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