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