Minutes January 3, 1995304
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
January 3, 1995
The Council convened into a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, January 3,
1995 at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members
Chew, Cott, Perry, and Miller.
ABSENT: Council Member Smith
1. The Council considered the following in a Closed Meeting:
A. Legal Matters -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.071
Held a discussion regarding GTE's response to the
letter of December 21, 1994, to J. Cody Wilbanks
from the Acting City Attorney.
B. Real Estate -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.072
Held a discussion regarding acquisition of property
for expansion of the City's landfill.
Held a discussion regarding lease of property for
additional parking for the DMC from Union Pacific
Railroad.
Personnel/Board Appointments -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE
Sec. 551.074
The Council convened into a Work Session on Tuesday, January 3,
1995 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members
Chew, Cott, Perry, and Miller.
ABSENT: Council Member Smith
1. The Council received a report concerning TMPA's power sales
agreement with the city.
city Manager Harrell stated that this item was placed on the Work
Session to update ongoing discussions the staff was having with
TMPA, specifically the desire of the member cities to achieve some
type of flexibility with the power sales agreement to allow the
cities to explore other alternatives available to meet current and
future energy needs. The City had communicated to TMPA by letter
on December 20, 1994 its desire to develop proposed amendment~
language to acquire the desired flexibility while at the same time
assuring the bond holders that all of the existing obligations
would be honored by the various cities. TMPA had responded by
letter on December 22, 1994 and indicated that various individuals
had met to discuss the proposal. There was a general indication
305
city of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 2
that some progress had been made and an amendment might be
possible. He had received a fax indicating the first proposed
amendment language as proposed by TMPA counsel which would allow
the member cities the desired flexibility while at the same time
protect the bond holder. Page 2 of the fax talked about the way
the lawyers envisioned the amendment. They suggested that the
individual cities be given the opportunity to review the proposed
language and revise it where needed. After review by TMPA's legal
counsel, final precise language would be drafted and submitted to
the TMPA Board of Directors. Page 3 of the fax indicated a
procedure in which the Board would adopt a resolution approving the
amendment conditioned upon the occurrence of several events. Those
events were quite detailed and were a cause for some concern. He
was concerned that although the amendment seemed to get to the
point wanted, there needed to be more dialog with TMPA to come to
an understanding why this type of procedure was needed rather than
a declara%ion of a project with the cities having the ability to
decline to participate in the project. It appeared that they were
at the point to have a genuine willingness to try to develop a
procedure to allow the flexibility which was needed by the cities
but how to reach that point was still needing more discussion. He
felt that this was positive news and positive movement toward such
a process of flexibility.
Council Member Miller asked what was the next step in this process.
city Manager Harrell felt that the next step would be to contact
the other member cities and take a leadership role to direct how to
proceed with this process. If the cities were willing to proceed,
TMPA would arrange a meeting between the lawyers involved and the
cities to discuss the issue. No action was needed by Council at
this point unless someone was uncomfortable with the direction it
was going.
Council Member Miller felt that the process described by the
lawyers could be pursued and perhaps finally settled. If that
aspect did not work, then the other aspect of declining a project
could be pursued. He felt that one avenue dealt with the symptoms
and one avenue dealt with the cause of the problem.
City Manager Harrell felt that either procedure was a means to
reach an end. Whatever seemed to work best and left the City less
liable to any legal problems would be the avenue to follow. There
was a need to find out if the Drocess were started with an
amendment and one of the conditions could not be met, would the
declaring of a project then subject the cities to more legal
problems.
306
city of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 3
Council Member Cott felt that there was a need to separate the
money and electricity.
2. The Council received a report and gave staff direction
concerning an upcoming bond sale.
Kathy DuBose, Executive Director for Finance, stated that the bond
sale would consist of general obligation bonds and certificates of
obligation and would take place on February 21, 1995. Originally
it was anticipated that $1,634,750 of general obligation bonds
would have to be issued. As the City only issued in $5,000
increments, it was anticipated that $1,635,000 of bonds would have
to be sold. During the City's annual audit, it was found that
approximately $25,000 of interest earnings would be available to
complete one of the projects and it was now recommended that
$25,000 less be issued that originally indicated. Certificates of
obligation were to be sold for solid waste expenditures for the
1995-96 fiscal year. It was anticipated that $1,682,000 would be
used and the first quarter of the following year would use
$1,360,000. Not all of that debt would be issued at this point in
time with only $2,000,000 being issued. $1,942,000 would be issued
to actual projects and $58,000 for bond issuance costs. The
$1,100,000 designated for property acquisition would not be sold at
this time to help keep the solid waste rates down at this time.
Part of the funds would be used to reimburse $310,000 which was
designated as reimbursable by the Council in October of 1994.
There would be a bond rating trip on February 9-10 to New York
city.
Mayor Castleberry asked for a Council representative to go on the
trip.
Council Member Chew indicated that he would like to attend.
After discussion, Council Member Chew indicated that as Mayor Pro
Tem Brock had not attended a bond rating trip, he would like to see
her attend.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock indicated that she was not interested in
attending at this time.
Council Member Chew indicated that he would then like to go on the
trip.
Council returned to the Closed Session in the Civil Defense Room.
307
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 4
The Council convened into a Regular Meeting on Tuesday, January 3,
1995 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members
Chew, Cott, Perry, and Miller.
ABSENT: Council Member Smith
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 with regard to a
proposed annexation and zoning of a 199.5 acre tract located east
of Mayhill Road and north of Edwards Road. (A-64)
Harry Persuad, Senior Planner, stated that the purpose of this
annexation was to expand the City's landfill operations. This was
the first of a series of public hearings scheduled in accordance
with the State law and the City Charter. The purpose of the
hearing was to receive input from interested parties in the matter.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
No one spoke in favor.
Roger Crawford asked for the time frame for the expansion and
questioned the need for such an expansion. He felt it would be
many years before the area near Mayhill and Edwards would be
needed.
Howard Martin, Director of Environmental Operations, stated that
this site would be approximately 155 acres. It was anticipated
that it would be a 35 year site and the time frame depended on the
closure of the existing site which was anticipated to be mid-1997.
Crawford stated that the size of the property was approximately 200
acres and asked what was going to be done with the remainder of the
site.
Martin stated that the 155 acres would include all the land from
Foster Road to Edwards Road and would then follow the wastewater
interceptors up the tributary. The entire 199.5 acres would not be
used as a landfill site.
308
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 5
Crawford asked if the property he was interested in would not be
needed for the landfill. He asked why the City would want to
include that property and suggested using it as a buffer between
the landfill and the existing mobile home park. He felt that his
property would be outside the requirements of the landfill and
could be left out of the proposal.
Martin replied that the whole idea of the area which the City was
trying to permit was to maximize the amount of landfill space
available.
Crawford stated that he understood that the actual landfill would
follow the drainage and felt that the people in the mobile home
park would like some type of buffer. His property would be a good
buffer between the landfill and the mobile home park. He asked
that the property be removed from the proposal.
City Manager Harrell stated that the action being proposed at this
meeting dealt with the annexation of the property. To acquire the
property was not contingent on the annexation. Mr. Crawford's
points could be considered by staff.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
The item did not require action at this point in time.
B. The Council held a public hearing with regard to a
proposed annexation of a 1.1 acre tract located on and being the
east part of the right-of-way of Corbin Road. (A-68)
Harry Persuad, Senior Planner, stated that this proposal dealt with
a 1.1 acre tract being the east portion of the right-of-way of
Corbin Road. That portion of Corbin Road was currently in the
County. There was a situation in the area with a low water
crossing in which the City proposed to close the road after
annexation. There were some homes in the area with one recently
built and one under construction. Eight homes would be affected
with the closure. Two existing homes would not be affected as they
were before the low water crossing.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Lyle T. Whitworth asked that the Council not close the road as it
would devaluate his property, increase crime, isolate all of his
neighbors, and reroute the mail, the newspaper plus the school bus.
It would also increase response time for public service vehicles
and turn the area into a dump ground which would pollute the City
309
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 6
water in the area. There was already a problem in the area and if
the road was closed there would be more problems.
Janie Whitworth stated that the road needed to remain open with the
gates maintained until a suitable way was found to fund the road.
At this time there was no urgent need to close the road as there
were not many times when the road was under water. Corbin Road was
located in the area of Airport Road which was a manufacturing area.
Employees of the businesses used the area daily. Corbin Road was
their main outlet from their homes and nine households and eleven
property owners would be affected with the closure. Four heart
patients were in the area which might be affected if the road were
closed. The road was vital to the residents and she felt that
the City could find funding for an alternative method rather than
close the road. She asked the Council to maintain the gates
rather than close the road.
Robert Hammer stated that he had recently built a home in the area
and that another home was being built west of his home. One reason
he purchased the property was that they liked Denton and the area
seemed to be growing. The vacant property in the area seemed to be
prime property for a growing business. If the City wanted to
attract business to the area, it needed to make improvements to the
road and enhance the area rather than close the road which would be
a detriment to the area. A letter he had received regarding the
annexation did not give an explanation as to why the City wanted to
annex the area and close the road.
City Manager Harrell stated that there were two concerns regarding
the area. One was that there was somewhat dangerous situation
regarding a low water crossing in the area. If for some reason, the
gates were not closed properly or the timing was not right, there
was the potential for a problem. There had been some incidents in
the past where the city was making large settlements because of
unsafe conditions connected with the low water crossing. The
second reason was that to eliminate the low water crossing which
'would be a very expensive project with an estimate of approximately
$1 million to bridge the crossing. Currently the residential
density in that area did not justify that level of expenditure to
fix the problem.
Hammer replied that the residential or commercial density might
improve if the road were improved. A bridge constructed in the
area would eliminate the liability conditions. The City, as a
municipality, would not be liable for more than $100,000 in a suit.
He asked that if the City Council voted on this issue this evening,
that they table the issue to be able to look into the estimate for
310
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 7
the bridge. The cost of building the bridge would be justified in
connection with the City's efforts to improve the Airport.
Jackye Havenhill stated that this issue was of great concern to
her. She felt that the area could be dangerous but could also be
beautiful. She felt it would be a crime to shut it off from the
rest of the community and asked that the road not be closed. The
extra distance was not great but felt that it was unnecessary to
close the road. No one would build close the creek and felt that
the area should be deannexed which would release the City of the
responsibility of the road. Closing the road would hurt more than
help.
John Gandy stated that he and his wife use Corbin Road to go to
work everyday. If the road were closed, he would have to take all
of his farm equipment another route to get to his farm property.
His suggestion was that if there was not enough money to maintain
the gates that they should be taken down and a high water sign put
up.
Allen Norman stated that he owned one of the two farms in the area.
The people who leased his property were not in favor of closing the
road. There were 11 homes which would be affected as there was
farm property on both sides of the road and would have to go around
to get to the property. If the city closed the road, he asked what
type of commitment the city would have to maintain the north side
of the road. What was being discussed was not progress as the
City was merely saying that it had annexed an area and was not
willing to maintain the area. He appealed to the Council's pride to
improve the road properly with the needed bridge and not close the
road.
Terri Meador stated that she had purchased property in the area.
She selected this property due to the accessibility to I35 to go to
her job. She had had good service from the city in the area due to
the accessibility of the property. She recently had gotten caught
in the high water in the area and had received good help from the
rescue people. She asked what was the cost to maintain the current
gates.
Mayor Castleberry stated that one of the concerns was that human
error might not close gates when needed.
Persuad stated that it cost $7,000 per year to keep gates open and
closed.
Meador replied that that was a small price to pay for the 11 ~-~
311
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 8
families to have access to their homes.
Scott Hudson stated that he represented the owner of the 166 acres
between Underwood and Corbin Road. If Corbin Road were closed, it
would have a future impact on the marketability of the property.
Without Corbin Road access, the property on Corbin Road would have
a significant reduction in value.
Mike Riley stated that he was opposed to the closing of the road.
There was a lot of traffic in the area and felt that the usage was
from the businesses in the area. Corbin was a better road than
Underwood Road for usage. Signs might help in addition to the
gates in the low water crossing area. He was concerned that there
would be an increased incidence of illegal dumping in the area if
Corbin Road were closed.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock pointed out that the annexation schedule
allowed for a second public hearing on January 17th with final
action to be taken on March 21st.
Council Member Cott stated that he had discussed the issue with the
neighbors and discussed various alternatives for the area realizing
that no one in the area lived in the city limits and the Denton
taxpayers would have to pay for any alternatives. He recommended
that the entire area be considered for annexation to determine how
much money that would bring the City.
Council Member Perry asked how the individuals living on Corbin
Road would be able to leave the area.
Persuad pointed out on a map how the affected residents would come
and go from the area. Springside and Underwood Roads would be used
instead of Corbin Road resulting in an additional 1.1 miles to
travel. The existing homes on Underwood would have minimal impact.
Because of the low water crossing, it was unlikely that commercial
development would occur in the area.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that the second public hearing would be
on January 17th.
3. Consent Agenda
Perry motioned, Chew seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as
presented. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye",
Chew "aye"~ Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion
312
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 9
carried unanimously.
ae
Bids and Purchase Orders:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Bid ~1693 - Fleet vehicles
Bid #1694 - 12 CY Dump Truck
Bid #1698 - Vibratory Roller
Bid #1699 - Fleet Wash Service
Bid #1702 - Tractor with sideboom Mower
Bid #1703 - Trencher and Trailer
Bid ~1700 - Jim christal Road Paving and Drainage
Phase II
P.O. ~52157 & 52158 - Paradigm/Transyt Traffic
Controllers
4. Ordinances
Council considered the Consent Agenda Ordinances A-C. Perry
motioned, Cott seconded to adopt Consent Agenda Ordinances A-C. On
roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
A. NO. 95-001
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A
CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR
SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (3.A.1. - Bid #1693, 3.A.2. - Bid
#1694, 3.A.3. - Bid #1698, 3.A.4. - Bid ~1699, 3.A.5. - Bid #1702,
3.A.6. - Bid #1703)
B. NO. 95-002
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A
CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR
SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (3.A.7. - Bid #1700)
C. NO. 95-003
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR
PURCHASE OF MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE AVAILABLE FROM ONLY
ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING
SUCH PURCHASE FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (3.A.8. - P.O. # 52157 & 52158)
313
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 10
D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance accepting
the dedication by Hersman Development Corporation, Verl Lybbert,
Chris Lybbert and Katherine Lybbert of .273 acres of land located
on the east side of Teasley Lane (F.M. 2181) at the intersection of
Teasley Lane and Lillian Miller for street and utility purposes.
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that as the Teasley Road
project began, it was discovered that there would be a need for a
traffic area to be built as part of the construction of the
intersection at Teasley Lane and Lillian Miller Parkway. In
discussions with Mr. Hersman as well as the Texas Department of
Transportation, an agreement was worked out whereby Mr. Hersman
dedicated the amount of land needed for TxDot to build a right-turn
lane for future improvements of the area. This was a win-win
situation for the City, for Mr. Hersman and for TxDot.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-004
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING THE DEDICATION BY HERSMAN DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, VERL LYBBERT, CHRIS LYBBERT AND KATHERINE LYBBERT
OF .273 ACRES OF LAND FOR STREET AND UTILITY PURPOSES; AND
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Miller motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement between the City of
Denton and the City of Roanoke for the impoundment and disposition
of dogs and cats and the collection of fees pursuant to the
provisions of said agreement.
Nonie Kull, Environmental Health Services Manager, stated that this
was the third year that Roanoke had asked for City services in this
area. The Roanoke City Council had agreed to the proposal.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-005
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE CITY OF ROANOKE FOR THE
IMPOUNDMENT AND DISPOSITION OF DOGS AND CATS AND THE
COLLECTION OF FEES PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SAID
314
City of Denton city Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 11
AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Cott motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
F. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute, on behalf of the City of Denton,
an interlocal agreement with Denton County for the provision of
services associated with the holding and disposition of dogs and
cats for Denton County; and authorizing City personnel to collect
fees pursuant to the provision of said agreement.
Nonie Kull, Environmental Health Services Manager, stated that this
was the eleventh year of this agreement. Both the County and the
City were comfortable with the arrangements which would net the
City approximately $22,000.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked if Denton provided such services for any
other municipalities.
Kull replied not at this time but that the City had done such in
the past on a temporary basis.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked if the city staff went into the County to
provide services or if the County brought animals to the City
facility.
Kull replied that the County had its own animal program and own
officers. The City merely housed the animals and provided
disposition of the animals.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-006
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO. EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND DENTON COUNTY FOR THE
IMPOUNDMENT AND DISPOSITION OF DOGS AND CATS AND THE
COLLECTION OF FEES PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SAID
AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Cott motioned, Miller seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
voter Bro~k "aye", Cott "aye"v Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
315
city of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 12
G. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance creating
an offense for urinating or defecating in public and providing for
a penalty in the maximum amount of $200.00.
Acting City Attorney Mike Bucek stated that this ordinance involved
a prosecution issue. Usually an indecent exposure charged was
filed but there were cases where an individual might not be
indecently exposed but still the performing act.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-007
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, CREATING AN OFFENSE
FOR URINATING OR DEFECATING IN PUBLIC; PROVIDING FOR A DEFENSE
TO PROSECUTION OF THIS VIOLATION; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN
THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $200.00; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
H. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract between the city
of Denton and Kelly, Hart & Hallman for professional legal services
associated with the landfill permitting process.
Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that in
approximately 6-8 weeks, the City would need to file the permit for
the new landfill. As part of the process, it was appropriate to
have outside legal assistance to help the City through the legal
process to file the permit. Staff had interviewed four firms for
the contract and selected Kelly, Hart & Hallman. The firm had
agreed to put a cap of $25,000 on a non-contested landfill
application.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that the firm which the staff was
recommending did not have any specific experience listed in
permitting a landfill.
Nelson replied that most of the experience of their staff members
had been in the Houston and Central Texas area. Many of their
a~tiviti~ d~alt with Exxon landfill sites and medical hazardous
landfill sites. This firm was highly recommended from those in the
field.
316
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 13
Council Member Cott asked where the permit was going to be filed.
Nelson replied that it would be
Resources Conservation Commission.
regarding the permit.
filed with the Texas Natural
There would be public hearings
Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that in view of the recent public
statements regarding the emission control process, would it be wise
to wait to see if there would be any changes in the regulatory
requirements on other environmental issues.
Nelson replied that he wished he had the liberty to do so. The
current landfill would be at capacity by the summer of 1997 and it
would take a period of time to prepare the site after the City
received the permit.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-008
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A
CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTONAND KELLY, HART & HALLMAN
FOR PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LANDFILL
PERMITTING PROCESS; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS
THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
5. Resolutions
A. The Council considered approval of a resolution
authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with the
Department of Transportation, United States of America, for a grant
under the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended.
Jomeph Portugal, Ammimtant to the City Manage~, mtated that on
December 7th the Federal Transit Administration notified the City
of Denton that its urban formula grant in the amount of $422,189
had been approved. This funding would be used to subsidize public
transportation services in the City. The funding included $40,187
for planning, $215,250 for operations and $161,600 for capital.
Also included in the grant was $5,152 in congestion mitigation air
quality funds to fund a three year demonstration project known as
the Ozone Alert Program.
317
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 14
Council Member Chew left the meeting with a potential conflict of
interest as he was a member of the Board of Directors for SPAN.
Council Member Cott stated that he had a problem with such grants
in that at some point in time, the City might have to pay for the
program as it might not receive the grant at a future time.
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R95-001
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA, FOR A GRANT UNDER THE URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION
ACT OF 1964, AS AMENDED; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Miller motioned, Perry seconded to approve the resolution. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott "nay", Miller "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 4-1 vote.
Council Member Chew returned to the meeting.
B. The Council considered approval of a resolution giving
General Telephone of the Southwest, sixty days notice as required
by Section XV of the franchise agreement to produce records
previously requested of GTE by Resolution Number R94-071 and by the
City Manager in his letter of February 10, 1994, pursuant to
Section XVII of the franchise relating to the inspection of records
necessary to audit GTE's franchise fee payments to the city.
Acting City Attorney Mike Bucek stated that an earlier resolution
addressed the issue of the audit of the franchise fees attempted by
the auditor. GTE failed to supply various requested records and as
a result, the auditor was not able to fully complete the audit. As
a result of that, the City Manager made several inquiries in an
attempt to get those records and was unsuccessful in that attempt.
The prior resolution, approved by Council, again requested records
and provided for a thirty day time frame. If no records were
received in that time frame, Council directed staff to return with
the proposed resolution.
Council Member Cott felt that Denton had a wonderful quality of
life and was a business friendly City. He did not want to have
law~uit~ with compani~ which w~r~ n~d~d in th~ City unl~s~ it was
necessary. This would be the second Fortune 500 lawsuit in the
last three years. He felt the Council needed to watch that and
think of that.
318
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 15
Don Williams, GTE, wanted to clarify some statements he had made to
Council at an earlier meeting, especially regarding an accounting
manual. The FCC set the accounting rules for the industry. The
accounting rules designed by the FCC were codified in their rules
and were public information and available upon request from the
FCC. GTE normally did not provide such a manual as it was readily
available from the FCC. Another misstatement was that GTE had
stated that it would not provide the access revenue which had been
requested because GTE did not feel it was relevant. GTE had never
claimed that the City was not entitled to reasonable compensation.
GTE felt that the City should live by the contract it had signed
with GTE as GTE had consistently complied with those provisions.
Neither the staff nor the consultant ever provided GTE
documentation or pointed to language specifically in this contract
that clearly stated that toll access revenues should be included in
the base. That was the reason that GTE was not providing the
information. It was not relevant to this particular contract. If
staff or the consultant could produce such language or
documentation, GTE would reconsider its position.
Melvin Willis, GTE, requested that Council take no action at this
time in order to allow time for staff to provide to GTE
documentation that access revenues were intended to be in the
contract fee base of the present contract. GTE would like to work
with the City to find a solution which both sides could support
instead of taking the inflexible position that the City should sue
GTE unless it provided the requested records.
Miller motioned, Cott seconded to postpone the resolution until
such time as when the staff could meet with the staff of GTE and
clear up the issue of access and whether it was really intended
that it be part of the contract. He was concerned about some audit
information which the city may or may not have received. On roll
vote, Brock "nay", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "nay", Perry
"nay", and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion failed with a 2-4 vote.
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R95-002
A RESOLUTION GIVING GENERAL TELEPHONE OF THE SOUTHWEST, SIXTY
DAYS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION XV OF THE FRANCHISE
AGREEMENT TO PRODUCE RECORDS PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED OF GTE BY
RESOLUTION NO. R94-071 AND BY THE CITY MANAGER IN HIS LETTER
OF FEBRUARY 10, 1994 PURSUANT TO SECTION VII OF THE FRANCHISE
RELATING TO THE INSPECTION OF RECORDS NECESSARY TO AUDIT GTE'S
FRANCHISE FEE PAYMENTS TO THE CITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
319
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 16
Perry motioned, Chew seconded to approve the resolution.
Council Member Miller stated that in 1989 there was an audit and at
that time there may have been some question about whether long
distance access information should be included in the base. It was
not and prior Councils had chosen to not include it until this
point. This resolution went back to 1988 and stated that GTE
should have included that access so that they were in default. The
resolution even asked to go back and audit from 1983 to 1988. If
the resolution asked for an audit of what was known and could be
agreed on at this point which had been covered and also continued
to talk about whether long distance access should be included, he
would be in favor of such a resolution. He felt the proposed
resolution clouded the issue and that the request was not for a
clear cut audit.
Council Member Cott stated that the City received the money and the
citizens paid the fee. He felt that that needed to be resolved
before such a resolution was passed. Once such a resolution was
passed, the Council had to be prepared to sue. He suggested that
the Council delay action and relook at the issue.
Council Member Miller stated that at the last work session he had
asked if it were possible to request that GTE to break out the
information from the 2% which was known to be collected and have
the area in dispute as a separate audit item. He asked if anything
had been done regarding that request.
Acting City Attorney Bucek stated that the audit request dealt with
an audit of what the Charter stated was 2% of the gross receipts.
Council Member Miller and Cott had talked about an audit of what
just the rate payer was paying but the issue was broader than just
what the rate payer was paying. The issue included had GTE
collected from certain long distance carriers, fees that if were
collected, would reduce the demand on the taxpayers.
Council Member Miller stated that his bill indicated 2% of a
municipal franchise fee. GTE was saying that that was all that was
due to the City. He was not saying that that was right or wrong.
He was asking for an audit to break out that the City was receiving
that 2%. Since it had not been asked for separately, he could not
be certain that that funds had been transferred to the City.
Bucek replied that the Droblem was that in all communications with
GTE, they had never relayed a way to do such an audit. They never
showed a willingness to produce anything additional other than what
the City already had. From the information which the auditor had
32O
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 17
at this point, he could not determine if the 2% fee had been
appropriately remitted to the City which was collected by GTE. GTE
had never been willing to produce any additional records.
Council Member Miller stated that he had previously asked if the
information had been asked for separately and the answer was no.
He asked if it was possible to do that. It was his understanding
that those two issues had never been separated and that the audit
was a complete total audit including the area in dispute.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that her recollection of the discussion
was that Council Member Miller had asked the auditor from Reed
Stowe if he could make that request and his answer was that he
could do that. Could the City ask for documentation that the 2%
which appeared on the phone bill which had been collected from the
customers been turned over to the city. That was an important
separate issue.
City Manager Harrell stated that staff had not been directed at
this point to pursue in that manner. Reed Stowe had not been
specifically asked to make an additional request for information
from GTE. There were several pieces of information included in the
list of documents asked for which GTE was unwilling to furnish.
Because of that unwillingness, the auditor, at this point, was
saying that he could not certify either the 2% nor answer the
question of what should be included in the 2% base. The auditor
would review any information in the list of documents asked for
which from GTE that they felt would help determine whether the 2%
had been paid. Council had not directed the auditors to take that
action.
Mayor Castleberry stated that the City had not received a reply to
the most recent letter sent to GTE and felt that GTE might be
ignoring the City.
On roll vote to approve the resolution, Brock "aye", Cott "nay",
Miller "nay", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye".
Motion carried with a 4-2 vote.
C. The Council considered approval of a resolution approving
an interlocal agreement with the County of Denton for ambulance
services.
City Manager Harrell stated that the Council had had a previous
discussion regarding this issue. The formula for this year had
been revised so as to be more beneficial to the City of Denton.
321
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 18
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R95-003
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INTERLOCAL AMBULANCE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND DENTON COUNTY FOR AMBULANCE
SERVICES; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Perry motioned, Chew seconded to approve the resolution. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
D. The Council considered approval of a resolution asking
Representative-Elect Burt Solomons to request an Attorney General
opinion regarding the constitutionality of the State's statue
allowing charitable solicitations in roadways (Art. 6701d Sec.
Sl(c)V.A.C.S) .
Acting City Attorney Mike Bucek stated that at a prior council
meeting, Council had asked staff to pursue an Attorney General's
opinion regarding this issue. Staff had taken the opportunity to
wait until after the November election to make sure who would be
representing Denton. Representative Solomons was willing to pursue
this matter on behalf of the city. This procedure was needed as a
city could only request an Attorney General's opinion on the Open
Records Act. All other requests for an opinion had to be made by
a State official.
Council Member Cott asked why the Council would want to do this.
Why not write the law and have it challenged or not challenged.
Bucek replied that there was some concern that if the state statute
was invalid and the City passed such an ordinance, it would have
some liability. If the Attorney General ruled that the provision
was constitutional, the City would have a good faith challenge.
Ken Gold stated that he was glad to see some action on this issue.
At first he felt it was merely a delaying issue but now saw it as
a favorable means to resolve the issue. Fill-the-Boot was a safe
and effective means to help the MS organization. The problem was
not the state law but the local ordinance.
The following resolution was considered:
322
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 19
NO. R95-004
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING REPRESENTATIVE-ELECT BURT SOLOMONS TO
SEEK AN ATTORNEY GENERAl'S OPINION REGARDING THE
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE STATE STATUTE ALLOWING CHARITABLE
SOLICITATIONS IN THE ROADWAYS (ARTICLE 6701d, SECTION 81(C)
V.A.C.S.); AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Miller motioned, Perry seconded to approve the resolution. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
6. The Council considered a nomination to the Keep Denton
Beautiful Board.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that Council Member Cott had previously
nominated Doug Ebersole.
On roll vote, Brock "aye" Cott "aye" Miller "aye" Chew "aye"
Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimouslY.
7. The Council considered selection of a Teen Court Board of
Directors.
City Manager Harrell stated that this item had been discussed at
the Council's last study session. Staff was asking that two
individuals be appointed by the various sponsoring agencies.
Council Member Chew suggested the president of LULAC and the NAACP
or their designees.
Council Member Perry suggested Harlan Jefferson.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked if Jefferson would have any ongoing
official function as a City staff member.
City Manager Harrell stated that the teen court would be a stand
alone, not-for-profit organization and would be separate from the
City of Denton.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that she was concerned that with the
appointments suggested by Council Member Chew, the Teen Court would
be seen as a primarily minority activity. She was not comfortable
with leaving the appointment to be designated "or his designee."
323
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 20
Council Member Miller nominated Dalton Gregory subject to his
acceptance.
Council Member Perry indicated support of the idea by Council
Member Chew but favored only one of the proposed organizations.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock seconded Council Member Perry's recommendation
to appoint Harlan Jefferson to the Board.
Council Member Chew felt that statistics indicated that African
Americans and Mexican Americans would be predominant in the Teen
Court and felt that the Board needed to be represented by one of
those organizations. He nominated Carl Williams to the Board.
After discussion, it was determined that each Council Member would
vote twice on the three nominees of Carl Williams, Harlan Jefferson
and Dalton Gregory. If not voting for a nominee, the Council
Member would abstain.
On roll vote for Harlan Jefferson, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller
"aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor CastleberrY "aye".
On roll vote for Carl Williams, Brock "abstain", Cott "abstain",
Miller "abstain", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry
"aye" .
On roll vote for Dalton Gregory, Brock "aye", Cott "abstain",
Miller "aye", Chew "abstain", Perry "abstain", and Mayor
Castleberry "abstain".
Mayor Castleberry indicated that Harlan Jefferson and Carl Williams
would be the Board representatives.
8. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
A. The Council received a report concerning the latest
honorees added to the Wall of Honor.
city Manager Harrell stated that 33 letters had been added during
the last quarter. Those letters had been included in the Council's
back-up materials.
B. There would be no meeting on the 10th of January.
C. The Texas Municipal League was holding a legislative
briefing on Monday, February 6th. This would be a time for lunch
with Denton's legislative delegation.
324
City of Denton City Council Minutes
January 3, 1995
Page 21
9. There was no official action taken on Closed Meeting Items
considered during the Work Session.
10. New Business
There were no items of New Business suggested by Council Members
for future agendas.
11. The Council did not convene into the Closed Meeting during the
Regular Session.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourn at 8:57 p.m.
Y ~ECRETARY
Y OF DENTON, TEXAS
BOB~B~~
CITY OF DENTON, TEXA~ ~
ACC0023A