Minutes August 07, 2001 CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 2 8 7
August 7, 2001
After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Regular Meeting
on Tuesday, August 7, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
PRESENT: Mayor Brock; Mayor Pro Tern Beasley; Council Members Burroughs, Fulton,
McNeill, Phillips and Redmon.
ABSENT: None
1. Pledge of Allegiance
The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas
flags.
2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of July 17, July 23, and July 24, 2001.
The minutes were approved as presented. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Fulton
"aye", McNeill "aye", Phillips "aye", Redmon "aye", and Mayor Brock "aye". Motion carded
unanimously.
PRESENTATIONS
3. Mayor Brock presented a Resolution of Appreciation to Charles Brockette.
Burroughs motioned, Fulton seconded to approve the resolution of appreciation. On roll vote,
Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Fulton "aye", McNeill "aye", Phillips "aye", Redmon "aye", and
Mayor Brock "aye". Motion carded unanimously.
4. Recognition of staff accomplishments
City Manager Conduff presented a video of staff accomplishments.
CITIZEN REPORTS
5. Andee Chamberlain regarding automated trash and curbside recycling.
Ms. Chamberlain was represented by Danielle Pierce who was speaking for the UNT Sierra
Student Coalition. She stated that more curbside recycling should be done especially in
apartment complexes. The Club had done a number of recycling projects at the University and
was in favor of what ever kind of recycling the City could do.
6. Bobbie Edwards regarding automated trash and curbside recycling.
Ms. Edwards indicated that she would speak during the recycling agenda item.
7. Julie Densmore regarding automated trash collection.
Ms. Densmore was not present at the meeting.
288
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 7, 2001
Page 2
8. Ross Melton regarding drainage, utility rates, and the budget.
Mr. Melton felt that drainage was not a big problem in the City and funding for such projects
was not necessary. He suggested ways to raise money for drainage from sources other than
taxes. He felt that the budget was not in proper order and there was a need to cut expenses.
CONSENT AGENDA
Council Member McNeill asked to pull Item/421, Council Member Phillips asked to pull Item
#22 and Council Member Redmon asked to pull Item #16 for separate consideration.
Beasley motioned, Burroughs seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and the accompanying
ordinances and resolutions with the exception of Items #16, #21 and #22.
Tom Adkins spoke regarding Item #10.
On roll vote to approve the Consent Agenda with the exception of Items #16, #21 and #22, Beasley
"aye", Burroughs "aye", Fulton "aye", McNeill "aye", Phillips "aye", Redmon "aye", and Mayor
Brock "aye". Motion carded unanimously.
9. NO. 2001-266
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR AN
AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE V LIBRARY, SECTION 2.157 OF THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, TO ELIMINATE
THE PAYMENT OF AN ANNUAL FEE FOR NONRESIDENTS FOR A LIBRARY
CARD; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A SAVING
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
10.
NO. 2001-267
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A 401 MONEY PURCHASE PLAN WITH ICMA
RETIREMENT CORPORATION GOVERNMENTAL MONEY PURCHASE PLAN;
AUTHORIZING AN ADOPTION AGREEMENT WITH ICMA; EXECUTING A
DECLARATION OF TRUST FOR THE ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST; NAMING
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR AS COORDINATOR FOR THE PLAN; AND
ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
11.
NO. 2001-268
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACCESS OF CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION IN FILES CREATED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
143.089(G) TO THE CITY MANAGER, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY AND TRANSPORTATION, HUMAN RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT STAFF AND CITY ATTORNEY AND HIS ASSISTANTS AND ANY
ATTORNEY HIRED TO ASSIST THE AFOREMENTIONED OFFICIALS AND
EMPLOYEES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 7, 2001
Page 3
289
12.
NO. R2001-041
A RESOLUTION VOTING FOR A MEMBER TO THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF
THE DENCO AREA 9-1-1 DISTRICT; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
13.
NO. 2001-269
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A PUBLIC
WORKS CONTRACT FOR NEW VESTIBULE STOREFRONT AT SOUTH BRANCH
LIBRARY, 3228 TEASLEY DRIVE, DENTON, TX; PROVIDING FOR AN
EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE (BID 2698 - NEW VESTIBULE STOREFRONT AT SOUTH BRANCH
LIBRARY, AWARDED TO DBR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, DENTON, TX, IN
THE AMOUNT OF $22,585).
14.
NO. 2001-270
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A PUBLIC
WORKS CONTRACT FOR THE DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS AND CLEARING
OF LOTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 2696 - DEMOLITION OF STRUCTURES
SET $$31 AWARDED TO ICE CONTRACTORS, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF
$24,200).
15.
NO. 2001-271
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING SEALED PROPOSALS AND AWARDING A
CONTRACT FOR THE SERVICES OF AN INSURANCE BROKER OF RECORD
FOR THE CITY OF DENTON; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS
THEREFORE AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (RFP 2686 - INSURANCE
BROKER OF RECORD AWARDED TO MCGRIFF, SEIBELS & WILLIAMS OF
TEXAS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $94,000 OVER A THREE-YEAR TIME
PERIOD)
16.
NO. 2001-272
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE PROPOSALS AND AWARDING A
CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF HEALTH INSURANCE; PROVIDING FOR
THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (RFP
2689- EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE AWARDED TO CIGNA HEALTHCARE
IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $5,354,000).
17.
NO. 2001-273
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A
CONTRACT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF CARPET, TILE, AND ACCESSORIES AT
CITY HALL WEST; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS
THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 2697- CARPET, TILE,
2 9 0city of Denton City Council Minutes
August 7, 2001
Page 4
ACCESSORIES FOR CITY HALL WEST AWARDED TO CARPET ONE IN THE
AMOUNT OF $17,677.50).
18.
NO. R2001-042
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, AS DENTON'S
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, TO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF
DENTON AN OFFER FROM THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(TXDOT) RELATING TO A GRANT FOR CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT; CONFIRMING AGREEMENT TO PAY A
PORTION OF THE TOTAL PROJECT COSTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
19.
NO. 2001-274
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A COMMERCIAL OPERATOR AIRPORT LEASE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND MICHAEL MOORE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
20.
NO. 2001-275
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF CHANGE ORDER THREE
TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND MOTOROLA, INC.;
PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE SERVICE PROVIDED AND SCOPE OF
WORK; AN INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT AMOUNT; PROVIDING FOR THE
EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(PURCHASE ORDER 11509 - MOTOROLA, INC. - $837,231 AND CHANGE ORDERS
ONE AND TWO IN THE AMOUNT OF $11,110, PLUS CHANGE ORDER THREE IN
THE AMOUNT OF $148,945).
21. This item was not approved.
22. This item was not approved.
Item #16
Council Member Redmon questioned the amount of compensation to the consultant for the
insurance bid.
Robert Waggoner, Risk Manager, stated that the consultant received $65,000 per year for
assistance with the health insurance, vision insurance, dental insurance and other types of
insurance needs.
Redmon motioned, Burroughs seconded to approve Item #16. On roll vote, Beasley "aye",
Burroughs "aye", Fulton "aye", McNeill "aye", Phillips "aye", Redmon "aye", and Mayor Brock
"aye". Motion carried unanimously.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 7, 2001
Page 5
291
Item #21
Council discussed the bid process and the difference between the low bid and the second low bid
for the recycling project. A discussion also centered on how the project would be done, the days
of pick up and the potential for the provider to take over operation of several City drop-off
recycling centers.
Phillips motioned, Redmon seconded to reject all bids and recommended reissuing the bids.
Council Member Phillips felt that the bids should look at the possibility of the vendor taking over
some of the bulk site recycling centers and include multi family recycling.
Bobbie Edwards, 608 A. W. Hickory, Denton, 76207, spoke in favor of recycling.
Comment cards were submitted from the following individuals:
Janay Tieken, 2400 Natchez Trace, Denton, 76210 - favor of recycling
Jan Dixon, (no address given) - favor of recycling
Heidi Klein, 1420 Broadway, Denton, 76201 - favor of recycling
Nick Hill, 715 W. Hickory, Denton, 76201 - favor of recycling
Elliot Jackson, 2300 N. Elm, Denton, 76201 - favor of recycling
Kyle Kilgore, 521 Pearl, Denton, 76201 - favor of recycling
Ginny Childs, 916 Denton, Denton, 76201 - favor of recycling
Andee Chamberlain, 823 W. Hickory, Denton, 76201 - favor of recycling
Council discussed the pros and cons of going out for a rebid of the service and whether or not the
process would be a fair process ifrebid.
On roll vote to reject all bids and go out for a rebid of the proposal, Beasley "aye", Burroughs
"nay", Fulton "aye", McNeitl "aye", Phillips "aye", Redmon "aye", and Mayor Brock "nay".
Motion carried with a 5-2 vote.
Item #22 was not considered.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
23. The Council held a public hearing on Illustrative Plan(s) for the City of Denton redrawing
the boundaries of the existing Denton City Council districts and direct the City Attorney to
prepare an ordinance adopting Denton's Redistricting Plan or setting a date for final adoption of
Denton's Redistricting Plan.
NOTE: See Attachment A for a verbatim transcription of this section of the minutes.)
This ends the verbatim portion of the minutes.
29'2
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 7, 2001
Page 6
24. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance rezoning
approximately 0.25 acres, commonly known as 1604 North Elm, from a General Retail (GR)
zoning district to a Planned Development (PD) zoning district. The property was located at the
northeast comer of North Elm and College Streets. A planned development permitting office,
retail and residential uses for an existing structure was proposed. The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval (5-0) with conditions. (Z-01-0020)
Doug Powell, Director of Planning and Development, stated that applicant would like a mixed
use ability with the current structure.
The.Mayor opened the public hearing.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 2001-276
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A
ZONING CHANGE FROM GENERAL RETAIL (GR) ZONING DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
(PD) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR
APPROXIMATELY 0.25 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 1604 NORTH ELM
STREET; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF
$2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
Fulton motioned, Redmon seconded to adopt the ordinance with the conditions recommended by
the Planning and Zoning Commission. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Fulton
"aye", McNeill "aye", Phillips "aye", Redmon "aye", and Mayor Brock "aye". Motion carded
unanimously.
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
25. The Council considered and took action on a request for relief from the Residential
Interim Zoni~tg Regulations, Ordinance 2000-046 for approximately 149 acres generally located
east of Highway 377 and south of Brash Creek Road. The property was in a Single Family (SF-
16) and Planned Development (PD-118) zoning district. A single-family subdivision was
proposed. (RR-01-0008)
Doug Powelli Director of Planning and Development, stated that the proposal only dealt with a
portion of the tract. The flood plain area encroached in the proposal and a zoning plan would
have to be done under the interim regulations.
The following individuals spoke to the issue:
City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 7, 2001
Page 7
29:3'
Tim House, Carmen Custom Homes, - waiver only for phase I
Sandra Lewis, 900 Brush Creek Road, Argyle, 76226 - opposed
Bill Lewis, 900 Brush Creek Road, Argyle, 76226 - opposed
Dennis Cox, 8008 Woodcreek, Denton, 76226 - opposed
Comment cards were submitted by the following individuals:
Lona Wolfe, 4 Woodcreek Circle, Argyle, 76226 - opposed
Henry Wolfe, 4 Woodcreek Circle, Argyle, 76226 - opposed
Susan Apple, 1 Woodcreek Circle, Argyle, 76226 - opposed
Burroughs motioned, Fulton seconded to deny the waiver request and to delay the drainage and
traffic analysis until the time of platting under straight SF-16 zoning to allow expediting of
project but to maintain protective measures. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Fulton
"aye", McNeill "aye", Phillips "aye", Redmon "aye", and Mayor Brock "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
26. The Council considered nominations and appointments to the City's Boards and
Commissions.
Beasley motioned, McNeill seconded to approve the nominations made at the previous meeting.
Council then made nominations that would be considered at the next regular meeting.
27. New Business
The following items of New Business were suggested by Council for future meetings:
Mayor Pro Tern Beasley asked for a resolution on the next Council meeting
opposing the proposed asphalt plant to be sent to the TNRCC.
B. Council Member Redmon asked for a feasibility study for the extension of Scott
Street.
Council Member Redmon asked for an update on the Denton Housing Authority's
proposed elderly units.
Council Member Phillips asked about an enforcement plan for the control of
semi-truck traffic on University Drive.
Council Member Phillips asked about a plan for traffic flow on main arterials in
the city - sequencing of the lights.
28.
Items from the City Manager
A. Notification of upcoming meetings and/or conferences
B. Clarification of items on the agenda
City Manager Conduff did not have any items for the Council.
4City of Denton City Council Minutes
August 7, 2001
Page 8
29.
There was no continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the
Texas Open Meetings Act.
30.
There was no official action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.071-551.086
of the Texas Open Meetings Act.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:54 p.m.
EULINE BROCK, MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
CIY~ SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
Attachment A
295
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
MAYOR BROCK: Then we will go onto the
public hearing part of our Agenda and this is a very
special public hearing. This is a public hearing on the
proposed plan for redistricting for the City of Denton.
This is Agenda Item No. 23.
Before we begin this, I would like to
remind Council members that what we are doing tonight will
be part of our submittal to the Department of Justice.
And when you speak, would you please identify yourself by
your place on the Council. For instance, Mr. Burroughs
would say this is At-Large Council Member Mark Burroughs.
I think this would be particularly important for those who
hold district seats.
So we'll now call this public hearing to
order. Welcome to those of you who have come for the
public hearing on the proposed plan for the City of Denton
redistricting. I'm Eulene Brock, Mayor of the City of
Denton. And the purpose of tonight's hearing is to
receive comment from the public on the proposed plan for
the realignment of the four City Council districts in the
City of Denton.
Following a brief presentation on the
proposed plan, the Council will welcome comments from
citizens. We will take those comments as requested by
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
1
296
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18.
19
20
21
22
24
25
filling out a blue card. If you would like to comment and
you have not filled out a blue card, I believe I have two
requests to speak here, please, you can get a blue card
right in the entryway. And if you would please give it to
the City Secretary over here and we will put you on the
list.
A little bit about why we're here tonight,
the Denton City Council is made up of seven members
elected by the voters of the City of Denton. Four of the
members are from single-member districts. The Mayor and
two Council members are elected at-large. After the
Federal governanent releases census data every ten years,
the City is required by both State and Federal law to
determine whether its four single-member districts are out
of balance.
And that means is the population -- whether
the population of each of the four City Council districts
is relatively equal. The City has been told that our
single-member districts are sufficiently out of balance so
that we will have to redistrict; in other words, redraw
the district lines. And, of course, we anticipated this.
The City was very different. It was smaller, the
population patterns were different in 1991 when this last
was done. So we're in the process now of redrawing those
district lines.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001 2
297
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
This process began on May 15th when we
received the initial assessment from the fi~m that we had
engaged to help us with this process, Bickerstaff Heath.
Since then, we've had a lot of effort to involve the
public in the process. Letters were sent to all the
neighborhood groups in the City of Denton that are
registered with our Community Development Department.
These letters informed them about the redistricting and
what the process would be like. An offer was made for
City staff to meet with them. They were told of the work
session that would be held on this subject in July.
Also, the City's Legal Department and the
City Secretary have provided information to anyone who
asked for it. There's been discussion of it in the public
.press. Senior Assistant City Attorney Dottie Palumbo has
reviewed the process with the Local Affairs Committee of
the Denton Chamber of Commerce, thus, reaching a number of
people. Also, Senior Assistant City Attorney Dottie
Palumbo met with a formal meeting with LULAC, the League
of United Latin American Citizens, and met with
individuals and representatives of various other groups.
At the July 24th work session, City Council
directed Ma. Palumbo and Allen Borquez of Bickerstaff
Heath to work with those who showed up that night. We had
some discussion, we had some public comment, and then
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
298
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
afterward, those two met with representatives of LULAC, of
the NAACP, of SEDNA, the Southeast Denton Neighborhood
Association. And out of those consultations and the
comments that were made during the work session on July
24th, Illustrative Plans 4 and 5 came out of those
consultations. Also, these two met with individual
Council members who had concerns, and especially with the
four who represent single-member districts, and expressed
any concerns or interests.
The legal staff, the City Secretary,
Council members have responded to E-mails, phone calls,
and any kind of inquiry or comment from citizens. So we
have done those preliminary things and now a major step is
to have this public hearing tonight. To discuss with us
what the issues are and where we are, I'd like to
introduce Allen Borquez from the law firm of Bickerstaff
Heath. Mr. Borquez.
MR. BORQUEZ: Thank you, Mayor and Council.
I'm Allen Borquez from Bickerstaff, Heath, Smiley,
Pollan, Keaver & McDaniel which is your consultant for the
redistricting process this time around. It's been a
couple of weeks since I was here last and, no, my name is
~till not on the letterhead but we'll keep plugging away.
The firm represents approximately 80 different entities
this time around in helping with redistricting, schools,
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
299
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
cities, counties, and other types of districts. We've
been doing this type of work for 21 years now. And we're
before you tonight and before the public to present five
different illustrative plans.
These are five different plans, all of
which meet the standards of State and Federal law, all of
which are balanced. And particularly the last two plans,
the Mayor mentioned Plans 4 and 5, are attempts to
incorporate as much of the cormuents that we have received
from staff and citizens and the Council as possible.
When the Council evaluates these plans and
the citizens evaluate these plans, I ask you to remember
that redistricting is a zero szun game. It's kind of like
preparing your budget every year. If you have your wish
list, something else has got to give. And it's fairly
frustrating sometimes to try and reach all the goals that
were set out in this process and seeing how the numbers
shift around. And while it may have seemed easy in the
beginning to just shift population from a big district to
a small district, when you see how densely populated the
urban core of Denton is, it becomes increasingly difficult
to move some of these lines around.
I will say that some of the information
that we have provided, and we still have extra copies of
today in case the public would like to see it or review it
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
300
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
prior to testifying, are the resolutions that the Council
has adopted at the outset, adopting criteria for these
plans, and guidelines for any third-party or public plans
that would be submitted. We have the demographic report
showing the existing boundaries for the City Council
districts and the breakdown in terms of total population
and racial or ethnic population.
We have copies of the maps. They're on
display throughout this meeting in the lobby. They're
very large maps. And I'll also show them quickly here
today on the overhead. And then the Council also has a
demographic report for each of those plans and Ms. Palumbo
has extra copies.
I know that the City Council and staff has
heard this but there may be some audience members that
have not, so I'll run through really briefly the fact that
the City population today or as of April of 2000, the
snapshot date when the census was taken, was 80,809.
Dividing that by your four single-member districts, that
gives an ideal population of 20,202 people per district.
So the purposes of one person, one vote, that is the goal.
And our maximu~ deviations are measured in terms of
variance from that goal.
To achieve your maximu~ total deviation, you
look at the largest district which was District 4 and you
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
301
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
subtract the difference from the ideal, and then you look
at your smallest district and then you subtract those two.
And so what you'll have as of today with your current
lines and the population as of 2000, is a total maximuza
deviation of 35.52 percent. The law has recognized under
ten percent as allowable. So we definitely had our work
cut out for us. And all five plans that you have get you
within that ten percent total maximum deviation.
Now, when it came to moving the lines
around, it was not just a matter of moving lines left,
right, up, or down. We had other things to keep in mind.
First of all, you'll recall the Voting Rights Act of 1965,
and Section 5 of that prohibits retrogression in te~ms of
minority voting strength. Section 2 also prohibits
discrimination such as packing or fracturing minority
populations.
And, finally, the new legal standard that
we had to keep in mind, the Shaw versus Reno line of cases
that prohibits you from using race as the predominant
factor unless you overcome a very difficult Constitutional
burden.
In terms of also following things that the
city has set out a~ criteria, I'll just li~t briefly for
the record what criteria you adopted in your Resolution.
First and foremost, you asked me and the law firm to try
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
30,2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and use easily identifiable boundaries so that when folks
know where they live, they may understand where they vote
and who represents them. You asked us to avoid splitting
neighborhoods, and in the cases of these plans,
particularly the last two, we actually made an effort to
reunite neighborhoods that may have been split at some
point in the past. We have used whole voting precincts to
make sure that there are resources within these different
districts to conduct your elections.
We have based all these plans, all five of
them, on your existing City Council districts, and we
tried to move them just enough to achieve the goals that
you set out for this process. They are all roughly equal
in population, at least as acceptable under Federal law.
They are oompact and contiguous. You will be pleased that
even in the last two incarnations, 4 and 5, all the
incun%bents are still in their districts and won't have to
run against one other next election.
And, then, finally, the law firm has
reviewed these plans and found that all five of them,
whichever one you may choose, if you choose one of the
five, all five will satisfy the Voting Rights Act, both
Section 5 and Section 4.
The other Resolution that the Council
adopted spelled out the guidelines for public plans,
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
30'3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
simply asking that the public plans or third-party plans
be in writing, they redistrict the entire City, they come
with demographic data showing the racial population
breakdown and total population, and that they be submitted
by a certain deadline. To my knowledge, we have not
gotten any third-party plans submitted as a whole, but we
have had ample public input into the process.
When it comes to the different plans, I'll
just review them very briefly to show you what they look
like. And I haven't used your fancy projection tool but
I'm sure we'll get close. This is Illustrative Plan 1.
Once again, all these are on display outside if a member
of the public would like to get a quicker view or we do
have some small copies available for hand out from Ms.
Palumbo if any of these are necessary.
And I will mention that the first three
plans were revealed to the Council at the illustrative
plan meeting on July the 24th, so these all have been
available to the public since that time.
Illustrative Plan 2. Illustrative Plan 3
which is very similar to 2, but was a concerted effort to
try and underpopulate 4 as much as possible in
anticipation of future growth. And then this is the first
unveiling in a large audience of Plans 4 and 5. And I'll
go ahead and leave Plan 5 up there only because the input
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
304
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
9.3
24
25
that I have received thusfar has indicated this is the one
that has a large bit of support and it's worth some
i ,
col~m%ents on.
The difference between Plan 5 and what the
Council currently has now, first of all, what we have
commonly started calling the peninsula, this area here
that goes along University and down south -- down
Mockingbird, Audra, and then over into District 1. That
part has been put entirely into District 1 in an effort to
unite neighborhoods and communities of interest. That
seemed the more logical to go together.
Another difference between this plan and
your current boundaries is that the primary boundary
between Districts i and 2 becomes Mayhill Road here on the
east side. When it comes to the boundaries between
Districts i and 3 over by the university area, Bernard
becomes the dividing line between there. And then there
was some population shift from District 4 to District 3
just north of the 35 East/West interchange.
When we first started this process, the
largest district by far was District 4 and it seemed like
it was going to be quite a challenge to unload some of
that population onto some less populated districts. What
we have found out in this process is that the area
bordering Districts 1, 3, and 4 is very densely populated
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001 10
305
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
with one census block, which in Denton, in the urban
areas, is essentially one city block, can contain almost
1,000 or more than 1,000 people. So if you follow a line
of streets so as to collect multiple blocks, so they look
unifo~, you've now picked up several thousand people.
And at the outset, the difference between
an ideal district and District 4 was only 4,000 people,
which showed -- it looked like a large deviation but when
you come to taking area along this inter city, it's not
really that much in geographic size because of the dense
population that is in there. So that's one explanation
for why you don't see as dramatic of a change to District
4 as you would see otherwise.
As far as the process, the Mayor did an
outstanding job of listing most of the highlights. We did
start on the 15th with your initial assessment. On June
the 25th and 26th, I conducted some personal interviews
with some members of the Council and staff and of the
community groups that expressed an interest to do so.
Also, on July the 19th. On July the 24th, we had your
illustrative plan meeting with 1, 2, and 3. And
afterwards, we had some individual meetings with folks who
asked us to listen to their concerns. That being LULAC,
the NAACP, and SEDNA. And then on the 31st, we also had
some follow-up meetings with those organizations.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
25
And so we come to you today with these
plans for public input and you will hopefully -- you could
choose today to designate a plan to go forward on, if you
choose, and schedule a public -- excuse me, an adoption
meeting for that plan. You will be handed out a copy of a
letter that I have prepared dated today that goes through
Plans 4 and 5 together, essentially, documenting in
writing that we have reviewed them and found that they
satisfy the Federal law and the criteria that you have
adopted.
And I'll mention Plan 5, I mean, assuming
it's one of the lead plans, and it may not be, but just by
comparison you will see on your demographics that for
District 1 where originally it was 4.7 percent over, it
would now be 4.41 percent under the ideal. And District
2, it was initially eight percent over, now it is just
less than three -- excuse me, eight percent under, now
it's just less than three percent under. Where District 3
was originally 16 percent under, now it's five percent
over. And where District 4 was originally 20 percent
over, now it's just two percent over. And we are total
deviation as of today is essentially 36 percent, under
Plan 5 it is 9.45 percent.
All of these plans that you have have
resulted in a very slight change when it comes to the
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
12
307
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING
percentages, the composition of Hispanics and
African-Americans within each district. Almost all of
them result in a slight increase in the percentage of
Hispanics and African-Americans in District I and a
corresponding decrease in District 4. We have reviewed
that under all the plans, particularly Plan 5, and do not
find any legal problems with that change in the
population; in part because of the percentage of minority,
Hispanic and African-Americans, within Denton and also the
fact that since we had to move some population from 4,
it's reasonable to conclude that the percentage would go
down on that scale.
So you also can look at your demographic
report of the voting age populations. The voting age
population corresponds to the breakdown of total
population, very slight changes. And like I say, it is
somewhat rare to be able to move this number of people
around through these lines and yet keep the breakdown of
Anglo, Hispanic, and African-Americans somewhat static.
So that concludes my comments. I will be
around if there is any questions from the Council, staff,
or from the citizens. Otherwise at this point, the
council is free to conduct the public hearing and receive
input.
MAYOR BROCK: Just a moment, Mr. Borquez.
AUGUST 7, 2001
13
308
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Mr. Burroughs has a question or a comment for you.
MR. BURROUGHS: Yeah. One of the things
that I had raised and several other Council members agreed
and brought to you is to try to take into account the
growth patterns of the City so that we don't get in five
years beyond the ten percent deviation. And I don't see
-- could you tell me how you've incorporated that, trying
to foresee where the heavy growth is going to be in the
upcoming years so that we don't get skewed very quickly?
MR. BORQUEZ: Certainly, Councilman. It is
my understanding that the bulk of the anticipated growth
based on development plans and plats and recent
annexations is going to be in District 4. And so Plan 3
that I brought to you was my effort to under-populate 4 as
much as possible, yet staying within the total maximum
deviation. Plan 3 is a plan that does that.
Now, I'll remind the Council that legally
you're only required to go through redistricting if you're
a city on the happening of two events. One is the census
that reveals a population imbalance. The other is going
to be if you annex a large populated area and that results
in an in%balance. The fact that the City may just grow
within the next ten years does not legally obligate you to
redistrict, although you can voluntarily choose to do so
to keep the representative capacities equal.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
14
309
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
That being said, Plan 3 tries to
under-populate 4 as much as possible. And I really have
no better explanation for you than the fact that I've been
given several priorities, particularly the input that we
received from the special interest groups, the community
groups regarding what roads, highways, or streets they
want to serve as boundary lines. When you do that, some
of the other priorities fell down the list. And I haven't
been really given a list of which priorities are truly
priorities and which ones are just nice things to have
happen.
MR. BURROUGHS: Okay. So are you saying in
4 and 5, that's not really taken into account very much
because of the other priorities of the streets and such?
MR. BORQUEZ: It was still a priority and
that's why it's just two percent over the ideal which is a
lot closer than being 20 percent over the ideal. But in
achieving those other priorities of using certain streets
or uniting certain neighborhoods, it just became
impossible to shift more people from 4 into other areas,
unless we decided to try and do something more out on the
eastern, western, or southern boundaries.
MR. BURROUGHS: And that's really what I
thought was going to happen is some of the more vacant
land which we know is going to be developing would be
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
15
31.0,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
shifted. But I didn't see that done in either 4 or 5 so
that's why I was just asking that. Okay.
MAYOR BROCK: You know, I thought about
that too, Mr. Burroughs, but it would be kind of hard for
us to put Robson Ranch in District 3. But, also, I saw
these jobs, you know because I consider 35E a nice, smooth
dividing line, but think about the little triangle there
where your office is between Teasley Lane and Dallas
Drive, there is such a huge concentration of population
there that if they were put in District l, for instance,
District 1 would be way over. And then you would start
messing with other lines that represented certain criteria
that were important to people who consulted about this.
The same thing goes with that little
triangle that's bounded by Eagle and Bernard. Again, a
great concentration of population right in there. And you
move that and you've changed everything. So there weren't
any easy solutions. I know I kept asking questions about
that.
MR. BORQUEZ: I will say that, you know,
one of the first requests that I received from multiple
folks was to try and get everything north of 35 into
either Districts 3 or 1 for simplieity's sake. I'll tell
you there were several draft plans, where you see ,_~
illustrative plans or simple draft plans where that was
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001 16
311'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the first thing we did. Just forget everything else, put
everything north of 35 in one of these two and then go
around and try and make the rest of it work out. And it
was virtually impossible to do or the resulting changes
were so severe to other districts that they just didn't
seem palatable, particularly cutting people out of their
district seats and those sorts of things.
I put back on the overhead the very first
illustrative plan where you see District 3 coming down
south of Jim Christal into District 4. That was an effort
to pick up some land and some sparse population without,
all of a sudden, severely under-populating 4. And it's
quite an exercise and I wish we had the portable computers
or the Council to come up to Austin and see this done.
When we take one single city block in the core, it shifts
thousands of people one way or the other. There were
several draft plans where Mr. McNeill's district was
severely under-populated and I was shifting around trying
to find places to boost his back up. One of the plans
revealed is 2 or 3 at our illustrative plan meeting
actually showed him gaining territory that had been
District 1 territory, and he had asked the question about
that. It was simply an effort to give him more population
because other changes had taken too much away.
It's a zero sum game and it's a difficult
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
17
312
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
thing to do. But one thing I've heard over and over from
Council, staff, and from the citizens was to try and use
major arterial roads or highways as a dividing line to the
point possible, so we quickly left Jim Christal as it is
today and moved the population from 3 back north and went
about trying to find the changes somewhere else. We
weren't able to achieve all the goals regarding everything
north of 35 or some of the others, but these five plans
are the best effort that we could bring forth today.
MAYOR BROCK: Council member McNeill.
MR. MCNEILL: Let me follow up on the
Mayor's comments here. If I look at the triangles in Plan
5 that you have there that there's one, two, three
triangles that are north of 35, and if I look at the
percentages, District 4 is two percent over and District 1
is four percent under. But I think what you're telling me
is that the population is so concentrated, that's heavily
multi-family in those three triangles, that it would be --
it would severely under-populate us, under-populate 4 and
grossly over-populate 1 if we move those into 1.
MR. BORQUEZ: That is correct. And we
talked about, you know, for you and I severe and grossly
are adjectives that have -- that mean ~omething to us.
For this exercise, just getting below that ten percent is
a hard thing. And just to demonstrate the point, the
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001 18
3 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
triangle that you mentioned that is just kind of on the
southeastern corner right along 35, that is in your
district now and remains in there under Plan 5. There's
over 1,000 people living just within that triangle. I
forget the raw numbers. And one of the problems that we
have that we have to deal with is we cannot use an
increment of geography smaller than a census block and
that entire triangle is counted as one census block.
There's no way to divide it or split it or -- and some of
these others, as well.
MR. MCNEILL: But if you took that 1,000 --
I mean, again, I don't want to get into micro-management,
as we said earlier, but if we took that 1,000 and you took
that from District 4, then that would make us 19,617 but
that would make District i go up to 20,000. So it looks
to me like that's a trade we ought to be looking at.
MR. BORQUEZ: Yeah. I believe you and I
absolutely promise you that that is a trade that I tried
and it did not work.
MR. MCNEILL:
MR. BORQUEZ:
Okay.
Because, believe me, that was
the number one marching order that I had was to get as
much az I could north of 35 into either one or two
districts so it's easier for folks to understand.
MR. BURROUGHS: It didn't work because of
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
19
314
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the minority populations because it works demographically
-- I mean, money -- I mean, with the number of citizenry
because it would be a less deviation in District 1 than
the 4.41 percent that it's below. District 4 would be
less than that below. And yet District 4 is where the
growth is going to be, so it would seem like that meets
it, from a population standpoint. But are you saying that
from some of the other -- from the minority populations,
it would be skewed?
MR. BORQUEZ: No, it's purely population.
And I'm standing up here before you kicking myself for not
having brought the exact breakdown of those three
triangles and I really do apologize.
MR. BURROUGHS: Well, just the one.
MR. BORQUEZ: I tried everything with that
one triangle and it would not work. Under one of the
previous plans, and let me try and at a glance see which
one I did that on, it was on Illustrative Plan No. 1, you
will see where I did shift that triangle. And it resulted
in some other changes that had to be made elsewhere in
population.
I'm trying to remember what all the
breakdow~ was. We actually, if you'll see the difference,
if you look north of Eagle on the central west side of
town, District 4 actually encroaches north into what is
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
20
31,5
6
7
8
9
l0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
currently District 3 territory. I don't know if you can
see that. Right here in this area under Illustrative Plan
l, that whole first row of houses north of Eagle all of a
sudden becomes District 4. The reason it did that was to
make up for the population that was shifted by that
triangle over here in the southeast corner.
MR. BURROUGHS: I just don't understand why
you would have to shift any population because just 1,000
people wouldn't negatively impact, in fact, it positively
impacts it.
MR. BORQUEZ: I'm suspecting that my 1,000
figure is wrong is what I'm thinking.
MR. BURROUGHS:
MR. BORQUEZ:
MAYOR BROCK:
Oh, okay.
It's probably 4,000.
Yeah. I was going to say
that sounds awfully small to me looking at the makeup of
that little triangle.
MR. MCNEILL: But that's all multi-family
right there around your office area there.
MR. BURROUGHS: There's some -- these are
multi-family complexes.
MR. MCNEILL: But even if it's 4,000, part
of the goal wa~ that we're seeing this huge influx of
population into 4 and there's certainly conflicting
priorities that you're dealing with. But if there was
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
21
316
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
some way that we could have done that, I think it was
probably a good idea because in five years we don't want
to end up with 60,000 in District 4 and the other
districts hardly have any change.
MR. BORQUEZ: Something will have to give.
Although I could still go back -- we are not limited to
Plan 5 or 4 or anything else before this body. The only
limitations are what this City Council chooses to do and
time. Time is running out but, certainly, I could try
some other variations. But I can give you, as my client,
my word, I have tried many variations putting that
triangle back into 1 and making shifts elsewhere.
And when I have done that, other priorities
such as other streets or dividing lines have had to give,
including areas up here, the peninsula that's been
reunited and some other major dividers. Sometimes the
wrapping of District 3 around what is currently District 2
on the northeast side, those kinds of things have had to
result to deal with that shift in population because it is
so dense all along 1-35 in this inter city.
I could certainly try if it's Council's
wish to try some other variations, I can certainly do
that. But I can tell you that one of the number one
things I was told my very first day, I have tried various
times to work that out. We can still try and I could also
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001 22
317
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
offer any Council member who'd like to come to Austin to
sit there and draw with me, we can do that, as well.
don't say that as a joke. Some clients have found that to
be very helpful. But that is a very tough thing to do.
MR. BURROUGHS:
of that triangle.
MR. BORQUEZ:
tomorrow.
MR. BURROUGHS:
I would like the population
I can certainly do that
Everything else you've said
and draw and such, I have no question with. I mean, it's
very difficult. That's the only one because I know it
real well. My office is right in the middle of it. So I
know there's some multi-family there, I would doubt it if
it's in, like, 3,000 range. I would think you'd be much
closer around 1,000, 1,500 maybe. Because with Dallas
Drive as a dividing line, you don't have any Township II
so it's -- I mean, it's just on our side of it and most of
it's commercial. We have a couple of big complexes, a
couple of parking lots, and some food stores and such, but
there's a couple of apartment complexes. I'd like to see
the nLunbers.
MR. BORQUEZ: I could print a very small
map that ~hows what the breakdown is of each of these
three triangles fairly easily and I'll send it to both of
you and to the Mayor.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
23
318
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MAYOR BROCK: And I think also it's my
understanding that some of the citizens that you consulted
with who were particularly concerned about communities of
interest did not consider that a part of the communities
of interest that they were trying to unite in District 1.
I mean, I don't know, perhaps other people can speak to
that. But that was one issue.
Is there anyone in the audience who has a
question?
member.
MR. MCNEILL: I had one more question.
MAYOR BROCK: Excuse me. Go ahead, Council
MR. MCNEILL: When I looked at the
redistricting that the County did for this area, that same
triangle was sticking up above 35. And when I raised that
question, the response there was because that was a voting
district. But you didn't let voting districts interfere
with what you're doing in terms of dividing the
population?
MR. BORQUEZ: One of your criteria was for
us not to split voting districts, and so to the extent
possible we tried to keep those in there. But I don't
know that that ~ame into the analysis on this one.
MR. MCNEILL:
MAYOR BROCK:
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING
Okay. Thank you.
Of course, the County by
AUGUST 7, 2001
24
319'
8
9
10
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
definition had to move around voting precincts. I mean,
they were moving around voting precincts rather than
census blocks.
MR. BORQUEZ: Ideally, you use voter
tabulation districts which is something larger usually
than down to census blocks.
MAYOR BROCK:
MS. BEASLEY:
Mayor pro rem Beasley.
Well, and my question is
simply on time because you said we're running out of time.
And I was looking through my file trying to find, when is
it that we have to approve, I mean, when approximately do
we have to approve a new plan?
MR. BORQUEZ: I believe the initial
Resolution that you selected would have adoption by the
21st.
MS. BEASLEY:
MR. BORQUEZ:
MS. BEASLEY:
MR. BORQUEZ:
Of August?
Of this month.
Okay.
One reason for pushing that
is that, by law, the County cannot split single-member
district lines with its election precincts. Those
election precincts must be drawn by the County by October
the 1st. So if you Bo into -- if you extend the City's
process into September, you severely hinder the County's
ability to draw its election precincts on time. It's
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
25
320
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
merely an inter-governmental courtesy sort of issue.
MS. BEASLEY: Well, and I remembered that
from our original discussion. I thought I had that in my
file, but I just couldn't find it so I just wanted to
refresh my memory. ~
MR. BORQUEZ: I believe it's the 21st is
the deadline that the City Council has adopted.
MS. BEASLEY: Okay.
MR. BORQUEZ: And your outstanding senior
assistant city attorney has reminded me that at one of
your previous meetings, the City Council voted to extend
that deadline to September 4th so as to allow for more
public input. So your new official deadline by Resolution
is September the 4th.
MAYOR BROCK: All right. Thank you.
Anymore questions for Mr. Borquez? Thank you.
MR. BORQUEZ: Thank you.
MAYOR BROCK: We do have~ two request to
speak forms, One of them is from Carl Williams who had to
leave because he was going to the County redistricting,
and I believe that Ms. Elsie Higgins will be speaking in
his -- pardon. I'm sorry. I just heard what I said. I
was thinking Charlie. Ms. Higgins, please come forward.
I'm so embarrassed. Please come forward, Ms. Higgins.
I've never said that before in my life but -- well, good.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
26
3 2:1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
That's good. I made a simple one.
MS. HIGGINS: Thank you very much, Mayor.
Charlie Mae Higgins. That's okay. Elsie was my
sister-in-law anyway.
I would like to let the Council know that ~
the Executive Committee of the local NAACP met on Saturday'
morning in session and we looked, we talked, we analyzed,
and we came up with a unanimous vote on Plan No. 5. We
felt that we needed that plan because it did put
communities of interest together, being that that area
would encompass some of the older communities. So we are
100 percent in favor of Plan No. 5. Thank you.
MAYOR BROCK: Council member Redmon, did
you have a question for Ms. Higgins?
MR. REDMON: Thank you, Mayor. I wanted to
thank Ms. Higgins for coming up and making the
recommendation that the NAACP strongly endorses. Plan 5,
in talking to Council member Burroughs and Council member
Phillips, I.just -~ Plan 5 just seems to work well with
District 1. I'm in the process of negotiating the
triangle part that Council member Burroughs had spoke
about, which would really be the -- where his office is on
~h~ corner of Dallas Drive and Tea~ley and then where the
Applebee's and then toward the Holiday Inn. I think it
would work well with District 1. Thank you.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
27
322
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
ll
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MAYOR BROCK: Any other questions or
comments for Ms. Higgins? Thank you very much.
MS. HIGGINS:
MAYOR BROCK:
from Rudy Moreno.
MR. MORENO:
Council members, City staff.
Thank you.
We have a request to speak
Thank you, Mayor Brock,
I sincerely appreciate the
opportunity to speak to you while I am still awake. I am
Rudy Moreno, 3608 Marianne Circle here in Denton, Texas.
I hope you'll indulge me. I'm going to read a letter to
you rather than speak off-the-cuff, so to speak. I'm this
evening representing Denton LULAC Council No. 4366 here in
Denton.
This letter is addressed to each one of the
Council merabers. After the City redistricting
presentation to City Council on July the 24th, 2001,
representatives from the Denton League of United Latin
A~erican Citizens and the Denton National Association for
the Advancement of Colored People met with Assistant City
Attorney Dorothy Palun%bo and representatives from the fi~
of Bickerstaff Heath & Smiley. As a result of the input
given by City Council, LULAC, and NAACP, redistricting
Plan No. 5 was drafted.
I come to you this evening to inform you
that at the last LULAC meeting which I believe was on
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001 28
3213:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lO
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
August 1st, the Council voted to support draft Plan No. 5.
I think that's referred to as Illustrative Plan No. 5 this
evening, which supports the redistricting criteria of
maintaining communities of similar interests and the use
of identifiable boundaries, understanding the democratic ~
process can often be difficult enough without adding
further complications by splitting neighborhoods.
We believe that when Council district lines
are drawn without identifiable boundaries, confusion
arises due to these boundaries and citizens can have a
difficult time trying to determine who their elected
representatives are. We believe that draft Plan or
Illustrative Plan No. 5 will minimize confusion, maintain
neighborhoods of similar interests, and ultimately
encourage and facilitate citizen's participation in
municipal goverrnnent.
On behalf of the Denton LULAC Council, I
would like to thank the Denton City Council for the
opportunity to address our issues on the City's
redistricting plan. Feel free to contact us should you
have any other questions. Rudy Moreno, charter member,
Denton LULAC Council.
And I have a handout, if I may.
MAYOR BROCK: All right. Would you hand it
to the City Secretary and she will -~ are there any
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
29
3,24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
questions for Mr. Moreno regarding LULAC's position?
MR. REDMON:
MAYOR BROCK:
MR. REDMON:
I have one.
Yes, Mr. Redmon.
Would LULAC be in -- would
they be in opposition of including the triangle that we
talked about?
MR. MORENO:
be perfectly acceptable to that idea. We thought about
the same thing. I was concerned individually about the
sawtooth effect along 1-35, but we were told that it just
wasn't possible to work through that. Moving that
triangle into District No. 4, I think would make a lot of
sense and preserve, further preserve our identifiable
boundaries. Excuse me, moving it out of District 4. I
had it going the other way.
MAYOR BROCK:
MR. MORENO:
MAYOR BROCK:
My feeling is that LULAC would
Okay.
No one
Ail right. Thanks.
Any other questions?
Thank you very much.
else has filled out a request to speak form. Is there
anyone else in the audience who would like to speak? Mr.
Coomes, I saw that you did fill out a form but that you
did not ~- but you're welcome to speak, and I do have a
card.
MR. COOMES: Did I not indicate I wanted to
I'm not sure that I'm in favor or in opposition to
AUGUST 7, 2001
speak?
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING
30
32:5'
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
any of these so if the NAACP or LULAC -- I guess I need to
identify myself; is that correct?
MAYOR BROCK: Yes, even though we have your
name and address here on this little card, you can go
ahead and -- ~
MR. COOMES: Okay. I'm sorry, Mayor. My
name is Mark Coomes and I live at 728 North Elm Street,
Apartment No. C. If LULAC and NAACP have a favorite map,
you know, I think you'd probably be best to go that route.
I did look at these maps earlier today and some of the
accompanying material and I think they all look very
strange. That's something I'm going to have to get over
in terms of trying to commit to memory where the boundary
lines are. I'm not sure where the boundary lines are
today so, you know, that's been a problem for the last
decade for me.
I do have some concerns about that triangle
that you were talking about. It does kind of throw the
map off kilter. I like 35 being a boundary line. The
triangles there up around the University of North Texas
are problematic for me; although I see in our large
audience, a lot of student activists, and I'm sure they're
very concerned this evening about tha~. There I see we're
also doing this process right in the middle of the summer
vacation for the universities.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
31
3 216
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I did put on my comment card that if we
could possibly sometime during the decenniu~ after the
next census -- and I'm in no way suggesting this be done
prior to then and I certainly don't think we should redraw
the lines after we do it this time. The County goverrzment
did it three times during the last ten years and that
really, well, screwed over a lot of people. In any event,
for the next decenniu~, the next census, it would possibly
revise the charter which I assume would take a vote of the
citizens in order to create a 6-1 Council.
And, you know, part of the problem here, I
think if we're looking to increase the types of
representation on the Council is to have more
single-member districts. I'm not sure that I'm really in
favor of that either. I may be speaking about something
that I'm not sure of at the moment. But as something to
look at down the road, and, you know, to see Mr.
Burroughs' seat and Ms. Beasley's seat become a smaller
geographic area.
MAYOR BROCK: Mr. Coomes, I'd like to
respond to a couple of your comments.
MR. COOMES: Sure.
~YOR BROCE: First, I know that that big
triangle bounded by Eagle and Bernard does have a large
number of students in it.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
32
327
6
?
8
9
l0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~.3
24
25
MR. COOMES: Right. I'm aware that there's
a large nunfoer of people in those areas. And something I
mentioned to the Assistant City Attorney today, a lot of
these people are renters. I mean, I'm a renter, too.
Don't get me wrong. But a lot of these people are
renters. They're students. They're very mobile. I
rather suspect that a lot of the people that filled out a
census card by April of 2000 aren't there anymore.
MAYOR BROCK: Right.
MR. COOMES: And, sure, they may be 18 or
above and, sure, they may actually be registered to vote,
but in the City elections, do they vote? And if the idea "
is to sort of help out the people who make Denton their
home for a long time, and I'm not sure that that really
keeps the community of interest, but it's not so much a
problem to me that I would say, you know, just walk away
from what's been done. Because from what I understand,
this is a very laborious process and to meet the various
criteria that particularly the Department of Justice
requires, I would say don't walk away from it. And
particularly since it seems that you have the support of
two very important constituent groups, the NAACP and
LULAC.
MAYOR BROCK: Yes, but also that area was
more fragmented under our old map, and we have a large
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001 33
3 2:18:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
copy of the old map on display there in the lobby. And if
you think these look weird, you should look at that one.
But we really did, and this was one thing that I really
was concerned about early on, that we not split the
student population as much as it was in the 1991 map, and
so we have made considerable improvements in uniting the
student population, even though we couldn't do that
perfectly. Of course, they're everywhere, all over the
City, but particularly concentrated in that area. But I
do think we've made a giant step forward in uniting that
population.
Also, the issue of single-member districts
came up early on and, of course, we all know we would have
to amend the charter, and I know that both the NAACP and
LULAC did briefly look at that issue. There were certain
political factions who went to them hoping that they would
adopt that as their issue, as I understand it from -- this
is second or third-hand.
But one of the major arguments I think that
LULAC particularly had was that at the present time
anybody in Denton has a single-member district, someone
who's representing or looking after the special interests
of a relatively small group and who's familiar with that
area because he or she lives in that area. But also that ~
person can vote for the Mayor, but for the two at-large
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001 34
329
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
members. And this means that every citizen actually can
help to vote, to elect a majority of the Council.
And'I know that some of the LULAC leaders
who came to me to discuss this issue were saying that they
didn't want to give up that privilege of having four
people who had to answer to them in the next election.
You know, and I think that came up because they looked
around, and this was before I was elected Mayor, and they
looked around and at some public meeting on an issue that
was very important to them and they saw that Mr. Miller,
who was then the Mayor, and Ms. Beasley and I were all
three there, even though we were not in their district,
you know, strictly speaking. And so they were seeing the
advantage of having access to the three.
Of, of course, ideally, every single
citizen has access to all seven of us. But they did not
think that -- they felt that they would be giving up a
great deal of the power and influence that they have right
now.
MR. COOMES: I agree with you absolutely
and I'm not in any way saying that this should be pursued
at the moment, but --
MAYOR BROCK:
coming up again.
MR. COOMES:
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING
Right. I think it will be
But by the end of this
AUGUST 7, 2001
35
330
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
decennium, it might be something that the City would want
to look at. And, you know, and given the fact that you're
all term-limited, and I usually am not in favor of term
limits, but in this case you people are term-limited so
you're not going to be around, you may not be around and
some of you may not even live in Denton at the time. But,
certainly, the demographics of the City will change and by
then it might be something that the City would want to
consider.
MAYOR BROCK: Well, early on I did ask Ms.
Palumbo to do some research on some similar cities, cities
that were similar in size or makeup and so forth to see
what the makeup of their council was, because I thought we
might be facing this issue if there were a challenge, and
to see how common that was. We were really surprised to
see how many sizable cities have all at-large members. So
we felt we had a good mix there.
MR. COOMES: Mayor, I remember when there
were five people up here and they were all elected
at-large. And then the five of them got together and
decided who the Mayor was going to be.
MAYOR BROCK: Right. And, of course, the
citizens revised the charter.
MR. COOMES: See, this is a lot more
democratic than it used to be.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
36
331
7
8
9
l0
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
MAYOR BROCK: And this current system did
come out of a suit that was filed by the NAACP in the
1970s, I believe, because of that. But one of the
argLLments for single-member districts is that it's
impossible for a minority to be elected to the Council
otherwise. Actually, that's not -- that was not the case
even when we had all -- we had a minority who was elected
completely at-large. But also one person was elected
three times at-large, an African-American, with the
largest vote that anyone had ever received in the history
'of Denton City elections. And so, obviously, that
argument is not there.
But another concern that I had,
particularly for right now, was expressed by Mayor Ron
Kirk of Dallas. And he said it's so hard with a 14-1
system, it's so hard to get anybody concerned about what's
good for the entire city because they're just concerned
about how much money is going to be spent in their
district, whether services are delivered in their
district. They can't look at big projects that would
benefit the whole community. So I'm really glad you
brought this issue up because it's something that we do
Redmon has a question or a corament for you.
long time, I know.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING
I think Mr.
I've taken a
AUGUST 7, 2001
37
3 3:2
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
l0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. REDMON: Thank you, Mayor. That's
okay. To your point, Mayor, I just wanted to say to Mr.
Coomes that don't feel alone about the 6-1 or
single-meraber distriots. Several months ago, several
members in the community approached me about single-member
districts. And one of the comments that the Mayor had
stated that it's such a difficulty for minorities to run
at-large and win. I know that we've had, I think, one
minority or maybe possible two to run several years ago
at-large and win.
But the difficulties today, there's a lot
of different variables. There's finances and just
multiple reasons why it would be difficult for minorities
to win an at-large seat. And one of those ways would --
and, you know, as a minority in Denton running two
unsuccessful --
MR. COOMES: Speaking from personal
experience?
MR. REDMON: Absolutely. You hear a lot of
people say, you know, I would have loved to have voted for
you but I didn't live in your district. And so it is
difficult as we look at the way our City is going to grow
and o~r minority populations are going to grow, that even
though our minority populations are going to grow, it's ~-
even more difficult to run at-large and win, especially
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001 38
333
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
when you have to be -- when we have our single district
Council members and we have minority populations all over
the City of Denton.
So I'd be willing to look at, you know, as
we grow, I think we should rethink a lot of our charter
amendments and so forth because, you know, we want to be
inclusive to all groups and all minorities. So that's
food for thought.
MAYOR BROCK: All right. Thank you, Mr.
Coomes.
MR. C00MES: Ail right. Thank you for all
your time. I know this is a volunteer position for
everybody but the staff, so I appreciate your time. Thank
you.
MAYOR BROCK: If there are no more -- is
there anyone else who would like to speak to the Council
during this public hearing? Is there anyone else who
would like to speak to the Council? Thank you very much
for your participation. The public hearing is ended. The
City -- yes, I have to read, I do have to read the
comments here.
I wanted to add this, I received -- we
received a fa~ from a person who was not able to be here
tonight. This is Carolyn Phillips who is the Chair of
SEDNA, the Southeast Denton Neighborhood Association, and
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
39
3', 3:
3.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
she asked that we add this information or these comments
to our public hearing. And I'll just read this briefly.
Upon careful review of the redistricting
maps and the process at a recent meeting of SEDNA
Executive Committee, we've opted to support Plan 5 as the
plan is more closely conducive to our needs. The
following observations are offered for consideration by
your panel and the consulting fizm.
Concern No. 1, though non-partisan
elections occur, it is crucial to know voting tendencies
within each district. As the racial makeup of the
district is important so are the voting tendencies. Are
there currently any ways to determine the percentage of
Republican voting tendencies within the eligible voting
age groups versus Democrats in District 1 currently? The
rationale for that question is should a district be made
up of more who tend to vote and will vote for a certain
party, certain groups could be systematically eliminated
from the process.
Question No. 2, people with common
interests placed within one district is conducive and
works well under normal circumstances. However, should
that common interest include masses of people who tend not
to vote or have communicative skills that would enhance
voting tendencies, it serves to tip the scales in another
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
40
335
6
7
8
9
10
ll
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
direction.
Party lines would again become an issue to
figure into the equation. Political parties can control
the district and cloud the one man, one vote precedence by
pitting those who tend to vote and vote a certain way
against a dilution of those who tend to vote plus those
who do not or cannot.
Thanks for considering our observations.
We shall watch the redistricting process and election
outcomes with interest. We're also interested in any
printed material the consultants could provide that deals
with the above two areas of concerns as it might relate to
District 1. And a carbon copy of this was sent to the
County -- I mean, not a carbon copy but a fax was sent to
the County Redistricting Committee. And Ms. Phillips says
that due to a prior commitment, she's not able to attend
and would like a portion of these concerns read.
Mr. Borquez, would you like to respond to
those or do.you have any comments for those questions?
MR. BORQUEZ: Madame Mayor, I guess I can
respond to both by saying that it's possible to see, based
on election returns, what the voting outcome was in
certain election distri¢~. And we could c~rtalnly go to
the County Clerk's office and retrieve that information if
we wanted to. I can say that normally speaking, because
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
41
3,3,6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in Texas municipal elections are non-partisan, then
partisan voting records tends not to be part of the
criteria that is used for evaluating municipal
redistricting plans and thusfar the City Council has not
asked us to do so. So I can tell you affirmatively that a
person's partisan affiliation and voting record has not
been anything that the firm has considered when drawing
these lines.
We could certainly try and retrieve some of
that data if the Council wanted us to. I would suggest
that it amend its criteria for that to be something that
we consider if that's what the City wants to do. It would
be unusual for a city to do that, not unheard of, but it's
unusual.
MAYOR BROCK:
MS. BEASLEY:
Mayor pro rem Beasley.
Well, I had pressed my button
long before you read -- was reading that so I wasn't
responding to that particular. What I was looking at was
setting a date for final adoption of Denton's
redistricting plan since it seems like we're fairly close
to consensus on Plan 5 by most of the members of the
Council. Since I'm an at-large person, I'm not as -- I
think you asked us to say whether we were at-large or not.
MAYOR BROCK: I think we totally ignored
that.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING
AUGUST 7, 2001
42
3: 3: 7:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. BEASLEY: But, anyway. I am at-large.
But it sounds like all the district people, themselves,
are pretty well satisfied with Plan 5 with the exception
of that little triangle, if we can work it or not. And I
think NAACP and LULAC also said they'd be fine if we could
move that into District 1; thereby, under-populating
District 4. So I was just going to see if we were going
to set a date for final adoption.
MAYOR BROCK: I think that actually --
didn't we earlier decide that September 4th, is that the
final --
MS. BEASLEY: Well, it says in the title,
we're setting a date, prepare an ordinance adopting
Denton's redistricting plan or setting the date for final
adoption.
MR. BORQUEZ: I believe the Council
Resolution has amended it to say that the deadline for
doing this is September the 4th. I believe the issue
before the Council is actually setting a date to vote on
it, whether it's going to be at your meeting on the 21st,
on the 4th of September, or at some other date. And I
believe that's the question.
MS. BEASLEY: And that was the quemtion I
was asking. I don't know if we said we would go out to
September 4th, maybe that would give us the time we need
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
43
3 3,'.8:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ll
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to look, or if -- do you think we have enough time for the
21st? I'm amenable to either one. I was going to suggest
the 21st.
MAYOR BROCK: Before we finish the formal
part of this public hearing, Ms. Fulton, did you have a
question?
MS. FULTON: No. I just wanted to say that
in all the years I've been voting, I don't think I have
ever voted a straight party ticket so I don't think, and
particularly this being the City, that we need to draw it
along party lines as such. I'm not a yellow-dog Democrat
or whatever they call the Republicans. I was raised to
vote for the person, and that's on the national elections
all the way down. So I don't think that's a consideration
we should even deal with. And I'm ready to accept
something as soon as we set a date.
MAYOR BROCK: I think it would be
particularly inappropriate for us to consider that as an
issue because we are by law and by charter non-partisan.
So I think that looking into taking that factor into
consideration would not be appropriate for us. Is there
anyone who would like to argue? Mr. McNeill.
MR. MCNEILL: I was ~oin~ to a~k a question
of legal.
elections, can you?
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING
You can't have partisan politics in City
AUGUST 7, 2001
44
339:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. PROUTY: No. No.
MR. MCNEILL: So I don't see how we could
even consider that as part of the criteria. Is that
correct or incorrect?
MR. PROUTY: Well, I'd have to defer to
Allen on that. I think that he said it is very unusual
but it's not unprecedented. It's possible that you could,
you know, consider it in redrawing those lines but it
wouldn't be recommended, and it would be highly unusual.
MR. BURROUGHS: I don't see a compelling
reason to do it.
MAYOR BROCK: I'm sure that some people who
don't mention in public that that's what they're doing are
moving around little census blocks to facilitate certain
elections of certain people but, you know, to do it,
mean, I just don't think it's relevant for us, really.
MR. MCNEILL:
MAYOR BROCK:
the public hearing.
MR. MCNEILL:
MAYOR BROCK:
Then I'll move that --
Just a minute. Let me close
Oh, I'm sorry.
The public hearing is now
closed. And a motion is very much in order.
MR. MCNEILL: Then I would move that we
move the question to August the 21st late in the Agenda
for a vote. I think I may be late getting here. But on
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001
45
340
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
August the 21st would be the appropriate time, I think,
for us to consider voting on the plan. And I would put
forth Plan 5 as the plan to vote on with the proviso that
we, if possible, we would move the Teasley/Dallas triangle
into District 1 to assist with the desire to
under-populate my district, District 4, and then bring 1
up in a higher number.
MR. REDMON:
MAYOR BROCK:
I'll second.
I think that we can figure
out some way to communicate what happens because of moving
the triangle before that so that we would have an
ordinance ready for us to look at at that time.
MR. BORQUEZ: If it's okay with the
Council, I will send written information detailing all the
triangles along 35 and UNT and provide to Ms. Palumbo and
Mr. Prouty by the end of this week to distribute among the
Council members.
MR. MCNEILL: Let me just make one comment
about that. The comment was made the students, and those
folks -- I know that in the last election there were a
number of those students who did come out and I know they
did vote. They said they voted for me, but -- I know they
did vote. They weren't in my class. So I think they are
active. Now, the problem as he said or as the Mayor said, ~-,
lots of those students are now gone and there will be a
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING AUGUST 7, 2001 46
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
whole new crop come in here in about two or three weeks.
So it's -- but the numbers are there.
MAYOR BROCK: And we can't consider what
the voter turnout is. We just consider the population of
the voter. Is there any other comment on the motion?
MR. BURROUGHS: The only thing is to make
clear that we have that one triangle as an alternative,
not that they're tied together in a single ltunp where we
have to go one or the other.
MAYOR BROCK:
logical target out there.
Right. That's the most
But before we vote, I would
like to thank Mr. Borquez and Ms. Palumbo for the
incredible work they've done and particularly how open
they've been. And a special vote of thanks to LULAC and
to NAACP for spending a lot of time and effort on this and
really involving themselves in the process, so that they
have been very helpful to us and their positions have
helped us to formulate our own position and see some of
the issues more clearly.
very much.
So we really appreciate that
Any other posturing before we vote? The
Mayor is at-large and has to do a lot of posturing. I'm
just kidding. I hope that -- I was sincere about that.
Okay. This passes 7-0.
break now.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON REDISTRICTING
Excellent. So we will take a
341
AUGUST 7, 2001 47
342
BOARDS/COMMISSION NOMINATIONS
AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD
Dist Current Member Nomination Term Council
Richard Franco
1 Hal Jackson 1999-01 Redmon
Approved 7/17
2 Rick Woolfolk Larry Lute 1999-01 Fulton
Approved 6/26
Don Smith
6 Don Smith Approved 7/31 1999-01 Burroughs
Edward Adcock
4 Joe Roy Approved 7/31 2000-02 McNeill
ANIMAL SHELTER ADVISORY COMMITYEE
Dist Current Member Nomination Term Council
Susan Weinkein
7 Bob Rohr 1999-01 Brock
Approved 6/26
1 VACANT Trisha Barrington 2000-02 Redmon
Approved 7/31
William Atldnson
3 Lyrm Stucky Approved 8/7 1999-01 Phillips
Jennifer Walters
4 Jennifer Walters 1999-01 McNeill
Approved 6/26
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Dist Current Member Nomination Term Council
Harry Bell 1999-01 Redmon
1 Harry Bell Approved 6/26
Pat Colonna
2 Pat Colonna 1999-01 Fulton
Approved 8/7
Hank Dickenson
4 Diane Crew 1999-01 McNeill
Approved 6/26
Peggy Fox 1999-01 Burroughs
6 Peggy Fox Approved 8/7
CONSTRUCTION ADVISORY & APPEALS BOARD
Dist Specialty Current Member Nomination Term Council
1 General Contractor Bill Redmon John Ryan 1999-01 Redmon
3 General Contractor Jay Thomas Don Richards
Approved 8/7 1999-01 Phillips
Scott Richter 1999-01 Beasley
5 General Contractor Scott Richter Approved 7/17
Rep. fi.om electrical Jimmy Polozeck 1999-01 Burroughs
6 industry Doug Grantham Approved 8/7
7 Rep. fi.om Frank Ctmningham
Frank Cunningham 1999-01 Brock
plumbing industry Approved 6/26
343
DENTON HOUSING AUTHORITY
Seat Current Member Nomination Term Council
7 Rosemary Rodfiguez 1999-01 Brock
7 Katie Flemming 1999-01 Brock
7 Mark Chew 1999-01 Brock
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION
Dist Current Member Nomination Term Council
Lanelle Blanton
2 Lanelle Blanton 1999-01 Fulton
Approved 8/7
Bob Montgomery
4 Barry Vemfillion Approved 7/31 1999-01 McNeill
Peggy Capps 1999-01 Beasley
5 Peggy Capps Approved 7/31
John Baines
6 John Baines Approved 8/7 1999-01 Burroughs
Mildred Hawk
1 Vacant 1999-01 Redmon
Approved 7/31
3 Steve Johansson Ann Hatch 1999-01 Phillips
HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Dist Current Member Nomination Term Council
Carol Bounds
4 Audrey Bryant Approved 7/31 1999-01 McNeill
James McDade
5 James McDade Approved 7/31 1999-01 Beasley
1 Mae Nell Shephard Carl G. Young, Sr.
Approved 8/7 1999-01 Redmon
Betty Tomboulian
3 Betty Tomboulian Approved 7/31 1999-01 Phillips
Peggy Kelly 1999-01 Beasley
5 Peggy Kelly Approved 7/31
Caleb O'Rear
6 Kent Miller Approved 8/7 1999-01 Burroughs
Elinor Hughes 1999-01 Brock
7 Elinor Hughes Approved 7/31
LIBRARY BOARD
Dist Current Member Nomination Term Council
Ken Ferstl
5 Ken Ferstl Approved 7/17 1999-01 Beasley
Adrienne Norris
6 Adrienne Norris Approved 7/31 1999-01 Burroughs
2 Carroll Trail Judy Deek 1999-01 Fulton
Approved 6/26
344
PARKS, RECREATION AND BEAUTIFICATION BOARD
Dist Current Member Nomination Term Council
5 Don Edwards Don Edwards
Approved 7/17 1999-01 Beasley
6 Teresa Andress Teresa Andress
Approved 7/31 1999-01 Burroughs
Dalton Gregory
7 Dalton Gregory Approved 6/26 1999-01 Brock
Shalaura Logan
1 Gwendolyn Carter Approved 6/26 1999-01 Redmon
4 Vacant Ged Aschenbrenner
2000-02 McNeill
Approved 7/17
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Dist Current Member Nomination Term Council
4 Elizabeth Gourdie Susan Apple 1999-01 McNeill
Approved 7/17
7 Susan Apple Joe Roy 1999-01 Brock
Approved 6/26
1 Carl Williams Bob Powell
Approved 7/31 1999-01 Redmon
2 Rudy Moreno Bill Keith
Approved 6/26 1999-01 Fulton
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD
Dist Current Member Nomination Term Council
6 Charldean Newell Charldean Newell
Approved 7/31 1997-01 Burroughs
2 VACANT Bill Cheek, Jr.
Approved 6/26 1999-03 Fulton
TMPA BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Seat Current Member Nomination Term Council
0 Sandy Kristoferson Perry McNeill
Approved 7/17 1999-01 ALL
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
Dist Current Member Nomination Term Council
3 Marshall Smith 1999-01 Phillips
4 Michael Monticino Murray Ricks
Approved 7/31 1999-01 McNeill
7 Pat Cheek Pat Cheek
Approved 6/26 1999-01 Brock
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Dist Current Member Nomination Term Council
John Johnson
3 Greg Muirhead Approved 7/31 1999-01 Phillips
Marry Rivers 1999-01 Burroughs
6 ByronWoods Approved 8/7
James Kirkpatrick 1999-01 Brock'
7 John Johnson Approved 6/26
Tom Reeee
1 Tom Reece Approved 6/26 1999-01 Redmon
Grant Jacobson 1999-01 McNeill
4 Jon Bergstrom Approved 6/26
0 Grant Jacobson (Alt. 1 ) Greg Muirhead 1999-01 ALL
0 James Kirkpatfick (Alt. 2) David Gumfory 1999-01 ALL
Approved 6/26
0 David Gumfory (Alt. 3) 1999-01 ALL
345