Loading...
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