Loading...
Minutes September 19, 1995395 CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 19, 1995 The Council convened into a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, September 19, 1995 at 5:45 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room of City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Biles; Council Members Brock, Cott, Krueger, Miller and Young. ABSENT: None The Council considered the following in Closed Meeting: A. Legal Matters -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.071 Discussed contemplated litigation concerning the request to rezone 3.753 acres from SF-7 to O zoning on the south side of I35-E and Lindsey Street. Consulted with the Attorney on contemplated litigation regarding paving liens and potential settlement of such contemplated litigation. B. Real Estate -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.072 Deliberated the purchase, exchange, lease or value of the property located south of McKinney between Loop 288 and Woodrow Lane and conferred with employees of the City to receive information and to ask questions regarding this real property transaction. C. Personnel/Board Appointments -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.074 The Council convened into a Regular Meeting on Tuesday, September 19, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall. 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. Mayor Castleberry presented a proclamation for National Fire Prevention Week. 2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of July 18, 1995. 396 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 2 Biles motioned, Young seconded to approve the minutes as presented. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 3. The Council considered approval of an exception to the noise ordinance for Capricho Show at the North Texas State Fairgrounds on Saturday, September 23, until 1:00 a.m. Jennifer Walters, City Secretary, stated that Julia LoSoya, representing the Capricho Show, was requesting an exception to the noise ordinance on Saturday, September 23rd until 1:00 a.m. A concert would be held at the North Texas State Fairground. In the past, this event had received numerous complaints for its amplified music. The loudspeakers were recently moved so as to not face the neighborhood which resulted in an elimination of the complaints. Krueger motioned, Young seconded to approve the exception. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 4. Public Hearing A. The Council held a public hearing and considered rezoning a 3.753 tract from SF-7 to Office and considered adoption of an ordinance rezoning 3.03 acres from Single Family-7 (SF-7) to office with conditions. The land was located on the south side of IH-35, about 200 feet east of Lindsey Street. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning of 3.03 acres to Office with conditions, 5-1.) Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that this was a City initiated zoning. The zoning case involved 3.03 acres of the 3.753 acre tract. Mayor Pro Tem Biles left the meeting. Robbins continued that the Denton Development Plan amendment which was the next item on the agenda would expand a moderate activity area into this area. He detailed the change in zoning lines proposed by changing the Denton Development Plan amendment on a map which was included in the agenda back-up. The Planning and zoning Commissions' first vote on the Plan amendment was 3-0 to postpone consideration and include it with a major update for the Plan in the near future. Staff was recommending that if the ordinance for this item was not approved, the resolution regarding the Denton Development Plan amendment should be postponed. In 1961, this area 397 city of Denton city Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 3 was changed in zoning from single Family-7 to the Business District. Later in 1961, with a major general ordinance amendment, the Business District was renamed Commercial District. In 1969, a new zoning map was adopted by ordinance, and there had not been any other ordinances changing the zoning in the area since then. During staff's research, map changes were found for which there was no ordinance, no minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council or any public hearings on a map change. A 1971 zoning case in the area to the north, had a zoning map which showed the Commercial zoning line at a different location from that adopted in 1969. Another zoning case from 1975 indicated another zoning line on the property which corresponded to the current zoning map. The map should have not been changed as there was no ordinance supporting the change. The map was probably changed sometime between 1969 and 1971. In the spring and summer of 1994, an application was made to change the zoning from SF-7 and Commercial to office with conditions. The Planning and Zoning Commission made a recommendation on a site plan with screening conditions concerning an eight foot masonry wall's placement so that three- fourths of the landscaping would be on the outside of the wall. A new site plan was never submitted and the applicant withdrew the rezoning application in the face of neighborhood opposition with the "20% rule" in effect. After withdrawal of the site plan, an application was made for a preliminary plat for a 5.381 acre tract which the Planning and zoning Commission denied in November of 1994. It was not known until after this case that the current zoning map was in error because it had not been changed since 1969 by ordinance. Planning and Zoning's analysis of the case was centered on policy recommendation for office with conditions on a smaller area than Council was asked to evaluate. There were three alternatives for the Council to consider. The Planning and zoning Commission's recommended was that (1) there be no direct illumination of adjoining land zoned SF-7 or any other district permitting single family use; (2) no motorized vehicle access to Lindsey or Willowwood Streets; (3) a masonry wall at least eight feet tall would be constructed before development along the west and rear of the property that was developed; (4) an additional row of trees adjoining the Southside Baptist Church would be planted or maintained; (5) if the property that drained south was developed, its drainage should be redirected to drain north; (6) there must be living quarters on site for a full time manager; (7) there would be a two story height limit; and (8) a limited area within which the motel could be built. Mayor Pro Tem Bil¢~ r~turned to the meeting. Robbins continued with an alternative set of conditions (Alternate 1-Conditions 2). These were conditions which would be favorable to 398 city of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 4 the owners of the property. A comparison of the Planning and Zoning Commission's conditions and the alternate set of conditions included: (1) the condition for direct illumination would be the same; (2) the access to Lindsey and Willowwood would be the same; (3) the masonry wall would be constructed six feet tall on the sides and rear of the property and an eight foot masonry wall would be constructed adjacent to property in the district which was zoned and used and would be constructed at the time of development; (4) the condition for a church buffer was the same; (5) drainage would be according to City specifications which would not require the water to drain north; (6) the manager would change to an on-site manager as opposed to a full-time manager; (7) there was no change in the height requirement; and (8) there was no change for the building area. Alternative Two dealt with the deletion of certain kinds of uses. A comparison of Alternative Two and the conditions from the Planning and Zoning Commission were: (1) unchanged; (2) unchanged; (3) unchanged; (4) unchanged; (5) the drainage would be to City regulations; (6) unchanged; (7) a series of uses would be deleted from those uses allowed in the office district. As a condition of this ordinance the following uses would be deleted: hotel, motel, hospitals, dormitories, boarding house, rooming house, group homes, half-way homes, fraternities, sororities, homes for the care of alcoholic/narcotic/psychiatric patients. Some of these uses were allowed in an office district as specific use permitted uses. This proposal would delete those uses completely. None of the conditions recommended by the Planning and zoning Commission had a site plan requirement for any use and did not delete any of the uses authorized by the office district. Mayor Castleberry opened the public hearing. Mary Jo Hill stated that her family had lived in the area for many years. They did not object when the highway was built nor did they object when other establishments were constructed in the area. They did object to the proposed motel within 200 feet of their home. The first site plan had a parking lot within 35 feet of their bedrooms. A motel was not needed in the area as there were four motels within walking distance. A quite neighborhood was n~eded. They were not against building nor growing bu% were opposed to this development. One Council Member who indicated favor to the proposal asked if the developer had worked with the residents. Last July the residents had an appointment with the developer. The day of the appointment it was cancelled because the developers were busy. They had had no contact since that time. The developers had not tried to contact the neighborhood. There was no discrimination connected with this case and she objected to such statements. The motel was not needed and they did not want the motel. There would be traffic problems, sewer problems, and 399 city of Denton city Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 5 drainage problems with another motel and another motel would create more crime in the area. Don Bailey encouraged the Council to oppose the ordinance change for the motel on this site. The motel would further deteriorate the area. This was a quality of life issue for the neighborhood. He suggested that the Council focus its attention on that area of the neighborhood that had an existing motel on the site plus enforcement of laws on that site would help. He was concerned about the quality of life and about the neighborhoods with the possibility of having this type of activity so close to their homes. John Weber stated that this case had been ongoing for 1½ years. He always felt that the citizens were the City and the Council Members were elected by the people to represent the people. When the Council served other groups they no longer served the people. The citizens of Denton were before the Council and had stated their opposition to the building of the motel in this area. The citizens pointed out many areas which would violate zoning regulations. He asked the Council to consider the residents and citizens of the City when making a decision and not vested interests. They were trying to develop the neighborhood with the COPS program and the beautification program. He asked Council to not rezone the property. Steve Fore stated that the rezoning proposal had become a political issue for some members of the local political and business community. The Denia Area Community Group had worked hard against this proposal, not because they were a political group, but because they lived in the area. The Denia Area Community Group was a diverse collection of people that all saw the negative impact of this proposal. The standard reason given for approval of the proposal was that it would send the wrong message to other potential developers if denied. He felt that parcels of land along 1-35 were being built rapidly. This property was different as to its proximity to a long established neighborhood and because of the nature of the existing development in the surrounding area. Stipulations in the Denton Development Plan were intended to preserve the balance between residential areas and commercial development. It was clear that many of those stipulations applied to this case and indicated that a motel should not be built on the location. City could move the zoning boundary anywhere it wanted and could change the intensity allocation to any figure. But the fact remained that it was still in the neighborhood and they felt that the proposal was bad for neighborhood and bad for Denton. He questioned what type of message would be sent to other neighborhoods. 400 city of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 6 Dr. Kathleen Eiland spoke about the motel franchise fee which had been mentioned many times. The proposed Sleep Inn was on the low end of the quality chain. She had called other area motels regarding room rates and the Sleep Inn was on the low end of those rates. Some of the area motels were not in good condition. There were many vacant rooms for visitors in Denton. There were violations of the Denton Development Plan's half mile requirement as there were five motels within a half a mile of each other. There was no site plan review for this proposal and she asked the Council to not put another low dollar motel in the neighborhood. Carol Brantley stated that there was no need for another motel in the area. This area was a diverse residential area with many different types of homes. She felt that the neighborhood was being invaded with another proposal for a motel. Most motels were built for a quick return on investment and not for the benefit of the neighborhood. The average motel was built to last approximately seven years and most motels were sold within the first three years or did not make it financially. If traveling though Denton, she would not stop in such an area. The motels look great when first built but deteriorate quickly. She asked the Council to remember who their constituents were in the City. Annette Mulkey felt that the city was just trying to get past the reputation of not being business friendly and was going too far on this issue. Statements had been made on how the motel was willing to help the neighborhood which was not true. If the Council considered something of a business nature in the area, she asked the Council to keep conditions on the property so that it would not be a blight to the area. She asked the Council to listen to what had happened to the other motels in the area. It appeared that the Council was not listening to what the neighbors were saying and she requested that the Council respect the needs of the neighbors. Bill Miller stated that changing the location of the driveway would not keep traffic off Lindsey. The issue was based on the false statement that Denton was not growing. The question was how did Denton want to grow and not whether Denton would grow. In his opinion the motel industry in the city was poor, and until it improved he would not put any more in neighborhoods. He asked the Council to keep a small area for the residents of the neighborhood. He felt that the neighborhood had been put in double jeopardy as the issue kept coming back in many different modes. This issue was driven by people who did not represent the citizens and he felt that the council members in the district should represent them. Linnie McAdams stated that this was a very diverse neighborhood with a variety of people and price of homes. The area was a special 401 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 7 place to live and adding another motel would detract from the quality of life in the neighborhood. Traffic situations in similar motels was not what was wanted in the neighborhood. A half a mile away the University of North Texas planned to build an arts center and another motel in the area would not add to the quality of Denton. There was not a problem with not having enough rooms in Denton. She objected to a motel in the area, but did not object to an office in the area. They did not want to add to the crime problems which might be associated with cheap motels. She asked the Council to adopt Alternative 2 to preclude motels in the area. Henry smith stated part of the property which would be changed for the request for commercial zoning was in the backyard of the last house on Lindsey Street. There was an enclosed fence around this entire land. This was a neighborhood and they wanted to keep it such. He asked why the Council would want to commercialize the backyards of residents. The neighborhood has been trying to work for over a year with the owners of the property. The owners were ordered twice by the Planning and Zoning Commission to meet with the neighborhood which was never done. Art Anderson started negotiating with the neighborhood and proceeded to mail a barrage of letters to the neighbors. In one of the meetings, Art Anderson made it clear the intentions of the RPS Ventures was that they were only here for the short-term. Motels change ownerships many times over the years and some people were living in motels on a permanent basis. He asked the Council to take a stand for the neighborhood and oppose the zoning to allow a motel to be built. chris Mehaney stated that Choice Hotels International fully supported the development of this proposal. Typically Choice Hotels produced a substantial property with an extensive Quality Inn inspection system. They had a signed franchise agreement with the property owners. There was a Sleep Inn in Richardson and Plano with one under construction in Addison. Art Anderson stated that the property owners did not support the recommendations of the Planning and zoning Commission but would accept the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendations subject to the conditions in Alternate 1. He had talked several times with some of the residents and an attempt had been made to try and address the issues. From the beginning they tried to be consistent with the development. The owners bought the property based on commercial zoning as indicated on the maps for 20 years and intended to build a motel on the site. The owners tried to address the issues raised from the neighborhood from an adjacency standpoint recognizing that this was a tract of land which had frontage on 1-35. The bottom line was that it was a commercial tract of land on an interstate highway. Motels could co-exist with 4O2 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 8 residential neighborhoods. The commercial zoning line was 200 feet away from any residential structure and the layout of the property was changed so that it would be fronting and oriented to the highway. This tract was not a part of the neighborhood in terms of how it was zoned and the conditions placed by the Planning and Zoning Commission addressed all of the adjacency issues. Jennifer Phillips stated that the Denton Development Plan was written to preserve the integrity of neighborhoods. This zoning case violated several items in the Plan. One of those dealt with building neighborhood service centers. The City staff's solution was to move a line on a map to put this in a moderate zoning area which was not realistic. The problems would still be there even if a line were moved. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Council Member Brock stated that the area was now over the intensity allocation before any building was done. Robbins stated correct. Council Member Brock asked if the Raddison was included in determining the intensity area. Robbins stated yes. Council Member Brock asked how much the intensity was over the allocation. Robbins stated that the whole intensity area was 17% over allocation. The Raddison was calculated at a commercial rate and the golf course was calculated at an institutional rate. Council Member Brock stated that if the re-zoning was approved for a hotel/motel, the intensity level would need to be changed or move the boundary of the intensity area. Robbins replied that staff felt they should move the line but there was no ordinance which required such. The staff did not say that the line had to be moved. It might be prudent but the Council was not required to do so. Council Member Brock asked if the Planning and Zoning's study of the Denton Development Plan would anticipate major revisions to the Plan. 4O3 City of Denton city Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 9 Robbins replied correct. The Planning and zoning Commission's recommendations were due in October on how to revise the plan. Krueger motioned, Young seconded approve Alternate 1. Council Member Miller stated one issue to consider regarding the case was how individuals would get to the motel from the Interstate. As he understood, there was a pledge to not use the neighborhood for the traffic flow. He had driven in the area and felt that in order to not use the neighborhood as a way to get to the motel an individual would have to come in from the northwest and get off 1-35 on McCormick Street. That was a very difficult intersection to go through. If an individual stayed on the Interstate and exited in the vicinity of where the motel would be built, he would have to turn on Bernard Street. This would take him through the neighborhood to get to the motel. The location was poor as far as how to get to it. The owners of the property bought the property based upon a line on a map and assumed that everything was correct. They did not check adequately into the details. Art Anderson stated the owners bought title insurance and had zoning verification from the City. Council Member Miller stated there was property #12 which had a zoning line through the property. He asked if that was normal where owner did not have that knowledge. Art Anderson stated he was at a zoning hearing the prior evening where that exact situation occurred. The property was zoned into two different zones. The bottom line was that the zoning line was consistent from the first zoning hearing and the plat hearing. There was no reference at the first zoning hearing and the first plat hearing and no objection made when it was stated that the commercial line was as it was shown. Everyone assumed that that was where the line was. Staff cannot find an ordinance but that did not mean that it was never approved. Council Member Miller asked how the property was zoned at this point, based on ordinances. Robbins replied it was zoned SF-7. Council Member Miller stated that this was a zoning hearing to determine whether or not the property would be rezoned. Most decisions made by Council were made by a majority and the majority ruled. In this matter, the law indicated that in a zoning case where 20% of the property owners within 200 feet were in opposition to the rezoning, a super majority of the Council was needed in 404 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 10 order to approve the rezoning. That meant six of seven council member votes was needed to approve the proposal. Herb Prouty, City Attorney, stated that it was not 20% of the property owners but rather 20% of area of the land or more owned by the property owners. Council Member Miller asked what percent of the land owned by the property owners in this case was in opposition. Robbins replied that there was 39% in opposition. Council Member Miller asked what percentage was recommending approval. Robbins stated that there were no replies in approval without conditions. Council Member Miller stated that the percentage in opposition to the proposal was more than normal. Some had indicated that this was an economic development issue on which he supported growth. The case was very difficult, with possible threats of lawsuits against individual Council Members and against the city. He had been threatened with a lawsuit against him personally. He felt that the land had a different use other than just SF-7. He agreed that there were enough motels in area and would vote against the proposal. There was a use for the land which was not just single family land usage. If the motion did not carry, he hoped the Council would consider a motion which would allow the property owners to use the property for office purposes with the restrictions named and referred to in Alternate 2. Council Member Krueger asked what the percentage of opposition would be if the existing motels were removed from the 39%. Robbins stated that it would still be over 20% Council Member Brock read a statement from a document Mr. Robbins presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission on January 4, 1996 "preventing and/or mitigating potential adverse impacts to single family and other types of residential development by other uncomplimentary or incompatible land uses had historically been an important reason to instituting land use controls in every country which had land use controls. Preservation and protection of neighborhoods was as goal of almost all community master plans. The Denton Development Plan was no exception." For over two years the community had been involved in a visioning project. Her areas of concentration dealt with areas such as this. Entranceways were 405 city of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 11 not seen just as a "live" issue but as apart of the economic issue to be studied. There was a great deal of discussion on entranceway corridors which came into the city and through the city. There was the need to present a positive image of the city. One recommendation was to establish a brand image as a quality community and market that image per the Fantus study. In the past, some had interpreted economic development as anything anywhere. The city had a need to take charge and decide on how the city was going to grow. People all over Denton had a right to be concerned about zoning in the City. Everyone had an investment in Denton and should be concerned. This rezoning issue and placing of a motel violated the intensity strip development, neighborhood preservation policy, entranceway policies, and violates long-range economic development policies. On roll vote to rezone the property with Alternate 1, Condition 2, Miller "nay", Young "aye", Cott "nay", Krueger "aye", Brock "nay", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion failed with a 4-3 vote as a super majority was required. Miller motioned, Cott seconded to rezone the property with Alternate 2 plus the seventh condition that hotels/motels, hospitals, boarding/rooming houses, group homes, half-way houses, fraternities, sororities, and homes for the care of alcoholic/ narcotic/ psychiatric patients were prohibited. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "nay", Cott "aye", Krueger "nay", Brock "aye", Biles "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion failed with a 3-4 vote. 5. Resolutions A. The Council considered approval of a resolution amending Appendix A of the Denton Development Plan by changing the boundaries for Intensity Areas 99 and 119 defined therein in conformity with the map attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit 1, by extending the boundary of Intensity Area 119 along the south side of I35-E to its approximate intersection with Lindsey Street, and reducing Intensity Area 99 correspondingly to accommodate the expansion; and amending the concept map of the Denton Development Plan to conform therewith. (The Planning and zoning Commission recommended approval 5-1.) Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, requested that this item be deferred until a later date with the update of the Denton Development Plan. 406 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 12 Miller motioned, Brock seconded to defer the item. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "nay", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a vote of 5-2. 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. A. Bids and Purchase Orders: 2. 3. 4. 5. e Bid #1789 - Ti Channel Banks Bid #1790 - 100 MBPS Network Backbone Equipment Bid #1791 - Diesel Powered Electric Generator Bid #1801 - Janitorial Services Bid #1785 - Addition to Denton Municipal Generating Station Bid #1798 - Metal Building Bid #1799 - Egan/Panhandle Area Water/Sewer Utility Replacement and Rehabilitation RFP ~1774 - University of North Texas 7. Consent Agenda Ordinances The Council considered adoption of the Consent Agenda Ordinances 7A.-7C. Biles motioned, Cott seconded to adopt the ordinances. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. A. NO. 95-187 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 PROVIDINC FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (6.A.1. - Bid ~1789; 6.A.2. - Bid #1790; 6.A.3. - Bid #1791; 6.A.4. - Bid #1801) B. NO. 95-188 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.5. - Bid #1785; 6.A.6. - Bid #1798; 6.A.7. - Bid #1799) 407 city of Denton City council ~inut~s~'~ ~ September 19, 1995 Page 13 C. NO. 95-189 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING A COMPETITIVE SEALED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (6.A.8. - RFP #1774) 8. Ordinances A. 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. Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that several weeks ago the Council requested a reduction for services and for the City to do their own services on some items associated with this proposal. Whether Council was in favor or against storm water fees, a consultant's expertise was needed to determine whether to proceed with such a fee. Council could consider a less aggressive program fee which could range between $2.00 to $2.25 per month. This would hold constant for five-six years. Council Member Cott stated the speed of how to do this was Council's determination as much as was the water's determination to make. There were three items on this issue: 1) what the city had done, 2) what the developers had done, and 3) what individuals had done. Nelson stated that his staff contacted a number of residents and businesses regarding increased drainage in neighborhoods. It was very difficult to spend those dollars and raise the revenues needed to do those projects in a rapid pace. This issue was about to go on the CIP process which would be good for the issue. There was a tentative time table regarding the issue. Council Member Young stated he was against the $23,000 for a consultant because he knew that the city needed to do something about drainage and flooding. He felt that the city could do $1 million per year in drainage projects and not have to do this fee, which was a tax. He asked if the City could do $1 million per year for drainage and not have to hire a consultant. Nelson stated that he just completed the budget process and would have welcomed $1 million for that project. The $1 million for that project was five cents on the tax rolls and presently the City had 408 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 14 approximately two cents on the tax rolls for operations and one cent for debt services. Council Member Young stated that paying for this study before citizens voted on it was in the wrong order. Nelson stated that when this issue was before the Council several years ago, one concern was no one was certain on what fee to implement. A study would determine that fee. Council Member Young stated that a study was done in 1990 and a consultant paid for then. Nelson stated it was not done by a consultant, it was done with a committee. Council Member Young stated that that should be done now. Nelson state that due to prior discussions he felt external assistance was needed to go through State regulations and procedures. Council Member Krueger stated that he had asked for a reduction in the contract and was pleased with the revisions. In his opinion this tax was not a new tax and could replace a tax with lower taxes as much as 8%. This merely created a new line on the utility bill and would be a fee added to the utility bills. He agreed that the issue should be taken to the people and let them vote on the issue. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-190 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND CAMP, DRESSER & MCKEE, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATING TO ESTABLISHING A FEE OR CHARGES UNDER WHICH A MUNICIPAL DRAINAGE UTILITY SYSTEMMAY BE FUNDED; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; A/~D PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Miller motioned, Biles seconded to adopt the ordinance. Donald White stated that he was representing himself as a business man and some 800 signatures of residents and registered voters in the City who were in opposition to the contract and to any new drainage utility. He was prepared to exercise whatever was needed to see that the City's money was spent in a frugal and business- 409 City of Denton City Council Minutes~ September 19, 1995 Page 15 like manner. Based on the Charter, he felt that there must be a City election before a new utility was formed. The city Attorney indicated that these waters had not tested in following the letter of the law to create a new drainage utility district. At some point, a stand must be taken and a limit on where to draw the line. L. T. Hensley stated that he was in opposition to the tax and did not want another tax added to his bill. He had had enough taxes and this needed to be put to a vote by the people. He believed that another bureaucracy did not need to be added. Carl Williams felt that a consultant should not be hired for every item which needed to be studied. This was a back door way of violating the constitutional rights of the City. Calling it a fee when it was really a tax was not right. It seemed like a back way to make universities and churches and schools pay taxes. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated the item this evening was not a vote on whether or not to adopt the fee. These seven individuals were not elected in order to be told what to do. They were elected to listen and to make decisions on what was heard and on what they thought. This was not a tax as so stated in the newspapers. This was an attempt to educate the Council and have individuals knowledgeable in this area advise the Council on whether or not this was feasible for Denton. Approximately 30% of the acreage in the city limits were governmental entities which did not pay taxes but which contributed to wastewater problems. No one on Council had indicated whether they would vote for or against the fee. They were just trying to learn something. The fee for the contract before Council was less than half of the original proposal. The city needed to spend dollars to learn whether or not a reasonable fee schedule had been developed to take to the voters in the future. Council Member Young stated he understood the need to study this issue. But the people needed to make the decision on the issue and the issue should be studied after an election on the issue. The people should vote on the issue, and if approved, proceed with the study. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "nay", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. B. The Counoil oon~idered adoption of an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 88-189, which granted a franchise to Sammons Communications, Inc. to reconstruct, operate, and maintain a cable television system in the City of Denton, Texas; consenting to the 410 City of Denton city Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 16 assignment and transfer of that franchise from Sammons Communications, Inc. to Marcus Cable Associates, L.P. in accordance with the terms and conditions of this ordinance; and approving an acceptance agreement; and providing for liquidated damages not to exceed $4,000 for failure to meet customer service standards. (Second Reading) Richard Foster, Public Information officer, stated that this was the second reading of this ordinance. The second reading transferred the cable television franchise from Sammons Communications to Marcus Cable. Last week Council approved an ordinance and agreement incorporated with it, but had a deletion on language regarding telecommunications services. This was the same document that was approved last Tuesday. Herb Prouty, City Attorney, stated that he had inserted in the acceptance agreement and ordinance a provision which indicated that Marcus would apply for a franchise if it decided to go into telecommunication services. If it did not have to do that under the law, it would have to pay a 5% franchise fee which would be applicable to cable television on all telecommunication services. That statement was deleted with the understanding that the issues would be discussed further with Marcus. This was not a possibility, and was consistent with what had been discussed during the negotiations. Some conditions included in the agreement were an additional penalty if Marcus failed to maintain certain customer service standards, information on various staffing levels and. expenditures, signal quality assurances, economic opportunity goals, access to records which the City did not have before, payment of consultant and attorney fees up to a $125,000 limit and an access charge to help fund local access activities on the cable access channel. The staff recommendation was to approve the ordinance. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-191 A/q ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 88-189, WHICH GI~3~NTED A FRANCHISE TO SAMMONS COMMUNICATIONS, INC. TO RECONSTRUCT, OPERATE, AND MAINTAIN A CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS; CONSENTING TO THE ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER OF THAT FRANCHISE FROM SAMMONS COMMUNICATIONS, INC. TO MARCUS CABLE ASSOCIATES, L.P. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; APPROVING AN ACCEPTANCE AGREEMENT; PROVIDING FOR LIQUIDATED DAMAGES NOT TO EXCEED $4,000 FOR FAILURE TO MEET CUSTOMER SERVICE STANDARDS; PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; 411 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 17 PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECT OF THIS ORDINANCE UPON OTHER ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Young motioned, Krueger seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "nay", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried 5-2 vote. 9. Resolutions A. The Council considered approval of a resolution authorizing the Community Development office to submit an application to the Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services seeking funding and authorizing the City Attorney to negotiate a contract with the Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services. Derrick Collins, Human Services Coordinator, stated that this resolution would authorize the Community Development office to submit an application to the Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services to seek funding and to negotiate a contract with that department. Mayor Pro Tem Biles left the meeting. Collins stated the purpose of the grant was to develop community based programs for assistance to families and provide an opportunity to improve coordination of services. In the past four weeks, he had been working with various agencies within the county. The proposal would be for $250-300,000 funding for two case workers for case management and financial assistance to potentially homeless individuals. The second portion of the grant would purchase hardware and fund a position to expand the tracking system at the Denton County Cooperative Ministries. The proposed 5% match would be made with funding already allocated towards human service organizations and there would be no additional City funding for the project. Council Member Cott asked if these were new programs within the current programs. Collins stated that this would not be a new program. This was building on collaborative efforts already built within the community and would coordinate programs. 412 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 18 Council Member Cott asked if this was funded by CDBG or HUD funds in the past and now would be funded by general funds. Collins stated that there were no additional funds not already allocated. Council Member Krueger stated that this was only a grant. Collins stated it was a grant which could be renewed for up to three years. Council Member Krueger asked what would happen to the new positions hired after the grant was ended. Collins stated that a service committee would be responsible for securing additional funding for the programs. If at the end of the three year period, no additional funds were secured, the program would discontinue except for service provision with a tracking~ system. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-056 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS/ AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PROTECTIVE AND REGULATORY SERVICES SEEKING FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT WITH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PROTECTIVE AND REGULATORY SERVICES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Young motioned, Miller seconded to approve the resolution. Mayor Pro Tem Biles returned to the meeting. 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 approval of a resolution accepting a grant from the Texas Forest Service. Cecile Carson, Community Improvement Coordinator, stated that this grant was a continuation of a project started in 1992-93. The Texas Forest Service had selected Denton for an $8,500 grant. The City, through a variety of in-kind services, would bring the total grant to $10,475. The grant would provide the City with staff 413 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 19 familiar with tree and tree identification who would go out and identify trees on collector streets and then map that information. This information was useful in the CIP Program and in land use analysis. There was no cash expenditure on the part of the city with in-kind matches such as a salary to supervise an intern and the use of City utility bills to distribute a pamphlet on tree planting. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-057 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A GRANT FROM THE TEXAS FOREST SERVICE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Cott motioned, Brock seconded to approve the resolution. 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 approval of a resolution approving budget adjustments for fiscal year 1994-1995. Jon Fortune, chief Finance officer, stated this resolution would adjust the 1994-95 budget. It transferred $45,000 from savings identified from other departments and placed it in the Fire Department to cover unanticipated overtime. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-058 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994-95; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Biles motioned, Krueger seconded to approve the resolution. 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 approval of a resolution consenting to the assignment and transfer of a contract with Dynamic Health & Performance Inc. to Pacificare Wellness Company; and authorizing the City Manager to execute an assignment of the contract from Dynamic. Craig Maroney, Human Resources Generalist, requested approval of the resolution which would authorize the transfer and assignment of 414 City of Denton city Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 20 a contract from Dynamic Health and Performance Inc. to Pacificare Wellness Company. Both parties agreed with the transfer and had signed the contract. There was no additional costs associated with the assignment and transfer. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-059 A RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO THE ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER OF A CONTRACT WITH DYNAMIC HEALTH AND PERFORMANCE, INC. ("DYNAMIC") TO PACIFICARE WELLNESS COMPANY ("PACIFICARE"); AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN ASSIGNMENT OF THE CONTRACT FROM DYNAMIC; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Biles motioned, Brock seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. E. The Council considered approval of a resolution adopting Policy No. 106-04 "Overtime". Tom Klinck, Director of Human Services, stated this item made minor revisions to the City's overtime policy. The Fair Labor Standards Act provided for exempt employees who were exempt.from the overtime provisions and non-exempt employees who were not exempt and who were paid overtime. There were three categories of exempt employees-administrative, executive, and professional which were compensated with salary and were not eligible for overtime. Non- exempt employees were compensated on an hourly basis and were eligible for overtime at a time and a half rate. civil Service employees were non-exempt. Non-exempt employees' overtime hours were those hours over 40 hours per week and were paid at 1½ times their hourly rate of pay. The City could pay compensatory time which was accrual of actual time at time and a half. That provision was used to better manage overtime payments. The changes requested provided for the supervisor to designate all overtime as paid in ~a~h or a~ru~d in ~ompensatory time up to the maximum %ime provided. The maximum compensatory time balances for non-Civil Service employees were 80 hours, for Police Officers, 100 hours and for Fire fighters 200 hours. Those were the policy provisions requested. This provided for non-Civil Service employees to be able to respond to emergencies and special needs coverage for sick leave, vaoation~, unsoh~dul~d activities such as shift transitions, and service delivery interruptions due to acts of nature. 415 City of Denton city Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 21 Council Member Cott questioned why this was not done during the budget process. Tom Klinck stated that staff had been working on these minor changes for a number of months. There was no additional budget impact for this budget year as a result of the changes. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-060 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING POLICY NO. 106.04 "OVERTIME"; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Krueger seconded to approve the resolution. 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 approval of a resolution in support of 1-35 Corridor Coalition in its effort to receive federal designation of Interstate-35 as the official North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Highway. Linda Ratliff, Economic Development Coordinator, stated that this resolution was in support of the designation of I35 as the official North American Free Trade Agreement Highway. Judge Moseley was instrumental in the formation of the coalition in April of 1984. The resolution would be sent to Denton's representatives in Congress asking them for their consideration. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-061 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING THE NORTH AMERICANFREE TRADE AGREEMENT (NAFTA); AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Biles motioned, Young seconded to approve the resolution. Council Member Miller stated that whether the designation was received or not, the truck traffic would be there. The purpose of the coalition and the reason for the designation would be to be able to use Federal tax dollars rather than State tax dollars %o provide for heavy truck traffic. There were more miles of I35 in Denton County than any other County. 416 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 22 On roll vote, Miller "aye" Young "aye", Cott "aye" Krueger "aye" Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. G. The Council considered approval of a resolution voting for a member to the Board of Managers of the Denco Area 9-1-1 District. Kathy DuBose, Executive Director for Finance, stated that the Denco 9-1-1 District had requested each city to vote for a candidate for a two year term beginning October 1 on the District Board of Mangers. The opening available was the end of the term for Mayor Olive Stephens. There were three nominations before the Council. One was to reappoint Mayor Olive Stephens, one was for Council Member Ronni Cade from Lewisville and one from Oak Point, Ms. Sherry Schuyler. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-062 A RESOLUTION VOTING FOR A MEMBER TO THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF THE DENCO AREA 9-1-1 DISTRICT; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Krueger seconded to nominate Olive Stephens. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "nay", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried 6-1 vote. H. The Council considered approval of a resolution approving the fiscal year 1996 budget of the Denco Area 9-1-1 District, pursuant to Tex. Health & Safety Code, Section 772.309. Kathy DuBose, Executive Director for Finance, stated that this was the fiscal year plan of the Denco Area 9-1-1 District for 1996 and a review of the past year which they asked Council to approve. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-063 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 1996 BUDGET OF THE DENCO AREA 9-1-1 DISTRICT, PURSUANT TO THE TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE SECTION 772.309; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 417 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 23 Biles motioned, Krueger seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 10. The Council held a public hearing and considered, deliberated and took action on the duties and evaluation of the Municipal Judge; considered, deliberated and took action on the resignation of the Municipal Judge; and discussed recruitment of a new Municipal Judge. Mayor Castleberry stated there were three individuals who reported directly to the Council. Those individuals were the city Manager, the City Attorney and the Municipal Judge. At the request of the Municipal Judge this was a public hearing. There would be a 15 minute time limit on her presentation which the Mayor would be coordinating. Judge White stated she was here to discuss the duties and evaluation of the Municipal Judge, to discuss the resignation of the Municipal Judge, and to discuss, if necessary, the recruitment of a new Municipal Judge. As she had stated to City Council members who had contacted her upon receiving her resignation, she did not want to resign but felt she was being forced to resign due to issues which she had continuously brought forward and which she felt were not being adequately addressed. She had been the Municipal Judge in Denton for nine years and during that nine year period she served the City well. She also had been appointed the Chief Magistrate of Denton County in 1992 and was a substitute magistrate before that. One function of the Municipal Judge was the administrative portion which involved a review of all the functional activities of the Court; development of the organizational structure; formulation of all the local rules of practice and procedures for operating the Court; development of all the administrative policies and procedures for the Court and the Court Clerk's office; allocation of the work load among the various judges; facilitation of the judge's understanding and performance of their role as judges and magistrates; preparation of the Court's annual budget; preparation and oversight of all reports to the City administration and the Texas Judicial Counsel. Some of the duties as Municipal Judge and as a Magistrate were to preside over trials to hear all of the evidence; decide all the questions of law and render appropriate judgements; preside over jury trials which included issuing writs to summon a jury panel, ruling on challenges for cause, summoning additional jurors, complying written jury charges and instructions, and instructing the jury; taking and recording pleas; enforcing the Court's judgement; setting and forfeiting bail in misdemeanor and felony cases; issuing search 418 City of Denton city Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 24 warrants; administering Magistrate warnings to defendants charged with misdemeanors and felonies; issuing summons in misdemeanor and felony cases; issuing arrest warrants in misdemeanor and felony cases; accepting affidavits of probable cause in misdemeanor and felony cases; appointing counsel when required in misdemeanor and felony cases; conducting examining trials in felonies before a Grant Jury indictment was rendered; conducting emergency mental health commitment hearing, and issuing warrants for involuntary hospitalization; conducting medical revocation hearings; conducting juvenile detention hearings when the juvenile judge was unavailable; issuing building inspection warrants; issuing processes such as subpoenas, warrants and writs of attachment; deciding motions to quash, motions for continuance, motions to compel production of documents, motions to adjudicate guilt and motions for indigency; keeping and maintaining a docket and minutes of all proceedings had in the Court whether misdemeanor or felony; considering direct and indirect contempt of Court proceedings; conducting driver licenses suspension hearings; and hearings under the Texas Liability Insurance statute. The law changed on a daily basis on appeals and the business of being a judge meant keeping up with all of those changes. She submitted copies of her past performance reviews which she felt was important to the new members of the Council. She felt that the evaluations were necessary for the Council to review in order to be enlightened as to some of the tasks she had done while a Municipal Judge and were instructive in pointing out some of the issues she had raised over the last nine years. In each evaluation salary compensation was an issue as were terms of contract. Since her evaluation in December of 1994, her most major development was the implementation of the Court of Record legislation. This legislation was implemented on August 16, 1994 and coincided with the Court's move into the new facility. In anticipation of this legislation and the move to the new Court much work needed to be done to implement this Court of Record. While implementing the Court of Record there could be no down time in the Court. She was involved in the process of design and construction of the Court facility. She had to establish additional dockets for Court and established the Juvenile Diversion Task Force and began working on the teen courts program. She had been asked by several of the Council Members to stay on but one of the issues they were unable to agree upon was the compensation issue. She did not feel that the current salary of $57,075.20 with no car allowance was adequate for the type of work she was required to do. She felt that she deserved a higher salary for what she did. She had some handouts dealing with the compensation matter for Council consideration. Mayor Castleberry stated that Judge White was out of time for her presentation. ~ 419 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 25 Young motioned, Cott seconded to extend! Judge White's time for 10 minutes. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. Judge White presented a judicial salary survey which she had compiled and reviewed several exhibits given to Council. Exhibit 31 was an executive City of Denton assignment which showed a control point for each of those positions. It was her understanding that once the control points were reached, there were no longer merit increases but incentive bonuses awarded as cash lump sums which were not reflected on Exhibit 30. Exhibit Bi showed how the program worked and the type of increases the executives received once they reached the controls point. Exhibit C showed the pay plans with minimum, mid-point and maximum salary range. According to these documents, her salary did not even meet the mid-point. When the part-time judge was hired, the Council's agreement was to hire at a range of $15-17 dollars when in fact the employee was hired at $23 per hour. The general pay schedule for that position indicated that that was at the maximum level. Exhibit Q showed the job classification and showed that the job classification was a 10 with a hiring range of $15.72-$17.70 per hour and a maximum rate of $23.15 per hour. That employee was hired in at the maximum rate with no prior judicial experience. Four months later, that employee was given a 4% increase in salary. She felt it was important to look at each salary plan as they highlighted the fact that her salary was not in compliance with the salary survey. Exhibit F was a salary survey done by the Human Resources Department in 1993 which showed that the maximum was $67,000 and a mid-point of $56,000. At that time she was making $50,000. Exhibit I was the salary survey done in August by the Human Resources Department with regard to her position and included a survey of cities which were not Court of Record cities. That survey did not include the Chief Judge's salary but rather only the full-time associate judges. Most of the judges, who were Chief Judges were only doing administrative work and not presiding on the bench as she did. She was on call 365 days a year, worked during all holidays, was not able to take vacations with this job as the schedule would have to be redone to do so. Most of the associate judges worked in the evenings and there were two judges who filled in when necessary. She asked the Council to look at the information presented as she was not able to adequately discuss it in prior meetings. Exhibit 4 contained her proposal with the conditions she would accept if she was to continue her employment with the City. 42O City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 26 Council Member Young asked White if she would be willing to take her resignation off the table and give the Council a week to study her proposal. Judge White stated that her resignation was not effective until September 30th and if Council needed until the next session to study the matter, she would not need a response at this meeting. There would be no need to remove her resignation from the table if Council could look at it by this time next week. Young motioned, Cott seconded to delay this item until next week and consider it in an Executive Session which would give Council time to go through all of the Judge's materials. Mayor Castleberry stated that the motion was to consider the item in an executive session. Herb Prouty, city Attorney, stated that Judge White would have to remove her request that all of these discussions be held in a public hearing. Judge White stated that the discussion of next week with regards to the materials she had presented could be discussed in Executive Session if that was the desire of the Council. Mayor Castleberry asked Council Member Young if that was a part of his motion. Council Member Young agreed. Mayor Castleberry asked Council Member Cott if that was a part of the second. Council Member Cott replied no that he preferred to continue the discussion in public. Young motioned, Biles seconded to delay the item until next week and to discuss the item in public. Council Member Miller stated that he wanted to discuss the item in open session and asked Judge White if she preferred it be done in open session. Judge White stated she had no objection to either forum. Council Member Miller stated the whole purpose of the Executive Session was to have information presented to the Council. If there was something which might cause an individual personal harm, it was 421 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 27 not done in open session. The ExecUtive Session was for the benefit of the individual and the issues being discussed. He wanted to make sure that the Judge wanted that forum. Judge White stated that she understood why the Executive Session existed. The fact was that there were no minutes of those sessions. She would defer to the vote of the Council. Council Member Cott stated that Judge White started this discussion in this forum and Council should continue it in that forum. Judge White replied that that was fine with her and if she needed to state on the record that she was requesting it in public, then she would do so at this time. Mayor Pro Tem Biles asked for a restatement of the motion. Council Member Young stated that his motion was to delay the item for a week and to consider it in a public forum. Mayor Pro Tem Biles asked if that would be to review the material presented by Judge White or to conduct the evaluation. Council Member Young replied both. Council Member Brock stated that the next session was just a work session next week and was not a regular session. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that the next regular meeting would be after September 30th. He suggested taking a 15-30 minute recess to review the information presented by Judge White as there was no regularly scheduled meeting before September 30th. City Attorney Prouty stated this had been posted as a public hearing. He wanted to find out from the Judge if she wanted to proceed with the public hearing and then have Council go into an Executive Session if desired to discuss the material presented. Judge White stated that she would like to give the public an opportunity to speak. Council could then go into a recess after that, if desired. Council Member Young withdrew his motion. Mayor Castleberry stated that the public hearing would be held and discussion continued after that. 422 city of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 28 Sandra Lee stated that she felt Judge White had done a wonderful job and had made the Court successful in many ways. Before becoming a Court of Record the city lost money due to appeals made out of the Court. Council Member Young left the meeting. Lee continued that night arraignments had been started to accommodate those coming to Court who worked during the day. Judge White had consistently provided the Clerk's office with written material in the form of Judicial Orders which were followed to ensure that the Court operated in accordance with State legislation. The Orders focused on changes which affected the office and office procedures. Council Member Cott left the meeting. Lee stated that Judge White was the only Black executive currently working for the City. The reason most Blacks were leaving was due to not being paid adequately, unfair business practices and/or discrimination. She felt that a compromise must be reached. Ken Royal stated that he was speaking on behalf of Judge White to address the issue of equal salaries and benefits for equal work. He believed in fairness and if a job was performed, fair compensation should be received. Judge White was doing a satisfactory job but had a discrepancy of compensation. He urged that Judge White be given an increase equal to other city employees. Heads of other departments were paid more. New employees would cost more to obtain than the process of correcting the inequities of the current Judge. Herman Wesley stated that he was speaking in support for Judge White and on behalf of other department heads on the City staff who he felt were not compensated relative to fair market value nor compensated equitably to their counterparts in other departments. Those employees were the City Treasurer and the Head Librarian. What Judge White was seeking from the Council was understandable and fair. He could not understand how the Municipal Judge, who had been on the job for nine years and had oversight of an entire branch of the City government would make less than the Director of Information Services who had oversight of a staff of four. He did not understand why she would make less than the Parks and Recreation Director who had only been on the job for six months. He questioned that the problem was between the Judge and the Council. That the Judge was not given as much time as needed to talk with the Council was an indication of the problem. The way the Judge was being ignored and the way some of the members were 423 City of Denton City Counci~ Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 29 talking during her presentation showed disrespect to the Judge. The Judge had done many positive things in this community. Her compensation should be in-line with the other employees of the Council - those being the City Attorney and the City Manager. He felt this was an issue of respect. The three lowest paid directors in the City were Black. Her talent,, dedication, bilingual background, and color made her too valuable an asset to lose. He encouraged the Council to treat her fairly. Cay McSpedden stated that she had been employed by the City for the last 7 years. When she began working in the Municipal Court there was a severe backlog of cases. CurrentlY there was no backlog and there had not been any for quite some time. The Judge dealt fairly and firmly in the Court. The Judge was consistent in handling cases and everyone was well versed in the policies and procedures of the Court. The Judge was a great asset to the City and was dedicated to quality service. To serve the best interest of the City would be to do whatever was required to keep Judge White. Council Member Young returned to the meeting. Bob Stalder stated that he had been the Court Bailiff for several years. Last year he had the opportunity to attend a Court Bailiff school where a retired Texas Supreme Court Judge was a speaker. He asked a series of 50 questions of 75 court bailiffs from across the State. After each question he asked the bailiffs if their judge was following that item. After all the questions were asked, only three bailiff's had judges which were doing everything according to law. He was one of those three. He asked Council to do everything in their power to keep Judge White. He requested that Council work out a compromise and put some of their personality conflicts aside to do what was right. Carl Williams stated that in 1995 he was disappointed to be standing here. In 1979, he stood here with some of the same issues and he would like to move forward. There were several problems which he had heard. One was communications which was a two-way street. He was concerned about the message the City was sending to the people of Denton. The City was trying to implement a teen court and the City would have to start over again if a new Judge was hired. The Part-Time judge made as much as the Municipal Judge. What message was this sending to African-Americans. African-Americans were being told to do everything right but they did not need as much money as a white male. Valla Rhae Royal did not want to speak but was in favor of Judge White. 424 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 30 Council Member Cott returned to the meeting. Council Member Miller summarized the meetings the Municipal Court Advisory Committee had had with Judge White. The Council did not initiate this and was first brought into it when the Judge submitted her letter of resignation effective September 1st. After so many years with the City the Council wanted to find out the issues before accepting her letter of resignation. Prior to this Council a Municipal Court Advisory Committee was established. Two members of that Committee were not re-elected. The present Council appointed two new members to the Court Committee-Council Member Cott and Mayor Pro Tem Biles. The first meeting with the Judge was on August 16th. During that time, it was felt that there was not enough time before September 1st to resolve the issues and requested that the Judge extend her the letter of resignation to September 30th which the Judge did. The Committee felt that the issue was what could be done and what was a solution to the problem. The Committee indicated to the Judge that they felt the Judge was doing a good job and that they would like to see her continue to do so. He asked the Judge if she wanted to stay and Judge White indicated yes, but only if certain items were done. He stated that the Committee could not make any commitments and could not bind the rest of the Council on any of the issues. This was not a negotiation process. This was a process of communication to receive information. The Committee asked what were the issues and dealt with them one at a time. One of the major issues was communication which was a two-way street. Another item was that the Judge felt she was not getting fair attention or respect from the Council. The Council had three functions which reported directly to them - the City Manager, the City Attorney, and the Municipal Judge with the Assistant and Part-Time Judge. The Council assumed if they did not hear anything, everything was going okay. Some issues were not brought to Council which were relevant. At the conclusion of the first meeting, the Committee stated that it would talk with the Agenda Committee and ask that the Judge be put on the agenda at least once a month. It was suggested that the Council spend as much time as possible informally and that Judge White be included in those meetings. The Committee asked the Judge to consider her willingness to stay with the understanding that Council would look at the salary issue on April 1, 1996. After the meeting of September llth, the Committee stated that it would talk to the Council to have the item placed on the agenda in a Closed Session on the following Tuesday and would present her letter for full consideration. Judge White's letter indicated that because of the salary concern she was asking for back pay, an immediate increase in pay, a car allowance, and vacation pay. The Committee said that at that point it could not commit the Council. The Judge 425 City of Denton City Council Minutes~ September 19, 1995 Page 31 had an increase in April of last year and was on an annual review. 'The Committee was willing to talk to Council when her review came up this year and to look at the fact that there was a salary issue to deal with. To meet her needs and her satisfaction could not be done all at one time and in one year. He asked if the Judge would be willing to work on other issues and in April take a long look at the salary issue. If so, he asked that she let the Committee know and if not the Committee would take a report to Council the following week. He received a fax in his office on Labor Day which detailed and reviewed prior discussions. This was apparently the response to the Committee's ability to go back to the Council and work on these issues. He quoted from the Judge's letter:"Listed below are several options that the Council could consider as it related to my compensation request. Option One - Pay $10,000 back pay; $4,000 vacation pay; and $2,400 car allowance with current year 1994-95 Municipal Judge budget. Increase pay to $75,000 and $3,600 car allowance in deferred compensation from 1995-96 budget effective October 1, 1995. option Two: $10,000 back pay; $4,000 vacation pay; $2,400 car allowance from current fiscal year 1994-95 Municipal Judge budget. Raise salary to $65,000 plus $3,600 car allowance effective October 1, 1995 and then raise salary from $65,000 to $75,000 effective December 1, 1995. With an additional amount of $2,000 lump sum for the City benefiting at my expense to the $10,000 they were able to use for the period October to December". The Committee had a meeting on September llth and tried to explain that they were trying to take care of the issues, but it could not happen overnight. He felt the issue of back pay was not legal under State law. He requested the Judge consider waiting until April to work on the issue of salary. The Committee recognized the need to do so and recognized that in April this would not be a normal salary increase. Judge White and the Committee could did not agree and the Committee indicated that it would submit the Judge's demands to the Council by giving them a copy of her letter. The Council planned to discuss this in Executive Session and invited the judge to attend the Executive Session so that she could discuss these matters. He talked with the Judge at the next meeting and indicated that they would be going into Executive Session with a number of items on the Executive Session agenda to discuss. Some of those issues might be considered later in the meeting and was that alright with her. In the meantime and unknown to him, the Judge had submitted a letter through the City Attorney that she wanted to do this in open session. There continued to be issues of communication and obviously a compensation issue. He felt that it was something which could be done in the course of a normal contract increase. Last year the Judge received an increase in April of about 7-7.5% was the largest increase given by Council. Doing this in the middle of the year and on the basis as presented, his 426 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 32 recommendation was that this was not an appropriate way to go. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that the Judge was fair and open to new ideas. He had respect for her as a Judge and had known her to be very open and easy to talk with. After three meetings of the subcommittee, he had a feeling that the Committee was beginning to implement a number of the Judge's suggestions. Some of those needs she had outlined included: security in the office, doubling the size of her office to accommodate a secure hallway, a second bailiff, a car to serve warrants, and the implementation of security procedures in the Court room. He felt it was a good faith demonstration to the Judge that the Committee was seriously committed to those items the Judge felt had been neglected. The Committee also specifically addressed the communication and participation issues. The Council decided that during the budget process was not a good time for discussions on these issues. The Council decided that on regular meetings, they would start a half an hour later so that Council could talk with each other without having to discuss business. As a part of that process, the Council wanted the Judge to join them. He wanted the Judge to begin making not less than monthly reports to the Council on the status of the judiciary. He felt tonight, in spite of a demonstration of good faith, Judge White indicated an unwillingness to work with Council and the financial constraints they had to wait for her annual review which most likely would result in a substantial pay raise on April 1st. The memo from the Judge indicated it had to be October 1st. On April 1st of this year, the Judge received a 5.85% raise in salary plus, for the first time, an additional payment of 4% deferred compensation. She was now asking for what amounted to an $18,000 pay raise which would be the equivalent to a 31.5% pay increase. That would be the second pay increase in one year. Those two pay increases in one calendar year would be approximately 37%. He did not want Judge White to leave if there was a way to implement this on April 1st. Every year there was a review process and every year there was most likely a pay raise. The next review process began in December and January and most likely would result in an annual pay increase for the Judge. This subcommittee did much to try and understand the specifics as well as the big picture o£ Judge white,s position and opinions, why the deadline o£ October 1st without a little bit of patience and a little give and take, he did not understand. Council Member Cott stated that there was a system in this organization and 950 employees. If Council went through this the wrong way, th~ organization would be in chaos. If he wa~ called a racist one more time he would become intolerant. 427 City of Denton City Council!Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 33 Council Member Young stated that the city Council agreed to keep all people they hired, the city Manager, the City Attorney and the City Judge on the same level. The City Manager made $101,000, the City Attorney made $90,000 and the City Judge made $57,000. This was not keeping it on the same level. The Judge did not have a car allowance as the car she had was for the Court. All of the items which Mayor Pro Tem Biles indicated was given to the Judge was not money from the General Fund but was money generated from the Courts. Her starting salary was $35,000 while the City Manager's starting salary was $68,000 and both had been with the City nine years. Over that nine year period, a 34% increase was given to the city Manager and a 12% increase was given to Judge White. The city Attorney was just hired at $90,000. This was one problem right there as the city was not keeping faith with Judge White. Five years ago another problem started with the Judge. Reports sent to the Council went through another Council Member's office and never reached the Council. Even her budget never went to Council as it was found thrown in the trash. The communication factor was a problem. A Judge in a Court of Record was different from other courts. What Judge White was asking for was parity and to be compensated equal to other city Council hired employees. She asked to be treated fairly and she felt as though other directors disrespected her and discriminated against her and she had to go through all this to get a hearing. He felt that Judge White's request of vacation pay was not the way to go. The Judge should receive a car allowance of $2,400 and her salary increased to $65,000 in October when by her contract she had an annual review. In December, increase her salary to $75,000 where it would be in parity with other Municipal Judges of her calibre. Judge White was a very good judge for Denton. Council Member Miller spoke on the issue of comparative salaries. The policy of the city for the employees who reported to the Council and for all employees was to survey comparable jobs in similar kinds of situations in cities and over a period of time pay the going rate. He felt the appropriate time was in April and would create all kinds of problems to do it now. The Court Advisory Committee asked the Director of Human Resources to put together a list of the Courts of Records in Texas, and the median salary for those 13 cities was $57,200. Judge White took exception to the survey data used. Using the Judge's data for nine cities, the median salary was $66,000. The Committee went as far as it could go and recommended Council work on the salary issue in April. Council Member Brock stated she was not directly involved with the subcommittee's work. She did not know how previous Councils had reached the salaries for the three individuals hired by Council. She did not see the fact that these three positions were filled by 42'8 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 34 Council would indicate that they should all be paid equally. They were very different kinds of jobs. For instance, the City Manager was in charge of hundreds of people with very diverse responsibilities and a complexity of expertise was needed which was similar to the presidents of the two universities. Council Member Young stated the agreement was made that they would be on the same level. The city Attorney had approximately the same amount of people to supervise as did Judge White yet Judge White's salary was much less. Mayor Castleberry stated that there was nothing wrong with this situation. He was disappointed in the statement which cast a negative reflection on this Council. Council Member Krueger stated that actions of Councils in past years should not reflect on what this Council could and should do. He was willing to work towards the issues and felt that the Judge would receive a substantial raise in April. As a representative of the City he could not see going back to the citizens and explain two raises in one year. It was not fair and he would recommend an extensive review in April. The Council could not reflect on past Councils. He requested that Judge White consider that option and come back in April to correct the problem. Council Member Young stated he was disappointed with the Mayor. Since he had been on Council, there had never been a time limit on a director giving a presentation. For the Mayor to tell a citizen that he did not like what was being said was heavy handed. Mayor Castleberry stated he had talked with the City Attorney about a time limit because the Judge should have a certain time limit and not one-two hours. He was concerned when anyone stated that there was underhandedness going on when there was not. He would not be accused of doing something wrong. There were some salary issues people did not understand and he was glad that this was brought out. He was the presiding officer of the Council and had the authority to place time limits. He confirmed this with the City Attorney. Council Member Miller requested a 10 minute recess. City Attorney Prouty stated that the Council could take a recess but could not deliberate in a recess. Mayor Castleberry stated if Council was going to talk with the Judge it needed to be done in open session. : ~ 429 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 35 Young motioned, Cott seconded to delay this issue for two weeks if it was alright with Judge White. Mayor Castleberry stated that delaying it would place the item on an October agenda. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that the resignation would become effective before the next meeting. Council Member Miller felt that something needed to be done and not wait another two weeks. Judge White stated that the Committee had made some progress but had reached a stalemate regarding salary problems. The Council had made some statements that would give her cause to pause for another two weeks if Council wanted to take it up at that time. She would make her resignation effective after giving the Council some time to consider the matters presented to them at this meeting. Council Member Krueger questioned if Judge White needed the two weeks to consider her position. The Council had indicated their feelings about the issue. Judge White responded that she hoped the Council would take time to look at the documentation she provided. She had strong feelings about the matter and tried to present documentation from her view point. After review, she hoped they had might have different positions. She asked them to review those materials and see if they had the same position after the review. On roll vote to postpone, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "nay", and Mayor "nay". Motion carried with a 5-2 vote. Cott "aye", Castleberry 11. The Council considered appointments to the Economic Development Transition Committee. Mayor Castleberry stated the members would vote on only four appointments. Council Member Cott voted for Troy LaGrone, Ed smith, Bob Coplen and Harry Hall. Council Member Brock voted Troy LaGrone, Ed Smith, Randall McDonald, and Bob Coplen. Council Member Miller voted for Troy LaGrone, Bob Coplen, Ed Smith and Randall McDonald. 430 city of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 36 Mayor Castleberry voted for Barbara Russell, Derrell Bulls, Bob Coplen and Troy LaGrone. Mayor Pro Tem Biles voted for Carl Anderson, Ed Smith, Dick Smith and Harry Hall. Council Member Young voted for Carl Anderson, Ed Smith, Dick Smith and Troy LaGrone. Council Member Krueger voted for Carl Anderson, Ed Smith, Dick Smith and Harry Hall. Tabulation of the results indicated that Ed Smith, Troy LaGrone, Bob Coplen were the top votes. Carl Anderson, Dick smith, and Harry Hall each had three votes. Mayor Castleberry stated that the Council would vote again to break the tie. If a member was not voting for a nominee, the~abstain button would be used on the voting board. ~ On a vote for Carl Anderson, all members abstained. ~ On a vote for Harry Hall, the vote was 6-1 with the~ Mayor abstaining. ~ On a vote for Dick Smith, all members abstained. Harry Hall would be the member on the Committee. 12. The Council considered nominations/appointments to the city's Boards and Commissions. Francis Caster was nominated byCouncil Member Cott to the Downtown Advisory Board. 13. Vision Update Council Member Miller stated there would be public meetings on October 30th and November 1st at the Campus Theater with two presentations by the Vision Group. 14. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, presented the following items, A. Next week the Council would be making nominations for the Appraisal District. 431 City of Denton City Council Minutes September 19, 1995 Page 37 B. Sunday was the City Picnic and the Council was invited to attend. 15. There was no official action taken on Closed Meeting items discussed earlier. 16. New Business The following items of New Business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas. A. Council Member Krueger asked for an update on the presentation by Teri Woods regarding an easement dedication. Deputy City Manager Svehla stated that the Council would receive that update at the first meeting in October. B. Council Member Brock requested a discussion regarding the City's in-fill policy or send the item first to the Public Utilities Board for a recommendation. 17. The Council did not meet in Closed Meeting during the Regular Session. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:10 a.m. NiF~ WALTERS Y SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS BOB' CASTL~ CITY OF DENTON, TEXA~ / ACC002BE