for operation of the City. of Denton Opt~ogal
Reconstruction Program and eligibility criteria and authorizing
expenditures in excess of $15,000 for projects meeting program
guidelines and criteria.
Nancy Baker, Housfng Rehabilitation Specialist, stated that this
was approval for the optional reconstruction program which the City
had just added to its services. There were now £unds available to
demolish and reconstruct a structure. This would put the City in
compliance with the State statute.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 94-188
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY CoUNCIL OF THE CfTY OF DENTON, TEXAS,
APPROVING GUIDELINES FOR OPERATION OF THE CITY OF DENTON
OPTIONAL RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAM AND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA;
AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURES IN EXCESS OF $15,000 FOR PROJECTS
MEETING PROGRAM GUI~.~LINES AND CRITERIA; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Smith motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance, on roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving
new rate schedules for Texas Utilities Electrio Company; providing
an effective date therefor; providing conditions under which such
rate schedules may be changed, modified, amended, or withdrawn;
1 3'8
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 24
finding and determining that the meeting at which this ordinance is
passed is open to the public as required by law; and declaring an
emergency.
Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that in June,
Texas Utilities had filed for four rate increases. On July 5,
Council suspended that rate increase pending the Pubic Utilities
Commission's review. The Public Utilities Commission had not made
a ruling at this time and the 90 day suspension was over. Staff
was recommending that the Council approve the rates to the extent
that the Public Utilities Co~mission approved such rates. This
procedure was in keeping with all other Texas Utility rate
increases.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 94-189
AN ORDINANCEAPPROVING NEW RATE SCHEDULES FOR TEXAS UTILITIES
ELECTRIC COMPANY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE THEREFOR;
PROVIDING CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH SUCH RATE SCHEDULES MAY BE
CHANGED, MODIFIED, AMENDED OR WITHDRAWN; FINDING AND
DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICHTHIS ORDINANCE IS PASSED
IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY.
Brock motioned, Cott seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye-, Perry"aye-, and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
E. The COuncil considered adoption of an ordinance accepting
the dedication from James D. Lynch and wife, Joyce Lynch of Lots 6,
7, 8, and 9, Block G, of Avondale Addition, Sect~ion Three in the
City of Denton, Denton County, Texas for public park purposes
subject to conditions regarding delinquent ad valorem taxes. (The
Planning and Zoning Commission and the Parks and Recreation Board
recommended approval.)
Micki Oland, Park Planning Coordinator, stated that the Parks aha
Recreation Board had recommend approval to allow the City to accept
the dedicat'ion of 1.6 acres to be used for park purposes adjacent
to Avondale Park. The property consisted of four lots in the 100
year flood plain. There was $7,000 outstanding taxes due on the
property, $2,000 of.which were City taxes. The owners were willing
to. dedicate the property to the City and take a Personal judgement
for the County and DISD taxes. In accepting the dedication, the
City would agree to not pursue its portion of the taxes. The
dedication would provide the Parks Department additional access
139
city of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 25
from Churchill and open space for the park. If approved, this
would be the second dedication since the 1989 park dedication
requirement.
Council Member Perry stated that there was a flood way ~hrough that
area. In order to get from one part to the other, the flood way
would have to be crossed. He asked what the Parks Department was
planning to do about that situation.
Oland stated that a low water crossing would have to be installed
to get across. Funding would not allow the City to span the 100
year flood plain.
Mayor Castleberry asked the City Attorney if there was any possible
recourse for the other taxes from the DISD and County. If the
property was accepted, could the DISD and County sue the City for
the taxes.
city Attorney Drayovitch stated that that was a technical
possibility.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 94-190
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING THE DEDICATION FROM JAMES D. LYNCH AND
WIFE, JOYCE LYNCH OF LOTS 6, 7, 8, AND 9, BLOCK G, OF AVONDALE
ADDITION, SECTION THREE, IN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY,
TEXAS FOR PUBLIC PARK PURPOSES SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS REGARDING
DELINQUENT ADVALOREMTAXES; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", ~mith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
10. Resolutions
A. The Council considered approval of a resolution re-
adopting the Denton Development Plan. (The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval.)
Harry Persuad, senior Planner, stated that this plan had last been
approved'by Council on September 1988. Since then, staff, Planning
and Zoning and Council bad been using the plan for daily use in
zoning decisions. The plan provided for a three step update
procedure and had been amended thirteen times over the years.
There was an annual procedure to reconfirm that this was the master
plan to be used for zoning decisions and land use. Approval of the
140
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 26
proposed resolution would reconfirm that the plan was the policy
for the City for the next year. It also pointed out that the
Visions Project would be used for the major update.
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R94-059
A RESOLUTION RE-ADOPTING THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT PLAN; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, Perry seconded to approve the resolution. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
11. The Council considered a nomination to the Human Services
Committee.
council Member Perry nominated Larry Nicholson to the Human
Services Committee.
12. Vision Update
Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that the Cabinet met earlier in the day
to make final plans for the Impact Group presentations which would
begin this Thursday. These would be reports to the community and
was also a chance to receive public input on the issues. The
Cabinet would be holding a retreat on November 11-12 to review all
issues.
13. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
A. The City had received a notice that north bound I35E
would be closed between 7:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. for installing of
bridge beams on Teasley Lane.
14. There was no official action taken on Closed Meeting Items
discussed during the Work Session.
15. New Business
The following items of New Business were suggested by Council
Members for future agendas:
A. Mayor Pro Tem Brock suggested scheduling a discussion on
how the Council agendas were made. In looking over the Council's
new rules of procedure, there was a need to do further clarifying.
She was not clear on how an item was placed on an agenda and what
was the role of the Agenda Committee. Did the Agenda Committee
' 141
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 4, 1994
Page 27
merely shuffle items around on the agenda or did it determine what
would be on the agenda. If it had the second role, she would like
the Council to consider rotating membership fairly frequently to
make the process fairer to individual Council Members.
B. Mayor Castleberry suggested that Council consider a
resolution or a letter from Council thanking the Fire Department
and the Chief for their efforts during the two days of fires. He
also asked about the establishment of a reserve group of fire
fighters.
16. The Council did not hold a Closed Meeting during the Regular
Session.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
W TERS
SF~ZRETARY
OF DENTON, TEXAS
CITY OF DENTON, T
ACC00217