Loading...
Minutes June 11, 1996415 CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11, 1996 The Council convened into a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, June 11, 1996 at 6:00 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room. PRESENT: Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Beasley, Biles, Cott, Krueger, and Young. ABSENT: None 1. The Council considered the following in Closed Meeting: A. Legal Matters -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.071 Considered acceptance of a possible assignment on behalf of a 4B non-profit economic development corporation to be formed by the City from Bill Methenitis, Trustee; the possible lease of the assigned property and discussion regarding terms of the lease relative to the vacant Texas Instruments facility. 2. Considered demand of Ann Laird. B. Real Estate -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.072 Considered acceptance of a possible assignment on behalf of a 4B non-profit economic development corporation to be formed by the city from Bill Methenitis, Trustee; the possible lease of the assigned property and discussion regarding terms of the lease relative to the vacant Texas Instruments facility. Ce Personnel/Board Appointments -- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Sec. 551.074 The Council convened into a Work Session on Tuesday, June 11, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Beasley, Biles, Cott, Krueger, and Young. ABSENT: None 1. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the initial findings of the DentonNet Vision Task Force. Dr. Bettye Myers stated that this project was an outgrowth of the education portion of the Vision for Denton project. Members on the project were from the Denton Independent School District, GTE, TWU, UNT and others. The purpose was to make the technology for the information accessible for all citizens of Denton. City of Denton City Council Minutes June 11, 1996 Page 2 Dr. Susan Ward, Chair, stated that a year of research indicated that people seek information from many different means. The task force looked for different cities which had networks similar to the one they would propose. Most of the successful projects had one thing in common which was a collaboration between key players in the community such as the city, higher education and business. Currently there was all types of data information available in Denton. There were also individuals in agencies and businesses who had started working on WEB pages. The group felt that there needed to be more coordination among the entities and that access for all citizens was missing. Coordination would not oversee what the other agencies would develop but would help all the individuals talk together so that the information was unified and not disjointed. Access should be given to those individuals who did not have other means such as a home personal computer. She presented a demonstration on how the DentonNet would work and indicated that at a future date, they were suggesting that the City put in a line item in the budget to support matching grants to help support such a system. The group had already had received one grant for such a program. Mayor Miller asked the City Manager to see how the City could address a coordinated effort for this project. City Manager Benavides stated that staff was already working on the technology that Dr. Ward and others had presented for the Internet and made already made great progress. The city staff would work to determine the best efforts for a final product. A report would be made to Council regarding how to produce this project in the best manner and at the best cost. Dr. Myers stated that one concern was to have various sites available for individuals to use the system such as the libraries, the mall, recreation centers, etc. 2. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the results of the 1996-97 supplemental City Council budget priority questionnaire. Kathy DuBose, Executive Director for Finance, stated that the first set of numbers were ranked by priority response. Two different facets were looked at for the ranking. One was what the Council considered to be the effort level - what Council would like staff to look at as the service level and effort for each of the different areas. The second facet was how high a priority was each comment. The first set of numbers indicated highest priority of responses. These were in the area of police patrol, fire suppression, street construction and building. There were also 417 City of Denton City Coun¢i~'~h~~ ' June 11, 1996 Page 3 specific comments from the various members of the Council. The second set of numbers was ranked by effort. Those were areas which should be increased and were ranked from the lowest to the highest areas. Council Member Cott suggested placing a dollar amount for each of the categories for the next year's questionnaire. DuBose suggested using a percentage as opposed to a dollar amount due to the difference between the areas. 3. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the nomination process and schedule for this year's Board/Commission appointments and gave staff direction. Jennifer Walters, City Secretary, reviewed the procedures for the upcoming Boards and Commissions nominations/appointments and the information which the Council would be receiving. Council Member Biles indicated that he would like to consider the composition of the boards/commissions. There were some boards/commissions which some Council Members did not have any nominations. There were some boards/commissions on which the Council had more than one nomination. He requested a listing of the boards and how they were created, whether by City Charter, City ordinance/resolution, or by State legislation. Mayor Miller felt that this issue would be better discussed during the Council's planning session as the process was already under way and the approved time line needed to be followed. Council Member Biles stated that this was a concern he had raised last year and he had asked that it be discussed prior to the process beginning this year. Mayor Miller felt that the issue would require a great deal of discussion and that there would not be enough time to hold such discussions prior to the process needing to be completed. Council Member Biles felt that this session would include those issues so that Council could discuss the membership on the boards/ commissions before the appointments were made. Mayor Miller felt that the item was placed on the agenda in this manner as there was not enough time to have lengthy discussions about the process and still complete the appointments in a timely manner. 418 city of Denton city Council Minutes June 11, 1996 Page 4 Council Member Krueger stated that the Council's planning session was schedule for June 28-29. He questioned when the nomination process was to begin. Mayor Miller stated that Council was to vote on the nominations by the second of July. Council was to have nominations on June 18th and 25th. Council Member Krueger felt that those boards/commissions which could be changed by ordinance/resolution, could be discussed during the Council's planning session and Council Members could have possible nominations ready for such changes. Mayor Miller felt the process was more complicated than just adding or subtracting members to the various boards/commissions as it might cause inequality in other areas due to the way the original process was established. It might be possible to change the arrangement of the boards during the next year. 4. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding solicitation for charitable contributions on City streets, solicitations by employees while on duty and to address recent Attorney General opinions. City Attorney Prouty presented the history of the process. Until 1989 there was a State law that prohibited any type of solicitation or activity in city streets. In 1989, the State law was amended to authorize charitable solicitations in the streets provided a city's governing body passed an ordinance which allowed for that. In 1994, the City Council considered this question and rejected a request to amend Section 25.5 of the City Code to authorize charitable solicitations in the streets as allowed by State law and at the same time requested the City Attorney to seek an Attorney General's opinion regarding the matter. Last year, prior to the time the City received the Attorney General's opinion, the city Council amended Section 25.5 of the Code to authorize charitable solicitations on streets under certain conditions. Some of those conditions included obtaining a permit from the Chief of Police, approval of an indemnification agreement by the City Attorney for those employees or others persons who wanted to solicit, not walking in the main travelled portion of the roadway, and not soliciting during peak hours along primary arterial roadways. There was some debate whether City employees, primarily fire men in uniform and on duty, should be allowed to solicit on duty. At that time counoil voted not to allow that. Any solicitation by fire fighters or other city employees for charitable contributions would have to be off duty and out of uniform. Subsequent to that the City received the Attorney General's opinion which indicated that City of Denton City Council.~Minutes ~:~ June 11, 1996 Page 5 a city could not request that type of opinion but had to request the opinion through a State legislator. The Attorney General's opinions which the city ultimately received raised a substantial question that the State statute as well as the City ordinance was not constitutional. The primary issue was that there were certain First Amendment rights to use streets as a public forum. If that activity was restricted or authorized it had to meet two tests. One test was that the ordinance or State law be narrowly drawn and content neutral to serve a significant government interest. The Attorney General indicated that because the State law was not content neutral, that it only allowed charitable solicitations in the street, that as a matter of law, it failed the first test. The second test questioned whether it was necessary to limit just to charitable contributions to serve a compelling State interest and was it drawn narrowly enough just to achieve that particular State interest. The Attorney General refused to rule on that particular second test indicating that the only way the State statute could pass that test was if it passed after being subjected to the highest possible examination since this was a First Amendment right being discussed. Although the Attorney General's opinion did not say that the State law which authorized charitable solicitation through a City ordinance was unconstitutional or illegal, it strongly suggested that that was the case. The city's current ordinance which was approved last year, had a high risk of being declared illegal if challenged and his first recommendation was to amend that ordinance either to completely prohibit all types of solicitation on the streets or to allow all solicitation to take place on the streets, including non-charitable solicitation, to all individuals. Another question which was debated was whether or not to allow fire fighters to solicit on City time in uniform with the fire trucks present. Some of the pros of allowing the fire fighters to solicit charitable contributions in uniform and with a truck were that it would allow city employees to more effectively solicit charitable contributions, it would allow the fire fighters to respond more readily to the fire calls if in uniform and the trucks were near and the fact that the city was already allowing city employees through the United Way effort to solicit on city time. There was a specific State law and some ethics rulings which indicated that within certain guidelines that was allowed. Some of the cons related to this issue included that to authorize employees in uniform on city time might create more congestion, more traffic, it might be a bad precedent for other city employees because if some employees were allowed to solicit for funds in uniform all should be allowed, and then there was a question on indemnity. If an employee was acting within the scope and course of his du%y and was hurt or caused someone else to get hurt and was sued, the City would provide a legal defense and indemnify that employee. If the City authorized employees to solicit on City time, the indemnity 42O City of Denton City Council Minutes June 11, 1996 Page 6 ordinance would come into play because that would be in the scope and course of employment. There was also a question of whether or not authorizing City employees to solicit a charitable contribution served a public purpose. If it did not serve a public purpose, the constitutional prohibition against making a gift or lending credit to a private corporation would have to be considered. Council Member Krueger felt that there were several areas which were being overlooked. He knew that there were both volunteer and paid fire fighters who were currently doing this type of solicitation both on and off duty. He knew the Fire Department did volunteer work in the school classrooms while on duty for fire safety education. He felt the current procedures put undo restrictions on the Fire Department to solicit charitable contributions. Soliciting for their organization was one way that the fire fighters were visible in the community. It was not any different from the United Way efforts by others employees in the City while on duty. He felt it was important for the fire fighters to be in uniform when soliciting for the contributions but it did not have to be done while on duty. Krueger motioned, Young seconded that according to City Code 95.5 the fire fighters be allowed to solicit in uniform on designated street corners according to the current code to allow them to participate in the "Fill the Boot" campaign only. Mayor Miller asked if the motion was to allow the solicitation on City time or not. Council Member Krueger stated that initially he felt they should be allowed to participate on City time but hearing concerns that other citizens had expressed, in order for this to be a benefit and promotion for the fire fighters and for the city, he felt they could do it on their own time but allowed to do it in uniform. Mayor Miller stated that the motion was to have staff prepare an amendment to the ordinance to allow the fire fighters to solicit charitable contributions in uniform but within the framework of the current ordinance. Council Member Young felt that the fire fighters should be allowed to participate while on City time with fire truck close by. Council Member Beasley asked if it were possible for the fire fighters to do this activity in uniform while off duty. If it was possible to be in uniform, she preferred that they participated off duty due to the liability concerns for the City if something were to happen while performing on duty soliciting. She would not want 421 City of Denton City Council~Minutes '~ June 11, 1996 Page 7 to put the City in that type of position. City Attorney Prouty stated that if the City allowed one set of City employees to do charitable solicitations in uniform, all should be allowed such as the police officers and others who wore uniforms. Council Member Cott felt the "Fill the Boot" operation was part of their work and the fire fighters needed to be paid while part of their work. It was part of their work because it raised pride in the community. Young motioned, Biles seconded to amend the motion that the fire fighters be allowed to solicit in uniform while on duty. City Attorney Prouty stated that the City would be taking a risk with regard to allowing charitable solicitations. He did not feel that the City could approve an ordinance which indicated that one set of city employees who wore a uniform could solicit on duty. In order for the ordinance to be legal, it would have to allow any City employees who wear uniforms to participate in charitable contributions. Council Member Biles stated that there was a specific personnel policy which was established which had specific exceptions, one for United Way solicitations on duty and the second for special circumstances when someone was ill. There already was an ordinance in place which allowed charitable solicitations. The ordinance which needed to be amended was to allow the individuals to go into the street. The other element was to change the personnel policy as to what charitable solicitation could be made while on City time. City Attorney Prouty stated that it was necessary to make it clear that either through a change in the personnel policy or the ordinance, that any City employee who wanted to do charitable solicitations in the street in uniform or out of uniform could do so. That could be done either through an amendment to the personnel policy or by an amendment to the ordinance. Mayor Miller understood that the personnel policy dealt with solicitations within the City among City employees. The ordinance dealt with State law which allowed one exception. The State law indicated that solicitations were not allowed in the street except that it be done for this one particular exception. City Attorney Prouty stated that the State law made an exception to solicit for charitable contributions. 422 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 11, 1996 Page 8 Mayor Miller stated that the State law dealt with solicitation on the roadways and the personnel policy dealt with solicitation among City employees. Biles motioned a second amendment to the motion to amend the city ordinance having to do with the traffic regulations so that the charitable solicitations could be made in the roadway subject to the hours as indicated in the current ordinance. The second element would be to change the personnel policy to allow solicitation by firemen on duty for this specific campaign "Fill the Boot". There was a specific exception for United Way which had a mechanism with specific definitions and parameters within which it must operate. In order to make this as narrow as possible, it should be a specific exception for personnel who would be working on "Fill the Boot". Mayor Miller asked for a clarification of the amendment. Council Member Biles stated that it would be to amend the traffic ordinance to allow charitable solicitation on the roadway. city Attorney Prouty stated that that was already in place. Council Member Biles stated that his amendment would allow the individuals to go into the moving lane of traffic. There was a zero incident of accidents in the U.S. for many years with this campaign. The second part of the amendment would be a directive to the City Manager to modify the personnel policies so that City employees could participate in the "Fill the Boot" campaign while on duty. Mayor Pro Tem Brock felt that it was important to have the ordinance for debate. Krueger seconded the second amendment proposed by Council Member Biles. Mayor Pro Tem Brock felt that Council should have a very thorough debate when th~ item ~am~ up for vote and that ~ev~ral different possibilities should be considered as there were different elements to this item. She would like to have the opinions of both Chief Chadwick and Chief Jez on this issue. She was disappointed that the fire fighters did not participate in the campaign last year while off-duty. She was concerned about one group being singled out for a special privilege of being paid to solicit for their favorite charity. There had been much discussion about response time in the past several years and to do this solicitation while on duty seemed to be a contradiction. 423 City of Denton City Counci!,~Minutes,~ ~ June 11, 1996 Page 9 Council Member Young stated that it was a known fact that fire fighters all over the country raised much money for this charity. This time period was a very effective time period for this solicitation. No money collected went to the fire fighters, it all went to the charitable organization. Council Member Krueger felt that there was a direct correlation between this effort by the fire fighters and what the current employees did for United Way. This was not about separating a class of employees. Mayor Miller stated that he was supportative of the fire fighters to solicit in the roadway. He was not in favor of allowing the fire fighters to solicit for this organization while on duty. The employees did not solicit on the streets for United Way. Only other employees were asked to contribute. Citizens supported fire prevention, fire suppression and fire fighters and any other safety issue. But no matter how noble the cause, it was his feeling that the commitment of the group should be carried through on their own time. He did not have a problem with the fire fighters soliciting while in uniform but did have a problem with soliciting while on duty. Council Member Cott stated that this campaign was for only three days once a year. Mayor Miller stated that it might be three days for this group but if other groups wanted to so something similar, the City could not single out those groups. He understood Council Member Biles' amendment to exclude this only to the fire fighters as far as the personnel policy was concerned. Council Member Biles clarified his amendment. His amendment did not specify fire fighters. He suggested that the personnel policy be amended to allow solicitation while on duty for the City for the "Fill the Boot" campaign. The traffic ordinance would be amended to allow the solicitation in the moving lanes of traffic. He did not see a difference between employees soliciting for United Way while on duty and the fire fighters soliciting for "Fill the Boot" while on duty. Mayor Miller stated that the distinction was that United Way was solicited among other employees while "Fill the Boot" was soliciting funds from the public. Council Member Krueger stated that the last United Way chair was a City employee who sometimes spent full days to do solicitations from service organizations. He did not remember anyone else 424 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 11, 1996 Page 10 requesting to perform such a task. Mayor Miller stated that the problem was whether to allow the fire fighters to solicit for charitable contribution while on duty or off duty. The Fire Chief and the battalion chiefs and captains were directing assignments to carry out the mission of the fire department. That mission was to prevent fires and suppress fires. Those individuals were not indicating to the fire fighters that they had to solicit funds in the roadway. This was something the Fire Fighters Association wanted to do and was not part of the job. Council Member Young withdrew his amendment. On roll vote on Council Member Biles' amendment, Beasley "aye", Brock "nay", Cott "nay", Krueger "aye", Young "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Miller "nay". Motion carried with a 4-3 vote. On roll vote on amended main motion, Beasley "nay", Brock "nay", Cott "nay", Krueger "aye", Young "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Miller "nay". Motion failed with a 3-4 vote. Krueger motioned, Young seconded to allow City employees through the direction as it now stood with United Way and other worthwhile groups to solicit funds through the "Fill the Boot" campaign and in accordance to redefine City Code 95.5 to allow access to the street. Mayor Miller stated that this would be done on City time. The motion and second would authorize City employees to solicit funds for the "Fill the Boot" on city time and in uniform. On roll vote, Beasley "nay", Brock "nay", Cott "aye", Krueger "aye", Young "aye", Biles "aye", and Mayor Miller "nay". Motion carried with a 4-3 vote. 5. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding cable television rates. Richard Foster, Public Information Officer, stated that the city was certified by the Federal Communications Commission to regulate the rates that the local cable company could charge for the basic level of cable programming, for the equipment that people who subscribed to cable television had and for the hourly service charge. Marcus Cable filed for a rate increase to be effective June 1, 1996. The City had 90 day~ from the initial filing date to examine those rates before they became effective. The City joined with Fort Worth and several other north Texas cities which were served by Marcus to hire a consultant to help examine the proposed 425 City of Denton City Council Minutes June 11, 1996 Page 11 rates. It was recommended that the City approve the rates for the basic level of programming and request a lower rate for the equipment and for the hourly service charge. After a public hearing for public comment on the proposed rates, Council would consider a resolution to approve the proposed rates. Council Member Young stated that he had been renting his remote control from Marcus. He recently needed to obtain a new one and was told that Marcus no longer rented the units and he would have to purchase a remote control from Marcus or from someone else. In his opinion this was not a rate reduction in this area. Foster stated that he would find out that information for Council Member Young. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that what was suggested from the consultant was considerably lower than what was the original rate request. The hourly service charge would increase from $31.55 to $42.72 which she felt was a large increase. Foster stated that the cable company had to justify with numbers what the costs were for service and what they were allowed to charge based on those numbers. Consensus of the Council was to prepare a resolution for consideration. The Council returned to a Closed Session in which no action was taken. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. TNIP~fWALTERS Y SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ACC00319 yMILLER, MAYOR OF DENTON, TEXAS