Loading...
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