Minutes August 15, 1995295
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
August 15, 1995
The Council convened into the Work Session on Tuesday, August 15,
1995 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Biles; Council Members
Brock, Miller and Young.
ABSENT: Council Members Cott and Krueger.
1. The Council received reports and held discussions regarding
the following budget hearings:
Council Member Cott joined the meeting.
Council Member Young stated that the people in his district wanted
to supply the Mayor with a knife to work with the municipal pie.
His district represented 16.7% of the City and he wanted them to
get their "slice of the pie"
Municipal Services
MuniciDal Services/Economic Development - Linda Ratliff, Economic
Development Coordinator, detailed the functions of the MS/ED office
and how the office coordinated with the Chamber Economic Develop-
ment Office. The proposed budget for the next fiscal year was the
same as in past years. They were requesting benefits for their
part-time secretary and would be reclassifying the position to a
regular part-time position. This position was difficult to recruit
when there were no. benefits.
Council Member Krueger joined the meeting.
Library - Eva Poole, Director of Library Services, stated that the
library provided a valuable service to the community. Her budget
contained four supplemental packages. Additional funding was
requested to purchase contracted maintenance to insure the overall
integrity of the automated system and to receive maximum return on
the investment. Maintenance would provide continued service for
hardware, software, telecommunication equipment, the central
processing unit, technical support, etc. The Support Services
Division reflected a 3% increase over last year's budget. Funding
requests would allow the generation or purchase of bar codes for
the two libraries. Adult Services reflected a 1% increase over
last year's budget. Additional funding would allow the lease of
multiple copies of certain books. Youth Services reflected a 3%
decrease in funding. Last year there was a one time package for
replacement of books. There were no new funding requests for that
division. The Branch Services Library Division reflected a 21%
d~er~a~e due to last year's one time operational costs for the
branch library. Supplemental funding would allow for the purchase
of a library book security system to help prevent the loss of books
from the library.
296
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 2
Council Member Young asked about the progress in allowing young
people to ride SPAN free of charge to the library.
Poole stated that due to the low usage of the program, it was
decided not to continue the program. It could be reactivated if
enough children indicated a desire to use the trolley.
Council Member Cott asked if there was an extra charge to patrons
to lease books.
Poole replied that there was no extra charge except if the book was
returned late. If that happened, the charge would be $.15 per day.
Council Member Cott suggested looking at that service again. If
the City was providing that kind of an extra service and it was
costing the City, the patron should pay something for that service.
Consumer Health/Animal Control - Nonie Malo-Kull, Manager - Animal
Control and Consumer Health, presented the budget for consumer
health which was not requesting any additional funding for the
proposed 1995-96 budget. The Animal Control budget was proposing
the following budget changes: a new vehicle for 1995-96; an
additional $3550 to bring the other animal control units up to
safety standards; a package for maintenance on the crematorium;
and an increase for overtime pay for the staff.
Council Member Cott asked if the department had enough sanitarians
for inspection of restaurants.
Kull replied that Denton had a responsible restaurant business and
she was comfortable with the level of service the department was
currently providing. Unless there was a large increase in demand
for service, she was comfortable with the service level.
Council Member Krueger asked if the off-duty on-call officers drove
their vehicles home.
Kutl replied yes.
Council Member Krueger asked if they had to maintain the vehicle
such as washing the vehicle at the office, etc.
Kull replied yes plus changing tail lights, head lights, etc.
Facilities Manaqement Bruce Hennington, Facilities Manager,
reviewed the duties of his department. His budget was less than
last year due to the fact that last year his department had
budgeted for 23 one-time projects which were all completed. The
297
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 3
budget was proposing five packages. Packages for facilities
management were determined by one of two methods. If there was a
building need from any department, it was submitted to Facilities
Management before the budget process started. That need was placed
in a package, checked for pricing and then ranked. The packages
were ranked by safety, code, how the package would affect the
citizens and how it would affect programming. Those packages were
then submitted to the Executive Staff for review. The second
method for determining packages was to include it in the facilities
management budget which would be an on-going cost. Those were
usually one-time packages which were building needs. The packages
for this year included: (1) a 3/4 ton truck which would replace an
old van; (2) a secretary position for the division, (3) renovation
of the Traffic Control Center, (4) replacement of fire doors at
North Lakes and Denia and reconstruction of the rest rooms at the
Senior Center, and (6) a refrigerate recycling system to take freon
out of the chilling units and recycle it.
Parks and Recreation - Ed Hodney, Director of Parks and Recreation,
stated that Parks was composed of three divisions operations,
administration and leisure services. He detailed the operations of
these divisions. The Administration Division had one supplemental
request which was a total replacement of the MLK Center phone
system. This was a used system when installed and the equipment
was no longer available for repair.
Janet Simpson, Superintendent of Leisure Services, presented the
budget for Leisure Services. She stated that they had proposed
three supplemental packages. One was for utilities for the
American Legion Building. The second was for a pool controller for
chemicals at the Civic Center Pool. The third package was for a 15
passenger van. The Recreation Fund was asking for four packages -
recreational center equipment for all recreation centers; preschool
equipment; starting block platforms at the Civic Center pool; and
furniture at the Senior Center.
Bob Tickner, Superintendent of Parks, presented the job
descriptions for his department. Packages for equipment included
the replacement of a back hoe; replacement of three pickup trucks;
two mowers for the cemeteries; a large area mower; a flail mower;
and three diesel riding mowers.
Council Member Miller stated that he had read an article about the
YMCA offering its pool to the City.
Hodney stated that the department was looking at the proposal but
it would take some time to gather data associated with the
proposal. Such data would include information on what it would take
298
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 4
to operate that pool.
Council Member Brock asked if the Parks Department considered
contracting out any maintenance work which City personnel currently
performed.
Hodney replied that he had looked at some contracting, specifically
a request which would have used additional general fund money to
contract out work to free existing staff which was needed in other
areas. It was cheaper for the City to perform its own mowing
rather than contracting it out.
Council Member Young stated that he noticed tractors going to
different jobs in different parts of the City which caused wear and
tear on the engines. He suggested having specific areas around the
City to house equipment so that it would not have to be moved to so
many locations.
The Council convened into a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, August 15,
1995 at 5:00 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room.
1. The following items were considered in Closed Meeting:
A. Legal Matters -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.071
B. Real Estate -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.072
Personnel/Board Appointments -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE
Sec. 551.074
The Council held a discussion regarding the
appointment, employment and evaluation of the
Municipal Judge.
The Council continued the Work Session on Tuesday, August 15, 1995
at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Biles; Council Members
Brock, Cott, Krueger, Miller and Young.
ABSENT: None
Emerqency Services - Mike Jez, Executive Director for Emergency
Services, presented the Police Department budget. The two major
divisional goals for the next fiscal year were to operationalize
the department's record management computer system and the complete
implementation of the Community Oriented Policing Strategy program.
Two packages for this budget included the reclassification of a
299
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 5
clerk position to a statistics secretary and the replacement of
three traffic radar units. An additional supplemental package was
for the completion of training for the K-9 officers. Currently the
dogs only performed narcotics detection and additional training
would include tracking, building search and handler protection.
Council Member Miller stated that there was a question of the court
bailiff having more hours to work than one officer could handle.
Jez replied that to date the extra hours performed by the court
bailiff were absorbed into the Police Department's budget. The
problem occurred when the bailiff went on vacation or was sick plus
was contingent on the Judge's court docket. He had an agreement
with the Judge to absorb the cost in this fiscal year for overtime
and Judge White would consider a part-time bailiff in next year's
budget.
Council Member Cott asked for a review for continuing the take home
vehicle policy.
Jez stated that in his previous report he had indicated a number of
reasons to continue the program. One was that the City had already
incurred the largest cost associated with the program which was the
up front cost of vehicles. It also enabled the City to mobilize
resources when needed and the fact that vehicles were parked in
neighborhoods helped decrease the fear of crime.
Council Member Young asked if anything was being done to increase
the number of Afro-Americans in the Police Department.
Jez replied yes that one individual was being hired as a jailer.
The civilian duty officer program was formally done by officers and
now was being done by civilian officers. There was an effort to
attract young people in protected classes who might be interested
in a police career.
John Cook, Fire Chief, stated that he had several packages for
consideration. One package was for a half year funding for a
supervisory position in communications. The Operations Division
had two packages - one for an inflatable boat for street flooding
and drainage ways flooding; and the addition of six fire fighters.
The staff recommendation for deployment of these new fire fighters
would be to place a fourth fire fighter on Engines 2 and 3. Council
had asked for additional options regarding staffing and station
locations. One option would involve reactivating Central and
closing Station Three which would be moved to the Airport. A
problem with this option was that there would be some service gaps
along East University. There might also be response time problems
3OO
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 6
in areas south of the Interstate. Another option was to not
reactivate Central but build a new station near the intersection of
Maple and Carroll. There would still be a service gap along East
University but coverage was provided to the downtown area and the
south side of the Interstate. It also picked up more area on the
north end of Township II.
Council Member Young asked if there were any Afro-American fire
fighters.
Cook replied not at this time.
Council Member Young asked what the City was doing in regards to
that situation.
Cook stated that there was an extensive recruitment program which
went to many universities, job fairs, and military installations to
recruit individuals to the City.
Council Member Young asked for the number of people employed in the
Fire Department.
Cook replied there were 103 employees, none of whom were African-
American.
Council Member Young asked why.
Cook replied that there had been very little turnover in the
Department and very little opportunity to hire African-Americans
because of the number of people in the Civil Service system. So far
none had placed high enough on the exam for them to be selected.
Council Member Young stated that he had seen paperwork where a list
of Afro-Americans had passed the test and one had made a 93 and one
a 91. When it got to them, that was when everyone decided to
change and hire fire fighters who only had fire fighter
certificates.
Cook replied that the Courts had indicated that cities needed to go
by the list and the scores and the City rarely had gotten below the
score of 93.
Council Member Young felt that this situation needed to be changed
quickly. Changing the system to another system of hiring fire
fighters with only certificates might be discriminatory. He wanted
minorities in the Fire Department and it looked as if the City was
trying to keep Afro-Americans out.
301'
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 7
City Manager Harrell stated that part of the problem was that
according to the Civil Service law, the eligibility list was only
valid for a certain period of time and the last list was a six
month list.
Cook stated that 100% of the clerical staff was female and 25% of
Fire Marshal staff was female. It was important to understand that
with the examination just given where the system was changed, there
was not significant time to recruit as it was important to have an
examination quickly in order to meet a pressing need.
City Manager Harrell stated that staff had been frustrated as well
in not being successful in hiring protected classes in the sworn
fire department area. Staff had explored with Council the
possibility of setting up two Civil Service lists and hiring off
those lists to try and help guarantee the hiring of protected
classes. The City was not able to do that due to prior court
decisions. There were two areas not successful in hiring protected
classes. Those areas were in sworn police officers and fire
fighters where there were strict State Civil Service rules to
follow.
Council Member Krueger asked if there would be adequate fire
fighters if Central was opened bringing the number of stations to
six.
Cook replied that six stations could not be opened with existing
personnel.
Council Member Krueger asked if there would be adequate staffin9
with six new additional fire fighters.
Cook replied that it would depend on how those six were deployed.
One option was to take the truck crew from Station Three and move
it to Central. That crew also cross staffed an ambulance. The six
new fire fighters would allow for the replacement of that crew and
staff a third ambulance full time. There would be marginal
benefits with that option. Council needed to consider purchasin9
some type of alternate piece of equipment, such as a quint, which
would maintain aerial capability. This was important as there were
many apartments and strip shopping centers in Denton. The snorkel
was currently in the shop and did not work much. If the Council
provided additional funding for a piece of equipment plus deployed
the six fire fighters as suggested, improvements would be made in
emergency medical services and in fire protection for the
community.
Council Member Krueger stated that part of that was in the CIP.
302
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 8
Cook suggested not waiting until the CIP. To take a truck out of
service now to reopen Central might result in problems before the
equipment was received. An alternative would be to add three
positions if the equipment had to wait for the CIP.
Council Member Biles asked if the combination squad was included in
the $121,000 line item for services for this budget.
Cook replied yes.
Council Member Biles asked if a quint was purchased, where would it
appear in the budget.
Cook replied that it would be in the operations budget and would be
a motor pool item.
City Manager Harrell stated that that figure was not represented in
the proposed budget as the budget did not propose adding that item.
Council Member Biles stated that the only dollars in the budget
were for six months of a squad.
City Manager Harrell stated that that was a separate package. One
alternative for staffing and opening Central was to put on a quint
and a squad. That was an additional squad over and above the one
recommended. If nothing was done in regards to Central, there was
still a squad which would be recommended for purchase.
Council Member Cott stated that all that was in the budget was the
addition of six people for six months. The addition of one person
to each of the six stations did not make a lot of difference on how
that station operated.
Cook replied that the budget included six fire fighters for twelve
months with five stations unless the Council directed the reopening
of Central. In that case, existing personnel would have to be
redeployed.
Mayor Castleberry asked for more specific information regarding an
estimated cost for a volunteer reserve fire fighter program. He
asked for the number of fire fighters and paramedics on a squad.
Cook stated that assuming that company levels remained at Station
Three, the squad would be placed in a non-fully staffed station.
Three individuals would man that piece of equipment.
Mayor Castleberry asked for additional information regarding this
issue, and if possible, an illustration of a squad.
303
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 9
Council Member Krueger asked for a list of cities which had
purchased a squad.
Council Member Young left the meeting.
Transportation
Engineerinq - Jerry Clark, Director of Engineering, stated that
Engineering was requesting approximately $30,000 less than last
year. There was a net drop as an individual was transferred to the
Transportation Department. Two vehicles were requested for the
Engineering Inspectors. A copier was needed for the move to City
Hall West as well as a GIS uninterruptable power supply source and
right-of-way software. Two work stations would be upgraded.
Transportation - Clark indicated that Transportation was asking for
the replacement of two bucket trucks and the replacement of one
work truck.
Council Member Young returned to the meeting.
Council Member Cott asked why the City did not contract out for
street patching.
Streets Clark replied that the City did its own work as it
received a better quality of work than what was seen from
contracting out.
Council Member Krueger stated that $275,000 was budgeted in 1994-95
for street cut reimbursements, an estimate of $330,000 for this
year and $300,000 was being proposed.
Clark replied that this was an active season this summer. This was
generated by water and sewer and if there were many breaks in the
lines, the number might vary.
City Manager Harrell stated that water and sewer were not expecting
to do as much replacement next year as was done this year.
Clark stated that the Street Department was requesting several
vehicles for the next fiscal year including a rubber tire roller,
a pot hole truck, a cold mix truck and the repair of a front end
loader for overhaul of the current truck.
The Council convened into the Regular Meeting on Tuesday, August
15, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
3O4
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 10
PRESENT:
Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Biles; Council Members
Brock, Cott, Krueger, Miller and Young.
ABSENT: None
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 June 13 and
June 20, 1995.
Biles motioned, Cott seconded to approve the minutes. On roll
vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock
"aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye" Motion carried
unanimously.
3. Citizen Reports
A. The Council received a citizen report from Nancy Jessee
regarding Denton County's proposed bond issue.
This item was not considered.
B. The Council received a citizen report from Dessie Goodson
regarding street drainage and streets in general.
Ms. Goodson stated that in the area where she lived there were
problems with drainage. The sidewalks needed to be safer than what
they were and tree limbs needed to be cut away from the sidewalks
so people could walk on the sidewalks. She still needed answers
regarding her SPAN bill.
4. Public Hearings
A. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption
of an ordinance amending the Detail Plan of Lot 4R to include
retail as a permitted use. The subject property consisted of 0.611
acres and was in PD-156. The property was located between S. Elm
Street and S. Locust Street, approximately 140 feet north of
Prairie Street. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval 4-0.)
Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that
there was no opposition for this change in use and it did not amend
the site plan. The only difference between the minor amendment and
305
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 11
the detail plan was that office and retail space would be allowed.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
No one spoke in favor.
No one spoke in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-148
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR AN
AMENDMENT TO THE DETAILED PLAN OF LOT 4R, BLOCK 27, ORIGINAL
TOWN OF DENTON, A 0.661 ACRE TRACT LOCATED APPROXIMATELY ONE
HUNDRED FORTY FEET (140') NORTH OF PRAIRIE STREET, BETWEEN ELM
AND LOCUST STREETS, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT
A, ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE HEREIN;
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUMAMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR
VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, Biles seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock
"aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
5. Variances
A. The Council considered a variance to Section 34-125, (b)
(private road requirements) of the Subdivision and Land Development
Regulations, for the proposed Stateson-Miller Addition. The 76
acre site was located on the west side of Tom Marshall Road in
Denton's extraterritorial jurisdiction. (The Planning and zoning
Commission recommended approval 4-0.)
Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that
this was the third variance within a subdivision which the Council
had considered over the last six months. Staff was working on
amending the ordinances so that there might not be so many
variances to deal with. This type of subdivision was a very large
lot, single family residential subdivision located in Denton's
extraterritorial jurisdiction. This variance dealt with the
requirement to have access to a public street or a private street
in a planned development. This was in the extraterritorial
jurisdiction with no zoning. The proposal was for a private street
not in planned development zoning. The Planning and Zoning
306
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 12
Commission recommend that the variance be granted to allow for a
private street in the extraterritorial jurisdiction where the City
did not have zoning.
Council Member Cott asked why the City would want to do this, could
it be reversed and why was this better than concrete or asphalt.
Robbins replied that the concrete and asphalt related to the next
variance. This dealt with whether there should be public or
private streets.
Council Member Cott asked how the City knew that the streets would
be maintained.
Robbins replied that the final plat would require a guarantee for
its maintenance. There would be a note on the final plat that the
City and County would not accept this property for maintenance by
the public. This would be a private street, allowed by ordinance,
but without a planned development.
Council Member Krueger stated that this type of development was
discussed in the Council's planning session. He asked what type of
utilities were there.
Robbins replied wells and septic tanks and would not be connected
to the Bolivar Water Company.
Council Member Krueger asked if this was something the City might
want to take over in the future.
City Manager Harrell stated that staff discussion in the planning
session dealt with the City's relationship to the Bolivar Water
System and what stand the City should take as development happened
in the extraterritorial jurisdiction. The position articulated was
that as there were regulations in the extraterritorial jurisdiction
so that when an area started to urbanized and more densely
developed, there would be pubic improvements in place that would
not place a great burden on the citizens of Denton to upgrade those
facilities to bring up to standard. With water, the strategy was
that as long as the area was rural, the developer was responsible
to extend a water or sewer line to the property if needed for
development.
Council Member Cott asked why the City would want to wait and later
have to upgrade that road.
City Manager Harrell stated that the variance with a private road
would be allowed within Denton's city limits if a planned
3 0 '7
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 13
development was done. Zoning could not be done in a rural area and
with the homeowner's agreement this would be a good arrangement.
Young motioned, Brock seconded to approve the variance. On roll
vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock
"aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
B. The Council considered a variance to Section 34.114 (3)
(paved standards) of the Subdivision and Land Development
Regulations, for the proposed Stateson-Miller Addition. The 76
acre site was located on the west side of Tom Marshall Road in
Denton's extraterritorial jurisdiction. (The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval 4-0.)
Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that
the City standards for a private street was 6" of lime subgrade and
5" of asphalt which was the same standard as a public street. The
Planning and Zoning Commission felt that for this private street
gravel could be provided rather than meeting City specifications.
A condition was that the road be 20' wide to accommodate emergency
vehicles rather than the 15' proposed road.
Biles motioned, Miller seconded to approve the variance. On roll
vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock
"aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
C. The Council considered a variance to Section 34-114 (17)
(sidewalks) of the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations for
the proposed Stateson-Miller Addition. The 76 acre site was
located on the west side of Tom Marshall Road in Denton's
extraterritorial jurisdiction. (The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval 4-0.)
Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that
this variance dealt with the requirements for sidewalks on internal
streets. This was a request for a variance from those provisions
as there would be no requirements to build sidewalks on perimeter
streets.
Miller motioned, Biles seconded to approve the variance. On roll
vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock
"aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
308
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 14
6. Consent Agenda
Brock motioned, Biles seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as
presented. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye",
Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry
"aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Bids and Purchase Orders:
Bid #1781 - Turbine Generator Inspection
Bid #1778 - Distribution Transformers
Bid #1782 - Brochures for Parks and Recreation
P.O. #56685 - American Management Systems, Inc.
P.O. #56686 - IBM Corporation
RFSP #1749 - Telephone Maintenance
7. Consent Agenda Ordinances
The Council considered Consent Agenda Ordinances 7.A. - 7.D.
Biles motioned, Young seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda
Ordinances 7.A - 7D. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott
"aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
A. NO. 95-149
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.
(6.A.2. - Bid #1778; 6.A.3. - Bid #1782)
Bo
NO. 95-150
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND PROVIDING FOR
THE AWARD OF CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR IMPROVEMENTS;
PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (6.A.1. Bid #1781)
Co
NO. 95-151
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR
PURCHASES OF MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE AVAILABLE
FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISION OF
STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURC~LASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF
COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(6.A.4. - P.O. #56685, 6.A.5. - P.O. #56686)
309
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 15
D. NO. 95-152
AN 0RDINANCE ACCEPTING A COMPETITIVE SEALED PROPOSAL 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. (6.A.6. -RFSP #1749)
8. Ordinances
A. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance amending
Section 22-32 of the Code of Ordinances, Chapter 22 (Parks and
Recreation) prohibiting the possession and/or consumption of
alcoholic beverages in all city parks, with the exception of the
Civic Center Park. (The Parks and Recreation Board recommended
approval.)
City Manager Harrell stated that this ordinance implemented the
recommendations made by the Council during the work session
regarding this item.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-153
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING TEAT
PORTION OF CHAPTER 22 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
DENTON, TEXAS, RELATING TO ARTICLE II. ENTITLED "PARK RULES",
BY PROHIBITING THE POSSESSION OR CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGES IN ALL CITY PARKS EXCEPT CIVIC CENTER PARK;
PROVIDING FOR A REPEAL OF ANY ORDINANCE IN CONFLICT THEREWITH;
PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY PROVISION; PROVIDING FOR A
PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUMAMOUNT OF $500.00 FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE
PROVISIONS HEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Young motioned, Biles seconded to adopt the ordinance.
Dessie Goodson asked if the ban would be in all parks.
Mayor Castleberry replied except for the Civic Center Park.
Goodson asked why that was an exception.
Council Member Young stated that the people who elected him asked
him to bring up this issue as they felt that it was not fair to
allow alcohol at other parks and not at Fred Moore Park. This item
was discussed at a Council meeting and was returned to the Parks
and Recreation Board for a solution. That Board felt that all
310
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 16
alcohol should be removed from all parks with no variances and just
allow it in the Civic Center Park. This was a central park and the
main park for the City. The people in his district felt this was
fair. Denton was against alcohol in parks but felt that for
certain activities such as the Jazz Festival and other activities
like the Juneteenth celebration it would be fair to have alcohol in
that park.
Goodson felt that prohibiting drinking in all parks would be fair.
On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "nay",
Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion
carried with a 6-1 vote.
B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to an
agreement between the City of Denton and the North Central Texas
College (NCTC) for the purpose of allowing for the construction of
parking improvements in the vicinity of NCTC campus.
Ed Hodney, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated that in
accordance with a lease approved by the Council in June of 1992,
the City leased 12,000 square feet of office and classroom space to
the North Central Texas College in the Denton Municipal Complex.
The lease was for a 10 year term and expired in June of 2002. The
term was for a rental rate of $84,000 per year which increased
yearly. The College was provided 100 parking spaces. After the
College occupied its space, the City began to receive a number of
complaints dealing with inadequate parking around the Complex.
Staff started to implement a plan for parking expansion which
included the leasing of additional property to accommodate parking
around the Complex. The proposal was to expand one existing
parking lot to allow for easier parking in the area and to police
the area if needed. In order to offset the expenses, staff
negotiated Amendment No. 1 which provided for an annual parking
assessment of $10,000 per year which would be payable on a monthly
basis. If approved the amendment would be effective September 1,
1995 and would create 70 additional parking spaces.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-154
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE
CITY M3kNAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO Alq AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COLLEGE
(NCTC) FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
PARKING IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY OF NCTC CAMPUS,
311
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 17
AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Young motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock
"aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
C. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving
the City of Denton 1995 ad valorem appraisal roll.
Jon Fortune, Chief Finance Officer, stated that this item provided
for formal approval of the 1995 appraisal roll. This was the roll
presented to the Council on July 25th which was not under protest.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-155
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING THE 1995
APPRAISAL ROLL; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Biles motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock
"aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement between the City of
Denton and Camp, Dresser and McKee, Inc. for professional
engineering services relating to establishing a fee or charges
under which a municipal drainage utility system may be funded.
City Manager Harrell stated that this discussion regarding
establishing storm water fees began in 1990. At that time, the
reason for beginning that discussion was that the Environmental
Protection Agency was in the process of implementing congressional
legislation which would require cities over 50,000 population to
implement a storm water program which would require the treatment
of storm water from a quantity standpoint rather than a quality
standpoint. Under Congressional regulations, the whole area of
water standards and protection of runoff into streams and lakes,
identified storm water as an area which needed to develop plans and
treatment in such a way to improve the quality. The Council
decided to investigate a storm water fee at that time and appointed
a 19 member committee made up of a cross section of Denton
citizens. The Committee took a year to deliberate that issue and
312
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 18
provided a comprehensive report to the Council. The Committee
recommended that a storm water utility be formed and a fee be
assessed. As the report came to Council and primarily because a
majority of the Council had questions about the seriousness of the
EPA requirements, the Council decided not to move forward at that
point in time. At the Council's July planning session, the storm
water fee was again discussed. From that session, staff was asked
to prepare a plan for the Council to demonstrate if such a fee
could be implemented by January 1, 1996. It was felt that the
primary reason for looking for a storm water fee had changed. The
Congressional action was still in place which mandated that storm
water quality had to be addressed but the deadlines for compliance
were moved back. It was now felt that the current CIP had $9
million worth of storm water improvements in that proposed 5 year
CIP. That CIP had not been voted on yet and would not be ready
until February, 1996. Most of major storm water projects, unless
changed, would not occur until year 4-5 of the five year CIP. It
was the Council's concern, based upon expressions of need in the
community, that work should be accelerated. If a storm water fee
was adopted, revenue bonds could be issued to do those $9 million
projects in 1-2 years instead of 4-5 years. The second item dealt
with storm drainage maintenance. One of highest concerns was storm
water drainage maintenance for which not much money was allocated
but many citizens needed. The needs could not be met due to
insufficient resources. Looking at the technical necessities of
items which had to be done in order to implement the storm water
management fee, it was felt that consulting work was needed to
perform the various calculations necessary to assess the fees. If
there was no predisposition that this kind of fee made sense, it
was wise to not make the allocation of $50,000 for this study.
Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that the
consultant had proposed a two phased approach. The first one would
be an interim rate policy which would go into effect January 1,
1996. Recognizing the short time frame, it might not be possible
to do the detailed refinement of each parcel of property so
industry and national averages would be used. Approximately a year
later those rates would be refined and in January 1997 the refined
rates would be implemented. The interim rate for single family,
duplex and multifamily would be considered as one residential unit
with a flat fee. Non-residential property such as commercial and
industrial would be custom billed based on actual land parcel area
and an average of impervious areas. The action plan would be to
evaluate the existing utility billing system to determine its
capability to accommodate the storm water utility; evaluate
available data sources with, tax plats, maps, and aerial
photographs; develop a schedule; develop a data management
spreadsheet and train staff on customer data collection; assist the
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 19
313
City Attorney in drafting utility fees and ordinances; and assist
with public meetings and meet with City staff on a weekly basis if
needed. Nelson reviewed the schedule for the 1996 bond election
and drainage fee time table. This schedule had been discussed with
the consultant and they felt they were not able to move ahead
faster than presented. The total consultant fee would not exceed
$5o,oo0.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that he was still interested in the fee
and agreed that the reason for the interest was different from
several years ago. There was a problem in Denton which must begin
to be addressed. He had a problem with the cost of the consultant
fee when a report prepared by the citizen committee was compressive
including consideration of issues and fee structure. He understood
that there was a short time table and this would be man power
intensive.
Nelson stated that many times a consultant fee might seem high.
There was a tremendous amount of work to implement this which the
City had not done before. There were a number of intricate issues
regarding the billing and many issues to deal with when dealing
with a multitude of different properties. Each commercial property
had to be dealt with individually. The Utility Department had lost
a number of key staff who normally would have done this work and
just did not have the people at this time to do the work.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that the consultant had proposed a two
phased process with interim fee structure and a regular fee
structure. He felt that Council could make the determination
regarding some of these issues and felt that much of this
information was already done. If staff could determine the rate
structure, why was a consultant needed.
Nelson replied that there were many other issues which required the
advise of a consultant who had been through the process a number of
times.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles asked for those issues.
Nelson replied that he could not list all the multitude of steps
needed to resolve the process. There were multiple questions on
how to handle types of property, what were the difficulties
experienced by other cities, etc.
City Manager Harrell stated that there were many cities which had
implemented this fee system. He was not aware of any city which
did not use a consulting firm experienced in such a fee system.
Those cities used a consultant because State law provided for
314
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 20
certain steps which had to be complied with. This was a complex
system which needed to be done in the correct legal form. Knowing
the staff limitations at this point in time, there was a need for
the expertise of an outside consultant.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles asked if the cost estimate could be reduced if
Council felt the cost was too high.
Nelson replied that it could be researched.
Council Member Krueger felt that there were people on staff who
could do the job. If Fort Worth and other cities had already done
this, then Denton could follow their ordinance. Council could set
a rate structure which would be fair and equitable for all
involved. The public already had a wrong impression of the fee and
it appeared to him to be too high. He suggested a fee structure of
$2 per household, $10 on every business and $5 on every non-profit
organization per month.
Nelson replied that the State legislature indicated that a precise
formula had to be used to calculate the charge and had to be based
on impervious area of the property. A determination needed to be
made regarding the amount needed through the fee and then determine
how to achieve that goal.
Council Member Cott felt that the drainage system was started in
the 1930's and had always been maturing. The City was trying to
find enough money to rebuild the system so that the next years were
better. If this was a serious problem, then the need was to go
through the General Fund and not a tax increase.
Council Member Young stated that there was a drainage problem in
Denton. Storm water was either directed down a ditch or down a
street. The streets were in poor condition due to that process.
The Wastewater Utility District was needed but was something which
the people needed to vote on. He was in favor of proceeding with
the time schedule but felt that staff could handle the project. He
was not in favor of hiring the consultant.
Young motioned, Krueger seconded to not fund the consultant.
Council Member Miller felt that the basic issue was whether it was
a good idea to have a storm water district or not. At the Planning
Session, Council stated that one problem with the drainage issue,
the storm water issue and the CIP was that the City never seemed to
get there. He felt it was a good idea to look at the storm water
issue but that some type of outside help was needed. If the City
went through the process itself there might be credibility problems
315
City of Denton City Counci! MSDq~eS
August 15, 1995
Page 21
because no matter which answer was found, the citizens would feel
that the City found the answer it wanted from the start. If the
Council did not approve the consultant, he felt that the Council
was not really supporting the idea of a storm water district. If
the Council supported the district, then the services of a
consultant were needed.
Council Member Brock felt that there were two issues. One was the
Council's attitude of establishing a storm water district and the
other was whether to hire a consultant. When the Council looked at
this issue earlier she was against the establishment of the
district. One reason was her question about the urgency of the
EPA's requirements and another was a concern about the fee
structure that the committee had developed. She felt that this was
a very complex issue and the committee did good work but that the
fee structure was critical. A consultant was needed when the
overall expenditures for this system was considered.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that casting a vote on the contract was
not sending a message about the storm drainage issue itself. His
position on this contract was not indicative of the merits of a
drainage fee. He felt such a fee served all property owners with
equitable distribution of storm water problems. His concern was
over the fee of the consultant. There was already a vast amount of
information at the City's disposal and the fees would not be that
complex to determine. He agreed that the City would need help with
these issues but could it be done for less.
Council Member Krueger stated that his vote on this ordinance was
not an indication of whether or not he was in favor of a storm
water drainage fee. Rather than take all the projects at once,
determine what type of fee structure was needed to replace that $7-
9 million.
City Manager Harrell stated that as the Council went through the
type of fee structure it might want to implement, those were
options. Staff did not have a recommendation in those areas. There
were three different scenarios regarding a fee structure and
several alternatives which might be considered. One was to visit
with other consulting firms to determine if the scope of the work
could be pared down. Cities often temporarily hire outside people
to deal with special projects and after that project was completed,
the people were no longer employed. The alternative was to gear up
the City staff to handle these projects as they came along. The
third option, if Council was interested in proceeding with the
project but uncomfortable with the cost of the consultant, was to
return to several firms to try and reduce the scope of work with a
lesser contract price, or return with a price tag of cost to hire
316
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 22
staff for the City to do the work. A determination of projects and
activities currently in progress in the Utility Department would
have to be done and if the work was done in-house these items would
have to be put on hold to take on this special project.
Nelson stated that he was not sure what could be cut from the
current scope of work. He felt the consulting work was needed for
drafting the ordinances, simplifying the billing system, for one or
two of the three public hearings and one policy meeting. He felt
that for the Council's protection some external advice was needed.
Council Member Young stated that he was against the consultant
contract and felt staff could handle the work but was not against
the idea of the fee. This would be a new tax and he did not want
a new tax. He felt the people should vote on the issue and was
against the consultant.
Council Member Cott stated that a fourth alternative was to take
this through the General Fund even if other city projects had to be
reduced.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that he appreciated the value of a
consultant. Determine what was needed from the expert and then
determine the fee. He suggested deferring the item to the next
meeting.
Mayor Castleberry stated that the utility fee was a tax and he was
not ready at this meeting to decide on the issue. He would be
ready to look at the issue after the budget was set. If a utility
fee was done, he wanted to be sure that the tax rate was lowered.
He did not feel delaying the issue one month or until there was
additional information would be a problem. The CIP Blue Ribbon
Committee could proceed. If Council desired to proceed with the
fee, the amount could be taken out of the CIP.
City Attorney Prouty stated that the schedule was prepared with the
idea of having a bond election in February. If that was moved back
and if it was important to have it decided before the bond
election, the procedures and notices needed for the fee might put
pressure on the Council to resolve the issue before the bond
election. There was possibly a risk that the date of the bond
election might be impacted if Council had to have this resolved and
established before the bond election.
City Manager Harrell stated that the driving force was the January
1st implementation date. By delaying this issue until September
12th which was only a month, Council could still keep on schedule
but not implement the fee by January 1st.
317
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 23
Mayor Pro Tem Biles asked if staff could return in two weeks to
make a decision on the contract.
Mayor Castleberry stated that he was not comfortable with the issue
until after a decision on the budget.
City Manager Harrell stated that the January 1st implementation
date might be delayed a month if the issue were held until after
the budget but that was not a crucial date. The crucial decision
was whether to proceed with the fee before the CIP election in
February.
Council Member Miller stated that the Blue Ribbon Committee report
had to be completed by January 2nd.
City Manager Harrell stated that the fee would not be implemented
but a decision would have been made by then on whether or not to
implement a fee.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that he was more comfortable with
considering the item on September 19th.
Council Member Young stated that he did not want to fund this item
at this meeting but rather to have the contract returned with a
lower price in two weeks.
Miller motioned, Biles seconded to defer the contract to September
19th.
Mayor Castleberry stated that this was not a motion to amend. It
was a stand alone motion to be voted on prior to the original
motion.
On roll vote of the amendment Miller ."aye", Young "nay", Cott
"aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote.
City Attorney Prouty stated that a motion to table took precedence
over any other motion and once passed, any other motion was mute.
The motion was to table until September 19th. On September 19th
there would still be a motion to not fund.
E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute a lease with American Legion Post
No. ~0 for the lease of the American Legion Building in Fred Moore
Park.
318
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15) 1995
Page 24
Ed Hodney, Director of Parks and Recreation stated that a lease had
been negotiated with the American Legion Post No. 840 for the
building in Fred Moore Park. The primary effort of the lease,
which replaced a 1953 lease, was to facilitate the renovation of
the building for Senior use. This kind of use was what the Council
anticipated and expected when they approved, in 1994, the CDBG
funding for the project. This ordinance would cancel the 1953
lease and provide for a new lease for 10 years with an additional
clause for 10 years. The American Legion Post would continue to
use the facility as negotiated subject to applicable City policies
and regulations, including restrictions on the consumption of
alcoholic beverages. The Legion would be required to annually
submit a prepared schedule for their use of the building. Other
uses from the City would also have a schedule. It was anticipated
that the Legion would use the building on weekends while the
Seniors would use the building during the week. There also was a
provision that the schedule could be altered with the consent of
both parties.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-156
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A LEASE WITH
AMERICAN LEGION POST NO. 840 FOR THE LEASE OF THE AMERICAN
LEGION BUILDING IN THE FRED MOORE PARK; CANCELLING THE
EXISTING LEASE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Young motioned, Miller seconded to adopt the ordinance.
Council Member Miller stated that the Legion would use the building
on the weekends but some weekends it could be available for other
entities.
Council Member Young stated that the senior citizens would have the
building during the week. If a special event was needed the
building could be used by another entity.
~odn~y ~tated that one ~lau~e of the lease indicated that if after
the schedule had already been set, either entity wanted a change in
the schedule, it would be allowed.
Council Member Young stated that the Legion would like the City to
help them find another building. The Legion could then turn this
building over to the City and go into a new building.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that there was no monetary consideration
paid in during the term of the lease.
319
City of Denton City Counci~i~tes .
August 15, 1995
Page 25
City Attorney Prouty stated that was the wording of the original
lease. The original lease stated that the only consideration was
that the American Legion would construct a building and at the end
of the lease turn the building over to the City. They also had an
agreement to maintain the building. The only difference in the
lease was that it was shortened to a ten year lease with another 10
year option. The City would maintain the building. The other.
lease gave the Legion exclusive rights to use the building and
there were some strong legal questions about the City's ability to
do that.
Council Member Cott asked about the $100,000 which was going to be
put into the building. If the Legion wanted to leave what would
happen to the money and the building.
Council Member Young stated that the $100,000 was to remodel the
building.
Council Member Miller stated that if the Legion no longer wanted to
use the building, it would be for the senior citizens to use
instead of the Legion.
City Attorney Prouty stated that the Legion had not maintained the
building and there were significant problems with the building. A
significant amount of work was needed to be done to the building.
Hodney stated that the $100,000 would include design work plus ADA
requirements. There was much interior work which needed to be done
including a kitchen for SPAN use, the roof needed to be replaced
and foundation work was needed.
City Attorney Prouty stated that one of considerations was the
Legion agreeing to the terms of the lease. One major term was that
the prior lease gave the Legion exclusive rights and complete
control over the building.
On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye" , Krueger "aye",
Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye" . Motion
carried unanimously.
F. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 2 to an
agreement between the City of Denton and the Denton Chamber of
Commerce for the purpose of providing for a program to promote
economic development.
320
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 26
Betty McKean, Executive Director for Municipal Services/Economic
Development, stated that this ordinance would provide the
additional changes to the agreement between the City and the Denton
Chamber of Commerce. There was one procedural item which needed to
be corrected in the document which the City Attorney would explain.
City Attorney Prouty stated that the change was in the ordinance.
The ordinance authorized the City Manager to execute the amendment
when it should be the Mayor as the amendment was being signed by
the Chairman of the Board of the Chamber of Commerce.
McKean stated that the major changes included that the members on
the EDTC could not be an employee of the City or the Chamber and
not an elected official. The members of the EDTC would select one
member as the chair and would adopt their own rules of procedure.
Mayor Castleberry stated that included the officers and employees
of the Chamber so that it would be an independent body.
Council Member Young stated that to make it very independent a
motion should be made to not allow any past Chamber presidents to
be a member.
Mayor Castleberry stated that the presidents were elected
officials. Past chairmen were considered an officer.
Council Member Krueger felt that the intent of the original motion
was to keep this body a non-partisan entity. A Chamber officer was
not an elected official and the membership should stand as was
originally indicated.
Mayor Castleberry stated that he could not see excluding the City
Council but that was what was passed and it should be equally
applied to officers of the Chamber. If the intent was to have an
independent body it should not be dominated by either the City or
the Chamber.
Council Member Cott stated that since the group would be dealing
with funds provided by the City, he felt the four City people
needed to be able to control the funds.
Mayor Castleberry stated that the Council was responsible for the
funds given by the Public Utilities Board to the Economic
Development group. As it was indicated there was not a good
balance.
Council Member Miller stated that this was the economic development
transition committee.
32I
City of Denton City Counci! Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 27
Council Member Cott stated that it was the economic development
committee and the transition had been eliminated.
Council Member Miller stated that it was agreed that an economic
development transition committee would be established and would
replace the current Economic Development Advisory Board. The
purpose of the economic development transition committee would be
to determine what would replace the program which was now in place.
This group would cease to exist at some point in time if Council
approved the recommendations such as a sales tax or corporation.
The group would only spend money allocated for the study and spend
money currently allocated for the economic development program'
which was in place.
McKean stated that the on-going operations and maintenance expenses
of the offices of Economic Development would remain as they were.
The expenses referred to in the ordinance were for special studies
or travel related to that study and research. The transition
committee would bring a recommendation to the City Council and the
Chamber in recommending what the final structure would be. The
City Council and Chamber would then make a final determination on
the recommendations and a final determination on what the final
membership would be.
Council Member Miller stated that by agreeing to this for the
transition committee and agreeing to this for the current advisory
committee, the Council was not necessarily agreeing that elected
officials could not serve on whatever permanent organization came
into place.
McKean replied correct.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that the basis for his motion and the
reason it was put into the contract was to depoliticalize the
transition so that Chamber staff or City employees would not be on
the transition. It was anticipated that Chamber and City staff
would be assisting the board as was done presently.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-157
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF DENTON AND THE DENTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR THE
PURPOSE OF PROVIDING FOR A PROGRAM TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
322
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 28
Biles motioned, Krueger seconded to adopt Amendment No. 2 as
written in the agenda back-up so that the only exclusions were
elected officials defined as City Council people, and Chamber staff
and City staff.
Mayor Castleberry stated that it was written in the contract that
this seven member board was an interim board and not the permanent
board of the economic development corporation.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that was correct.
Mayor Castleberry asked for another explanation as to why Council
members were excluded.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that it would put Council on both ends
of the equation. The Council would be on one end considering
funding and. on another end considering how much to get. The
Council already was able to appoint four members of the board.
Mayor Castleberry stated that he did not see a reason for the
exclusion.
Council Member Brock expressed concern about accountability.
Elected officials were the only ones directly accountable for the
public money going to be spent. There needed to be some trust in
the people providing the money.
Council Member Miller stated that the agreement indicated that a
final report would include recommendations for the proposed
organizational structure, budget for the EDC, a final draft of the
charter and an analysis of the sales tax as a funding option as
well as an analysis of other funding options. If the economic
development corporation was developed using sales tax, that
committee had to be appointed by the City Council and would not be
shared with the Chamber. He felt the study would have to be done
in a way which the Council and citizens would agree with. This
group would have to be held accountable for providing
recommendations which would make sense and which would take the
group forward. If this were going to be a permanent board he would
have a different feeling. He questioned why a recommendation for
the corporation was needed in January when the final report was not
to be completed until March.
Miller motioned an amendment to take out the reference to January
31st and have a report from the committee on March 31st.
Mayor Castleberry stated that the exclusion of any City Council
member was a bad move and would not be in favor of the contract.
323
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 29
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that his motion was to adopt Amendment
No. 2 to an agreement between the City of Denton and the Denton
Chamber of Commerce as written.
McKean stated that Mayor Pro Tem Biles was asking the Council to
consider the entire document shown as Amendment No. 2.
Council Member Miller asked if Mayor Pro Tem Biles would accept a
friendly amendment regarding the changing of the dates for the
final report.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that he would not accept the friendly
amendment because when the recommendations were read on page 2,
they all indicated to develop funding for the EDC. It was
necessary to know before having final recommendations whether or
not to have a corporation.
Council Member Cott felt that the January 31st date was better to
start with and then be late rather than have an original later
date.
Council Member Young called the question.
Council Member Miller stated that he wanted to offer an amendment
to the motion.
Mayor Castleberry stated that calling the question took precedence
over an amendment and it required a second.
Council Member Krueger seconded the calling of the question.
Council Member Miller withdrew his request for an amendment.
On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye",
Brock "nay", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion
carried with a 5-2 vote.
McKean stated that the second part of the presentation dealt with
a suggested scenario regarding appointments to the EDTC which were
due on October 1st. It was suggested that Council might want to
appoint a Council committee and then solicit any number of nominees
from each of the Council Members with a statement of qualifications
for consideration of the subcommittee. A possible time frame was
offered regarding the appointments to the EDTC.
Council Member Cott felt that the process was too long and it was
assuming that the Chamber was an enemy. The Chamber of Commerce
were Denton people and they did not have to go through all of this.
324
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 30
Mayor Castleberry felt that the plan was good but that each Council
member needed to determine one or two names for consideration.
More time was needed for consideration.
Council Member Cott stated that these individuals were not enemies
and saw no reason to worry about these appointments.
Council Member Krueger felt that this was not on the agenda and
should not be discussed.
McKean stated that there was an item on the agenda dealing with
Council committees. This was presented as a scenario to the
Chamber and brought to the Council with their concurrence.
City Attorney Prouty stated that if this item was part of the whole
issue to approve the amendment, the Council could discuss it. The
Council could have a staff report and not debate among themselves
about the report.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that the agenda item indicated adoption
of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment
No.2. It did not indicated anything about Council discussing
anything about the nomination process. He indicated that he would
abstain from any further discussion because he felt that the
Council was out of order and not following the posted agenda. The
Council was only to discuss the contract.
City Attorney Prouty stated that under the way the item was worded,
the only safe way to proceed was to either have a staff report and
not deliberate or not consider the item.
Mayor Castleberry stated that staff could present a report and
Council could ask questions of staff.
City Attorney Prouty indicated yes and that Council could not
discuss it among themselves.
McKean presented the scenario as submitted in the staff report.
G. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving
and authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement for
engineering services with Carter and Burgess, Inc. for improvements
at the Denton Municipal Airport. (The Airport Advisory Board
recommended approval.)
Joseph Portugal, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that
approval of this ordinance would authorize the City Manager to
execute an agreement for engineering services with Carter and
325
City of Denton City Counci~l Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 31
Burgess for the Denton Municipal Airport. A request for proposal
was prepared to solicit proposals for the services with four firms
responding. Based on presentations to the Airport Advisory Board,
the firm of Carter and Burgess was recommended. He presented the
scope of services related to airport improvement projects and those
which would be eligible for funding by the FAA. There was no
charge to the City to file the preapplication for these projects.
Pending approval by the FAA of the project, the City would then
enter into an agreement with Carter and Burgess for the scope of
services. The FAA determined the guidelines for payment of the
services.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-158
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH CARTER &
BURGESS, INC. FOR IMPROVEMENTS AT THE DENTON MUNICIPAL
AIRPORT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Krueger motioned, Young seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock
"aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
H. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance amending
Section 25-5 ("Soliciting business or charitable contributions") of
the Code of Ordinances; providing for a permitting procedure for
soliciting charitable contributions; providing for a severability
provision; and repealing all ordinances in conflict therewith.
City Attorney Prouty presented a revised version of the ordinance
based on comments made by Council Members. The ordinance was a
redraft of an ordinance considered by Council on October 8, 1993.
The ordinance stated that it was unlawful for any person to be upon
any portion of the street or roadway including the shoulder or
median for the purpose of soliciting charitable contributions or
business unless he had obtained a permit to do so. The name of the
organization must be provided plus some kind of evidence of
charitable status, and a hold harmless and indemnification
agreement must be prepared by the office the City Attorney.
Originally the ordinance contained both an indemnification
agreement and insurance requirements but because of the First
Amendment problems, it was decided that insurance requirements
might be viewed as an obstacle for freedom of speech. This could
be true for the insurance requirements as some groups might not be
able to obtain or afford the insurance but less likely a
326
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 32
restriction for the hold harmless agreement. Another change in the
ordinance made clear that an applicant could be allowed no more
than two of these permits per calendar year. The ordinance followed
the new state law which created an exception to the rule that
people could not solicit by standing in the roadway. That
exception was for those soliciting for charitable contributions.
At the time the law was passed an issue was raised that the law was
flawed because it made the exception only for non-profit or
charitable organizations and excluded for-profit organizations.
The Council felt there was a First Amendment flaw with the statute
and ordinance which only allowed for an exception for non-profit
organizations. The Council requested an Attorney General's opinion
to determine whether the statute was constitutional. To date an
opinion had not been received which meant that there was some risk
if this ordinance was approved without addressing that problem. The
other concern which needed to be addressed was the problem with
having the solicitation done on duty by City employees. This
ordinance was not specific just to City employees soliciting for
charitable contributions. It was known that the Fire Department
wanted to solicit for muscular dystrophy. It was recommended
against allowing City employees to solicit in the street for
charities. Reasons for this opinion was the section of the
Constitution, Article 3-52 which prohibited the City granting a
thing of value to a private corporation or individual. It was felt
that the weight of those opinions indicated that to allow an
employee to solicit charitable contributions on City time in a City
paid for uniform or using City vehicles would violate this
provision. If the Council made some type of finding that it did
not, the Council would have to follow a complicated procedure set
forth by an Attorney General's opinion which indicated that the
services which the City employees made for the charitable
organization when soliciting on City time and using City uniforms
served some public purpose. The Council would also have to find
that that purpose was appropriate to the various functions of the
City and that the services were provided adequate consideration to
the public. It would also have to be found that the government
maintained through the ordinance, control over the charity's
activities which were being funded by the government. The other
problems were that there were public safety Droblems and liability
problems associated with solicitation on the streets both from the
standpoint that there were third parties which might be injured if
these employees were in the street and the individual tried to
avoid hitting that employee. The employee might also be hit by
another vehicle. That tied into the new indemnity ordinance and if
this were authorized, the authorized City employee soliciting on
City time could probably say this was being done in the scope and
course of employment. If they did get hurt or if someone sued
them, the City would be liable. Once this was opened for one group
327'
City of Denton City Counci~Min~es ~
August 15, 1995
Page 33
of employees to solicit, all City employees must be allowed to
solicit if they obtained a permit and must be allowed to do it on
City time.
Council Member Cott stated that other cities did this campaign for
muscular dystrophy and he could not believe that there were other
cities which did not care about their own liability as the City of
Denton did.
City Attorney Prouty stated that these opinions were researched
with regard to the constitutional prohibition against granting a
thing of value to a private corporation. Those opinions either
prohibited it or required that those four specific findings be
made. It was very difficult to make those four findings. Perhaps
other cities had determined that there was some public purpose to
be served which overrode these other considerations. Taking into
consideration all of the negatives which could accrue from having
city employees doing this on City time, it was not recommended to
allow City employees to solicit on City time.
Council Member Miller stated that he supported the ordinance in
that he felt it was something which should be tried. He also
supported the idea of not allowing this to be done on City time.
If the project was worth doing, it was worth doing on the
employee's own time. He did not have a problem with the employees
being in uniform but should be done on their own time.
Council Member Brock asked for a clarification to be sure that
there was nothing in the ordinance which dealt with City employees
working on City time.
City Attorney Prouty stated that this was generic from the stand
point that it dealt with an exception to the general prohibition
against anyone soliciting in the roadway if a permit was obtained.
The issue of whether or not to allow this on City time was a
separate issue.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that Section 25-5 indicated a purpose of
soliciting business or charitable contributions. He questioned
that business contributions was not mentioned in the ordinance.
City Attorney Prouty stated that the original ordinance was written
just dealing with charitable organizations. Council Member Miller
raised the point that if solicitation of business or charitable
contributions was not addressed in the first section, someone might
make the argument that solicitation of business was not prohibited
in the roadway. When the State law which prohibited anyone from
soliciting in the roadway was amended, the only exception was for
328
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 34
charitable solicitations. By the State statute itself, business
solicitation could not take place in the roadway. In order to
follow along with that, the first part was a prohibition of any
type of business or charitable contributions being solicited in the
roadway except for a permit to solicit charitable contributions
which was the only exception allowed under State law. Section
25.5.1. indicated that the only type of permit which could be
obtained was for charitable contributions. The ordinance might be
flawed as well as the State law as it did not allow business or
for-profit entities to solicit. The State law, as written,
prohibited the City from allowing that.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles questioned the fact that a business person who
wanted to solicit business contributions could indicate that
Sections 25-5 and 25-5.1 did not provide for a permit to be
obtained and thus was excluded from obtaining a permit.
Council Member Miller stated that the existing ordinance made it
unlawful to solicit business or charitable contributions of any
kind. The way that the ordinance was written indicated that it was
unlawful for any person to stand in the roadway to solicit
charitable contributions. Someone could indicate that the
ordinance did not indicate that it was unlawful to solicit
business. The change suggested was to eliminate the solicitation
of any kind from the occupants of a vehicle except for charitable
contributions having obtained a permit.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that the City did not have to regulate
it if State law already addressed the concern. He asked for a
clarification of the requirement indicating that the charitable
organization sponsoring the solicitation.
Council Member Miller stated that the national organization would
be the sponsoring organization.
Mayor Pro Biles stated that the fire fighters would then have to
produce evidence of MDA's status with the IRS. He asked who would
execute the hold harmless agreement - MDA or the fire fighters. If
it was the fire fighters, as a group of employees, would every
employee have to execute that hold harmless agreement.
City Attorney Prouty felt that the City would want every fire
fighter working have to signed such an agreement.
Council Member Krueger stated that currently there were City
employees who solicited funds for United Way during business hours.
He felt that there was no difference between the fire fighter or
this type of solicitation. The fire fighters needed to be treated
32'9
City of Denton City Counci! Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 35
the same as other employees. If fire fighters were excluded from
wearing their uniforms, the same was to be with other City
employees.
City Manager Harrell stated that the Legal Department indicated the
difference between the two types of solicitation, especially in
dealing with the liability which might occur to the City.
City Attorney Prouty stated that the point was that both would be
soliciting on City time. The difference was that one case would
produce a high exposure to liability especially under the new
indemnity ordinance and the other case produced a low risk of
liability. It was up to the Council to determine whether that was
a significant difference.
Council Member Brock stated that there was a difference between
clothing for an office setting and a uniform.
Council Member Young left the meeting.
Council Member Brock continued that the issue was whether to allow
solicitation on the roadways under certain limited conditions.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 95-159
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25-5 ("SOLICITING BUSINESS OR
CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS") OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE
CITY OF DENTON; PROVIDING FOR A PERMITTING PROCEDURE FOR
SOLICITING CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS; PROVIDING FOR A
SEVERABILITY PROVISION; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT
THEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION THEREOF NOT
TO EXCEED $500.00; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, Miller seconded to adopt the ordinance.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles asked if Council Member Brock would accept an
amendment to delete the word business.
Council Member Miller stated that he would have a problem with City
employees standing in a roadway soliciting contributions for the
United Way. He would not have a problem with a fire fighter going
in City offices and asking employees for contributions for muscular
dystrophy. The main difference was that it was out in the public
and not an internal solicitation. The United Way campaign was an
accepted standard not only in City government but in private
industry as well.
33O
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 36
Council Member Krueger stated that he was trying to make a point
that the way fire fighters attract contributions for muscular
dystrophy was equally deserving as the way contributions were
attracted for the United Way.
Mayor Castleberry asked what the City's liability on anyone,
whether a city employee or citizen, soliciting contributions in the
roadway or on the median would be if that person was hurt after
receiving a permit from the City to solicit funds.
City Attorney Prouty stated that if the solicitation was not done
on City time, the liability was limited because it was not being
done in scope or course of their employment. If it were being done
on City time and was in the scope and course of employment then the
principles of agency would apply to where the City would be liable
for the acts of its employee.
Mayor Castleberry asked if the City would be a party to a suit.
City Attorney Prouty stated that if a third party, driving a car,
hit a City employee or tried to avoid hitting an employee and had
an accident, that individual would sue anyone and would go for the
City. If this were an off-duty incident, the chances of success
against the City would be less than if on-duty. There were certain
restrictions placed in the ordinance for the location of the
solicitation such as not being able to be in medians or on the
roadways.
Mayor Castleberry asked what the State law indicated in relation to
City employees using uniforms and City equipment.
City Attorney Prouty stated that it did not address that. The
State law, until amended, completely banned any type of standing or
being on the roadway. The only exception the State law made was
for solicitations of charitable contributions. It did not address
City employees or whether they could use uniforms or solicit on
City time.
Mayor Castleb~rry questioned that a previous opinion was that
uniforms and city equipment could not be used.
City Attorney Prouty stated that that was based on another section
of the Texas Constitution which prohibited a City from making a
gift or giving a thing of value to a private individual. Based on
staff's analysis of Attorney General opinions and ethics opinions,
it was felt that it was prohibited or that the Council would have
to make the four findings as indicated in the Attorney General's
opinion before allowing the contribution of City money or equipment
331
City of Denton City Counci~M~nut~s
August 15, 1995
Page 37
for charitable contributions. If the Council could make those four
finding, which would be difficult to do, it would be possible to
allow City employees to solicit on duty. It was not recommended to
do that.
Ken Gold stated that this was an important issue. When people
found out what the fire fighters were trying to do, they would
support it. He asked the Council to approve the ordinance for the
children afflicted with muscular dystrophy. He felt the issue
between the United Way and muscular dystrophy were identical with
the only difference being the question of soliciting on the
streets. He knew the campaign could be conducted safely in Denton.
Mayor Castleberry asked what percentage of the funds collected by
the Denton fire fighters stayed in Denton.
Gold replied that it would be for Denton County.
Mayor Castleberry asked what percentage went locally and what
percentage went to the national organization.
Gold replied that all was in Denton County.
Mayor Castleberry felt that that was not correct. He felt that not
all that was raised for a national organization was spent within
a city or county.
Gold stated that the amount of money raised did not raise enough to
cover what was already being spent in Denton County.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that he had a problem with the fire
fighters doing this on the job. One minute made a difference and
did not feel that this should be done while on duty.
On roll vote, Miller "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye",
Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion carried with a 5-
1 vote.
Council Member Miller asked that the issue of soliciting while on
duty be placed on the next meeting for discussion.
9. Resolutions
A. The Council considered approval of a resolution
appointing Bill Giese to the TMPA Board of Directors.
332
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 38
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R95-040
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING BILL GIESE TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY; AND DECLARING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Miller motioned, Krueger seconded to approve the resolution. On
roll vote, Miller "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye",
Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
B. The Council considered approval of a resolution approving
the 1995-96 budget of the Denton Central Appraisal District.
Jon Fortune, Chief Finance Officer, stated that on July 18th the
Denton Central Appraisal District presented their budget to
Council. Since that time the Appraisal District's Board of
Directors had approved the budget. This item was a formality as
the Property Tax Code provided that the Council had to approve or
disapprove the District budget within 30 days of its adoption.
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R95-041
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING THE 1995-
1996 BUDGET OF THE DENTON CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT; AND
DECLARING A/~ EFFECTIVE DATE.
Biles motioned, Brock seconded to approve the resolution. On roll
vote, Miller "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Council Member Young returned to the meeting.
C. The Council considered approval of a resolution
authorizing support for Denton County's proposed new ~ourt~
building and juvenile justice facility expansion projects.
City Manager Harrell stated that this was a request from County
Judge Moseley regarding their bond election.
Council Member Krueger stated that this was similar to the City's
CIP process as there would not be a tax rate increase with this.
One of the most common questions regarding the bond election was
why should this be approved as the money would probably be spent on
333
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 39
something else. That would not happen due to how the issue would
be worded on the ballot. It was important to send the message that
this would be good for Denton. The new facility, which was badly
needed, would be built in Denton. There was only one city in the
County which thus far had not approved the bond election.
Council Member Young stated that he was in favor of the proposal
but wanted to be sure that it would be built in Denton. He felt
that Hickory Street, where it stopped at Ruddell, needed to be
extended on through so that that area could be developed. He
suggested a note to Judge Moseley to extend the street.
Council Member Cott suggested an amendment indicating that the
facility would be built in Denton. If not, there would be no
guarantee that it would be built in Denton.
Council Member Krueger stated that it would be built in Denton.
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R95-042
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUPPORT FOR DENTON COUNTY'S PROPOSED
NEW COURTS BUILDING AND JI/VENILE JUSTICE FACILITY EXPANSION
PROJECTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Miller motioned, Brock seconded to approve the resolution as
presented. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "nay",
Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry
"aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote.
10. Vision Update
Council Member Miller stated that there would be a Cabinet meeting
the following evening to discuss the four impact group reports and
how to proceed from there.
11. The Council considered nominations/appointments to the City's
Boards and Commissions.
Mayor Castleberry nominated Robert C. Courtney to the Plumbing and
Mechanical Code board.
Council Member Krueger nominated Bill Coleman to the Historic
Landmark Commission.
12. The Council considered appointments to the Blue Ribbon CIP
Committee.
33'4
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 40
Mayor Castleberry indicated that each Council Member would appoint
seven people.
City Manager Harrell stated that the Council would appoint a chair
to the Committee.
Council Member Cott appointed Gail Garcelon and Glenn Garcelon;
Bryon and Lois Woods; Frenchy Rheault; Terry Schertz; and Dianne
Edmondson.
Council Member Brock appointed Kent Miller; Roni Beasley; Jim
Englebrecht; Charldean Newell; Ruby Cole; Fred Patterson; and Mark
Burroughs.
Council Member Miller appointed Jo Ann
Donsbach, Rudy Rodriquez; Eric Billips;
Kristoferson.
Ballantine; Roberta
Tom Judd; and Sandy
Mayor Castleberry appointed Fred Connell; Mark Hannah; Gene Gamble;
George Hopkins; Margaret Smith; Donna and Lawrence McClendon.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles indicated that he was not ready to make his
appointments.
Council Member Young appointed Joe Mulroy; Rick Salazar; Troy
LaGrone; Fred Hill; Bullitt Lowry; Herman Wesley; and David
Zoltner.
Council Member Krueger appointed Herb Schaake; Spunky Adams; Jerry
Falbo; Fran Miller; and Ken Moran.
13. The Council held a discussion and gave direction regarding
City Council committee assignments.
The following assignments were made:
Agenda Committee - Mayor Castleberry, City Manager, and Council
Member Brock.
Audit Committee - Mayor Castleberry, Mayor Pro Tem Biles and
Council Member Krueger.
Investment Policy Committee - Council Member Cott
Municipal Court Advisory Committee - Council Member Miller, Mayor
Pro Tem Biles and Council Member Cott.
335
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 41
Vision For Denton 21st Century - Council Member Miller and
Council Member Brock.
Lalor Fund Committee - Mayor Castleberry, Council Member Brock and
Council Member Young.
14. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
Council returned to the Budget Discussions.
Airport - Joseph Portugal, Assistant to the City Manager, reviewed
the objectives of the Airport as noted in the budget document. One
major item for the Airport budget was the installation of a
terminal building sewer line.
Miscellaneous Kathy DuBose, Executive Director for Finance,
presented the non-departmental miscellaneous expenses as listed in
the budget document.
The following was considered under Miscellaneous Matters from the
City Manager:
A. The Council received a report and held a discussion
regarding the Quarterly Financial Reports.
Kathy DuBose, Executive Director for Finance, stated that this
report came to Council three times per year for a three month, six
month and nine month analysis. The current year ad valorem taxes
reflected the reduction from last year upon the implementation of
the half cent sales tax. The one percent based of the half cent
sales was up 4.8% as of June 30th. Regarding franchises, TU would
be more than what was budgeted, Long Star Gas was down from budget
and GTE ceased paying pending litigation. The Lalor funds were 76%
received and the bingo tax had gone up by 1/4th percent. Revenue
fees were driven by athletic programs and recreation. Fines and
fees associated with the Court of Record were up. Licenses and
permits at the end of June had a decrease in building permits and
associated fees.
Mayor Pro Tem Biles asked why the estimate for the sales tax was
very close to the actual figures but the estimate for the half cent
property sales tax was lagging.
DuBose stated that the sales tax was implemented October 1, 1995
and did not begin receiving those funds'until December as there was
a two month lag. The estimate for the half cent property sales tax
was given to the City by the State.
3 3:6
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 42
Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that the predictions should be the same.
DuBose stated that the half cent sales tax was implemented October
1 and took two months to be received by the City. She indicated
that with 75% of the year lapsed, most of the expenditures were
well under budget. The electric utility revenues were under where
they were last year as were expenditures. The water fund was ahead
compared to the prior year.
Council Member Young asked about the $3 million in reserve in the
motor pool fund.
DuBose indicated that when a vehicle was purchased, money was
dedicated for future replacement of that vehicle so that when it
was necessary to replace it, there were funds available for the
purchase.
Council Member Young felt that $3 million should have been spent on
the fleet in the past.
DuBose stated that that money was dedicated for future replacement
of vehicles.
City Manager Harrell stated that the problem with the fleet was
that in the past the City never funded the motor pool. The system
in place now was working well.
DuBose continued with the wastewater fund which showed that the
operating revenues were higher than last year.
Council Member Krueger stated that after nine months of operation,
revenues were slightly up and expenses were slightly down from what
was budgeted. There was a $2.5 million surplus after 9 months.
City Manager Harrell stated that when the proposed budget was
presented, it was projected what the ending revenue and expenditure
would be. The "surplus" was then rolled over to the fund balance
so that the starting fund balance would already be accounted for in
the budget.
15. New Business
There were no items suggested by Council for future agendas.
16. The Council did not meet in Closed Meeting during the Regular
Session.
337
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 15, 1995
Page 43
17. There was no official action taken on Closed Meeting Items
discussed in the Work Session Closed Meeting.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:57 p.m.
~ECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
CITY OF DENTON, TE~ ~
ACC002B0