Loading...
Minutes October 24, 1995CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 24, 1995 The Council convened into a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, October 24, 1995 at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Biles; Council Members Brock, Cott, Krueger, and Miller and Young. ABSENT: None 1. The Council considered the following in Closed Meeting: A. Legal Matters -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.071 Discussed settlement and defense of contemplated litigation concerning the denial to rezone 3.853 acres from SF-7 to Office zoning on the south side of I35-E and Lindsey Street. B. Real Estate -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.072 Personnel/Board Appointments -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.074 Considered a resolution of the city of Denton, Texas appointing Robin Ramsay as the Acting Chief Judge for the City of Denton Municipal Court of Record; authorizing the Mayor to execute an amendment to the contract for his term of employment. Considered a resolution of the city of Denton, Texas appointing Nancy Jesse as Assistant Municipal Judge for the City of Denton Municipal Court of Record; authorizing the Mayor to execute a contract for her term of office. The Council convened into a Special Called Session on Tuesday, October 24, 1995 at 6:00 p.m. in the city Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Biles; Council Members Brock, Cott, Krueger, and Miller. ABSENT: Council Member Young 1. The Council considered an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving the release of various paving liens assessed against homesteads by ordinance nos. 61-16, 62-13, 64-26, 65-31, and 66-30; authorizing the Mayor to execute said releases; and providing for an effective date. City Attorney Prouty stated that this ordinance would release ~ertaln paving liens a~e~ed by the above five ~rdin&n~e~ adopted in the 1960's. The ordinance would authorize the release of certain paving liens and authorize the Mayor to execute the lease documents which were attached to the ordinance. These liens were assessed by Article l105B of the Texas Civil Statues. The Article City of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 2 provided a procedure whereby a city could assess liens for paving and other street improvements to the adjacent property owners and in effect share costs for the costs of those improvements with the property owners. This was usually done under the statute called the "special benefits rule" which meant that the city would assess no more than the amount of enhancement to the property caused by the paving improvements. The city had to go through a certain number of procedures to assess the liens. Those procedures included preparing an estimate of the cost of improvements; providing notice to the public at least three times in a newspaper of the fact that there would be a public hearing at which the assessments would be considered; holding a public hearing at which any owner who was protesting the assessment had the right to speak; and finding at the public hearing that every individual assessment of each of the liens did not exceed the special benefits or enhancements to the property caused by the paving. This was usually done by people knowledgeable in real estate who testified at those hearing that the property owner's enhancement to each individual property would be equal to or exceed the amount of the assessment. In almost all of the cases, the City did not initiate the assessment process. It was done by a petition of the property owners who recognized the fact that the benefits of the paving would exceed the cost of the improvements. The assessments were only made after notice of hearing at which the property owner had a right to speak. The assessments were, in most cases, initiated by the property owners through petition and not by the city. All of the property owners benefited in enhanced value to their property in excess of the assessment. There was a misconception that the city made these assessments and then did nothing to try and collect the liens until several months ago. Records showed that in most cases multiple notices during the years were made to the property owners advising them of the amount of the lien. Some of the property owners made payments while others did not. Council Member Young joined the meeting. Prouty continued that there were efforts to collect these liens during the years. There were many obstacles to legally release these liens. There were problems due to the constitutional provisions which prevented a city from granting a gift or thing of value to a private person because each property owner benefited as a result of the improvements made to the property. There were also problems in regards to statutes of limitations regarding the property owners. The mtatute provided a Drovision whereby each property owner, if not satisfied with the assessment, could appeal that assessment within 15 days from the date of the hearing at which the ordinance was passed. None of the property owners presented an appeal. With the exception of notice, that ended the rights of the property owners to protest the assessments. There was also a four year statute of limitations which was applicable and meant that if the property owners did not file suit within four years to set aside the liens, their legal rights to protest in most cases were cut off. The only way to release the liens was to find (1) that the property was a homestead at the time the assessment City of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 3 was made and (2) no mechanics lien contracts had been entered into by the property owners who had the homestead and recorded prior to the construction of the improvements. Even though the law indicated that the liens could be released, the personal debt could not be released. Staff had to make sure that the current property owners were not the original owners when the lien was assessed. There were approximately 300 of these liens in existence. The above ordinances covered 107 liens with 41 being recommended to be released as they fell within the category of a homestead and did not have a mechanics lien contract before the improvements were built. A procedure had been established whereby the property owners who might not be on the list would be given instructions on how to make an affidavit and prove up the fact that the property was a homestead at the time the lien was assessment with no mechanics lien contract in existence at that time. If Council approved the ordinance, letters would be sent with a copy of the releases to all of the 41 property owners notifying them that their liens had been released. Letters with the affidavit and instructions on how to file such would be mailed to the other property owners. The remaining liens would be researched and Council would consider another ordinance to release liens established during the early-mid 1970's. The same procedure would be used with those liens. Council Member Cott felt this was a unique way of paying for improvements. He questioned if this was done anywhere else in the city at this time. Prouty stated that back in 1960's, this procedure was only available for certain types of street improvements. It was a way to assess the costs of particular improvements, rather than spreading them on all the taxpayers, to the taxpayers who really benefited from the improvement. Many cities were doing this at that point in time. Council Member Cott asked if this was an attempt to get the lowest cost into the improvements in that area. Prouty stated that this was a cost sharing agreement between the adjacent property owners and the city and used city funds. The property owners did not pay the full cost of the benefit of the improvements to their property. city Manager Harrell stated that the difference from then to now was the fact that development standards had increased greatly. Today, as new developments happened, the developer was required to put in the paving, curb and guttering. The property owner, when he purchased the property, was actually paying for those improvements through the purchase of the home. In the 1960's and 1970's the city wa~ dealing with developmen%s which were done prior to those more extensive development standards. This was a way many cities, during that time, felt was the equitable way to get those people who would truly benefit from the improvement, to share in the cost of making that improvement. City of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 4 The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-211 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS -APPROVING THE RELEASE OF VARIOUS PAVING LIENS ASSESSED AGAINST HOMESTEADS BY ORDINANCE NOS. 61-16, 62-13, 64-26, 65-31, AND 66-30; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID RELEASES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Biles motioned, Krueger seconded to adopt the ordinance. Council Member Krueger urged the City Attorney's office to continue to research and explore ways to legally release all of these obligations. Council Member Young asked if he had to leave before the vote on this issue as he had paid such a lien. City Attorney Prouty stated that it was not necessary for Council Member Young to leave for the vote as the names of all of the individuals were on an exhibit attached to the ordinance. Council Member Miller stated that the liens were released but that the money was still due. He asked what the expectation was for the collection of the rest of the money. City Attorney Prouty stated that the law indicated that when the lien was released because of the homestead, the personal debt was still in effect. The personal debt was the debt of the original owner and not of the current owner. It was felt that not many of these amounts would be collected. Council Member Miller asked what would happen to the other 60% of the liens on the list. Prouty stated that that was where the affidavit came into play. Next week they would be sending out letters with affidavits and instructions on how to complete them. The property owners would have to provide proof which showed that the property was a homestead at the time of the assessment. Council Member Miller stated that some properties, which could not meet %he homestead qualifications, would continue with the liens. Those would remain in force. city Attorney Prouty replied correct. Not all of the liens would be released. Three or four homesteads had signed mechanics lien contracts prior to the assessment and in those cases the liens would be valid. Council Member Miller asked if there was a way to forgive the interest. city of Denton city Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 5 City Attorney Prouty stated at this point in time, that could not be done as the City could not give a gift to a private citizen. Council Member Brock pointed out that the liens which would be released by this ordinance were in various areas of the city. council Member Young stated that 90% of the liens were in his district and felt that where the property was located was not important. It was important to get the letters out to those individuals with the liens explaining the process. Mayor Castleberry stated that many of these streets were dirt streets in the beginning and it was a different matter now. It should be understood that the debt was still due by someone and that the city would be pursuing that those debts be paid. On roll vote, Miller "aye" Young "aye" Cott "aye" Krueger "aye" Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 2. There was no official action taken on the Closed Meeting Items at this time. The Council convened into a Work Session on Tuesday, October 24, 1995 in the City Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Biles; Council Members Brock, Cott, Miller and Young. ABSENT: Council Member Krueger 1. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the city Manager to execute an Interlocal Agreement between the city of Denton and the Texas Department of Transportation for the design and construction of the Denton Branch Raii Trail project. Bob Tickner, Superintendent of Parks, stated that in 1991 the Union Pacific Railroad informed the City that they were in the process of abandoning the branch which ran from Dallas to Denton and wanted to proceed with filing with the ICC to abandon the line. In 1988 Congress passed a law which allowed these abandonments to be converted to trails as a process for preserving the rail corridors for future transportation uses. This was called rail banking. The Railroad contacted all of the communities on the line and the City of Denton indicated that it wanted to participate in such a rail bank. In 1993 the City applied to the Interstate Commerce Commission to use the trail. Council Member Krueger joined the meeting. Tickner continued that in June of 1993 negotiations were completed and a formal exchange of funds and the quit claim deed was city of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 6 completed. About the same time, the Intermodial Surface Transportation Efficiency Act was adopted which provided funding for the development of the trail. The City submitted a grant application through the Texas Department of Transportation in October 1993 to fund surfacing the trail, repairing the bridges, etc. In April of 1994 the City learned that it had been selected for funding of this project. As part of the ISTEA project, the City had to enter into an interlocal agreement with the Texas Department of Transportation for an 80-20 funding match. At the signing of the agreement the City had to send a check for its share of the design and administration of the project. Part of the project was to quickly relocate the old railroad depot. City Manager Harrell stated that the City did a good job in negotiating the purchase of the right-of-way from the Railroad. The thought was that in the future there might be a need for high speed transportation between Dallas and Denton. If the city had not pursued the right-of-way at that point in time, all of that right-of-way would have reverted to the abutting property owners and would not have been available for later public use. The city purchased the right-of-way for $10,000 when it had an appraised value of over $2 million. The purchase was done under favorable terms and was done with an 80% match. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that the land the cit~ihad purchased was actually inside the corporate limits of other ties. Tickner replied correct that about half of the right-of-way went through the City of Corinth. Mayor Pro Tem Biles asked if Corinth was participating financially in any way to help with the grant match. Tickner replied no not at this time but might possibly help with maintenance in the future. Mayor Pro Tem expressed a concern that if half of property owned by the City was in other cities, those other cities should help. City Manager Harrell stated that when they were in the negotiating stage with the Railroad, there were a number of conversations with Corinth. There were a number of citizens within that community who had major reservations regarding the project. Denton, through detailed di~u~ion~ wi%h Corin%h, was able to ~et a~id~ th~ property owners fears about using the trails close to their property. Three years ago city officials of corinth were not enthusiastic regarding the project. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that if the City was going to own the property, have the liability as the property owners and expend the tax dollars of the citizens of Denton to maintain and construct the property, the City needed to be in charge of the project. He asked to what degree the Historic Landmark Commission and the Main Street Program been incorporated into dealing with the issue. City of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 7 Tickner stated that they had been discussing the issue with various members of the Committee. When the timing was right they would be working more with the members. Biles motioned, Young seconded to direct staff to proceed with the development of an ordinance for the project. Council Member Krueger asked what was the city's financial obligation and whose jurisdiction was it to control. Tickner stated that State law allowed a city to maintain recreation properties in other jurisdictions. Council Member Krueger asked how this fit into the parks plan. He questioned if there was too much to maintain and fund at this point in time. Ed Hodney, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated that this project was in the Parks Master Plan and that maintenance costs had been budgeted for the past two years. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 2. The Council received a report from the Downtown Development Advisory Board concerning parking recommendations for Downtown and gave staff direction. Jane Jenkins, Main Street Manager, stated that at the request of the Council the Downtown Development Advisory Board had made two separate recommendations concerning specific parking issues in the Downtown area. One recommendation was to look into the possibility of modifying the existing signs or adding signs notifying customers of the parking fines. In April Council received a memorandum from the Deputy City Manager concerning the cost of either modifying the existing signs or adding new signs to reflect this information. At that time the Parking Committee of the Main Street Program addressed this issue and adopted the policy that Downtown signage should be kept to a minimum and that a message should be in the form of a positive message directing customers to long term lots as opposed to publicizing what the parking fines were. Council Member Young left the meeting. Jenkins continued that right now there were twelve signs on the Square with two-three signs on either side of the Square. It was felt that it might be difficult seeing the signs particularly if a car was parked on the merchant side of the Square. Adding fine information would not help with tho~e ~ign~. The Downtown Advisory Board felt that this could be better communicated through the individual merchants either through tasteful signage provided by Main Street brochures or signs located in the businesses. In response to the Council graduate students from the university of 8 City of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 8 North Texas were used to research and make recommendations concerning the two issues regarding time parking limits on and around the Square and parking fines on the Square. In addition to reviewing all of the relevant information on the issues, the students held public meetings regarding the issue. They also surveyed other cities with Main Street programs which were similar in size and which had parking fines on their Squares. The consulting team recommended that the present two hour parking limit was adequate and felt that if an increase were made, there would be continued abuse of the parking spaces. They also recommended that the current $15 fine be lowered to $10 which would have a fiscal impact on the budget. Long term recommendations included creating maps and parking brochures with a public relations campaign through the businesses rather than a negative sign issue; adapting the signs to reflect the motif of the area; designating all public parking lots in the area; and evaluating extenuating circumstances and communicating with shop owners where to go with these needs. Council Member Young returned to the meeting. Jenkins continued with Recommendation A which was to establish a public improvements district to facilitate parking management. This would be a first for a city of Denton's size. Parking management of the public parking in the Downtown area would be turned over to a private facility. Dan Martin, Downtown Development Advisory Board, stated that the attempt was to create a friendly users parking environment. The parking enforcement still needed to be retained but done in a manner which was much more plausible to the users. Council Member Krueger left the meeting. Martin continued that private services could include parking enforcement on a consistent basis and the use of a boot system for those over the time limit for parking. The parking attendant would be working in public relations between individuals parking on the Square and the store owners. With this system there would be some selective enforcement to deal with those individuals who all day parked on the Square and who used spaces needed for the shoppers. This type of parking system was more detailed, personalized and consistent. It would have to be paid for through some sort of district such as an improvement district or a taxing district. Council Member Young asked how much it would cost to remove the boot. Martin replied that that had not been determined but might be in the area of $20-25 to have the boot removed. Council Member Young asked if there would still be parking tickets. Martin replied yes that there would still be parking tickets. The boot provided a less risk for damage to cars than a tow truck, was City of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 9 easily removed and also showed others that the boot was in force. Council Member Young asked how the boot system would work after hours. Martin replied that the extend of enforcement would have to be determined. After hours enforcement could be done if the funds were budgeted for that procedure. A determination would have tobe made for the amount of fee for the taxing district and then determine how much enforcement would be needed. Jenkins stated that the hours from 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. were the biggest problems. After hours would be another issue the district would look at. They had not gone door to door to the businesses at this point because they were going to Council first. There had been public meetings on the issue and most of merchants received notices of the Parking Committee meetings. Council Member Young felt that the process was backwards. The business owners should to talked to first and then work with the Council. Council Member Krueger returned to the meeting. Jenkins stated that if a taxing district was done, it would require the support of the business owners and property owners in the area. This was not something the Council could do. The Council could direct staff to proceed but not to implement the taxing district. Council Member Young stated that the property owners should have already been involved. Jenkins replied that that had already been done but they did not do a door to door survey. Mayor Castleberry felt that the discussion should center on the parking ticket charge and signage at this meeting and consider other issues at a later meeting. Council Member Cott suggested that any discretionary ticket work needed to be discussed with the police department. This should be a plain cash flow with no government subsidy. Council Member Krueger asked who Jenkins felt would be opposed to easing the current parking restrictions and who would not be opposed. Jenkins replied that parking Downtown was a problem of perception rather than reality. There were concerns about downtown parking but the situation had improved. The merchan%~ had a problem with downtown employees in non-profit businesses taking up spaces all day. city of Denton city Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 10 Council Member Krueger felt that there was a need to be more discriminatory in regards to the employees who worked in the area. He felt there was room for more discussion of the issue and that the hours of parking restrictions might be changed. Jenkins stated that almost every issue dealing with downtown parking had been discussed with each of the business owners on the Square including hours, time limits, fines, etc. Council Member Brock asked about similar special districts in other cities. Martin stated that an assessment district would determine what service would be performed, service hours and how much to pay for those services. The District made the rules for the council to approve. Brock motioned, Miller seconded to maintain the two hour parking limit but to add signs to indicate where long term parking was and to have a $10 base parking fine all over the City. Council Member Miller stated that the Council did not set the parking fee but rather it was set by the Municipal Judge. The motion should be to recommend to the Judge to change the fee. Council Member Brock stated that she would change her motion to reflect such. Council took a short recess. After the recess, Council Members Brock and Young were not present. Council Member Cott suggested including an amendment to the motion to include the next procedure step in order to keep the issue moving. Mayor Castleberry suggested that that item could return as a separate discussion item. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that the motion was to maintain the two hour parking limit, to request of the Municipal Judge to consider a reduction of the base fine from $15 to $10, and to enhance the signage pointing to available parking. Council Members Brock and Young returned to the meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Biles continued that the signs should conform to a certain aesthetic appeal. He stated that there was not a parking problem on the Square - it was a perception problem. Jenkins asked if the motion was to amend the existing signs or add to the existing signs. Were other options needed for council to consider. City of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 11 Mayor Castleberry stated that the motion was to have a sign directing individuals to extended parking and nothing with the amount of the fine. 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 received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the City of Denton flag policy Joseph Portugal, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that this item was on the agenda at the request of the Council. Last year Council asked staff to research whether an official logo for the City had ever been adopted. Research indicated that there was no official logo. Staff prepared several renderings for Council approval and Ordinance 94-074 established a City logo but also applied to the City flag. The flag had been copyrighted and the ordinance developed safeguards for improper use of the City's logo. Section 3 of the ordinance, while not meaning to preclude citizens from displaying the City flag, did have a safeguard that that could be done only upon written application to and approval by the City Council. If Council chose to amend that ordinance, there might be some future uses of the City flag which would be objectional to the Council. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that he did not like the way this ordinance was presently written. He suggested having staff look at differences in what was being addressed by the ordinance. He suggested that a distinction could be made to continue to prohibit the use of the City's logo as a stand-a-lone symbol but if that logo were incorporated into a flag, the flag would be flown in the same manner as the State of Texas or national flag. Biles motioned to direct staff to develop a distinction using the State statute as a guide for parameters and the use of the State flag plus the United States Flag Code. The approach should be one of being able to freely fly the City of Denton flag versus a misappropriation of the corporate symbol. Council Member Young stated that he wanted an amendment to the motion to give each Council Member a flag. Mayor Castleberry stated that that was not legal. Council Member Miller seconded the original motion made by Mayor Pro Tem Biles. City Attorney Prouty stated that the gifts statute depended on the circumstances. If it served ~ome type of city purpose to giv~ a Council Member a flag, it might be acceptable. The City could not just automatically give a flag without a pubic service. Any Council Member could display the flag but the City could not give the Council Member a flag. 11 12 City of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 12 Council Member Young reworded his amendment to state that the City would make a flag available to the Council Members. Mayor Castleberry stated that they were available and could be purchased for approximately $30 per person. Portugal stated that the flag could be purchased for approximately $65 and with fringe, for $85. Council Member Young asked if it was legal for the City to make a flag available for certain circumstances such as the Juneteenth parade. City Attorney Prouty stated that that would be allowed under the law to make a flag available for certain groups provided it did not violate either the display of the flag with regard to the statutes governing the State of Texas and the statute governing the United States flag. Council Member Young withdrew his amendment. Council Member Krueger asked about the specifics of the motion. He asked for the distinction in the motion as to whether this would constitute a wind device. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that his motion did not address the sign ordinance in any respect. His motion was designed to segregate the misappropriation of a trademark under State law or copyrighted under Federal law, logo or design as distinguished from the use of the logo on a flag. A person should not have to receive permission to fly a City of Denton flag. This had nothing to do with the sign ordinance. Council Member Krueger wanted to make sure that this was not considered a wind device before he voted on the motion. Portugal stated that up to three flags could be flown from a flag pole or standard without the possibility of violating the sign ordinance or the wind device provision. If flown in this capacity, it would be in compliance. Mayor Pro Tem Biles stated that these were two different issues. On roll vote, Miller "aye", Young ~aye", Co%% "aye", /{rueger "nay", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. 4. The Council held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the selection process to hire a new City Manager. Mayor Pro Tem Biles and Council Member Young left the meeting. Tom Klinck, Director of Human Resources, suggested the use of an executive search firm to deal with a position profile which would City of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 13 include a job description; ideal characteristics for candidates; a community profile; key resources, assets, and strengths; significate issues in.the next 5-10 years; and a recruitment profile. The staff would solicit and evaluate proposals from the search firms; recommend 2-3 firms to the City Council for evaluation; Council would interview and select the firm best suited and authorize a contract to begin the search. Advertising sources would included the Texas City Management Association, the International City Management Association, and the Texas Municipal League. Advertising would be in the December and January issues and the application process would close January 15, 1996. The hiring range would be between $95,992 - $109,990. Major selection issues included selection and evaluation of candidates with an initial paper screen for minimum qualifications, experience, and presentation. The candidates would be then narrowed to 20-30 with a secondary face-to-face interview with the search firm to develop a semi-finalist pool of 10-15 candidates. The final screen follow- up would include telephone discussions and discussions with references. Mayor Pro Tem Biles returned to the meeting. Klinck stated that the search firm would present ten candidates for consideration with five-six finalists for Council interviews and a tour of the community with City panel interviews with Council. Council Member Young returned to the meeting. Krueger motioned to proceed with the selection of a search firm to begin the process and to proceed with the advertising as necessary. Council Member Young motioned to amend the motion to include an extensive in-house search. Mayor Castleberry stated that the original motion would apply to anyone who would like to apply. Council Member Krueger stated that his motion dealt with the selection of a search firm, not the selection of a City Manager. Council Member Young stated'that his amendment dealt with finding a search firm but also for an in-house search. Mayor Castleberry asked if Council Member Krueger wanted to add that amendment to his motion. Council Member Krueger stated that his motion dealt with the search firm. The issue of an in-house search could be discussed later with the selected firm. It was important to contract the firm first. Council Member Miller suggested ending the motion with the selection of a search firm as a firm might want to change the manner of adverting once it was hired. 13 City of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 14 Council Member Krueger agreed to that change. Council Member Miller seconded the motion. Council Member Cott stated that he would like to amend the motion. In his opinion the current City Council did not satisfactorily fulfill its expected leadership role of developing a cohesive policy position on many subjects. Before hiring a new City Manager the Council needed to be prepared to give him/her leadership and the Council was not ready to do this now. For these reasons, he felt one of the fine existing executives should be assigned as Acting City Manager for a minimum period until December 1995. Council should use this period to examine the Council with a minimum of two in-house retreats. There should be an analysis of all open positions for senior personnel and add to it the City Manger, the needs for a city manager to replace Mr. Harrell should be discussed and get the right person after that examination. The final search should be started after the first of the year with an approximate two month search. He motioned the above process. Mayor Castleberry stated that there was already a motion and a second on the floor. This would have to be an amendment in order to be considered. Council Member Young seconded the amendment to the motion. On roll vote of Council Member Cott's amendment, Miller "nay", Young "aye", Cott "aye" Krueger "nay" Brock "nay" Biles "nay" and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion failed with a 2-5 vote. On roll vote of the original motion, Miller "aye", Young "aye", Cott "nay", Krueger "aye", Brock "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 6-1 vote. 5. The Council held a discussion regarding City Council activities for Make a Difference Day, October 28, 1995. Council Member Brock asked if Council was interested in cleaning their adopt-a-spot up on Saturday morning at 10:30 a.m. After discussion, it was decided that 2:30 p.m. would be a better time. Council Member Brock suggested Council join the Noon Rotary Club in a project dealing with the collection books for young readers to be given at Christmas time to needy children. 6. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the Community Development Funding Application for a stage at Fred Moore Park. Council Member Young stated that the Juneteenth Committee was trying to get a stage in Fred Moore Park. He was asking for Council to find a way to fund this project. City of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 15 City Manager Harrell stated that this request for $25,000 for a permanent stage at the Fred Moore Park was submitted by the Parks Department after input from residents in the area as part of the Community Development Block Grant proposals. There was an appointed citizen group to review all requests for block grant funds and formulate recommendations for the funds. That citizen committee evaluated this request along with many others and did not recommend, during 1994, the funding of this request. The request was not part of the 1995 deliberations of the Community Development Block Grant Committee and was not considered in their recommendation to Council. The Committee was almost ready to start another round of requests for the next fiscal year with the first public hearing to be held in December. The request had never been considered as part of the normal city budget but had always been part of the Block Grant program. Council Member Cott asked if Council could send the request through the process for consideration2 Mayor Castleberry stated that Council Member Young could make a presentation in December to the Committee. Council Member Brock stated that during the regular budget process Council could consider the issue as funding did not have to come from Block Grant funds. Part of the stage in the civic Center came from a grant from the Benefit League. There might be restrictions for funding categories but it would be worth trying for at least part of the funding for the project from that source. Mayor Pro Tem Biles felt that a stage would be an asset to that park. There were many financing opportunities for such a stage through the CIP process, the CDBG process, the budget by Council, and private funds. The Council convened into a Closed Meeting to discuss the following: Personnel/Board Appointments -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.074 1. Considered a resolution of the City of Denton, Texas appointing Robin Ramsay as the Acting Chief Judge for the City of Denton Municipal Court of Record; authorizing the Mayor to execute an amendment to the contract for his term of employment. 2. Considered a resolution of the City of Denton, Texas appointing Nancy Jesse as Assistant Municipal Judge for the City of Denton Municipal Court of Record; authorizing the Mayor to execute a contract for her term of office. Following the completion of the Closed Meeting the Council reconvened in Open Session and took the following action: 1¸5 The following resolution was considered: 16 city of Denton City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 16 NO. R95-071 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPOINTING ROBIN RAMSAY AS THE ACTING CHIEF JUDGE FOR THE CITY OF DENTON MUNICIPAL COURT OF RECORD; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT FOR HIS TERM OF EMPLOYMENT; ESTABLISHING A TERM OF OFFICE FOR THE ACTING CHIEF JUDGE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Miller motioned, Young 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. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-072 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPOINTING NANCY JESSEE AS ASSISTANT MUNICIPAL JUDGE FOR THE CITY OF DENTON MUNICIPAL COURT OF RECORD; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT FOR HER TERM OF OFFICE; ESTABLISHING FEES FOR PAYMENT FOR HER SERVICES; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Miller motioned, Cott 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. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:17 p.m. NNiF~R WALTERS TY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ACC002C9