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