Loading...
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